1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Regular Session 10 Monday, December 9, 2002 11 9:00 a.m. 12 Commissioners' Courtroom 13 Kerr County Courthouse 14 Kerrville, Texas 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: FREDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County Judge H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 24 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X December 9, 2002 2 PAGE --- Commissioners Comments 3 3 1.1 Pay Bills 11 1.2 Budget Amendments 12 4 1.3 Late Bills 21 1.4 Read and Approve Minutes 22 5 1.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 22 6 2.1 Historical Commission's 2002 Annual Report 23 2.2 Discuss employee Health Insurance renewal rates 29 7 2.5 Final plat revision, Lots 9 & 10 of the Horizon, Section One, Precinct 1 41 8 2.9 Approval of refund to Ameripark Kerrville Corp. per agreed judgment 42 9 2.10 Rescind January 13, 2003 date set for public hearing on HOME Disaster Relief Funds until after 10 Disaster Relief application workshop is scheduled 45 2.11 Resolution requesting our U.S. Congressman, State 11 Senator, & State Representative's support for expediting construction of Hermann Sons Bridge 46 12 2.16 PUBLIC HEARING - applying for LLEBG Grant 50 2.3 Open sealed bids for reconstruction of Sheppard 13 Rees Road, consider awarding or rejecting same 51 2.12 Authorize condemnation process, if needed, to 14 acquire right-of-way for Hermann Sons Bridge 53 2.4 Open sealed bids for lease of wheel loader, 15 consider awarding or rejecting same 55 2.6 Consider authorizing Road & Bridge to acquire 16 construction easements to work on private property, authorize County to proceed with TCDP grant, 17 approve publication & set public hearing for TCDP grant application, authorize County Judge to sign 18 TCDP final application, and approve publication for TCDP grant application posting/mailing 56 19 2.7 Authorize Road & Bridge to close Sheppard Rees for up to two weeks during construction project 64 20 2.8 Presentation of Phase 2 MS4 Storm Water Permit by Sue Glover from TAC 67 21 2.13 Discuss accepting bonds for all newly elected public officials at December 23rd meeting 93 22 2.14 Discuss rescinding Court Order 27879, declaring December 24th a holiday, having employee luncheon 23 on December 23rd at 11 a.m. 94 2.15 Discuss amending holiday schedule adopted as part 24 of FY 02-03 budget to clarify it is applicable to only employees of County departments not headed by 25 elected officials 96 --- Adjourned 108 3 1 On Monday, December 9, 2002, at 9:00 a.m., a regular 2 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in 3 the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, 4 Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in 5 open court: 6 P R O C E E D I N G S 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Good morning, everyone. It's 8 9 o'clock in the morning on Monday, December 9th, 2002. 9 We'll call to order this regular session of the Kerr County 10 Commissioners Court. Commissioner Letz, I believe you have 11 the honors this morning. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would everyone please 13 stand, join me in a moment of prayer? 14 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Commissioner. At 16 this time, any citizen wishing to address the Court on an 17 item not listed on the regular agenda may come forward and 18 do so. Is there any citizen who'd like to address the Court 19 on an item not listed on the regular agenda? Seeing none, 20 we'll go to the Commissioners' comments. Let's start with 21 Commissioner Letz. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Brief comment. Great 23 football game. Sorry about the outcome. Commissioner 24 Baldwin may have a few other comments, but it really was 25 great to go down there, and a huge turnout. Fantastic. The 12-9-02 4 1 other comment I have is, I keep on forgetting to bring this 2 up, and it's been going on for a while, but I brought it up, 3 I think, probably six months ago. The Water Development 4 Board came out with their new population projections for 5 Kerr County and the state last summer, and under the new 6 system, I guess, Region J is the -- or the regions; Region J 7 for Kerr County are the ones responsible for appealing those 8 population projections, working with the entities with the 9 problems. We're in the process of finalizing the appeal for 10 Kerr County. They -- we've regressed back to some 11 projections probably in the early '70's or something. They 12 show our population leveling off in the Year 2030 at about 13 60,000, then dropping off after that, which is very 14 different from the last one they accepted two years ago when 15 they showed us going up to about 80,000 by 2050. Anyway, 16 that appeal is underway. We're working with the local 17 entities, City of Kerrville, and are trying to do that. 18 The -- one of the issues with the appeal is 19 that, under the state rules, that -- you know, and I object 20 to the state rule, but no region can change the total 21 population projection for the region, you know. And I 22 said -- you know, luckily for us, they -- in everyone's 23 estimation, they overestimated Bandera County, so we're 24 taking people from Bandera County, moving them to Kerr 25 County, and working that out with the region. But, I mean, 12-9-02 5 1 absurd rule that they said that, you know, no region can 2 change. But, anyway, it should work out okay. We're going 3 to end up with a projection probably of around 70,000 by 4 2080 for Kerr County -- or 2050 for Kerr County, which is 5 less than we showed previously, but it can be amended later. 6 But we just -- our main purpose at this point is to show and 7 justify continued growth. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Very good. We get to vote on 9 who comes up from Bandera County? 10 (Laughter.) 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any particular individual we 12 want or don't want? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We want a list of 14 names. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Griffin? 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No comments this 17 morning, Judge. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Baldwin? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to shock you 20 here; I'm going to talk about something other than football 21 first. Our old friend, Judge Sagebiel down at Seguin, is 22 retiring after 20 years of service as a County Judge down 23 there, and we just got the invite the end of last week, so I 24 didn't have time to put it on the agenda. So, I have asked 25 Commissioner Williams to assist me in doing a Resolution of 12-9-02 6 1 just our thank you, our friendship with him, and -- and then 2 I'll be going down there on December 20th to read that to 3 the community. So, I just -- you know, we want to get your 4 permission to do that, and then I guess it's necessary for 5 us to ratify that at a later time, if it's okay. So, we'll 6 do that. 7 And then Tivy football was a fantastic year. 8 We had 19 weeks of hard-nosed head knocking, and those kids 9 are a really great bunch of kids, and we had -- but it's 10 over. We -- we actually got beat. Unbelievable. The -- 11 those kids had a bad night Saturday night. But, you know -- 12 but the character is what I really want to talk about, the 13 character of our community and our parents. And 14 Commissioner Letz alluded to the crowd that was down there, 15 and I'm going to -- I estimated close to -- around 20,000 16 people, and probably about 10,000 people from Kerrville. 17 Huge crowd. Unbelievable crowd. But the -- you know, the 18 kids cried Saturday night, but Sunday, I'm going to tell 19 you, my phone has not stopped ringing. People called us 20 from all over the state just to talk, and it was -- it was 21 -- it's a fun thing. 22 But the -- the character in the whole thing 23 is our community. And you'll see it -- and the kids, you 24 know, will go back and hang up their football uniforms and 25 check out the track and field uniforms today, and the 12-9-02 7 1 baseball uniforms, and go to work. You know, it's over 2 with, and they're back to work. And if you watch baseball 3 and track, you will see the Tivy kids do as well, if not 4 better, than they did in football. So, they're -- you know, 5 everything up there -- and it's not -- you know, everybody 6 talks about we have a great coaching staff, and we do; we 7 have a bunch of great coaches. But those great coaches come 8 here because our kids are good, our community has character. 9 And -- and so the whole thing really works well together, 10 and it's going to be fun, fun, fun from now on. And so, 11 anyway, it was a lot of fun. 12 I see some old Tivy Antler fans -- the 13 General was there, and some family members of some players 14 are in our audience today, and it was great. And 15 Commissioner Williams came up with an idea this morning. 16 I -- I didn't think we were going to lose this early, so I 17 didn't pursue any kind of resolution or anything like that, 18 but Commissioner Williams is going to put something together 19 also for them, some kind of recognition notice of some sort. 20 Also, he had mentioned maybe inviting some of them to our 21 Christmas dinner, just to pat them on the back from the 22 County fathers, you know. If y'all don't do this, I don't 23 know what we'll do. But, of course, I like the idea. You 24 know, any time we -- we can support our kids in our 25 community, I like to do that. That's about it. And it was 12-9-02 8 1 a lot of fun. The seniors -- me and my little group, the 2 daddies, we watched practice every day for six years, and 3 it's just been -- it's just been the highlight of our lives. 4 It's been great. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's great. Commissioner 6 Williams? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we're all 8 going to miss taping up Commissioner Baldwin's ankles every 9 Monday as he gets ready for the game. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we have track. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But I think he's 12 correct in that the character of the team is reflective of 13 the character of the community. And it's been -- as I say, 14 it's been a great run for those kids and for the community, 15 and we will put together some kind of a resolution of 16 thanks, or proclamation that honors the kids, because they 17 have done a fine job and overcome some adversity. I'm not 18 sure how they've managed to stay healthy through this number 19 of weeks, but apparently they've done that, and in good 20 fashion. So, we'll do that and be back next week -- two 21 weeks. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On that topic, I believe 23 the Booster Club is going to try to organize some sort of a 24 community event as well. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cool. 12-9-02 9 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We talked about it at our 2 last meeting, but we didn't schedule anything until we got 3 to this point. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner Baldwin 5 had one hesitation about inviting them to our Christmas 6 luncheon. He's afraid we wouldn't have enough food. 7 (Laughter.) 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, they had -- they 9 had a luncheon up at the field house last week. They ate 40 10 pizzas. Forty pizzas. Can you imagine feeding that bunch? 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Less than one pizza per 12 person. That's not so many. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, when you look at 14 it like that, Judge -- 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: I mean, not for kids. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- what's a pizza? 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Depends on whether it's large 18 or small, medium. Anything else, Commissioner? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: As long as we're on the topic 21 of Tivy football, it's been a fantastic season. I've 22 enjoyed getting to a couple of games, and I was privileged 23 to go to the game last week against Bastrop when we beat 24 Bastrop -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Calallen. 12-9-02 10 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Calallen. You're right, 2 Calallen. And the thing that impressed me most about the 3 game was what happened immediately after the game. When the 4 game was over and we were victorious, all -- both teams 5 streamed out on the field; they shook hands with each other, 6 and then the teams themselves, not organized by coaches or 7 parents, they knelt in the middle of the field, led by Miles 8 Murray, big tackle for the Antlers, and offered up thanks 9 for the opportunity to compete and for the opportunity to 10 come out of the game uninjured and with their pride intact. 11 And I thought it was a remarkable spectacle of small town 12 Texas football, where, after a very hard-nosed, hard-fought 13 game against two excellent teams, they met in the center of 14 the field, exchanged thanks, and gave thanks to God for 15 allowing them to compete for their own schools and for their 16 own parents and their friends, and it was a wonderful 17 moment. 18 And I think, as Commissioner Baldwin says, 19 that expresses what these kids really are. They're not just 20 good football team players; they're wonderful examples of -- 21 of what kids can be and what they are in a situation like 22 this, and it's been a lot of fun to watch them and 23 participate, particularly through Commissioner Baldwin's 24 comments. Regret that they didn't go all the way, but they 25 surely have provided all of us a boost for the past 14 12-9-02 11 1 weeks. You know, if -- if the Boosters Club thing is 2 organized before our next meeting, I would certainly suggest 3 that we do the resolution and ratify it. No reason not to 4 have something from Commissioners Court in a celebration 5 such as that. 6 The other thing I want to cover, as long as 7 we're on good news, is that Jannett Pieper, the County 8 Clerk, is in Austin today, where the Kerr County -- County 9 Clerk's office will be honored with a 5-Star Exemplary Award 10 from the Texas Bureau of Vital Statistics. Of the over 540 11 local registrars in Texas, 65 attained the 5-star award, 12 which the Commissioners -- which Jannett's office has 13 received for the past five years, I believe it is, and only 14 eight out of 540 earned, I think, the designation. We talk 15 a lot about how -- what a fine group of County employees we 16 have and how hard they work and how well they do their job, 17 and it's always a great thing for someone other than us to 18 recognize the good job that's done by the people who work 19 for the citizens of Kerr County. And my congratulations to 20 Jannett and Nadene and everyone who works in the County 21 Clerk's office for their recognition of the excellent 22 service they provide. Without any further ado, let's turn 23 to the business at hand and pay some bills. Tommy, do we 24 have some bills to pay? 25 MR. TOMLINSON: As always. 12-9-02 12 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, do we. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any 3 questions or comments regarding the bills as presented by 4 the Auditor? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we 6 pay the bills. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 9 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the 10 Commissioners Court approve payment of the bills as 11 presented and recommended by the Auditor. Any questions or 12 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget 17 amendments. We have one budget amendment for 18 Nondepartmental, I guess it would be. 19 MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. The -- the 20 request is to declare an emergency, to increase the budget 21 by approximately $400,000 for -- for payment of a claim 22 relative to our health insurance to Methodist Hospital. I 23 provided the Court with the details of -- of this situation. 24 Ray Rothwell's in the audience as we speak for any questions 25 as far as the details that, you know, the Court might have 12-9-02 13 1 other than what I've explained in my memo. Essentially, 2 we -- we had a sizable claim that has been partially 3 satisfied by our stop-loss carrier, our reinsurer, in the 4 amount of $250,000. That -- that satisfies the claim, 5 except for the amount unpaid, which is -- which I explained 6 is -- is the $400,000. We -- we anticipate -- our plan 7 administrators anticipate that -- that this will ultimately 8 cost us $40,000. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much? 10 MR. TOMLINSON: Forty. But we have -- since 11 our plan ends December the 31st, we -- we have to pay this 12 claim before that date in order for it to have any chance 13 whatsoever that our reinsurer will reimburse us for -- for 14 their part. And the reason -- one of the reasons that we 15 have an obligation to pay this is that -- that, in our 16 estimation, a majority of the costs associated with this -- 17 with the $400,000 is outside of the -- the medical procedure 18 that was performed. The medical procedure that was 19 performed, our stop-loss carrier had a $250,000 ceiling on, 20 and that -- that ceiling was expressed in our plan. So -- 21 but there are -- there were costs involved that weren't 22 directly related to that procedure. So, if our -- our 23 stop-loss carrier is obligated to reimburse us for any costs 24 that -- that's not directly associated with the procedure. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My question would 12-9-02 14 1 be -- the only question I have is the -- the legal end of 2 it. I mean, are we liable for costs that are not directly 3 related to the procedure? 4 MR. TOMLINSON: I think we are. I visited 5 prior to the meeting with -- I had that question also, and 6 the opinion of our plan administrator is that, yes, we do 7 have an obligation. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, he's not a 9 lawyer, though. But, of course, if we asked our County 10 Attorney, it would be way into next year, and we'd blow the 11 other coverage before we got an answer to it. So -- 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 13 comments? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the -- I mean, the -- 15 it's thought that we will be reimbursed $360,000 out of the 16 $400,000? 17 MR. TOMLINSON: That's our estimate. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How certain is that 19 estimate? 20 MR. TOMLINSON: That's a question for Ray, I 21 think, to explain. 22 MR. ROTHWELL: Sure. To give you a little 23 bit more of the -- of the sequence for y'all's information, 24 the claim was about a million dollars, approximately, give 25 or -- plus or minus a few dollars. We had that -- that 12-9-02 15 1 claim negotiated down to about $650,000. It was a 2 transplant benefit, and the plan document has a $250,000 3 limitation on transplants. So, that 250 -- first off, the 4 County has a $40,000 stop-loss self-funded plan, and the 5 County has prefunded that $40,000 already. That's -- that 6 40 is paid. So, I've talked to the stop-loss carrier. They 7 agreed to prefund the $250,000 transplant benefit to get 8 some money to the hospital in a timely basis, to where we 9 wouldn't get into a conversation about losing that $400,000 10 discount. So -- so, we've done that. We've paid 250. 11 The sequence of events really play the 12 important part here. The -- the person went into the 13 hospital about the 1st of September here in Kerrville; was 14 immediately transferred to San Antonio Methodist, and 15 immediately transferred into their transplant -- into their 16 transplant unit. The costs between the 3rd of September and 17 the 11th of September, we believe, are not related to the 18 transplant, and I think the early review by the stop-loss 19 carrier agrees with that. We believe there's some costs 20 after the transplant for a couple of days before the person 21 died. So, we believe that we will get the majority of that 22 $400,000 back, if not all of it. Our track record says 23 we'll get it all back, and we believe we will. 24 The kind of contract we're on is a 12/12 25 contract, and that's been the most cost-effective stop-loss 12-9-02 16 1 contract for us to be on, and it continues to be. If the 2 County elected not to prefund that $400,000 per this 3 request, we would need to buy a 15/12 contract, which would 4 cost us about $270,000 more over the next 12 months. And 5 what that 15/12 contract would do, it would pay claims 6 incurred three months prior to the end of this contract, 7 going into the 12 months. Part of those claims fall within 8 that three-month period; some of them don't. So, it's in 9 the County's best interest to prefund the $400,000, let us 10 attempt to get it back, and we will make every attempt to do 11 that. Our track record says we're 99.9 percent effective at 12 doing that. We -- we believe we'll get it all back, and we 13 think it will take 45 to 60 days to do that on -- on this 14 type of contract. 15 It's a spec contract, and we have a contract 16 in our stop-loss plan of a -- of a spec program of $40,000, 17 an aggregate program at some dollar figure. And we're not 18 going to have an aggregate claim; we're under that total 19 umbrella. But we have this one claim that's -- we've 20 actually -- actually had two, but we've had just one that's 21 in question that we need to prefund sometime in the next 22 week or 10 days. And I think the request is a budget 23 transfer to do that, and then we will pay it and immediately 24 file for reimbursement; expecting to get that back probably 25 in February, would be my best guess. 12-9-02 17 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone have questions for 2 Mr. Rothwell? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question. Do 4 we -- do we approve $400,000? Do we approve "about 5 $400,000"? Or do we -- is the court order going to read, 6 "up to $400,000"? I mean, I think something needs to be 7 specific, doesn't it? We don't say -- in the court order, 8 we don't say "about $400,000." 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Tommy what -- 10 MR. TOMLINSON: I would say up to the amount, 11 but I don't know the exact number. 12 MR. ROTHWELL: And we don't know that exact 13 number. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand you 15 don't. 16 MR. ROTHWELL: But I think "up to" would be 17 safe, or "approximately" would be safe. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Not to exceed $400,000? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not to exceed. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Barbara, you had a question? 21 MS. NEMEC: I just wanted to kind of answer 22 Commissioner Baldwin's question about the legality of us 23 having to pay for it. If -- the reason that we're having to 24 pay this amount over and above the 250, it's because it's 25 not a trans -- the procedures that were done is not for the 12-9-02 18 1 transplant. We've paid the maximum that the transplant 2 benefit offered, so, you know, these other charges just go 3 into the regular benefits that we allow. That's the reason 4 that we're having to pay for it. If it was just all 5 transplant, then we would have paid the maximum; we wouldn't 6 be here today. But that's the reason, if that explains that 7 a little bit better. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It does. Thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the -- the question I 10 have for Tommy is, to declare an emergency for the full 11 $400,000, and then we get a refund, it seems like we're 12 going to be inflating the budget in future years to look 13 like we have a lot larger budget. I mean, the money's going 14 to go back into reserves, but still, it will increase the 15 budget. Is there a way that we can find the money in the 16 budget, you know, for, like, four or five months, and then 17 do the budget amendment to take the actual amount that's, 18 you know, not anticipated, and increase the budget by that 19 amount in the future, rather than do it a lot more than we 20 think we're going to end up needing? 21 MR. TOMLINSON: I hadn't thought of it that 22 way, but there's -- I think there's funds in -- well, 23 there's 500 -- like, $530,000 budgeted in -- in our Indigent 24 Health Care Fund. I don't know -- the only thing, I guess, 25 if we had to have the funds in there between now and the 12-9-02 19 1 time we're reimbursed, then we could transfer cash into that 2 -- into that fund. I don't know of anything large enough in 3 the General Fund budget to handle that. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know how the rest 5 of the Court feels. It just seems that it's -- it's -- when 6 we look back at our budget, it's a better way to do it this 7 way. 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: In other words, take 9 the hit when you know you got a hit that you got to take. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I kind of like that 11 approach. We got 530 in the Indigent Health Care? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: That's close. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Roughly? 14 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know exactly. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's what we started out 16 the year with. I don't know what we have now. 17 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't know exactly what we 18 have right now. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And then, when this 20 comes back, we'd reimburse the Indigent Health Care line 21 item? 22 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Good idea. And then 24 reimbursement would go in the General Fund. Then it would 25 have to be a budget amendment to take it -- 12-9-02 20 1 MR. TOMLINSON: To transfer it. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: General Fund, not Indigent 3 Health Care. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 5 MR. TOMLINSON: We could -- I mean, we could 6 increase the revenue budget part of it so we have an equal 7 amount of change in -- in the revenues as well as 8 expenditures. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but there's still 10 that -- 11 MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, still -- it still -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Increases the budget. 13 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it does. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the -- you know, 15 and we're really not increasing the budget, we don't think. 16 I mean, we have may have to do -- you know -- 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We can still do that 18 later. I mean, if you had to. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we -- in any 20 event, we have to do the -- well, it depends. If we didn't, 21 I would rather take it out of Indigent Health Care or some 22 other fund right now, until we have -- 23 MR. TOMLINSON: I think there's probably 24 enough there. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. I think that's a good 12-9-02 21 1 idea. Do we have a motion to that effect? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, 5 second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Commissioners Court 6 transfer not to exceed $400,000 from the Indigent Health 7 Care budget for purposes of paying the medical reimbursement 8 claim that's been presented for the health care of the 9 person -- whatever. Any other questions or comments? If 10 not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Do we have 15 any late bills? 16 MR. TOMLINSON: I have one. It's to Robert 17 Brown for $600 for repair on an electric lock in the jail. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, 22 second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court authorize a 23 late bill and hand check in the amount of $600 payable to 24 Robert Brown for repair to the electrical lock at the jail. 25 Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 12-9-02 22 1 right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this 6 time, I would entertain a motion to waive reading and 7 approve the minutes of the November 1st, November 12th, 8 November 25th, and November 25th meetings of the Kerr County 9 Commissioners Court. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 13 Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 14 waive reading and approve the minutes of the November 1st, 15 November 12th, November 25th, and November 25th meetings of 16 the Kerr County Commissioners Court. Any questions or 17 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Also at this 22 time, I'd entertain a motion to approve and accept the 23 monthly reports as presented. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 12-9-02 23 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, 2 second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve and 3 accept the monthly reports as presented. Any questions or 4 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 5 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 7 (No response.) 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Turning to 9 the consideration agenda, the first item, Item Number 1, is 10 presentation of the Kerr County Historical Commission's 2002 11 annual report by General Walter Schellhase, the president of 12 the Kerr County Historical Commission. General Schellhase? 13 MR. SCHELLHASE: Thank you. It's required by 14 our bylaws to make an annual report to the Commissioners 15 Court of the activities, the membership, and leadership of 16 the Kerr County Historical Commission. This past year, 17 we've had one marker approved. That was the Zion Lutheran 18 Church. After a two-year-long endeavor to get that 19 approved, that was finally done. It's getting harder and 20 harder each year to get these markers approved. We have two 21 in the works; one for Hunt, Texas, and one for Shoemaker 22 Crossing. Those both have been in the works for a little 23 over six months. We still have two that have been in -- at 24 the Texas Historical Commission for over two years; the A.C. 25 Schreiner, Sr., home, and the Union Church building. Those 12-9-02 24 1 are still being worked on a daily basis. 2 Our biggest project, of course, is the Union 3 Church project, of which we still have planned at this time 4 for the dedication to be on the 24th of December. That will 5 be, I believe, 118 years from the date the building was 6 dedicated originally. We hope -- I believe that's going to 7 be set for around 3 o'clock. It hasn't been established yet 8 at this time. Bill Blackburn is going to emcee it. We have 9 arranged for the four original pastors of the church -- four 10 original churches, pastors from those churches will be there 11 to participate in that function, so it should be a very, 12 very good opportunity for us. We have permission from the 13 City to do this one function, because the building will not 14 be finished; it will be sometime later in the year. We're 15 still lacking about $20,000 to do the final work on the 16 inside, furnishing. 17 During that ceremony, we'll have a collection 18 of plates that will be used as commemorative plates for that 19 function; they'll have the Union Church emblem in the middle 20 of them and the four original churches that splintered off 21 from that church surrounding it, so it will be a real nice 22 collector's item. I believe they'll be selling for $35 23 each. This year also we had the -- the 2003 calendar. We 24 have your complimentary copies. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 12-9-02 25 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 2 MR. SCHELLHASE: This will be our third 3 series of calendars of the historical reminders of what took 4 place in Kerr County over the last 150 years. Those 5 collections are -- a lot of them are collected from 6 individuals, and many of them at this time are from Glen and 7 Margaret Dolan, who has a great collection, and we're 8 already in the process of working on the 2004 calendar. Our 9 oral history program is continued. We have not had any 10 additional completed this year; we've been working to 11 complete the ones we have in the works. We have about 50 12 finished now. The question is still what we're going to do 13 with all these and how they're going to be used and where 14 they're going to be stored, but the finishing of the history 15 library, we hope that we will be able to display them in 16 that facility. As you know, we're condensing everything on 17 those histories -- oral history down to a CD-ROM, so that 18 we'll have the pictures, the audio, the videotape all in one 19 concise document that can be checked out and used very 20 easily. 21 We completed this year the update of the 22 historical marker location, where we have all of the 23 locations. We had 5,000 of these printed. We really need 24 about 15,000; because of budget, we did five. We had eight 25 additionals to add to it this year, so it made a pretty 12-9-02 26 1 good-sized brochure this year. Our archives are still down 2 in the basement here at the courthouse. More room is still 3 needed. Obviously, they need to be displayed in a much, 4 much better fashion than what they are now. The courthouse 5 display cabinets, after many years, those were finished; 6 we've had a full year now of displaying them. As you know, 7 those are for both the court use as well as Historical 8 Commission, so if there's anything the court would like to 9 have displayed in those, please let us know. 10 You have -- on the budget item, you have the 11 display of the items that we used the budget for last year, 12 and then we have the proposed use for this year. The 13 membership of the Historical Commission this time is 15 14 active members. We continue to grow a little bit. We have 15 a total of 21 really considered members. The leadership in 16 the coming year, there are 15 new board members that we're 17 asking for approval by the Court. The leadership will be 18 Joe Herring, Jr., will be the chairman; Ray Haney, vice 19 chairman; Ann Bethel, second vice; Lloyd Strange, the 20 Treasurer; and Brenda Craig, the secretary. We ask the 21 Court to approve those for us. 22 Coming year projects, we'll continue with the 23 historical restoration of the Union Church building. Our 24 oral history, we're making a goal of 10 interviews next 25 year. As you know, we're doing those over in the small 12-9-02 27 1 apartment behind the historical library. That library 2 facility is -- has no plans for it this year to be 3 demolished or anything, and that has been a rumor. They 4 have removed our telephone from that building, so we may 5 have to come to the Court and ask for a telephone to be 6 extended into that building. We use the bottom for the 7 interviews. We have a setup down there with a living 8 room-type set up so that people that we bring in for the 9 interviews feel comfortable and at home. They usually bring 10 in all of their library -- their photo collections. We 11 duplicate those, scan them all, put them into the computer 12 system so we have them for a historical record. 13 As I mentioned, the historical calendar for 14 2004 is in the works. We're in the process of collecting 15 those photographs at this time, and hopefully we'll have 16 those out earlier than we did this year, although we did 17 make the October deadline. Membership, we're continuing to 18 ask the Court to continue to consider those people that may 19 be interested in participating and refer them to us for 20 approval. Additional projects, we're looking at the 21 updating of the historical books that we have on Kerr 22 County. We have the gracious offer of Rosa Lavender to 23 assist us in those, as well as a historical video and slide 24 presentation, so those will be the main projects for the 25 year 2003. Thank you. Any questions? 12-9-02 28 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: General, how long have 2 you been chair? 3 MR. SCHELLHASE: Three years. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Three years? You've done 5 a good job. Appreciate what you've done. 6 MR. SCHELLHASE: Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you need a motion 8 to approve the leadership for the following year? 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: We need a motion to approve 10 the -- accept the report and approve the leadership. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I would move 12 that the Commissioners accept the report as presented by 13 General Schellhase, the current chairman, and -- and approve 14 the recommendations of the Commission for its leadership in 15 the ensuing year. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 18 Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court accept 19 the 2002 annual report of the Kerr County Historical 20 Commission and approve the new leadership as described in 21 the report. Any questions or comments? 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question. 23 Judge, the photograph on the front of the calendar is dated 24 1908. Walter, that looks like you there on that horse. 25 (Laughter.) 12-9-02 29 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Could that be you? 2 MR. SCHELLHASE: That was my 3 great-grandfather. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 5 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 10 MR. SCHELLHASE: Thank you. One quick 11 announcement. I'm going to be leaving immediately. The 12 V.A. has asked us to come -- the Council to come to San 13 Antonio to meet with the director out of Dallas and bring us 14 up to date on the current -- what they call Enhanced Care 15 for the Kerrville facility, so we'll find out what that 16 long-range plan is. Thank you. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Thank you. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Item Number 2 is to consider 20 and discuss employee health insurance renewal rate. 21 Barbara, are you going to introduce this one? 22 MS. NEMEC: Well, our third-party 23 administrator, our representative from there is Ray Rothwell 24 with Employee Benefit Administrators, and he's here today to 25 discuss our insurance renewal rates, and then our 12-9-02 30 1 representative here from Kerrville is Bryan Finley and 2 Curtis Finley, and Bryan was unable to be here, but Curtis 3 is here, so I'll just turn it over to them. 4 MR. ROTHWELL: What we're recommending is to 5 continue with -- and this kind of carries over from the 6 conversation we had a little bit ago about the -- the 7 prefunding of the -- the one large claim. Cost-wise, I 8 think y'all have all been presented with -- with the cost 9 figures. In my opinion, after we resolve this one 10 outstanding claim, our best buy continues to be a 12/12 11 contract. As of last Thursday, we had about three days work 12 on-hand, meaning claims in process in our shop were less 13 than three days old -- or they were three days or less old. 14 We have nothing large working. We've had no major pre-certs 15 into the hospital, up to last Thursday, over the last 45 16 days. So, in our opinion, we've got no reason to pay the 17 extra cost of the 12/12 contract. And you can see -- of the 18 15/12. 19 You can see our current rates on the display 20 of Plan A, B, and C. A is the best plan, and that's the 21 plan, if you go back to the individual sheets behind that 22 cover sheet, that has virtually all of the employees on it. 23 It's a $300 deductible, 90 percent plan. This county has 24 historically funded that plan, allowing the employees the 25 opportunity of buying down, if you will, to B or C, using 12-9-02 31 1 those extra dollars to supplement or to help pay for their 2 dependent coverage. If you look at those individual pages 3 of B and C, you'll see that not too many employees took 4 advantage of that. On Plan B, that's a $500 deductible 5 plan. There's 25 employees with four dependent units, and 6 on Plan C there's 13 employees, about three dependent units. 7 So, the majority of the employees are still taking advantage 8 of the best plan that the County offers and pays for. The 9 County pays, as you know, 100 percent of the employee cost. 10 The dependents pay 100 percent of -- the employees pay 100 11 percent of their dependent cost. With the resolution that 12 we reached earlier, it's my opinion that we should continue 13 with a 12/12 contract. Do y'all understand the difference 14 in a 12/12 and 15/12? Should I go into that a little bit 15 more? 16 (Commissioner Letz nodded.) 17 MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. On a 12/12 reinsurance 18 contract, that contract covers claims incurred and paid 19 during the 12-month contract period. It covers January 1 20 through December 31, anything incurred and paid during that 21 period. So, that would tell you that the majority of the 22 December claims aren't paid. We don't get those in, 23 generally, in the month. Some of the November claims will 24 be coming in a little later. But, historically, the trend 25 with the County has been very financially sound to stay with 12-9-02 32 1 the 12/12 contract. This year, we had these two things that 2 happened in September and October, these two transplants, 3 and one outstanding one, that -- that created a little bit 4 of extra looking at the back end of the contract to see 5 financially what was the best route. In my opinion, it is 6 the 12/12 route that we're asking you to approve. And 7 you'll see the -- that the rate increase on the Plan A is -- 8 is more than the Plan B and C, but it's because all the 9 people are in A and all the claims experience is in A. 10 Incidentally, let me back up one minute and 11 tell you, that large claim that we talked about, only 12 $40,000 of that claim goes against the history, experience, 13 that sort of thing. We have a $40,000 stop-loss program, so 14 we only get tabbed with $40,000 and only get measured with 15 $40,000. In this particular -- in the two cases that we had 16 that were large at the end of the year, one went off the 17 plan effective September 1, and one deceased shortly after 18 the surgery. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ray, go over the 12/15. 20 MR. ROTHWELL: Okay, the 15/12 -- but there 21 is a 12/15 also. The 15/12 picks up claims incurred and 22 unpaid during that 90-day corridor before January 1. 23 Anything incurred and unpaid in that period would be -- 24 would be covered under that 15/12 contract. I often 25 recommend 15/12 as a -- as a contract item, as maybe the 12-9-02 33 1 best way to go when we were looking at renewals. In the -- 2 in Kerr County's situation, it's never been cost 3 advantageous to do that. We believe that the 12/12 is the 4 best way to go. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the -- why is 6 there a different cost for one versus the other? 7 MR. ROTHWELL: They're picking up three more 8 months of liability within the contract period. You're 9 picking up all claims. And the reason it's not a good buy 10 for Kerr County is we know -- we know that we don't have any 11 outstanding claims. We know that we don't have anything 12 large working, and we know that there was not any material 13 hospital admissions during the last 45 days, from -- from 14 our looking at and checking with the reinsurance company to 15 see if they had precertified anything, and they hadn't. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you switch from a 17 12/12 to a 15/12 during the year? Like, the -- 18 MR. ROTHWELL: No. You have to make that -- 19 to have make that option going in. Historically, we've 20 ended up with -- with extra funds equaling, I believe, a 21 little more than a month in our -- in our health insurance 22 program, and I think we still have some surplus going out of 23 this year that -- that's not going to be spent. Even though 24 we're spending some large dollars now, we expect to get 25 those back. 12-9-02 34 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, what would basically 2 happen, to make sure I understand this, is that it's cheaper 3 for us to go with the 12/12 than a 15/12, but I guess the 4 risk is, if you had a real large claim come up in 5 December -- 6 MR. ROTHWELL: Then you have the option of 7 buying a 15/12, going off of a 12/12 contract. We always 8 have the option of buying a 15/12, or a paid, which is a 9 24/12. Those are always options available. If we had 10 something large working next December, we would certainly 11 wants to look at the 15/12, you know. See, the difference 12 is about $75 on an employee basis at this point in time, per 13 month, per employee. And going across to the -- excuse me, 14 the dependent units, it stages up a little more than that. 15 But, at the end of a 12/12 contract, we always have the 16 ability to -- to buy that 90 days previous, or 24 months if 17 we -- you know, if we needed it in our operation. We've 18 never needed to go to a 24/12, because we just don't drag 19 claims around. So, my recommendation is a 12/12. I think 20 this is financially the best route for the County to go. 21 And, you know, next year we may -- incidentally, let me back 22 up and tell you also, we shopped your reinsurance with nine 23 carriers. We had three carriers decline. The rest -- and 24 we're changing carriers. We have -- I've got better pricing 25 from a new -- from a different carrier; it's an A-plus rated 12-9-02 35 1 carrier, but we are charging carriers, 'cause we shop that 2 reinsurance market with all of our clients every year, so we 3 effectively bid that for you. And we do that for all of our 4 clients every year. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What did you say the 6 deductible was on Plan A? Did you say $300. 7 MR. ROTHWELL: It's $300. Three, five, and 8 750, I believe, are the three programs. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's $400. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought it was 11 $400. That's the reason I asked. 12 (Discussion off the record.) 13 MR. ROTHWELL: Oh, it's $400, not $300. 14 Okay, you're right. I'm sorry. I was thinking it was 15 three, but it's four. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it's $400 per 17 member? 18 MR. ROTHWELL: Per person. Three per -- 19 three per family, for the family units. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it's $1,200 for my 21 family. 22 MS. NEMEC: In network providers. 23 MR. ROTHWELL: As long as you're -- 24 MS. NEMEC: In network providers. If you go 25 out of the network, then it's higher. 12-9-02 36 1 MR. ROTHWELL: Yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 3 MR. ROTHWELL: Any other questions? 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: For the record, are there any 5 changes in the benefits? 6 MR. ROTHWELL: No. We're quoting -- we're 7 leaving the benefits exactly like they were in the three 8 plans. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ray, I have a 10 question. Here's my card. And I recently went to the 11 doctor and used this, and they asked me, "Who is your 12 insurance carrier?" And there's lots of words and numbers 13 on this thing, but I, to this moment, have not figured out 14 who any carrier is. 15 MR. ROTHWELL: The carrier is not identified 16 on there. You know, basically, by being a, quote, partially 17 self-funded company, you are the front-end carrier for the 18 first $40,000. After that, it's Union Labor, currently. 19 Union Labor Life. And we're proposing to go to Presidential 20 Life Insurance Company. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well -- 22 THE WITNESS: They're an A-plus rated 23 company. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That doesn't help me 25 at all. What -- I mean, can -- can you put that on our 12-9-02 37 1 cards? 2 MR. ROTHWELL: We don't -- 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or just pretend we 4 have insurance, or -- 5 MR. ROTHWELL: We don't ever -- we've never 6 put it on a card. I suppose we could put on it a card, 7 reinsurance carrier. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do you say to 9 your doctor? What do you say to your doctor when you use 10 your insurance? 11 MR. ROTHWELL: I tell them I'm covered by 12 Blue Cross. 13 MS. NEMEC: We're covered by Kerr County. 14 We're partially self-funded, so it's Kerr County. 15 MR. ROTHWELL: Kerr County Health Insurance 16 program. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've had that same 18 problem. Doctors don't like to hear you're insured by Kerr 19 County. 20 MR. ROTHWELL: We can put that on there, but 21 that's confusing, because, you know, there -- 22 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: They may file a claim 23 directly with that company, which -- 24 MR. ROTHWELL: And then it goes out into 25 never-never land then, you know. We have enough problems 12-9-02 38 1 with the local doctors not sending them to Greater Hill 2 Country Health Care Alliance, which is the P.P.O. -- the 3 primary P.P.O. that we use, which is the local group. 4 Outside of here is Texas True Choice, and we often have a 5 lot of local doctors sending claims to Texas True Choice. 6 We, in turn, have to argue with Texas True Choice. "No, 7 we're not going to pay you, 'cause we got to send it back." 8 So -- so, we constantly talk to the doctors directly and/or 9 through the Greater Hill Country folks, about telling their 10 doctors to make sure they file their claims directly with 11 us. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So I'm just going to 13 tell you, "Look, I promise you that we have insurance"? You 14 work that out with somebody? 15 MR. ROTHWELL: Buster, if you tell somebody, 16 "Trust me," I know they'll trust you. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Obviously, they do. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My question, Ray, is 19 more directed to Tommy. 20 MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This appears to be 22 about a 30 percent increase in the County's obligation per 23 employee. What did we budget? 24 MR. TOMLINSON: There's -- considering which 25 budgets -- 12-9-02 39 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? 2 MR. TOMLINSON: Considering which budgets are 3 involved, they're -- for those departments that have large 4 amounts of employees that we have turnover in, we'll 5 probably have enough budgeted. Others, no, we don't. 6 There's about -- for example, in my department, we have -- 7 there's three people covered, and I hope there's no 8 turnover. So, we're going to have a shortfall of about $400 9 per employee. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On an annual basis? 11 MR. TOMLINSON: On an annual basis. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Annual, okay. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, on that, are you 14 going to come back with one budget amendment to correct all 15 those at one time? As each department runs out? 16 MR. TOMLINSON: As needed. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: As needed. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You need a motion to 19 approve the new rates? 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: We need a motion to approve 21 the extension of the existing rates -- existing plan. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that was a motion by 25 Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin that 12-9-02 40 1 the Commissioners Court renew the existing Kerr County 2 Employee Health Insurance plan at the rates as presented. 3 Any questions or comments? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, because of the 5 importance of this one, I'm not sure it's posted properly 6 for that. Consider and discuss employee health insurance 7 renewal rates. I don't see that it talks about the plan. I 8 mean, I guess you could construe that by renewing the rates, 9 you're renewing the plan, but -- 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we can 11 restructure the motion, that the Court approve the renewal 12 rates as presented by the carrier, or the carrier's 13 representative. 14 MS. NEMEC: Then, when we have the contract 15 to be signed, then it will be worded properly, but this is 16 just for the rates. We don't have the contract yet. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: For the record, then, the 18 motion is to approve the employee health insurance renewal 19 rates as presented by Mr. Rothwell. Motion by Commissioner 20 Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin. Any questions or 21 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 22 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 24 (No response.) 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. We have two 12-9-02 41 1 public hearings scheduled at 10 o'clock. I think we can get 2 another item or two in before that. 3 (Discussion off the record.) 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Let's take up Item 5 Number 5, then, consider the final plat revision of Lot 9 6 and 10 of the Horizon, Section One, Precinct 1. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Johnston. 8 MR. JOHNSTON: Good morning. This -- this 9 plat consists of a revision of two lots. It essentially is 10 moving a lot line just a few feet, from one to the other. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks good to me. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 15 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court grant 16 final plat approval for the plat revision of Lot 9 and 10 of 17 the Horizon, Section One, in Precinct 1. Any questions or 18 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 19 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can take care of 24 Number 10 real quick, too. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Which one? 12-9-02 42 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Number 10. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's do Number 9 first. 3 Number 9 is consider and discuss approval of refund to 4 Ameripark Kerrville Corporation per the agreed judgment. 5 Ms. Rector. 6 MS. RECTOR: I don't know if you all have had 7 a chance to read over the information that I gave to you. 8 If you need a little background on how all this came about, 9 this once was a lawsuit that was filed by Ameripark against 10 the Appraisal District for value. It had gone on since 11 1999. We pushed to get it resolved before the 2002 taxes 12 were paid and had to be refunded also. And I put in there 13 the original value that they rendered and the agreed value 14 between the two parties, and then the agreed funds were 15 calculated based on that plus the interest that they are 16 allowed by the Property Tax Code. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval of the 18 refund as presented. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Where are we going to get the 20 funds? Favorite question. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Favorite question. 22 Tommy, do you have a good solution? 23 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I don't -- most of the 24 time, the tax -- on refund, we don't expense that, because 25 it's actually not an operating expense finance, the way I 12-9-02 43 1 see it, so we have the Tax Office take it out of their 2 collections. 3 MS. RECTOR: No, we're not. 4 MR. TOMLINSON: Not -- 5 MS. RECTOR: We can't, unless you want me to 6 withhold it from the next couple of months of what I turn 7 over to the County. But we need to pay it as soon as 8 possible, because the interest is accruing, and we had asked 9 each of the entities involved that they expedite the refunds 10 as quickly as possible, 'cause I calculated the refunds 11 through November. So, Tommy, you and I could talk about 12 it -- 13 MR. TOMLINSON: I think -- in my estimation, 14 it's overstated the operating cost, but it's actually a 15 return of -- of -- 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tommy, we can't hear 17 you on this side. 18 MR. TOMLINSON: They're essentially a return 19 of revenues. So, I -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, just do it on the 21 revenue side only? Just a revenue refund? Or refund of 22 revenue? 23 MR. TOMLINSON: That's what I'm thinking. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's a refund. Just 25 comes on the top of the profit and loss statement. It's a 12-9-02 44 1 refund. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we don't need a -- 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It lowers revenues; 4 that's all it does. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But do we need kind of an 6 amendment to lower revenues? 7 MR. TOMLINSON: I think we just need approval 8 to make the payment. I mean, I don't think it's a budget 9 item, so I -- I think it's simply a return. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That will be my motion. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tell me how much. I 13 can't seem to find the total anywhere. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Second page. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: $55,200.08. 16 MS. RECTOR: That's the -- $59,882.29 is the 17 total Kerr County and Lateral Road portion of the refund. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $59,882.29? 19 MS. RECTOR: Right. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That includes the 21 roads -- or the Lateral Road? 22 MS. RECTOR: That's Lateral Road and County. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, 25 second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve a 12-9-02 45 1 refund for the Ameripark Kerrville Corporation per the 2 agreed judgment in the amount of -- aggregate amount of 3 $59,882.29. Any further questions or comments? If not, all 4 in favor, raise your right hand. 5 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 7 (No response.) 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Thank you 9 Paula. Item Number 10, consider and discuss and take 10 appropriate action rescinding the January 13, 2003, date set 11 for public hearing on H.O.M.E. Disaster Relief funds until 12 after disaster relief application workshop has been 13 scheduled. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's -- the rules 15 of the game say that there's no need having a public hearing 16 prior to the time the disaster relief application workshop 17 takes place, and that has not yet been scheduled, so I move 18 we cancel the January 13th date. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 21 Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 22 rescind and cancel the January 13th date set for public 23 hearing on H.O.M.E. Disaster Relief funds. Any questions or 24 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12-9-02 46 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number 4 11, consider and discuss a resolution requesting our U.S. 5 Congressman, State Senator, and State Representative support 6 for expediting the construction of the Hermann Sons Bridge. 7 Commissioner Letz. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I handed out to members 9 of the Court, and gave one to Nadene, a revised resolution. 10 I put this on the agenda due to the schedule that came out 11 of TexDOT dated October 18th. In that schedule, it showed 12 the letting of the contract in 2004, with construction to 13 begin in 2005. That, in my mind, is not acceptable because 14 of the need to get that bridge done on a far faster time 15 route. So, I prepared this resolution so that we could ask 16 Congressman Lamar Smith and State Representative Harvey 17 Hilderbran, State Senators Troy Fraser and Jeff Wentworth to 18 do what they can to prod TexDOT along on this project. I 19 included Senator Jeff Wentworth because a lot of the 20 residents and a lot of use of this bridge goes into Kendall 21 County, and he is the State Senator for Kendall County. Let 22 me briefly read the resolution. 23 Resolution in Support of Expediting the 24 Construction of the Hermann Sons Bridge. 25 Whereas, on October 20, 2000, the low-water 12-9-02 47 1 bridge crossing the Guadalupe River on Hermann Sons Roads 2 washed out during a flood. 3 Whereas, TexDOT -- I mean the Texas 4 Department of Transportation is responsible for the "Off 5 System" road bridge program in the State of Texas. The 6 Hermann Sons Bridge is part of this program. Replacement of 7 this bridge was accelerated by and became a priority one 8 project after the bridge was destroyed by the flood of 9 October 20, 2000. 10 Whereas, Hermann Sons Bridge is vital for the 11 health, safety, welfare of the residents and the community 12 of Kerr County. The Hermann Sons Bridge serves the Hermann 13 Sons Retirement Community, which has over 65 residents, the 14 Hermann Sons Youth Camp, over 4,000 youth during each 15 summer, and the Pot of Gold Youth Camp, and numerous 16 residents in Kerr and Kendall Counties. 17 Whereas, the Hermann Sons low-water bridge 18 was the site of a tragic school bus accident where the bus 19 was swept away by a flood on July 17, 1987. Eleven children 20 were killed and over 30 were injured. 21 Whereas, in 2001, Kerr County, with the 22 assistance of Natural Resource and Conservation Agency, 23 constructed a temporary bridge across the Guadalupe River to 24 assist the many residents of the area; and 25 Whereas, in early July of 2002, a series of 12-9-02 48 1 floods on the Guadalupe River washed out and destroyed the 2 temporary bridge, and the Texas Department of Transportation 3 assured Kerr County and its residents that the permanent 4 replacement of Hermann Sons Bridge was a priority one 5 project; and 6 Whereas, by correspondence received from 7 Texas Department of Transportation in early November 2002, a 8 revised schedule dated November 18, 2002, was received by 9 Kerr County, where the construction date for the Hermann 10 Sons Bridge was 2005; and 11 Whereas, Kerr County has budgeted and planned 12 for its share of the expenses of this project and is ready, 13 willing, and able to proceed with this vital project at the 14 earliest conceivable opportunity. 15 Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Kerr 16 County Commissioners Court that Kerr County reaffirms its 17 unwavering staunch support for the Hermann Sons Bridge, and 18 that the proposed construction date of 2005 is unacceptable 19 to Kerr County Commissioners Court and the citizens of Kerr 20 County, and such delay greatly affects the health, safety, 21 and welfare of the citizens of Kerr County, and requests 22 that the Texas Department of Transportation give this 23 project the highest possible priority and complete the 24 project at the earliest possible time. 25 And may it further be resolved that the Kerr 12-9-02 49 1 County Commissioners Court request the assistance of U.S. 2 Congressman Lamar Smith, State Senators Troy Fraser and Jeff 3 Wentworth, and State Representative Harvey Hilderbran in 4 assisting the citizens of Kerr County, Kendall County, and 5 the State of Texas to insure that construction of the 6 Hermann Sons Bridge receives the highest possible priority. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. Is it a 8 possibility that a companion resolution will be forthcoming 9 from Kendall County? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. It's being sent 11 over to them tomorrow to do such. I'll move the approval of 12 the Resolution. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, 16 second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve the 17 resolution in support of expediting the construction of the 18 Hermann Sons Bridge. Any questions or comments? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will make one comment. 20 The local TexDOT office is aware of this, and they have no 21 problem and support the resolution. They feel this bridge 22 should be a higher priority, and they think it will emerge, 23 but encourage anything that we can do to make that happen. 24 They appreciate it. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, piggyback a 12-9-02 50 1 thought here. As I stated last month, we want to do 2 something similar to this soon regarding the High Water 3 Bridge, but what I want to do is have our elected officials 4 encourage TexDOT to come to this room and explain to the 5 Kerr County public why there isn't a high water bridge after 6 five, six years. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ten, 15. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ten or 15 years, 9 whatever. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that's a great idea. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll be doing that 12 soon. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Any other questions or 14 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 15 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this 19 time, we will recess the Kerr County Commissioners Court 20 meeting and conduct a public hearing on Kerr County applying 21 for an LLEBG grant. 22 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:04 a.m., and a public hearing 23 was held in open court, as follows:) 24 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, if there is any 12-9-02 51 1 individual who would like to address the Court on the issue 2 of Kerr County applying for an LLEBG grant, you may come 3 forward and do so. Is there any citizen who'd like to 4 address the Court on the issue of Kerr County applying for 5 an LLEBG grant? 6 (No response.) 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: One more time, is there any 8 citizen who would like to address the Court on the issue of 9 Kerr County applying for an LLEBG grant, which is a grant 10 for use by the Sheriff's Department? Seeing none, we will 11 close the public hearing and reconvene the special -- 12 regular session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. 13 (The public hearing was concluded at 10:05 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court 14 meeting was reopened.) 15 - - - - - - - - - - 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: The next item for business is 17 to open sealed bids for reconstruction of Sheppard Rees Road 18 and consider awarding or rejecting same. Opening the bids 19 here. First proposal is -- proposal is from Edmund 20 Jenschke, Inc. Total base is $393,544.50. Alternate bid 21 Item Number 2 is $54,584 and no cents. Time of completion, 22 180 days. The next proposal is from MPB, Inc. Base Item 23 Number 1 is $674,000. Alternative Bid Number 2 is $55,000. 24 Number of days for construction, 150 calendar days. Third 25 bid is from RosBan Construction Inc. Base bid, Item Number 12-9-02 52 1 1, $429,410.46. Alternate bid, Item Number 2, $52,520. 2 Time of completion, 145 days. Next bid is from Wagner 3 Materials and Construction. Base bid, Item Number 1, 4 $320,000. Alternate bid, Item Number 2, $67,000. Time of 5 completion, 120 days. The last bid is from Allen Keller 6 Company. $262,430 for base bid, Item Number 1. Alternate 7 bid, Item Number 2, $37,400. Time of completion, 80 days. 8 Not bad. Do I have a motion to accept the bids and refer 9 them to the Road and Bridge Department for evaluation and 10 recommendation? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move to do so. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 14 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court accept 15 all of the bids for reconstruction of Sheppard Rees Road and 16 refer them to the Road and Bridge Department for 17 recommendation. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hope they all read the 19 same bid package. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When -- when will you 22 be back to the Court with a recommendation? 23 MR. ODOM: You're asking me, sir? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 25 MR. ODOM: Next meeting? How's that? 12-9-02 53 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Next meeting? 2 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. We will not do anything 3 till after the -- the first of the year, anyway, even if we 4 did that. So -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, cool. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 7 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Okay. Why 12 don't we do Item Number 12, consider and discuss authorizing 13 beginning condemnation process, if needed, to acquire 14 right-of-way for Hermann Sons Bridge. Commissioner Letz. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda 16 for two reasons. One, I'm afraid we may have to go through 17 condemnation, actually, due to one of the landowners, 18 possibly two of the landowners there. And also, this is 19 really spurred a lot by the TexDOT schedule. They have -- 20 every time I talk with TexDOT, they want to know where we 21 are on right-of-way. I just want to make sure that we have 22 our right-of-way locked up as soon as possible, so they 23 can't say that is your reason for delay in the construction 24 of a bridge. So, what I'm really asking for here is for the 25 Court to formally approve or -- and authorize the County 12-9-02 54 1 Attorney to proceed with the condemnation. Of course, that 2 will be preceded by an attempt to not go through 3 condemnation by the County Attorney. We have made 4 preliminary contacts with all the landowners, and I think we 5 are going to need an appraisal of the property in either 6 event, so this is just to authorize the County Attorney to 7 proceed and get everything in order that he needs, and to 8 approve the -- you know, starting with the appraisal, 9 whatever. I'll make a motion to that effect. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second it. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, 13 second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court authorize 14 the County Attorney to begin condemnation process, if 15 necessary, to acquire the right-of-way for the Hermann Sons 16 Bridge. Commissioner Baldwin, you have a comment? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I do thank 18 you. We've negotiated with those landowners? I mean, I 19 know you have; I understand that. But has the County 20 Attorney -- I mean, is he -- is he ready and prepared? I 21 mean, he thinks this condemnation is the next step? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He is aware of the 23 situation. He has not yet talked to him, but this gives him 24 the authority to -- to start that. I mean, I don't -- I 25 hope we don't have to go through the formal condemnation, 12-9-02 55 1 but I think that it's -- we are at the point in time when it 2 needs to be taken out of my lap and Road and Bridge's lap 3 and given to the legal department to start negotiating so 4 that things are done properly if we do have to go to 5 condemnation, which is very likely, upon the landowners. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to strengthen 7 my second, if I could. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Your strong second is noted. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Strong second. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 11 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this 16 time, we're going to go ahead with Item Number 4, which is 17 to open sealed bids for lease of wheel loader, and consider 18 awarding or rejecting same. The envelope, please. We have 19 one proposal from Holt CAT on the wheel loader. The 20 proposal is for $62,680, which includes a guaranteed repair 21 expense. Five-year lease is $62,280. Guaranteed repair 22 expense of $400. Total bid of $62,680. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's it? That's 24 going to be a tough one. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, I'd entertain a 12-9-02 56 1 motion to accept the bid on the lease of wheel loader and 2 refer to it Road and Bridge Department for evaluation and 3 recommendation. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 7 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court accept 8 the sealed bid for lease of wheel loader and refer same to 9 the Road and Bridge Department for evaluation and 10 recommendation. Any questions or comments? If not, all in 11 favor, raise your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Let's go 16 ahead and do Item Number 6, consider and discuss the 17 following: Authorize Kerr County Road and Bridge to acquire 18 construction easements to work on private property; 19 authorize Kerr County Road and Bridge to proceed with 20 T.C.D.P. grant; approve publication, set public hearing for 21 T.C.D.P. grant application; authorize County Judge to sign 22 completed T.C.D.P. final application; and approve 23 publication for T.C.D.P. grant application posting and 24 mailing. Leonard, good morning. 25 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Good morning. If 12-9-02 57 1 you'll bear with me, I'll go through this that I presented 2 to you. There's several items that need to be addressed 3 before we complete the clean-up work from the July flood. 4 The attached letter from Natural Resource Conservation 5 Service shows six sites. Some of these sites are partially 6 on the right-of-way and partially on private property, and 7 that's Turner Lane or Turtle Creek there. Center Point 8 River Road; that's at the guardrails by -- where it -- 9 Martin Marietta, across from there. Center Point River Road 10 at Bowlin, at the cabins. The Center Point Dam. The 11 Hermann Sons Road at the bridge, and the Center Point River 12 Road at the springs. That's where young people swing off 13 there where it ate out real bad. 14 These are not FEMA-approved sites, but we 15 have preliminary approval from NRCS for 75 percent funding 16 to repair these sites. However, Kerr County is expected to 17 provide equipment and labor. Should Kerr County Road and 18 Bridge use County equipment and/or funds to work on the 19 private property portion of these projects, which are 20 predominantly reimbursed by NRCS? If so, will Commissioners 21 Court authorize Road and Bridge to obtain construction 22 easements across the private property portion of the 23 projects listed above, as well -- as well as work on this 24 construction easement to make the flood damage repairs? 25 On 12 August, '02, you signed the attached 12-9-02 58 1 resolution to submit to the Office of Rural Community 2 Affairs, O.R.C.A., for up to $350,000 grant funds to carry 3 out projects. When we first contacted Gus Garcia, we were 4 told that we would need final numbers from both FEMA and 5 NRCS before filing with them. On the 21st of October, '02, 6 FEMA final numbers arrived, and that was a total of 7 $338,761.60. The first check from FEMA arrived on the 29th 8 of October, '02, and we received all payments, for a total 9 of -- that gross amount, our 75 percent, of $261,862.72. On 10 the 24th of October, '02, NRCS preliminary numbers finally 11 arrived. They approved five sites at $86,000; one site, an 12 estimate between 20 -- $50,000 and $65,000. The NRCS 13 representative should be in Kerr County December the 18th to 14 let us know how we proceed. That's trying to get the 15 paperwork that we can get the Judge to sign. 16 October the 28th, we tried to contact 17 O.R.C.A. to start work on the grant we believed would be the 18 25 percent of all funds approved by FEMA and NRCS. Gus 19 Garcia, their representative, informed us this was not the 20 case. And we were -- we had talked to them several times. 21 Right at this point, we never heard any different that we 22 would get funded for all these sites, but we needed the -- 23 the paperwork. So you can see, in late October, we didn't 24 get all the numbers to submit the grant. We are now putting 25 together information to submit a grant to O.R.C.A. for 12-9-02 59 1 $80,445.27, and that's based upon the things that are not 2 complete. And I gave you a list here of these unfinished 3 NRCS and FEMA sites, for a total of $80,445.27. 4 What I'm here for is to ask you -- we need to 5 proceed quickly for approval for the following. First is 6 the authority for Road and Bridge to acquire construction 7 easements and to work on private property. Second, 8 authority for Road and Bridge to proceed, with cooperation 9 of other County offices, to assimilate the documents needed 10 to submit the grant; County personnel data, planned capital 11 purchases for one year, and census information. Approval of 12 the publication and setting of public hearing 72 hours after 13 publication for the T.C.D.P. grant application. Fourth, 14 authorization for the Judge to sign completed T.C.D.P. final 15 application. And, fifth, approval of publication for the 16 T.C.D.P. grant application posting and mailing. 17 What I've given you in the back of this 18 summary here are the copies of the notices, the first notice 19 for 72 hours, as well as the second notice to be published 20 before mailing the final application, the permission for 21 right-of-way entry, the letter from NRCS, how they came up 22 with their six sites, the copy of that resolution. So, 23 basically, those five items is what I need from the Court. 24 We have no problems doing it, but we just need authorization 25 to do this. We feel it's appropriate, but we wanted to 12-9-02 60 1 touch base with the Court in case there was any conflicts or 2 anyone felt like there was conflict, us doing work on 3 private property. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the 5 resolution -- the resolution that we adopted back in -- a 6 couple months ago? 7 MR. ODOM: August, wasn't it? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: August or September. 9 We discussed doing this -- the Court discussed doing this, 10 and we had some discussion as to whether or not we should do 11 it or allow Grantworks to do it, and we determined that Road 12 and Bridge would file this application, and they have done 13 so. They've done a lot of work on it, on the paperwork 14 that's necessary to do this. Can we handle this just with 15 one motion, or do they all have to be separate motions? 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: I have no problem with 17 approving the agenda item in one motion. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I would move 19 that we authorize -- should I list it in for the record, or 20 just a generic motion? 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: List them in. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: List them in. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: List them. I would 25 move that we authorize Kerr County Road and Bridge to 12-9-02 61 1 acquire construction easements to work on private property, 2 and to authorize Kerr County Road and Bridge to proceed with 3 the T.C.D.P. grant they started, and to approve publication 4 and set public hearing for T.C.D.P. grant application as 5 required, and authorize County Judge to sign the completed 6 T.C.D.P. application -- final application, and to approve 7 publication of the T.C.D.P. grant application including 8 posting and mailing. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Where's the public hearing 10 going to be held? Let's have a second first, I'm sorry. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 13 Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 14 approve the agenda item as recited by Commissioner Williams. 15 Questions or comments? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Public hearing would 17 be held here, 9 a.m. on December 16th at 700 Main Street. I 18 assume that means this courtroom. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. I've got a probate 20 hearing scheduled in here at 8:30. Do we have another -- 21 Thea, can you step out and see if we can find another 22 courtroom? 23 MS. SOVIL: For what date? 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: The 16th. 25 MS. SOVIL: December? 12-9-02 62 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. 2 MS. SOVIL: What time? 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 9 o'clock. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: 8:30 for my hearing. We'll 5 move my hearing, as opposed to the public hearing. 6 MS. SOVIL: 8:30? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other -- I think 8 the only comment I would make on that, it's probably clear 9 in the backup, but on the construction easements, those are 10 the construction easements related to the projects listed in 11 the application. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My question is related 14 to that, too. What do you have to go through to get a 15 construction easement? 16 MR. ODOM: Just the signatures to fill this 17 out. Just the signature. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: By luck or something 19 else, I've been working with Mr. Motley on a construction 20 easement for Hermann Sons, so he has just approved a new 21 form. 22 MR. ODOM: We can fix our -- if they don't 23 give us a construction easement, we can fix our portion of 24 this, and then determine if the health, safety, and welfare 25 is involved, and there's certain -- you know, where that 12-9-02 63 1 location is. But if they don't sign it, we don't have it. 2 It's only going to suffice us. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the sample 4 that you sent? 5 MR. ODOM: It's a sample, right. Right. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Permission for entry. 7 MR. ODOM: There may be more damage just 8 that -- you know, that surrounds that -- that initial -- 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This, for one thing, 10 would clear up that little dispute we have pending -- 11 MR. ODOM: On Bowlin? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- with the cabins 13 over on River Road. 14 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And I have 15 discussed that with the landowners and all, and I think that 16 we can resolve that problem. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 18 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 19 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 23 MR. ODOM: Thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have a question of 25 what time? 12-9-02 64 1 MS. SOVIL: What time is the public hearing 2 set? 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: 9 o'clock. Let's do Item 4 Number 7, then we'll take a break, get reinvigorated and 5 come back and listen to Ms. Glover. Item Number 7 is 6 consider authorizing Kerr County Road and Bridge to close 7 Sheppard Rees for up to two weeks during construction 8 project. Franklin Johnston. 9 MR. JOHNSTON: The Horizon end of Sheppard 10 Rees project will require some blasting work, and also 11 tie-in to the existing road. This activity and the grades 12 involved may require closing Sheppard Rees to through 13 traffic for up to two weeks for the safety of the public. 14 We'd like this decision made now so that contractor will 15 know how to schedule the project. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am certainly in 17 favor of it, and I am glad that the press is in the room 18 today to pick up on that, to maybe send a message out to the 19 public that this is going to happen. There's -- 'cause 20 that's -- there's a high traffic count that comes down 21 through there every morning and every evening, so I think 22 everything that we can do to prepare the public for the 23 closing of a road would be helpful. Newspapers, television 24 stations. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How will the traffic be 12-9-02 65 1 rerouted? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm guessing out Bear 3 Creek. 4 MR. JOHNSTON: Bear Creek would be the only 5 way. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, Precinct 1 and 4, 7 we plan ahead. 8 (Laughter.) 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's not saying 10 much for us, Commissioner. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He didn't say we didn't 12 plan. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wasn't throwing 14 rocks at anybody. I'm just telling you that we're ready. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's quite a -- I mean, 16 that's quite a long detour, so I think it is going to -- you 17 know. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you provide lunch 19 for those who have to detour? 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: I assume that it will be open 21 to people who have property along that stretch. 22 MR. JOHNSTON: We'll try to minimize the 23 time. I think there might be some time in -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You said two -- two 25 weeks? 12-9-02 66 1 MR. JOHNSTON: Right. 2 MR. ODOM: And we may not -- we may not have 3 to do it, but we wanted the option to do it and let everyone 4 know that the problem arises at The Horizon. But I -- where 5 we can, we will leave it open. If it's shut, it will be a 6 minimal time. But it gives the contractor an option. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, of course, they 8 have another entrance over by my house. 9 MR. JOHNSTON: Right, Horizon does. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So that's not a big 11 problem, either. Judge, I move that we authorize the Road 12 and Bridge Department of Kerr County to close Sheppard Rees 13 Road for up to two weeks during their construction project. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 16 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 17 authorize the Kerr County Road and Bridge Department to 18 close Sheppard Rees Road for up to two weeks during the 19 construction of Sheppard Rees. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And when the public 21 starts calling and screaming, give them Larry Griffin's home 22 phone number. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 24 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12-9-02 67 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's take a 15-minute break, 4 come back promptly at 20 minutes till 11:00. 5 (Recess taken from 10:26 a.m. to 10:40 a.m.) 6 - - - - - - - - - - 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: We will reconvene this 8 regular session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. 9 It's 20 minutes to 11:00 on Monday, December the 9th. Next 10 item for consideration is Item Number 8, which is a 11 presentation regarding Phase 2 MS4 Storm Water permits by 12 Sue Glover from the Texas Association of Counties. 13 Commissioner Baldwin? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Thank you 15 very much. You remember last month, gentlemen, we -- this 16 item for the issue was brought up, and I told you that I 17 would get someone from TAC to come over and brief us on it, 18 and I've called over there, and sure enough, I got the top 19 of the line. Our friend, Sue Glover, is an expert in this 20 field, and she's -- thank you, Sue, for coming over to brief 21 us on this issue. 22 MS. GLOVER: Good morning, Judge, 23 Commissioners. It's nice to come over and talk about storm 24 water when I had to come through a lot of storm water to get 25 over here this morning. So, as you will recall, we have 12-9-02 68 1 been monitoring the storm water Phase 2 issue since EPA 2 permitted this -- or proposed a rule back in 1998, so it's 3 going on five years that I've been talking about storm 4 water. But EPA did finalize its rule in 1999, and this 5 past year we've been working with the T.N.R.C.C., now the 6 T.C.E.Q., on how far they were going to administer the 7 Phase 2 program in Texas. And, as you will recall -- y'all 8 have heard me probably talk about this a lot -- there were 9 two issues in the Phase 2 rule, and one has to do with small 10 municipal separate storm sewer systems, MS4's. And the 11 other provision had to do with construction activity. 12 Fortunately, at this point, it appears that 13 you all are not a designated MS4 county. The designation 14 criteria for MS4 counties had to do not with water quality 15 issues, but had to do with population brackets. And so, 16 since y'all aren't a county of 50,000 -- or have an 17 urbanized area of 50,000 within your county, you're not 18 automatically designated under the Phase 2 rule. In Texas, 19 we had 51 counties that were automatically designated, so 20 for right now, that's a very good thing for you all, because 21 those 51 counties will have an enormous amount of tasks to 22 undertake to adhere to the MS4 permit. That's not to say 23 that, in the future, that T.N.R.C.C., or T.C.E.Q., as 24 they're now called, could not come in and designate a county 25 or an area of a county based on water quality issues. So -- 12-9-02 69 1 but at this point, I've checked the rule. You all are not a 2 listed county. Because you aren't adjacent -- next to Bexar 3 County, you won't have that urbanized area come in. 4 In San Patricio County -- which y'all know 5 that that's right next to Nueces County, but a very small 6 rural county -- there's a segment of San Patricio County, 7 because they're right on the edge of Nueces County, that is 8 designated, because it goes by census block tracts. So, as 9 Kendall County grows, and y'all are adjacent to them, there 10 could be some overlapping on your south side that could. Or 11 T.N.R.C.C. or T.C.E.Q. could come in and designate you based 12 on water quality criteria. So, today -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: As soon as the population 14 in Kerr County gets to 50,000, does it automatically then, 15 or is it -- 16 MS. GLOVER: No, sir, it will be based on the 17 census criteria. So -- and one of the things that we've 18 asked for -- there are two permits that are out there right 19 now. One is the MS4 permit. The other is the construction. 20 Under the MS4 permit, one of the things that we commented on 21 was that it should be the latest census tract area. So, you 22 all, under that definition, would probably not come under 23 for another 10 years. But that's not to say that -- that 24 the Commission couldn't come in at any time, based on the 25 criteria that they've listed in the MS4 permit, to designate 12-9-02 70 1 y'all, but at this point that does not seem to be. Which 2 y'all are very glad, because for our 51 counties, they are 3 going to see an enormous amount of expense, probably, in 4 adhering to those provisions. 5 So, right now, I'm just going to talk about 6 construction. And the handout that I gave you is a fact 7 sheet that the Commission has put out, as well as a copy of 8 the draft permit. And when I say it is a draft permit, it 9 has been out since about September, I guess, or maybe the 10 beginning of October, and it had a comment period date until 11 November the 15th. We did not submit comments on the 12 construction permit, because for the most part it was 13 everything that we had asked for. We did submit about 27 14 comments to the MS4 permit. The construction permit 15 probably will change very little. Again, the one that you 16 have in front of you is just the proposed permit. There may 17 be some modifications and changes as the Commission does 18 their final permit. 19 And they're supposed to be meeting today. 20 They're supposed to have this done by December the 9th. But 21 we just attended a round of work group sessions on the MS4 22 permit and on the construction permit, and, surprise, 23 surprise, surprise, but they're running a little behind. 24 So, it may be later this month before they issue the 25 construction permit, and maybe even into next year before 12-9-02 71 1 they issue the MS4 permit. So -- but I want to walk you 2 through the construction permit. There is a difference in 3 here between large construction activities and small 4 construction activities. When EPA came out, I guess back in 5 1990, they came out with a Phase 1 program, and it had 6 construction activities of 5 acres or greater. As y'all 7 remember, before we got T-21 as our federal funding, it was 8 called Ice-T, and there was a provision in there that it 9 didn't really roll back until about -- I think it was 1998 10 that the 5-acre construction activity came into -- came into 11 play. So, that's currently what we're under right now. If 12 you go out and do a construction activity over 5 acres, you 13 should be adhering to an EPA permit. Phase 2 -- and for 14 the -- for the comments that I'm going to make today, they 15 call that the large construction activity. And that's 16 5 acres and above. Phase 2, when it came out -- 17 Commissioner? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sorry I have so many 19 questions. On the large construction, I think, or as it 20 relates to a subdivision development -- 21 MS. GLOVER: Right. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- if a developer has a 23 large tract of land, over 5 acres, and they're clearing 24 cedar -- 25 MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. 12-9-02 72 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- can they claim that, 2 or is there an exemption for agricultural clearing? 3 MS. GLOVER: Well, yes, there is an exemption 4 for agricultural clearing -- well, agriculture itself has an 5 exemption under the Clean Water Act and under the N.P.D.S. 6 program. Now, when we started talking about this with the 7 Commission, one of the things they brought up was, oh, 8 somebody's going out and clearing their property. That 9 would be an activity. And it was brought up by the Farm 10 Bureau and others, no, that's an agricultural exemption. 11 And so I think that would be exempt, if somebody's going 12 out, clearing their field, and they really are going to 13 plant it, and they probably have an ag exemption somewhere 14 on file with the -- with the Tax Assessor's office. But if 15 they're going out there to clear cedar and then they're 16 going to subdivide it, I don't think that's a clear 17 exemption, because they're going to have to clear it 18 regardless if they're going to go out there and subdivide 19 land. So -- and in that instance, I think they would be 20 under the Commission's rule. At this point, they're under 21 EPA's rule on the 5 acres. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Road construction, 23 the aggregate of which is more than 5 acres? 24 MS. GLOVER: That's right. And it's not even 25 road construction, it's any disturbance of land of 5 acres 12-9-02 73 1 and greater. So, it is subdivisions at this point, for the 2 most part. And TexDOT -- 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But on the subdivision -- 4 and I'm just thinking, I mean, how a lot of our development 5 works, and we know what we're working with them. If they're 6 going out there and, you know, maybe planning the 7 subdivision, but don't have a plat and all that, or clearing 8 the land, then they're probably exempt under ag. But once 9 they file the plat, or once we approve a preliminary plat, 10 is that -- I mean, what's the trigger that would make it a 11 subdivision versus a -- an agricultural clearing for -- 12 MS. GLOVER: You know, it's not real clear in 13 the rule, in the permit itself, because it talks about 14 "disturbance of land," and I think that that gets it. But, 15 again, if it is truly for ag, then I think it would be on 16 that owner or operator to go to the Commission, or in 17 defense for not filing a Notice of Intent to the Commission, 18 to say, well, this was ag. It really kind of falls back on 19 them, on their credibility of what they assume that it is. 20 And, you know, I'll get into it a little bit later, but your 21 problem is -- is that you have a Commission inspector come 22 out and see that going on, and they come out and they say, 23 "Well, where's your Notice of intent? Where's your sign 24 posting? Where's your storm water pollution prevention 25 plan?" And you don't have any of that. 12-9-02 74 1 And you say, "Well, but this is ag, and we 2 were under that assumption." You should document it very 3 well to show that it truly is for ag use. Small 4 construction activity came about in the Phase 2 rule, and 5 that's 1 to 5 acres. So, you know, any activity that occurs 6 from 1 to 5 is considered small under the permit. Five and 7 above is considered large. So, when Kerr County goes out 8 and they decide they are going to do a road project -- and, 9 for the most part, unless you're going to build something 10 that you're not going outside contract on; you know, if 11 y'all were going to build a new jail -- I realize y'all have 12 recently done that, but if you were going to do that, your 13 outside contractor would probably be responsible -- they 14 would be responsible for getting the permit for an acre and 15 above. So, really, I'm going to really specify my comments 16 on roads, because I think that's where it's really going to 17 hit the pavement, as we call it, with you all as you look at 18 the -- at the permit. 19 If you're going to go out and you're going to 20 do -- and I'm going to talk about small construction 21 activity right now, because you're already under the 5-acre 22 requirement, so I'm going to really specify the 1- to 23 5-acre, but I'll cover both. If you go out and you're going 24 to do a new road project -- and I say "road project" -- 25 construction of a road project, you first need to determine, 12-9-02 75 1 is it new construction or is it just existing, routine road 2 maintenance? Now, one of the things that I think we were 3 very successful in when we submitted our comments to EPA 4 back in 1998, we said routine road maintenance should not be 5 considered a construction activity, and they agreed with us. 6 And they even gave us a broader definition in the rule than 7 we had asked for. And it says, you know, that routine road 8 maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line 9 and grade, hydraulic capacity, and original purpose of a 10 ditch, channel, or other similar storm water conveyance. 11 For 95 percent of our counties, this is what they do, so 12 essentially they are exempted from the permit requirements. 13 Now, you get into a lot of questions -- and 14 this is what I get. "Well, Sue, what is routine road 15 maintenance?" I think if you're going to go out, if you're 16 going to grade a -- an existing dirt road, that's routine 17 road maintenance. If you're going out and you're clearing 18 the bar ditches alongside your county roads, that's routine 19 road maintenance. If you were going to do asphalt overlays, 20 the only thing that -- I think that's a routine road 21 maintenance, except for if you build that road up where you 22 would change the grade; then it gets iffy on whether it's a 23 construction activity. If you have an existing road right 24 now, but you have a really bad curve to it, so you want to 25 go in and you want to straighten that road out, in that area 12-9-02 76 1 that -- where you straighten it, which it doesn't take much 2 to get to an acre, that's construction activity and would 3 not be routine road maintenance. For the most part, though, 4 we feel like, again, that 95 percent of the activities that 5 our counties are doing right now on road construction falls 6 under that definition of routine road maintenance. And I'll 7 just stop there and let y'all ask questions or -- 'cause 8 y'all may have specific questions about road projects you 9 have coming up for the next year. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We just opened bids 11 for one which is going to be how many miles, Commissioner? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A ways. 13 MS. GLOVER: But, see, you opened up bids for 14 it, so you'll have a contractor to do that. That 15 contractor, then, will be responsible, because they will be 16 the operator of the activity. They will be responsible for 17 adhering to the permit. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That has to be 19 reflected in the County's contract with the contractor, 20 though? 21 MS. GLOVER: It should. Yes, it should. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sue, we have the 23 Engineer's office behind you there. I was wondering, do 24 you -- 25 MS. GLOVER: I gave them copies too, 12-9-02 77 1 Commissioner. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do y'all have any 3 questions or comments at this time, or do you want to -- 4 MR. JOHNSTON: This permit you're showing us 5 is the general permit that -- do we issue a Notice of Intent 6 that we refer to this permit number? 7 MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. But let me go on -- 8 they asked about the Notice of Intent, and that's what's I 9 was going to get to next. If you decide that -- and you all 10 are doing it; you're not outside contracting to do it, that 11 you're going to do it yourselves, and you decide that it 12 doesn't meet that routine road maintenance definition. If 13 it's 1 to 5 acres, you do not have to submit a Notice of 14 Intent. You have to have one, and that's a form that's 15 going to come out; it's probably going to be a one-page 16 document that the Commission will comply with. And on that, 17 it will say the permit number that you're going under, that 18 type of thing. For 1 to 5 acres, though, you do not have to 19 submit that Notice of Intent to the Commission. You just 20 have to have it on-site. If it's a large activity, 5 acres 21 and above, you do have to submit the Notice of Intent to the 22 Commission, plus $100, and that's for every project that you 23 have going on. Okay? 24 So, for the smaller projects, you'll just 25 have to have the Notice of Intent on-site, and you'll have 12-9-02 78 1 to have -- where it gets -- where I think the counties are 2 going to have the biggest problem is creating a storm water 3 pollution prevention plan, and that's for any activity. It 4 doesn't matter if it's 1 acre, 5 acres, 3 acres, whatever. 5 Each county or each entity that has a construction project 6 that, again, doesn't meet that routine road maintenance 7 definition will have to create a storm water pollution 8 prevention plan. And that plan is on Pages 19 and 20 of the 9 permit, and I didn't -- 'cause it's very detailed, but I'll 10 give y'all just the general, is that you want to control 11 erosion and sediment controls, stabilization practices, 12 structural control practices, and permanent storm water 13 controls. And -- and, really, your best management 14 practices are going to be to control sediment. As I was 15 coming out here today on 16, I noticed that TexDOT has quite 16 a few projects going along there, and they've got their silt 17 fencing out there, and the water is standing up to here 18 today, but it's doing what it's supposed to do. It's 19 preventing any runoff. And the water's okay to run off as 20 long as it's clean and as long as it doesn't have that 21 sediment in it. 22 Now, the other thing that's unique about the 23 permit -- or not unique; it says waters of the U.S. or 24 waters of the state of Texas. Well, I would think, well, 25 that would be the Guadalupe River; that would be bigger 12-9-02 79 1 stream beds. It's not. When you look at the definition of 2 what they consider state waters, it's a ditch, it's a 3 channel; it's pretty broad. So, it's very inclusive, so 4 that I don't think you could get away and say, well, we're 5 not discharging into -- you're probably discharging into 6 something, because of how broad that definition is. But, 7 again, the storm water pollution prevention plan will be 8 your biggest expense. Most counties, or at least the 9 counties that I've talked to at this point -- the MS4 10 counties have to do the storm water prevention plan as well, 11 and it's -- it's a lot more detailed than the construction 12 will have to be. It will include a site map of where in the 13 county you're -- you're doing the project. Again, your best 14 management practices. 15 Now, one of the things that we argued with 16 EPA -- we even argued with the Commission on this -- is that 17 they shouldn't prescribe best management practices; that 18 that should be left to each entity to determine, because 19 your best management practices that you use here in Kerr 20 County are not the same that they'll use in Ector County. 21 Because this rain that we got, they're not getting. And 22 that it should be based somewhat on water that you get. 23 There are some exemptions and a waiver, and I think y'all's 24 time period is that if you can do and complete a project 25 between December 15th and February the 14th, you don't have 12-9-02 80 1 to adhere to the permit, but we all know that it doesn't 2 usually take -- it takes longer than two months if you're 3 going to do a project of, you know, any length and any time. 4 Once you've -- once you've got your storm 5 water pollution prevention plan, you've got your Notice of 6 Intent -- whether you submit it or not is based on how big 7 your project is going to be -- then you have to go out and 8 set up some inspection controls which will be specified in 9 your storm water pollution prevention plan. That will 10 say -- that will kind of keep a log of when you go out there 11 and do inspection of the site. Under the permit, you're 12 required to go out once in 14 calendar days just to do a 13 site inspection. This morning, you would be out doing an 14 inspection instead of in here, because if a half an inch 15 falls on your site within a 24-hour period, you have to go 16 out and do a site inspection. And the site inspections are 17 required to make sure that your silt fencing's still in 18 place, you know. Although I didn't see anybody from TexDOT 19 out there doing their inspections this morning, but I can 20 tell you I saw them; they were working. They're doing what 21 they're supposed to do. 22 You'll retain your records for each project 23 for three years. When you complete your project and you've 24 gone through kind of post-construction stabilization, which 25 it talks about that -- that will be one of your best 12-9-02 81 1 management practices in your storm water pollution 2 prevention plan -- you'll submit a Notice of Termination to 3 the Commission. There's no charge in that, and that's 4 really -- should be a fairly short, short report as well. 5 So, mostly what I see involved from the County's aspect on 6 construction is, one, hopefully it -- what y'all are doing 7 is routine road maintenance. You're not building a lot of 8 new roads. But if you are, then you'll have to submit your 9 Notice of Intent if it's over 5 acres. If it's under 10 5 acres, you'll just have that Notice of Intent on-site. 11 And you'll create your storm water pollution prevention 12 plans. 13 Now, one of the things that we're working on 14 is trying to assist y'all in these storm water pollution 15 prevention plans, 'cause we see that that is probably going 16 to be your biggest burden. And, really, for your county, 17 once you create one of them -- because, unless you're a huge 18 county, and I can't even think of one in Texas, because 19 Hudspeth and Brewster County is -- their conditions are all 20 still pretty much the same, so -- but once you create a 21 storm water pollution prevention plan, those best management 22 practices that you've -- you outlined tonight, you can use 23 throughout the county. The only thing that will change is a 24 description of your site, the N.O.I., and your map that 25 shows where you're going to be at. But, for the most part, 12-9-02 82 1 we're hoping that once the counties create one of the storm 2 water pollution prevention plans, it can be used throughout 3 with just minor changes to the plan, itself. And we're 4 working at TAC on trying to assist y'all with that. 5 We've applied for and been approved, but, you 6 know, we haven't gotten the money -- shock -- but we've 7 applied for a grant from EPA, as well as what we call the 8 Conference of State Associations, which is Texas all the way 9 over to Georgia. We're involved in that association, TAC 10 is, and we've applied for a grant, and we've been told that 11 we've gotten the grant to do a storm water guidance manual 12 that will kind of outline everything that I've talked about 13 today, as well as give you some hints on storm water 14 pollution prevention plans. Also, the North Central Texas 15 Council of Governments, they have a good web site on storm 16 water. They have contracted with an environmental entity to 17 create -- they have a B & P manual, because they've been 18 under the Phase 1 program on the 5 acres for four years now, 19 and so they have come up with a great manual on what best 20 management practices are out there. And so we hope to share 21 some of the information that's out there amongst the 22 counties, where you don't have to feel like, well, here we 23 are. We're pressed; we probably need to hire an outside 24 environmental engineer firm to come in and do this. So, 25 we're really trying to network as well as we can amongst the 12-9-02 83 1 counties to help y'all with the storm water pollution 2 prevention plans. So -- and that's kind of, really, a 3 summary of everything. I know y'all probably have plenty of 4 questions, though. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sue, just about 6 everything that you've said costs money. 7 MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And probably a lot -- 9 MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- of money. And I -- 11 in my pea brain, the years that we've been dealing with this 12 and looking at it, I still don't see the reasoning behind 13 the whole thing. I mean, does anybody other than me see 14 that this is bordering on insanity? Or -- 15 MS. GLOVER: No, you're not. Which this is 16 one time that you're probably not. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. 18 (Laughter.) 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sue's been around me a 20 little bit. 21 MS. GLOVER: No, Commissioner, you bring up a 22 great point, and one that I did want to follow up with. You 23 know, back in 1998, when we saw this rule, we were just -- 24 oh, we couldn't believe what was being proposed. And we 25 thought, well, we'll submit our comments, and we worked with 12-9-02 84 1 EPA and we were successful to get that routine road 2 maintenance. I mean, the other state associations, now that 3 they're working on this, they're, like, thank God y'all got 4 that verbiage in there, because that saves most of our 5 counties. I said, well, it does our counties too. But they 6 didn't go all the way. And one of the things that we 7 decided, as y'all know and y'all participated in with our 8 Storm Water Coalition, we -- after the final rule was done, 9 we sat back and we said, you know, here we've successfully 10 obtained some of these things. And so there was a period 11 that could go by without filing a lawsuit, and an 12 environmental group in California filed a lawsuit. 13 At that juncture, the public officials who 14 were county officials that sat on our steering committee of 15 the Coalition decided at that point to intervene in the 16 lawsuit to protect all those things that we had 17 accomplished. We had our oral argument before the Ninth 18 Circuit in California December the 5th of last year. That 19 Court normally takes 60 to 90 days to issue its opinions. 20 It's been over a year, and we still have not heard from the 21 Ninth Circuit. And most of the points that we brought up, 22 Commissioner, were how do you get 1 acre? They were sued -- 23 the Environmental Protection Agency was sued when they came 24 up with a Phase 1 rule on 5 acres. 25 That same Court, the Ninth Circuit Court of 12-9-02 85 1 Appeals, said 5 acres is arbitrary. Give us some facts. 2 How did you come up with it? And they came back -- the 3 Environmental Protection Agency came back and they came up 4 with a report on construction activities and how it's the 5 biggest contributor for non-point source, yada, yada, yada, 6 and it still didn't satisfy the Court, really. Because when 7 we made our argument to the Court, the Court said, wait a 8 minute. We told y'all 5 acres was arbitrary. Now you've 9 come up with 1 acre. How is that not arbitrary? And I'm 10 sitting back there going, yes. Yes, somebody's -- somebody 11 is listening to what we're saying. But what does it mean a 12 year later that that Court hasn't decided? That was also 13 the same court that threw out, you know, the pledge, so 14 they've been a little busy with that. But we really don't 15 know what that means, that they have not answered and -- and 16 ruled on our opinion yet. 17 We were joined in the lawsuit by the Home 18 Builders Association and by the forestry -- Paper and 19 Forestry also. So, we -- one of the arguments -- the 20 biggest argument that we had was we said that it violated 21 the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that prohibits 22 the federal government from imposing its programs on local 23 entities. And, again, the Judge said, how do y'all say this 24 isn't a 10th Amendment violation? So, I was so excited that 25 day when we left, because I thought, gosh, you know, 12-9-02 86 1 somebody's really listening to what we're saying and they 2 don't think we're nuts. But it's a year later and we're 3 fixing to implement the program, so I don't know how that 4 came out. 5 One of the things I did mention, it's 6 unclear -- and it was a comment that was raised. The 7 Commission has said that on the MS4 permit provisions, that 8 you'll have 90 days from the time they issue the permit to 9 comply with the permit requirements. There's not similar 10 language -- this is on existing construction activities, but 11 not on new construction activities. For instance, if they 12 were to come up and adopt this program; say it did go over 13 into January and they adopted it January the 6th of 2003, 14 and y'all had slated that on January 7th, 2003, y'all were 15 starting a new project. It's really unclear that you would 16 not be under the guise of the permit. And so it is 17 something that hopefully will be clarified as people have 18 submitted their comments. Like I said, we did not submit 19 comments on the construction provision, but other folks did, 20 and that was one of the questions that they had. So -- but, 21 unfortunately, we won't know the answer to many of those 22 comments until they issue the final rule. So -- and we'll 23 continue to watch that. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sue, I seem to recall 25 that when we discussed this up here the last time, we were 12-9-02 87 1 under some sort of a deadline to file this plan, and we were 2 uncertain as to what that plan was supposed to consist. Are 3 we still under a mandatory deadline to have a plan in place? 4 MS. GLOVER: There is no plan, per se. It's 5 only based on your activities. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. So, we 7 anticipate an activity in the reconstruction of a road. 8 MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it's a major 10 project. Are we going to have to file that plan? And, if 11 so, when? 12 MS. GLOVER: If it's -- if it's a major road 13 over 5 acres, okay, until -- 14 MR. ODOM: March the 1st, isn't it? 15 MS. GLOVER: Well, no. Five acres and above 16 is still under the EPA permit, and I don't think it 17 terminates until -- 18 MR. ODOM: Supposed to be 50,000, if you're 19 at 50,000 or above. 20 MS. GLOVER: That's only the MS4 counties. 21 Y'all are not an MS4 county at this juncture. 22 MR. ODOM: That's right. 23 MS. GLOVER: Okay. But, you know, 5 acres 24 and above is existing law now. If y'all do a project of 25 5 acres now, you should be complying with the permit. Okay? 12-9-02 88 1 If you're going to go out in that current -- because the 2 Commission does not have authority yet, really; even though 3 they're coming out with a rule, they really don't have 4 authority yet under the 5-acre requirement. So, until -- 5 and it's in there in that fact sheet. Until -- I think it's 6 July 7, 2003, EPA will still be administering the program 7 for 5 acres and above on construction, okay? And you'll 8 have to go under the Phase 1 requirements of that. And I'm 9 not near as familiar with it as I am the Phase 2, okay? 10 But let's just talk about the Phase 2 under 11 your question right now, Commissioner Williams. Say it's a 12 1- to 5-acre project, okay? And that y'all are thinking 13 about doing it. The County's going to do it. What you 14 would have to do, you would have to come up with your storm 15 water pollution prevention plan. And that is your plan, and 16 that would be for that site. Before you ever go out and 17 shovel any dirt, dig anything, you would have to have your 18 Notice of Intent, which the Commission will come out with 19 that form when they come out with the rule. You'll fill out 20 that form, you'll keep it on-site. You'll have a 21 construction site notice out there; that's at the very end 22 of the permit. It's an appendix. So, it's a construction 23 site sign; it will be out there, dah-dah-dah-dah-dah, where 24 you're at, what permit guise you're under and that type of 25 thing. But that will be your plan. And it's only based on 12-9-02 89 1 when you start that activity. So, if y'all don't build a 2 new road or don't do anything major activity for two years, 3 you don't have to do anything for two years. Does that 4 answer your question? 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I see. 6 Commissioner Baldwin's going to have to file that plan, 7 'cause we're going to do that pretty quick. 8 MS. GLOVER: But, again -- 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner whose precinct 10 it's in is personally and directly responsible for the plan. 11 MS. GLOVER: And if you're contracting it 12 out, again, it's probably a good idea to make sure in the 13 contract that you say, you know, you will be responsible for 14 adhering to the permit requirements that the Texas 15 Commission on Environmental Quality has set out, and that 16 kinds of relieves y'all. But that's really -- when it will 17 kick in is when you do a project. So I told most of our 18 counties earlier this year to do all your projects this year 19 that weren't routine. Again, hopefully, the routine road 20 maintenance definition will cover most of the -- of the 21 current work that y'all are doing. Commissioner Letz? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does TAC have a -- a -- 23 kind of like a draft plan that you're providing the 24 counties? I know you say you're working with county -- 25 MS. GLOVER: We're working on one. 12-9-02 90 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't have a -- 2 MS. GLOVER: No, sir, we don't, because -- 3 and one of the reasons that we don't is, I don't think the 4 construction permit will change much, but it could change 5 from the final. But we have started on the construction 6 one. The MS4 one we haven't even started on, because, like 7 I said, we alone submitted 26 comments. And, I mean, they 8 weren't 26 -- you know, "Change this." They were 26 pretty 9 lengthy comments that we submitted. So, until we really 10 know actually what's going to be involved, it's kind of hard 11 to get started. And that -- y'all won't have to do that. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Once you get the first 13 plan done, the rest of them pretty much -- 14 MS. GLOVER: They will follow. That's 15 exactly right. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Put it on computer and 17 fill in the blanks. 18 MS. GLOVER: That's right. And we're hoping 19 that, by sharing that information with the counties, the 20 counties will feel like they don't have to go out and -- and 21 go to the great expense of hiring an outside engineering 22 service or outside environmental engineering service to do 23 it for them. So -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sue, we have for 25 several years tried to form a little coalition of Hill 12-9-02 91 1 Country counties. 2 MS. GLOVER: Mm-hmm. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we work together 4 on certain issues. I wonder if it would be beneficial if we 5 was to have a workshop-type situation with contig -- our 6 contiguous counties here, and us host it. I don't know how 7 much information they have. Would it be beneficial to put 8 together a workshop and have you back down here? 9 MS. GLOVER: We could do that. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: To present to other 11 counties and try to get all of us on the same page? 12 MS. GLOVER: We could do that, Commissioner. 13 Or what we are also looking at, too, Commissioner Letz, is 14 looking at hosting a one and a half-day workshop in Austin, 15 January -- end of January, first of February, where the 16 first part of the day we would go over construction 17 activity, and we would -- we would kind of walk you through 18 doing a storm water pollution prevention plan, 'cause that's 19 really your -- your storm water pollution prevention plan. 20 And then the next day, the activity will be on the MS4 21 permits. So, in that case, unless y'all just wanted to, 22 thinking that eventually you might be pulled into it, that, 23 you know, y'all could just come for that -- that half day. 24 So, we're looking at doing that. I just sent a letter out 25 specifically to the 51 counties that were identified as MS4 12-9-02 92 1 counties to see if they had an interest, or if they're doing 2 their own thing for that type of workshop. So, if we don't 3 do something like that, I'd be glad to come back out, or if 4 this just doesn't work, you know, we can work around that. 5 But, as y'all know, my life changes on January the 14th, and 6 I become a slave to Austin, so -- so it would be a little 7 more difficult. This worked out great for me. I was 8 telling Linda, it was so nice driving out here and no 9 traffic. Had to be careful of the deer, but no traffic. 10 So -- but come January, as y'all know, because y'all come to 11 Austin quite often during the legislative session, it really 12 does become very time-consuming. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This meeting in 14 January or early February, is that free hotel rooms and 15 meals? 16 MS. GLOVER: You know, I wish I could -- I 17 need to land a deal like that. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we better have 19 one down here. 20 MR. LESLIE: I need to -- it would be -- one 21 of the things that we wanted to do, Commissioner, is make it 22 very nominal as far as the charge. And the only cost 23 associated with that charge would be the manual that we 24 would come up with that could hopefully help y'all. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 12-9-02 93 1 MS. GLOVER: But, again, a hotel in Austin 2 during the legislative session -- you know, hopefully we 3 could find a deal. But in that case, you know, if we 4 started at 1:00 in the afternoon, you know, y'all could come 5 and then maybe come back that evening or something, or if 6 you didn't want to do that, maybe find something less 7 expensive out there. But, yeah, the hotel cost is one of 8 the concerns that we have in having this type of meeting in 9 Austin during the legislative session. But -- 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else have any 11 questions of Sue? 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No. Good write-up. 13 MS. GLOVER: Thank y'all. You always know my 14 phone number; I'm always glad to answer questions. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thanks, Sue. Tell 16 everybody hi. 17 MS. GLOVER: I will. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Doesn't that just tick 19 you off? 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: What are you going to do, 21 push back the Sheppard Rees project now? Okay. Let's wind 22 this one up today. Item Number 13, consider and discuss 23 accepting and approving bonds for newly elected officials at 24 the December 23rd Commissioners Court meeting. Commissioner 25 Letz. 12-9-02 94 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda 2 because I'm going to be out of town the 1st -- well, the 3 week of New Year's, first of the year. I know Larry's going 4 to be out of town that same week, and I presume that there 5 will still be a Commissioners Court meeting, but if 6 something happened that day to have a situation where the 7 bonds had not been accepted, so I just recommend that -- 8 because two of us, I know, definitely will be gone on the 9 1st when we traditionally do this, that we do it early just 10 to play it safe. And if no one disagrees, I'll put it on 11 the next agenda, and we can do them then. Because Jannett 12 looked into it; there's no reason we can't do it before the 13 end of the year. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Sounds like a good idea to 15 me. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just -- I don't have 17 any problem with it. I just don't want to take away from 18 the possibility of having -- having the ceremony on 19 January 1. That's meaningful to some people. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, hopefully that 21 still will take place. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I do too. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Item Number 14, 24 consider and discuss rescinding Court Order Number 27879 and 25 declaring December 24th a county holiday and having the 12-9-02 95 1 employee luncheon on December 23rd, 2002, at 11 a.m. 2 Commissioner Baldwin. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. The Court 4 Order 27879, of course, is the recent court order where we 5 had decided that we were going to have the Christmas party 6 on the 24th, but now we would like to rescind that order and 7 say that we would like to have our Christmas party on the 8 23rd, and then the 24th would be a county holiday. And I 9 would assume that that would be an ongoing thing from -- for 10 years on, and hopefully later on agree to actually trade 11 that day for another one of our holidays, and I think 12 Columbus Day would be the likely hit. But we could trade 13 that and not take off Columbus Day and take -- use this -- 14 December 24th as a -- as a holiday for people that -- that 15 travel for Christmas. I've always felt like that we don't 16 give them enough leeway to -- to -- grannies to travel to 17 Dallas to go have Christmas and bake cookies with their 18 grandkids the day before Christmas. That's important. 19 Basically, that's it. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, this -- this year, we 21 would just add another holiday to the schedule, and amend 22 the budget accordingly? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The holiday schedule as 25 part of the budget? 12-9-02 96 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is correct. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You make a motion? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I was just going 4 to give everybody the opportunity to shoot holes in it. I 5 move that we approve -- that we rescind Court Order 27879, 6 and declare December 24th a county holiday, and we'll have 7 our luncheon on the 23rd. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 10 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court rescind 11 Court Order Number 27879, declare December 24th a county 12 holiday, and have the employee luncheon on December 23rd, 13 the year 2002, at 11 a.m. Any questions or comments? If 14 not, all in favor raise your right hand. 15 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number 19 15, consider and discuss amending holiday schedule adopted 20 as part of the FY 02-03 budget to clarify that it is 21 applicable only to employees of County departments not 22 headed by elected officials. I put this on the agenda in 23 light of the Attorney General's opinion which was provided 24 to us by Ms. Uecker, which basically states that an elected 25 official has the ability to give their employees time off as 12-9-02 97 1 they see fit, regardless of the holiday schedules or other 2 requirements adopted by the Commissioners Court. So, I just 3 thought I'd bring it to the attention of the Commissioners 4 Court and see if we wanted to clarify that the holiday 5 schedule that we actually adopt applies really only to those 6 employees that do not work for elected officials, as we are 7 setting ourselves up here for a potential argument that, by 8 having a holiday schedule that applies to everyone, we are 9 unduly interfering with the operation of an elected 10 official's office. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, my preference 12 would be to take no action on this at this time, and relook 13 at it after the first of the year and, at the same time, 14 review our personnel policy. By reading the Attorney 15 General's opinion, there also -- the Commissioners Court, 16 through the budget process, does have some, I guess, 17 authority over the amount of time people work. I think we 18 really need to look at the personnel policy to make it clear 19 that all employees -- at least in my opinion, all employees 20 are to work a certain number of days per year. And if the 21 elected officials choose to give off different days, that's 22 up to them, but they still need to work a certain number of 23 days to get their paychecks. And I believe that is afforded 24 under the Attorney General's opinion. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's what the 12-9-02 98 1 personnel policy says, is that you have to work a 40-hour 2 work week in order to qualify for salary and benefits. Is 3 that correct, Barbara? 4 MS. NEMEC: That's correct. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: But the Attorney General's 6 opinion says that if an elected official decides to close 7 their office, let their people go home, you can't dock them 8 for not putting in 40 hours that week, because the elected 9 official has made the decision to send them home. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: And I think it's pretty clear 12 that that's what it says. What this says is that the 13 Commissioners Court's recourse, as part of the budget 14 process, is to look at -- decide if the elected official 15 really needs that many people or not. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, I -- I 17 would request, then, the first of year also that our County 18 Attorney revisit that with the Attorney General and request 19 another opinion, because I'm -- I don't read it quite like 20 that. And I don't -- I mean, I can not imagine the Attorney 21 General -- he's going to keep an opinion up that basically 22 says an elected official can take his -- you know, expand 23 it. You know, and I don't believe -- think our elected 24 officials would abuse it. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Take off the month of 12-9-02 99 1 June. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. "We're not going 3 to work the month of June." And they're going to -- 4 employees are going to be paid for not doing any work. That 5 just doesn't make sense to me. And I think that's the 6 implication out of the Attorney General's opinion, that that 7 potential exists, and that just doesn't make sense to me. 8 So, I'd really request that we do nothing on this at this 9 time, and, you know, talk to the County Attorney, have him 10 look at this and our personnel policy, and make -- you know, 11 see what we can do, because I think that it is not right for 12 some employees, whether or not they work for the County or 13 elected officials, to get paid, basically, differently based 14 on the choice of elected officials. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: I have no problem deferring 16 it, but I think it's an issue -- and I'll quote from the 17 Attorney General's opinion. "A county commissioners court 18 may adopt a policy requiring a county employee to work or 19 account for 40 hours of work each week to be eligible for 20 compensation and benefits, but the court may not apply the 21 policy to interfere in the administration of another county 22 officer's office." The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh 23 away. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: The Sheriff wants to 25 speak. 12-9-02 100 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have one question 2 about that, too. Say, as an elected official, I want to 3 give most of the people in my department off on -- even the 4 23rd, just as an example. But since my department's a 5 24-hour, 7-day-a-week department, there are certain 6 employees I have to have there; you know, your dispatchers 7 and your jailers. Now, if -- if you adopt a -- a holiday 8 schedule that does not affect elected officials' employees 9 or their departments, okay, how can I give those people that 10 I can not give off on -- on holidays that I choose, how can 11 I give them overtime for working those holidays? I don't 12 know if that opinion addresses that I can pay -- have them 13 paid more, you know, or paid overtime -- 14 MS. UECKER: No. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- when they have to be 16 there. So I think, before -- before -- the only thing I'm 17 asking is, how do I do that? 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's not -- 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only thing I'm 20 asking is, before you go and adopt a holiday -- or a 21 schedule, holiday schedule that does not include elected 22 officials' employees, I would -- I would ask for a little 23 bit more research done on it to make sure that I can still 24 give my people holiday time, on those that have to work on 25 those holidays. 12-9-02 101 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think this Attorney 2 General's opinion says you can -- you can give them other 3 days off. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Give them a day off 5 in lieu of. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But when -- and our 7 dispatchers are considered civilian employees in my 8 department. They are allowed only to work 40 hours a week. 9 It's not law enforcement where you can, you know, give them 10 off later and change hours and that. So, if they don't get 11 it in that same 40-hour work week, they get overtime for 12 working that. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Do they have -- do 14 they have holidays? 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right now, we go by the 16 holiday schedule the County's adopted for everybody, just 17 like we always have. 18 MS. NEMEC: The only way they can get 19 overtime is if they physically work over 40 hours. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And a lot of them do. 21 MS. NEMEC: Then you give them overtime. You 22 have to if they physically work over 40 hours. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. That's the way I 24 feel. But if I don't -- if I can't go by the holiday 25 schedule the County adopts, okay, to give them a holiday if 12-9-02 102 1 they -- the only way they get the holiday is if they work 2 the holiday, all right? But if I got to set my own holidays 3 and that, and they're not set by the County, I'm actually 4 authorizing a person to get paid for a day that they 5 shouldn't get paid for, which would contradict this whole 6 Attorney General's opinion, is the way I read it. 7 MS. NEMEC: I think, in a nutshell, what this 8 opinion is saying is, unless the elected official authorizes 9 the County Treasurer to reduce the pay for hours that they 10 didn't work, the County Treasurer cannot do that. I have 11 to -- you know, even though I know they weren't here, unless 12 it's in writing that I deduct a certain amount of hours for 13 those employees, I have to pay them their regular salary. I 14 am not authorized to lower their pay, to reduce their pay 15 for hours they didn't work, if the elected official does not 16 authorize -- 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But if I authorized 18 everybody in the department that we can give off, off, can I 19 also authorize those that couldn't take off overtime? 20 MS. NEMEC: If they work over 40 hours -- 21 physically work over 40 hours, you have to. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, dispatchers, it's 23 hard to give them that day off, because -- 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At another time. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- they're stuck. You 12-9-02 103 1 have to do it within that 40 hours. 2 MS. NEMEC: Now, if -- if they work -- if 3 they work 40 hours, and they don't physically work over 40 4 hours, then it's not time and a half, but what you're saying 5 is then they're cheated out of a holiday because other 6 employees took a holiday. Then they get paid 40 hours plus 7 8 hours straight time. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 9 MS. NEMEC: That's how that works. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Even if I choose the 11 holiday? 12 MS. NEMEC: Yeah, 'cause they didn't work 13 over 40 hours. 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Going back to the 15 question, you can adopt -- 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: According to this -- 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You could adopt the 18 same holiday schedule that we have in the budget. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: There's nothing that 21 would keep an elected official from doing that. It's just 22 saying you don't have to. You could say, hey, I don't want 23 to grant any of these as holidays; I'm going to pick 10 days 24 at random and those are going to be this department's 25 holidays. 12-9-02 104 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, the only thing I'm 2 asking is what that opinion -- the way I was reading it -- I 3 think maybe David can get some clarity on it or something -- 4 is that I just want to make sure that those employees that I 5 couldn't give off, if I chose to, aren't going to get kind 6 of shafted out of some time. 7 MS. NEMEC: If they work eight hours that 8 holiday and the total amount of hours at the end of the week 9 is 40 hours, then they get paid for 40 hours plus 8 hours 10 straight time for the holiday. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Dispatchers. 12 MS. NEMEC: For the holiday. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think Commissioner 15 Letz makes a good point. We ought to take a look at it. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think that's good. I think 17 we all ought to keep in mind that this came up as we were 18 discussing the luncheon. One of our elected officials said, 19 "I'm shutting my office down on the 24th," you know, "so 20 y'all do what you want to." And the 24th at that time was 21 not an official county holiday. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've taken care of 23 that. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see your point, 25 Judge. And if -- to me, if -- if Linda, as an example, just 12-9-02 105 1 up and closed her office and let her employees off outside, 2 I mean, to me that's abuse. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's what was said was 4 going to happen. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know. I know. 6 MS. UECKER: Well -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But, I mean, just -- 8 you know, a common courtesy to the taxpayers, that that's 9 not a normal practice, I don't think. I mean, you don't do 10 that all the time, do you? 11 MS. UECKER: No. Never have. And the point 12 is -- is that I don't think that any elected official, 13 especially not me -- I'm speaking for myself -- is going to 14 abuse that. I want holidays to be what the Court sets. 15 But -- and I know many of you haven't been here, but for 16 years I've been trying to get the Commissioners Court to set 17 the 24th as a holiday every year, and we go through this 18 every year. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Linda, you never came before 20 us this past budget year or the budget year before that and 21 said, "Wait a minute, would you guys please put the 24th as 22 a holiday?" 23 MS. UECKER: Well, you're right, because 24 the -- one of the years, I think the 24th fell on a Monday, 25 and it was a holiday -- no, it fell on a Friday, and it was 12-9-02 106 1 a holiday. And the point I'm trying to make here, I want 2 the Court to set the holidays. I don't want to do it. I 3 want the -- but the 24th has always been a time, because of 4 the child support, that even if the other offices weren't 5 open, I had staff up there getting child support out. And 6 my staff this year, I've got one going to Dallas, I've 7 got -- no, I've got two going to Dallas, and it was just 8 going to be real difficult for them to do that, to get to 9 their Christmas destination without having the 24th off. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Of course, an alternative 11 would be they could take a day of vacation. 12 MS. UECKER: They could, yeah. Except that 13 it would leave me two short staff. 'Cause right now I've 14 got two employees that just had heart surgery last week. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I concur. I think -- I 16 mean, I'm kind of with Commissioner Baldwin and with Linda 17 on this. I mean, I think it's -- the 24th should be a 18 holiday. We've done that this year, and if we need to make 19 an adjustment to the personnel policy, I think we should do 20 it when we have more time to look into it next year. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, fair enough. 22 MS. NEMEC: In all the years past, it seems 23 like on Christmas, it doesn't matter what the holidays are, 24 if you look around, departments do close their offices early 25 right after the luncheon. And that's just been what I've 12-9-02 107 1 seen in years past. And I think Linda came up with this 2 because her office always had to end up staying here because 3 of the child support. Everybody else's office was closed 4 down except hers for years. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't think anybody's 6 objecting to the notion of the 24th as a holiday. The 7 concern that I'm trying to express here is the ability of an 8 elected official to simply let their people off when they 9 felt it was necessary or convenient, and the fact that the 10 Commissioners Court really has no recourse on that elected 11 official if they choose to abuse their authority in that 12 way. I don't care whether we take the 24th off or not. I 13 mean, that's -- 14 MS. UECKER: I don't think you have any 15 elected officials that are going to abuse that. I mean, I 16 would certainly hope not. I don't intend to. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're going to have a 18 great Christmas party this year. Man, this is going to be 19 fun. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, that's enough on that 21 one. We have an executive session posted for litigation, so 22 those of you who are not required for that need to leave. 23 (The open session was closed at 11:37 a.m., and an Executive Session was held, the 24 transcript of which is contained in a separate document.) 25 - - - - - - - - - - 12-9-02 108 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's go back into open 2 session, if you'll go out there and open the door? It is 3 now eight minutes until 12:00 on Monday, December the 9th, 4 Year 2002. The Court having concluded its executive 5 session, we'll return to open session. Is there any action 6 required as a result of executive session? Seeing none, we 7 stand adjourned. 8 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:54 a.m.) 9 - - - - - - - - - - 10 11 12 STATE OF TEXAS | 13 COUNTY OF KERR | 14 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 15 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 16 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 17 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 18 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 13th day of December, 19 2002. 20 21 22 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 23 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 24 Certified Shorthand Reporter 25 12-9-02