1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Regular Session 10 Monday, January 13, 2003 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: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 24 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X January 13, 2003 2 PAGE --- Visitors' Input 3 3 --- Commissioners' Comments 9 4 1.1 Pay Bills 19 1.2 Budget Amendments 21 5 1.3 Late Bills 33 1.4 Read and Approve Minutes 35 6 1.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 38 7 2.6 Discuss adopting sick leave bank for county 8 employees 39 2.1 Preliminary plat for The Reserve at Falling 9 Water, LTD, in Precinct 3 51 2.2 Purchase of 8.5-ton crane from GSC 59 10 2.3 Approval of final road & bridge alignment for new Hermann Sons Bridge 63 11 2.4 Resolution to participate in 216th Judicial District Narcotics Task Force 69 12 2.5 Discuss donation and planting of tree on courthouse square 79 13 2.7 Discuss having an upcoming Commissioners Court meeting at the Union Church 82 14 2.8 911 Coordinator status report 89 2.9 Discuss adopting 911 addressing letter to 15 property owner, & all related costs 106 2.10 Discuss setting workshop with 911 Board to 16 discuss 911 Guidelines 110 2.11 Clarification of County's authority to assign 17 road names and addresses in Kerr County 113 2.13 Revisions to Interlocal Agreement between Kerr 18 County & U.G.R.A. to cover current, pending & future projects 118 19 2.12 Approval of Mutual Aid Agreement for Regional Councils of Government 137 20 2.14 Authorize Road & Bridge to haul donated fill material to the Kerr County 4-H facility at 21 Red Rose Ranch 140 2.15 Discuss amending O.S.S.F. rules to abolish 22 Section 10 & set date for public hearing 142 2.16 Discuss whether County intends to not extend 23 current contract with U.G.R.A. for administration of O.S.S.F. program 153 24 2.17 Discuss procedures for Commissioners Court 166 2.18 Discuss Commissioners Court Committee Assignments 176 25 --- Adjourned 190 3 1 On Monday, January 13, 2003, 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 TINLEY: It's 9 a.m. local time, 8 Monday, on the 13th of January, 2003, and I'll now call to 9 order the regular Commissioners Court meeting for this date. 10 And I think the first item of business is the -- I'll call 11 on Commissioner, Precinct 1, Mr. Baldwin, for our opening 12 prayer. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be happy to do that. 14 If you would rise and have a word of prayer with me, then 15 we'll do the pledge of allegiance. 16 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. The next 19 item of business on the agenda is visitors' input. If there 20 is any member of the audience that has any comment that they 21 wish to make concerning a matter that is not on the 22 agenda -- if you wish to speak on matters that are on the 23 agenda, we would ask that you sign a participation form that 24 we have, or should have at the back of the room. We have 25 those, and we'd urge you to do that so that you can 1-13-03 4 1 participate with us. But as to items which are not on the 2 agenda, if there are any members of the audience that wish 3 to speak, we would urge them to do so and to come forward at 4 this time. The only caveat that I can give you is, we can 5 listen to you, but we cannot engage in dialogue with you. 6 And the reason for that is because, under the law, since it 7 is not posted as an agenda item, we can't engage in 8 discussion, but we can certainly listen. We'd be tickled to 9 death to do that, so anybody that has anything to -- to say 10 at this point in time on a matter not on the agenda, if 11 they'd rise and come forward, we'd be happy to hear it. 12 Yes, sir? Mr. Eller, Come forward, please, sir. 13 MR. ELLER: Good morning, Judge. Thank you. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. 15 MR. ELLER: The proper role of government is 16 health, safety, and welfare of the people, and anything 17 outside of that is social engineering. And every time the 18 government tries social engineering, it fails. Now, this 19 bond election for the hog barn does not fall in either of 20 those categories. It is strictly social engineering. Now, 21 I've tried to understand this bond election, and I hear 22 three reasons for it: The exhibition of animals, 23 agricultural interests, and economic impact. And I'd like 24 to briefly go over my opinion of those. If it's for the 25 exhibition of animals, there's less than 1 percent of the 1-13-03 5 1 population of this county involved in exhibiting animals. 2 Now, if we are going to, as a government agency and the 3 taxpayers, spend three and a half million dollars on 4 1 percent of the people, and if we treat everybody equally, 5 we need a bond issue of $350 million. I don't think we're 6 going to do it. 7 Now, if the reason is agriculture interests, 8 according to the U.S. Census Bureau, less than one quarter 9 of 1 percent of the population of Kerr County is employed in 10 agriculture and animal production. That makes our fair bond 11 issue 1 billion, 400 million dollars. I'm sure we're not 12 going to do that. Now, if the reason is economic impact -- 13 and my study of economics says if a business is profitable, 14 it came about by about a 35 percent markup on sales. You 15 reduce that by expenses, and you have net profit. If you 16 increase your sales with no increase in expenses, it becomes 17 pure net profit, and I don't really think there should be 18 any argument about that. So, if we -- the number I hear is 19 $10 million a year, net, of economic impact. That's sales, 20 increased sales with no increase in costs. That means the 21 business people of Kerr County will make three and a half 22 million dollars a year in new profit. 23 If that were true, these people are smart 24 enough to go build a hog barn themselves, pay for it in one 25 year, and sit back and reap three and a half million dollars 1-13-03 6 1 in profit every year from now on. I don't believe it. I 2 think it's smoke and mirrors. And I do not believe the 3 taxpayers should be asked to subsidize a very small special 4 interest group of any kind. And I do not believe the 5 taxpayers should be asked to subsidize local businesses when 6 purportedly they're going to get three and a half million 7 dollars in new profit every year. I ask the Court to return 8 to the proper role of government; health, safety, and 9 welfare, and stop social engineering. I ask you to cancel 10 this bond election. Thank you. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Is there any 12 other member of the public or in the audience that has any 13 comments that they'd like to make on matters which are not 14 on the posted agenda? Anybody else on matters not on the 15 agenda? I would note for the record that our Congressman, 16 Lamar Smith, has just joined us, and we're very happy to 17 have him here. Welcome, Congressman. Good to see you this 18 morning. 19 CONGRESSMAN SMITH: Thank you, Judge. May I 20 step forward? 21 JUDGE TINLEY: You certainly may, sir. 22 CONGRESSMAN SMITH: It's nice to see some 23 friends here, old and new as well. And, Judge, 24 congratulations to you, and it's just a pleasure being with 25 you. You might recall that one time in a former life, I too 1-13-03 7 1 was a County Commissioner and on the Commissioners Court in 2 Bexar County, and that was one of the most enjoyable jobs I 3 ever held, so I know you all are enjoying what you're doing 4 today as well. I'm not on the formal schedule today, and I 5 know you have a full schedule, so I don't want to take too 6 much time. What I do like is the peephole in the door so I 7 can sort of keep track of what's going on in here, try not 8 to interrupt y'all too much, too often. But I just 9 appreciate what you all do and look forward to meeting with 10 you and also being of help to you all any way I possibly 11 can. The most recent issue I've heard about in Kerr County, 12 of course, is the bridge in Comfort, and I know we're all 13 working to do that, and I've written TexDOT to try to get 14 them to help you all out in the county as well. So, we want 15 to do everything we can to help. I know that that's a 16 pressing concern, at least to one Commissioner, and to all 17 of us, because we're all worried about safety and people 18 being able to get where they need to be in a reasonable 19 amount of time. Judge, I don't have anything special. If 20 you have any questions for me, I'd be happy to answer any 21 questions that you might have. I am spending the day in 22 Kerrville, checking with constituents, and I'm going to be 23 meeting with my Chamber of Commerce friends a little bit 24 later on, and with Schreiner University officials a little 25 bit later today, as well as talking and visiting with other 1-13-03 8 1 individuals as well. So, I always look forward to being in 2 the Hill Country part of my district, particularly 3 Kerrville, and just glad to be with you all today for a 4 short time. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we very much appreciate 6 you being here, Congressman, and if you have a few moments, 7 what I will propose to do, with the Court's permission, is 8 in a short bit, after we get a few other matters out of the 9 way, to take our recess a bit early so that any of us that 10 have any questions or concerns we want to express to you, 11 we'll be able to do so. 12 CONGRESSMAN SMITH: I'm not going to rush 13 you. I'll be happy to wait and listen, and whenever it's 14 convenient, I'll be happy to meet with y'all outside of 15 court or whatever is convenient with you. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: We really appreciate your 17 time. Thank you for being here. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One question right 19 quick. Would you introduce those two lovely ladies with 20 you? 21 CONGRESSMAN SMITH: Oh, I'll be happy to, and 22 folks in the courtroom may be interested as well. O'lene 23 Stone, directly behind me, is the District Director for the 24 21st Congressional District, and oversees all of our 25 district throughout the district. Ann Overby, to O'Lene's 1-13-03 9 1 left, is our Kerrville District Office Manager, and 2 represents me here in Kerrville. So, if you need help 3 directly and quickly, call Ann. Ann, what's your number? 4 MS. OVERBY: 895-1414. 5 CONGRESSMAN SMITH: And we're in the phone 6 book. And so, between Ann and O'Lene and me, we hope to be 7 helpful to you all at least half the time. 8 (Laughter.) 9 CONGRESSMAN SMITH: Thank you, Buster. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much, 11 Congressman. We appreciate your being here. Is there 12 anyone else that may have comments to make on items not 13 listed on the agenda? We'll move forward, then, with the 14 Commissioners' comments. Commissioner, Precinct 1. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I have a 16 few. I wanted to remind every one of the stock show, and 17 I'm sure that everybody at the table will mention that. It 18 starts on Thursday, and, of course, we all have duties 19 there, but this is for the audience; that our Hill Country 20 Junior Livestock Show begins on Thursday, and I think it 21 ends up on Saturday, probably. But it's -- it is a huge 22 event, and it's an honor to work with that program. I had 23 received a phone call -- and I apologize that I didn't get 24 it on the agenda. And we don't have -- I just want to brief 25 you on it. We don't have to make a decision on -- I pretty 1-13-03 10 1 much can make the decision, I think, but on March the 4th, 2 the City of Kerrville Fire Department and the State Liquor 3 Control Board -- A.B.C.? I can't remember what -- 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: T.A.B.C. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: T.A.B.C., through 6 agreement with the Peterson Foundation, are putting on a 7 program at the Ag Barn out in the parking lot, and they -- 8 one of the things they'll do is they'll have an enactment of 9 a DWI automobile accident, where they'll extract someone out 10 of the car and, you know, do the jaws of life and the 11 ambulance runs up there and the fire trucks, you know, all 12 that kind of thing. And all the seniors -- juniors and 13 seniors from Tivy High School, and Center Point as well, 14 will be there, and it's kind of a DWI awareness type thing. 15 I think we probably have all seen that. Their request is 16 they are presently going to have this out in the parking 17 lot, and if -- in case it rains, could they go into the 18 arena and be out of there by 12:30 in the afternoon? And 19 there's a little bit of a scheduling problem; there's a 20 roping coming in the following day, and Glenn's staff is 21 going to be setting up. So, I -- I think that I will 22 probably just twist Glenn's arm just a little bit and try to 23 help the -- help all this happen. So, I wanted to say, 24 bring it out. 25 One other item, and I failed to bring the 1-13-03 11 1 letter in here; it's a letter that we all received from the 2 City Manager to Dr. Davis regarding the airport issue. The 3 letter -- lengthy letter, but it basically stated that -- 4 that the City Manager -- or the city system has the City 5 Manager in place to make all the decisions, hiring and 6 firing. I'm assuming that Dr. Davis was asking him to hire 7 a full-time Airport Manager, I think is the gist of the 8 letter, anyway. And he went on to let Dr. Davis know that 9 he was in charge, and he would do the hiring and firing. 10 And, here's my point. And that's great; I think that's a 11 great program, but my point is that if that -- if that 12 affects the County budget in any way, I highly recommend 13 that they bring that over here before anybody's hired or any 14 decisions are made. If it affects our budget -- and history 15 shows that, in all of our joint efforts with the City, which 16 are many, the City has simply gone out and done what they 17 want to do and sent us a bill. Well, that ceased a few 18 years ago -- two or three years ago. Commissioner Letz, you 19 remember. And I really think that needs to remain ceased. 20 If anything happens like that, and particularly if it deals 21 with the County budget, I -- I really think that they need 22 to come over and visit with us about it before -- before 23 they take us too far. That's all. That's my point. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner Williams, 25 Precinct 2. 1-13-03 12 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I want to 2 extend greetings to you and to Commissioner Nicholson for 3 joining this Court. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hopefully, all of our 6 service will be in the best interests of the people of Kerr 7 County. I also want to take the opportunity to wish some 8 members of the Court and everyone in the audience and Kerr 9 County a happy and a healthy and prosperous new year. If I 10 may, may I take a moment just to provide a little 11 information on what Commissioner Baldwin was referencing 12 relative to the airport? As you noted, Commissioner, I did 13 receive that copy of the letter, and I served as the Court's 14 liaison to the joint Airport Board. I think Dr. Davis' 15 attempt to emphasize the need for a full-time manager, not a 16 -- not a person whose -- whose responsibilities are divided 17 among recycling and all the other things that had been the 18 case in the past, is probably a pretty good point. What 19 concerned me, and you came close to it, and -- and you did 20 touch on one point -- the fact that they may be hiring a 21 full-time person without benefit of talking about an 22 amendment to the budget. My understanding about that is 23 that they have budgeted in the City budget sufficient to 24 cover that for the remainder of this budgetary year. If 25 that turns out not to be the case, then certainly they're 1-13-03 13 1 going to have to come to Commissioners Court relative to any 2 additional expenditures. But I think an equal to or greater 3 point than that has to do with the fact that there is no 4 interlocal agreement that we can put our fingers on existing 5 between the County and the City relative to the management 6 of the airport, and that needs to be corrected. We need to 7 have a document that says how we're going to plan the 8 airport, how personnel are going to be chosen, and things of 9 that nature. So, I think if this -- if nothing more, it 10 illustrated the need for us to do a little more work to get 11 the partnership up where it needs to be so we all clearly 12 understand what it's about. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's all I have, 15 Judge. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner, 17 Precinct 3, Commissioner Letz. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Really very serious on 19 that side of the table this morning. I just want to remind 20 everyone -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Football season's 22 over. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Baseball season is around 24 the corner. And also, almost more importantly is, going 25 back to Stock Show, the forecast is calling for 20 degrees 1-13-03 14 1 Thursday morning and 21 Friday morning, so I suggest 2 everyone dress warm when they go, because the heating is not 3 real good in that facility. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's a good facility, 5 though. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a good facility. 7 That's all the comments I have. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson, 9 Precinct 4. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: First, I want to say 11 to the three experienced members of the Commissioners Court 12 that I appreciate and value your experience in government, 13 and the knowledge that you have. I've come to understand 14 the reasons and the rationale and wisdom behind staggered 15 terms. It's good to have three experienced members of this 16 Court. Also, I thank you for the courtesies that you've 17 extended to me and the help that you've given to me. I'm 18 looking forward to working with you. To the new judge, Pat 19 Tinley, I want to say that I've carefully paid attention to 20 your -- your concerns about good government, and I support 21 those, and I'm looking forward to working with you on them. 22 I've moved around in my career to join new organizations 23 quite a number of times, and what I've found in doing that 24 was that in each organization, there was someone who -- who 25 knew how the organization worked, knew how things got done, 1-13-03 15 1 had some memory of how the -- the organization worked, and 2 in the Commissioners Court, I've found that person to be 3 Ms. Thea Sovil. And, Thea, I want you to know that I 4 appreciate your help, and am looking forward to working with 5 you. And the last, just to say to my constituents in 6 Precinct 4 that you hired me to be your advocate on the 7 court, and I will be. Thank you. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Commissioner 9 Nicholson. I, too, want to thank the other members of the 10 Court for welcoming me. I appreciate -- I appreciate your 11 tolerance of me, and I'll be looking to you for guidance. 12 And I will continue to look to Ms. Sovil for her guidance. 13 As Commissioner Nicholson said, I appreciate her experience 14 and efforts. And, more importantly, I want to welcome all 15 of you here today, because this is your county government 16 and this is your Commissioners Court, and -- and we're here 17 to represent your interests. Our -- our function is to 18 provide you with the services that you want and to solve the 19 problems that you have that fall within the purview of 20 government. 21 So, I want to welcome you, and -- and I want 22 to encourage you to give us input and let us know what 23 you're thinking, communicate the problems that you see out 24 there to us. Oftentimes, we're pretty well focused on a 25 pretty full plate, and -- and figure we've got enough 1-13-03 16 1 problems in front of us and we can't recognize the other 2 ones. Well, I suspect you folks can remind us of those and 3 give us a heads-up on them, and we ask you to do that. And 4 we want you to feel comfortable to come before us and to 5 tell us what's on your mind. And if some of you are 6 uncomfortable speaking before a group, I would encourage you 7 to -- to come to us at any time individually, and I think I 8 speak for all the members of the Court. Tell us what's on 9 your minds. We need to know. We can't read minds, and we 10 really want to know what you're thinking. And we want to 11 represent your interests and do what's best for you 12 collectively, and so I would urge you to do that. 13 The other thing I'd like to do this morning 14 is to thank -- we have with us this morning Mr. Don Bonner. 15 Mr. Bonner is the Assistant County Attorney, and -- and he 16 has indicated an interest to -- to assist this Court in 17 issues that come before the Court. And Mr. Motley, the 18 County Attorney, has reallocated and reshuffled his staff 19 responsibilities to permit this, and -- and I appreciate it, 20 and I'm tickled to have Mr. Bonner here. And a lot of folks 21 don't realize the degree of responsibility and duties that 22 the County Attorney has in county government. The County 23 Attorney's office, their responsibility is not just to 24 advise this Court. Rather, the County Attorney also acts as 25 a legal adviser to all the other elected officials, all the 1-13-03 17 1 department heads, and also is involved in representing the 2 State and Kerr County in the -- in the prosecution of all 3 misdemeanor criminal cases, and those that are before the 4 County Court at Law, and also all of the J.P. courts, the 5 four different J.P. courts that we have in the county. 6 The County Attorney's office also represents 7 the State of Texas in the interests of the State in all 8 juvenile cases and mental health cases, and we have a number 9 of those cases, I can assure you. In addition, they have 10 civil responsibilities relating to condemnations and 11 acquisition of right-of-way, and -- and involvement in 12 coordination in civil suits in which the County or any of 13 its officials or employees are named as a party. So, 14 they've got a pretty good responsibility that -- that 15 they've got to discharge, and so it's -- it's something that 16 we need to be mindful of, I think. And -- and that -- I 17 give you that information because, until very recently, as 18 most of you know, I was in the position wearing a lawyer's 19 hat, and I know how uncomfortable it is and for a lawyer to 20 get what we call a "cold inquiry," and that is something 21 that's dropped on them and wanting an immediate answer, and 22 sometimes that's not always possible. And there are a 23 number of legal issues that come before this Court, and as a 24 result, it's oftentimes difficult for a lawyer to be in a 25 position to give an immediate answer, both from the 1-13-03 18 1 standpoint of it takes research, and then because of other 2 responsibilities and priorities. 3 So, with that background in mind, I want to 4 make a commitment personally to the County Attorney's office 5 that, as to any matters that I see that are coming before 6 this Court, I am going to make every effort to identify the 7 legal issues and the legal matters that pertain to that 8 issue, and to try and obtain answers to those before that 9 item will even be placed on the agenda or place it on the 10 agenda. And I -- I think, in that manner, we can -- we can 11 have more orderly conduct of business. There will be less 12 uncertainty about the steps that we're taking if we get 13 those answers in advance. Oftentimes, all of the facts and 14 circumstances aren't known when those inquiries are made. 15 So, I just want the County Attorney and his staff to know 16 that I'm going to make every effort that I can to try and 17 give them early heads-up on -- on matters that I want to try 18 and move through this court, and I would -- I would hope 19 that my colleagues would do likewise. And we appreciate 20 your assistance, and thank you for being here. Thank you 21 very much. 22 At this point, if there's no objection from 23 anybody on the Court, because of the Congressman's presence, 24 I would suggest that we go ahead and take our 15-minute 25 recess early, and convene back here at about 20 minutes till 1-13-03 19 1 10:00 and get on with the business at hand. Thank you. 2 (Recess taken from 9:26 a.m. to 9:40 a.m.) 3 - - - - - - - - - - 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's call the meeting 5 back to order, if we could, please. First item of business 6 is to pay the bills. We have our Auditor with us. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: We have bills. One thing I 8 would like -- would like to comment on before I start is 9 that, for -- for the new members of the Court, I just want 10 you to know my office is always open for people to come in 11 and ask about bills to my staff, prior to meetings or at any 12 time. We have a -- that's where all the information is. 13 So, I invite you to come in at any time. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we 15 pay the bills. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion by 18 Commissioner Baldwin and second by Commissioner Williams 19 that we pay the bills. Is there any discussion? Comments? 20 Like activity? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have one question, if I 22 may. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: All right, sir. Commissioner 24 Letz? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, on the first page, 1-13-03 20 1 the -- under Commissioners Court, the first invoice to DRG 2 Architects, is that for the asbestos study or what is that 3 specific part of that for? Do you know? 4 MR. TOMLINSON: That's for the -- that's the 5 contract service for -- for the -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know the -- the $10,000 7 is the contract, but the 13 -- 8 MR. TOMLINSON: Oh, the first -- okay. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- $1,390 portion of 10 that. 11 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't recall what -- what 12 that was. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I presume it's for the 14 asbestos survey. I didn't have time to look that up. 15 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't recall. Let's see. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Here they are. 17 (Discussion off the record.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: He can find it quicker than we 19 can. 20 MR. TOMLINSON: It was the first one. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's unusual. 22 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it's environmental 23 study. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 1-13-03 21 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the only question 2 I had. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other questions or 4 comments? If not, all in favor of the motion, signify by 5 raising your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Next item of 10 business are budget amendments. Budget Amendment Number 1 11 appears to be from the County Court. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. I'm requesting a line 13 item transfer of $694.83 from Court-Appointed Attorney line 14 item to the Special County Judges line item in the County 15 Court, and it's to pay a -- a fee to Denton County, where 16 the probate -- probate judge in Denton County sat in for 17 Judge Henneke in a probate matter. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You didn't say Denton 20 County? 21 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, I did. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A judge from Denton 23 County came down here? 24 MR. TOMLINSON: It happened there. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay. So, 1-13-03 22 1 there's some kind of responsibility that Kerr County has in 2 another county? 3 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it was a Kerr County 4 resident. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kerr County resident. 6 The hearing was in Denton County? 7 MR. TOMLINSON: Hearing was in Denton, yes. 8 MS. SOVIL: Normally, mental health 9 money's -- it's a mental health. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Mental health matter? Okay. 11 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, actually, it's a 12 probate judge. It says it's for the estate of this person. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Guardianship or decedent? 14 MR. TOMLINSON: Deceased. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion to approve Budget 17 Amendment Number 1 by Commissioner Letz. Do I have a 18 second? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Second by Commissioner 21 Williams. Any discussion -- further discussion or comments? 22 Okay, none. All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 23 your right hand. 24 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 1-13-03 23 1 (No response.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget 3 Amendment Request Number 2. 4 MR. TOMLINSON: This is a request for line 5 item change, 27.50 -- $27.50 from Office Supplies to Bonds 6 and Insurance for the payment of County Judge's bond. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion to approve by 9 Commissioner Letz. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Second by Commissioner 12 Baldwin. Any discussion? Comments? All in favor, signify 13 by raising your right hand. 14 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 16 Motion carries. Budget Amendment Request Number 3. 17 MR. TOMLINSON: This amendment -- or line 18 item change is for the 198th District Court. The request is 19 to transfer $931.93 from Court-Appointed Attorney line item 20 to Court-Appointed Services, and it's to pay a $3,000 21 invoice for a criminal case. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner 1-13-03 24 1 Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, to approve Budget 2 Amendment Request Number 3. Any discussion or comments? 3 All in favor, raise your right hand. 4 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 6 (No response.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget 8 Amendment Request Number 4. 9 MR. TOMLINSON: This -- this line item change 10 is the result of the prior court meeting relative to the 11 renewal of the law enforcement liability insurance. We had 12 budgeted -- on -- or we had a budget balance for liability 13 insurance of $58,714. The bill was for $92,606. We have a 14 shortfall of $33,892 in the line item for that liability 15 insurance. My recommendation is to move $15,000 from Jailer 16 Salaries and $18,892 from Nondepartmental Contingency. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion by Commissioner 19 Baldwin. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Second by Commissioner 22 Nicholson. Any discussion or comments? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's no other place 24 other than Contingency? I mean, no place in the -- the 25 Jailer Salaries can't take all of that? 1-13-03 25 1 MR. TOMLINSON: Sheriff says no. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe the Sheriff's 3 salary. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's actually coming 5 from what was unexpended from October 1 to now, and we only 6 have one opening at this time, so you're not going to have 7 that unexpended amount continuing right now. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, if there's more 9 later, we can always transfer it back to Contingency. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other comments or 12 discussion? Being none, all in favor of Budget Amendment 13 Request Number 4, signify by raising your right hand. 14 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 16 (No response.) 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. We have 18 Budget Amendment Request Number 5. 19 MR. TOMLINSON: This is a holdover from the 20 prior meeting, at the request of the Court. It's for 21 Constable, Precinct 1. The request is to -- is a line item 22 change, to add $500 to Office Supplies, $500 to Books, 23 Publications, and Dues, $500 to telephone line item, which 24 is actually a new line item for that department, $500 for 25 Vehicle Repair and Maintenance, $1,000 for Conferences, $100 1-13-03 26 1 for Miscellaneous. From these -- these funds are being 2 moved from -- $500 from TCLEOSE Training line item, 3 $2,457.66 from Official's Salaries, and that would be the -- 4 yes, that's correct, and $142.34 from Group Insurance. We 5 held this over because the constable was not here at the 6 prior meeting, so he's here today to answer any questions. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, one of my 8 questions is, are these numbers in line with all -- $500 for 9 office supplies, is that in line with the other constables' 10 numbers? I mean, this was just laid here this morning. I 11 haven't had time to compare. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't recall what's -- 13 what's in the other budgets. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can you tell me the 15 difference between TCLEOSE training and conferences? 16 MR. TOMLINSON: The TCLEOSE Training line 17 item are funds that are received from -- from court costs, 18 and they're actually budgeted in the budget. This -- 19 they're fees that are paid as a part of court costs for 20 criminal cases that pay for officers' training, or law 21 enforcement training. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The reason I asked 23 that question, because in our conference -- this group up 24 here, our Conference line, that is the moneys that we spend 25 to become certified Commissioners and Judges. And here we 1-13-03 27 1 have -- it looks to me that you have that Conference line 2 for that purpose, like ours, and then you have a separate 3 one for TCLEOSE Training, and I would think TCLEOSE Training 4 is that certification program. I just -- seems like to me 5 there's two lines for the same thing. 6 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we separate the -- just 7 for the purpose of knowing how much we expend from those. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Because of the money 9 that comes in from the fines and fees? 10 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay. I would 12 really like to know -- I'd really like to know -- 13 Commissioner 4 has a budget in his hand, I understand -- if 14 could you peek at that right quick and tell us, you know, if 15 it's anywhere near in line with the other constables. I 16 don't mean to be picky. I'm just -- you know, we've worked 17 long and hard for years to try to get some of these offices 18 looking somewhat the same, you know. And through the 19 redistricting, we have the -- we have the same numbers -- 20 almost the same number of folks out in each precinct, so, 21 you know, the numbers in the budgets should be close to the 22 same. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, maybe you'd want 24 to address some questions to Constable Pickens. Maybe he 25 can tell you how he arrived at those numbers. 1-13-03 28 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That would be great, 2 sure. 3 MR. PICKENS: Good morning, Commissioners 4 Court, County Judge. In reference to Commissioner Baldwin's 5 question, in looking at the other Commissioners' -- 6 Constables' budgets, as far as on the justification for the 7 phone line item, in Precinct 4, the constable has budgeted 8 $400 for his telephone. And being, in fact, that this is a 9 new line item, and the fact that I have the office 10 downstairs where Sheriff Hierholzer used to have his office 11 when he was with the 198th, as far as on the office 12 supplies, the honorable Don McClure had only allocated $50 13 for office supplies. Being that I'm brand-new to this, I 14 don't have any letterheads or envelopes that I need to get 15 printed up along with business cards, where I feel like 16 they'll be justified to moving $500 into the office 17 supplies. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the other -- 19 you're just going to deal with Precinct 4 -- comparing 20 yourself to 4? 21 MR. PICKENS: No, sir. As far as on Precinct 22 3, Constable Garza has $100 allocated for his phone. As far 23 as on the Vehicle Maintenance and Repairs, Constable Garza 24 has, like, $75, but he also has Vehicle Insurance of $400, 25 which I'm not having on mine. Gasoline, he has $500. I 1-13-03 29 1 don't have that in my line item. And for Precinct 2, their 2 telephone is $350. That's for Constable Ayala. He also 3 has, like, $553 for fuel and oil. Whereas I feel that, 4 after looking at it all, there was salary from the -- from 5 October and part of November that was not paid to anybody, 6 and that's why I've looked at it and requested for the total 7 amount of $3,100 to be moved around the line items. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My concern is not as much 9 this particular amendment. It's just that we have, as 10 Commissioner Baldwin has said, spent a lot of time trying to 11 equalize things. We are increasing a lot of these line 12 items above -- I understand it's your first time; you do 13 need some of these. But we really need -- when next year's 14 budget comes around, in my opinion, these get reduced 15 substantially. 16 MR. PICKENS: I understand. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I guess the only 18 problem I have is that, you know, you have -- do you have a 19 budget reason for these numbers? I mean, have you gone out 20 and figured out letterhead and envelopes and cards are going 21 to cost $500 -- I mean an amount? Because I just think, 22 from a budget standpoint, rather than just putting numbers 23 here, I'm just asking if you have gone back and seen and 24 have a basic budget as to how you get to these numbers. 25 MR. PICKENS: Just waiting on some other bids 1-13-03 30 1 coming in. I've been told there's some people here in the 2 county that can help me, but there's also an out-of-state 3 agency that does our business cards for us and so forth. I 4 think business cards, it was my understanding, was going to 5 run, like, 100, 150 bucks. I can double-check on that and 6 see. Understand, this is my first time up here, and I 7 apologize for not being here last time as attending the 8 previous Commissioners Court. I didn't see that there would 9 be a problem having line items moved around without the 10 elected official being here, as far as moving from one line 11 item to another. And I understand your concerns, and I 12 assure you, though, that, you know, once we sit down for the 13 budget for this next coming year, I don't foresee it being 14 that high. I just need to get started up, get going. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, of course, Letz 16 -- Commissioners Letz hit the nail on the head. You know, 17 there -- there's really no rhyme or reason for these 18 numbers. It just appears that you pulled numbers out of the 19 air, and that's -- and that's kind of the reason we wanted 20 you to come in and explain it. And, sure enough, that's 21 exactly what it is. Can we put it off two weeks, and let's 22 really work the numbers? And do as Commissioner Letz 23 is talking about, actually budgeting, knowing what two boxes 24 of business cards are going to cost or, you know, how much 25 your conferences are going to cost, that kind of thing. 1-13-03 31 1 MR. PICKENS: I can give you an example. I 2 have a conference I have to go to next week. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. That just 4 answered my question. Can we put it off two weeks and come 5 up with some real numbers, or would you like for me to 6 approve this today? 7 MR. PICKENS: I'd like to get it approved 8 today, if possible, so I can get up and rolling. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I knew you would. So, 10 you don't want to attempt to do it properly? 11 MR. PICKENS: No, I'll -- I'll work with you, 12 Commissioner Baldwin. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 14 MR. PICKENS: I'll work with the Court if 15 they're willing to work with me. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd really like -- and 17 I know I'm being mean -- it appears that I'm being mean, but 18 I really think that we need to get some real live numbers in 19 here that are -- with some thought behind them and some 20 actual, budgeted numbers. Let's get off on the right foot. 21 MR. PICKENS: I understand that. As far as 22 on the phone line item, I don't think it's unfair, due to 23 the fact, like, with Precinct 4 has, like, $400 allocated 24 for them. Precinct 2 has $350 for theirs. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know what that 1-13-03 32 1 has to do with it, but we'll work on that. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a motion to approve 3 Budget Amendment Request Number 5? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bobby, you mentioned you 5 had a conference next week? 6 MR. PICKENS: Yes, sir. The conference alone 7 is $225. That's for courtroom security, which is required 8 for the constables. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think that I 10 would be in favor, and I'd make a motion to put enough money 11 in the budget to cover that conference next week right now, 12 out of the -- put $500 in the Conferences from -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait a minute. Let's 14 see -- excuse me. So, you have a -- you have a fee to pay, 15 you have a hotel to stay in, you have gas to put in your 16 car, and so how much do you think that is? 17 MR. PICKENS: The hotel is $47 plus tax. The 18 conference is $225. I'm looking at a two-night stay. The 19 drive up there, gas is -- in my vehicle averages about $25 20 for an 18-gallon tank. I got that one down pat. So -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much money? 22 MR. PICKENS: I would say probably around -- 23 to be on the safe side, plus for food, 400 bucks. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: $500. I make a motion to 25 put $500 into the Conference line item from Officials 1-13-03 33 1 Salary, and then address the rest of it later. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In two weeks. Second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner 4 Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that in lieu of 5 Budget Amendment Request Item Number 5, that the sum of $500 6 be moved from Officials Salary line item, as stated on the 7 request form, to Conferences. Is there any further 8 discussion or questions or comments? There being none, all 9 in favor, so indicate by raising your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 14 MR. PICKENS: Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, would you have 16 a few minutes in the next few days to sit down with the two 17 of us and try to work this out? 18 (Mr. Tomlinson nodded.) 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 20 MR. TOMLINSON: I can do that. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any late bills, 22 Mr. County Auditor? 23 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. We have three, 24 actually. One is -- the first one is to the U.S. Postal 25 Service for $1,500 for the County Clerk. 1-13-03 34 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 4 seconded, made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by 5 Commissioner Baldwin, to approve a late bill, and I presume 6 issue a hand check? 7 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: To United States Postal 9 Service, $1,500 for postal services to the County Clerk's 10 office. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, raise 11 your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Any others? 16 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. Second one is also to 17 the Kerrville Postmaster, $370 for the Treasurer's office, 18 with a hand check. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made by 22 Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, 23 approving a late bill to U.S. Postmaster for $370, and 24 issuance of a hand check on behalf of the County Treasurer. 25 Any discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right 1-13-03 35 1 hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 6 MR. TOMLINSON: One more. It's payable to 7 Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation for $1,277.44. 8 It's for the initial payment -- lease payment for 9 Caterpillar motor grader that will be delivered this week, 10 so I need a hand check to be able to deliver that. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is a budgeted item? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made by 16 Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, to 17 approve a late bill to Caterpillar Financial Services, and 18 issuance of a hand check in the sum of $1,277.44. Is there 19 any discussion? Being none, all in favor, raise your right 20 hand. 21 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 23 (No response.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. Okay. Do I 25 hear a motion to waive the reading of the -- approval of the 1-13-03 36 1 minutes and waive the reading thereof? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, which -- which 3 meeting are we waiving the minutes of? 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, okay. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It might be wise to -- 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Good plan. Good plan. Okay, 7 looks like we've got several of them here. The first one is 8 the regular session meeting from Monday, December the 9th. 9 Do I hear a motion that we approve those -- the transcript 10 and minutes of that meeting and waive the reading thereof? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Moved by Commissioner Baldwin, 14 second by Commissioner Letz, that we waive the reading of 15 the minutes and transcript of the regular session on Monday, 16 December 9th, and approve the same. Any discussion? Being 17 no discussion, all in favor, signify by raising your right 18 hand. 19 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 20 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. The next one 23 that we've got here are for the minutes of a special session 24 which occurred on the afternoon of Tuesday, December the 25 17th. Do I hear a motion that we waive the reading of these 1-13-03 37 1 minutes and approve the same? 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner 5 Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that we waive the 6 reading and approve the transcript and minutes of the 7 special session meeting for Tuesday, December 17th. Any 8 discussion? Being none, all in favor, raise your right 9 hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. The next one 14 that we have here is the special session meeting for the 15 morning of Monday, December the 23rd of last year. Do I 16 hear a motion that we approve the same without reading? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner 20 Letz, second by Commissioner Williams, that we approve the 21 minutes of the special session on Monday, December the 23rd 22 in the morning, and waive the reading thereof. Any 23 discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right 24 hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 1-13-03 38 1 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 2 Motion carries. Next minutes I have before me are the 3 emergency session conducted on Monday, December the 23rd. 4 Do I hear a motion to approve those minutes and waive the 5 reading thereof? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner 9 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that we waive the 10 reading and approve the minutes of the emergency session in 11 the afternoon of Monday, December 23rd of last year. Is 12 there any discussion or comment? Being none, all in favor, 13 raise your right hand. 14 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 16 (No response.) 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Next item is 18 approval and acceptance of monthly reports. Do we have any 19 monthly reports that need to be considered by the Court at 20 this time? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move that we 22 accept them as presented. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 25 seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Williams, 1-13-03 39 1 respectively, that we approve and accept the monthly reports 2 as presented. Is there any discussion or comment? Being 3 none, all in favor, raise your right hand. 4 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 6 (No response.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Okay. That 8 brings us down to the consideration agenda, if I've got 9 everything lined up here correctly. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I'd like to 11 point out that we have a scheduled appointment at 12 10 o'clock. If you don't mind, I'd like to jump to that, if 13 we could. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Your point's well-taken, 15 Commissioner. It's already after 10 o'clock, and this item 16 was scheduled for 10 o'clock. And, there being no 17 objection, we'll move directly to Item 2.6 out of order on 18 the consideration agenda, that being consider and discuss 19 adopting a sick leave bank for County employees. 20 Commissioner Baldwin. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much. 22 I've had several county -- members of the county family come 23 to me with interest in a sick leave bank, and I've also been 24 informed that probably the guru of all sick leave banks was 25 over at Kerrville Independent School District, and so I 1-13-03 40 1 called over there, and Mr. Green was kind enough to come 2 over and make a presentation. I think that they have a 3 program in place, and he -- I've asked him to just kind of 4 tell us what his program's like and see if we can maybe fit 5 it in. And I'd like to tell you up front that I probably 6 would like to take this issue, after -- after we get through 7 visiting on it, and table it for a couple weeks, chew on it 8 and think about it and see if it -- see if school districts 9 fit county governments, et cetera and so forth. So, we'll 10 do it that way, if you don't mind. So, we have with us 11 today the Assistant Superintendent of K.I.S.D., Mr. Bob 12 Green. And, Bob, if you'd come to the podium, please? 13 MR. GREEN: Let me share these with you. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, thank you. Thank 15 you for coming. By the way, Lamar Smith was here a while 16 ago. 17 MR. GREEN: Okay. We have -- we came to this 18 at the -- probably at the request of our employees. We 19 modeled our program on Spring Branch I.S.D. We did use the 20 Texas Association of School Boards legal services to give us 21 advice in developing this. It's certainly not a new idea. 22 We have had it in place in our district for about 12 or 15 23 years now, and I've been administering it. It has been a 24 very -- probably a very popular benefit with our employees. 25 We have some pretty conservative guidelines 1-13-03 41 1 for administering this. You can look at the specifics of 2 the plan, and this can certainly be modified to -- to fit a 3 county government's needs. I think our employees basically 4 designate one year of their -- I mean one day of their leave 5 each year for the sick leave bank. Those days do not carry 6 over and are not cumulative from one year to the next. And 7 then, when we have employees with a serious need, there's 8 several guidelines that must be adhered to. First, it has 9 to be a catastrophic illness. We require medical 10 documentation. It has been a real godsend for us in 11 terms -- we've had several employees that have had terminal 12 cancer, who have had really debilitating illnesses. They 13 were extremely appreciative of having this, both financially 14 and available to them and their families. 15 It is not an inexpensive thing. We budget -- 16 our board budgets about $12,000 to $14,000 a year in 17 additional substitute leave. These are days that our 18 employees actually have. They have to have used all their 19 sick days prior to asking for the -- for the leave bank. 20 They can apply for up to 30 days each time they apply. They 21 can apply more than once, but we grant the days in 30-day 22 increments, and we grant them based on medical documentation 23 that it is a catastrophic illness. And in most cases, they 24 have to be hospitalized or be under a physician's care for a 25 very serious illness. We do apply it to immediate family 1-13-03 42 1 members. On a couple of occasions, we have had employees 2 who were the only child and had a parent who was in a 3 serious condition or had a terminal disease, where they had 4 to take days to care for that parent, and we have granted it 5 for that. 6 There are a lot of variations on setting 7 these guidelines. The guidelines that I gave you, we worked 8 out over about a year, year and a half period. We used 9 Spring Branch I.S.D. as our model, 'cause they had a 10 successful program for a number of years. The program has 11 worked real well for us. It hasn't been challenged. 12 Probably the main reason that it hasn't been challenged is 13 that we administer the program with representatives of all 14 of our employees. We have a representative from each 15 faculty, we have a representative of paraprofessionals, we 16 have a representative of our custodial staff. So, I work 17 with a group of about six to eight who kind of serve as a 18 board. We meet together when there is a need. They request 19 medical documentation. We sit down and review the needs. 20 A couple of things that we have adjusted, 21 because we now have long-term disability insurance in the 22 district, we reduce the amount that we pay on the 23 catastrophic sick leave bank. If they are receiving 24 worker's comp or if they are receiving our disability 25 insurance, we only pay up to their salary. In other words, 1-13-03 43 1 they cannot be participating in this and receive more actual 2 pay than what their salary is. We don't want it to be 3 viewed as -- we'd like to be it viewed as a replacement to 4 salary, helping them in difficult times, but not something 5 where it is a financial incentive and they're making more 6 money than they would if they were at work those days. So, 7 we've taken a pretty conservative stance. Some districts do 8 not deny those things. And, of course, with serious 9 financial needs attached to the sick leave conditions, there 10 may be times where you know they need all the money they 11 can, but the -- our -- really, our philosophy is -- is to 12 try to make this as equitable as we possibly can for our 13 employees. 14 As I said, we've been doing it a number of 15 years. We have different representatives that are on 16 rotating terms that come off and on. We have a meeting, we 17 vote on each of these. We give our responses, whether they 18 are agreed to or denied, back to the employee. And I think 19 you have some pretty comprehensive guidelines. The things 20 that we have had -- to be honest with you, the things that 21 we have had difficulty with are things such as problem 22 pregnancies and things like that. With over 700 employees, 23 we have things like that that come up, that the physician 24 does not classify as life-threatening, but that are very 25 serious, and those are usually when our -- our group has a 1-13-03 44 1 difficult time making a decision. 2 But I would ask you, you know, at your 3 leisure to look at this. I think, in administering 4 personnel for the district over a number of years, when we 5 hire new personnel and for even existing personnel, this is 6 probably viewed as one of the most significant benefits that 7 we give our employees. We pay about 100 percent of their 8 insurance now, but they still feel like that, in a time of 9 need, this is one of the best things that we do for them, so 10 it's viewed very positively by our employees. Our board 11 feels like we've had very little abuse of it, because we 12 have a group that look at this pretty critically before we 13 make decisions. Are there any questions that I might 14 address with you? 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bob, do you ever 16 deplete the bank? 17 MR. GREEN: The bank does not carry over from 18 one year to the next. They contribute one day every year. 19 And part of the reason for that is, in a school district, if 20 you let it accumulate, you may not use all the days in the 21 bank in any one year, but you're really kind of obligated to 22 have that number of days available. What we do is, our 23 employees have a card they fill out and they elect to be a 24 member of the bank each new school year. So, by September 25 of each school year, they have an enrollment period. They 1-13-03 45 1 enroll in it, we enter them on the computer. We actually 2 take one of their local sick days off, and they realize that 3 they're contributing that and that they won't get it back. 4 And that was based on Spring Branch and some larger school 5 districts' experience in terms of you want it to be a 6 year-to-year thing. 7 Some years, we may use nearly all the -- all 8 the days. Other years we may use very few, but it is there 9 sort of as an insurance policy to our employees, and 10 particularly our -- our older employees have appreciated it. 11 I can't think of a campus in our district that hasn't had to 12 access it at one time or another. Sometimes we get to the 13 end of the year and have used very little. Other times -- 14 this year we've had several major issues right at the 15 beginning of the year. But it is a very humane thing in 16 terms of our employees' view of it. They know that it's 17 pretty restrictive in the way it can be used, but it's there 18 for them if a catastrophic illness should strike. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bob, what percent of the 20 employees contribute? 21 MR. GREEN: I'd say about 85 percent. And 22 the ones that -- usually the ones that don't are relatively 23 young, or are paraprofessionals or part-time employees. But 24 we have a very good response from our employees. Nearly all 25 of our professional employees contribute. 1-13-03 46 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we know what this 2 is going to cost if we adopt it? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. 4 MR. GREEN: And let me tell you, that was 5 something that we had to address with our board when we 6 considered it. The days that they contribute are there. 7 You know, if everybody used all of their days, you know, we 8 are -- to be in compliance, we would have to provide them 9 those days. But we have lots of employees -- many of our 10 employees that never use a day. You know, it's no problem 11 for them, knowing that when they retire, they'll probably 12 have days left over and days that they've never used. Our 13 board generally budgets a lot less than the number of days 14 that are contributed. 15 Now, what it costs us is -- since those days 16 are there, both locally and with the state, what it costs us 17 if they -- if those sick days exist, somebody could access 18 those days and we'd be paying those salaries, and the 19 salaries are budgeted. But the cost to us is that we know 20 we're going to have to pay substitutes. When an employee 21 runs out of days, we're docking them for those days. That 22 helps us pay the substitute's salaries. So, when we have an 23 employee that is using a number of days, they have run out 24 of days, we do budget about -- anywhere from $14,000 to 25 $20,000 a year in substitutes, which is a very insignificant 1-13-03 47 1 cost in our overall substitute budget. And what we did is 2 we took the first two or three years to kind of get a feel 3 for it, the number of days that were being used, and kind of 4 get an average, and then we budget a little extra money for 5 substitutes. But, you know, it's -- it is really a real 6 variable thing. But I -- with 700 employees, we normally 7 have six to ten pretty significant needs every year, you 8 know. Very seldom do we have less than that. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How many sick days does 10 K.I.S.D. give? 11 MR. GREEN: They get five local days each 12 year, and that is cumulative. So, when they donate one of 13 those days, they are giving up one sick day for that year. 14 But, of course, as I said, many, many of our employees never 15 use the sick day. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The opponents -- 17 opponents to the program -- I mean, I've had two phone calls 18 this morning, people wanting to talk about it, and they use 19 the word "abuse." It's an easy way to abuse the system. I 20 really don't see that with the way you have your board set 21 up and the decision-making process of how it's administered. 22 MR. GREEN: I think we've been extremely 23 fortunate, because, you know, I'd venture to say that there 24 has been very little abuse; it's almost been nonexistent, 25 because of the amount of medical documentation. And, 1-13-03 48 1 really, because it has to pass the muster of six or eight 2 people, usually there's someone from that campus that's well 3 aware of the individual's situation, so that we have had 4 very little abuse of it. And it has -- a lot of our 5 employees are not going to be in a situation where they can 6 draw worker's comp. Now, what we do have is, we have 7 disability insurance for all employees now that, after 90 8 days, kicks in and we'll pay up to 60 percent of their 9 salary. So, when we're paying them a day's salary and 10 they've used up all their sick leave, if it's been an 11 extended thing, our -- we have a -- really, our long-term 12 disability pays 60 percent of their salary, so when we give 13 them a day, we're only kicking in 40 percent of their 14 salary. So, we have some protections built into ours. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bob, did I understand 16 you correctly that your sick leave program does not allow 17 for rolling over from year to year? 18 MR. GREEN: That's correct. They have to 19 enroll each year with one day. And because our sick leave 20 is -- you know, there -- there are different models for 21 that, because our sick leave is cumulative, they get it 22 every year, that's not a problem, because the sick leave -- 23 the five days the district gives them is cumulative. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is cumulative? 25 MR. GREEN: Yes, but the day they donate 1-13-03 49 1 comes off of that each year. So, somebody that's been in 2 the district four years may have 20 days of local leave. 3 They're only giving one of those five days that they get 4 each year. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, then -- but 6 regardless of the use from this pool of days, at the end of 7 the budget year or fiscal year, it's gone; is that correct? 8 MR. GREEN: That's correct, you start over. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So there's no rolling 10 consistently built into the school district -- 11 MR. GREEN: That's right. So the liability 12 really exists from one year to the next. Also, this is a 13 board decision. Our board's consistently approved it, but 14 it is a decision, when we look at the budget each year, that 15 they can approve or disapprove. So, it is a year-by-year 16 decision to maintain it. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: If I understand the import of 18 Commissioner Williams' question, the day each year that's 19 donated to the pool is lost? 20 MR. GREEN: That's correct. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: But the remaining four days 22 that the individual employee retains continues to accrue and 23 roll over from year to year? 24 MR. GREEN: That's correct. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: So, in actually, you may be 1-13-03 50 1 reducing your contingent liability? 2 MR. GREEN: Well, in a way, we are. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my 4 understanding. 5 MR. GREEN: And, as I said, because we 6 have -- we really have -- and I've looked at it for the 7 board on a number of occasions. We really have very little 8 abuse of our sick leave in schools. You know, it does in 9 some ways reduce our liability a little bit each year, when 10 you have that number of days donated -- you know, if you 11 have 500 days donated, those are days that, if they're not 12 used, that we are not physically responsible for. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions? 14 MR. GREEN: And please feel -- if you need 15 other information, I'll be glad to provide it for you. 16 There are a lot of different ways of administering this. 17 I'm familiar with other entities that use it, other school 18 districts. So, you know, if you look at this and you have 19 questions or would like some more information, I'll be happy 20 to provide you with information if you need it. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you for taking 23 time to come. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here. I 25 gather from Commissioner Baldwin that he intends to make no 1-13-03 51 1 motion to take any formal action on this? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not going to make 3 a motion. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else have a motion to 5 offer? If not, why, we'll move on to the next item, which 6 is back up to 2.1, consider the preliminary plat for The 7 Reserve at Falling Water, Limited, Precinct 3. Franklin 8 Johnston. 9 MR. JOHNSTON: Morning. You probably have in 10 your packet a -- a memo that I wrote. This drawing's rather 11 large, but the preliminary plat will be larger. The final 12 will have to be chopped up in several pages to meet the size 13 requirements. Looking over it, the actual entrance to the 14 property is through Kendall County. I understand that their 15 roads are, however, the same specifications that we require 16 on this one, so it would be same road. Several lots have -- 17 have less than 200-foot frontage that's required in the 18 rules, but some of them are just a little less, I guess due 19 to the geography of the property. I think the developer may 20 plan on asking for a variance to those. 21 MR. CRENWELGE: That's right. 22 MR. JOHNSTON: Those particular lots that are 23 that way, like, 5 or 10 feet different to make the -- the 24 lots work out right, several lots -- or at least one lot -- 25 actually, I think it's about half a dozen that have really 1-13-03 52 1 strange configurations. They're very slender. Lot 33 is an 2 example on size. It may have a problem with the septic 3 setbacks and all that to get -- get it to work on the site. 4 I think U.G.R.A. requested them, you know, placing it -- 5 placing to-scale residence and layout on the site to see how 6 it would work if they left it like that, or I think they may 7 be redesigning some. 8 MR. CRENWELGE: Well, we're going to 9 redesign, keep U.G.R.A. happy. 10 MR. JOHNSTON: So they may be a little wider 11 than that. Lot 12 contains a -- it has frontage on one 12 road, but has a 24-foot flagpole coming out on another road. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one? 14 MR. JOHNSTON: I don't know if that's a 15 drainage system or if that's a road. I think it's a road. 16 It may be too narrow for -- to have a road in the 17 drainage -- 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which lot, Franklin? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Lot 12. 20 MR. JOHNSTON: Lot 12. You don't -- do you 21 know what that is? 22 MR. CRENWELGE: I'm not looking at it, 23 Franklin. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see. Boy, is that 25 a flag lot or what? 1-13-03 53 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, it's not a flag lot; 2 it's got frontage on another road. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, I see it. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But close. Very 5 close. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not even close. 7 MR. CRENWELGE: No flag lot. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Weird configuration, but 9 it's not a flag lot. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not a flag lot. 11 MR. JOHNSTON: It's this one. It has that 12 little strip, but 700-foot frontage down the hill. 13 MR. CRENWELGE: They can get access that way 14 or the other way. 15 MR. JOHNSTON: Medford Road? 16 MR. CRENWELGE: Several options. They can 17 either access that or access the other way. 18 MR. JOHNSTON: Okay. So I don't know what 19 the Court's -- 20 MR. CRENWELGE: That's a large lot. It can 21 be -- they can access a couple different ways, that tract. 22 MR. JOHNSTON: It's not technically a flag 23 lot. Generally, we require more width than that for a road. 24 It's really a driveway, but -- 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, the entrance 1-13-03 54 1 would be on The Reserve -- the road named "The Reserve"; is 2 that correct? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me -- why don't we 4 let Franklin go through them? Then we can address them. 5 But it's preliminary. I've got some comments I need to make 6 as well. 7 MR. JOHNSTON: I don't -- the developer 8 probably has the answer to some of these. I'll just go 9 through my list. Drainage study. Most of these lots are 10 high on the hill, so they're not in the floodplain, but 11 there would be some drainage studies required for culvert 12 sizing and for insuring that it doesn't increase the flow 13 off of the subdivision boundary. Roads are local roads. 14 There'll be 24 foot of pavement; that's the same spec as 15 Kendall County. This subdivision doesn't really -- the 16 roads don't connect with Falling Water; is that correct? 17 MR. CRENWELGE: Correct. 18 MR. JOHNSTON: It's separate in that respect. 19 The water system is shared, however. And we'd need, I 20 guess, a letter from T.N.R.C.C., or whatever their new 21 initials are, that -- showing that they have adequate 22 capacity for that. They meet the 5-acre rule. Some of 23 these narrow lots, they might want to show the building 24 setback on the plat. I don't know if that's a requirement, 25 but we have a building setback rule, and since it's a small 1-13-03 55 1 top-of-the-hill situation, then it drops off, they may be 2 attempting to build close to the road, which they've got a 3 20-foot rule. And we mentioned the O.S.S.F., so that's 4 basically my comments. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we normally show 6 that on a plat, the building setback? 7 MR. JOHNSTON: Sometimes we do, sometimes we 8 don't, as far as the setback rule -- the setbacks. 9 Sometimes it's done by notes. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the setback 11 rule? Outside the right-of-way line? 12 MR. JOHNSTON: There's generally a 10-foot 13 easement around for utilities and a 20-foot front setback 14 for a building. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can I make couple of 16 general comments? The -- the subdivision -- one of the 17 reasons -- or the reason the lots are laid out the way they 18 are is the developer, Mr. Crenwelge -- he knows, clearly, 19 our minimum lot size requirements, which are 5 acres, and 20 he's above that by .6 acres, I believe. The lots are driven 21 by building sites. And this is an extremely rough area of 22 the county, and there's a lot of it, and to -- you know, 23 what has been done is what our -- we've kind of been pushing 24 in this direction, by the way, with our Subdivision Rules, 25 is to protect as much land as possible and, you know, 1-13-03 56 1 cluster homes in the areas that are like this so as to have 2 a minimum impact on the environment, and also just drainage 3 and everything else. So, the reason for the configuration 4 is to maximize building lots, and at the same time, not 5 destroy the terrain and the whole aesthetics of the 6 development. So I think, you know, I don't have any problem 7 at all with the -- the lot configuration, and I think our 8 Subdivision Rules contemplate doing this type of thing. 9 The ones I do have a concern about are the 10 areas around Lot 35 -- well, 32, 33, 34, 35. I'm not -- 11 those are all on a cul-de-sac. I don't really have a 12 concern on the frontage, but I just think we need to make it 13 real clear that there are building sites there. And I 14 think, also, we need to remember that this is a preliminary 15 plat. When they go out there and start cutting these roads 16 and actually doing the work, it's possible that these lot 17 lines are going to move, and they will move. I think it's 18 without question, they're going to move some. Some may get 19 eliminated altogether. So, this is more of a -- you know, 20 an advance concept plan that we're looking at, as opposed 21 to, you know, figuring out, well, you know, this is going to 22 -- this will narrow right there. I think when they get into 23 it -- they just need, I think, direction right now from the 24 Court as to, will we allow less than 200 foot frontage on 25 cul-de-sacs? I think we -- we have historically done that. 1-13-03 57 1 MR. JOHNSTON: I think, on cul-de-sacs, it's 2 not 200 foot, it's 60 feet. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sixty feet. It doesn't 4 quite meet it on the cul-de-sac. The other one on Lot 12, 5 you know, if -- that 24-foot strip, to me, does need to be 6 changed. It either needs to be 60 foot for a -- whatever is 7 our minimum right-of-way, or it needs to be eliminated. You 8 know, either one. And that's just -- I had not noticed that 9 until Franklin's note, when I looked at it previously. And 10 the other question I have, is there a variance -- I'm asking 11 Mr. Crenwelge this. Is there a variance needed on any of 12 the roads from a road construction standpoint? 13 MR. CRENWELGE: Going up the hill into the 14 subdivision, there's going to be a serious -- in Kerr 15 County, there's going to be a slope and a curvature 16 requirement. There's only one way to get up this major 17 hill. We're going to need, probably, maybe -- we're still 18 working on that, but maybe a 1 or 2 percent increase in the 19 grade going up the hill. And the curvature may be a little 20 tighter than the subdivision standards, just to get up this 21 hill, but that's all. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you see any problem 23 with that, Franklin? 24 MR. JOHNSTON: Well, I think we can work with 25 that. We have 12 percent now. If it's up less than 15 -- 1-13-03 58 1 MR. CRENWELGE: It will be less than 15. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I don't I think 3 it's a -- looks like a good subdivision. I think Franklin's 4 done a good job of outlining all the requirements we're 5 going to have prior to final plat approval. Letter from 6 T.N.R.C.C.; water will be important. You know, the roads 7 will be local roads. I think that, you know, where -- where 8 feasible and where possible, the frontage needs to be 200 9 foot. But on some of these areas where it doesn't quite 10 work out, you know, I don't have a real problem with a 11 slight variance, considering that he could actually put in 12 more lots if he wanted to in the subdivision. But it's 13 being driven kind of by building site. I did note on -- I 14 think it's Lot 16 that says 98 foot, which is a little bit 15 small. It seems to me that could be shifted -- by shifting 16 the lot lines, you can get up over 150, 175 foot on that 17 one. That seems a little bit small. But, overall, it looks 18 good. Any other -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to 21 approve the preliminary plat for The Reserve, Falling Water, 22 with the comments noted in court and by Franklin's letter 23 regarding requirements prior to final plat approval. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I will second that 25 motion, with a comment; that we're -- you guys will get to 1-13-03 59 1 know Dale. He's been in here for a year and a half now. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made by Commissioner 3 Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 4 approve the preliminary plat for The Reserve, Falling Water, 5 Limited, in Precinct 3, with the conditions and caveats as 6 set forth this morning in court, and as further set forth in 7 communications from the County Engineer to -- to the Court 8 and to the developer. Is there any further discussion or 9 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 14 MR. CRENWELGE: Thank you very much. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, gentlemen. Next 16 item on the agenda is consider purchase of 8.5-ton crane 17 from G.S.C. I assume that's a surplus -- 18 MR. ODOM: Good morning, Judge. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. Glad to 20 have you here. 21 MR. ODOM: Thank you. I would like the Court 22 to consider us purchasing from the Government Surplus 23 Corporation in San Antonio, as an outlet for state surplus 24 as well as federal surplus. And what we have is a 1984 25 Pettibone 8½-ton crane, and we're going to have a need -- of 1-13-03 60 1 course, that purchase price is $4,850, very cheap. We've 2 gone down to look at it. It functions very well. We're 3 going to need the use of a crane on Center Point River Road 4 on two projects there; a grade inlay that weighs 5 7,000 pounds and about 150 feet of corrugated metal pipe, 6 48-inch, to meet NRCS design. I am also going to need it -- 7 we're proposing to use a gabion-type material on the area by 8 the swing where it was washed out, about 20-foot deep there 9 coming off Highway 27 where it washed down across that area. 10 I also have two projects on Hermann Sons. One is on the far 11 end, where we had the structure wash out twice during the 12 floods. We replaced it twice. And then we'll have the use 13 of it when we work on the structure at Hermann Sons Bridge 14 there. We can utilize it when we start to pull the rail 15 cars up and pull it across, so we will need that help. 16 What I've determined is that if we do this, 17 that basically it would pay for itself, what I would rent a 18 crane for these different projects. The money's going to 19 come out, and I would rather utilize that money to help us 20 in the future, because I have a 42-foot reach. It makes 21 sense that this is not the only project in the future that I 22 can use it for. It's inexpensive. It's well into the 23 hundreds -- you know, $100,000-plus if you bought a 24 brand-new one. So, this was a Navy surplus; it's got 1,400 25 hours on it. It has hardly ever been used, so it's an 1-13-03 61 1 opportunity, I think, to pay for itself and to have a use in 2 the future. And this will utilize our funds, I believe, a 3 whole lot better than to pay it out on a rental. So -- 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have two questions. 5 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One is, how do you get 7 this thing from Point A to Point B? Do you have to have a 8 truck to haul it? 9 MR. ODOM: Well, this is motorized. It's 10 like our grade-all. It is a motorized unit. It's 11 self-contained, and it can be driven by our personnel to 12 where we need to. If it's a long distance, then we would 13 put on it a haul truck, the one that we have to move 14 equipment around, and that's the way we would -- on a long 15 distance, I would prefer to do that to save down on 16 maintenance on it. And it can move, but to move around and 17 to adjust itself -- it's self-propelled. It's a Detroit 18 diesel. It runs fine, but it's like me. It's getting a 19 little bit old, but it will function. 20 (Laughter.) 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then my final 22 question is, you're proposing that you move the funds from 23 Contracts? 24 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, Contract Fees. I 25 have -- go ahead. 1-13-03 62 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you make sure 2 that those projects that you'll be taking from are in 3 Commissioner Letz' precinct and not mine? I mean, that's 4 where all the work's going, so -- 5 MR. ODOM: Unfortunately, that's where all 6 the 54 inches of water, just about, fell. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thanks for the pass. 8 MR. ODOM: I feel confident that if we take 9 it out of Contract Fees, 553, that I have enough, looking at 10 where I'm at and where our projects are at, that I want to 11 reserve that. I don't intend to start anything until we see 12 how Sheppard Rees is coming down. I have some contingency 13 funds there, plus I want to look at the contracts for -- 14 that would be coming up soon for petroleum. I feel like we 15 would have a price hike, and I -- that's another subject. 16 But to say that I may hold off on petroleum for emulsion 17 until after Mr. Hussein is resolved, I think very quickly, 18 and -- well, at least I pray it occurs without too much 19 length in time. But I think that we'll be all right. I 20 would go into it comfortable that the $4,850 is a good buy 21 for the County, and it would pay for itself. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move approval of 23 the purchase of 8½-ton crane from General Services 24 Commission, and authorize the County Judge to sign contract, 25 transfer the money from 15-611-533, Contracts, to 1-13-03 63 1 15-611-570, Contracts -- Capital Purchases. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made by 4 Commissioner Williams for the Court to authorize the 5 purchase of the 8½-ton crane from G.S.C., and authorize 6 County Judge to sign appropriate documents purchasing the 7 same, allocate the funds from Road and Bridge Contract 8 funds, 15-611-553, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. Any 9 further discussion? If not, all in favor, signify by 10 raising your right hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. 15 MR. ODOM: Thank you, Judge. I thank the 16 Court. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Next 18 item of business is to consider and discuss the approval of 19 final road and bridge alignment for the new Hermann Sons 20 Bridge. Commissioner Letz. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the packet, I have 22 provided a map that's very difficult to figure out what's up 23 and what's down. But what it is, is a -- it shows the 24 current Hermann Sons Bridge location and the current 25 right-of-way alignment, and it shows -- as you're looking at 1-13-03 64 1 the paper in front of you immediately to the right, an area 2 that says "Alternate Alignment." And then, just to the 3 right of that, there is a dashed line that kind of runs 4 parallel, and then to the right of that there's another 5 dashed line, which is -- to make everyone clear, what we're 6 talking about is this line; that furthest dashed line is the 7 alignment that I'm proposing. And the reason for that is, 8 after meeting with a representative of TexDOT and C.E.C. 9 Engineering, Road and Bridge Department, it is felt that the 10 alignment furthest to the right is the safest alignment for 11 the future road. And this is the permanent Hermann Sons 12 Bridge; let me make that clear. The safest alignment. It 13 is also the alignment that has the least amount of 14 environmental impact. 15 The negative of it is, it is also the 16 alignment that requires the most right-of-way. It does not 17 change the individuals that we're dealing with from a 18 right-of-way standpoint, but it does -- it will require more 19 right-of-way. And that is the right-of-way Mr. Tijerina -- 20 we have not been very successful in negotiating with him on 21 any of the three alignments up to this point, and that is 22 being referred to the County Attorney for him to proceed 23 with negotiations and/or condemnation on -- to obtain that 24 right-of-way. The reason this is on the agenda now is that 25 the County is 100 percent responsible for that right-of-way 1-13-03 65 1 acquisition, and TexDOT will not proceed too much further 2 with this project until we have that right-of-way, and I 3 don't want this to be a holdup. They have -- or are going 4 to release this for final engineering once the Court 5 approves the alignment, so this will be the -- once this is 6 done, this is it. This is where that bridge is going to be. 7 It is being released to their outside engineering firm, 8 which is C.E.C., to do the final engineering on this bridge. 9 When I mentioned environmental consequences, 10 the reason -- it's hard to read on this plat, but there 11 are -- right along the river, there's a couple of cypress 12 trees, and the alignment that uses less right-of-way takes 13 out those trees. One is a 96-inch cypress tree; one is a 14 66-inch cypress tree, and it is just felt that -- and a 15 number of other trees as well. This -- the furthest to the 16 right alignment, it saves those trees, which I think is 17 important. Those are, you know, if not the largest, they're 18 close to probably the largest cypress trees in the county, 19 and I think we should try to save them if possible. And -- 20 but the primary reason is safety. I say safety. The reason 21 is that the current road has a double S-curve in it, and we 22 are eliminating those S-curves, making it into a gradual 23 curve. It will be safer coming to the bridge from either 24 side, and also improves the visibility. So, I will make a 25 motion that we -- 1-13-03 66 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, let me ask a 2 question before you do that, please. How much more property 3 are we going to need to take, whether through condemnation 4 or otherwise? How much more than your original -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can't give you an exact 6 answer, 'cause Mr. Tijerina refuses to allow us to onto his 7 property to survey it for any of the alignments. I would 8 guess that we'll be taking about an acre under this 9 alignment, and we'd probably be taking maybe a little bit 10 over an acre -- probably about three-quarters of an acre for 11 the other alignment. Probably -- maybe a quarter to half an 12 acre additional property, something in that area. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. It looks a lot 14 better taking out those curves and more of a straight shot. 15 I knew TexDOT would love that. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's great. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, they -- once they 19 got out there on the site, they thought -- the reason they 20 had that alternative alignment is one of the boulders, they 21 thought we were going to like that. When they got out 22 there, they realized that was not a real feasible location, 23 so they concur that this is the alignment. They -- I won't 24 say they like the location; they'll do whatever we say, 25 but -- 1-13-03 67 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Letz told 2 me last week that if they stayed with that original 3 alignment, he was going to go tie himself to those trees and 4 save the trees. He was -- I mean, he's a true -- a true 5 servant of the community. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or find someone to chain 7 themselves to the trees. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Are we dealing with any more 9 landowners -- additional number of landowners than we were 10 already dealing with? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. No, we will deal 12 with four landowners any way we do this bridge, and three of 13 them are agreeable and are talking with us and are very 14 happy to cooperate, and one has not been so cooperative up 15 to this point. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You answered my 17 questions. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It may not be 19 relative to this decision, but is his objection to having 20 the bridge at all, or the price that we're willing to pay? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I really can't answer 22 that, 'cause he -- I've met with him twice, and he won't 23 give me any reason other than he doesn't want -- he's not in 24 -- he's in favor of the bridge. He's just not in favor of 25 the bridge going on his property. And -- and in his 1-13-03 68 1 defense, he's got a very small piece of property. But we 2 have been -- you know, I think at least I have been -- 3 everyone that's visited with him has bent over backwards to 4 try to accommodate him, and I think we still would like 5 condemnation to be the last resort, but at some point, you 6 know, we're going to have to say, "This is what we're 7 doing," and then Mr. Motley's going to have to go say, "And 8 we're taking it if you don't agree to work with us." And up 9 to now, he's just -- I mean, like I say, all we have asked 10 for in -- I guess we've sent two letters and two meetings 11 that I've had with him. Two certified letters have been 12 sent to him and one noncertified letter. All we had asked 13 for is permission to get on his property to survey. He 14 refuses to give us permission to come on -- enter his 15 property. When I talk to him, he's very nice, but he 16 wouldn't sign the letter then either to give us permission. 17 But, anyway, so I think the -- I think his objection is that 18 we're using any of his property. He would rather we move 19 the bridge to the left side of the paper and upstream. And, 20 from an engineering standpoint, that's not feasible. It 21 would take a whole lot more right-of-way, because you would 22 -- as you go upstream, you get to the point that you're not 23 hitting the river perpendicular to the river, so you have to 24 really -- you have to put almost a 90-degree corner on 25 Hermann Sons Road to get it to a point that you can hit the 1-13-03 69 1 river perpendicular, which is what TexDOT's going to require 2 on the bridge. And, so, I mean, it's driven by need. I 3 make a motion that we approve the alignment shown furthest 4 to the right on the attached plat. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made by 7 Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, that 8 the Court approve the final road and bridge alignment for 9 the Hermann Sons Bridge -- TexDOT bridge shown furthest to 10 the right on the plat attached to the packet. Is there any 11 further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right 12 hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, just for the record, 18 Congressman Smith advised me that every time I get a call, 19 he gets a call from the same person, and encourages us to 20 expedite this as soon as we can, which is what he's trying 21 to do as well. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: He advised me to the same 23 effect, Commissioner Letz. Next item of business is 24 consider and discuss resolution to participate in the 216th 25 Judicial District Narcotics Task Force. Mr. Hill. Yes, 1-13-03 70 1 sir? 2 MR. HILL: Good morning. It's that time of 3 year again when we begin to make application to the 4 governor's office for these federal funds for a Narcotics 5 Task Force in the 216th Judicial District. Basically -- 6 well, actually, the money that they're going to give us this 7 year is the same that it's been for the last two years, so 8 we're not really operating on a true 75/25 percent agreement 9 with them any more. It's more like 29/71 percent for this 10 next year. We have been able to not have to go to each 11 entity for more money. We've got some funds in our program 12 income that we've been able to obligate to make up for any 13 difference, and primarily the difference next year from this 14 year is going to be salaries. Salaries are going to go up, 15 and we have to pay -- we have to pay whatever increases each 16 entity gives their employees that's assigned to the task 17 force. However, like I said, we were able to obligate a 18 certain portion -- $17,000 exactly -- from program income 19 that we've accumulated over the years, so that we don't have 20 to hit each entity up for out-of-pocket type of expenses. 21 The cash match portion for Kerr County, they 22 allow us to use the amount that the County pays for the 23 District Attorney for annual District Attorney fees. Also, 24 the amount of money that Kerr County pays to two Deputy 25 Sheriffs, as far as their fringe benefits go. They allow us 1-13-03 71 1 to use those figures as part of the cash match. So, 2 basically, it's not really costing Kerr County anything 3 out-of-pocket to participate in this. It's money that they 4 would -- the County would spend anyway, except for possibly 5 the two deputies that are assigned to us; they could be back 6 working at the Sheriff's Department. But that's pretty much 7 where we stand on that. 8 Something a little different also this year; 9 beginning January 1st of last year, they did away with the 10 Texas Narcotics Control Program, which was the oversight 11 unit for the task forces up in the governor's office. They 12 did away with that and they put administrative oversight 13 over to D.P.S. Narcotics Service. Of course, I guess the 14 first thing D.P.S. did was get their attorneys involved, and 15 see if we were doing everything the way we're supposed to 16 do. The only thing they've come up with is this Mutual 17 Cooperation Agreement on Extraterritorial Peace Officer 18 Jurisdiction. They felt like, even though we've got a 19 cooperative working agreement between all the counties and 20 the cities, that it didn't spell out exactly the peace 21 officers who have the jurisdiction to work in the other's 22 jurisdiction. So, they came up with this multi-page form 23 that, as far as I can tell, covers every contingency that 24 could possibly come up and gets everybody in the world to 25 sign off on it, so it would be a true multi-jurisdictional 1-13-03 72 1 agreement. 2 I've got some numbers of what -- for all of 3 this. We do actually occasionally get out and get to do 4 some work. In Kerr County -- and the reason this is broken 5 down -- it's broken down by counties as opposed to each 6 individual entity, because that's the way we file our 7 charges, so we go strictly by county. But in the last 8 12-month period from December of 2001 through November 2002, 9 the task force conducted 150 investigations in Kerr County. 10 And when I say we conducted these investigations, these are 11 actual cases that we wrote reports on; there was actually 12 something there. It doesn't include the number of times 13 that we go looking for bits and pieces of information and 14 nothing pans out. During that 12-month period, we secured 15 80 felony indictments, filed 35 misdemeanor charges -- and 16 these are all drug charges. And we -- in that 12-month 17 period, we seized $102,895 worth of narcotics. So, with all 18 that said, we ask your participation in the program again 19 for another year. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Question. 21 MR. HILL: Yes, sir? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Has the contract that's been 23 presented been reviewed by the County Attorney and his 24 staff? 25 MR. HILL: Are you talking about the 1-13-03 73 1 extrajurisdictional -- or Extraterritorial Jurisdiction 2 Agreement, or the whole thing? 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Funding Participation 4 Agreement. 5 MR. HILL: Okay. Yes, sir, it's been 6 reviewed by the City -- the City of Kerrville being the 7 applicant agency, their attorney reviewed this for a good 8 while. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: What about the Kerr County 10 Attorney's office? Has it been reviewed by that office? 11 MR. HILL: I couldn't say. 12 MR. MOTLEY: I don't recall seeing that. I 13 know that the D.A. in the 216th has probably looked it over; 14 I would assume Bruce is pretty familiar with the contents of 15 it, but I don't recall having seen a contract this year on 16 it. But I know it's probably the same as contracts in the 17 past, but I would be happy to look over it. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: I'd certainly feel more 19 comfortable about it. One item in there, there's an 20 indemnity provision of the employees that are outside of our 21 control that, you know, may or may not be a problem. The 22 other question I have is, am I to understand that -- that 23 the task force will be -- if we approve this, the funds 24 would come from Kerr County, being $43,700 roughly; that 25 that's essentially what we would be paying for two Deputy 1-13-03 74 1 Sheriffs that are assigned to the task force if they were in 2 our employ, rather than handing this money to you, and the 3 task force will be paying these same two individuals? Is 4 that essentially what I'm given to understand? 5 MR. HILL: That figure, $43,000, is a 6 breakdown based on what -- if I can explain this, we come up 7 with a budget of what we think we're going to need to 8 operate on for a year. We know that the Byrne Fund out of 9 Washington is going to give us 442,000-some-odd dollars. 10 That leaves the difference, which we have to come up with; 11 it's called cash match. We take -- based on population 12 figures, primarily, that's broken down. That -- that cash 13 match figure is broken down based on population, and this is 14 something that I don't do; it's way above my head. But as I 15 understand it, this is the way the figures come up. The 16 $43,000 is -- I'm not sure what Kerr County pays to the 17 District Attorney every year, but whatever it is, I would 18 think that would probably not -- doesn't indicate what's 19 really paid in fringe benefits to the two officers assigned 20 to us. And -- would I be right? 21 AUDIENCE: Assistant District Attorneys. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What it does is, the 23 task force actually, Your Honor, pays a percentage of the 24 Assistant District Attorney's salary -- or the County does, 25 and that Assistant D.A. is the one that prosecutes these. 1-13-03 75 1 As far as the two officers that are assigned from the 2 Sheriff's Office to that, what the County is actually out on 3 those is just the fringe benefits, is what the County pays 4 as part of this. The salaries of those two officers is 5 recouped by the grant and is actually paid by that grant, so 6 we're not paying that salary at all. And that salary would 7 be much more than even the total $43,000 because of those 8 officers' experience. So -- but the $43,000 is actually 9 part of the Assistant D.A. and the fringe benefits, where if 10 we tried to pay just the two deputies alone, it would be 11 more than that. 12 And the other thing is, in -- in the 13 Sheriff's Office, we get a lot better drug enforcement 14 having two deputies assigned to that because of the amount 15 of time it does take to do drug investigations. It's not 16 just going out and stopping somebody and seizing drugs. Our 17 normal patrol officers do that day-in and day-out. But a 18 lot of these investigations that they do take a lot of time 19 and a lot of manpower and a lot of hours, and there's no way 20 we could do it. So, what -- what the patrol officer and 21 what our department does, the -- the drug investigations 22 that are kind of instant, that we just run across, we can 23 take care of right then and right that minute, we handle. 24 The drug investigations that you may need to develop a 25 confidential informant or you may need to do other 1-13-03 76 1 investigation work on and it could take weeks or months, we 2 refer all of those investigations over to the task force. 3 And I think you'll see that Kerr County -- actually, in Kerr 4 County is where most of their investigations are done and 5 where actually most of the seizures is done, as we're the 6 largest part of this -- of this operation with them, and I 7 would definitely recommend continuing it. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's no question 9 that we get more bang for our buck going through the task 10 force. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Definitely, because you 12 have -- I don't know how many members you actually have in 13 there. 14 MR. HILL: I have eight investigators. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Eight? With eight 16 investigators -- and, see, even the investigators out of 17 Boerne or Fredericksburg also do investigations into this 18 county. That's part of that mutual agreement. And then our 19 own do investigations over there. But it does drastically 20 improve the -- the narcotics investigations and the quality 21 you can get, because I just can't do it with -- with patrol 22 people, you know, just working their normal shifts. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff, you actually 24 transferred two men from your manpower contingent; is that 25 correct, to the task force? 1-13-03 77 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you replace those 3 two for other lines -- other duties within the scope of your 4 responsibilities? Or -- 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. They -- I just lose 6 two officers that are -- 7 MR. DICKERSON: Do you replace them? 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, we do, because if 9 they were to send them back, okay, the only way that those 10 two officers would have a job back with the Sheriff's Office 11 is if we had an opening at that time. Otherwise, they're 12 just unemployed. So, I do get to replace them as far as 13 more manpower actually doing patrol duties, 'cause I like to 14 keep the guys in the neighborhoods and doing the actual -- 15 actual -- not actual crime -- the actual patrol part of it, 16 being in the neighborhoods and that, and let -- we have 17 D.P.S. narcotics personnel here and we also have them here, 18 so it really makes a good -- with those two working together 19 and every agency supplying manpower to it, it really makes 20 for a good narcotics investigation unit taking care of this 21 county. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: What's your pleasure? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion we 24 approve -- what are we approving? Approve the resolution to 25 participate in the 216th Judicial District Narcotics Task 1-13-03 78 1 Force as presented, and ask that it be sent to the County 2 Attorney's office for approval. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Subject to County Attorney's 4 approval and review? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct, that's what I 6 said. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Following that approval -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And authorize you to sign 9 it. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: -- review and approval, 11 authorize signature. All right. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion is made and seconded by 14 Commissioners Letz and Nicholson, respectively, that we -- 15 subject to the review and approval of the County Attorney's 16 office, we approve the funding participation agreement among 17 member agencies of the 216th Judicial District Narcotics 18 Task Force, and upon such review and approval of that, the 19 County Judge be authorized to sign same. Any further 20 discussion? If not, all in favor, please signify by raising 21 your right hand. 22 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 24 (No response.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Thank you, 1-13-03 79 1 Mr. Hill. 2 MR. HILL: Thank you. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is to consider and 4 discuss the donation of the planting of tree on courthouse 5 square. Mr. Holekamp. How are you this morning? 6 MR. HOLEKAMP: Fine, thank you. 7 Commissioners, County Judge, I'm representing a request from 8 the Kerrville Garden Club, who is an affiliated member with 9 the National Garden Clubs, Incorporated. They have -- I 10 think they've contacted Commissioner Baldwin also about this 11 particular request. They've requested to purchase and have 12 a tree planted on the courthouse yard representing and 13 honoring freedom, as a freedom tree. And as -- as you'll 14 notice on the note, if approved by Commissioners Court -- 15 and I kept Commissioner Letz in mind here. And the tree -- 16 we really are out of places in the courthouse square here to 17 place trees, and I -- I felt like, after two years ago, 18 three years ago when we eliminated some of the hackberries 19 on the outside perimeter, there's a possibility for some 20 placement of some trees there. So, I -- if approved, I 21 would recommend that's where it be placed. They are going 22 to furnish the tree at their cost. They're going to have it 23 planted, and for one year they're going to take care of it, 24 if it's approved by -- accepting this tree by Commissioners 25 Court. 1-13-03 80 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What kind of tree? 2 MR. HOLEKAMP: Big-tooth maple. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are you looking at 4 me for? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with Glenn 6 about placing it out here where the -- where he's taken the 7 -- what kind of trees? 8 MR. HOLEKAMP: Hackberries, and there's some 9 cedars. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hackberries. And 11 there are some other hackberries that need to come out on 12 around. And every time we talk about this, I say that 13 hackberries and cedar trees God made to cut down; that's 14 what they're for. That's the only thing that they're for. 15 (Laughter.) 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we have too many 17 here. But I think that would work. Glenn, by the way, this 18 is the wife of former County Commissioner Royce Stone in 19 Precinct 4. And, so, I -- anyway, I agree that the place of 20 the planting is really the only question, I think. And, you 21 know, out there where you're talking about, I think, is 22 wonderful. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that a motion? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is a motion, as a 25 matter of fact. 1-13-03 81 1 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. And I gather the 2 motion is that it be on the outside perimeter, the site to 3 be approved by our Maintenance Supervisor, Mr. Holekamp? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. I 5 thought maybe y'all would want to discuss this for a couple 6 hours. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 9 seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Letz, respectively, 10 that we approve the request to approve the donation of 11 planting of a tree on courthouse square, being on the 12 outside perimeter, at a location to be approved and selected 13 by our Maintenance Supervisor, Mr. Holekamp. Any further 14 discussion? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a comment, that a 16 big-tooth maple is an excellent selection. 17 MR. HOLEKAMP: Thank you. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion? If 19 not -- 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They only have one 21 they can give us? 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, no. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They only have one 24 they can give us? 25 JUDGE TINLEY: My concern is we'll have a 1-13-03 82 1 whole bunch of other folks line up; they want to present 2 their tree. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what will 4 happen. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor, raise your right 6 hand. 7 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 8 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 9 (No response.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 11 MR. HOLEKAMP: Ms. Stone thanks you. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item of business is to 13 consider and discuss having the January 27th or 14 February 10th -- I presume that's this year -- meeting at 15 the Union Church. I assume that's Commissioners Court 16 meeting. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is, yes, sir. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I just -- I 20 thought it would be a fun thing for the Commissioners Court 21 to convene at the old Union Church and have a session down 22 there. And the reason for it would just be fun; it would be 23 a fun thing to do. And I think it would bring -- I think it 24 would bring a focus to the Union Church and -- and their 25 program of rebuilding it, and et cetera. Commissioner Letz 1-13-03 83 1 and I attended the grand opening of it for Christmas, and 2 just -- it's just so nice to see a -- really, a part of Kerr 3 County history. It really was truly a neat thing, and I 4 remember the days -- and, General Schellhase, I remember the 5 days we were trying to get the building transferred over to 6 whoever owns it, y'all or us, or all of us, and it was a 7 pretty exciting -- some pretty exciting moments of trying to 8 figure out how to do all that. And it's done, and it's a 9 neat place, and I'd just like to have a Commissioners Court 10 meeting there. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with 12 Commissioner Baldwin; I'd like to see that happen, too. I 13 just have one question. Perhaps General Schellhase can 14 answer that question. For the special Christmas Eve 15 service, I'm given to understand that you had to get special 16 permission, building -- temporary building occupancy permit 17 or something; is that correct? And would that have to 18 happen again? 19 MR. SCHELLHASE: That's correct, it would 20 have to happen again. We had special permission, because 21 the building was not 100 percent finished and we did not 22 have an occupancy permit. But we've discussed meetings -- 23 as you know, we have several requests for meetings already, 24 and we have been given permission to go ahead and have some 25 from the City. 1-13-03 84 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good. I think it's a 2 great idea. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who do you get the 4 special occupancy permit from? 5 MR. SCHELLHASE: City. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We get a permit to 7 meet in our own building? 8 MR. SCHELLHASE: We get a permit to occupy 9 the building when it has not been completely finished. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I'd better stop 11 there. Although that's ridiculous, but okay. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: When this first idea was -- 13 idea was first broached, I had a concern about the 14 provisions of the Local Government Code providing for time 15 and place of meetings of the Commissioners Court, and -- and 16 I believe it's Section 81.005 of the Local Government Code 17 dealing with that. My reading of that section indicates 18 that if you're going to meet somewhere other than at the 19 county seat, under the current circumstances, that there's 20 some requirements that you got to -- some hoops you got to 21 jump through that I'm not sure we can permissibly do that. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, the only hoop I 23 saw was that we agree to do it. And that's the reason it's 24 on the agenda, is to agree to do it. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought the law, 1-13-03 85 1 Judge, had been changed to enable that to happen, so long as 2 the meeting is within the county. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's -- like I say, 4 when it was first broached to me, my reading of Section 5 81.005 states that if you're going to meet outside of the 6 county seat, the corporate city limits of the City of 7 Kerrville, certainly, that -- that's one section that it 8 merely takes the -- the action of this Court, but otherwise 9 you've got to have some other action taken and some other 10 conditions existing, is the way I read it. Now, certainly, 11 there's more than one way to interpret that law, I'm sure. 12 But I do have that concern, and apparently maybe we do have 13 a -- a difference on how we interpret that. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- and I -- I'm going 15 off memory, last time I read that portion, but I thought 16 that referred to regular meetings had to be here. And if we 17 did it at the next meeting, it's a special meeting. 'Cause 18 I believe -- isn't the term "regular" -- our regular meeting 19 has to be held here, but it's silent on special meetings? 20 But, either way, I mean, that's the reason I'm saying that, 21 'cause we've always had regular meetings here. But, 22 clearly, the Commissioners Court has used many locations 23 other than this building for meetings, including U.G.R.A., 24 the City of Kerrville, and none of the above. I mean, we've 25 -- you know, we've met at the Ag Barn; I believe we had an 1-13-03 86 1 actual meeting before. So, anyway -- 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We are within the 3 county seat, right? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think probably 5 "county seat" is the courthouse, I think, in that -- 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, there's another 7 provision in that -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: City of Kerrville. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: There's another provision 10 in -- in that same section that talks about located inside 11 the municipal limits of the county seat, which would 12 indicate to me that that indicates the entirety of the 13 corporate city limits of the city of Kerrville. Maybe 14 that's something we need to get the County Attorney's 15 guidance on. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How about a motion -- a 17 motion subject to ability to do it, so we don't have to take 18 it up again? I can't imagine -- 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Or do whatever's 20 necessary to make it legal. If it takes a notice or 21 whatever it takes to make it work, we have time to do that, 22 I presume, between now and then. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, tell me if I just 24 got a motion. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's do it this way. 1-13-03 87 1 Let's select February 10th, to give us plenty of room to get 2 our attorney to tell us yes or no, and then -- actually -- 3 actually, we can bring it back on the 27th. I'll just have 4 it back on the agenda at the 27th. If the attorney says 5 yes, we can go do it. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, essentially, your 7 motion is to refer to the County Attorney if we can meet 8 there, and if so, under what circumstances, and what kind of 9 notices or whatever other conditions may be required? 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, that would 11 be a great motion. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly what I 14 said. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second that 17 motion. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion by 19 Commissioner Baldwin, second by Commissioner Nicholson, that 20 the issue of -- of having the February 10th meeting at the 21 Union Church be referred to the County Attorney's office for 22 review, and -- and as to the legalities of being able to 23 meet there, and if so, under what circumstances or 24 conditions and what types of notices, and the matter to be 25 brought back here before the Court on the 27th at its 1-13-03 88 1 regular meeting. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, in your opening 3 comments today, we should do as much research as we can 4 before we hand it over. Would you provide him with that? 5 So we -- 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did we have comments yet? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think so. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, if we're going to 12 go to the trouble -- to me, I think it's a bit ridiculous to 13 have to do all this, but if we're doing it, sending this to 14 the County Attorney -- considering we meet at City Council 15 chambers on a pretty regular basis, we meet upstairs on a 16 regular basis, we've met at the Ag Barn before, we meet at 17 U.G.R.A. Why don't we find out the rules for to us meet 18 anywhere, and get a definite answer, so we don't have to 19 refer to this back when we have to go meet at U.G.R.A. later 20 this year? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Basically, I think 22 that is the question. Can we meet outside this building? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: And if so, under what 24 circumstances, with whom, and under what conditions? You're 25 amending your motion to that effect, Commissioner? 1-13-03 89 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, actually, that's 2 what I said in the first place. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I'm sorry. All right. 4 Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your 5 right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That was easy. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Piece of cake. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and 13 discuss County 911 Coordinator's status report. 14 Mr. Bullock. 15 MR. BULLOCK: Morning. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. 17 MR. BULLOCK: The project of addressing is 18 proceeding on out at the Emergency Network office, and the 19 addressing portion of it stays well ahead of the 20 notification part of it. And one of the problems there is 21 the -- the Post Office in San Antonio is usually sent a 22 postal route that has been addressed, and they do some 23 notification also. The problem with that is that the Post 24 Office will not accept a postal route that is not 90 percent 25 complete. And on my notes this morning, I had 80 percent, 1-13-03 90 1 but I was -- have since found out they've changed that to 90 2 percent. And 90 percent or less -- if the route has 90 or 3 less percent complete, that's mainly the pertinent mailing 4 information, and that is very time-consuming on the net -- 5 on the network people, researching that by all the means 6 that they possibly can to try to supply that information to 7 get that up to 90 percent so that they can send it to the 8 Post Office. 9 And, once it gets to the Post Office, there's 10 at least two forms of notification that they send out, and 11 one of them is to request information on the properties that 12 do not have a complete mailing address. And the second type 13 of notification would be notifying the postal patron of 14 their new mailing address -- or their new physical address. 15 The third notice that would go to a postal patron -- or to a 16 property owner, excuse me, would be a letter that is 17 intended to come from the County to the property owner 18 indicating their physical address of that piece of property. 19 And, let's see. At this date, there has been 40 percent of 20 the partials in Kerr County addressed, and 15 percent of 21 those -- of that 40 percent have received a form of the 22 notification. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Jim, let me ask you one 24 question on that point. On the 40 percent addressed, that 25 doesn't include the city of Kerrville? 1-13-03 91 1 MR. BULLOCK: No. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or city of Ingram? 3 MR. BULLOCK: The 20,600 partials does not 4 include the incorporated areas of Kerrville and Ingram. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. But 40 percent of 6 the -- of the partials have been addressed? 7 MR. BULLOCK: Yes. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Outside the city limits. 9 MR. BULLOCK: Right. But only 15 percent of 10 those have been -- have received any type of notification. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Any of the three 12 letters -- or I guess the second or third letter? 13 MR. BULLOCK: They've either received the 14 notification requesting information or the notification of 15 the new physical address. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: About how many -- or do 17 you have the number as to how many have received the -- 18 either the letter from the Post Office or from the County? 19 MR. BULLOCK: Let's see. I think that was 20 probably -- if I remember right, that was in the 21 neighborhood of 1,500. At one of our last meetings, they 22 was talking about the incoming calls. That has been a 23 concern of the -- of some of the people involved, incoming 24 calls from the people inquiring about their addressing or 25 questions concerning that. And it has been a very 1-13-03 92 1 time-consuming issue for some -- depending on where the call 2 is coming into, it has been time-consuming in getting the 3 response back. And there's -- according to the number of 4 calls that comes in on a particular morning or afternoon, it 5 could be disruptive in the office that the calls are coming 6 into. So, it's been proposed that a separate line be 7 established that would be nothing more than accepting the 8 911 calls, and possibly recording those calls to be handled 9 at a later, you know, period of time. And, what I -- 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's the nature of 11 these calls, the problems? 12 MR. BULLOCK: Probably 90 percent of them or 13 more have been discussing the property, itself, as far as 14 location, the road name, so forth. Very few calls have been 15 coming in as to -- in regard to the stipulations that's been 16 issued from the Post Office about the size of the letters, 17 where to place them, you know, describing the location. But 18 90 percent, I would say, of the calls are more technical 19 than -- than not. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you receiving them 21 now? I mean, do they come in to you? 22 MR. BULLOCK: So far, there's been, I'd say, 23 two that have come to me downstairs. And that's strict -- 24 mainly because of the phone number that's on the 25 notifications that's coming from the Post Office is giving 1-13-03 93 1 the Kerr -- the Emergency Network office phone number. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 911 office? 3 MR. BULLOCK: Right. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And so they're getting 5 most -- most of it over there? I mean -- 6 MR. BULLOCK: Right. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Most of it? 8 80 percent? I mean, how many phone calls are we talking 9 about? Ten? 5,000? 10 MR. BULLOCK: Somewhere in between. 11 (Laughter.) 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 13 MR. BULLOCK: I'm not real sure how many -- 14 how many have come in. I do know that they are keeping -- 15 maintaining a log out there of the type of calls that's 16 coming in, and we can get that back to you. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's okay. I'm just 18 trying to -- trying to figure this thing out. So, most of 19 them are technical calls? 20 MR. BULLOCK: Right. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And calls that you 22 have the ability to answer? 23 MR. BULLOCK: No, I would not have the -- the 24 information downstairs to do the research to answer those. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I thought. 1-13-03 94 1 Well, I've been looking at this for a week or so, and it's 2 my opinion that those calls need to be routed into the 911 3 office, again, because they are so technical in nature that 4 only -- probably only those folks out there can answer them, 5 the questions. Plus the fact that -- I mean, we can get 6 another phone put in down here to -- you know, he lays it 7 out here, how many -- 180 minutes of messages and all that 8 stuff that our phone bank will handle, but if you remember, 9 this guy is part-time. He's not going to be employed in the 10 courthouse, as per our contract with him, very much longer. 11 I mean, if we put in a phone line and get started, and all 12 of a sudden he's gone, do we jerk the phone out and then say 13 to 911, "Hey, you have to start receiving these calls"? Why 14 don't we just say that right now and get it over with? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with -- I mean, 16 on this particular point, I agree with Commissioner Baldwin. 17 I think that it -- I mean, it doesn't make sense -- 18 (Laughter.) 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, I might add, we 20 agree many times. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there something 22 coming down the pike? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, it makes sense for 24 this to be out at 911. Now, it may -- but from prior 25 conversations I've had -- and I understand that it's a 1-13-03 95 1 disruption to them in trying to get other things done 2 because a phone call comes in; I understand that. Is it 3 possible to add a phone line, if they need another phone 4 line out there, or have a dedicated line at 911 with a 5 recording on it, so the calls come in and then either you 6 or -- they can be looked into and then responded to simply 7 and in a manner that seems like it would solve the problem? 8 MR. BULLOCK: That would be the solution. 9 And even phones in -- from what I understand about the 10 current system, you can set the phone where it goes directly 11 into voice mail without rolling over or -- or, you know, 12 ringing several times before it goes into voice mail. But 13 it could go directly into voice mail, but the -- like you 14 suggested, a separate line, dedicated phone line for that 15 would be -- would be great. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seems to me that that 17 would be a -- I mean, this is going to be a problem that, as 18 Commissioner Baldwin says, is going to last far beyond the 19 114 -- 150 hours that you have left under your contract. 20 But also, I do think that it's a -- I mean, it's an 21 important -- we need to have some mechanism set up or work 22 with 911 to have some mechanism so at least calls are 23 responded to quickly, and input however -- have them as 24 nondisruptive as possible to 911. And it seems to me they 25 have a phone line out there, dedicated line. I don't know 1-13-03 96 1 whether their system that's out there right now would work. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think having 3 911 do it makes some sense. I'm curious about this sample 4 recorded message. The average caller is going to understand 5 what you're asking them to do with respect to "K" numbers 6 and "R" numbers and so forth? 7 MR. BULLOCK: Well, that would be information 8 on the notification. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's there for them? 10 All they have to do is read it? 11 MR. BULLOCK: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Understanding it's 13 another matter. 14 MR. BULLOCK: Understanding it would be a 15 different matter. But it would be some -- it would be some 16 real good clues for the people to -- or anybody that's doing 17 the research on that particular question. That would aid 18 them in finding the -- 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It wouldn't make it 20 more confusing? That's my only concern. 21 MR. BULLOCK: It shouldn't. And that's 22 just -- that message -- that sample message is one of my 23 creations, so -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 25 MR. BULLOCK: Okay. The time estimates for 1-13-03 97 1 this project, the way it's going and all the research and 2 restrictions that have been put on from the Post Office, and 3 having to continue with the process that they're currently 4 going through, it's been estimated that it would take 5 another two years to do that. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much? 7 MR. BULLOCK: Two -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Years? 9 MR. BULLOCK: -- years. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Two more years, okay. 11 MR. BULLOCK: An alternative would be to 12 totally address the county as a whole, rather than different 13 postal routes. To address the entire county, and then send 14 notifications out. And that's estimated to be done within 15 possibly -- well, the addressing would be done within six 16 months, and then the notifications could go out, and the 17 property owners at that time would be the people that would 18 receive the notifications, and we would not be bringing the 19 Post Office and their restrictions into the loop at that 20 point. And in that notification, you could request the 21 property owners to notify the Post Office, all their service 22 providers, as well as their personal contacts of their new 23 address, and that would keep the Post Office and -- like I 24 say, and their restrictions totally out of it. At that 25 point in time, the County people, like county offices, like 1-13-03 98 1 the County Clerk, County Tax Assessor, Road and Bridge, all 2 of them could be notified of the changes immediately, either 3 electronically or by printouts. And also, the -- before we 4 sent notifications out, we could contact these various 5 service providers to see if they would accept electronic 6 address changes. We do know that the telephone company 7 would probably not accept it electronically. They prefer to 8 get it from the individual customers. Now, whether the 9 utility companies are that restrictive or not, we don't know 10 yet, but I would suspect that utility companies would 11 probably be like the Appraisal District and be willing to 12 accept the changes electronically. So, we can -- in that 13 notification to the property owners, we can provide all the 14 information or any of the information that's possible to aid 15 them in making their address change request to their 16 providers. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, Jim, what I'm 18 hearing you say is that we can continue on doing what we're 19 doing today, and it would be at least two more years before 20 we turn the key to the job? 21 MR. BULLOCK: Right. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or we could just go 23 out -- which is what this Court has said on several 24 occasions, is just go out there and address everything. 25 And, the way I see it, just go ahead and address everything 1-13-03 99 1 throughout the entire county, and then you come back and you 2 get into a -- and 911 may want to say something about 3 this -- and you come back and get into a -- into a 4 maintenance mode and start picking up those mistakes that 5 were made, or those little things that were left on the 6 table. But go ahead and get everything done, and then come 7 back and pick up those things that you possibly missed, and 8 that would cut it down from a minimum of two years down to 9 six months? I mean, that's -- this is a tough one for me. 10 Is that what you're saying, though? Something like that? 11 MR. BULLOCK: After that six months, there 12 would naturally be some disputes or problems that would need 13 to be resolved. But, like I say, this would be the 14 housecleaning rather than the -- starting all over from each 15 mail route. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me ask a question 17 before you -- 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under the six-month plan, 20 though, we would just not ever notify the Post Office. What 21 we'd do, we would send a letter out from the County Judge or 22 from Commissioners Court saying, "Here's your new address." 23 And, with that, would that letter say, "except for mail"? 24 Because, I mean, I'm -- my question is, what's going to 25 happen when the utility bill is changed and the Post Office 1-13-03 100 1 refuses to deliver it 'cause they don't know that address? 2 MR. BULLOCK: Well, the Post Office, in their 3 notifications, have indicated that the old and new addresses 4 are good for 12 months. So, actually, in our notification, 5 the person to be notified would be notified to contact the 6 Post Office, and would then -- in the next 12 months, they 7 would have to be -- you know, they would have to contact the 8 Post Office within the next 12 months. But, supposedly, the 9 Post Office will deliver to the old and new address for a 10 12-month period. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there -- can we get 12 that in writing from the Post Office? 13 MR. BULLOCK: We got it in their copies of 14 their notifications. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Is this a matter that we can 16 take formal action of the type that Commissioner Baldwin's 17 possibly thinking about, or is this just mainly an 18 information item, as I read this thing? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think it's 20 more of an informational item, and just kind of -- I've 21 asked him to bring this as a briefing, as part of his status 22 of where -- where we all are in the -- particularly with 23 his -- Mr. Bullock's position. But I don't -- I don't think 24 that this is really -- I think this is a 911 Board issue. 25 But I -- if it's that simple, which I doubt, but I would 1-13-03 101 1 like to hear from the 911 side. And, you know, if it's 2 anywhere near that, I would certainly encourage our board 3 members to pursue it. I mean, I would. But I'd like to 4 hear the other side of it. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Reese? 6 MR. REESE: Oddly enough -- 7 JUDGE TINLEY: What happens if we leave the 8 post office out of the loop, which is what I'm hearing? 9 MR. REESE: You need to be aware that there 10 are going to be some significant changes, as opposed to the 11 way we have been directed to handle this notification 12 process. This that we are proposing will put the land -- 13 the property owner and the occupants and the users into the 14 loop of notification. First of all, when they do take part 15 in that notification to the phone company or the Post 16 Office, there is an element of accuracy that we only 17 estimate in many, many cases. Secondly, the six months 18 issue is not a bad estimate, and the reason is that when we 19 take a property record and we address it and reroute -- we 20 research it, we get 90 percent of the information in the 21 first five minutes, if we're ever going to get it at all. 22 We have been tied up with matching addresses for occupants, 23 renters, and so forth that we have no way of knowing they 24 even exist. That's the time-consuming element. 25 Now, if we do go to this and complete all of 1-13-03 102 1 the addressing, a one-time notification, in the process of 2 doing that addressing and notification, we will still be 3 providing the 90 percent information that we're going to 4 have before us. We are just not going to take any more time 5 doing detective work, is really what it amounts to. So, on 6 the one hand, we will have -- we will have a more rapid 7 release of addresses for convenience, for public safety. We 8 will have the citizens -- we will rely on citizen input; 9 that's going to be crucial. I can tell you, and you need to 10 know going in, that, typically, not all the citizens comply 11 with the request to give information. But that's -- that's 12 something for the Court to decide as to whether it's going 13 to be the responsibility of 911, Mr. Bullock, or yourselves 14 to determine at what point you can release information for 15 somebody's use, or just go ahead and get on with it. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bill, this thing -- 17 I'm going to say this again, because I think it's important. 18 This thing of counting on the people to call the -- be a 19 part of the notification, be in the notification loop, you 20 know, somehow we need -- we've got to get this message 21 across, that this is not about us and it's not about the 22 mail service or about our friends finding our homes and all 23 that. It's about a person having a heart attack at 2:30 in 24 the morning and an ambulance being able to find their house. 25 MR. REESE: That's correct. 1-13-03 103 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all it's about. 2 I couldn't care less if people get mail or anything else, 3 but I want Rusty to know where that house is at 2:30 in the 4 morning. That's what it's all about. So, it would be in 5 the best interests of that person to contact the telephone 6 company to change their address. 7 MR. REESE: Absolutely. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And if they don't, you 9 know -- I mean, there's got to be some personal 10 responsibility in this picture somewhere. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I almost echo 12 what Commissioner Baldwin said -- that's twice now -- and 13 even go a little bit further than that. I think people need 14 to be responsible for this. I think they need to be 15 responsible, and I think it is a lot easier for 911 or 16 Commissioners Court or both to do a one-time education, 17 promote it with local media, and say, "You're about to get 18 these letters, and this is what that letter says." And if 19 you want your mail changed, I mean, or -- you need to do 20 this. Rather than do it piecemeal, like we're doing now a 21 little bit, and no -- and the public is very confused. I 22 think we do a one-time education effort, give it our best 23 shot we can, and then put it on the individuals to be 24 responsible for, you know, their own circumstances. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we took this 1-13-03 104 1 six-month approach, we would -- that's us or 911, I don't 2 know -- does that mean that six months from now, when 911's 3 phone rings over at the Sheriff's Department, in every case 4 they'll be able to know where that location of that call's 5 coming from? 6 MR. REESE: In every case, no. Until we get 7 the -- the final feedback from the citizens, there are -- 8 there are going to be -- even the way we're doing it now, 9 there are limitations as to -- we've got to know somebody 10 lives at a certain place and their phone number is a certain 11 number before we can get it into the -- excuse me -- the 911 12 database for display purposes. To get 100 percent, we're 13 going to be able to provide, I would say, 50 percent of the 14 phone numbers. Then people who have phone numbers listed in 15 a business name, you know, they're going to have to take the 16 -- take the bull by the horns and see to it that the phone 17 company or us or you get the -- get the match between this 18 phone number -- this is my address, you know; let's get it 19 in the system. Did I answer your question? 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. Having 21 attended probably almost all of these Commissioners Court 22 meetings in the last year and a half or so, I've sensed a 23 lot of frustration among the members of the Court about the 24 Court's inability to move this -- this addressing thing 25 along a little faster. And, frankly, what I'm hearing here 1-13-03 105 1 is that I'm not sure the estimates now are as good as they 2 were six months ago. We seem to be losing ground rather 3 than solving the problem. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we're getting 5 realistic estimates now. 6 MR. REESE: I have some basis behind those 7 estimates. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I don't want 9 to jump into another agenda item. 10 MR. REESE: I think -- go ahead. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the question is, how 12 much of the delay is caused by the guidelines that the Court 13 adopted at the recommendation of 911? Have we made some 14 modifications in there as to addressing streets with 15 multiple residences and driveways and all that? 16 MR. REESE: No, that's not a delay issue. It 17 hasn't been at this time. We do have a couple of delay 18 issues, and that's unnamed roads. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I'm talking 20 about. 21 MR. REESE: Well the unnamed -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's a big -- that's 23 exactly what I'm talking about, is that the fact that our 24 guidelines say that if it's over a quarter mile and it's 25 more than two structures, that it has to get an address or a 1-13-03 106 1 name and an address. And that's where most of the unnamed 2 roads are, in that category. 3 MR. REESE: It's just been -- everything 4 involves the guidelines. What we do, there's always a yes 5 and there's always a no element. There are a couple of -- 6 what we are contemplating doing -- contemplating doing now, 7 I think you will find will take care of a lot of these 8 issues that -- that have been dragging around like little 9 anchors all over. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Do we need to take any action 11 on this? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, we probably 13 need to get back to our -- Mr. Bullock and his status 14 report. Are you about through with that -- 15 MR. BULLOCK: Yeah. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- particular part? 17 All right. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Next item of business, 19 consider and discuss adopting 911 addressing letter from the 20 County to property owners and all related costs. My 21 question is, in view of the uncertain status of the previous 22 item, are we ready to move forward on this item? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, we are not 24 ready to adopt a letter at this time. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Do you think we ought to just 1-13-03 107 1 pass that one? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, no. I want him 3 to touch on that. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you don't mind. 6 MR. BULLOCK: There had been some -- well, a 7 letter had been created following the current notification 8 process, and I think y'all have a copy of that letter. And 9 the question here would have been if it -- to adopt a 10 version of that letter, and then start pursuing the problems 11 of getting it printed, where to get it printed, how to get 12 it printed, and how to get it mailed. And that's where the 13 related costs are coming in. I have found one company so 14 far -- I've checked with three, OfficeMax and one of the 15 mailbox places, and they were not too interested in 16 discussing this type of mailing process. But the -- the 17 person that was -- the Mailbox did refer me to Copies and 18 More out on -- out in the shopping center behind -- well, 19 close to Rick's Furniture, and he can -- he is set up to 20 handle a mailing process by taking an electronic media and 21 producing the letters, so we do have a source to do that. 22 Then the next problem came up of the postage, 23 and whether or not it would be an envelope-type mailing or 24 just a fold and -- like, a fold and staple-type mailing. 25 So, that was the issue on that. But if we choose to go with 1-13-03 108 1 the six-month deal, that letter's going to have to be 2 expanded quite a bit with more -- clearer details. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to point out 4 something to you, Commissioner. In this letter, if you'll 5 notice, here is -- here is that "K" and here is that "R." 6 And the "K" is related to -- the person's name? 7 MR. BULLOCK: No, the "K" is a map number. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Map number. 9 MR. BULLOCK: It's just really -- well, it's 10 like a key to that record in -- in the 911 system. The "R" 11 number is the number associated with the -- from the 12 Appraisal District. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Some pretty good 14 information, if you look at it close enough. Okay. 15 Obviously, we're not going to deal with that letter today. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- have you come 17 up with a cost estimate if we went the route you have come 18 up with, or can you come up with a cost estimate as to how 19 much that's going to cost? 20 MR. BULLOCK: Not yet. We'd have to come up 21 with a letter or notification design and see if it's going 22 to be two or three pages or -- and if y'all would like to 23 include the forms necessary to change addresses. The Post 24 Office has a form that they use. I'm not sure if we could 25 get enough of them to stuff envelopes with, but the Post 1-13-03 109 1 Office will accept in a letter form the name -- the old 2 address and new address, and they'll accept that as long as 3 the customer -- the customer -- the patron or the resident 4 signs it. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think my personal 6 preference would be I'm really going to want to spend a 7 little more time on this. I think we need to start giving 8 some direction -- at least from a budget standpoint, some 9 numbers. My preference would be to send the Post Office 10 form. I'm sure we could get all we need. We could get 11 20,600 or whatever we need of the Change of Address forms 12 from the Post Office at no cost. But what I would like, if 13 we could get -- next time you come before us, is, you know, 14 the estimated postage. If you use the Post Office form, 15 that's going to require a letter, so we're going to need 16 envelopes and printing -- just estimate two pages. That way 17 we can get some kind of an idea of the dollar consequences 18 to our budget, 'cause we don't have funds for this budgeted 19 in the County. I don't know what 911 has, but we're -- I'm 20 guessing we're looking at probably close to $20,000, 21 $15,000, something like that. If we could come up with some 22 kind of good -- I guess a recommendation is what I'm asking. 23 Give us a recommendation of one or two options that we could 24 have to look at at that workshop coming up. 25 MR. BULLOCK: The person I talked to out at 1-13-03 110 1 Copies and More is more than willing to work with the 2 designing and proposing costs for that. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, great. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: I think we're bordering on the 5 next item of business, so if we're through with discussions 6 here, we'll go to Item 2.10, consider and discuss setting 7 workshop with the 911 Board to discuss the 911 Guidelines. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Gentlemen, I put my 9 name on there, as usual, as a service to Commissioner 3. 10 This is -- 11 (Laughter.) 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is his issue. 13 And, Commissioner 3rd, just wanted to let you know I'm here 14 to serve you, sir, and this is yours. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mine? But, anyway, I 16 think we need to have a workshop. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. Me, too. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Set a date and get on 19 with it. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see Chuck Lewis in the 22 back, one of our appointees to the 911 Board. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And Colonel Harris. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Colonel Harris, 25 sorry. 1-13-03 111 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Harris was here all the 2 time. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Appreciate both of y'all 4 coming, actually, for the agenda item today. From a timing 5 standpoint, what would be a -- do you have any preference 6 from a timing -- 7 MR. LEWIS: After the new director is on 8 board. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: After the director -- 10 MR. LEWIS: After the director is on board. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that will be? 12 MR. LEWIS: We're having a hand-over meeting 13 on the 23rd. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 23rd. 15 MR. LEWIS: Of this month. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you really -- you're 17 asking that we defer this until probably the first meeting 18 in February? 19 MR. LEWIS: Probably. Well, you have to give 20 him a chance to become familiar with what we're going to 21 request here, and -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: First or second meeting 23 in February? 24 MR. LEWIS: -- discuss the 911 guidelines. 25 We don't -- we don't feel that the guidelines that we have 1-13-03 112 1 right now are really delaying anything. Just -- not really 2 delaying it. It's the procedure we go through that seems to 3 be holding it up. That's why -- the alternative that 4 Mr. Bullock has discussed was just food for thought for you 5 to consider. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. All right, then. 7 Why don't we just postpone this until either the second 8 or -- first or second meeting in February, and we'll bring 9 this back to the agenda. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just one question. 11 The procedure is what's slowing it down. Who has the 12 responsibility and authority to solve that problem? Is it 13 911 or the Commissioners Court? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to say 911. 15 We appoint two people to sit on -- they're both here to sit 16 on that board and solve -- 17 MR. LEWIS: To do what? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- all the problems. 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You said the 20 guidelines weren't the problem; it's the procedures. And my 21 question was, who's got the authority and responsibility to 22 change and approve the procedures? And I'm told it's 911. 23 MR. LEWIS: I can't tell the Post Office that 24 they can do it in less than 90 percent, what we just 25 discussed and explained to you. I don't have that 1-13-03 113 1 authority. I don't have the authority -- I, speaking as a 2 board, don't have the authority to tell anybody what their 3 address is. We provide technical support to the county 4 government to tell people what their addresses are. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Time for a workshop. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Time for a workshop. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, if there's 8 nothing further on this one, let's move on to the next 9 number, 2.11, consider and discuss clarification of Kerr 10 County's authority to assign road names and addresses in 11 Kerr County. Commissioner Letz. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is one I think we 13 can take action on. If we go back -- go back to our 911 14 guidelines and look at the court orders for a while, and 15 state law -- as you know, I put a -- a part of the Local 16 Government Code -- I'm not sure which code that's in -- 17 that's in the backup, but that the County has the authority 18 for naming roads and addressing. We have assumed that we 19 are -- we have accepted that authority in Kerr County, but I 20 couldn't find a court order that says we have formally 21 accepted it. And the reason this came up is, working with 22 some utility companies, essentially the phone company, from 23 an indemnity standpoint, it may be a good idea to help them 24 move along if we formally say that we are the authority in 25 Kerr County for addressing and road-naming. And, therefore, 1-13-03 114 1 I'll make a motion to that effect, that in Kerr County, the 2 Kerr County Commissioners Court has the authority to assign 3 road names and addresses, and those are the official names 4 and addresses for Kerr County. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In the unincorporated 6 areas? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the unincorporated 8 areas, correct. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 11 seconded by Commissioners Letz and Baldwin, respectively, 12 that the Court assume/declare/state that it has the 13 authority to establish road names and addresses in all the 14 unincorporated areas of Kerr County. Is there any further 15 discussion? 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Does that require a 17 public hearing? I hope not. It appears in Part (d) that it 18 does. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it does. 20 Therefore, we'll -- I'll rescind that motion, and -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Are you withdrawing your 22 motion? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm withdrawing my 24 motion. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: You're withdrawing your 1-13-03 115 1 second, I assume, Commissioner Baldwin? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I guess. I don't know 3 why yet, but I will. I don't see what you're talking about. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see it in 5 251. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: (d). 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, it does. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was wrong. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Therefore, I will make a 11 motion -- I guess it's going to be a 30-day notice, to play 12 it safe -- that at our -- when's the first meeting in -- the 13 second meeting of February? 14 MS. HAMILTON: 24th. 15 MS. SOVIL: It would be the 24th. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: 24th? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me ask the County 18 Attorney, if I may, a question first. David, for this type 19 of public hearing, is it 15 days generally, or 30 days? 20 MR. MOTLEY: This is just as far as to change 21 the -- or set up the rules for the naming of the -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's to formally say the 23 Kerr County Commissioners Court has the authority for 24 road-naming. We've already -- the road-naming guidelines 25 are in place for both of these. 1-13-03 116 1 MR. MOTLEY: I think the County does have the 2 authority. As far as how many days, I really just need to 3 look at it, 'cause I can't tell you. I can look at it real 4 quick and tell you, but -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we're probably 6 meeting after lunch, if you can get us an answer after lunch 7 as to number of days. 8 MR. MOTLEY: I've got hearings at 1:30, so 9 I'll try to do the best I can do with that. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: David, wait a minute. 11 The (d) under here, it says, "... may adopt an order under 12 this section only after conducting a public hearing..." We 13 have already adopted the guidelines. We have already done 14 it. That's a done deal. All we're -- all we're saying 15 now -- all we're saying in this court order is, we're 16 responsible. The guidelines say that. And I feel like, by 17 adopting the guidelines, we're saying that we're taking the 18 responsibility. But one of the utilities feels like that 19 they need -- would like to have a little stronger language, 20 and so we're just -- it's a separate -- it's really a 21 separate court order that's simply saying, you know, we're 22 the ones. 23 MR. MOTLEY: There is an order for the -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's not amending the 25 guidelines or anything like that. 1-13-03 117 1 MR. MOTLEY: This is an order for the 2 particular utility that's concerned about being more 3 specific? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's all it 5 is. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. What -- I mean, 7 the guidelines never expressly said we have that authority. 8 We just -- but we approved the guidelines and we had a 9 public hearing on the guidelines. 10 MR. MOTLEY: And you recognize that you have 11 the support by approving the guidelines, right? And you had 12 a public hearing on the guidelines? 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe we did. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, we did. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: David, I'd have to check 17 that. 18 MR. MOTLEY: You may be okay right now. If 19 you want me to just double-check, I can do some checking 20 real quick and maybe give you something after lunch, or send 21 you a message one way or the other. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Speaking of lunch -- 23 (Discussion off the record.) 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's go ahead and I'll 25 table this until the next meeting. We'll find out what 1-13-03 118 1 exactly we want to say in that court order. And, David, if 2 you can get back -- I'll send you a memo as to -- 3 MR. MOTLEY: I may look real quick. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: If there's no further 5 discussion on 2.11, then let's go -- 6 (Discussion off the record.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I've had a request that 8 we take up, out of order, 2.13, concerning interlocal 9 agreement. Is there any objection to the out of order? 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: None, sir. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: The Court, at this time, will 12 take up Item 2.13, consider and discuss and take appropriate 13 action on revisions to the Interlocal Agreement between Kerr 14 County and the U.G.R.A. for Kerrville South Wastewater 15 Project, to cover current, pending, and future projects. 16 Commissioner Williams. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. 18 This -- this will bring back an item from two weeks ago in 19 which the Court was presented with some proposed amendments 20 to the Interlocal Agreement between Kerr County and the 21 Upper Guadalupe River Authority for the Kerrville South 22 wastewater project. I'd like for Mr. Mosty, if you will, to 23 come up and help us step through these. At the Court's 24 request, I sent this to the County Attorney for his review, 25 and we need to hear back from Mr. Motley as to his thoughts 1-13-03 119 1 and/or recommendations, if any, with respect to this 2 revision of this document. 3 MR. MOSTY: The members of the Court -- I 4 think maybe the two new members were here at the last 5 discussion, but just to remind you, there are -- the former 6 Texas Rural Development Agency has changed its name to 7 O.R.C.A. And there -- there are two projects; one, a 8 Community Development project, one a Colonia project, which 9 have been approved, and one is in construction and one is in 10 planning. And then there is a pending application for a 11 Community Development grant, and a pending application for a 12 Colonia grant, all of which have previously been approved by 13 both U.G.R.A. and the Commissioners Court. And when Mr. 14 Brown was going through his housecleaning, he discovered 15 that there is only one interlocal agreement that deals with 16 the 2001 Community Development Grant. In fact, there's not 17 an interlocal agreement on the 2001 Colonia grant. 18 So, the concept of this is to create a 19 template of an interlocal agreement that can cover the -- 20 both the existing projects when granted, the pending 21 projects, pending funding, and if the Court chooses to adopt 22 additional projects at a future time, to -- to incorporate 23 those. And this would be the template under which they 24 would be organized. And all of them are generally that 25 U.G.R.A. does the grant work or supervises the grant work, 1-13-03 120 1 oversees the construction. At the end of the project -- the 2 County does the application. At the end of the project, the 3 project goes to U.G.R.A. So, it's really -- the effort here 4 is really to take the one existing agreement and create a 5 template that can cover all of those. I understand from 6 Mr. Motley this morning that he does have some comments or 7 some questions that apparently we're going to have to 8 address. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can we hear from 10 Mr. Motley as to what those are? 11 MR. MOTLEY: Well, I had left a voice mail 12 for Commissioner Williams to try and -- I think what I 13 really wanted the most was to look at the other contract 14 from the predecessor agency to O.R.C.A. -- all those 15 initials run me in the ground -- Texas Department of Housing 16 and Community Affairs. I wanted to look at that older 17 agreement. But, in looking at this -- and Mr. Mosty and I 18 have talked a little bit, and I had made him aware of some 19 of the concerns I had. It's -- you know, it might be that 20 that would be something that we could take up in another 21 meeting, but let me just highlight some of the questions 22 that I have. I was looking, of course, at the interlocal 23 agreement statute, and I, first of all, just kind of 24 question whether or not there is any authority in general to 25 enter into this agreement. There's 791.026 of the 1-13-03 121 1 Government Code, which allows for municipalities, districts, 2 or river authorities to make such a contract. In other 3 words, I believe what I'm trying to say is, my understanding 4 of the interlocal cooperation agreement is that it needs to 5 be clear that both sides have the ability to do the 6 particular job before they agree -- this is a conservative 7 view, and perhaps may be a little bit older view, but both 8 sides need to have the ability to do this contract before 9 they can make a joint contract to -- to handle it together 10 through an interlocal agreement. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Excuse me. Is this 12 opinion that you're stating now different than your position 13 when you reviewed this at the outset, originally? 'Cause 14 this -- this agreement is in effect right now. Not -- not 15 the model agreement, but there is an interlocal agreement. 16 MR. MOTLEY: I hear you. 17 MR. MOSTY: Do y'all have the red-lined 18 version in front of you? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. 20 MR. MOSTY: That's -- the scratch-outs are 21 the current agreement. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My point is that 23 there is an interlocal existing, signed by Kerr County, in 24 place, and I'm pretty sure you reviewed it before the Court 25 approved it and it was signed. So, is your position on it 1-13-03 122 1 different? That's my question. 2 MR. MOTLEY: I don't know. I don't know if I 3 reviewed the previous agreement. I don't recall having seen 4 it, but I'd be happy to take a look at that, along with 5 that -- that O.R.C.A. predecessor contract. That's -- that 6 was the message that I had left. I thought I needed to take 7 a look at the contract before I could really make some, you 8 know, final calls on a couple of issues. One of the 9 things -- and I have spoken to Richard about this, and he 10 may have an answer for it, so I don't want to address it 11 heavily, but there was a -- an item in number -- it's on the 12 first page -- let's see. No, second page. Just a moment 13 here. 14 It says that the -- after the bids -- after 15 the bids are awarded, it says Tetra Tech shall review the 16 bid package as prepared by Grantworks, shall make such 17 design and consulting recommendations as it deems necessary. 18 Kerr County shall solicit and receive all bids. All 19 accepted bids shall be referred by Kerr County to Tetra Tech 20 and U.G.R.A., who shall jointly evaluate the bids and make 21 recommendations to Kerr County. It says Kerr County shall 22 award bids pursuant to Texas Local Government Code. And 23 then -- that's Number 4 on Page 23, I believe. And then, 24 dropping down to Number 6, it talks about if there's a 25 disagreement between U.G.R.A., Tetra Tech, and Kerr County 1-13-03 123 1 as to who is supposed to receive the bid or who's the best 2 bidder, then a majority recommendation would control who 3 receives the bid. And I don't think Kerr County can 4 delegate that authority under -- I don't believe you can do 5 that or go by a majority rule. I think Kerr County would 6 have to make that bid decision. That was one of the 7 examples. 8 MR. MOSTY: Let me just address that one 9 right now. I think that thing needs to be reworded, because 10 that's the County's consultant, and the County -- if the 11 County's consultant, U.G.R.A., and the County can't agree. 12 By definition, the County has the majority under there, so 13 it's sort of redundant. I presume you're going to agree 14 with your consultant. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, not 16 necessarily. 17 MR. MOSTY: I guess, theoretically, under 18 that, your consultant and U.G.R.A. could have one idea, and 19 the County could have another. That -- that language was 20 melded out of the old one, and needs to be cleaned up. And 21 if there's an issue about that, we can work that out. 22 Because I -- I agree that there's probably an issue of 23 whether or not you can delegate out your bid-awarding 24 responsibilities. 25 MR. MOTLEY: There was a -- again, I -- you 1-13-03 124 1 know, I'm -- I'm not exactly sure, but when I looked at this 2 business, it does say very plainly in the Local Government 3 Code that cities and districts and special districts can do 4 this. And they seem to -- by the inclusion of one thing, it 5 seems to exclude the part that's absent. So, 721.026 is 6 Contracts for Water Supply, Wastewater Treatment Facilities. 7 "A municipality, district, or river authority of the state 8 may contract with another municipality, district, or river 9 authority of this state to obtain and provide part or all 10 of: Water supply or wastewater treatment facilities," or go 11 on down the line, "A lease or operation of water supply 12 facilities or wastewater treatment facilities." So, I -- I 13 don't say that the authority is -- is not there under some 14 other provision, but when I was looking through this, I saw 15 the authority to -- for the cities to do this, realizing 16 that cities can do anything, basically, that the -- unless 17 the law prohibits them from doing it, whereas counties can't 18 do anything unless the law allows them to do it. Looks to 19 me as if counties might have less authority than the cities 20 under that specific enumeration of powers. So, I -- I 21 thought that bore some more looking into it. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I don't mind 23 looking into it, but, I mean, I'm -- I mean, my memory's 24 kind of like Bill's on this. I think you've been involved 25 on this somewhere along the line for the last two or three 1-13-03 125 1 years, and it seems odd that -- I mean, we're way down the 2 road on this, and the state agency granted the money, you 3 know, to the County to do the deal. And it seems odd now to 4 say that the County doesn't have authority to do the deal. 5 MR. MOTLEY: Again, I would -- I'd like to 6 review the previous contract or the previous interlocal 7 agreement. I don't specifically remember doing it, but I -- 8 you know, a few agreements have passed across the desk, so I 9 don't know. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's been three 11 documents, counselor. There was this interlocal agreement 12 to begin with, there was the easement for the access for the 13 Riverhill Bypass, and there was the contract between Kerr 14 County and the contractor. Those are the only three 15 documents, but they're the three pertinent documents. All 16 were reviewed by you. 17 MR. MOTLEY: Wasn't there a mobile home 18 agreement about easements? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There was a corollary 20 issue, because that had to do with a quid pro quo on the 21 part of a mobile home operator to put in the sewer line when 22 it got there, but at this rate, it's not going to get there. 23 But that's a corollary issue. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Motley, is there a 25 requirement under interlocal agreements generally that -- 1-13-03 126 1 it's my understanding that this particular document is not 2 going to identify any particular specific project, but 3 rather is to be used as an ongoing format. Is there -- is 4 there a requirement under the interlocal agreement statutory 5 provisions that the specific project or -- or -- or subject 6 of the interlocal agreement be identified? 7 MR. MOTLEY: Yes, there is an issue on that, 8 and I have spoken to Richard about that, and he said that -- 9 and I'll let him speak for himself, but he said he didn't 10 see that as a problem here, because it wasn't really under 11 the -- the action being sought today is not seeking to 12 approve any particular contract, but merely to approve sort 13 of a template and put some sort of a structure in place that 14 might facilitate the awarding of future grants and such. 15 The statute in particular is 791.014 of the Government Code. 16 And it does say, "Before beginning a project to construct, 17 improve, or repair a building, road, or other facility under 18 an interlocal contract, the commissioners court of a county 19 must give specific written approval for the project." 20 Approval must be given in a document other than the 21 interlocal contract. So, that would be like the minutes, I 22 would assume, of the court. It must describe the type of 23 project to be undertaken and identify the project's 24 location. Then it talks a little bit about payments, and if 25 payment is made under such an agreement where it's not done 1-13-03 127 1 this way, then the payments can be reversed and such. But 2 that seems to require -- and I saw that as a potential 3 roadblock, but I think Richard might want to speak to that 4 now. He talked to me about how he thought that this was -- 5 this document that he's seeking is not trying to approve any 6 particular job, but mainly to set something up in the way of 7 a format that might ease things through in the future. Each 8 document -- each contract will come before the Court. 9 MR. MOSTY: Each of the four projects, being 10 the two that are in place and the two that are pending, have 11 been individually approved by resolution of the 12 Commissioners Court, and -- and the document doesn't commit 13 the Court to anything new. If there is a new project, and 14 there's an idea of what those might be, they would have to 15 come before the Court for individual resolution and 16 designation for each particular project and whatever the 17 parameters of it are. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: And the Court approving this 19 template would not commit the Court to any future projects 20 that have not been approved by this Court to engineering 21 services with the one named here, or with the governmental 22 entity named here, in connection with moneys coming from 23 O.R.C.A.? 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the intent, 25 Judge. 1-13-03 128 1 MR. MOSTY: Yes, this interlocal agreement 2 does not create any commitments that aren't already there, 3 and it doesn't commit to future projects. I mean, it -- 4 future projects would be on an individually decided basis, 5 if and when they come up. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is just a form 7 contract, basically? 8 MR. MOSTY: Yes, it is, and it's to clean up 9 the fact that -- and if there's a -- if there is a question 10 about authority, I think it needs to be resolved sooner 11 rather than later, because we're in the midst of this, as 12 Commissioner Letz says. We're in it. And if -- if the 13 County doesn't have authority to do so, then I think that's 14 something we ought to find out pretty quick. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: But you're indicating that 16 these projects are in existence, but nobody's able to find 17 contractual agreements to cover those projects? Is that 18 what I'm hearing? 19 MR. MOSTY: There are four projects. The 20 2001 Community -- 2001 Colonia, and that is the -- that is 21 the interlined copy that you have in front of you. There is 22 the 2002 Community Development, and that has been funded and 23 is in the engineering phase now. There is no interlocal 24 agreement that has been executed for the 2002 Community 25 Development Program. 1-13-03 129 1 JUDGE TINLEY: It's been approved, but 2 there's no agreement to cover it? 3 MR. MOSTY: That's right. It has been 4 approved by resolution. It's in the process; it's been 5 granted, and is in -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're trying to get a 7 contract? 8 MR. MOSTY: It's in progress. 9 MR. MOTLEY: The 2001 Community Development 10 grant, is that also lacking an agreement? Did you tell me? 11 MR. MOSTY: No, 2001 Colonia -- 12 MR. MOTLEY: No, the -- 13 MR. MOSTY: -- is the agreement. There's a 14 2002 Community Development; there is no interlocal 15 agreement. 16 MR. MOTLEY: Was there a 2001 develop -- 17 Community Development grant? 18 MR. MOSTY: No. The document you have in 19 front of you -- 20 MR. MOTLEY: That's 2001. 21 MR. MOSTY: -- is the 2001 Colonia. That's 22 the only document. 23 MR. MOTLEY: Okay. 24 MR. MOSTY: And there is a 2003 Community 25 Development and a 2003 Colonia, which are in the grant 1-13-03 130 1 pipeline, and I understand indications are they will likely 2 be funded. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: And those have been approved, 5 at least by resolution of this Court? 6 MR. MOSTY: Yes, they are approved and they 7 are in the grant process, and I think the understanding is 8 that those will, in all likelihood, be granted and funded. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. So, 10 what am I hearing? That we have a couple more things that 11 need to be resolved between counsels, County Attorney and 12 counsel for the River Authority? Is that what I'm hearing? 13 MR. MOTLEY: I would -- I don't know if 14 Mr. Mosty has the two particular documents that I was 15 referring to earlier that I would like to review. It's a 16 little bit hard to review these documents just on their own 17 without having some background documents, but I don't know 18 where I would get those. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What documents are there 20 is the documents we have. 21 MR. MOTLEY: I understand. I'm talking about 22 the one that -- the copy of the final version of this 23 document. The final version of this. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There it is. Am I -- 25 unless I'm missing something. 1-13-03 131 1 MR. MOSTY: That's it, except it's -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Red-lined. 3 MR. MOSTY: It's got the red lines. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You want red lines? 5 MR. MOTLEY: No, I want an executed copy of 6 the thing. I think we would have one in the Clerk's office 7 or somewhere. I'd like that, and I'd also like to have the 8 T.C.D.P. -- let me get my junk out of here -- T.D.C.P. -- 9 or, excuse me, T.D.H.C.A. contract that's in existence, 10 because there's some reference made back to that, and it's 11 hard to say -- it's hard to evaluate this in total when 12 reference is made back to another agreement that I don't 13 have. 14 MR. MOSTY: I'll give Mr. Motley now the 15 document that has -- that shows at least the U.G.R.A. 16 signature, and it does show the County's signature as well. 17 That's the -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that a copy? 19 MR. MOSTY: -- the copy of the red-lined 20 document you have. That is not the -- if you're talking 21 about grant guidelines, I'm not sure -- 22 MR. MOTLEY: I didn't mean grant guidelines. 23 I mean the agreement, itself. Last year, the Colonia 24 agreement for construction funds from the Texas Department 25 of Housing and Community Affairs. I'd just like to have 1-13-03 132 1 that. Can I make copies and give this back to you? 2 MR. MOSTY: You can have that. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have an idea when 4 we can get this revolved? 5 MR. MOTLEY: I don't think it will take long. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: A date. Next meeting? 7 MR. MOTLEY: Sounds good to me. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll have it back on 9 the next agenda. 10 MR. MOSTY: Which is when? 11 MS. SOVIL: 27th. 12 MR. MOTLEY: Maybe at that time -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The 23rd. 14 MR. MOTLEY: Is it going to be at Union 15 Church? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We don't know, but 17 we'll let you know where to be. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's up to you. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Fourteen days hence, 20 the 27th. 21 MR. MOSTY: Okay. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Before we -- is that all we 23 have on this particular item, 2.13? 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess so, Judge. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got a couple 1-13-03 133 1 observations and a question on it. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I first thought I 4 understood that what we were trying to do here is simply 5 update the contract to -- to take into account the two 6 additional projects -- two or three projects. But, reading 7 the contract, it appears to me that we're looking at an 8 open-ended contract that will cover future projects that may 9 or may not have been identified yet, specifically for 10 projects involving, quote, "treated water, wastewater, or 11 other infrastructure improvements." Updating the current 12 contract's one thing. Entering into an open-ended contract 13 for other projects is quite another one. I've got the same 14 concerns that the County Attorney expressed about Section 6, 15 where U.G.R.A. and Tetra Tech would make a decision about 16 awarding bids. And, then, this is more of a question than 17 anything else. It appears that Groves Engineering, now 18 Tetra Tech, has some duties and responsibilities under the 19 contract, but they're not a party to the contract, so my 20 question is, does the County have another contract with 21 Groves Engineering, now Tetra Tech? And if not, why isn't 22 that entity a part of the contract? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: I think that's an excellent 24 question, and I suspect Mr. Motley may want to address those 25 in his analysis if he can't find such a document. He may 1-13-03 134 1 recommend that they become a part of the contract, possibly; 2 I don't know. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe there is a 4 contract for engineering services; it needs to be 5 researched. And, just a quick response to your question; 6 this doesn't contemplate -- it contemplates maybe other 7 projects, but only if approved by this Court. And if a 8 matching fund is required, it would have to be approved by 9 the other body as well. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, following up on 11 that -- and this is something I didn't mention earlier. 12 Really, my preference on that, to me -- I mean, I like the 13 fact that we do a formal contract that we can just kind 14 of -- as things come up, we can just be done with it, but I 15 don't know whether or not each project needs to have its own 16 contract. I mean, I think so. I think we're doing a form 17 and trying to get a form worked out, but each contract 18 should have a separate -- otherwise, I see great confusion. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, each project. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Down the road. 21 MR. MOSTY: I'm not an authority on that, but 22 I think that as you go through the grant process, you 23 identify what the grant's for, what the funds are, who the 24 contractors are, and what the construction services are, and 25 it is detailed as to, you know, who are the parties and what 1-13-03 135 1 are the projects, what's going to happen to that project, 2 and all that stuff is a separate body of documents that, 3 really, Grantworks, as I understand, sort of takes the lead 4 on. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. 7 MR. MOTLEY: Just sort of to anticipate or 8 clear up one other thing, Mr. Nicholson asked if there was 9 some sort of agreement between Kerr County and Tetra Tech. 10 I assume that we probably ought to be looking for some sort 11 of agreement between Grantworks and Kerr County, as well. 12 Is there something like that? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Court order. 14 MR. MOTLEY: Pardon? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Court order. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Court orders, 17 resolutions, one place. 18 MR. MOTLEY: That's fine. That's fine. I 19 just want to -- I'm -- I don't have any doubt that that 20 exists. I'm not -- I just wanted to see all the -- and I 21 don't know -- I'm going to have to go back and check memos. 22 The copy of the contract that Richard provided for me does 23 not have any signatures on it, but I can not say that 24 without looking and checking -- I don't recall having 25 advised Judge Henneke on this contract, but I may have, but 1-13-03 136 1 I don't recall it at all. But I will go back and look and 2 see what I can -- 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Sovil, could you 4 please go back three years now and pull all our court orders 5 related to Grantworks, U.G.R.A., all this topic? And -- and 6 I guess excerpts from the Commissioners Court minutes 7 related to those as well, so we can see -- evidently, it 8 sounds like Mr. Motley wants all the backup to support 9 what's been done, and that would be the quickest way to get 10 it. 11 MR. MOTLEY: I'm mostly interested in that -- 12 in the contract between Kerr County and the predecessor 13 agency to O.R.C.A., is the main thing I'm interested in. 14 That's something I want to double-check and see. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All the grant workup, all 16 that, it's all through court orders, everything we did. 17 So -- 18 MR. MOTLEY: I'll look at everything that I 19 can find on it, but the main thing I'm interested in, I want 20 to be certain that the contract that we entered into allows 21 certain delegation of certain duties and functions of 22 things. If it does, fine. If it doesn't, fine. I'll let 23 you know. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: You're talking about all the 1-13-03 137 1 court orders relative to the engagement of Grantworks and -- 2 and Groves Engineering and the supporting documentation? 3 That's contracts -- 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess. That's what it 5 sounds like he wants. And then, you know, as regarding, you 6 know, approvals, minutes, I guess if it's been referred to 7 the County Attorney or not, you know. So, I know it's a lot 8 of work, but that's what it seems I'm hearing. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 10 MR. MOTLEY: Somebody give me a time frame. 11 I have a lot of minutes on my computer; I might be able to 12 find them as well, so if you give me a time frame, I might 13 be able to -- I'll help. 14 MR. MOSTY: I think I'll wait to hear from 15 Mr. Motley, and then we'll work on the language. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: If I might, I believe that's 17 all we have on 2.13. 2.12, it's my understanding we were 18 merely waiting for the County Attorney's approval on that 19 Mutual Aid Agreement; is that not correct? 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe we could simplify that. 22 Do you or do you not approve? 23 MR. MOTLEY: I'm all for it. I just want to 24 make sure that there's no local COG that's powering -- I 25 want to make sure we're not cutting off state aid or 1-13-03 138 1 anything. Other than that, I'm all for it. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that yes? 3 MR. MOTLEY: Well, that's a yes, but I don't 4 know about some of those others. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's, "Yes, 6 but..." I mean, it's yes or -- is it yes or no? 7 MR. MOTLEY: This is a new concept to me, 8 this sharing of County duties at time of crisis under the 9 authority of the local COG, so I just want to make sure, 10 just in general, that there was nothing to cut us out of 11 state funds, but I think there is not, so -- and so I 12 really -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, David, I 15 think what this is, is state and national funds. That -- I 16 mean, that's what we're talking about doing, is sharing -- 17 sharing in that. 18 MR. MOTLEY: Pass through the -- okay. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Do I have a motion? 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move -- well, let's 21 see what it is here first. I move that we approve the 22 Mutual Aid Agreement for Regional Council of Governments and 23 authorize County Judge to sign that same document. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion by Commissioner 1-13-03 139 1 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court 2 approve the Mutual Aid Agreement for Regional Councils of 3 Government and authorize County Judge to sign that document. 4 Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your 5 right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 8 Motion carries. Gentlemen, what time should we recess 9 until? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 1:30. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds good to me. 12 MS. SOVIL: You have probate at 1:00, 2:00, 13 and juvies at 3:00. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Bet you I can get the probate 15 at 1:00 taken care of by 1:30. 16 MS. SOVIL: But you also have another probate 17 hearing at 2:00. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: I understand we may -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In this room, Judge? 20 We can -- we can put an end to it pretty easy. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll stand in recess till 22 1:30. 23 (Recess taken from 12:24 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.) 24 - - - - - - - - - - 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let the record reflect 1-13-03 140 1 that we're going to reconvene this regular session for the 2 Monday, January 13th meeting, having adjourned shortly after 3 12:00, and it is now 1:30. And it looks like the next item 4 of business is Item 2.14, consider and discuss authorizing 5 Road and Bridge to haul donated fill materials to the 4-H 6 facility at Red Rose Ranch. Commissioner Letz. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think this is a very 8 noncontroversial one. We should be able to get through it 9 very quickly. Drymala Construction, the contractor at the 10 new Kerrville high school, has a bunch of excess material 11 they need to get rid of. The Kerr County 4-H facility needs 12 fill material in there construction, and if we can get -- 13 I've talked to Len Odom. He has agreed to make his trucks 14 available if we had -- if he has a court order so he doesn't 15 go to jail. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: It's been moved and seconded 19 by Commissioners Williams and Letz, respectively, that the 20 Court authorize Road and Bridge to haul donated fill 21 material from the new K.I.S.D. high school facility to the 22 Kerr County 4-H facility at the Red Rose Ranch. Any further 23 discussion? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One question. The only 25 material's from Drymala Construction. I don't want to make 1-13-03 141 1 it -- it's just from Drymala at the facility. It's not from 2 K.I.S.D. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. With that 4 correction, any further discussion? 5 MR. JOHNSTON: Is there a problem with the 6 County using our vehicles to pick up on private property and 7 hauling to other private property? 8 JUDGE TINLEY: That's a matter, I think, 9 maybe -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You do it all the time. 11 You pick up at -- at the pit right next to Red Rose Ranch, 12 which is private property, and haul it to another spot. I 13 mean -- 14 MR. JOHNSTON: It's usually for, you know, 15 road use. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The issue is whether we 17 can use it for this purpose. 18 MR. JOHNSTON: Yes. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's not the fact that 20 it's private property, you know. It's a -- it's the same 21 issue as to whether you can -- or a county tractor can be 22 used to mow grass, you know, at Flat Rock Park. That's the 23 same logic on that. And I -- I think the Court has granted 24 that authority in the past. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 1-13-03 142 1 discussions? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we ought to 3 turn it over to the County Attorney -- just a joke. Just a 4 joke. I'm joking. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: If there's no further 6 discussion or questions, all in favor, raise your right 7 hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Let's note 12 for the record that this is to be done if they have time. 13 There's no rush on it. 14 MR. JOHNSTON: Do we know how many yards that 15 is? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 300 yards. 17 MR. JOHNSTON: 300? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Up to 300 yards. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The next item of 20 business, 2.15, consider and discuss and take appropriate 21 action to amend the On-Site Septic Facility rules to abolish 22 Section 10, Real Estate Transfer Inspection, and set a date 23 for public hearing. Commissioner Nicholson. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm having a little 25 trouble with my voice today, so I'll try to speak up. The 1-13-03 143 1 real estate transfer rule, Section 10, was established to 2 provide a mechanism for a spec sample of the septic systems 3 in the county, and require the repair of those not meeting 4 standards. The concept that significant numbers of failing 5 systems can be discovered by employing the real estate 6 transfer rule is flawed. A reasonable guess is that, over 7 20 years, the rule might result in fewer than 10 percent of 8 Kerr County septics being inspected. The rule's an 9 unnecessary intrusion on property rights, it hinders real 10 estate transactions, it drives up transfer costs, and 11 damages the properties under contract. We need to abolish 12 this ineffective rule, and then be serious about finding 13 effective methods to identify and correct inadequate septic 14 systems. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. And you are asking 16 that this matter be placed for -- set for public hearing? 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that the extent of what 19 you're requesting at this point? 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, is that a 23 motion, or do you need -- 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. I move that we 25 set a public hearing on the issue of abolishing Section 10, 1-13-03 144 1 the real estate transfer rule, of the O.S.S.F. regulations. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What date? Where? We 3 can't meet outside this room, my god. 4 (Laughter.) 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What -- second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 7 seconded, that -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to have a 9 public debate. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: -- a public hearing be set at 11 -- let's get the time and date figured out. I presume -- I 12 don't know what we need in the way of notice, whether it's 13 15 or 30 days notice. We're probably looking at -- what was 14 that last meeting in February, the 24th? 15 MS. SOVIL: 24th. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: If it takes 30 days, that's 17 where we're going to be safe. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's do it the safe 19 way, be on the safe side and say February 24th. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: At what time? 10:30? 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 10:30 would be good. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Public hearing relative 23 to the abolishment of Section 10 of the Kerr County O.S.S.F. 24 Rules, February 24th at -- at 10:30 a.m. That's your 25 motion? 1-13-03 145 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's my second. 2 I've got a question before we get on it. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is there any 4 discussion? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, thank you. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Go ahead. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Were you fixing to say 8 something? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go ahead. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thanks. At the 11 risk of taxing your voice, I have to know, do you have any 12 thoughts as to a replacement for, and a way to cause 13 inspections? 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I do not, 15 Commissioner. It would take -- it's an issue that would 16 take some study. You know, there are a myriad of different 17 ways that you could -- could do inspections, some of which 18 would probably not be constitutionally correct, and others 19 might, so I don't have the answer to that. I just know that 20 this is -- this is not a good way to go about it. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. Well, I -- I 22 was on the Court when -- when this all began, and we kicked 23 it around, and I remember -- I remember at that time, our -- 24 our O.S.S.F. representative that represented the 25 Commissioners Court and the County, his idea of inspecting 1-13-03 146 1 septic tanks in the county was to start at Greenwood Forest 2 and go door-to-door and dig their yard up. And that 3 conversation lasted maybe a minute and a half or two 4 minutes, maximum. But that's kind of where that started. 5 And we -- we've kicked this thing around, I'm telling you, 6 for weeks and months and months and months, and this real 7 estate thing is the only thing that we have ever found to 8 hang our hat on. And I know that that -- you know, that's 9 the government causing someone to get an inspection. I 10 guess, in my mind, the other side of it is -- is to rely on 11 the property owner to do what's best for themselves. And, I 12 mean, I -- I would, and I know you would do that, but I just 13 don't know, you know, about the general public out there. I 14 mean, my neighbor. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Couple comments, 16 Commissioner. There's two aspects of this that are 17 objectionable. One is the rule itself and the way it's 18 administered, but the more critical thing, in my mind, is 19 that it's ineffective. If, indeed, there are a lot of 20 failing septic systems out there, this is not a very good 21 way, a very effective way of finding them. I -- and the 22 second aspect of that is I keep hearing that there are a lot 23 of failing systems, and we keep hearing it's Kerrville 24 South, it's Greenwood, it's other places. I'm not sure what 25 keeps us from putting our energy and our resources, our 1-13-03 147 1 money into going after those failing systems instead of this 2 -- this lottery effect. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's exactly the 4 reason I seconded your motion, 'cause I want to have that 5 discussion. I think it's time to have that discussion. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I don't 7 disagree -- are you finished? 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am, I'm through. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've wrestled with 10 myself for about several days now, how as to address this 11 particular agenda item, and I don't have a particular 12 problem with a public hearing, but I do have some 13 questions -- because public input is valuable. I do have 14 some comments and some questions, which I don't suspect are 15 going to be answered today, but I want them in the record, 16 because they need to be answered, and I'm going to go 17 through it. If, as you contend, the concept of inspecting 18 septic systems at the time of real estate transfer is 19 flawed, when would you propose to identify failed septic 20 systems, or systems that, while functioning, are not in 21 compliance with state regulations? If the current real 22 estate transfer regulations are, again, using your words, 23 "grossly ineffective," how is it that the statistics that we 24 have been given to believe are accurate by the Designated 25 Representative show that 40 percent of those inspected at 1-13-03 148 1 the time of real estate transfer have been identified as 2 either failing or out of compliance? And so I guess I'm 3 asking a rhetorical question at this point. 4 Would your position be that, unless all 5 failing systems or out-of-compliance systems are identified, 6 should we not try to identify any of them? Further, if, as 7 you state in your agenda memorandum, the current real estate 8 transfer requirement is, quote -- your quote, a very 9 ineffective way to accomplish the goal, unquote, of 10 identifying failing or out-of-compliance O.S.S.F.'s, then, 11 following up on the question that Commissioner Baldwin just 12 asked, do you have a better system? Have you constructed a 13 better mousetrap, if you will, to do this? I think that's 14 very important. I think that to do otherwise -- if we have 15 a better system to put in place, then we should put it in 16 place forthwith. If we don't have a better system to put in 17 place, then we should leave it alone until a better system 18 comes about. 19 I'm also -- I'm also very concerned about one 20 other aspect of this. And I don't know whether or not I 21 represented these concerns to you in the one meeting that 22 you and I had, but I'm pretty sure that I represented my 23 thoughts to Judge Tinley on one occasion, and that I think 24 the elimination of Section 10, or something equal to or 25 better than, if we can find what that is -- if we don't have 1-13-03 149 1 that, we are -- we are encouraging deception, dishonesty, 2 and cheating in property sales, and that troubles me. In 3 effect, what we do, then, we have created a situation where 4 Kerr County gets labeled as a "buyer beware" county. That 5 troubles me greatly. And I would think that all the real 6 estate agents in this county should support that notion, 7 that they don't want Kerr County to become a "buyer beware" 8 county. So, if it takes a county hearing to get these 9 issues on the -- I mean a public hearing to get these issues 10 on the table, then I guess so, but these are my concerns, 11 and I think they have to be addressed. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Those are good 13 concerns, Commissioner. Just -- I'll address a couple -- 14 just two of them very briefly. One, on the statistic that's 15 been floating around that 40 percent of those systems 16 inspected under the real estate rule were found to be 17 failing, I have spoken with the president of the board of 18 the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, and was informed that 19 that's not a good number; that's an exaggerated number, that 20 40 percent of the inspections did not result in findings of 21 failing systems. I'm hoping in the public hearing, we'll 22 get -- we'll -- by that time, or during that hearing, we'll 23 have better data from the U.G.R.A. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would hope so, too. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think that's the 1-13-03 150 1 only thing I have. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have -- I'm not sure it 3 will advise the Court, but a few comments. And I'm -- let 4 me start out by saying I've never been a fan of Section 10 5 or of the real estate transfer provision of Section 10. I'm 6 coming from a property rights standpoint; it's a bit of an 7 intrusion. And the fact that Commissioner Williams has said 8 "buyer beware," well, I think we are a buyer -- I'm a buyer 9 beware person, and I think we should be a buyer beware 10 county. I think that for us just to single out septic on 11 that doesn't make a lot of sense, to me. I mean, what about 12 the foundation? What about, you know, the paint? What 13 about everything else? And I think if you started going 14 down that road, all of a sudden we're becoming so intrusive. 15 That's a road that I don't want to go down. 16 So, I'm really -- I mean, I don't have a 17 problem at all with eliminating Section 10. I didn't like 18 it when we put it in there. It was kind of a -- how we got 19 to the current verbiage was a -- kind of a negotiation and 20 kind of an agreement amongst the Court to see how it worked. 21 I don't think it's worked real well. I think that, from my 22 conversations with Stuart Barron, I don't -- you know, I 23 don't mean to speak for Stuart, but there -- it's hard to 24 enforce what we've written. It's hard to know really what 25 to do. So I think we have problems with Section 10, and not 1-13-03 151 1 necessarily with the concept of figuring out how to find 2 septics that are bad. I think we do need to do that. 3 But, that being said, I have a problem with 4 the public hearing right now. And I take -- in the light of 5 the next agenda item we're getting ready to get to do. And 6 I don't want to get into the situation that we got into last 7 time we looked at the septic, where we had three or four 8 public hearings on septic, and by the time we were done, the 9 public was so exasperated and so fed up, no one came to the 10 hearings any more. And if we go and do anything -- any kind 11 of a change under anywhere else in our septic rules, I'd 12 rather do it at one time. I'd rather let us get our act 13 together, get -- come up -- you know, figure out who's going 14 to administer the program, how we're going to do it, where 15 it's going to be done, and what exactly it's going to say, 16 spend a lot of time on that, and then do one public hearing 17 and get public input, rather than this piecemeal approach. 18 And, for that reason, I'm not going to vote for the public 19 hearing. 20 What I would much rather be in favor of doing 21 is get -- get it on the agenda for our next meeting, 'cause 22 I don't think we can do it this meeting. Suspend 23 enforcement of Section 10 for six months, in which case we 24 can then take that time -- 'cause I don't think it's working 25 right now. Take that time to come up with a -- and figure 1-13-03 152 1 out where we're going on the whole septic issue for this 2 county. I think it's a better approach than to do a 3 piecemeal public hearing here and public hearing there. 4 Just my opinion. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's a good 6 point to consider. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've heard more wisdom 8 at this table in the last 15 minutes than I had in years. 9 Good stuff. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Point of order. 11 Would it be permissible for me to amend the motion to -- 12 from what I said earlier to suspend the enforcement of 13 Section 10 for six months? 14 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think we can do it at 15 this meeting; it's not on the agenda as such. It would have 16 to be a posted item. I don't think a suspension of 17 enforcement would require public hearing, however. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: I think this issue and the 20 motion before the Court right now is whether or not to hold 21 a public hearing on -- on the elimination of Section 10 on 22 the 24th of February at 10:30 a.m. And that, of course, is 23 in conformance with the agenda item. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would be willing 25 to -- 1-13-03 153 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll withdraw my 2 second. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- to defer this to 4 the next meeting and consider a proposal such as 5 Commissioner Letz proposed. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. You're withdrawing your 7 motion, then? 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: And you're withdrawing your 10 second? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody want to take any 13 further action in connection with this particular item at 14 this time? 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought I withdrew 16 my second before he gets to withdraw his motion. No, sir. 17 Thank you very much for your courtesy. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Commissioner 20 Nicholson and I will get together, make sure we're in 21 agreement with -- with what I was thinking about doing. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Court will next move on to 23 Item 2.16, consider and discuss and take appropriate action 24 to inform the U.G.R.A. of the County's intention to not 25 extend the current contract for administration of On-Site 1-13-03 154 1 Septic Facility program, to establish a transition team to 2 create a plan for administration of the O.S.S.F. program by 3 the County or another entity. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: My thinking here is 5 that it's very likely that we're going to see changes in 6 water government in Kerr County in 2003. I think that for 7 at least three reasons. One, a significant number of Kerr 8 County citizens have petitioned the -- our State Senator and 9 State Representative to abolish the U.G.R.A. Two, the 10 U.G.R.A. has not budgeted funds to administer the O.S.S.F. 11 program beyond this year. And, three, our State 12 Representative has indicated that he will introduce 13 legislation to permit the combining of U.G.R.A. and the 14 Headwaters Groundwater Conservation District into a single 15 agency. For these reasons and more reasons, I think we need 16 to -- to make a decision that we're going to take back the 17 responsibility for O.S.S.F., and the right way to do this is 18 to appoint a -- a transition team of knowledgeable people to 19 create a plan for the orderly transition and then the 20 administration. And that that -- appointing that team would 21 be appropriate, whether or not ultimately Kerr County winds 22 up managing it itself or we assign that responsibility to 23 another government entity. Again, I apologize for my voice; 24 I'm having a little trouble. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I got the thumb, so -- on 1-13-03 155 1 this one, I agree partially with what Commissioner Nicholson 2 said, and primarily with the latter part of his comments. I 3 think that it is appropriate right now for us to take 4 another real hard look at the septic situation, and I -- I 5 would propose the first step be that we invite T.N.R.C.C., 6 or T.Q.E.C. -- T.C.E.Q., whatever they are -- T.C.E.Q., 7 whatever their -- T.C.E.Q. to come down to Kerr County and 8 give the Court and anyone else that wants to sit in -- you 9 know, go over the septic rules and responsibilities. And 10 now I know how this is done; I've heard of this before. I 11 have new questions now. I think I'm a little bit more 12 educated on really what to ask. But there's some questions 13 that I really need to know, and it really goes back to 14 the -- what I hear frequently, the 1,500-foot rule that 15 U.G.R.A. has. I really think that it's critical that I 16 understand exactly how that authority interacts with the 17 County's authority and how T. -- whatever they're called -- 18 T.C.E.Q., you know, how they're going to work with that. I 19 mean, because I see -- I don't want to get into a situation 20 where there's two sets of septic rules in Kerr County, and I 21 could see us going down that road. Commissioner Baldwin is 22 holding up fingers. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Possibly City of 24 Ingram. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: City of Ingram, City of 1-13-03 156 1 Kerrville; they do have some septic left. But I just think 2 that, to me, the first step is to get T.E.C.Q. down here and 3 go over the rules one more time, so I really have a clear 4 understanding, and then I think we need to get -- take the 5 recommendation of Commissioner Nicholson and establish a 6 team to come out and come up with a recommendation as to who 7 should handle the septic; whether it would be best with a 8 contracted agent such as U.G.R.A., or best for the County to 9 come back, to really look at the cost involved. And then 10 look -- at the same time as that's going on, look at the 11 actual rules we have, and then, you know, try to, certainly 12 before our budget, be able to come back with a 13 recommendation so we can build it into next year's budget. 14 And it's really not a far -- too far off from what 15 Commissioner Nicholson is recommending here. I don't see 16 the point right now in taking any action related to 17 U.G.R.A., 'cause we don't -- I mean, I don't know what we're 18 going to be doing. We don't have a plan yet. I think we 19 need to have a full plan and then, you know, execute that 20 plan. And, to me, what I just outlined gets us down -- 21 we're going down that road. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The two -- that plan 23 and the plan proposed here might be compatible and might be 24 able to run parallel. Should we do something different than 25 have U.G.R.A. administer the -- the O.S.S.F. program, the 1-13-03 157 1 contract requires that we give the U.G.R.A. notice not less 2 than 90 days before the expiration. I think that's 3 July 1st, would be the last day, and that's just around the 4 corner. Perhaps we should have a transition team working on 5 it. And if we have one named and operative, they would be 6 also listed in the T.C.E.Q. and doing the same sort of -- of 7 research that we're doing. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my thinking -- I 9 can't vote to cancel a contract with U.G.R.A. until I know 10 what we're going to do. I mean, I just -- you know, it 11 doesn't -- and I think -- I mean, I'm not -- I have -- 12 honestly have not made up my mind yet whether it's best to 13 leave it at U.G.R.A., try to find another third-party, or 14 for the County to take it back. I'm just undecided. It 15 doesn't make sense to me to, you know, vote to cancel 16 something when I may not want to cancel it. I just don't 17 know yet. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: If I'm hearing you correctly, 19 Commissioner, you've got no objection to appointing some 20 sort of a committee to study the various ramifications upon 21 cancellation and -- and reallocation of that particular 22 responsibility, but you don't want to take any formal steps 23 to cancel the agreement in place. You just want to see what 24 your other options are and elect some sort of committee or 25 whatever you want to call it to be put together to look at 1-13-03 158 1 all the ramifications. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Because I don't 3 think -- I mean, if I come down on the side of the fence 4 that I want to continue to contract with U.G.R.A., I think 5 it does a lot of damage to vote to cancel it now. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Your point's 7 well-taken. I think it would be premature -- although we 8 don't have much time, it would be premature now to serve 9 that cancellation, and it would be better to get all the 10 advice and input we can get before -- before we make a 11 decision. So, I would modify that and make a motion that we 12 appoint a team to study the issues -- the O.S.S.F. issues 13 and make recommendations and proposals about how the County 14 can best handle that in the future. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have any -- any 16 specifics on how you want that committee composed or who 17 appoints it? Or -- 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would be satisfied 19 if the Judge would appoint a committee, or some sort of a 20 scheme where each Commissioner appoints a person or two 21 people to it. Whatever -- whatever the majority would like. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Any particular thoughts about 23 that? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, if we -- yeah, I 25 have a particular thought about that. If we -- if we do the 1-13-03 159 1 committee, I would want us -- each one of us to appoint one. 2 I wouldn't want to put the burden on you to appoint the 3 committee, and then the thing bomb out and just -- we have 4 fair representation across-the-board. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Your suggestion, then, would 6 be that -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not suggesting 8 anything. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: -- each member of the Court 10 appoint one member of the committee? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One's plenty. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that acceptable to you? Do 13 you include that in your motion? 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, come back next 17 meeting with a person in mind to -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What -- well, I mean, 19 looks like we're going -- you've got us going down this path 20 now. I've got a question. What's this committee going to 21 do? What's their charge going to be? Are they going to 22 have staff? You know, we've appointed a lot of committees 23 since I've been on the Court, and if you're going to appoint 24 a committee and you don't give them any staff or funding, 25 they're not going to get much done, because it's going to 1-13-03 160 1 take a lot of research and time. And, I mean, I would -- 2 rather than appointing a committee, I would really rather 3 two of the Commissioners get together, or if we can find two 4 that want to tackle this. I'm not one of them. 5 (Laughter.) 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I want to jump in and 7 tell you I'm not the other one, either. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, it's -- 9 JUDGE TINLEY: If you give me the authority 10 to appoint, I think I figured out who the other two are. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just -- I really think 12 that we're asking the community, you know, representatives 13 an awful -- to do an awful lot to -- you know, to evaluate 14 the whole county's septic program and come back with a 15 recommendation. I really think that's something that we 16 probably ought to tackle ourselves, either through a series 17 of workshops or, you know, appointing a lead Commissioner, 18 like we've done on other issues. Or something like, you 19 know -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me suggest this. 21 This has been done before. There's a -- I don't remember 22 exactly when, but an ad hoc committee was put together and 23 studied this thing from top to bottom, and there's a 24 possibility we can maybe get our -- get that report and take 25 a look at it to see what -- do you have that, Mrs. Sovil? 1-13-03 161 1 To take a look at that and see what their findings were. 2 And I remember some of it. It was in great depth. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, just a word or 4 two here. I don't know if they're going to be wise like 5 they were last time. I don't even know if mine were 6 included in your compliment. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, they were. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But I'm not the one 9 to be on that committee for a couple reasons right at the 10 outset. First of all, I don't believe that U.G.R.A. has 11 demonstrated it's incapable of administering O.S.S.F. I 12 don't think there's been any presentation of evidence 13 anywhere in the last 12 months to support the allegation. 14 And, secondly, Commissioners Court has, I think, at least 15 twice -- am I correct, Commissioner? -- tried to administer 16 the rules itself, and two times it has said, "Enough of this 17 sticky tar-baby," and they got rid of it. And that's 18 exactly what it is; it's just like a tar-baby. And so I 19 don't want to be on that committee, Judge, if that's what 20 you have in mind, because I have two good reasons in my head 21 why that's not a good way to go. But I think, also, I -- I 22 agree with Commissioner Letz. I think there's too much 23 uncertainty right now in our world, our immediate world, to 24 make any rush to judgment, if you will, and the liability of 25 a water agency. I think it's too early to rush to judgment 1-13-03 162 1 about what the Texas Legislature may or may not do. I think 2 it is impossible to rush to judgment about whether or not 3 the governor will sign legislation, if, for some reason, it 4 manages to get to his desk. And, for those reasons alone, I 5 think the best thing to do is to keep in place the system we 6 have. And if we need to examine the flaws in it, then 7 examine the flaws. If we need to build a better mousetrap, 8 then build it. If there's another agency out there that can 9 do a job equal to or better than, fine. If Kerr County has 10 that capability, it's going to be a demonstrated capability 11 as never demonstrated before. But that's -- let's check it 12 out. So, those are my thoughts. Do I still qualify? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's very wise. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very wise. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't hear a lot 17 of really differing opinions from anybody. It's just a 18 matter of how to tackle it. What I'm hearing is that, you 19 know, the Court's willing to review the septic issue one 20 more time, and -- but it's a matter of how we do that. I 21 would really -- based on that, I'd propose -- why don't we 22 just start out by setting a workshop with T.E.C.Q.? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good 24 suggestion. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And go from there, and 1-13-03 163 1 just do it through a series of workshops. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion on the 3 table before us now that a committee be appointed, and with 4 each member of the Court to appoint one person to that 5 committee to look at the various alternatives on 6 administration of the O.S.S.F. program. That's where we are 7 at this point. We have a motion. Do we have a second? 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion, therefore, is 10 going to die for lack of a second. Now, did we have any 11 other issues that -- anything else we want to do in 12 connection with this agenda item? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd make a motion that we 14 set a workshop and schedule the T.E.C.Q. representative to 15 come down and give a presentation to the Court on the -- you 16 know, the current law and the status of the U.G.R.A.'s rules 17 and our rules that are in -- I mean, not -- when I say 18 U.G.R.A. rules, I'm talking about the 1,500-foot rule, which 19 I think really needs to be understood by me before we can go 20 a whole lot further, and then go from there. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Motion by Commissioner 22 Letz that we establish a workshop with T.C.E.Q. relative to 23 the current O.S.S.F. status, rules, and -- and the authority 24 of U.G.R.A. in connection with those rules in Kerr County. 25 Is that what I heard you say? 1-13-03 164 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, sir. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a second? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not yet. 4 Commissioner, if you can amend that to not necessarily set a 5 workshop, but ask one of us -- ask me to get in touch with 6 the folks in Austin and to see when they can come down and 7 start the process of setting up a workshop. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I -- I amend 9 my motion to appoint -- to ask Commissioner Baldwin to get a 10 range of dates that we can then vote on at our next meeting. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just have a 14 question. Have we -- for clarification purposes, have we 15 established, or have we -- yeah, have we established exactly 16 what we want them to come down and talk about? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: O.S.S.F. rules and 18 regulations. 19 MR. BARRON: If y'all have any immediate 20 questions, I may be able to answer them. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Then we may be able to 22 -- in our thinking process, we might be able to come up with 23 some other questions as we go along. From the good 24 Commissioner from Precinct 4. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, I look at it as an 1-13-03 165 1 overview of state law and what the County's 2 responsibilities, you know, are, and what the current 3 authorities are in Kerr County. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He has the 1,500-foot 5 rule and all that kind of thing. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Current status of authority in 7 Kerr County. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm cool there. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, that -- that's 11 good, and I think we'll probably learn something from it. 12 And there are some questions, particularly about the 13 1,500-foot rule. With the degree of uncertainty that 14 Commissioner Williams pointed to that's on the horizon, some 15 of these things are going to be resolved one way or another 16 this year, in the next few months. This is -- this workshop 17 is not going to move us any further along toward dealing 18 with the issues that we may have to deal with. Perhaps 19 there will still be time after the workshop -- depends on 20 when we have it, but I do worry that we might sit on our 21 hands and not do the planning that's needed, and then again, 22 to rush to do it without giving enough resources and 23 thought. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion? I 25 have a motion and second that Commissioner Baldwin contact 1-13-03 166 1 the T.C.E.Q. in order to obtain available dates for a 2 workshop with regard to the current O.S.S.F. rules that are 3 in place under the law and the legal authority concerning 4 O.S.S.F. in Kerr County. And I think, by implication, at 5 the earliest possible time. Is that a fair statement? Any 6 further discussion? All in favor of the motion, indicate by 7 raising your right hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Next item of 12 business, 2.17, consider and discuss procedures for 13 Commissioners Court. Commissioner Letz. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda 15 just, with the new Court in place, sort of procedural things 16 that tend to be -- we need to iron out, in my opinion, 17 before we get too far into the year. And I think, in the 18 backup, we can go over some of these items. The first one I 19 had is the presiding member of the Court in the absence of 20 the County Judge. Previously, it was set up where we just 21 started with Precinct 1 and rotated around the table; then 22 2, 3, and 4, and then back to 1, in the event that the 23 County Judge is not present to act at presiding officer. 24 The opening prayer schedule, I asked Ms. Sovil to pick up 25 basically where we left off, start with Precinct 1 and go on 1-13-03 167 1 down through the list until we had a schedule, so we're all, 2 you know, aware of it and see who has what responsibilities 3 on what date. 4 I'm just going to go through and toss all 5 these out; we can just deal with them as the members of the 6 Court want to. The third item is the employee evaluation. 7 I really put this one on here more -- not to try to resolve 8 it today, but try to ask the two new members to think about 9 it, because in the six years I've been on the Court, we -- 10 I've never been really happy with the evaluation system 11 that's been employed, and it's a difficult situation. The 12 employees I'm talking about are those members of the County 13 staff that report straight to the Commissioners Court, such 14 as the Maintenance Director, Ms. Sovil, Len Odom, and people 15 of that nature. To me, they need to be evaluated. And what 16 we've been doing, up to now, anyway, is that each 17 Commissioner does an evaluation. 18 I think I attached the most recent form we've 19 used. And individual -- and those are provided to the 20 employee. They're not, I guess, really mandatory. It's 21 strongly suggested that Commissioners do it, but they don't 22 have to. And that's where the breakdown -- after that 23 point, the breakdown has always kind of occurred, in my 24 opinion, because none of us have authority individually. We 25 can't really go tell these people what to do. And we've 1-13-03 168 1 never been able to come to a full consensus as to what the 2 evaluations should be of any employee. And maybe it's not 3 going to be possible, as part of the nature of governing by 4 committee. But, anyway, I put on it here just to -- maybe 5 the new members have some ideas as to how we can more 6 effectively do that. I think it -- it is important to the 7 employees to get feedback from the Court as a whole or under 8 a process, because it's not -- they -- I think they 9 frequently get put in a position of being told one thing by 10 one Commissioner and something else by another Commissioner, 11 and that's not fair to the employee, when what they're being 12 told differs. So, this is more kind of something to think 13 about. 14 Next item I put was the Agenda Request Rules, 15 and that's really -- rule's probably a little bit strong, 16 but it's -- the current process is any Commissioner can get 17 anything on the agenda, and I hope we continue that. And 18 the other part of that is that agenda requests are due to 19 Ms. Sovil by the Tuesday preceding the meeting, for a Monday 20 meeting. And I also recommend, really, that we continue to 21 implement that. And it's strongly encouraged, if not 22 required, that backup material be provided. You know, I 23 think our current rules say it has to be provided, but I 24 know that I've -- myself and probably almost every other 25 Commissioner has been guilty of not always having backup, 1-13-03 169 1 and some of the things don't really -- by the nature of 2 them, I mean, backup's just a waste of a piece of paper. So 3 I think, if at all possible, we always should remember to 4 have backup in there. 5 And the other item I added this morning is 6 just the County Attorney -- I really was adding just a 7 little bit of clarification as to the current process of 8 getting, I guess, counsel, is that each Commissioner sends a 9 memo down there, as we choose. And -- you know, and I know 10 that the three -- Commissioner Baldwin, Williams, and 11 myself, all three, have memorandums pending down there right 12 now. Never really had a system as to how to prioritize 13 these; I really don't know how you could prioritize them if 14 we want to. But, you know, Judge Tinley made the comment 15 earlier that he'd like to get as much of this done before 16 things come to the -- on the agenda, to get the legal form 17 approval and such as that. But I'm just trying to -- 18 wondering how -- if we want to, if we should discuss how 19 we're going to handle this and how we're going to have 20 priorities set and things of that nature, so that's the 21 reason for the agenda item. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Your rules and procedures, are 23 they part and parcel of your agenda request in the package 24 also? I notice that they're right behind that. I assume 25 that they're -- 1-13-03 170 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Really, what I did here, 2 I asked Ms. Sovil to go -- you know, to pull up the things 3 that we were currently using to update the prayer schedule, 4 to pull one page of the evaluations -- or one evaluation, 5 and then to pull the current procedures for agenda and just 6 attach them as a starting point. And I really don't -- I 7 mean, but aside from the evaluation form, I think that the 8 current procedures for the agenda are fine, and the prayer 9 schedule format is fine, and the other items we talked about 10 with the presiding member of the Court, and that's just kind 11 of -- as long as we know how we're going to handle that, 12 that's taken care of. And I don't know if, in the past, we 13 did a court order on most of these or not. It's really -- 14 Ms. Sovil is nodding that we did. And the easier items -- 15 you know, one being the presiding member of the Court, two, 16 opening prayer, and four, agenda request rules, those are -- 17 you know, I'll make a motion that we adopt those rules as 18 presented and discussed today. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion by 21 Commissioner Letz and second by Commissioner Williams that 22 we adopt the presiding officer schedule by rotation, 1, 2, 23 3, and 4, and then starting back over; and also that we 24 adopt the opening prayer schedule, agenda request rules and 25 rules of procedure, and I assume that the presiding officer 1-13-03 171 1 would become part of the rules of procedure at the 2 appropriate space, which is probably going to be under 3 section Roman numeral V. Should we insert that at that 4 point? In the absence of the County Judge, who the 5 presiding officer would be? 6 (Commissioner Letz nodded.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, as presented. Is there 8 any further discussion about that? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not by me. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All those in favor of the 11 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other two items are 17 really more -- the employee evaluation is something to, you 18 know, just be thinking how we want to handle that, if at 19 all. I mean, we don't have to do anything on that. And 20 then, really, related to the County Attorney, that was just 21 some observations based on some comments that the Judge made 22 at the beginning of the meeting. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Any formal action that you 24 wish to take on either of those items? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, sir. 1-13-03 172 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not sure I 2 understand where you're coming from on the County Attorney 3 issue. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it's just the 5 current procedure is that whenever you have a -- whenever 6 any of us have a request, we forward it down there, or 7 occasionally it comes out of an agenda item, and usually in 8 that case, we direct -- 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Somebody is directed 10 to send a memo. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The Judge or one of the 12 Commissioners is directed to send a memo. And I just -- 13 and, you know, we really -- priority is set in each memo by 14 the person who writes it, and I just -- you know, kind of 15 making it clear, that's the way we're operating, and I would 16 recommend we don't operate that way. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think my suggestion 20 was to necessarily put in place any established procedure, 21 but rather, whichever Commissioner might have an interest in 22 a particular agenda item that that Commissioner sees coming 23 down the pike, try and identify the legal issues or matters 24 that are -- that fall within that particular area, and -- 25 and having done so, submit those items to the County 1-13-03 173 1 attorney ahead of submitting the agenda request. That was 2 what I was primarily referring to, to try and -- so that 3 when we get into discussing the agenda item before the 4 Court, we don't have something jump up and say, well, you 5 know, what about this, that, or the other? Well, we'll 6 hopefully have those questions addressed and know the answer 7 to it. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: But, insofar as changing the 10 procedure of whoever has the primary interest in that agenda 11 item, being the one that requested it, I assumed it would 12 go -- go in the same way. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Sovil handed me a 14 note, and it relates to the night meetings. Are we going to 15 continue to have those? 'Cause they're listed on the prior 16 schedule, and I forgot to bring that up. Are we going to -- 17 does the Court wish to continue to have night meetings, or 18 are we going to not have night meetings? It's currently 19 scheduled for once a quarter. Personally, I haven't seen 20 any great turnout, greater at those meetings from the public 21 than any other meeting, but it doesn't really make any 22 difference to me one way or the other. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I -- you know, the -- 24 the purpose of conducting night meetings was to make it such 25 that members of the public -- it would be easier for them to 1-13-03 174 1 attend, those that work during the day, and therefore, they 2 could attend. And, on the other side of the coin, you've 3 got some requirements that are imposed upon the staff, 4 maintenance, courthouse security, keeping people after hours 5 from the Clerk's office, Ms. Sovil, and possibly other 6 elected officials, and maybe members of their staff that 7 have matters before the Court. If -- if we're getting the 8 intended purpose accomplished by having additional members 9 of the public present at the night meetings, that's great, 10 but if we're not, as you say, I think we're wasting some 11 resources by doing it. If we're not getting the 12 participation, that's my thinking. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think it's 14 been a noble experiment. I'm not so sure that it has 15 totally fulfilled its intended purpose. And part of that is 16 that, you know, the general public, until the last minute, 17 doesn't know what the agenda's all about, and unless they 18 have a specific thing that they're interested in, they're 19 not likely to attend. So, like I say, I have mixed 20 emotions. There is value in it. I'm not sure that it's 21 totally successful. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that falls under 23 procedures. Do I hear a motion one way or the other? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner Baldwin, 25 what's your recollection of the benefit or not? 1-13-03 175 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just remember we 2 tried that about 185 years ago, and it was like a barn 3 burning there for a while, and pretty soon it died out where 4 just us and some staff people were staying here late at 5 night. You know, absolutely didn't make any sense then. 6 It's been a little bit better this time, though; we've had 7 some pretty good participation. But, again, I -- I -- you 8 know, I want to leave the doors open to serve the public and 9 all that as much as we possibly can, but I really don't see 10 the -- the major benefit of it when you consider asking 11 staff to stay over late and disrupt their family life, or 12 maybe even paying some overtime, you know, where you're 13 getting into costing dollars and cents for the taxpayers. I 14 move we delete the nighttime meetings. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 17 seconded by Commissioner Baldwin and Williams, respectively, 18 that we -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't ask me any more 20 questions. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: -- that we eliminate the 22 evening meetings. Is there any further discussion? If 23 not -- 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you, 25 Commissioner Baldwin. 1-13-03 176 1 JUDGE TINLEY: -- all those -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was bothered, 3 myself. I'm sorry. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He likes supper at 5 6:30; that's his problem. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Six. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor, raise your right 8 hand. 9 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Let's move on 13 to Item 2.18, consider and discuss Commissioners Court 14 committee assignments. I included this because, apparently, 15 it had not been addressed in several years, and I tried to 16 distribute those and also do what I thought aligned the 17 interests of the respective Commissioners in their previous 18 areas of expertise, and maybe some new designed areas of 19 expertise. So, I had at least one preference expressed to 20 me, and I tried to incorporate that for Commissioner 21 Williams. And -- but there they are, folks. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I don't -- I'll 23 start down here. I don't mind working with the "Hysterical" 24 Commission at all. It's -- it's fine. I don't understand 25 the AACOG thing. Where does the Commissioner Williams, 1-13-03 177 1 Commissioner Baldwin, alternate -- what did you do? 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good -- I'm 3 glad you brought it up, 'cause I did have a conversation 4 with Judge Tinley along the lines that if he was not -- his 5 schedule did not permit him to attend the AACOG meetings, I 6 would be happy to do that. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that what we're 9 saying here? 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. That's why I plugged 11 that in. You specifically requested it, and if you're -- if 12 you're unable to do that, then Commissioner Baldwin would be 13 the alternate. As he was previously, I believe, on the 14 previous assignments. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: I believe that was correct. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, I've served 18 on the board down there as a representative of Kerr County 19 years ago. Our County Judge chose not to participate. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: I was not aware of that. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that what you're 22 saying? You probably will not participate? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, in looking at some of 24 these dockets that I've got to deal with, I'm thinking 25 that -- 1-13-03 178 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Trip to San Antonio 2 may be kind of problematic. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: If we're going to have 4 consistent representation on that, you had indicated to me 5 that -- that that was a preference of yours, and -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: -- I thought, well -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: You know. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll do it. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would recommend that 12 you go down one time, though, and take a peek at it, and -- 13 do whatever you want to do, but I'd recommend that you take 14 a look at it one time; just make an appearance. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think I'd be 16 prohibited from attending, certainly. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: And I want to probably do 19 that, but -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, you can 21 appoint us as alternates, and -- good word, but you're still 22 the board member. You're still the member of the Executive 23 Board of AACOG. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't realize that. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The County Judge is 1-13-03 179 1 always the Executive Board member of -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He can't appoint that -- 3 what you're saying is he can't delegate that? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, no, I think he 5 can, but I don't -- I'm not understanding that's what we're 6 doing here. I think we're going to keep it in there as -- 7 we're just alternates. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I don't think we can 9 change their rules. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I think, so far as primary 12 responsibility from this Court, by the designation here, 13 Commissioner Williams would be -- 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: -- primary liaison with -- 16 with AACOG. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And if, on those 19 occasions, you decided you wanted to attend, if that 20 happened, then I would step down and you'd be right there. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, not necessarily. I 22 could attend with you. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's okay, 24 either way. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Yeah. 1-13-03 180 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't mean to -- to put you 3 there and then be able to say, you know, you can stay at 4 home today; I'm going. No, it -- 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: You need to have some 7 reasonable reliance upon where you stand. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question I have, is that 9 -- well, and I don't know the answer here. Is the -- is the 10 Executive Board something you need to -- like, is there a 11 vote that we need to have at that Executive Board? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, absolutely. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If that's the case, I'd 14 recommend that it be a formal appointment to Commissioner 15 Williams, and then Judge Tinley can go when he can, but that 16 way we always have our vote there. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that's what 18 we're doing. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my 20 understanding. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It may require the 23 Judge to write a letter to AACOG Board. Is that correct? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thank you. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, there is a -- 1-13-03 181 1 I've seen 75, 100 million dollars go through there in one 2 day. It's kind of a serious deal. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: When you had your wheelbarrow, 4 did they manage to -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I got a half a 6 wheelbarrow, brought it back to Kerr County, but the City of 7 San Antonio rakes off most of it before it gets to us. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The EMS Board, I 10 certainly would be happy to stay on that. I really think 11 that the 911 issue, right now, we need to leave it the way 12 it is, in my opinion, because we're -- Letz and I are just 13 now beginning to have an understanding of what's going on 14 over there, and we're, you know, building a relationship 15 with them and trying to get this thing to turn the corner. 16 And I just -- I just think it -- right now would be a bad 17 time to change, it's my opinion. And that's it. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: What do you show currently for 19 911? The current -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't show anything. 21 Commissioner Griffin and I were the -- were appointed by 22 this -- by the Commissioners Court to be the liaisons over 23 there. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: The only -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Griffin 1-13-03 182 1 is no longer here. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: The only information I had 3 furnished to me indicated that he was the only designated 4 liaison. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, my name is in 6 there too. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I was not aware of that. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I had picked up Letz, 9 and since -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He needed somebody to 11 carry his bags. I started working with that not long ago. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, that's the 13 end of my stuff. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I only have 15 one comment on -- and it has to do with K.E.D.F. and the 16 Economic Development Foundation. And I guess, just for 17 information only, I am a member of the K.E.D.F. Executive 18 Committee by their election -- appointment and election. I 19 don't represent the County in there, but I am a member. So, 20 I just wanted you to be aware of that. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: That's great. I -- I think, 22 by virtue of their -- their organizational setup, not 23 individually, but in my -- in my representative capacity, I 24 am, too. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: County Judge is by 1-13-03 183 1 reason of the -- of office, yes. As is the mayor. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, mm-hmm. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can -- can your name be 4 put there instead of mine, so if Pat can't attend, then you 5 can have two votes? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nice try. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you want it there, 8 it's okay. Depends on which -- 9 JUDGE TINLEY: I think this way, we get the 10 maximum votes. If you're an alternate, that -- that's 11 probably the way to get the max, wouldn't you think? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would think so, 13 yeah. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, as it is. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If two others show 16 up, we've got the executive committee, right. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: That's right. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comments I would 19 have would be -- 911, I mean, if Dave really wants to get 20 involved with it, I don't have a problem, but have I been 21 working with that recently, and it's -- you know, I'm -- 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If I can just have 23 Animal Control, I'll -- I'll be -- 24 (Laughter.) 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is it the tradition, 1-13-03 184 1 the junior member gets Animal Control? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, 'cause I've had it 3 for six years. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Boy, we're going to 6 refer a lot of calls to you; mad dog calls, dead dog calls. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I do have an interest 8 in 911. Everything else is fine -- well, the only thing, my 9 name is on the Ag Barn. On Region J, that really shouldn't 10 even be listed on here. My position on Region J is 11 appointed by Water Development Board and the governor, and 12 it really has nothing to do with being a Commissioner. I 13 just keep y'all informed because I'm there a lot. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So you don't care what 15 we say. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can tell me that I'm 17 off, and I'll just say thank you. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. What I'm hearing is -- 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me make a comment for 20 everyone's information, 'cause I don't know if the Judge and 21 Dave know. The County representative for Region J is Judge 22 Sansom out of Real County. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: By law. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: By law. You know Judge 25 Sansom? Oh, he -- anyway, Judge Sansom is that 1-13-03 185 1 representative for counties. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Did you have 4 something you wanted to say, Rusty? 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I do before you vote, 6 but after you get finished discussing it. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have any further 8 comments? 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No. I'm just so 10 happy to have Animal Control, I'll just let it go. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I -- what I'm hearing is that 12 the -- the assignments, as tentatively presented, with -- 13 with changes of Commissioners Baldwin and Letz on 911, and 14 Region J being omitted totally, that with those -- with 15 those two modifications, everybody's satisfied? Is that 16 what I'm hearing? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Apparently so. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do I hear a motion to 19 take effect? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just have one more 21 comment. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, would you be 24 interested in K.E.D.F.? I asked Dave if he had any interest 25 in K.E.D.F. And the reason I said -- I mean, it's -- I've 1-13-03 186 1 been there. I was an appointee once before, and I don't 2 have a burning desire to go back. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: K.E.D.F., airport, and 5 dogs. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's just a good board. 7 Learn a lot. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, you do. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. With that additional 10 change, do I hear a motion to approve? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Moved by Commissioner 14 Williams, second by Commissioner Letz. The Sheriff has got 15 something he wants to throw in here. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just a recommendation. 17 With the Sheriff's Department taking up the majority of the 18 County's budget; anyhow, being several million dollars -- 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Glad you acknowledge 20 it. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I do. And I acknowledge 22 it every time I go to working on the budget. But, in 23 knowing they got -- also got to have a liaison for county 24 facility and maintenance-type, I would appreciate a liaison 25 that would help us with law enforcement out there, because 1-13-03 187 1 we are off-site, you know. Normally -- not knocking any 2 Commissioner, I don't -- we don't see -- and y'all don't see 3 our day-to-day operations, which it does have a humongous 4 impact on the budget. And just somebody that would be a 5 direct liaison working back and forth with law enforcement 6 over there -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd vote to do it. 8 Rusty, will you give me a badge? 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about a gun 11 that's not loaded? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can I have a ride in 13 your new S.U.V.? 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'll go down to T.G.&Y. 15 and we can find you one and buy you a gun. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That would work. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will you give me a 18 ride in your new S.U.V.? 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got some old 21 badges at home; I'll just use one of my own. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Go to another county, 23 Commissioner, please. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think Commissioner 25 Baldwin would be a good one. 1-13-03 188 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You know, I would just 2 like to have a liaison that would -- that we could get to 3 come out there and actually see a lot of the day-to-day 4 stuff and a lot of the equipment stuff, that could truly sit 5 down and help during budget time, and just -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In other words, help 7 him come over and sell the program to -- I don't know if 8 it's me or not. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I -- let me think out 10 loud. That may be a good selection, appointing Commissioner 11 Baldwin to that, because he has a tendency to be a little 12 tightfisted, and -- and he might -- he might keep the 13 Sheriff's request for funds under control. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, how about a 15 commitment now that we're still going to be friends? 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sure. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have no problem. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: We add Commissioner Baldwin as 20 the law enforcement/jail liaison? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So I'm in charge of 22 the jail? Is that -- 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Please. I'll give that 24 one to you. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You'll be in charge 1-13-03 189 1 of the Sheriff. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that acceptable to you, 3 Commissioner Williams, amending that, adding that to the 4 motion? 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Absolutely. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fine. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further discussion? All 9 in favor? 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Okay. I 14 don't think we've got any Executive Session items, none that 15 I'm aware of here. Information, Commissioners Court, Road 16 and Bridge, Maintenance. Do we have any of those reports? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We accepted them 18 earlier on. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I'm -- I have some here 20 from J.P.'s and -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is something that 22 we hardly ever do, and I'm glad you pointed that out. 23 There's a good section right there for us to make comments 24 and talk about projects that we have going and that kind of 25 thing; that's really where it belongs. 1-13-03 190 1 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going -- for informational 2 purposes, I'm going to add to our agenda henceforth that -- 3 that we have added to that reports from public officials 4 and/or department heads, and also reports from boards, 5 committees, and commissions and boards. And -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good place for it. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Just to keep us informed, keep 8 the public informed. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Might want to add it 10 on for next time, 'cause I'm bringing in a couple reports. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: It will be there. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cool. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: It will be there. Okay. That 14 looks like the end of it. There being no further business, 15 I'll declare the meeting adjourned. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You guys did good. 17 Appreciate it. 18 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 2:36 p.m.) 19 - - - - - - - - - - 20 21 22 23 24 25 1-13-03 191 1 STATE OF TEXAS | 2 COUNTY OF KERR | 3 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 4 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 5 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 6 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 7 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 20th day of January, 8 2003. 9 10 11 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 12 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 13 Certified Shorthand Reporter 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1-13-03