1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Special Session 10 Monday, June 23, 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 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4 25 ABSENT: WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 2 1 I N D E X June 23, 2003 2 PAGE --- Commissioners Comments 4 3 1.1 Presentation from Cypress Creek community 4 concerning enhanced law enforcement 8 1.2 Request for permission to use county park on 5 Riverside Drive for car show/chili cook-off 21 1.3 Request to override decision of Road & Bridge 6 to not widen Holloman Road 25 1.4 Update on Mooney Airplane Company, Inc. 44 7 1.7 PUBLIC HEARING - abandon, discontinue and vacate 545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road 56 8 1.8 Consider abandoning, discontinuing and vacating 545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road 57 9 1.5 Budget amendment to transfer funds from Workers Compensation to Contract Fees 59 10 1.6 Consider merit increases 64 1.9 Request for approval to purchase a laser 11 printer for County Clerk's office 88 1.10 Review and report from Third Party Administrator 12 on pending reimbursement of claim paid by County 91 1.11 Update on status of Worker's Compensation cost 13 and claims 102 1.12 Discuss upcoming Post-Legislative Conference and 14 State County Judge and Commissioners Conference 108 1.13 Discuss status of Kerr County's burn ban 110 15 1.14 Consider allowing Water Education Task Force to place a temporary display in the courthouse 112 16 1.15 Confirmation and reappointment of Sam Junkin as Kerr County representative on Board of Trustees 17 of Hill Country MHMR Center 118 1.16 Announcement of pending retirement of Eddie 18 Holland as Kerr County Extension Agent 119 1.17 Consider ratifying County Judge's signature on 19 Memorandum of Understanding with AACOG for Domestic Preparedness funding 124 20 4.1 Pay Bills 129 21 4.2 Budget Amendments 144 4.3 Late Bills 154 22 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 155 23 --- Adjourned 156 24 25 3 1 On Monday, June 23, 2003, at 9:00 a.m., a special meeting 2 of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the 3 Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, 4 Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: 5 P R O C E E D I N G S 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me call to order the 7 special Commissioners Court meeting that's posted for this 8 date, Monday, June 23rd. It's just a tad after 9 a.m., the 9 scheduled time for the meeting. I believe the honors today 10 go to Commissioner, Precinct 3. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would everyone please 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.)stand, join me in a 13 moment of prayer? 14 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I want to welcome all of you 16 here this morning. If any of you desire to speak about any 17 matter that is listed on the agenda, I would ask that you 18 fill out a public participation form. The forms are on the 19 table at the back of the room. It's not absolutely required 20 that you do that in order to be able to speak. It just 21 helps us for purposes of planning and to make sure that we 22 don't miss you when that item comes up on the agenda. So, 23 if you want to speak on any matter that's listed on the 24 agenda, we'd ask that you fill out the public participation 25 form. Now, with regard to items not on the agenda, if 6-23-03 4 1 there's anybody here that has anything on their mind that 2 they want to tell us about, we want you to feel privileged 3 to come forward at this time and tell us what's on your 4 mind, what -- what concerns you. Is there any member of the 5 public that wishes to address the Court about any matter 6 that is not on the agenda? Anybody? 7 (No response.) 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Looks like we got no takers 9 today. We appreciate you being here anyway. We'll move on 10 to the next item, Commissioners' comments. Precinct 3. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No comments today. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, I see one of 13 our firefighters here, and vice president of KARFA, and I 14 want to let you know that the agenda item to discuss the 15 contract for the fire departments was deleted from this -- 16 this meeting. 17 AUDIENCE: Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It will be first 19 meeting in July. And I apologize, we didn't get the word to 20 you. 21 AUDIENCE: No problem, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We called as many 23 people as we could. That's all I have. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I have a 25 couple of things. I noticed in this morning's newspaper 6-23-03 5 1 that Judge Ables is assessing a $100 fine for cell phones 2 going off in his courtroom. I know that we have not 3 assessed any kind of fine, but we do have in our -- in our 4 rules, no cell phones going off or wearing hats in the 5 courtroom. And I can't remember how the list goes, but it's 6 something that we need to pay attention to and have respect 7 for. And I see that Judge Ables is going a step further, 8 and good for him. It has to stop. I was out nosing around 9 over the weekend, and I was out at the county park and saw 10 the motorcycle rally down there, and drove through and 11 looked at all the wonderful motorcycles. But I noticed 12 there was a -- like, about 50 port-a-pottys sitting on 13 County property away from the motorcycle rally. Was that -- 14 do you think that that's for the motorcycle rally? Or -- 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know. You're 16 looking at me, so -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are people out setting 18 their port-a-pottys out there and renting them on our 19 property? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Possible, but probably 21 they were there for the rally. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then the final 23 item I wanted to bring up is my beloved aerobic system at my 24 house, week before last I spent $436 maintenance on that 25 thing. Last week, I -- Friday, I spent another $300. This 6-23-03 6 1 week I have $200 coming up. That is a grand total of almost 2 $1,000 just on maintenance items on that thing in less than 3 three weeks. I can't afford that. I can't afford to live 4 in the county any more, so I'm putting my home on the market 5 and hot-footing it back into the city of Kerrville where I 6 can afford to live. So, I just wanted to let you know that 7 I'm not going to be there very much longer, Judge. That's 8 all. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're not moving to 10 Precinct 4, are you? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm thinking about it. 12 (Laughter.) I was thinking about getting me a cardboard box 13 and moving it down toward Comfort, and -- and declare 14 residency and run for Commissioner down there, be a 15 Commissioner in two positions. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: These new larger 17 refrigerators -- 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Pretty good size boxes 20 available that they ship those in. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can get my whole 22 family in those big ones. Be nice. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: You may want to, in the 24 interim, prior to making your transition, contact that 25 port-a-potty company and see if they may have something that 6-23-03 7 1 you need. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, I could beat 3 U.G.R.A. in the process, couldn't I? What a great idea, 4 Judge. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: That's a thought. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Godly counsel right 7 here. This is good. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Better news -- and speaking of 9 alternatives to septic systems, I received notification 10 approximately a week ago from O.R.C.A., the Office of Rural 11 Community Affairs, that a grant that Kerr County had made 12 application for -- it's actually the second phase, I suppose 13 you would call it, for Community Development programs for 14 the sewer service out in Kerrville South, in the amount of 15 $250,000 has been approved. The caveat in the notification 16 stated that the grant may be rescinded if the State 2004 17 Community Development Block Grant allocation is 18 significantly lower than the 2003 allocation of $85,267,000. 19 I don't think there's any -- any great degree of concern 20 that that's not -- that that will occur, but the caveat was 21 there. But -- so now we have -- this will be the fourth 22 grant that we have in the Kerrville South area for tying 23 onto that sewer line. We had a $500,000 and a $250,000 24 originally. Then we received notification a month or so ago 25 about the second round of 500. Now we have the 250. So, I 6-23-03 8 1 thought that may be of interest. I don't think it's going 2 to extend out quite as far in Kerrville South as you would 3 need, though, Commissioner Baldwin. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, not yet, and I 5 can't wait. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: I see. But that's all that I 7 have this morning. We'll now move to the consideration 8 agenda. The first item is to consider and discuss the 9 presentation from Cypress Creek community concerning 10 enhanced law enforcement. Commissioner Letz. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda 12 at the request of some of the residents in the Cypress Creek 13 community. We've had -- or I've had, I guess, two meetings 14 out there with them, along with -- Sheriff's been out there 15 once, and his deputy several times, and Constable Garza as 16 well, and they had some concerns. Some of the concerns 17 relate to budget. And I thought it would be a good idea if 18 I'd have them on -- well, they asked to come to court. I 19 thought this would be a good time, during the budget 20 process, to hear what they have to say. They also have 21 given me a letter this morning to hand out to members of the 22 Court. I'll turn it over to the spokesman, Mr. Falduto. 23 MR. FALDUTO: Yes. My name is Paul Falduto. 24 I'm here with Harry Reeh our president, and Neil Dunn, 25 another one of our members, and we represent the Cypress 6-23-03 9 1 Creek Community Center. We're housed over in the old school 2 house just off of Cypress Creek Road, way on the east side 3 of Kerr County, the far east end. By the way, any time 4 you're riding around on Sunday, we'd like you to stop and 5 see our community center; we're quite proud of it. Not only 6 did we rejuvenate the old school house, but we also put on a 7 pavilion area where there's reunions and so forth held, and 8 we're very, very proud of the site. We're in Precinct 3, 9 and we did send you a letter showing you that we are 10 attempting to do everything that we can to do our part in 11 the way of organizing the Crimestopper program. We're 12 probably about 60 percent through the organization with the 13 help of the Sheriff and quite a bit of his staff. 14 We're also quite concerned about the 911 15 program, and we see that you have taken the time to -- and 16 finances to update the 911 program, and we're very happy for 17 that, and we hope that that keeps going the way that it has 18 been going. As you know, we had some very unfortunate 19 situations happen just in the near future, and that was the 20 double murders, which is only, like -- I believe it's about 21 a mile and a half from our community center, which, by the 22 way, represents about -- we have about 120 members. We 23 almost probably represent about 70 percent of the people in 24 the area. Not only did we have the double murders very, 25 very close to our neighborhood, but we also had a home 6-23-03 10 1 invasion here about two years ago, just a little over two 2 years ago, which ended up in a manhunt, which I think you 3 all read about in the papers, and we're very, very concerned 4 about. 5 In our letter, we talk about three areas of 6 concern, and there's one other thing besides the home 7 invasion and the murders. We -- we do nestle along IH-10 8 and we get a lot of people stopping along that way, and a 9 lot of intruders, breakdowns, things of that sort. Harry 10 Reeh is a full-time farmer, and he can speak of numerous 11 times that -- I think, Harry, you've been robbed what, two 12 times? 13 MR. REEH: Yes. 14 MR. FALDUTO: I think he's been robbed two 15 times, and the numerous problems that he has with people 16 coming off of IH-10. We hope that you take the time to read 17 our letter. The reason that we're here this morning at 18 budget time is to appeal to you to add vehicles for your 19 constables. We feel that a constable with a vehicle, fully 20 equipped with communications back to the Sheriff's 21 Department, with all of the rights of a Sheriff's deputy, 22 would be a valuable, valuable asset, and with a small 23 expenditure of funds. If he had the vehicle when he's 24 riding around on his official business, he would be able to 25 be exposed. People would see him. And as we were talking 6-23-03 11 1 to the Sheriff before, the way that you can -- the way that 2 you stop speeders is not by stopping one speeder, but it's 3 being visually there for him, and that slows down all of the 4 people. That's what slows them down, and that's what we're 5 attempting to do, and that's what we'd like to do. We'd 6 like to get the -- get him visible in his everyday means, 7 give us a better means of communication with the Sheriff's 8 Department through the constable. He's there. He's being 9 paid for on a 40-hour basis. We feel that, with the 10 expenditure -- and I believe we have four constables. With 11 the expenditure of four vehicles, it would be money well, 12 well spent, and we're appealing to you today to add those 13 people, and to go along with us to help us in our program, 14 our 911 program. Our constable has been out to our 15 meetings, has been attending all of our night meetings, and 16 we're quite pleased with what he's doing, and what Mr. Letz 17 has been doing for us. He's come out to our meetings. And, 18 again, I just appeal to you to increase your budget to at 19 least give those people the vehicles. And it adds another 20 man to the -- to the daytime program of patrolling our 21 roads, and we all need -- know that we need that. So, thank 22 you very much, and thank you for your efforts, and we 23 appreciate it. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much, sir. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I might make one other 6-23-03 12 1 comment, if I may, one of the -- and I've been -- you know, 2 several meetings, as Mr. Falduto said, and I really commend 3 the residents of Cypress Creek, because it is probably, from 4 what I see, the only true community left in the rural areas 5 of Kerr County. I mean, they really -- they bond together; 6 they look out for themselves. And it's kind of going back 7 to the way things were throughout central Texas probably 20, 8 30, 40, 50 years ago. It's a tight-knit community, and I 9 applaud the efforts that they do. I mean, I've been down 10 there. There have been some heated meetings this year, 11 lengthy meetings this year, but the bottom line is that 12 they -- they have a strong bond with each other, and I'm 13 very happy to try to help them and work with them. But I'm 14 really -- what I want to end up by saying is, hats off to 15 them for being a community in the true sense of the word. I 16 appreciate it. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a couple of 18 questions. Jon, were you through? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. You talked 21 about marked vehicles, I think -- marked cars. And in your 22 notes, you recommend that we get some from Department of 23 Public Safety. I don't -- I don't know anything about that, 24 if they have a turnover of vehicles, what they do with them 25 or anything. 6-23-03 13 1 MR. REEH: That's an organization in Austin 2 that takes used D.P.S. cars, refurbishes them, puts new 3 tires on them, and they're available to only county entities 4 to purchase at a reduced price or half price, fourth price. 5 That's why -- in our community, we have a Texas Ranger; he 6 may be aware of that. In fact, when I used to work for the 7 county 30 years ago, that's all we ever had, was used dump 8 trucks that were taken from TexDOT. We didn't have the 9 luxury of a new truck. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just didn't know 11 D.P.S. did that. 12 MR. REEH: Yeah, area organization in Austin. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a great idea. 14 We need to look into that. And I would think our constables 15 would look into that and bring to the Court the program -- 16 you know, how it works and what the cost and that kind of 17 thing. You know, I thought we had had -- I thought we had 18 had a program similar to that worked out with the Sheriff. 19 Maybe we don't. Rusty, you were fixing to make some kind of 20 comment there. Do you want to comment on that? 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The comment on the 22 D.P.S. cars is, that's the ones, after they turn them back 23 in, they go up for auction. And you do it -- Kerr County 24 has participated in that a couple times. Last one, I think 25 Sergeant Seal's we bought at one time. The only difference 6-23-03 14 1 and the only problem was -- is those cars would have right 2 at 100,000 miles on them when they turn them back in. And 3 then I think the last one we bought, you still end up 4 costing the County a little over $9,000. That's not really 5 that advantageous, if you buy a car with 100,000 miles on it 6 that's already got -- or that they're wanting $9,000 for it. 7 With the wear and tear on police cars, it's just not that 8 great. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think what 10 we're talking about, the main topic here is visibility in 11 the community. Maybe -- maybe we need to help them purchase 12 magnetic signs for their doors. The one constable out in 13 Ingram, there's no question who he is when you see his car. 14 He has two or three -- I think three signs on his car, and 15 it's pretty obvious that he's a police officer of some sort. 16 But maybe that's a -- maybe that's a way to go. Yes, sir? 17 MR. FALDUTO: That would not give him the 18 communications. We're lacking the communications. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to get to 20 the communications in just a second. I just want to deal 21 with the four wheels going down the road, and communications 22 is my second question. What are we talking about, 23 communications? Radios? That link to the Sheriff? Don't 24 we have that today, Sheriff Hierholzer? 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir. 6-23-03 15 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's the question on 2 it, then? 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think most constables 4 have in their budgets where they all got radios. I know 5 we've given portables to a couple of them, some of our old 6 portables. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you link them up to 8 your operation? 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They can talk to us 10 anytime they want to. Now, if they -- you know, I'm trying 11 to see if all of them have a radio in their vehicle. I'm 12 pretty sure they all do, okay? I haven't had any requests 13 from any other ones on them. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A lot of times their 16 radios are older and outdated, but they do have radios, do 17 have communications. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, as long as we 19 budget for them to have radios. And we can't make them go 20 out and buy a new radio or used radio or whatever, so I -- 21 it seems that we've done our part there. Did you say that 22 we needed more people? New constables? More constables? 23 Is that what you were saying? 24 MR. FALDUTO: Me? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 6-23-03 16 1 MR. FALDUTO: No, I said to utilize the 2 constables in their -- if they had the vehicle and it had 3 the bubble up on top and -- you know, I mean, there was no 4 difference between seeing them and seeing a Sheriff's 5 deputy; that when they're all doing their everyday duties, 6 coming to our meeting and so forth, we know -- I mean, 7 there's a vehicle there. Like when he comes to our meetings 8 and parks, he's just another car, where if it was a car that 9 looked identical to a Sheriff's car, people coming by or 10 speeders or anybody else says, oh my gosh, they've got 11 people -- surveillance. I mean, they've got patrols around 12 here, you know. But, you know, as the Sheriff's told us at 13 our meeting, at any one time -- correct me if I'm wrong, 14 Sheriff. You said that there could possibly be five people 15 patrolling the county at one time? 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct. 17 MR. FALDUTO: That's correct? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir. 19 MR. FALDUTO: This is a pretty big county to 20 have five patrols out, as far -- with all the roads that are 21 out there. I mean, I don't know what it is for one to come 22 by a specific road, what it would be. Maybe once every two 23 weeks. This would just add another person for a minimum 24 amount of dollars. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you're -- so what 6-23-03 17 1 you're saying, then, you're not talking -- are you talking 2 about utilizing constables or are you talking about us 3 hiring new Sheriff's deputies? 4 MR. FALDUTO: No -- well, we'd love to hire, 5 but we know that that -- that cost; the Sheriff has already 6 told us what that cost is, which is astronomical. And that 7 was our first thought when we had the Sheriff out, was to 8 put more deputies on, and he said that's impossible because 9 of the budget restraints. And -- but adding -- but you've 10 already got -- you're already paying the constables a wage, 11 so it's just a matter of giving them the vehicle. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, vehicle is the 13 deal. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Sheriff, would you 15 comment on the usefulness of the constables in general law 16 enforcement and whether or not there's some potential for 17 them to be more useful? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I think there's -- 19 and I hate to speak for any of the constables without them 20 being here, but I think there's always potential for them to 21 be more useful. The thing is, it's just like y'all's or my 22 position; it's an elected position. A lot of it for a 23 constable is kind of like a part-time position. They'll 24 have a full-time job somewhere else, so their availability 25 is not that much. And their main duties are serving that 6-23-03 18 1 J.P. court, being -- you know, serving all the small claims 2 lawsuits and being bailiff in their court when it's going on 3 and that. But, you know, we're fairly fortunate; our 4 constables that we have around here do like to get out and 5 do police work, and they have full authority to as a peace 6 officer for the state, that they can do any type of police 7 work that they care to do. And if they had good, marked 8 cars, yeah, I think it would help that they're visible in 9 their precinct. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the issue, from 11 talking with the residents of the community, is visibility, 12 what it comes down to. And that there -- I don't think 13 there's any real argument that the constables have marked 14 cars -- or, that is, that look like law enforcement cars. 15 They're more visible, and the more visible law enforcement 16 cars that we have patrolling the county, the -- it's a good 17 deterrent against crime. And I think, you know, that's 18 basically, I think, the argument, is -- and I think the 19 residents that came here today and that I've talked to in 20 the community, they understand that budget is a big issue. 21 They've come up with an option of a -- one of the lower cost 22 ways for the County to provide vehicles to the constables, 23 rather than going out and buying new cars. The next -- 24 another option would be like you're talking about, is, you 25 know, providing funds in the budget to enhance the cars they 6-23-03 19 1 have. 2 One of the things, and I think kind of where 3 Commissioner Baldwin's going a little bit with this, is that 4 we don't have -- we can't make them do certain things. I 5 mean, we can provide certain things. We can put the money 6 in their budgets for them to have radios, but we can't make 7 them spend that money. So, I mean, I think the -- like the 8 Sheriff just said, our constables now are very good and, you 9 know, are trying to do patrol work and do more. That hasn't 10 always been the case. And this Court doesn't have any 11 authority to make constables do something. The public has 12 that authority by not re-electing them. I don't think 13 that's an issue right now, but that's kind of -- you know, 14 with the radio discussion that I was hearing, but I think 15 that the -- you know, if there is a way that we can provide 16 more visible law enforcement cars or vehicles to the 17 constables, I think it would be -- it's an improvement. I 18 think it's something that we just need to look at during the 19 budget process, you know, and see if we can do it. 20 From what I've heard, Constable, Precinct 4 21 is happy with the car that he has; he doesn't want his own 22 car, or a -- you know, a different used law enforcement 23 vehicle. But it's just something we have to look at. I 24 think would it help. And I think it's something -- when we 25 get to that workshop, that's something that I intend to look 6-23-03 20 1 very hard at -- look at, and see if there is a way that we 2 can fund or increase the funding in that area, whether it's 3 buying used cars or buying more equipment to make the cars 4 -- you know, make sure that they're up to speed when it 5 comes to law enforcement. 6 MR. REEH: Increasing the one in Kendall 7 County, that constable's -- of course, he loves his job and 8 he loves exposure, but he patrols all the schools, writes 9 lots of tickets, is always visible in Comfort, as you can 10 attest to, Jon, because you drive through Comfort many 11 times. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And been stopped by him 13 like everybody else. Yeah. I mean, constables, they can -- 14 you know, if constables do like the individual that 15 Mr. Reeh's talking about in Comfort, they're a huge revenue 16 enhancement for the county as well, because, I mean, every 17 time they write a ticket, it's about $80 for Kendall County, 18 and it's a -- just talk to the J.P., Judge Pressler in 19 Comfort. In fact, I had reason to visit with her the other 20 day, and she informed me that they bring in about $300,000 a 21 year under that -- from that precinct from law enforcement, 22 from overall; that's D.P.S., Sheriff's, and constable. But 23 they -- you know, and it depends. But that constable wants 24 to do it. And the key is for the voters to elect constables 25 that really want law enforcement. I think that, from 6-23-03 21 1 talking with Constable Garza, you know, he wants to and he 2 would like to have more funds in his budget for a vehicle. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Any formal action to be taken 4 at this time, gentlemen? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a report that we 6 need to receive. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate the interest, 8 and we appreciate you being with us here today. The next 9 item is to consider and discuss request for permission to 10 use county park on Riverside Drive on Saturday, the 1st of 11 November of this year, for a car show and chili cook-off by 12 the Hill Country Automobile Club for a fundraiser. 13 MR. HUGGINS: Gentlemen, good morning. My 14 name is Harry Huggins. I'm the vice president and chairman 15 of events for the Hill Country Automobile Club, which is 16 stationed and originated here in Kerrville. We're in the 17 process of having our fifth annual 4th of July open car show 18 in River Hills Mall parking lot, which, you know, 4th of 19 July is a real nice time to be in an asphalt parking lot all 20 day. And so this is strictly a fundraiser for the local 21 high schools; Ingram Tom Moore, Tivy High, and 22 Fredericksburg. And we -- this year we've given them about 23 $4,000 to the three schools -- Center Point, also -- through 24 this one car show. We'd like to eventually move it to the 25 county park. And we're -- we have about half the sponsors 6-23-03 22 1 this year that we had last year, so we need to do something 2 else and raise more funds. So, we're requesting from the 3 Court that we be able to use the park in November, which 4 hopefully it will be nice and cool. If we don't get rained 5 out, we'll have another fundraising car show, and eventually 6 we'd like to make this the annual event. And our request is 7 simple. We are a 4 -- 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, so 8 we're tax-exempt and all that other stuff. And we're a 9 local community-supporting club, if you will, and that's all 10 I'm asking, is that we can use your park -- or our park on 11 Saturday, the 1st of November. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Have you checked the 13 availability of that date -- 14 MR. HUGGINS: Yes, I have. We've been -- 15 JUDGE TINLEY: -- with the Facilities 16 Director? 17 MR. HUGGINS: -- working closely with the 18 people downstairs. And we wanted to use the Ag Barn, but 19 they wanted $275 for that, and, my goodness. The River 20 Hills Mall lets us use their parking lot. They give us 21 $300, donate it toward the scholarships and all that. But, 22 see, that's a private entity. The County wants to charge 23 us. The County wants to charge us, so we can't afford it. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You may want to stop 25 there. 6-23-03 23 1 MR. HUGGINS: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would -- I can't 3 believe they'd let you off so cheap. But I don't have any 4 problem with it. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's what parks 6 are for. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what parks are 8 for. Especially when you're giving to the high schools 9 and -- 10 MR. HUGGINS: Absolutely. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- helping kids 12 further their education. Appreciate that very much. 13 MR. HUGGINS: Okay. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a motion? 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we allow 16 the Hill Country Automobile Club to use the county park -- I 17 assume we're talking about right below the Ag Barn? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Flat Rock Lake Park? 19 MR. HUGGINS: Yes, sir. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: For Saturday, 21 November 1st, 2003, for a chili cook-off and car show, from 22 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 24 MR. HUGGINS: May I -- 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Excuse me. Motion made and 6-23-03 24 1 seconded by Commissioners Baldwin and Letz, respectively, 2 that the Court approve the request by the Hill Country 3 Automobile Club to use the Flat Rock county park on 4 Riverside Drive Saturday, November 1st, 2003, from 7 a.m. 5 till 9 p.m. for a car show and chili cook-off. Now, you had 6 a question, Mr. Huggins? 7 MR. HUGGINS: Yeah. I was going to ask if we 8 could get out the night before and rope off some areas for 9 the various vehicles and all that, like we do at the mall. 10 I mean, it's a minor thing. We won't be camping out or 11 anything, but just making preparation. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Put out a little fire 13 ant bait. 14 MR. HUGGINS: That's all. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thea has something 16 down there, Judge. 17 MS. SOVIL: You might remind him there's no 18 electricity down there. 19 MR. HUGGINS: We have generators. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Y'all plan on using 21 generators? 22 MR. HUGGINS: Yes, sir. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. Any further 24 discussion or questions? 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think we talked 6-23-03 25 1 about this a little bit once before. I'm not sure that 2 these kind of decisions require Commissioners Court 3 attention and approval. And I -- you all have had more 4 experience with it than I have, so there may be good reason 5 for that, but I'd be willing to delegate to our facilities 6 coordinator to make those kind of decisions. But we don't 7 have to deal with that now. I just make that point once 8 again. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 10 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 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 does carry. Thank you, 16 Mr. Huggins. 17 MR. HUGGINS: Thank you, gentlemen. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is consider and 19 discuss a request to override the decision of Road and 20 Bridge to not widen Holloman Road to meet the right-of-way 21 standards. 22 MS. DOERRIES: Hello. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, ma'am? 24 MS. DOERRIES: Yes, I'm Patrice Doerries. I 25 live at 103 Roland Trail in the Wood Trails Ranch property 6-23-03 26 1 subdivision in the county. I represent -- I'm president of 2 our homeowners' association, and we are concerned about a 3 section -- the entrance and exit to our subdivision, which 4 entails approximately 189 property owners, to say nothing of 5 the families that live with them, and it's regarding 123 6 records of property. Attached to our request to address you 7 is a -- a map, and it particularly concerns the road. And 8 I'm going to let our vice president, George West, address 9 this. We have met with County Road and Bridge, and they've 10 been very gracious and helpful in helping us look at this 11 issue, as well as Dave Nicholson. We are part of Precinct 12 4. The verbal meeting that we had -- or the meeting we had, 13 the decision was that they would not widen Holloman Road, 14 and we are concerned about this, because this is our only 15 entrance and exit, and there have been several accidents 16 that have occurred. It is a safety issue. And I respect 17 the argument that if every county road was put up to code as 18 it needs to be, you would have hundreds of roads that needed 19 to be worked on. I would -- I respect that opinion, but I 20 also know, living there, that we would like the 21 Commissioners Court to consider overriding this decision, 22 because we are a -- an entity that does need this additional 23 space added to the road. And I'm going to let George, the 24 engineer, address this further. 25 MR. WEST: Thank you. Some of you know that 6-23-03 27 1 I would much rather be singing than speaking. I have no 2 formal training as a public speaker, but I have stayed at a 3 Holiday Inn Express. (Laughter.) 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Last night? 5 MR. WEST: I can sing Old Man River. We are 6 concerned in Wood Trails Ranch over several things. We have 7 also had a double murder, by the way, which the Sheriff's 8 very familiar with. We now have enhanced reinforcements, 9 for which we are grateful. Road and Bridge is taking care 10 of our roads and has done a magnificent job maintaining our 11 driving surfaces, for which we are grateful. But we have a 12 condition on Holloman Road. The piece of Holloman Road 13 which comes into our subdivision off of Goat Creek, this is 14 the only way in and out. It's below the minimum -- current 15 minimum standards for widths of roads in Kerr County. We 16 have discussed this with several people. We have a -- what 17 -- the real reason we're here is, we have a dangerous 18 situation there, and we're concerned about the safety of our 19 citizens and their property. We -- we know that the ideal 20 situation would be to bring the right-of-way up to the 21 minimum standards. We have now been told, I believe, that 22 the current existing right-of-way through there is about 23 25 feet. 24 I've done some measuring -- since Patrice 25 said I'm an engineer, I'm a retired registered engineer and 6-23-03 28 1 surveyor. I've done some surveying out there myself, and 2 the wire fence on the north side belongs to Ruth Bauer, and 3 her property, I feel like, is on the property line. There's 4 about 2 feet between the fence and the edge of the pavement, 5 and then the pavement's about 17 feet wide, and on the south 6 side of -- of this strip of Holloman are several obstacles: 7 A wooden fence, which is only 21 feet from the wire fence; 8 trees with masonry circles built around them which extend 9 into the so called right-of-way and are right up next to the 10 driving surface. The dangerous situation is that when the 11 mail truck, garbage and trash trucks and occasional Fed Ex 12 and UPS go in and out, citizens have a hard time getting 13 over far enough to let this happen to keep from running into 14 them. We've got one person on our board, Fred Etheridge, 15 who has already lost two side-view mirrors off of his truck 16 because of this situation. 17 And, really, I think what we're after is to 18 request the Court to investigate clearing the existing 19 right-of-way, whatever that is, to the extent that we have a 20 safe passing condition on the road. That's what we're 21 after. And whatever the Court feels like it takes to do 22 that -- you know, get the surveyor out there and measure, 23 make field notes and a drawing showing exactly what's there, 24 and then the decisions can be made about what to move and 25 what not to move. But we really do need a little wider 6-23-03 29 1 traveling surface than 17 feet for these trucks and 2 passenger vehicles to safely pass each other. That's why 3 we're here. That's our request, and we will thank you for 4 whatever you come up with to help us out. Thank you very 5 much. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Anybody 7 on the court have any questions of these individuals? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a question. It's 9 probably not really to the individuals; it's to either 10 Franklin or Leonard. That's a county road? Holloman is a 11 County road? 12 (Mr. Johnston nodded.) 13 MR. WEST: Yes, it is. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm sympathetic with 15 the -- with the homeowners' association. That road's not 16 wide enough; it needs to be wider. I'm not sure I would 17 describe it as dangerous, but certainly, you can lose a 18 side-view mirror in there; I can believe that. The dilemma 19 we have here -- I'd like for Franklin or Len Odom to speak 20 to it. The dilemma we have here is that, in order to 21 provide some relief and widen that road, we need more 22 right-of-way. And if we set that precedent of -- of fixing 23 something that was a mistake in the past here, then we can't 24 afford to live up to that precedent and fix all the other 25 mistakes that we have out there. So, I'd like to hear from 6-23-03 30 1 Mr. Odom and Mr. Johnston. 2 MR. JOHNSTON: Well, what George says is 3 what's on the ground; the way it was developed, I guess, 4 when the subdivision was first put in. The limitation we 5 run into, when he was talking about the barbed wire fence on 6 one side, then there's a wood fence on the other. There's 7 some people that live -- I think there's one or two houses 8 on that side, so if we move that fence, you're moving into 9 their front yard; they're real close to the road. So, 10 it's -- that's not a good situation either, but it's what's 11 there. And I guess, like we discussed, the only way to do 12 it is to condemn property and to move it from the north 13 side, I think, to move the road that direction. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are we certain that 15 neither one of those fences is in the right-of-way? 16 MR. JOHNSTON: I think Lee was out there. 17 Didn't you do some work on that? 18 MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir. 19 MR. JOHNSTON: The fence is right on the 20 right-of-way? 21 MR. VOELKEL: Basically on the right-of-way. 22 MR. JOHNSTON: Basically on the right-of-way, 23 about a foot or two. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: On or in? 25 MR. VOELKEL: On. On the right-of-way. I 6-23-03 31 1 don't think they protrude into the right-of-way whatsoever. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: They are up against the 3 right-of-way? 4 MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: But not actually within the 6 right-of-way. 7 MR. JOHNSTON: So the fence is probably on 8 the property line. 9 MR. VOELKEL: Correct. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, are these deeded? 11 Is the right-of-way deeded or is it by prescription? 12 MR. JOHNSTON: Do you know? 13 MR. ODOM: I'm sorry, what was the question? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is the right-of-way 15 deeded or by prescription? 16 MR. ODOM: There was -- it's un -- let's put 17 it this way; it is -- it is padded. No, wait a minute, it 18 shows a road in there. The way that we find it -- and I 19 want Lee to address this. We've looked at this several 20 times in the past. What we have is 22 feet. We think Lee 21 has been out there before doing some surveying at Holloman 22 and Wood Trails, and we pulled a corner back off it we 23 found, but that fence along the north side is shown to be 24 on. When we measured, Commissioner Nicholson and I went out 25 and we pulled 22.4 feet between the fences, and -- and then 6-23-03 32 1 up to 24 feet, 25 feet. There's nothing -- the subdivision 2 -- it was a flagged subdivision when it was set in. Now, 3 what I mean by "flag," it was a real narrow entrance. Seems 4 to be prescribed, what you have on the ground. So, the 5 other -- other part of the subdivision is 50 foot; this is 6 only 22. That's all that we can find that's there. And we 7 had Lee look at it, and I would like for the County Surveyor 8 to address that. But we've done all that we can possibly 9 do. I don't see the infringement up in there. It's narrow, 10 but it's been that way, I guess, since 1968 or early '70's 11 when that subdivision's been put in. We've got a little bit 12 more traffic. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me say something. 14 Holloman -- that part of Holloman Road is not a part of that 15 subdivision, is it? 16 MR. ODOM: No. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Holloman Road came in 18 about the time Noah's Ark did. They've been out there -- 19 MR. ODOM: A long time. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- a long, long -- I 21 mean, generations. And -- but the subdivision came in 1977. 22 MR. ODOM: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If I remember, which 24 was prior to Commissioner Baldwin being the Commissioner out 25 there, I'd like to add. But all we're talking about is the 6-23-03 33 1 Holloman Road part of it going -- 2 MR. ODOM: To Wood Trails. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- to the subdivision. 4 Is that right? 5 MR. ODOM: Well, up to Wood Trails there. 6 Now, Holloman turns to the left and goes back to the old 7 ranch back there, but it's this narrow neck part in there. 8 And, as a matter of fact, once you hit that corner, Buster, 9 you go back to the left, it's only 25 foot. And that's 10 Kitty Cowden and them gave that. And the lady that owns 11 that property there will not give anything; we've tried -- 12 attempted in the past. Our position is that if this -- this 13 was -- has already been there, and for the County to go and 14 condemn something and set precedents, I just think that 15 we're going the wrong way. I would like to think that the 16 citizens in that -- in that association could purchase more 17 right-of-way and then come to the Court with something, and 18 then we would look at it. But to set precedents, our 19 position is we don't think we should. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you have two 21 options; homeowners purchase the land from Mrs. Bauer, or 22 Mrs. Bauer, out of the kindness of her heart, give you 20 or 23 30 feet, whatever. 24 MR. ODOM: Whatever it needs. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that would answer 6-23-03 34 1 it right there, if we could just get "X" amount of feet from 2 here all the way around to the curve to the entrance, and 3 it's done. 4 MR. ODOM: We've put all the road that we 5 could possibly put in there to be safe. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think in this -- from a 7 precedent standpoint, what they're outlining is exactly 8 what's been done county-wide in the past. I mean, there are 9 many situations where additional right-of-way, people -- I 10 mean, the roads need to be, you know, tweaked a little bit 11 from a safety standpoint, and the County recognized that. 12 And if the people are willing to give the right-of-way, the 13 County was willing to do the legal work to accept the 14 right-of-way. But I don't know that we've ever -- at least 15 in my precinct, we've never condemned to get the additional 16 right-of-way. 17 MR. ODOM: On something that's already set a 18 precedence over, you know, many years. I mean, it's not 19 something that just came up in the last couple years. It's 20 been something that's been there since that subdivision went 21 in. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think what I'm 23 hearing you say, just so the residents understand clearly, 24 if they acquire the right-of-way or get Mrs. Bauer to give 25 the right-of-way, then we would do the legal work to receive 6-23-03 35 1 it. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What Mr. Odom has 3 said -- has told the owners is that if we'll -- we can get 4 the right-of-way through one of those two means that you 5 mentioned, we will widen the road. 6 MR. ODOM: And we'll make it up to the 7 standards that we've got, that meets the road back there, 8 and I have no problems with that. But for us to go in and 9 condemn the land and to do that if it's not given, I don't 10 think we need to set precedents doing that. But I would 11 like, if there's any other questions, to have the County 12 Surveyor to say what he's found. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom -- Mr. Odom, I'm not 14 that familiar with -- with the property on the ground. It's 15 been a while since I've been there, but I heard a comment 16 from the surveyor that these fences are up to and adjacent 17 to the right-of-way. Do we have any -- any growth over into 18 the right-of-way, in terms of shrubs, trees, or anything 19 like that, that it might be helpful to trim back and at 20 least give the perception to a driver that it's -- it's 21 wider than it is, and maybe get them to drive closer to the 22 outside edge? 23 MR. ODOM: Well, there's a -- there was a 24 complaint about vegetation, and we cut that. And, to my 25 knowledge, there hasn't been anything else, but we've gotten 6-23-03 36 1 in there to cut that vegetation back within the last 30, 40 2 days, I guess, and we've addressed that. Anytime we have a 3 complaint like that, we normally respond and put it into the 4 system to try to get to. But it has a curb on one side. 5 That curb's been there since I've been here, for 12 or 13 6 years, and that's on that north side of that fence. And the 7 other one's an old wooden fence that's -- as a matter of 8 fact, I think that gentleman's even laid out the corner 9 there. They've had accidents up in the front right there. 10 As far as a rash of accidents, I don't recall that on any of 11 the reports that I received up in there. Maybe there hasn't 12 been anything filed. But I -- we'll be more than happy to 13 let Lee -- I asked Lee to be here to substantiate what he 14 found on the ground. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the thought of -- the 16 thought of condemnation, I don't like that thought, taking 17 people's property away from them, anyway. That's not a good 18 neighborly thing to do. Plus, my understanding is that it 19 would cost you in legal fees. I mean, you go out and buy 20 the lady's property, almost, compared to -- you know, I 21 mean, if you just -- just the legal fees on condemnation. 22 It's not the right way to go. Mr. Motley is very, very 23 hesitant about moving in that direction. So, to me, that 24 takes -- that takes that option off the table. Lee? You're 25 up, buddy. The highest vote-getter in all of Kerr County 6-23-03 37 1 right there. Unopposed for how many centuries? 2 MR. VOELKEL: Too long. I don't know that I 3 can tell you any more, other than what you see is what you 4 get as far as that right-of-way's concerned. As they have 5 said, there's fences on both sides of the road. Those 6 fences are basically right-of-way, property line. Whether 7 there are any trees or things of that sort that's inside the 8 right-of-way, Judge, I -- I didn't address that, so I don't 9 know how to answer that one, other than the fences are 10 basically on the property line, and we have a very narrow 11 right-of-way there. And the research I've done, I can not 12 find any dedications for that road, but I'm with 13 Mr. Baldwin; I think that road came about long before the 14 plat did. It was added to the plat. I don't think it's a 15 part of it, as far as dedicating anything. Just to show it 16 as Holloman Road and their access to go through the road. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody have any further 18 questions of the surveyor? Thank you. Appreciate it. 19 MR. WEST: Judge, can I make one more 20 statement? 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, Mr. West. 22 MR. WEST: What we would like to see -- and 23 I, as a surveyor, would like to see is for Mr. Voelkel and 24 his field crew to go out there and find the property -- 25 corners of the property on both sides of this road in 6-23-03 38 1 question, bring it together and actually determine what's 2 left in the middle. That would be the space we've got to 3 work with. There is questions now about whether it's 4 25 feet, 20 feet, 22 feet. I don't think anybody knows 5 exactly what it is. I would like to know. And if it's 6 25 feet, I'm pretty certain that that 25 feet can be cleared 7 so we'll have a safe driving condition. That's what I would 8 like to see happen out there. Thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the question I 10 have, and it goes back to something that Mr. Voelkel said, 11 if it's by prescription, it's difficult to determine exactly 12 what it is. 13 MR. VOELKEL: That would be a correct 14 statement, too. Yes, sir. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, kind of -- 16 prescription is kind of -- depends, I guess, where the 17 fences are, kind of. I mean, it's -- I mean, so many of the 18 roads in my precinct are by prescription. It may be it's 19 kind of wherever the old farmers and ranchers put the fences 20 a long time ago, and kind of where the road ended up being 21 is kind of where it is. It is where it is. So, I -- you 22 know, that's why I asked the question, is it a deeded 23 right-of-way, because then you can pinpoint it. If it's by 24 prescription, it may be 10 feet and it may be 50 feet. It 25 just depends on where the read is. That's kind of what you 6-23-03 39 1 have to work with. So, I think it's -- you know, to answer 2 Mr. West's question, it's difficult -- it's impossible 3 without a deeded situation to -- you know, to, like, point 4 four points out and connect the dots and figure out that's 5 the right-of-way. It doesn't work that way, unfortunately. 6 Now, if the -- if the people involved would deed the 7 right-of-way to the County, then we could -- there's 8 something to work with. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: I note in the -- in the 10 information that there are some references in the field note 11 descriptions to -- to the two tracts of land out there that 12 are describing not the right-of-way tract, but the tracts 13 apparently adjacent to the right-of-way, and which it -- 14 there's course and distances up to a so-called right-of-way 15 line of a public road. But, as Commissioner Letz said, if 16 there's -- if there's not some sort of an instrument by way 17 of right-of-way deed or -- or some sort of specific easement 18 or conveyance of a right-of-way that specifically describes 19 that, whether it be by separate instrument or by plat 20 itself -- and I don't think the plat that we're looking at 21 here related to Wood Trails Ranch -- while it may dedicate 22 the roads within the subdivision, this lies outside of the 23 subdivision; therefore, it cannot dedicate that road. 24 MR. WEST: That's right. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: But without having some sort 6-23-03 40 1 of specific dedication instrument on the road itself, as 2 opposed to adjacent property, up to an existing so-called 3 public road, what we're left with is a prescriptive 4 easement, and so what it is on the ground is what it is that 5 you get. 6 MR. WEST: Just like the surveyor indicated, 7 I'd like to find out exactly what it is on the ground. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: I think we've determined what 9 it is on the ground, according to what the surveyor has 10 indicated. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 25 feet is what the notes 12 say. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: What you look at, you go out 14 there with a tape measure, and that will tell you what you 15 got. What's being utilized as a roadway is the roadway. 16 MR. WEST: Like I said, though, I think you 17 need to get the south side -- the south corner of the 18 property on the south, the north corner of the property on 19 the north, bring it together, establish those points, and 20 what's left, that's the prescriptive right-of-way, whether 21 it's 25 feet or 20 feet or 22 feet or whatever. Then we'll 22 know what we've got. That's what a surveyor has to do, go 23 out and find the property corners and measure up to the 24 so-called roadway. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, yeah, up to the -- it's 6-23-03 41 1 pretty easy to figure out where the roadway is. Just go out 2 there and look, and if it's road, that's your roadway. If 3 it's not road, it's not the roadway. 4 MR. WEST: That hasn't been determined. Only 5 way to find out is to establish where the property lines are 6 of the property on both sides, and what's left, that's the 7 roadway. And what are you -- only way you're going to do 8 that is to come from the back corners of each piece of 9 property. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe your legal 11 interpretation and mine differ a bit, Mr. West. A 12 prescriptive roadway is what's actually being used for the 13 roadway. And even if it doesn't go all the way up to the 14 adjacent property line, that doesn't enlarge a prescriptive 15 roadway all the way to the adjacent property line, 16 necessarily. You might get the Supreme Court of Texas to 17 agree with you after 8 or 12 years of litigation, but my 18 background tells me that a prescriptive road easement is 19 what's actually being used as the roadway and the passageway 20 in question. So, I'm not -- I'm not sure that identifying 21 the parameters -- the outside parameters of the adjacent 22 property owners is going to give you what's left between 23 them as being the roadway. What's -- what a prescriptive 24 roadway is is what's actually being used for -- 25 MR. WEST: Again, what's there to provide 6-23-03 42 1 that safe driving condition? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: It may well be that with that 3 additional engineering information, you could go to the 4 adjacent property owners and get them to quitclaim anything 5 outside their property line. But, here again, you're back 6 -- you're back to square one of one of two options that Road 7 and Bridge has indicated they'd be willing to work with you 8 on to resolve the issue, if -- if that would, in fact, 9 permit you to gain additional space between the two record 10 ownership areas. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think my final comment 12 is that we can just ask Leonard to go out and look at the -- 13 see if there's anything more they can clear. You know, 14 that's about all we can do at this point. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's in good shape 16 now. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, let me ask you 18 a question in line with your statement. If -- let's say 19 that Mrs. Bauer decided to deed another 15 feet to the 20 County, so she's deeded -- we have deeded 15 feet, and then 21 we have 25 feet prescription. What happens with that? I 22 mean, that -- how would you deal with that, as far as County 23 ownership and maintenance and all that? 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the -- the public has 25 acquired a right of prescriptive portion. The -- the 6-23-03 43 1 additional 15 feet would be to the governmental entity, the 2 County, for the benefit of the public. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what we legally 4 really own is 15 feet? Or do we consider the 25 feet 5 legally owned? Which I do. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Well -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: By prescription? 8 JUDGE TINLEY: -- you do. Under the -- under 9 the terms of the law, it's a recognized doctrine in the law 10 that, in essence, gives the public ownership -- a right to 11 continue use of that. That right has -- has arisen through 12 the prescriptive and continuous use of that particular area 13 as a roadway. The right is in the public. Right's in the 14 public. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Best solution to 16 this dilemma right now seems to be to persuade Ruth Bauer to 17 give us another 15 feet of right-of-way, and then go in 18 there and widen that -- widen that road. How do we go about 19 that? Who's -- who works on convincing Mrs. Bauer that 20 that's the right thing to do? Me? I'll do that. Thank 21 you. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Yeah, I guess 23 it would be. I was thinking the homeowners of the 24 subdivision, but that's outside the subdivision, so it's 25 really up to us. And she's a very nice lady; I know her. 6-23-03 44 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Good. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. No further action? 3 We'll now move to the next item on the agenda, consider and 4 discuss an update on Mooney Airplane Company. I notice 5 Mr. Happy just joined us. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to introduce 7 the president of Mooney Aircraft, Nelson Happy, and I also 8 see in the audience Dave Pearce, the County/City Airport 9 Manager. So, Mr. Happy, thank you for coming to 10 Commissioners Court. And I've visited with him by phone and 11 just asked him to kind of give us an update on what's going 12 on at Mooney Aircraft. 13 MR. HAPPY: Great. Well, I'm glad to be 14 here. I was sort of scooped by the newspaper writing a 15 story over the weekend, so a lot of my thunder was taken 16 away, but it's always better to be here in person, anyway, 17 and be able to tell you from my heart what's going on and 18 answer any questions. Sometimes when you're dealing with 19 starting a company from scratch, seems like the progress is 20 slow, and yet when you -- in my situation, looking back to 21 this time last year, we had around 16 employees. The 22 company was basically shut down, and we were in the process 23 of planning and thinking about what to do with the company, 24 but we really weren't there yet. Now, a year later, we have 25 about 175 employees. We have a backlog of about 15 6-23-03 45 1 airplanes that have been sold, but not delivered yet, and 2 the company's back to normal in many respects. It's not 3 fully back to normal, but it's -- it's on its way. So, in 4 retrospect, looking back, that's a lot of accomplishments by 5 a lot of people in a pretty short time. 6 We had a tremendous benefit, though, because 7 we had some really good Mooney employees that have just been 8 waiting to come back to work. Nice thing about Kerr County 9 is that many of our employees are ranchers and farmers, so 10 they had other things to do while Mooney was shut down. But 11 they -- their love in their heart was still in making 12 airplanes, so they didn't go off to other cities or leave 13 the state, go somewhere else. Instead, they're pretty much 14 staying around home, waiting for something to happen, which 15 showed a lot of faith, I think, in the company. The thing 16 that I've discovered is that we are dealing with 175 Texans, 17 and these are people that are proud of their work. They do 18 a fine job. They're hard workers, but they're also very 19 independent. And managing 175 Texans at Mooney factory is a 20 challenge to management, and fortunately we have good 21 managers that are Texans themselves, know how to do it. But 22 I've been very impressed by the independence and the -- the 23 feeling of pride that our employees have in the company and 24 the product. 25 And I might just say a little bit about the 6-23-03 46 1 product, because that's the only reason we're in business. 2 A Mooney airplane is a four-place, high-performance airplane 3 made out of aluminum, principally. And our main competitors 4 who make similar size airplanes don't have as good 5 performance; they're not as fast, they certainly don't have 6 the range that the Mooney does, and most of them -- most of 7 our competitors are made out of a composite material which 8 hasn't been proven over time. Composites are -- are good. 9 They certainly have many advantages, but when it comes down 10 to knowing what will last, we know that metal lasts the 11 longest, and if a repair is necessary, metal can be 12 repaired, while many plastic parts cannot be repaired. So, 13 it's more economical, if a repair is necessary, to have a 14 metal airplane. 15 As the Mooney company has had a resurgence 16 and we've started selling airplanes again, the aviation 17 press has picked up on this and we've had some tremendous 18 publicity at no cost. For example, probably the biggest 19 aviation magazine is the AOPA Pilot magazine, and this month 20 in June, they featured our airplane on the cover and did a 21 four-page story with pictures about our airplane in a very 22 favorable light, and saying that it was the number one for 23 what it is, a high-performance, single-engine, 24 piston-powered airplane. I've had many, many calls from 25 pilots all over the world interested in buying a new Mooney 6-23-03 47 1 and talking about the company. People tell stories about 2 Mooney. It's a legend. I think today it's the only 3 airplane made in Texas. And although San Antonio has a good 4 aerospace business, none of the companies in San Antonio 5 actually have ever, in recent history, made an airplane. 6 So, we here in Kerrville are doing something even in the big 7 city they're not able to do. 8 And, as a matter of fact, I've had calls just 9 in the last two weeks from major European manufacturers 10 interested in potentially having us do work for them here in 11 Texas, because they know the quality of the work we do, and 12 we know -- they know the capability of our plan. And in 13 history, Mooney's had a lot of international work. We are 14 the only company ever to team up with Porsche, for example, 15 in Porsche-Mooney. We teamed up with Aerospatiale of France 16 to develop the TBM-700, which is the premier turboprop, 17 single-engine airplane. We teamed up with the Japanese in 18 building a Mitsubishi MU-2. So, it's nothing new for Mooney 19 to be working with foreign companies, and of course, Mooney 20 itself has been owned in the past by foreign companies. So, 21 we work in a little bit more of a plane than is just totally 22 local; we are working on international projects. We've also 23 sold two Mooneys this year in -- one in Germany and one in 24 France, and we expect international sales to resume. They 25 used to sell about 15 airplanes a year internationally, and 6-23-03 48 1 that was pretty much shut down under the prior management, 2 but we're emphasizing again getting back into international 3 markets. We've opened a distributorship in Mexico and one 4 in Germany, so we should start seeing more international 5 sales happen. 6 Having said all that, that doesn't mean we're 7 finished or everything is perfect or that it's all -- all 8 the hard work is behind us, because that just isn't the 9 case. The company is moving toward having the assembly line 10 work in a normal fashion by September. We've had to work 11 off a lot of partially completed airplanes that were in 12 inventory at the time we took over the company a year ago. 13 And the problem of shutting down an assembly line and then 14 restarting it is that every plane that wasn't finished now 15 has to essentially be hand-built, because the assembly line 16 isn't running. So, each of our airplanes is built more like 17 the Rolls Royce used to be than a mass-produced product. 18 And that is good for the customer, it's good for the 19 airplane, but it's lousy for profits or our shareholders, 20 and only until we get running in a normal assembly line are 21 we going to see that the company's going to achieve a 22 reasonable level of profitability. 23 From another standpoint, we're a public 24 company; our stock is trading over the counter. We've been 25 catching up on all our financial reporting, and it's now 6-23-03 49 1 current with the S.E.C. And that has been a big job for 2 Rich Lucanatti, our controller, and Jim Price, who is in 3 charge of our accounting for our parent company, these 4 people who are kind of unsung heroes. They don't turn a 5 wrench or make anything, but they make it possible for to us 6 comply in a very difficult legal environment for a small 7 company. So, we're really hoping that by the late fall, 8 we'll have our assembly line running normally, we'll have 9 our sales back at a pace of seven -- roughly seven airplanes 10 a month, that we'll have delivered all of the backlog of 11 airplanes that we have and will have created a new backlog, 12 and that the employment in the company will probably be 13 around 200 employees. Today it's around 175. We expect 14 that we'll probably be adding 25 more employees over the 15 next few months. Ultimately, total employment may go to 250 16 as situations normalize. 17 One thing we have emphasized is that we are 18 interested in quality first, and air safety and quality are 19 hallmarks of what we do. We don't compromise in those 20 areas; we make sure that every plane that's finished goes 21 out as perfect as it can be, and we're always putting 22 emphasis on improved quality control and modernizing our 23 ways to make high-quality products, because that's the key. 24 We can see down the line, after we normalize our operations, 25 there's certainly opportunity for dealing with international 6-23-03 50 1 companies, for doing assembly work, to do other things in 2 our factory. We have about 415,000 square feet of available 3 space. It's not all efficient. Some of it is old, some of 4 it is obsolete, but much of it is quite usable. We've had 5 great support from the City and the County in our 6 applications for some grants and low-interest loans from the 7 State of Texas, and I understand that those applications are 8 moving along very well. 9 We've had tremendous cooperation and support 10 from the Airport Manager and Airport Authority, and we 11 really view that as critical to our existence, because 12 without good management of the airport and without a lot of 13 cooperation from it, it would be impossible for us to do 14 business. We particularly like the fact that we have an 15 uncontrolled airport, so we can take off and land when we 16 need to. We do have a lot of test flights. Every airplane 17 is flown 10 to 12 hours in tests before it's signed off and 18 delivered, so you can imagine, that's a lot of test flying 19 and a lot of access to the airport. I think that the 20 improvements that are going on at the airport are really 21 very desirable. We've been working hard to deal with some 22 environmental issues and infrastructure issues at the 23 airport, and I think we're making really good headway on 24 those. Part of our grant application is to do some 25 infrastructure improvements with respect to our sewers and 6-23-03 51 1 waste disposal systems, as well as paving and parking. 2 We are a public facility. We do lease the -- 3 the facility, and partly from the County, partly from the 4 City, so we want to be good stewards of the property that 5 we're leasing. I know we will be back to discuss with the 6 County and the City an extension of our lease. There's 7 approximately 11 years left on it. We would like to extend 8 it to a total of 30 from now. That will assist us in 9 getting some additional financing. So, that's something 10 that is in the planning stages, but we will be dealing with 11 you in a formal way of telling you what we have in mind and 12 discussing that, and I expect that that will be coming up 13 very shortly. Probably in the next week or so, we'll have 14 some proposals about extending our lease at the airport. 15 Obviously, we have to work closely with the Airport Manager 16 and lay all this out as a -- as a long-term plan. But I -- 17 my basic feeling about the company is that, 50 years from 18 now, there'll be somebody else standing here talking to some 19 other group of Commissioners about Mooney, and we'll still 20 be making airplanes and they'll still be number one of what 21 they are. 22 The tradition of Mooney goes back 50 years. 23 I'm sure that Al and Art Mooney, 50 years ago, expected the 24 company to last this long. They put together a good product 25 that's evolved over the years, and it's been very, very 6-23-03 52 1 successful overall, and I expect that that tradition will 2 continue. And, interestingly, in general aviation, which is 3 now in the lowest point financially in my life, it's the 4 toughest economic conditions in history for general 5 aviation, yet we're still able to generate sales, generate a 6 backlog, and see interest. Partly, this may be due to the 7 fact that we were shut down for a while, and so there was a 8 pent-up demand, but nonetheless, that's very important, I 9 think. So, I think that we have made a lot of headway in 12 10 months. I'm proud of the work force that we've been able to 11 rehire. I'm proud of the product that we make, and I think 12 our long-term is good. I think we've tried to be good 13 neighbors and encourage our employees to get active in civic 14 affairs and county affairs and city affairs and things that 15 they can do themselves to help the Mooney image in the 16 community, because we do think community involvement is 17 important. Our focus hasn't been as much on community 18 involvement as it has been to just get our business back 19 running, but I expect that you'll see more activity on our 20 part as that objective is met. So, I hope that gives you a 21 pretty good overview, and if anybody has any questions, I'll 22 be happy to answer. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't have any 24 questions. Of course, my big concern is our citizens that 25 -- that work for you. 6-23-03 53 1 MR. HAPPY: Right. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And do everything we 3 can to take care of our people. That's what makes this 4 thing work, you're absolutely right. Talking about 5 integrity, people of integrity. 6 MR. HAPPY: Right, that's the key. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good folks. Thank you 8 very much. 9 MR. HAPPY: Great. My pleasure. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Appreciate very much you 11 coming. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Happy, we appreciate you 13 being with us, giving us this report. 14 MR. HAPPY: Great. Thank you. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Look forward to working with 16 you some more. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I do have a question. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm shocked. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What makes the Mooney so 20 great? What makes the airplane -- what is so different 21 about -- you mentioned body, but, I mean, how does it become 22 the best? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That tail fin. The 24 tail fin. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In five minutes or less. 6-23-03 54 1 MR. HAPPY: It was just a good design. It 2 started out good in the 50's, and it was before the time of 3 computer design. Art Mooney was a genius, and Al Mooney 4 too. They both were extremely -- sort of Wright brothers 5 type people that had new ideas and fresh ideas. By the time 6 the airplane evolved into the '80's, there were people like 7 Roy Lapresti, who was an expert in aviation performance. 8 Again, these are seat-of-the-pants people. They weren't 9 computer guys, but they knew what made an airplane fast, so 10 they were able to take a great design, speed it up by 11 eliminating drag and weight in the airplane, and they 12 focused on speed and range. They didn't focus on useful 13 loads, so as a result it's a relatively small airplane in 14 terms of capacity for seating; it's only four-place. But 15 most of our customers only fly with themselves and one 16 passenger at the most, so weight isn't a big important 17 factor for them. But, by reducing the total weight and by 18 having the least air resistance and a good ratio of power to 19 the overall weight of the airplane, it's able to give 20 exceptional performance. And it's amazing to see how many 21 competitors we have with big companies; Piper, Cessna, 22 Beech. They've never been able to make a product that has 23 performed so well. 24 In addition to that, because it's been around 25 so long, all of the opportunities to improve it have been 6-23-03 55 1 thought out, and all of -- there are maybe 10 or 15 more 2 ideas that we're working on now that we can upgrade. Most 3 of the things that a design could improve with have 4 happened. So, we've had the benefit of a lot of years of 5 experience with the design and building of the plane, so 6 it's been improved over a long period of time, whereas many 7 other products haven't. I think that's helped. In 8 addition, it's just one of those products that evolved due 9 to genius, and can't be replaced. It's unique in that 10 sense. And we've taken the basic air frame, the design, and 11 made three models out of it. The least expensive is now 12 called the Ovation 2, and then the middle one is Ovation 13 2-DX, and the fastest airplane is the Bravo DX, and we 14 expect that we can tweak all of them a little bit more and 15 get a little more performance out of them. But I think the 16 bottom line is just the uniqueness of the original design. 17 And then, in addition to that, I feel that the metal -- our 18 metal construction is helpful too, because we have a good 19 weight ratio. Composites tend to be heavy. And so we have 20 a lighter airplane as a result of that. I hope that's -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 22 MR. HAPPY: Quick explanation. I'm sure an 23 engineer could do better. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wouldn't understand the 25 engineer, though. Thank you. 6-23-03 56 1 MR. HAPPY: Thank you very much. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Mr. Happy. 4 Thank you, Mr. Pearce, for being here as well. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a timed item on the 6 agenda that we're late getting to, but it's now that time, 7 so at this point we will recess the Commissioners Court 8 meeting and call to order and convene a public hearing 9 concerning the abandoning, discontinuing, and vacating of 10 545.16 feet at the end of Dickey Road out in Precinct 4. 11 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:18 a.m., and a public hearing 12 was held in open court, as follows:) 13 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Public hearing is now open, 15 and any member of the public who wishes to speak with regard 16 to this particular issue, why, I would ask that you please 17 feel free to come forward. Is there any member of the 18 public that wishes to speak with regard to the abandoning, 19 discontinuing, and vacating of 545.16 feet at the end of 20 Dickey Road? Not seeing anybody indicating they wish to be 21 heard on this, I will close the public hearing, and I will 22 reconvene and call to order Commissioners Court meeting and 23 take up the item immediately following the public hearing. 24 (The public hearing was concluded at 10:19 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court 25 meeting was reopened.) - - - - - - - - - - 6-23-03 57 1 JUDGE TINLEY: That is the abandoning, 2 discontinuing, and vacating of 545.16 feet at the end of 3 Dickey Road. Mr. Odom. 4 MR. ODOM: In the past, we have met with Doug 5 Evans, and Commissioner Nicholson went out to the property. 6 I see no problems. We discussed the cul-de-sac, I believe, 7 the last time we were in court, and what we proposed. We 8 went out in the field, and Doug Evans agreed to that. And 9 I'll let him address anything else after me, but we have no 10 problems as long as that is followed through, and I would 11 make this abandonment contingent upon that cul-de-sac being 12 finished like we proposed. And I think that will help that 13 piece of property and allow people to turn around without 14 getting in other people's driveways. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody have any questions of 16 Mr. Odom? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The way I understand 18 it, coming off of Highway 27, there is a -- I don't know how 19 much of Dickey Road -- that is going to stay a County- 20 maintained road? 21 MR. ODOM: Right. Yes, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It provides access to 23 a home or two? 24 MR. ODOM: I believe that there's two homes 25 or three homes there. Doug? 6-23-03 58 1 MR. EVANS: There's four homes. 2 MR. ODOM: Four. There's several residents 3 there, but what we're doing is going to the back end of 4 this. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 500 -- 6 MR. ODOM: To the 6 acres, I believe, is 7 platted back there, from memory, and that will end at the 8 far end of that property, and that cul-de-sac will turn 9 around there. We had concerns because of the narrowness of 10 Dickey Road, of people getting down there and having to back 11 up and tearing up fences or whatever if there was a gate. 12 And I think this will circumvent any problems we would have, 13 but it would not affect any of the residents up there. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Evans, anything 15 you want to say? 16 MR. EVANS: No. Just that we -- like 17 Mr. Odom said, that we agree to do the cul-de-sac to the 18 specifications of Len. And -- and we'll go forward with 19 that. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In my view, this is 21 a -- this is a good move for the County and for Mr. Evans, 22 and with the construction of the cul-de-sac, that won't just 23 accommodate anyone, so I propose that we -- that we approve 24 abandoning, discontinuing, and vacating 545.16 feet at the 25 end of Dickey Road, contingent upon Mr. Evans' completing 6-23-03 59 1 the cul-de-sac. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second -- third. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's made and seconded 5 that we abandon, discontinue, and vacate 545.16 feet at the 6 end of Dickey Road in Precinct 4, contingent upon a 7 cul-de-sac there being constructed upon specifications and 8 in the manner as approved by the Road and Bridge Department. 9 Any further discussion or questions? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was raising my hand to 11 vote. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, 13 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 does carry. Thank you 18 very much, Mr. Odom. 19 MR. ODOM: Thank you. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Evans, we appreciate you 21 being here. 22 MR. EVANS: Thank y'all. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go ahead back and pick 24 up 1.5, consider budget amendment to transfer funds from 25 Workers Comp to Contract Fees. Mr. Odom? 6-23-03 60 1 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Last year, when the 2 budget was set, there seemed to be an excess of funds placed 3 in Workmen's Compensation. Today, I -- when we put this 4 together, we looked at how much outlay we had and what the 5 estimate was for our workmen's comp. Talking to Tommy this 6 morning, we feel comfortable -- I had asked for $35,670.84. 7 That was excess that we felt like was in there. But, 8 talking with Tommy, there may be mitigating circumstances, 9 but I need -- I would ask the Court -- and Tommy can talk 10 about this, but he agreed that $20,000 would -- I could take 11 out of that Workmen's Comp and put into Contract Fees. I 12 have three more months, and I assure you, my budget is very 13 distraught at this time. Flood damages have really hurt us. 14 We have completed the NRCS, which we're still awaiting funds 15 from that. Hopefully this week I will meet with them to 16 finalize that project. 17 We have one project left in FEMA, and that 18 has been $500,000 to $600,000 outside our budget. Of 19 course, 75 percent was paid by those entities, FEMA and 20 NRCS. The other 25 was in-kind for the County, whether it 21 was actually materials or whatever, hours by man. But our 22 budget's -- we've been trying to survive, and that's what 23 I'm trying to do here. It's not anything -- I just -- three 24 months and one week still left before the new budget, and I 25 need material for patching, whatever may transpire in those 6-23-03 61 1 next three months, so I'm asking that that $20,000 be 2 shifted out of Workmen's Compensation. I feel comfortable 3 that -- talking to Tommy this morning, that that will be 4 sufficient. He feels comfortable with that number. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Essentially, what you're 6 asking for is just a budget amendment within your own 7 budget? 8 MR. ODOM: Within my own budget. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Of $20,000 from one category 10 over to another? 11 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Doesn't change the 12 budget whatsoever. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of 14 transferring $20,000 from Worker's Compensation to Contract 15 Fees -- 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- in Road and Bridge 18 Department. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 20 approve budget amendment for Road and Bridge Department to 21 transfer $20,000 from Worker's Compensation to Contract 22 Fees. Any further questions or discussion? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I do have a question 24 related to this. Leonard, out of the -- well, due to the 25 flood, I know that we've -- we had some court orders, you 6-23-03 62 1 know, authorizing if you needed the money, we'd basically 2 find the money. Did we have -- have we ever transferred any 3 money actually into your budget to make up for the flood 4 damage? Or -- 5 MR. ODOM: I have had a line item, FEMA, and 6 we've been plugging those numbers in there. I am probably 7 in deficit on that one. The $104,000 is what I had with 8 NRCS, actual outlay of money, and we have not received 9 anything there. I'm not quite sure if they function the 10 same way that FEMA does. I was hoping I had some excess 11 funds, but I've done it cheaper than what they estimated, 12 and so I'm -- I won't know until this week whether I will 13 get excess funds above that. That was $113,000, so there's 14 only $8,000 or $9,000 extra that we -- that I could use if 15 they paid me what they proposed to pay me. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- I mean, but in a 17 -- I mean, there's obviously -- there's a budget increase 18 because of FEMA, NRCS, other funds coming in, but outside of 19 those funds, we haven't transferred any money into your 20 budget? 21 MR. ODOM: No, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: From the general fund or 23 from flood -- 24 MR. ODOM: To my knowledge, we haven't. 25 We've -- I've been working off those line items, trying to 6-23-03 63 1 hold the budget without -- just making it work, and I think 2 y'all can see that as you look at the bills. I've been 3 trying to balance it and not ask you for anything. So, 4 that -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought that was the 6 case. I was just wondering. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that includes two 8 truly major projects, larger than normal in this county; 9 Sheppard Rees, and, of course, the bridge down at -- at 10 Jon's place. That he stayed in budget and worked very hard 11 and moved some things around and made it work. And with 12 all -- with all that -- you know, and those are -- I know 13 the Sheppard Rees project was -- is a little larger than 14 what we normally do, so he -- I mean, he tiptoed on ice to 15 get that thing pulled off, and with all that in mind, he's 16 still doing an excellent job with his budget. Excellent 17 job. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: The flood moneys, you -- you 19 put out the work and used the materials, and it's 20 after-the-fact that you get reimbursement for those, if I 21 understand correctly. Isn't that -- 22 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. They -- they will re -- 23 they estimate a cost to repair the damage, and if it didn't 24 hit a certain amount, they didn't give me anything, you 25 know. So I had to repair a lot of things this year that I 6-23-03 64 1 didn't get any money for, so it was excess -- you know, the 2 budget's been really tight. But they reimburse me 3 75 percent of this estimated cost of -- to complete that 4 project, and I have to supply 25 percent and for in-kind, 5 whether it's equipment, manpower, or actual materials that I 6 put in there. So, I have to tweak it. It's -- 7 JUDGE TINLEY: But the point is, you go out 8 on the hook first before you ever get any reimbursement. 9 MR. ODOM: Right. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, okay. 11 MR. ODOM: That's the reason that line item 12 was in there, and it was a deficit. Then FEMA came back 13 with money they projected to give us. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I appreciate your 15 efforts. Any further questions or discussion on the motion? 16 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 17 hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Let's see 22 if we can't get the next item in right quick. Consider 23 merit increases. That, again, is one of your items, 24 Mr. Odom. 25 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Which item was that, 6-23-03 65 1 Judge? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Number 6. 3 MR. ODOM: 1.6. In July we had, of course, 4 our floods of 2002, and I've had a lot of people, but 5 predominantly it was in Commissioner Letz' area and 6 Commissioner Williams' area where most of the damage was 7 done, and I had four people. We completed that, and I would 8 like at this time to ask -- I know it's outside normally, 9 but we've looked in our budget, and I have four people I 10 think have really worked hard. I don't -- I have Doug 11 Koennecke and Steve Kraft. Deter Geurin helped me down in 12 the river. He's helped move stuff around, hauled -- been 13 down in the river; we made that bridge work. And Truby has 14 been in with me since the day it started, just two of us in 15 working the floods and putting this book together and 16 working with FEMA and doing everything she's done. 17 What I'd ask the Court is a 2 and a half 18 percent increase. I have it in my budget. What -- and you 19 asked me how. I've had some retirements and attrition. And 20 out of that, I can give this -- this increase without 21 affecting my budget whatsoever. And I've also figured it 22 into next year's budget, along with longevity and 23 certification and cost-of-living increases, and I've already 24 submitted that to the Judge, and it all balances. It's not 25 one penny more. As a matter of fact, it's only 2 and a half 6-23-03 66 1 percent increase, compared to the 5 percent that was asked. 2 I think we've done a real good job, and I think it's an 3 opportunity to show some people that we appreciate what 4 they've done. And I ask the Court to allow me to do that by 5 June the 30th, in the next pay period, and to give them that 6 2 and a half percent increase without affecting anything, or 7 no increase. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I have a problem 9 with it from the standpoint of out of budget cycle, and 10 things of that nature -- you know, you and I discussed this 11 briefly. 12 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is no question that 14 you're right, that certainly the three out in the field, 15 Douglas, Deter, and Steve, worked very long hours, did -- 16 did things in their -- you know, things that -- probably 17 Deter more than the rest, 'cause he operated equipment 18 that's clearly beyond what we normally in the county 19 operate. I trust that they all earned overtime pay based on 20 the hours they worked; at least I hope they were, but I just 21 don't know how we can give an increase without a -- I guess 22 a job description change that justifies it. I think if we 23 do that, we get in a situation of just basically throwing 24 the Nash study and any other salaries that we've done out 25 the window, because you're, all of a sudden, because of a -- 6-23-03 67 1 you know, a unique situation, someone that did additional 2 job functions, on a permanent basis. I've racked my brain 3 to see if there's any way to -- maybe to provide some 4 additional compensation, which is probably the best 5 "attaboy" that the County can do. They certainly deserve an 6 "attaboy" for what they've done, but I don't know how do you 7 that, and that's my dilemma that I have. I mean, it's just 8 how we can do this with the County policy. But I agree with 9 you that those individuals clearly -- most of it was in my 10 precinct. Way above their normal job responsibilities. I 11 just don't know how we recognize that. 12 MR. ODOM: Well, I respect your opinion. Of 13 course, I differ. The Nash study was to place people in a 14 position that they were, and I'm not asking to get outside 15 the Nash study. I'm asking to take something that I have. 16 I wouldn't ask for this -- 'cause I couldn't do it if I 17 didn't have some retirements which were at higher pay and 18 that reduced it back down. I just think that it's there. I 19 don't know if a pat on the back and an "attaboy" is enough. 20 Sometimes it is. But if it's there, I think it's my 21 responsibility to try to help my people. I mean, everybody 22 would love to have one. I think these four individuals 23 are -- truly have put a lot of time and effort into it, to 24 help the county. And that flood was as good as -- as great 25 as the '78 flood. It took two years. We're coming out in a 6-23-03 68 1 year. And a lot -- a lot of big work was done, and you know 2 that. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 4 MR. ODOM: But I would ask you to consider 5 it. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got -- I got a 7 question I think the County Treasurer can answer, Ms. Nemec. 8 Actually, I got several questions. Is it correct that -- 9 that the Local Government Code bars us from giving bonuses? 10 MS. NEMEC: That is correct. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In our -- in our 12 policies, do we have a -- do we have a policy about granting 13 merit increases? 14 MS. NEMEC: The policy -- our policy on 15 granting merit increases is that they have to come before 16 the Court to be approved. It doesn't state that it cannot 17 be done during a budget year or that it has to be done 18 during the budget process. It just says that we have to 19 come before the Court to get it approved. And I think -- 20 looking at it from the outside in, I think the only thing 21 that you all need to be concerned about, and I've said this 22 before to other courts, is that because a department has 23 money to give merit increases, and then if somebody else 24 from another department comes to you and says, "My 25 employee's done a great job. I don't have the money in my 6-23-03 69 1 budget," but they've done a great job, just because that 2 department doesn't have the money in their budget, you're 3 discriminating against that employee if you don't give it. 4 So, it's kind of like you -- there has to be a policy to 5 where you're going to take for granted the work -- 'cause a 6 lot of times, like the Road and Bridge, you see those 7 employees and you can vouch for them, what they have done, 8 but if another department upstairs comes to you from 9 wherever, you're not in there; you don't know and you can't 10 back them up as much. So, it's just something that has to 11 be decided amongst you all. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: My third question 13 is, have we granted merit increases in the past? 14 MS. NEMEC: Yes. Yes, there have been 15 exceptions in the past. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm supportive of 17 this request, because I think it does a lot for the -- for 18 the department. I think it motivates employees by showing 19 that good work and hard work's appreciated. And also, I've 20 generally seen and believe that we're not paying our people 21 quite enough, that we need to find a way and we need to pay 22 County employees more than we're paying them now. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: I have some recollection of a 24 merit increase request coming before this Court last year, 25 and the response of the Court at that -- at that point -- 6-23-03 70 1 the merit increase message was, well, I've got the money 2 already in my budget, so it will not require any increase in 3 my budget. The Court's response, according to my 4 recollection at that point, was that if you've got the money 5 in your budget, you know, we really don't have much say-so 6 over it, or words to that effect, and the merit increase was 7 permitted. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't recall that 9 exactly. I do believe -- I mean, the prior Court, meaning 10 the -- basically, when the budget was put together with 11 Judge Henneke and the Court approved it, there was a policy 12 of giving elected officials leeway in their budget to kind 13 of adjust salaries a little bit, as I recall -- and we 14 actually have enough elected officials in the audience that 15 can correct me. In your -- I mean, some of that, like, you 16 were given a 5 percent increase that was kind of to do with 17 whatever you wanted, as I recall, or some amount. 18 MS. UECKER: That's a totally different 19 subject. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that was part of -- 21 but that was one thing that was done. On the -- I don't 22 recall the Court ever giving a merit increase without a job 23 description that changed, that justified the increase. I 24 mean, I think -- and we did do that, but there was a change 25 in job description. And, you know, whether that was, you 6-23-03 71 1 know -- 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think it -- 3 MS. NEMEC: May I say something? A merit 4 increase really -- 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just a second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Hold up. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: May be just a matter 8 of semantics, Mr. Letz, but if there's a change in duties, I 9 see that as different than a merit increase. By definition, 10 a merit increase says, through your job performance and 11 energy and all that, you've earned a larger -- larger 12 salary, where a job description increase says we're asking 13 more of you or requiring a higher skill level or something 14 like that. That's probably just semantics. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Reclassification, as it were. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. Go ahead. 17 MS. NEMEC: And normally you go up with a job 18 description reclassification, not -- not across. Across is 19 merit, and that is for -- used for giving -- for exceptional 20 duties. I believe it was a good four or five years ago when 21 the Court did some merit increases in the middle of the 22 budget year. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the past four or five 24 years? 25 MS. NEMEC: Yeah, it's been a long time. 6-23-03 72 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're affecting 2 future budgets. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: I understand that. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Number one. And 5 that's -- that's a dangerous road to get on. I just -- you 6 know, I agree with you. These guys -- I was there part of 7 the flooding as well, and trying to answer your telephone, 8 and these guys were way beyond the call of duty. But I 9 just -- I can't go along with allowing an increase in the 10 middle of the budget process -- I mean in the middle of the 11 budget year. Certainly, we'll consider it in the next month 12 or so in the budget process, including it in that. But 13 today, I -- today I'm not going to be able to support it. 14 Nothing against these people. They're great people. 15 MR. ODOM: But may I interject something? 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. 17 MR. ODOM: That I -- you know, I agree with 18 you; if I had a change in the budget, if I was going to 19 affect this year's budget and have a long-term effect over 20 next year, I wouldn't be asking for it. But what I've done 21 is be able to -- to give this increase and still not 22 increase anything next budget year. The one I've submitted 23 does not affect it a bit, Buster, and I'm still 2 and a half 24 percent under net -- under what was proposed with the 25 increases. I mean, I'm -- we're really -- it doesn't affect 6-23-03 73 1 my budget. If it affected it, I wouldn't come to you. I 2 wouldn't ask you to do this. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you telling me 4 that -- it has to work one of two ways. Next year, you 5 would take out that 2 and a half percent -- 6 MR. ODOM: It's already figured into the 7 budget. It's already figured in what I gave the Judge. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But that increases the 9 budget by 2 and a half percent for future years. 10 MR. ODOM: Well, sir, but the increase was to 11 have been for 5 percent. I only increased the total budget 12 for crew salaries 2 and a half percent, and I'm not at 13 5 percent. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know a thing 15 about your 5 percent, but you're transferring money from one 16 line item to another line item. You're decreasing one by 2 17 and a half and increasing one by 2 and a half. When we get 18 into the future budgets, that 2 and a half will be in both 19 lines. That increases the budget. 20 MR. ODOM: Well, let's see if I -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll tell you 22 something just as important, though, is there are -- one, 23 two, three, four -- five elected officials in here that I 24 would be willing to guess that they're wanting to do the 25 same thing. 6-23-03 74 1 MR. ODOM: Well, then I -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not trying to be 3 unkind or anything. I'm just trying to speak reality here, 4 that it will affect the taxpayers' pocketbook a pretty good 5 chunk. 6 MR. ODOM: Well, what was projected by the 7 Treasurer, I'm less money than what she projected, what you 8 sent out to start the budget. I didn't -- we're not 9 affecting the budget. We're reducing what was projected 10 over 2 and a half percent, but for next year. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You'll have to sit 12 down with a pencil and piece of paper and show Buster. 13 MR. ODOM: I'll be more than happy to. But 14 that's what I'm saying; I really am not affecting this 15 year's budget whatsoever, because of Danny Smith and Ray 16 Cook. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand this 18 year's. 19 MR. ODOM: This year's. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the one year, right 21 now. 22 MR. ODOM: The way I figured this, if the -- 23 this rolled right on into it, I still save money by giving 24 these increases. I've still reduced it probably $4,000 25 that's excess, okay? Maybe. 6-23-03 75 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me say it a 2 different way, Mr. Odom. Next year, these four employees' 3 salaries will continue to be 2 and a half percent more than 4 they would have been had we not -- if we took this action, 5 but your total payroll for these work crews will -- will 6 increase less than the guidelines for next year? 7 MR. ODOM: That's right, sir. That's exactly 8 right. What the guidelines are given, we're less than those 9 guidelines with this increase. 10 MS. NEMEC: May I explain why that happened? 11 'Cause I know, Buster, you're wondering if it's going to 12 impact at 2 and a half percent in the next budget year, how 13 is it -- you're wondering where that increase is going. 14 It's because the employees that he had that retired were at 15 a step and grade that is way up here, and next year 16 they're -- that -- when they left, that grade went to a one. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So when you replace 18 them, it goes back to one. 19 MR. ODOM: That's right. 20 MS. NEMEC: Exactly. 21 MR. ODOM: So we figured all that in. I 22 figured everything in, and I reduced the amount that was 23 projected, and we're less money -- I'm not costing the 24 taxpayers any more money. Longevity, I'm still saving 25 money. And that met the guidelines. 6-23-03 76 1 MS. NEMEC: When I had projected the position 2 schedule for next year, those people had not effectively 3 gone, so I projected them at that rate that they were in. 4 MR. ODOM: That's right. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's an interesting 6 concept. I'm going to have to give that some thought. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I guess my 8 final word on this -- and I'm not willing to take action 9 today, but I'm not closed totally to it, either. I mean, 10 and I think and the reason is -- I'm seeing Commissioner 11 Nicholson nod a little bit -- I agree with what he said 12 early on, in that we need to figure out a way to, I guess, 13 reward excellent performance by employees so we can keep 14 them. But, at the same time, we have to be able to do this 15 on a county-wide basis in a policy, and have it -- you know, 16 not have long-term or drastic long-term budget impact. And 17 what I -- you know, and if any elected official or 18 department head is able to come up with a way that works 19 throughout the county, where we can, you know, I guess, get 20 more done, become more productive with either the same 21 people or fewer people, we need to figure out a way to 22 reward that. And that's kind of what we did here. We got 23 more work done during this flood because of some -- and 24 saved the County money; there's no question in my mind that 25 these individuals, you know, saved the County 20, 30, 40, 6-23-03 77 1 $50,000 by doing a lot of this work themselves, as opposed 2 to contracting it out. So, there's clearly -- we did save 3 money here because of excellent performance, but we need to 4 figure out a way to get that into our policy. If we can 5 figure out a way to do it so all departments can benefit, I 6 can be in favor of it. I just can't -- I need a little more 7 time to figure out how to do it, maybe come up with some, 8 you know, guidance. Maybe Dave and I can talk a little bit, 9 and elected officials, because I think it is a good 10 direction to try to take the County to do things like this. 11 I'm just not sure how we do it and not have -- you know, 12 really get out of control budget-wise down the road. So, 13 it's kind of a -- not today, but maybe. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me see if I understand 15 correctly. I'm told, and I'm going to take it at face 16 value, that any merit or equivalent-type increases must be 17 approved by the Court. But, on the other hand, I'm -- it's 18 been indicated that no such merit increases have been 19 requested or approved in the last four to five years? Is 20 that what I just heard a moment ago? 21 MS. NEMEC: In the middle of the budget year. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: In the middle of the budget 23 year. Ms. Nemec, what occurred in your situation last year? 24 MS. NEMEC: Last year, that was during the 25 budget process. And during the budget process, if you don't 6-23-03 78 1 go over your bottom-line figure, then you're able to give a 2 merit increase, as long as you don't go over the bottom-line 3 figure. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: I see. And the effective date 5 of that increase? 6 MS. NEMEC: Was October 1. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: That was -- 8 MS. NEMEC: October 1. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Okay. And how 10 long had that employee been with us at that time? 11 MS. NEMEC: She was here a year this 12 February, so -- eight months. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- are you 15 finished, Judge? 16 MS. NEMEC: I don't know what difference that 17 made, but eight months. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the other thing 19 that, you know, we commonly have done on the merit side in 20 the past, we have pretty much -- when it was requested, when 21 we have had someone retire and we've brought somebody else 22 back, there was somewhat of a -- I mean, the grade was set 23 somewhere -- not always at a one. I mean, it was felt that, 24 to get a person, we needed to hire someone at a -- you know, 25 a 15/5 because -- and justify it because of experience. 6-23-03 79 1 That has been done. So, we have -- I don't want to say 2 arbitrarily, 'cause it clearly was a rationale and a reason 3 where we have adjusted the merit side of the step and grade. 4 So, there is precedent for doing it in those situations. 5 And if -- it enters into a whole thing that I really need to 6 get my thought process around, is to -- you know, I guess 7 for an example, say some of Leonard's people went and got 8 experience on new equipment that we didn't -- they weren't 9 able to use before, didn't know how to use before. How do 10 we regard that? Right now we don't have a way to increase 11 their -- in the policy. It's not just Leonard. If, you 12 know, someone goes and -- on their own time, not paid for by 13 the County -- gets experience in certain computer processing 14 that enables them to do their job better, and should that 15 person not get a merit increase for that? You know. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We do that. We do 17 that -- almost do that with the Sheriff's Office. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, the Sheriff's 19 Office, we do. They get educational -- you know. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Educational increases. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: I guess the point where -- the 23 defining point that I'm hearing now is that, as long as 24 you're within budget -- as long as you're within budget, the 25 elected official or department head can make whatever 6-23-03 80 1 adjustments that that elected official or department head 2 wants to make for a budget year on the basis of merit. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't think 4 that's what's we've -- I mean, I think the Court has always 5 made those -- made those calls, and once it's done, it's 6 there forever for that employee. So, I think that there's 7 a -- it has -- I don't -- it has been done occasionally, it 8 seems now, during the budget process. 9 MS. NEMEC: Another thing the Court did, 10 whether it was this year or last budget year, last year, 11 was -- and it's not -- it wasn't anything about merit, but 12 basically it's the same thing, is everybody's supposed to 13 enter at a Step 1. If a person has more experience than 14 entry level, then the elected official comes to the Court 15 and asks if they can come in at a higher step, and that has 16 been approved also within the last year or so. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Mrs. Uecker? 18 MS. UECKER: Historically, I think this -- 19 the Commissioners Court has always been very, very reluctant 20 to give merit increases, period. You know, the only way 21 we've been able to do it in the past is during the budget 22 process, if someone has retired and you bring someone in at 23 a lower -- the entry scale, we've been able then to use that 24 money to give to the people that are going to take their 25 places. But as far as giving merit increases generally, 6-23-03 81 1 I -- I can only remember that happening one time. And it 2 was a great idea then, and I've always said it was a good 3 idea, is in addition to the cost-of-living, a 2 and a half 4 percent merit increase to be distributed as that elected 5 official chooses. In other words, if you want to give one 6 person 5 and the other one nothing, that's fine. But as 7 long as I've been an elected official, since 1987, that's 8 only happened one time. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would say we don't 10 have a merit increase program. 11 MS. UECKER: No, we don't. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Doesn't sound like it. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what was I was 14 thinking. That one time, that was maybe three, four years 15 ago, it seems. 16 MS. UECKER: It's been about -- been about 17 four or five years ago, actually. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was on the Court. 19 MS. UECKER: It worked very well, because the 20 Court did not -- they cannot and should not have any say 21 into which employee gets a merit increase. But if you've 22 come -- and say, Leonard, this year you've got 2 and a half 23 percent to do with as you like. He may wish to give one 24 person, you know, 7 and a half and nobody else get anything. 25 But the call is his based on how he knows his employees 6-23-03 82 1 perform. But, historically, this Court -- I mean, there has 2 been all but that one time, no merit increases. 3 MR. ODOM: Sounds like I'm trying to set a 4 precedent here. I guess so. I -- to me, you know, 5 mathematically, financially, it -- it works. It is a 6 savings. It is less money than what I have -- what I'm 7 spending right now because of these retirements. And next 8 year it doesn't affect it at all. 9 MS. UECKER: Many of us have done what he's 10 wanting to do now. I mean, I've done it, but it's been 11 during the budget process. 12 MS. NEMEC: And that's what I did last year. 13 MR. ODOM: If I knew -- 14 JUDGE TINLEY: That seems to be the 15 demarcation line, is you -- you plug it in planning for a 16 new budget year. Did you have something you wanted to say, 17 Sheriff? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I -- Linda hit on it 19 pretty close, and that is that the County really never has 20 had a good merit increase deal. And what Jonathan's talking 21 about, studying it and looking at it, I would think it would 22 be more -- we all have, like, an overtime line item in our 23 budget for people that have to work overtime. Why stop 24 there? And I don't know if it's even possible that each 25 department head be given so much money at the beginning of 6-23-03 83 1 the budget process to use for merit increases, because a 2 merit increase, to me, is not just a one-time -- and 3 Leonard's guys, I'm sure, deserve it, but it's not just 4 something that occurs because they did a fabulous job there 5 one time. It's an overall. They're -- in the -- in kind of 6 the spectrum of those job duties, they're all the way up at 7 the top, doing -- hitting everything fabulously, instead of 8 being the low one on it. 9 (Cell phone rang in the courtroom.) 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You'd better -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Get Judge Ables down 12 here. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But if they were given 14 in proportion to how many employees they have or whatever in 15 their department, a certain amount that the department head 16 could then use for merit increases during that year. 17 MS. UECKER: And that would impact -- 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. 19 MS. UECKER: -- other budgets. 20 MS. NEMEC: What happened when that policy 21 was in place, though, is, like, the departments that only 22 have one employee, like, for instance, mine and County 23 Judge's, they were only given 2 and a half percent, and so 24 they only had 2 and a half percent to give that one 25 employee. Whereas the other departments, they get a larger 6-23-03 84 1 portion, and if they chose not to give three of their 2 employees merit increases, but they were able to give one 3 employee three merit increases, so that didn't really work 4 either. 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think it goes along 6 the same lines as the educational/longevity. The Court can 7 then limit the number of merit increases per employee per 8 year. If it's just one, and it says that you can't give one 9 employee more than a 2.5 percent merit increase in a year. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think this is something 11 that -- it's a good discussion. I really think that it 12 needs to be part of the budget, and I think the -- you know, 13 as part of our budget, we go through the personnel policy 14 and all that, as well as all -- kind of all lumped together. 15 And I think it's good. I think it's -- clearly, in my mind, 16 we need to reward our better employees. I think -- I don't 17 want this to be a situation where you're paid based on your 18 number of years and that's it. I mean, it's a job for life; 19 you get paid whether you do a good job or bad job. We need 20 to have a policy that our better employees get paid more. 21 MS. UECKER: Well, I don't think -- well, at 22 least in my office, that doesn't -- you know, I don't do 23 the -- how many years you've been here. But -- and I think 24 because of the step and grade and where we put those people 25 determines, you know, more what you were talking about. You 6-23-03 85 1 know, pay the good ones a little bit more. That goes to 2 responsibility. But the -- the County has never really had 3 a merit -- merit -- a really true merit increase program. 4 MR. ODOM: But this is what I'm asking for, 5 is a true merit. So -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's get back to the 7 issue of today. Leonard, with your explanation of what -- I 8 did not understand what you were doing -- 9 MR. ODOM: I should have put it on paper a 10 little bit better, but I -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- totally before we 12 came in here. 13 MR. ODOM: -- thought maybe y'all saw the 14 budget. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But you have moved me 16 somewhat over towards you, and I can see where there 17 possibly may be three votes here to do that. But I'm -- if 18 you would like to bring it back in the next meeting and try 19 it again -- and, I mean, I want to think about it. I want 20 to think about it and I want to talk to these elected 21 officials and get counsel from them and -- and the Treasurer 22 of how this thing really works and all that. But I -- I 23 will reconsider it. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Did Mr. Williams 25 give me his proxy? No? That's a good proposal, 6-23-03 86 1 Commissioner. 2 MS. UECKER: I think -- I mean, I'm not -- 3 Leonard's probably doing the right thing, but, you know, I 4 could do the exact same thing. What it's allowing is using 5 retirement -- you know, retired employee money to give merit 6 increases. And although that's the only out we've had, it's 7 the only way he's got to go, that's really not the way it 8 should be. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, but that -- that 10 issue needs to be dealt with in policy, though. In a policy 11 setting, not in here dealing with Leonard's people. 12 MR. ODOM: In this instance, I'm not going 13 that way. I'm going with the fact -- the way that I have to 14 do it, it works. You know, I have no other option to do 15 this right here. I could care less what the -- you know, 16 what the elected officials are talking about here. That's 17 fine for them, but at this point, this time on this earth, 18 I'm talking about this merit increase for these people. And 19 it does work, sir. 20 MS. UECKER: Except that you're going to be 21 setting policy. And, you know, I'm for it, but I'll be here 22 next month. 23 MR. ODOM: Well, then you have the funds to 24 do that, I'm sure. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Is there -- 6-23-03 87 1 MR. TOMLINSON: I have a comment, just a 2 brief one. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: We've got a, quote, merit 4 increase program, but we don't, quote, have a merit increase 5 program. 6 MS. UECKER: Right. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: But I think there needs to be 8 some -- some sound, logical policy where you pay for 9 performance -- for superior performance, and that's why you 10 -- that's why you are able to retain good employees who are 11 performing at the top of their game, as opposed to just 12 run-of-the-mill individual. And we want to keep those 13 people. 14 MR. ODOM: I want to keep that -- and some of 15 these people will be coming up for retirement soon, and 16 they're young. I want incentives for me to keep them. 17 I've -- I've lost probably 30 years experience when Danny 18 and Ray Cook left. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thirty years each. 20 MR. ODOM: Yeah. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any formal motion to 22 be offered on this? If not, we'll stand in recess until 23 about 10 after. 24 (Recess taken from 11:00 a.m to 11:10 a.m.) 25 - - - - - - - - - - 6-23-03 88 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I'll call the meeting 2 back to order. Next item on the agenda is consideration and 3 discussion of request for approval to purchase a laser 4 printer from Office Max for $249 from remaining $1,730 5 Operating Equipment item, to be used in County Court at Law 6 section. 7 MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, this is just a budget 8 amendment within my own budget. I have the money. I would 9 just like to request to purchase a printer, and we have a 10 little thing from Office Max that shows we can get one for 11 $249.99. However, Shaun informed me this morning that, for 12 whatever reason, Software Group doesn't like the Brother 13 printer. So -- but I would like to request the money to 14 purchase a printer. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Up to $250? Is that 16 what you're saying? 17 MS. PIEPER: Yes. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Software, Inc., 19 doesn't like Brother? 20 MS. PIEPER: Supposedly it can't be networked 21 or something. I'm not real sure what the deal is. He was 22 going to call and check on them, and that was this morning, 23 and he hasn't got back with me. So -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this a replacement? 25 MS. PIEPER: No, this is an additional 6-23-03 89 1 printer, because I have three other deputies that are 2 sharing this one printer, and in the County Court at Law 3 section, they have to do mass mailouts every week for 4 notices of hearings and motions for continuances and all of 5 that. So, trying to share one printer, it's just delaying 6 their process of getting all this work done. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Buster, you had 8 mentioned $250. We had to replace one -- two of ours during 9 the year, and I think we did get them at Office Max, a laser 10 printer, and they're running closer to $600 for a good one 11 that will work with the network, we had to go with. I don't 12 know what it was. Tommy, $650 or something like that? It's 13 going to be more than $250. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wasn't questioning 15 the amount. I mean, I was questioning -- how much do you 16 want? 17 MS. PIEPER: Well -- 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the court order, we 19 need to have a specific number, in my opinion. 20 MS. PIEPER: I have $1,730 left in this line 21 item. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You try to ask her how 23 much she wants. 24 MS. PIEPER: So, I'll -- so I would like 25 $700. (Laughter.) 6-23-03 90 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it's your money. 2 It's your employees. You do what you want to do. 3 MS. PIEPER: Well, but I'm having to come in 4 to court because this was not a budgeted item. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's also a capital 7 expenditure. 8 MR. TOMLINSON: No, it's not. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, it's not equipment -- 10 MR. TOMLINSON: It's under $1,000, so, in the 11 original budget, that -- that item would not typically be 12 listed in the budget anyway. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 14 MR. TOMLINSON: So, the account that she's 15 taking it out of is not a capital expenditure item. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So she doesn't need to be 17 making this request of us? Is that what you're telling us? 18 MR. TOMLINSON: That's actually right, it is. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See ya. 21 MS. PIEPER: I was always told if it was not 22 a budgeted item, that I needed to come to you. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under $1,000, it can come 24 out of Operating Equipment. If you're trying to buy it out 25 of Salaries, you have a problem, but Operating Equipment, it 6-23-03 91 1 can come out of there. 2 MS. PIEPER: Okay. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Solved that problem. Next 4 item, consider and discuss a review and report from 5 third-party administrator on pending reimbursement for claim 6 paid by Kerr County on behalf of employee. Mr. Rothwell. 7 MR. ROTHWELL: I'm here. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: There you are. 9 MR. ROTHWELL: Got up here before you looked 10 up. I'm Ray Rothwell. Commissioners and Judge, thank y'all 11 for inviting me back on this subject again. We have now 12 filed and received, in my opinion, probably all the funds 13 we're going to get from the reinsurance company on this -- 14 on this claim. As you know, there was about $400,000 15 transferred from a reserve account of some type, and I'm not 16 really sure what type, and we have received slightly over 17 $200,000 back, leaving $200,000 outstanding. The final -- 18 the final appeal and response to that appeal from -- on my 19 company's behalf was that, due to the nature of the 20 procedures on the 5th of September -- and I guess you'll 21 recall that this person was in the hospital, transferred to 22 a transplant unit about the 3rd of -- about the 29th of 23 August, and on the 5th of September, there was a device 24 implanted or hooked up to a device that was -- was totally 25 set to continue the -- the life's blood flowing for a period 6-23-03 92 1 of time until the transplant procedure was actually 2 completed. 3 The reinsurance carrier, under their 4 insurance contract, believes, and I think I tend to agree 5 with them at this point, that the 5th of September was the 6 magic date that they would pay through, and they have paid 7 through that date. From the 5th to the 11th, or to the -- 8 when the transplant -- when the procedure was actually done, 9 it was strictly a life support system that was -- that kept 10 this person living, waiting on the -- on the procedure. 11 There was -- and we kept going back. There was a variety of 12 things happening during that 5th to 11th. There was some 13 diabetes control management. There was some other life 14 systems necessary to be -- to be supplemented. Their 15 opinion has come back, and we've had a third party look at 16 it, and the opinion came back that, yeah, there was diabetes 17 problems and there was this and that, but it still was a -- 18 they were on this support system that -- that, had they 19 turned it off, there wouldn't have been a need for anything 20 else. 21 So, I think the -- the County has about 22 $200,000 that we had hoped to get the majority of back. We 23 are apparently not going to be able to. I have discussed 24 with the Judge some -- some options that I would like for 25 y'all to discuss amongst yourselves, and at some point come 6-23-03 93 1 back with a recommendation to the Court on how we want to 2 proceed with that. And I think that's probably the end of 3 my report, unless there's some specific questions. And, 4 under the circumstances, I'd as soon not be real specific. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I'm confused. 6 And I don't want to get into specifics of this case. So -- 7 and a transplant took place after -- at some point, correct? 8 MR. ROTHWELL: Yes. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, if an employee, you 10 know, gets injured and gets put under some sort of life 11 support waiting for some other procedure, as soon as they 12 get put on that life support -- 13 MR. ROTHWELL: No. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- they no longer have 15 insurance coverage? 16 MR. ROTHWELL: No. This particular procedure 17 has -- has forever had a $250,000 maximum benefit with it. 18 That's not true with -- with cancer or other kinds of 19 procedures, but with a transplant of any type, the County's 20 plan has always had -- it's one we inherited at E.B.A. 21 We've asked a few times, do we want to change any of the 22 benefits. We've talked specifically on one occasion about 23 that one. We've never changed that benefit. It only 24 relates to transplants, and there's a specific $250,000 cap 25 on that benefit. 6-23-03 94 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are there -- I have no 2 idea. I mean, is that a reasonable maximum for transplants? 3 MR. ROTHWELL: Yes, when it's handled 4 properly through a transplant network, it is. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's that mean? 6 MR. ROTHWELL: Well, it means, like, in our 7 program with the County, we have Lifetrack Transplant 8 Network, and Lifetrack is a large transplant network -- 9 P.P.O., if you will -- that has fixed rates all over the 10 country. At Johns Hopkins, at Baylor, at Anderson, at 11 Stanford, they've got fixed rates for varying kinds of 12 transplants. This happened so quickly and in such a short 13 time period with someone that was not on a transplant list 14 to start with, that Lifetrack did not have the ability to 15 enter into that. The reinsurance company actually uses 16 Lifetrack also, but the procedures were so rapid and did 17 unfolded so rapidly that my company actually didn't know 18 about the transplant until the 10th, that it was -- that the 19 transplant was going to take place. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the other 21 question is, and the root of the -- from a dollar 22 standpoint, why wasn't the Court told this in December? 23 MR. ROTHWELL: Well, I think the Court was 24 told that, that -- that we felt like we would get a large 25 percentage of the money back. We've ended up getting about 6-23-03 95 1 50 percent of it back. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, there's -- I 3 mean, it seems that it's pretty -- I was under the 4 impression that there was a strong likelihood of getting 5 most of it, if not all of it, back. And it seems that the 6 -- because of the transplant rule for this procedure, 7 whatever, that it would be real obvious way before December 8 that this was going to be the maximum the County was going 9 to be able to get back. 10 MR. ROTHWELL: We felt like, when we -- when 11 I made that presentation, and again at the smaller meeting 12 that took place prior -- prior to that happening, that we 13 would. We -- we had talked to the reinsurance company, and 14 we felt like we would get the majority of it back, based on 15 -- at that point in time, our understanding, we thought that 16 this -- this piece of equipment was being used from the 9th 17 forward. That was the early report that we got. When we 18 got all the records and started really looking at them, he 19 was put onto a support system on the 5th, about 10 o'clock 20 in the morning, and we were going under the impression that 21 that -- that all happened on the 9th. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean -- 23 MR. ROTHWELL: And we felt like we would get 24 paid through the 9th. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, as I recall, this 6-23-03 96 1 came through in December. And, I mean, certainly we would 2 have records, or should have records on this type of an 3 expenditure, in a two-month period. 4 MR. ROTHWELL: We frequently don't get claims 5 in -- the full claims in and all the records that we request 6 within 90, 120 days. When we start requesting details from 7 hospital providers, that's not over the line. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I suspect that you would 9 get that very quickly if they weren't going to get the 10 money. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Rothwell, I came 12 into this issue in the middle of it, so I probably don't 13 have the background the others do. What is your role here? 14 MR. ROTHWELL: We are the T.P.A., 15 administrator of the County-sponsored plan. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So -- so you're -- 17 you're representing us? You're not -- 18 MR. ROTHWELL: Yes. We don't represent the 19 insurance company, we represent you. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. So, I -- I'm 21 also ignorant about insurance, so help me out here a little 22 bit. 23 MR. ROTHWELL: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One, I'm -- I'm 25 surprised about two things. I'm surprised that I could run 6-23-03 97 1 up a medical bill that would be underpaid by $200,000, and 2 that the provider would be looking to me to pay $200,000 in 3 addition to my county insurance. And I'm also surprised 4 that -- that my employer, Kerr County, is out $200,000 after 5 having purchased an insurance policy. And can you help me 6 with those two? 7 MR. ROTHWELL: I'll try. First off, this 8 claim was slightly under a million dollars; it was $982,000 9 or something like that. As I said, it unfolded rapidly. It 10 was one of those -- it's one of those rare things that -- 11 that one thing led to another to another to another. You 12 know, it's very infrequent that a person gets a transplant 13 of that type without being on a list for a period of time, 14 and this person was not. Now, to address the insurance 15 plan, Kerr County uses a -- what we call a fully funded 16 self-insured plan. Rather than going out and buying an 17 insurance policy from -- from Allstate or Blue Cross or 18 someone, we go out and we shop and we buy the reinsurance. 19 And in the County's case, it's set at $50,000, and we have 20 the ability to -- to structure the benefits under that kind 21 of a plan, kind of the way we want it to be structured, and 22 we can add benefits or delete benefits or change benefits 23 as -- as you go along from one year -- you know, at renewal 24 time. It allows an employer a lot of flexibility in 25 designing the kind of plan they want. The $250,000 6-23-03 98 1 transplant benefit, handled appropriately, in my opinion, is 2 still more than 80 percent of most transplant costs. The 3 costs related to this particular one was just astronomical, 4 not particularly related to the transplant, but all the 5 things that happened during that period of time were deemed 6 to be related at the time. I do know that -- that the -- 7 the estate -- or I'm led to believe that the estate is not 8 being chased for the balance of the money, around $600,000 9 or so. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I understand that if 11 I -- as a county employee, if I got caught up in these same 12 set of circumstances, somebody would be trying to bill my 13 estate for either $200,000 or $400,000? 14 MR. ROTHWELL: If you -- yes. If -- if, 15 under the same set of circumstances, and your estate had 16 some value in it that made chasing worthwhile. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: More than that. It would 19 be more like $750,000 they'd be looking for. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's scary. So, 21 then, the -- the only remaining question is, we -- the 22 Commissioners Court put the County at risk for over $400,000 23 that we didn't -- didn't have to? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We weren't required to do 25 it. 6-23-03 99 1 MR. ROTHWELL: Weren't required to. I think 2 the -- I personally think the decision the Commissioners 3 Court made at the time was a very good, very valid decision. 4 And I do think that -- that there is -- and I think that 5 Judge Tinley will hopefully discuss it with y'all, a method 6 of getting the majority of the money back, back into that 7 reserve account. 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. Thank you. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: It may be something that we 10 have to discuss in executive session because of potential 11 litigation aspects and so forth, but Kerr County was put at 12 risk to the tune of $400,000. 13 MR. ROTHWELL: That's right. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Kerr County has no legal 15 liability to pay that on behalf of the employee, correct? 16 MR. ROTHWELL: That's true. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: But we've gotten half of it 18 back, and we now stand out $200,000. 19 MR. ROTHWELL: That's true. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: That's where we are. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If I can make a comment, 22 the only comment I'd like is, on the September 5th to 23 September 10th, have you visited with the other employee 24 that this was -- that was involved in this to see if those 25 dates are really accurate? 6-23-03 100 1 MR. ROTHWELL: We know the dates are accurate 2 from the hospital records. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But, I mean, as far as 4 being a life support situation on that date to the next 5 time, I'm not -- I'm not positive. And I think the employee 6 that's still with us ought to be interviewed to see if 7 there's a different type of appeal on when that date was 8 going into effect. 9 MR. ROTHWELL: According to all of the 10 medical records, the -- the device that was used kept the 11 organ that was going to be transplanted operational. 12 Without that device, at 10 o'clock on the morning of the 13 5th, that that organ was gone. That's where the decision 14 was made. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I'm not so sure that 16 other part to that -- or agree to that, the way that all 17 went down. I was there too a lot of that time and during 18 that time, and I'm not -- you know, I'd just like to -- at 19 least the employee interviewed to see if there's an appeal 20 on that part of it as to those dates, 'cause that could get 21 back a lot of that other money. I'm not so sure that's 22 accurate. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it may well be that 24 Mr. Rothwell will want to talk to that individual that 25 you're referring to, Sheriff, and that -- that may be -- may 6-23-03 101 1 be another option that we have, as far as trying to pursue 2 the balance of the $200,000 that Kerr County was not legally 3 obligated to pay, but at this point is out. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: But I think, at this point, 6 the consideration of further avenues, we'll probably looking 7 at executive session because of the potential litigation or 8 other administrative legal recommendation aspect. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does what you're talking 10 about -- I mean, litigation -- all relate to what the 11 Sheriff is talking about? It seems to me what he's -- if 12 what he's saying is correct, there may be action the County 13 could take or employee could take -- or the employee's 14 estate could take against the hospital. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I hope the Sheriff has 16 somebody with some information to give the -- 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have no problem 18 setting up a meeting between Mr. Rothwell and that employee, 19 because I think hearing it from that employee -- you know, I 20 may be wrong. I'm trying to recall. All of that did happen 21 so fast and all of a sudden, but I don't think there was a 22 life support situation for a week. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: I'd be tickled to death to get 24 any leverage that we can, and I'll leave you gentlemen to 25 pursue that avenue. But as to if and how and when we go 6-23-03 102 1 forward, I think that's a matter that's going to have to be 2 -- we need to get the County Attorney involved and get into 3 executive session. Thank you very much. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you talking about 5 executive session today, maybe? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the County Attorney's 7 not here. And -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I recognize that. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: -- there wasn't a suggestion 10 of an executive session till just the last little bit. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Rothwell. 13 MR. ROTHWELL: Thank you. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item on the agenda, 15 consider and discuss an update on status of worker's comp 16 cost and claims. Ms. Nemec? I asked Ms. Nemec to be here 17 today because it's been brought to my attention that since 18 January 1, we've had had 26, I believe was the number, 19 quote, claims, unquote, that were filed under our worker's 20 compensation program, and I thought maybe we needed some 21 clarification as to if, in fact, these are claims in the 22 sense that they are pending claims or have been adjudicated 23 before the Workers Compensation Commission, or they were 24 merely the first notice of accident or injury or incident 25 reports required by our internal policies or whatever it is. 6-23-03 103 1 I just want to get a handle on where we were on that. 2 MS. NEMEC: I have a little printout here for 3 you. You can pass it around. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 5 MS. NEMEC: What this is here is just the 6 date of the injury and the department for where that injury 7 took place, the position, and then the type of injury. 8 These are claims that were filed in our office and have been 9 submitted to our worker's comp carrier. We tried to get a 10 report from them as to how many are ongoing as of last week 11 and what the dollar amounts were that were paid out for 12 these claims, and Jim Maddox' office was unable to give us 13 that because the quarter doesn't end till next Monday. And 14 so I'm -- 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who wasn't able to 16 give you -- 17 MS. NEMEC: Jim Maddox' office. They're the 18 ones that work with this. It's where we get those figures 19 from. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 21 MS. NEMEC: Anyway, so I can -- I can get 22 those figures to you Monday, but they were not able to give 23 us those figures. But this just kind of gives you a rough 24 idea on where the accidents are taking place and what kind 25 of accidents they are. But there are 26. 6-23-03 104 1 JUDGE TINLEY: So, at this point, we don't 2 know the cost that's been incurred in connection with these 3 claims? 4 MS. NEMEC: No, sir. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: And we don't know if -- are 6 these merely notices of injury, and we don't know whether 7 there were ever actually a claim filed with the Worker's 8 Compensation Commission? 9 MS. NEMEC: These are -- these are injury 10 reports that were given to our office, and then we, in turn, 11 turn around and file them with the Worker's Comp Commission. 12 Now, whether any money was paid out on them, that we don't 13 know till we get that report. But, more than likely, just 14 from hearing what's going on and helping people with these, 15 they more than -- they normally always go to the hospital or 16 a doctor, get some kind of treatment. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: You say these 26 represent 18 notice of an accident or injury to your office? 19 MS. NEMEC: As of January 1st. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: And you then refer the matters 21 to our worker's compensation carrier? Or to the Texas 22 Workers Compensation Commission? 23 MS. NEMEC: To -- to TAC. We report them to 24 TAC, to the -- 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. They underwrite our 6-23-03 105 1 worker's compensation program as Texas Association of 2 Counties? 3 MS. NEMEC: Right. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: So we don't know what 5 percentage, if any, of these have actually been filed as 6 claims with the Texas Worker's Compensation Commission, 7 then, do we? 8 MS. NEMEC: We don't know how many. I'm 9 certain there are several, because we're on the phone daily 10 with them from one employee or another, so I can tell you 11 that there's several of them -- 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 13 MS. NEMEC: -- if not all, just by the way 14 the phone calls come in on a daily basis. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Barbara, do we provide 16 worker's comp for all the volunteer fire departments? 17 MS. NEMEC: Yes, we do. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: All but one. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All but one. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If you'll indulge 21 me, I'm still working on my education here. Again, I'm a 22 County employee and I'm injured on the job, and I go to the 23 emergency room, get some treatment. Then I come down to 24 your office and fill out a form? 25 MS. NEMEC: Yes. 6-23-03 106 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do I -- I give you 2 any receipts? 3 MS. NEMEC: No. What they do is, when you 4 get to the emergency room, they'll call our office to verify 5 that that, in fact, was a worker's comp injury. If the 6 department has not called us to notify us that there is a 7 worker's comp injury, that the employee just hasn't made it 8 down to our office yet, if we don't have that notification, 9 then we need to verify with the department head that there 10 is an injury at the emergency hospital in order to verify 11 it. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you. 13 MS. NEMEC: What we do is verify that, yes, 14 they were injured on the job, whatever ones. We send all 15 the paperwork to TAC. Then they investigate the matter to 16 make sure that it does fall under worker's comp. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: These all go to the 18 emergency room? 19 MS. NEMEC: Not all of them. Not all of 20 them. Some might wait a day or two and realize that the 21 injury is worse than what they thought it was, and just go 22 to a regular physician. And then there's some that are 23 injured that have to go for ongoing therapy, and -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe I mentioned, 25 most of these look like they're not life-threatening. 6-23-03 107 1 MS. NEMEC: You'd be surprised what goes to 2 the emergency room. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that's where I'm 4 going with this, is that -- I mean, is it possible for the 5 County to contract with a clinic so we don't have the costs 6 of these people all going to the emergency room? 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I know it's -- I 8 know it's been done for other employers that I have worked 9 for. There's set doctors that they're to go to. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or clinics? 11 MS. NEMEC: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 13 MS. NEMEC: So that's all the info I can get 14 now. I can get you those figures when I get them. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson asked 16 you if the employee comes to your office and fills out 17 paperwork. Is that always the employee, or does it 18 sometimes come to your office as a notice of an accident or 19 an incident from the department or the supervisor, or does 20 it sometimes come to you that way and you never actually see 21 the employee? 22 MS. NEMEC: It sometimes does come that way, 23 and when it does, we'll notify our worker's comp carrier 24 that there has been an injury. However, we'd have to track 25 down that employee. That employee needs be to be the one 6-23-03 108 1 that fills out that report. In the past we've had someone 2 -- a department head that filled it out for an employee 3 before, and it was not accurate and we ran into all kind of 4 problems, so the policy is that even if it takes a week, we 5 have to track down that employee and go to their home, fill 6 out the paperwork with them or whatever, but it needs to 7 come from them. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, your arrangement 9 with Texas Association of Counties, through whom our program 10 for worker's comp is underwritten, is that you will get a 11 statement from the employee affected? 12 MS. NEMEC: Right. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And whether you get it 14 right away or a week or two later, whatever, but -- 15 MS. NEMEC: We just have to notify worker's 16 comp right away that there has been an injury. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. That's all 18 the questions I have. 19 MS. NEMEC: Thank you. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and 21 discuss the Post-Legislative Conference and State County 22 Judge and Commissioners Conference. Commissioner Baldwin? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I just 24 wanted to bring this to you gentlemen's attention, that 25 these -- these two conferences are coming up. The 6-23-03 109 1 Post-Legislative Conference is in August. They take money 2 to go to, so I just wanted to let you know that the -- if 3 you -- if you're intending on going to these things, you 4 need to find some money. I understand that the 5 Commissioners Court's travel line is zeroed out, and so good 6 luck there. The -- also, the legislative conference, I 7 don't think, offers educational hours anyway. It's more of 8 an informational-type situation. I have a call in to TAC 9 right now, and they have not returned my call as of break 10 time this morning, that -- what I'm going to request to do 11 is, when this conference is over in August, that they send 12 someone down here to Kerr County and to do a mini 13 post-legislative conference right here in Kerr County, and 14 invite the contiguous counties to come over, 'cause I 15 know -- you know, if we're broke, most of those other 16 counties are broke as well and not able to go to Austin to 17 see this thing. So, that's what I'm -- we're attempting, 18 and we've done that on a couple of occasions. I'm really 19 not sure whether they're going to be able to pull this one 20 off or not, but anyway, that's in the -- that's in the 21 makings. And then there's this other conference in Corpus. 22 That's in the new budget, and we'll have the opportunity to 23 pick up some -- the rest of our hours if we so choose. I 24 just wanted to bring that to your attention today. No 25 action needed. I'm ready to go to Item Number 13. 6-23-03 110 1 JUDGE TINLEY: That's what we'll do. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Good idea. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Consider and discuss status of 4 Kerr County's burn ban. Commissioner Letz. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just put this on the 6 agenda -- I know we're currently operating under the 90-day 7 burn ban, and with the amount of rain, it, to me, would make 8 sense just to cancel that burn ban, and if we want to go on 9 a new 90-day burn ban in mid-July, late July, we can put it 10 back on the agenda to do so. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When's this 90 up? 12 How far are we in it? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Since early June. 14 MS. SOVIL: August. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: August? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess we could leave it 17 on, too. It's just that -- either way. I just put it on 18 there so we can discuss it, 'cause I believe all of the -- 19 currently, county-wide, we're under a burn ban right now, 20 because they all expired last night. I just wanted to get 21 it on the agenda so we either extend them or cancel it. At 22 least I would extend mine. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Supposed to rain again 24 Thursday, by the way. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would make a motion to 6-23-03 111 1 cancel the current burn ban. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 4 cancel the current county burn ban. You're speaking of the 5 one, I assume, that was for a period of 90 days unless there 6 was some placement on or off by the individual 7 Commissioners? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: And you're just wiping the 10 slate clean? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can put a new one 12 back -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We can bring it back 14 anytime. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further discussion? 16 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 17 hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, on that, it may be 23 a good idea to put that on the agenda, you know, for the 24 next couple of months, you know, every meeting, so we can 25 act if we need to, so we don't get caught in a situation of 6-23-03 112 1 having to go to an emergency meeting again. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think that that's 3 the solution to my problem. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We just put it on. If 5 there's no action -- we can just put it as the last item on 6 the agenda. No action, we can go over it, but that way -- 7 'cause it can -- conditions can change rapidly, you know. 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think if KARFA 9 representatives were here, they would be urging us not to 10 take the burn ban off, leave it like it is. But if we go 11 the route you've suggested, that would, I think, satisfy all 12 concerned. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, and we can do 14 that. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and 16 discuss allowing the Water Education Task Force to place 17 temporary display in the courthouse. Mr. Letz again. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda 19 at the request of Charles Napper with -- he's in the 20 audience -- with U.G.R.A. W.E.T., Water Education Task 21 Force, is a -- a group of entities that have gotten together 22 in Kerr County, and primarily to promote water education. I 23 represent the County on that board. Commissioner 24 Nicholson's on there from a -- 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: West Kerr County. 6-23-03 113 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- west Kerr County 2 chamber standpoint. City, U.G.R.A., Headwaters, Riverside 3 Nature Center -- anyway, numerous groups are on there. And 4 working with them, U.G.R.A. has put together a display. 5 They would like to be able to put that display in the 6 courthouse somewhere. So, I'll turn it over to Charles 7 Napper from U.G.R.A. to explain what they have and what they 8 need. Charles? 9 MR. NAPPER: Well, currently we have a -- a 10 poster display; it's a tri-fold that's about 10 foot wide, 11 maybe 2 foot deep, that would stand up, and these posters 12 will actually Velcro on there to it. And each one is just 13 a -- has a conservation tip that can be offered to -- to 14 anybody that comes by and reads them. And they all offer 15 something different to someone else. Not everybody goes 16 about washing their vegetables the same way. Not everybody 17 leaves all their water running while they brush their teeth, 18 but they may leave their water running when they're washing 19 their car. So, I think it's important that we get these 20 conservation tips out there just for -- you know, sometimes 21 if you don't know, you just don't know. But if you're 22 willing to work anyway you can, best time to start 23 conserving water is right now, not when we need it. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The display is 10 feet 25 long? 6-23-03 114 1 MR. NAPPER: I believe it's about 10 feet. 2 It can be adjusted as far as how wide it is, but I believe 3 how it's set up right now, it's about 10 foot wide and about 4 2 foot deep. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Trying to figure out 6 where we have a 10-foot wall in the courthouse that we 7 could -- are there smaller -- is there a smaller version? 8 MR. NAPPER: I'm sure we can make a smaller 9 version. One of the things that we're going to be -- we're 10 talking about with the City of Kerrville is just actually 11 taking one or two posters at a time and just having them on 12 a rotation through City Hall over there, because they don't 13 have an area to hold the tri-fold. Riverside Nature Center, 14 we're just putting those on the display corkboard that they 15 have over there. And so, you know, not everybody's able to 16 maintain that -- that full tri-fold the way that -- that we 17 have an area over there at the Guadalupe Basin Center. So, 18 we can -- we can definitely work with y'all, and we can 19 figure out something to set it up. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thea, you had a comment? 21 MS. SOVIL: There's one spot, but there's 22 chairs. If we move those chairs from the -- this glass door 23 over here, I think that's more than 10 feet. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think it would 25 have much more of an impact for people to look at if you had 6-23-03 115 1 the full -- 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd like to get it 3 all there if we could. It's -- I think water education by 4 conservation is -- maybe it's longer-term, but it's one of 5 the keys to solving water problems. And I base that on 6 thinking about back in '70's -- you won't remember this, 7 Commissioner; you were too young, but we began educating 8 people about energy conservation, and much of it was 9 directed at children. Children would then educate parents 10 to turn off the lights. And I think that's had a 11 significant impact on that. And there are other examples. 12 So, while this probably is not earth-shattering, this 13 concept of trying to educate people, it can have a very 14 positive impact. We've got lot of traffic in here, a lot of 15 people hanging around waiting to conduct business, and 16 probably a pretty good spot for it. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only question 19 was -- I have a question and a suggestion. My question is, 20 how -- we're talking 10 foot or 2 foot deep and all that. 21 How long of a period of time are we talking about? 22 MR. NAPPER: That is up to you. However long 23 that the -- the Court feels that -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What are y'all going 25 to say? 6-23-03 116 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Month of July? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The month of July? 3 MR. NAPPER: And I know that Riverside will 4 be keeping it through -- Riverside Nature Center has day 5 camps going on this summer. One of the day camps started 6 this week, and I believe it lasts for the week, and then 7 another one starts in July sometime, and they'll have it for 8 that day camp also. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we should do it the 10 month of August, maybe? 11 MR. NAPPER: That might be better. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: July and August? Or just 13 August? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just August. August. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, Judge, if we run 16 out of room, I could also -- you remember how, back in the 17 olden days -- you guys would remember this -- probably back 18 in the early 1900's, how they used to wear those displays? 19 I could -- 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Sandwich board, we call them. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, sandwich boards, 22 y'all called them. I could wear this thing as I'm on my 23 patrol, the hall monitor patrol, and just kind of wear them 24 up and down the hallway if there's nothing else. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Why don't you come up here 6-23-03 117 1 and -- stand up, Buster, and let's see how these are going 2 to fit. I think they'll fit just about right. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can just kind of 4 stick them on my back. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, one on either side 6 there. I think it's about the right size. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May have to bend the 8 one on the front to kind of form, but -- well, I mean, I'm 9 just trying to offer my services. I'm here and I'm out 10 there, out there patrolling. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that 12 we authorize Charles Napper to work with Thea Sovil to find 13 a place in the courthouse to place this for the month -- 14 this display for the month of August. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. All 17 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 22 MR. NAPPER: Thank you. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item is consider and 24 discuss confirmation and reappointment -- 25 MR. NAPPER: I'd also like to say that, as 6-23-03 118 1 far as getting this set up, taken down, and if there's any 2 problems that you -- you're needing to have it moved or 3 anything like that, just contact me and I'll take care of 4 all that. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: You'll hear from Ms. Sovil. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Charles. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Charles. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and 9 discuss confirmation, reappointment of Sam M. Junkin as Kerr 10 County representative on the Board of Trustees at Hill 11 Country Community M.H.M.R. Center. I put this on the 12 agenda. I received notification from the -- from the 13 M.H.M.R. Community Center people that Dr. Junkin's 14 appointment was going to expire in August of this year, and 15 we are authorized one member of that board -- Kerr County 16 is. There's some counties that collectively have to agree 17 on one, but we're authorized one. I took the liberty of 18 calling Dr. Junkin to see if he would be willing to continue 19 serving. He indicated that he would. Dr. Junkin, as most 20 of you know, is the former chief out at Schreiner University 21 for many years, has been very active in this community in a 22 number of different capacities, and I think has really done 23 yeoman's service on this board, and I would urge that the 24 Court consider reappointing him for another two-year term. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 6-23-03 119 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Any discussion? All in favor 3 of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 4 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 6 (No response.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item, 8 consideration and discussion of the announcement of pending 9 retirement of Eddie Holland as Kerr County Extension Agent. 10 Mr. Holland, we finally got to you. 11 MR. HOLLAND: Finally. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Good to have you with us 13 today. 14 MR. HOLLAND: I wrote a letter to the Judge 15 and expressed my appreciation over the years that I've been 16 employed as the Kerr County Extension Agent. I started here 17 in -- in March, I guess, of 1982, and always said when I 18 started out that this was the county I wanted to come to. 19 And I'd been in extension about 10 years when I arrived at 20 my mecca, and I looked forward to it, working in this county 21 all those years, and it's been wonderful working with 22 different County Commissioners Courts throughout that time. 23 And it's always been interesting, Rusty, the different, you 24 know, complexion of the Court that I've seen along the way. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, yeah. 6-23-03 120 1 MR. HOLLAND: But they've all been very 2 supportive, and they've all had some big differences as 3 well. I know when I was hired back -- I guess it was 4 probably a February meeting, the district agent at that time 5 was Doyle Moore, and he brought me up here and he said, 6 "Now, don't be alarmed if they don't move that day to hire 7 you as the new county agent." He said, "This Court's a 8 little different." And they were a little different. And 9 we drove up that day, and, I mean, the parking -- remember, 10 this is '82 now, and this parking lot and everything around 11 here was packed. I said, "My gosh, is there going to be 12 this kind of controversy to hire me?" You know, and that 13 was -- you know, going back in time now, Buster that was 14 whenever they were deciding the spike buck deal. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah. 16 MR. HOLLAND: But I didn't know that, and 17 neither did Doyle at that time. And so they ushered us back 18 to the -- there was a little, small room in the back, and 19 they -- they stopped the court in here and they went back in 20 there and they hired me as the new county agent. But I 21 thought that was -- that was quite interesting, that time 22 when they did that. But, again, the Court has been very 23 supportive in all budget action throughout the years. 24 And -- and then Judge Denson was the County Judge when I had 25 some prodding along the way from Buster and from Thea about 6-23-03 121 1 aspiring to do some National Association ventures, and I do 2 appreciate, you know, their support and the Court's support 3 for the time that I've been gone, you know, doing this 4 National County Agent Association work. And I know it's 5 taken time out of the county, and we've had good staff pick 6 up the slack and do that, and I do appreciate what the 7 Court -- and everyone's efforts, so I just want to let y'all 8 know, and I'm sure that they will continue. 9 As you know, all of the state has been going 10 through budget woes as well, and they've had some cutbacks, 11 and that's why they're having this volunteer early 12 retirement. And I'm 10 months shy of when I would have gone 13 out anyway. And so, anyway, they offered this, and I'm 14 taking it. As I'm finishing up this National County Agent's 15 thing, it's a perfect fit; just kind of finish that. I only 16 had 10 months left, and they offered this, so that's why I 17 chose to do this. I'm sure that they -- you know, the 18 County, they recognize the importance of the Extension 19 Program in Kerr County, and I feel sure that they will, you 20 know, contact the Judge and -- and come up with some, you 21 know, plans for hiring a replacement for me. And I 22 suspect -- this is -- again, there's nothing official; I 23 don't know, but I suspect by September, they'll have someone 24 in here. That soon, they should. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Eddie, is that Darrell 6-23-03 122 1 Dromgoole that does that? 2 MR. HOLLAND: He's gone. It's now actually 3 Cheryl Mapston. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember her. 5 MR. HOLLAND: One of the budget things they 6 did was to consolidate. Rather than having two different 7 ones supervising the same district, they thought it would be 8 more cost-effective having one. And Darrell has been 9 supervising down in Corpus for the last year and a half, 10 anyway, with the retirement down there, so now Cheryl is 11 going to be over the Court -- over this -- this district. 12 Actually, they've moved kind of like, you know, y'all have 13 moved your regions. Now they've clustered Kerr County with 14 west, and it is now 6, which is El Paso, 7, which is San 15 Angelo, and our district has moved in with them, and they 16 call it the western region now. So, that's a cluster, and 17 so they have -- those three districts are together. And the 18 one that Darrell moved to is in Corpus, which is the south. 19 It's 12 and 11 and 9 or something, but they're -- they're 20 clustered down there. So -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Will Cheryl still be 22 out of Uvalde? 23 MR. HOLLAND: She'll be in Uvalde, and she'll 24 be, you know, serving, and she'll be the one that will be 25 the contact for the Court on that. 6-23-03 123 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. 2 MR. HOLLAND: Nothing's really changed on 3 that at all, but I just wanted to, you know, come and -- and 4 express my appreciation for y'all's support over the years, 5 and, you know, thank y'all very much. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Holland, what 7 are you going to do in retirement? 8 MR. HOLLAND: Well, assuming I can get my 9 house sold here, Dave -- you know, and my wife still has 10 four years left before she -- she's a teacher, and so she's 11 not giving up her contract here. She's going to do that. I 12 have a place -- a ranch in Llano County, and so I'm going to 13 -- I guess, as the old saying, you know, ranch when all the 14 money's gone. That's what I plan on doing, some of that up 15 there. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, good luck to 17 you. 18 MR. HOLLAND: Thank y'all. Like I said, I'll 19 still be around. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You'll still be 21 judging pig shows, one thing or another. 22 MR. HOLLAND: Coming around the shows in 23 Kerrville. That's still going to be our regional area to 24 come back to. 25 MS. SOVIL: Pecans. 6-23-03 124 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, pecans. 2 MR. HOLLAND: Oh, yeah, pecans. And I'll do 3 that, so -- 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Eddie, appreciate all 5 you've done. You've done a lot for the youth of Kerr 6 County, as well as for Kerr County, but especially the 7 youth. You've spent many, many hours, done a lot of good. 8 Appreciate it. 9 MR. HOLLAND: It was a lot of fun. We've had 10 a lot of success over the years. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate your service, 12 Eddie, and I know all the young people over the years have 13 benefited from -- from your efforts. And I know Kerr County 14 generally, by virtue of Eddie's involvement in the National 15 Association and holding that office there, has gained some 16 attention nationally. 17 MR. HOLLAND: It's been good. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate your efforts 19 there. Good luck and godspeed. 20 MR. HOLLAND: Thank y'all. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Muchas gracias. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and 23 discuss ratifying County Judge's signature on Memorandum of 24 Understanding with AACOG for Domestic Preparedness Funding. 25 This matter was held over from last time. That was the 6-23-03 125 1 traditional signature on the -- on the communications 2 trailer that -- that we sent down to AACOG. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we 4 ratify the County Judge's signature on the Memorandum of 5 Understanding -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- with AACOG for 8 Domestic Preparedness Funding. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second that motion. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 11 the Memorandum of Understanding for Domestic Preparedness 12 Funding be approved, and the County Judge's signature on 13 same be approved. Any further discussion or questions? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And this -- the 15 agreement, as I recall -- there was some questions about 16 costs to Kerr County and some unanswered questions at the 17 last meeting. All those have been resolved? This is not 18 going to cost Kerr County anything to accept the grant? 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Initially, it will not 20 cost Kerr County anything. And let me clarify that. There 21 is a meeting on the 1st of July at 9:00 in the morning that 22 I was invited to at AACOG where the committee's going to 23 actually put together the communications trailer and 24 what-all's actually going to be in it. They're all going to 25 be ordered at one time, five of them around this region. 6-23-03 126 1 They'll all be identical except for their capabilities. We 2 will be able to use it locally for anything we have going on 3 at any time we wish. We do own the trailer. We just agree 4 that, if possible, okay, if there's an event in San Antonio 5 or anywhere else in the region, that we would try and take 6 that trailer there if it's called on to be used. 7 Maintenance costs on the trailer -- on that trailer, as the 8 discussions were going, they said the -- I think they're -- 9 the grant is actually $80,000 for allotment for the trailer. 10 That's going to take care of everything on the trailer at 11 first that's needed. The County won't have to buy anything 12 or put anything into the trailer. Now, later on through the 13 years, you may have to replace tires on the trailer, you 14 know. You may have to replace a piece of radio equipment 15 that may go out in it or something like that, but it's 16 County-owned. It is a county trailer. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Five-year commitment, correct? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And there's a five-year 19 commitment on the trailer to the AACOG -- to this region. 20 Now, there was a lot of discussion, mainly about the other 21 type of trailer, on maintenance, because in this money that 22 was federally handed down, there is nothing in there about 23 maintenance. But, you know, when you get into the 24 decontamination trailers and the decontamination chemical 25 suits, all that kind of stuff, that ends up having a shelf 6-23-03 127 1 life, okay? Who pays to replace those? So the thought at 2 that meeting was the government will end up coming down 3 later with a -- a maintenance figure, at least for 4 decontamination, to replace equipment and that. Whether 5 they do it for the communications trailer, I would have no 6 idea. And, thank goodness, maintenance on communications 7 equipment is not near what it would be on the 8 decontamination. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we don't like our 10 experience with the trailer, we can give it back in five 11 years. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: After the five -- no, 13 after five years, we own it. I mean, we own it anyhow. 14 They're giving us the money. They're actually ordering the 15 trailer. We own the trailer the day it gets here. The 16 agreement is just that we'll use it -- 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In five years, we 18 can make a decision about whether or not we like owning a 19 trailer. If it's too expensive -- 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Or whether we want to 21 stay as part of that agreement. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't see very 23 much risk. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The deal -- and, 25 Jonathan, this will help you. I don't know if it will help 6-23-03 128 1 Comfort, because I'm not sure Kendall County was awarded 2 anything in that. What the -- on overall -- and you have to 3 recall, there's another $100,000 on top of this 80 that 4 we're getting for equipment. What that will also do that I 5 learned was, all our volunteer fire departments, people like 6 that, we will buy the protective equipment or any equipment 7 that's needed for either a Haz-Mat spill, you know, a 8 terrorist-type situation; it's a multitude of all kinds -- 9 it's a disaster-type thing, okay? That we can help furnish 10 those volunteer fire departments with equipment. That's 11 what that $100,000 is. It's not just the Sheriff's Office; 12 it's for all around. And what I'm -- I've told them at 13 their next KARFA meeting, I'd like to attend and talk to the 14 members there and see how they want it, because I don't 15 think we want to buy these Class A chemical suits -- you 16 know, protective suits that may run $1,000 or so, and just 17 issue them out to volunteers. I think we want, maybe, one 18 or two issued to that department, and then keep the rest of 19 them in storage the same place we're going to have this 20 trailer. The only immediate concern with the -- with the 21 trailer -- not immediate; I don't know how long it's going 22 to take them to get them once they order them -- is emptying 23 out those records out of the other half of that building out 24 there to store it in. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 6-23-03 129 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 2 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 3 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. We don't have 8 any items today for executive session that I'm aware of. 9 Now we get down to the approval agenda. Mr. Auditor, you're 10 finally up. Payment of the bills is the first item. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I had one question 12 earlier that I'm going to bring up now, just to point the 13 issue out. But I went and visited with Tommy this morning, 14 and we had to go hire a lawyer to get to the bottom of it, 15 but we finally did -- no, that's not true. But on Page 9, 16 the very top -- the very top department there, and the third 17 item, Stroeher and Company, four tires for $403. It seemed 18 to me that a couple years ago, that we have taken our -- our 19 maintenance moneys and put them into the -- into the salary 20 lines, included it in with the salary, and then we're 21 responsible for our own maintenance of our vehicles. And 22 when I saw this, it was certainly the contrary to that, and 23 this is not the first time we've seen this. Several years 24 ago, we had a major knock-down-drag-out in this room over 25 this exact same issue. And -- but it's not what it appears 6-23-03 130 1 to be. You may want to ask, what is it. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What is it? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you. The 4 way I understand it is, this gentleman has -- has purchased 5 the tires through the County, and -- and then has -- is 6 reimbursing the County for the tires. Because of some -- 7 maybe some kind of purchasing program or something, you 8 think? 9 MR. TOMLINSON: I would suspect -- I haven't 10 talked to him about it, but as far the car is -- the car he 11 uses for his job, he's actually paying his -- for the tires 12 himself, but he purchased it through the County. I think 13 probably because we had that company we deal with frequently 14 for Road and Bridge and Sheriff's Office, and so, for him to 15 get the benefit of pricing on -- on those tires for his 16 vehicle, he chose to purchase the tires there. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you 18 something. I use my truck and car for County business, and 19 I go out and look at roads and visit with folks, and will 20 the County buy me new tires? 21 MR. TOMLINSON: We're not buying -- 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just asking a 23 question. Will the County -- 24 MR. TOMLINSON: You're mixing things here. 25 The -- 6-23-03 131 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you think the 2 County will buy me new tires? 3 JUDGE TINLEY: You want a simple, one-word 4 answer? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: No. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Would it pay 8 for -- the County pay for my oil changes and maintenance on 9 my vehicle? 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Probably not. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. That's all. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Part of what you're talking 13 about, about the -- the amount of travel moneys that got put 14 into -- into the salary, -- 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 16 MR. TOMLINSON: -- most of that has to do 17 with mileage or -- or oil changes for -- or travel that that 18 elected official or department head might have within the 19 county. At one point in time, the County had a travel 20 allowance, and you had -- each person had the opportunity to 21 pay for whatever it was they used for their vehicle. There 22 was a tax problem for -- for the individual, and there was a 23 withholding problem for the County, because we -- the County 24 did not require specific records for that reimbursement. 25 And because we did not require specific mileage charts or 6-23-03 132 1 records for elected officials, then the Internal Revenue 2 laws required us to put that in the salary. So, that's -- 3 that's the background on why -- why that amount was -- 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, let me ask you 5 this. Judge, I won't spend much time. I'm sorry, I just -- 6 this is kind of -- 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Take all the time you need. 8 I'm going to take a shot at it in a minute. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, okay. At one 10 time, we had -- we had in-county travel and out-of-county 11 travel. Now we've rolled everything into the salary line. 12 Now, is that, in your mind -- I just started thinking about 13 this the other day. Just, kind of, some flags went up in 14 what's left here, is that, see, to me, that travel outside 15 the county, when we go to conferences, to me, that's what 16 it's for, is for our education. 17 MR. TOMLINSON: That's -- 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that for me to go 19 to -- if I'm -- okay, I'm on a committee with TAC. Does 20 that pay for my meetings with TAC? 21 MR. TOMLINSON: Not -- not the travel 22 allowance part of it. The -- the Conference line item or 23 Training line item, whatever -- whatever you want to call 24 it, is for that purpose. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Pays for mileage, 6-23-03 133 1 whether it's going to a conference or a meeting? 2 MR. TOMLINSON: Right. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- 5 MR. TOMLINSON: You know, we have -- I mean, 6 for constables, I -- this has been an ongoing discussion for 7 13 years that I remember, but there have been occasions 8 where -- where the County's agreed to -- for instance, for 9 an example, pay the auto coverage on that -- on that 10 constable's car. Because the County did not furnish that 11 vehicle for the constable. And, I mean, there's -- there's 12 line items that the Court has approved in the budget process 13 for maintenance on vehicles or fuel for the vehicles. So, I 14 mean, it's -- what's there is a result of, you know, what's 15 happened in -- in the budget process. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You'll see in the 17 budget there that almost every -- and I know Commissioner 18 Letz has worked on this for years. Almost every constable's 19 budget is different. One of them has fuel and oil, the 20 other one has gas, and the other one doesn't have any of the 21 above. Craziest thing. 22 MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, just to follow 24 up on that a little bit, how we got out of whack again, I 25 mean, as I recall, when I first became a Commissioner, the 6-23-03 134 1 Commissioners and the constables were $1,200 a year, which I 2 think was a travel allowance, and it was tacked to salaries. 3 And I was one of the proponents that the salary -- why don't 4 we call it salary, put it in that line item, so that no one 5 gets anything? And none of the Commissioners -- they didn't 6 care anything, but sometimes the constables started adding 7 back in gasoline and maintenance. And they did it -- oh, I 8 can remember exactly how they did it. They did it very 9 slowly. When they were given discretion -- a discretionary 10 amount of budget through the budget process to do what they 11 wanted with, they decided they wanted to use their $500 or 12 whatever the amount was for gasoline. One wanted to use it 13 for tires, and we left them do it. And then, all of a 14 sudden, it's in your budget. Then we're starting to fund it 15 automatically. Darndest thing you've ever seen. 16 MR. TOMLINSON: That's exactly right. You're 17 right, that's exactly what happened. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: I got two questions on this 19 particular item. Number one, this Stroeher and Sons or 20 Stroeher-Olfers, are they on some sort of a state contract 21 over there? 22 MR. TOMLINSON: I think so. Isn't that what 23 you said? 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They had the state bid 25 where you buy -- we purchase all our patrol vehicle tires 6-23-03 135 1 from them. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: So, we can not buy for a 3 comparable price for county purchasers here locally? 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only thing I would 5 wonder about is, I'd be curious what that state bid says, 6 'cause if it says it has to be used on governmental 7 vehicles -- 8 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going to get there. 9 Just -- 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the reason. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Stroeher and Olfers is being 13 utilized because it's state contract price, not because, you 14 know, we checked with two or three local suppliers and they 15 said "X," and Stroeher and Olfers says "Y." I'm kind of 16 like Commissioner Nicholson. I need to get a little 17 education here and help me out. The constables utilize 18 their own vehicles, correct? 19 MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: And, several years ago, what 21 was travel has been rolled into their salary, in part to 22 compensate them for the use of their own vehicle, correct? 23 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. That -- in general, I 24 think that's a true statement. I don't -- there's some -- 25 you know, some specifics that -- that are contrary to that, 6-23-03 136 1 as the Commissioner alluded to, but generally, yes, that's a 2 correct statement. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And they all supply 4 their own vehicles? 5 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, they do. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. And, as part and 7 parcel of that, since it is their vehicle, they in turn are 8 permitted -- or not prohibited, I guess would probably be a 9 better approach, from using it for whatever personal reasons 10 they want to use it for, correct? 11 MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: When they're not using it for 13 what they feel is Kerr County's business, they use it for 14 whatever they want to. Okay. When this purchase of these 15 tires was made at Stroeher and Olfers through the state 16 contract account by Kerr County, that amounts, does it not, 17 to a certification that that's a tax-exempt purchase? 18 MR. TOMLINSON: He represented that, yes, 19 that's right. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, then, that's an 21 erroneous representation, wouldn't it be? I mean, these -- 22 these goods or services are not going to be utilized solely 23 for governmental purposes. 24 MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unless he uses his car 6-23-03 137 1 solely for governmental purposes. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, certainly. If his car 3 -- he's not prohibited from using it for -- 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And whether he 5 reimburses the County or not. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Whether he reimburses the 7 County or not, that -- that's not the issue. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, don't yell. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Couldn't he say that 10 -- that he's on duty 24 hours a day? 11 JUDGE TINLEY: He could say he's on 24 hours 12 a day. Buster could say he's on duty 24 hours a day. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I am. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: He checks his roads out like 15 you wouldn't believe. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But he's a law 17 enforcement officer, and everywhere he goes, he -- he might 18 have occasion to -- to be in the business of law 19 enforcement. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: When he's in the county. 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: When he's in the 22 county. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: If he stays in the county. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I agree with what 25 you're saying. I mean, I know -- 6-23-03 138 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Where do we draw the line? 2 We've got us a slippery slope here, as I see it. And -- and 3 under this scenario, what's to prevent me from going to 4 Stroeher and Olfers, saying, "Put some tires on my truck out 5 here. I'm going to reimburse Kerr County, so that's not a 6 problem." 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we know you don't 8 drive around for the county. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: You don't know that. You 10 don't know that. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's the same thing. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. Absolutely. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I -- 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Absolutely. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry I brought it up. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Now, if -- if, in fact, his 17 budget permits Kerr County to take care of all of his wear 18 and tears; tires, batteries, things like that, that normally 19 are -- are recurring maintenance items, that's a different 20 story, but I don't see that in his budget. 21 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I don't have his budget 22 with me, but I think there is a line item for -- for 23 maintenance on his car. But -- 24 JUDGE TINLEY: I see one for equipment 25 repair. 6-23-03 139 1 MR. TOMLINSON: But it's not near that much. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: $150 for equipment repair. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's his pencil 4 breaking. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: There's nothing for insurance 6 on here either, so that's not in the equation. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But even if it's in the 8 budget, I think the argument is the same. You're -- it's 9 the potential of using government funds for personal use. 10 Unless he's using that vehicle 100 percent for county 11 purposes, I mean, whether or not it's in the budget. I 12 mean, that's almost an irrelevant point, to me. I mean, if 13 you're -- if he uses that car at all for personal use, 14 that's not right, in my mind. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: If part of the consideration 16 for him having travel moneys rolled into his salary is that 17 he uses his vehicle in the performance of his duties, then 18 he's out of the ordinary scope of maintenance. He's on his 19 own nickel, the way I see it. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the way I am. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: And utilizing some state 22 contract to get a better deal or to avoid otherwise 23 applicable taxes, I think, is wrong. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I do too. 6-23-03 140 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's the same as me. 2 I mean, I can't -- I would never go to over there and try to 3 purchase tires for my car. Would you? 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just tell him don't 5 do that any more. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. That's -- I 7 mean, if it's wrong. I don't know. That wasn't my point. 8 My point was that the guy's reimbursing -- it looks like 9 here that the County's buying him some tires, but that's not 10 the case. He's reimbursing the County. That was my point. 11 And it takes a lawyer, of course, to get off down into the 12 dump. 13 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm sitting here 14 trying to figure out how Commissioner Baldwin can get 15 reimbursed from U.G.R.A. for his septic expenses. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's try. 17 MR. TOMLINSON: When you're talking about 18 partial use of, you know, a vehicle, what do you do about -- 19 about the guy that -- that's a Road and Bridge supervisor 20 and he drives his pickup home? Or the Sheriff's -- 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Deputies. 22 MR. TOMLINSON: -- deputies that drive their 23 car -- the deputy's -- you know, county car from home to 24 work and work to home? 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Rusty, are your guys permitted 6-23-03 141 1 to pack up their family and go to Wally World? 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I didn't think so. 4 It's -- 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's not a personal use. 6 They have them at their house to make them available. Now, 7 I mean, sure, you're going to have somebody on his way home 8 may stop at Circle K and pick up a gallon of milk. That's 9 going home. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Or a six-pack. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: May do it. They may go 12 to H.E.B., but he's not allowed to put his family in that 13 vehicle and use it for -- 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the policy, 15 though, addresses a lot of that. I know it's an issue, and 16 if it's a surrounding county -- we have some that -- we have 17 some of our county employees that live outside of Kerr 18 County and that vehicle's driving across the county line. 19 They don't go very far across the county line, those that 20 I'm thinking of, but I know in a neighboring county, they 21 will take Sheriff's vehicles to the -- to Pleasanton. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not this one. My guys 23 who live out of county -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're wrestling with 25 that same issue about using -- you know. 6-23-03 142 1 MS. SOVIL: You could put it in your general 2 provisions in your budget book on what you will pay for and 3 what you won't pay for, and that makes the whole thing 4 cut-and-dried. 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think you'll hear more 6 about it in the budget process. A couple of the constables 7 came over and got with us about vehicles and that, and what 8 we recommended to them is look at, like, the last one we 9 purchased from the Ford dealership, you know, the -- the 10 program cars. You can get a Taurus for about $11,000. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a little 12 bit -- it's one thing if it's a county vehicle that's 13 used -- that we permit to go home for the -- basically, it's 14 for the benefit of the County to have them have access to 15 that vehicle at a short notice. I think it's a lot 16 different when we use any private vehicle, and use the -- 17 you know, their position to get anything done to it, for 18 that matter, because there's no difference between constable 19 or Commissioner, Jannett, anyone on her staff, anyone else 20 in the county. I mean -- 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If there's 22 nothing -- if there's nothing wrong with it, and there may 23 technically be something wrong with it, at least it gives 24 the appearance of something wrong. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 6-23-03 143 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. There went 2 another 15 minutes of my lunch, Buster. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: You'll make it. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not going to bring 5 this up, but if I were, I'd say something like, if you look 6 down at the bottom of the page, it's the same company, same 7 tires for about $40 difference, only the Sheriff is charged 8 more. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe he bought more tires. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's a good question, 11 Buster. I might want a copy of that one. I'll go talk to 12 Stroeher. 13 MS. PIEPER: Size tires, probably. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't say that, so 15 no sense even bringing it up. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I believe those are 17 16-inch, and the other ones -- 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah, sure. 19 You're trying to get out of it now. But, Judge, outside of 20 all that, I'd like to make a motion that we pay our bills. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 23 seconded that the bills as presented be paid. All in favor, 24 signify by raising your right hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 6-23-03 144 1 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wasn't that fun? It's 5 good to go through these exercises every once in a while 6 during the lunch hour. Good for you. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Budget amendment requests. 8 Number 1. 9 MR. TOMLINSON: This request is from the 10 Treasurer to transfer $306.95 from Office Supplies to 11 Postage. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 15 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1. Is that a 16 question? All in favor, signify by raising your right hand. 17 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 19 (No response.) 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request 21 Number 1 is approved. Number 2 is from the Sheriff's 22 Department. 23 MR. TOMLINSON: This is a request from the 24 Sheriff to move $1,770.60 out of Software Maintenance, 25 $839.18 to Investigation Expenses, $357.97 for Radio 6-23-03 145 1 Repairs, and $573.45 to Vehicle Equipment. I do have three 2 late bills that go along with this. One is to -- for -- to 3 reimburse the Sheriff for $817.11, and a Robert Weissinger, 4 a hand check for $1,700 for installing cameras and camera 5 strips, and one to H.E.B. for investigation supplies for 6 $116.59. I have a fourth one -- I didn't see that one. 7 That one is to Chevron for $115.83. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: These are in connection with 11 this -- this budget amendment request? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: The whole amendment request is 14 only $1,770, and you've got about $2,500 worth of hand 15 checks. 16 MR. TOMLINSON: Part of the amendments 17 were -- part of the line items had money there, part of the 18 money there. So, the amendment is just for enough to pay 19 the bills. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, you're rolling some 21 late bills in here on us too? 22 MR. TOMLINSON: We wouldn't pay the bills, 23 because this money wasn't there, but they're due, and so we 24 want to have a -- do a hand check before the next court date 25 to actually make the payment. The budget amendment puts the 6-23-03 146 1 money in the account to pay it. Typically, we'll hold these 2 to the next court date to pay them if -- if there's not 3 other circumstances that we feel like that they need to be 4 paid immediately. Like -- like, for instance, for the 5 Chevron bill, it would be past due next court date if we 6 held it to pay next court date. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a question. 8 I got lost in a little bit of that, Tommy, and I apologize. 9 The top one, the original amendment here, I can see where 10 the $1,770 comes out of the Software Maintenance and covers 11 those issues that are there. But what's paying for these 12 new -- about $2,000 deal? Where's that money coming from? 13 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, that -- they're coming 14 out of the line items that -- like, for instance -- 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, it's a late bill. 16 It's a late bill. These are late bills. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Some of these 18 accounts got money in them. 19 MR. TOMLINSON: Some of the accounts have 20 money in them. This -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 22 MR. TOMLINSON: If we get a bill that we had 23 had to charge to an account and it doesn't totally satisfy 24 the bill -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 6-23-03 147 1 MR. TOMLINSON: -- we don't pay that until -- 2 until the Court approves a transfer to put funds in that 3 account. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. 5 MR. TOMLINSON: Some of them have some money 6 in them. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. 8 MR. TOMLINSON: And so this -- this amendment 9 is to bring those accounts up to an amount that will satisfy 10 these bills. Typically, we won't include those bills in the 11 regular bills that you just approve, because we want to get 12 the amendment done before we actually make the payment. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: So, you're requesting -- 14 MR. TOMLINSON: In these cases, we did not 15 want to hold them until the next court date. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure, and I appreciate 17 that. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: So, what you're requesting is 19 approval of budget amendment request and the issuance of 20 these hand checks, these four hand checks in the amounts 21 indicated? 22 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second that motion, 25 but I still have another question. 6-23-03 148 1 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know who made the 2 motion. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Letz did. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He seconded it already. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. Oh, that end of 6 the table must do everything. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, okay. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a question. 9 May I ask my question? 10 JUDGE TINLEY: You certainly may. I'm 11 curious. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sheriff Hierholzer. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: For the last two or 15 three pay periods, we have spent money similar to this right 16 here, the $350 on radio repairs. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we just spent a 19 million bucks on new radios. What are we repairing? 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Hand-held. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What could we possibly 22 be repairing? 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The million dollars 24 spent was on the radio system, it was not on any radios at 25 all. 6-23-03 149 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We didn't get any 2 radios in the car? 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We did not replace a 4 single radio in a car or a single portable with that 5 million-dollar system. That was the system. Now, we did 6 add -- we did make -- and that was all explained back then. 7 We did make one -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought there was 9 some radios involved in -- 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We made one amendment to 11 that system here -- how many months ago? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: For the recorder? 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: For the recorder. But 14 that was it. There's no actual car radios or portables. We 15 purchased those. One is in the six cars a year that we've 16 been getting, we're buying those equipped, okay, so all the 17 equipment in those, being the car radios, is new when we get 18 our six cars every year. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So we have those, all 21 right. So we still have a few of the old ones, 'cause we 22 haven't replaced every single car in the department yet, so 23 we're gradually having to repair or find ways of getting rid 24 of those. We purchased a few, and then the first year I 25 took office, we replaced -- with the Court's permission, we 6-23-03 150 1 replaced all of the hand-held radios for the deputies, so we 2 already had new portables. The car ones we're getting 3 replaced yearly. So, no, there were no radios -- actual 4 radios in that million-dollar system. 5 MR. TOMLINSON: That's encouraging, isn't it? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: You got something more than 7 blue sky, didn't you? 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, okay. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Further questions? 10 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 11 hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, Budget Amendment 16 Request Number 3. 17 MR. TOMLINSON: This -- this is for the 198th 18 District Court. We need to transfer $60 from the 19 Court-Appointed Attorney line item to Books, Publications, 20 and Dues. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are these, like, 22 pocket parts? Or what are you -- fish and game magazines? 23 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, this one -- particular 24 one is to American Judiciary Society. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. 6-23-03 151 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 4 Budget Amendment Request Number 3. Any further questions or 5 discussion? All in favor, signify by raising 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. Next item, 11 Budget Amendment Request Number 4. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: This is for Information 13 Technology Department, transfer $100 out of Miscellaneous to 14 Office Supplies. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 18 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 4. Any further 19 questions or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising 20 your right hand. 21 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 23 (No response.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Do we have 25 any late bills? 6-23-03 152 1 MR. TOMLINSON: I have one other amendment 2 that I didn't get until late. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request 4 Number 5. 5 MR. TOMLINSON: This is from the County 6 Attorney's office. His request is to transfer $600 from 7 Telephone line item, $600 from Postage, for a total of 8 $1,200 to go in Books, Publications, and Dues. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are these, like, 10 pocket parts, or is it like fish and game commission 11 membership? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, he -- I mean, his 13 explanation was that he anticipated additional books for his 14 library, or for -- as a result of the Legislature session, 15 or -- I don't -- I don't have a bill. This is an 16 anticipatory -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 18 MR. TOMLINSON: -- amendment. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, that's a pretty 20 big variance from the current budget. My first question, I 21 mean, usually I can see us having a $60 book or one extra 22 book come in, but $1,200, that's 20 percent of his budget. 23 That's pretty big off the mark. And then, under Postage and 24 Telephone, he's nowhere -- I mean, he's -- well, especially 25 on telephone, he's way behind. He budgeted a lot more than 6-23-03 153 1 he seems to be spending there. Is there a reason that we're 2 not -- the variances are so great in these line items from 3 the budget, that you're aware of? 4 MR. TOMLINSON: I think the telephone line 5 items, on the average, for every department has been down 6 somewhat below what we anticipated. Some of it -- some of 7 that had to do with -- with the year before last, we had 8 some extraordinary expenses for telephone, and it had 9 something to do with something governmental, federal 10 government tax on telephones. And our total bills -- 11 telephone bills were really more than they usually were, and 12 we budgeted based on what we actually were looking at the 13 year before last. And I think, from what I'm seeing, 14 every -- you know, every department's telephone line item 15 is -- is actually lower than what we thought. I can't 16 answer on the postage. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. All right. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you hired the 19 attorneys that he really would like to have, that money 20 would be spent; you wouldn't be asking these questions. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Good point. 22 MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, as I said, this is 23 anticipating -- this is anticipation of what he thinks will 24 come, so I don't -- I don't really have a need for this. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 6-23-03 154 1 MS. SOVIL: Nobody's made the first yet. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, see? Y'all are 3 awake. I move that we pay the bill. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: You mean budget amendment? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry, yes, the 7 budget amendment. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 9 Budget Amendment Request Number 5 be approved. Any further 10 questions or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising 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 does carry. Other than 16 what we've discussed, any late bills? 17 MR. TOMLINSON: I have one from the -- for 18 the County Clerk, $2,000 for postage to U.S. Postal Service. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought that was in 20 the regular bills. No? 21 MR. TOMLINSON: No, that's right here. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Check that out. 23 (Discussion off the record.) 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Somebody's got that -- 25 Treasurer, I believer it was. 6-23-03 155 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, ten rolls of stamps. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what's the 3 question? I didn't follow all that. To do what? 4 MR. TOMLINSON: A late -- a hand check for 5 $2,000 to U.S. Postal Service. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So moved. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 9 the Court approve a bill and authorize a hand check for 10 payment of $2,000 for postage to United States Post Office 11 on behalf of the County Clerk. All in favor, signify by 12 raising your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Don't have 17 any minutes before me. I have been presented with monthly 18 reports from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Justice of 19 the Peace, Precinct 2, and the District Clerk. Do I hear a 20 motion that the reports as presented be approved? 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I make a motion they 22 be -- as presented, be approved. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 6-23-03 156 1 the monthly reports as presented from J.P. 1, J.P. 2, and 2 District Clerk be approved. All in favor, signify by 3 raising 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. 8 Information. Anybody have any more information? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do, but I'm not 10 going to tell you. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: None. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Being nothing further, I'll 13 declare the meeting adjourned. 14 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:41 p.m.) 15 - - - - - - - - - - 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 6-23-03 157 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 27th day of June, 2003. 8 9 10 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 11 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 12 Certified Shorthand Reporter 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 6-23-03