1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Special Session 10 Monday, July 28, 2003 11 9:00 a.m. 12 Commissioners' Courtroom 13 Kerr County Courthouse 14 Kerrville, Texas 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 24 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X July 28, 20-03 2 PAGE --- Commissioners Comments 4 3 1.1 Road name changes for County-maintained roads, 4 regulatory signs, set public hearing for same 5 5 1.2 Road name changes for privately-maintained roads 8 6 1.3 Contract with Kerrville Daily Times for advertising space to publish public notices 11 7 1.4 Funding September 13, 2003 Constitutional 8 Amendment Election 14 9 1.5 Approval of agreement with Texas Engineering Extension Service concerning State Homeland 10 Security grant, authorize County Judge to sign 16 11 1.6 Request to transfer funds for Constable, Precinct 1, to purchase portable radio 17 12 1.13 Proposed rate change for Medical Examiner 13 services 25 14 1.8 Security fence around Exhibit Center 39 15 1.7 Update on High-Water Bridge 53 16 1.9 Approve card to be mailed to county citizens for 911 address change, funding of same 63 17 1.10 Discuss proposed new OSSF Rules and Regulations, 18 set public hearing on same 85 19 1.11 Approve revisions to form contract between Kerr County and volunteer fire departments 106 20 1.12 Authorize RFP's for Information Technology 21 maintenance service for FY 2003-04 131 22 1.14 Burn Ban 142 23 4.1 Pay Bills 143 4.2 Budget Amendments 144 24 4.3 Late Bills 160 4.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 161 25 5.1 Reports from Commissioners 162 --- Adjourned 173 3 1 On Monday, July 28, 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 meeting of the special Commissioners Court meeting scheduled 8 for this date, Monday, July the 28th, posted for 9 a.m. It 9 is now just a bit after 9 a.m. I believe Commissioner 10 Precinct 4 has the honors this morning. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Join me in prayer, 12 please. 13 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning. This is the 15 portion of the agenda in which any citizen or member of the 16 public who wishes to be heard on an item which is not listed 17 on the agenda is -- is privileged to come forward and tell 18 us what's on their mind. If you want to speak on an item 19 that's listed on the agenda, we would ask you to fill out a 20 participation form. They're located at the back of the 21 room, and hopefully we've got a pen or a pencil back there 22 now to assist in doing that. But we'd ask that you fill 23 that out. It's not absolutely essential, but so that we 24 won't miss you when it comes to that item, why, we'd prefer 25 that you do that. If there is anybody that has anything 7-28-03 4 1 they want to say on a -- on anything that is not listed as 2 an item on the agenda, why, feel privileged to come forward 3 at this time. Any member of the public. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: There being none, why, we'll 6 go on with the agenda. Commissioner 4, have you got 7 anything for us this morning? 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Nothing this 9 morning, thank you. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: One? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I have one 12 item I've been kind of following. I noticed it in the 13 Kerrville Daily Times this morning, the son of Judge O'Dell 14 playing golf. He is -- I think he's 12 years old, maybe 13, 15 but he's the son of J.P. 3, and he is qualified for the 16 South Texas PGA area championship tournament. That's golf, 17 Bill. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm listening. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And -- young 20 kid. And I was visiting with the O'Dells recently about it, 21 and they said, "I don't know where it came from." It's just 22 one day he walks out there and starts hitting the ball, and 23 hits it very, very well. So, congratulations to him and his 24 family. That's all. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, aside from the 7-28-03 5 1 fact that his mother is a sterling individual, he's on the 2 right track if he's chasing that little white ball. 3 (Laughter.) 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Those things are hard 5 to cook up, though, I'm telling you. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have nothing, 7 Judge. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nothing, Judge. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it's a clean sweep. 10 Let's get on with the business at hand. First item on the 11 agenda is to consider road name changes for 12 County-maintained roads in accordance with 911 guidelines, 13 as well as regulatory signs, and set a public hearing for 14 the same. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hardin? 16 MS. HARDIN: Hello. We have -- one, two, 17 three, four -- six road name changes that need to be 18 advertised. Those would be Hasenwinkel, just the spelling 19 of it, from "el" to -- "le" to "el," right? Okay. And then 20 Cypress Creek Loop to Cypress Creek Road, Cypress Creek Loop 21 to Gaddis Bluff North, Cypress Creek Loop to Bartel Road 22 North. There's a state right-of-way that's numbered as 1491 23 to be Ried Graham Road North, and then Veterans Parkway 24 North changed back to Spur 100 North. And then we have two 25 regulatory signs that are now stop signs that we'd like to 7-28-03 6 1 change to yield in Sleepy Hollow Circle and Country Lane. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we approve these at 3 this particular time, or set a public hearing? 4 MS. HARDIN: We need to set a public hearing. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we set a public 6 hearing for September 8th at 10 a.m. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 9 seconded that we set a public hearing for September 8th at 10 10 a.m. on the road name changes and regulatory signs as 11 indicated. Any further questions or discussion? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a -- a comment or 13 question. It's kind of related to the eyes opening up by 14 the two gentlemen in the back from 911. I guess we need to 15 go through the public hearing because these are 16 County-maintained roads, and we have to have public 17 hearings, but I think at some point we need to look at if 18 we're going to assume these names are going to go through 19 prior to that, 'cause -- is there a problem with doing that? 20 And the reason I'm saying that is, if we're getting ready to 21 do the mailouts on these changes, we really want the changes 22 to go out with these names on them. I -- these are -- and 23 the first four are in my precinct, and they have been worked 24 and reworked and reworked and reworked. And there's going 25 to have to be an enormous, compelling reason for me not to 7-28-03 7 1 go with these names. That I don't envision. And this is a 2 -- it's been an area that we've really, you know, been -- I 3 guess we could wait until right after the public hearing 4 until we mail the notices out, but I just want to bring that 5 up, that that's a little bit of an issue because of our 6 schedule with 911. And it -- I'm looking at Commissioner 7 Baldwin. What date do we -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: September 1. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We going to mail them 10 out? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: September 1 mailouts. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a problem if we 13 delay until after the public hearing? Is there an issue on 14 it? 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would look at it a 16 little differently. What I would do is go ahead and mail 17 them out -- go ahead and mail them out, and then if that is 18 a mistake -- which it won't be, but if that is a mistake, 19 that's one of those mistakes that we've made, and we kick 20 over into the maintenance program. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Okay. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, that's what I 23 would do. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That sounds fine with me. 25 I was -- if you want to keep us on schedule, we need to get 7-28-03 8 1 these changes part of this change right now. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: These changes will be 3 a part of that right now? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. It'll be a good way 5 to get a good turnout to the public hearing if they don't 6 like it. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You've got a lawyer 8 sitting at the table that may not like that, but -- actually 9 send a document out before you have a public hearing. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're just -- the public 11 notice, though, would be looking at more information for 12 them to have for the public hearing. Okay. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 14 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 15 your right hand. 16 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 17 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 18 (No response.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item 20 is to consider road name changes for privately maintained 21 roads in various locations in Kerr County in accordance with 22 911 guidelines. 23 MS. HARDIN: You had five. I have three more 24 that came in this morning that they would like to get in 25 there before the deadline, and these are all privately 7-28-03 9 1 maintained roads. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is -- if I might ask 3 Bill -- Bill, do you know the status of -- I can't remember 4 which name we ended up with -- on Adolph Stieler Road? 5 MR. AMERINE: Do not. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You do not? 7 MR. AMERINE: No. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's Stieler Ranch Road 9 goes to Becky Patterson's house, the old Stieler Ranch. 10 We've talked several times, and we were hoping to get that 11 on this list as well. I believe we have settled on Adolph 12 Stieler Road for that, but it can just go later. 13 MR. AMERINE: Well, if I can make a comment, 14 we'll go ahead and address using the number of roads, and if 15 it's a private road, its no problem. We can change that 16 while we're in the process. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I'll just tell her 18 when she -- you know, that it's not on the list. Okay. 19 MS. HARDIN: Do you know what the proposed 20 name is? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Going to be -- I'm pretty 22 sure it's Adolph Stieler Road. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You should be. 24 MS. HARDIN: Can we not just add it now? And 25 I'll get the number to the -- to the clerk? 7-28-03 10 1 MR. AMERINE: We can verify that that's not a 2 duplicate. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's -- yeah. It's -- 4 I'm sure it's not. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's not. 6 MR. AMERINE: You'd be surprised. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move that we 8 approve the road name changes for privately maintained 9 roads, the nine roads that've been submitted by the Road and 10 Bridge Department. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 13 the named roads, as submitted by Road and Bridge, privately 14 maintained roads, be changed. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For the record, that nine 16 includes Adolph Stieler Road. 17 MR. AMERINE: Does not or does? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does. 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Does. 20 MR. AMERINE: Okay. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 22 discussion? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would say -- I 24 probably -- this isn't real relevant. The name Adolph 25 Stieler was a bit controversial because there are some 7-28-03 11 1 Stieler Roads already, but a secondary option there we 2 looked at was Goat King, which was Adolph Stieler's 3 nickname, and he has raised over a million goats out in 4 central Texas. But, anyway, Goat King was already taken or 5 was too confusing, so we went back to Adolph Stieler. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 7 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 8 your right hand. 9 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item, 13 consider and discuss a contract with Kerrville Daily Times 14 to publish not less than 100 column inches of advertising 15 within the period beginning July 1, 2003, and ending 16 June 30, 2004, to receive better rates for public notices, 17 and authorize County Judge to sign the same. 18 MS. PIEPER: Judge, I think I may need to 19 pull this, 'cause I feel like I'm going to do more research 20 on it. Friday afternoon the Mountain Sun approached me; 21 they would like us to do a contract with them, and then that 22 -- we'd get a better rate, but I just kind of feel like I 23 need to do a little bit more research. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm glad you did 25 that, 'cause I was going to ask you about that. 7-28-03 12 1 MS. PIEPER: Yeah. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: The more the merrier. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You may have to 4 bring in three different contracts. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: That's right. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We've got a new west 7 Kerr County newspaper. 8 MS. PIEPER: Is this something we could go 9 out for bids on? Do y'all know? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's not -- is that 11 a newspaper in general circulation throughout the county? 12 MS. ALFORD: Yeah. 13 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Its mission is west 14 Kerr County; Ingram, Hunt, Mountain Home, Divide. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that would be 16 one criteria. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I see, yeah. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If it's general 19 throughout the county. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think you have to 21 go out for bids on this. I wouldn't see why. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go out for bids on 24 advertising. I mean, I think -- what type of advertising 25 are you -- are these our public notices? 7-28-03 13 1 MS. PIEPER: Just our public notices, yes. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The Court needs to 3 have a policy. I believe we've rotated back and forth 4 between newspapers. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The contract for 100 6 column inches or whatever, it's a good idea, because the 7 difference in prices is significant. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A minimum contract. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. Yeah, Bill 10 knows that better than anybody else. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We used to rotate 12 them back and forth, and doing a contract is fine because 13 you can get a little better line price. 14 MS. PIEPER: Each newspaper is quoting us a 15 different price, so I don't know how -- how we want to 16 handle that. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Find out -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whichever is easier. I 19 think it's a good idea to go out and say we're only going to 20 select one. I think you get the best price if we say we're 21 only going to select one; that one gets it. 22 MS. PIEPER: And the only concern I have, the 23 Mountain Sun, they come out once a week. The Daily Times is 24 daily, so if we have a public hearing, we put it in the 25 Mountain Sun, because the Court meets on Monday, there's no 7-28-03 14 1 way we can probably get that notice in the newspaper, you 2 know, for them to publish it that following Wednesday. 3 Therefore, it knocks it up a week. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, that's what we 5 need to know. 6 MS. PIEPER: So, I just kind of feel like I 7 need to do a little bit more research on this. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: I gather no one wishes to 9 offer a motion at this time. If not, we'll move on to the 10 next item, consider and discuss funding the September 13th, 11 2003 constitutional amendment election. Ms. Pieper. 12 MS. PIEPER: Okay. I gave you a printout of 13 my election budget, of what I have left in there and what I 14 feel I'm going to need. And, basically, I just want to ask 15 if I can utilize the money that we have in the election 16 expense that was left over from the Ag Barn, and then that 17 way I won't break my budget. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which is $7,700? 19 MS. PIEPER: Yes. And I've got the line 20 items -- you know, like, I'll need $5,739.05 for my judges 21 and clerks, and what my ballot expense is going to cost, and 22 I think these are pretty accurate figures. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the -- where it shows 24 a negative $525 under Rental -- 25 MS. PIEPER: That's positive. I have $600 in 7-28-03 15 1 that line item, and I'm only going to need maybe $75 for 2 rental. Therefore, I do have an excess in that line item. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, okay. So, what do 4 you need us to do? 5 MS. PIEPER: Basically, what I'm asking is, 6 when I run out of money in one line item, can I just code it 7 to my election expense, the 402-569 code? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you need to -- I 9 think we need to have a budget amendment to get them into 10 the right categories. 11 MS. PIEPER: Okay, let's do that. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or you can do it before 13 or after. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Come in after the fact. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Come in after the fact. 16 I think that we would -- I'd be in favor of using that 17 $7,760 to cover all these expenses, but just do a -- you 18 know, after the election, do a one-time budget amendment and 19 transfer all the funds into the right categories. 20 MS. PIEPER: Okay, I'll do that. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: So, it's the logical thing to 22 do, obviously. 23 MS. PIEPER: Okay. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Next item, 25 consider and discuss approval of agreement between Kerr 7-28-03 16 1 County, as a sub-recipient of the State Homeland Security 2 Grant Program, and Texas Engineering Extension Service and 3 authorize County Judge to sign the same. Mr. Sheriff? 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You've all been given a 5 copy of this agreement. It has been reviewed by the County 6 Attorney's office. They didn't have a problem with it. 7 This is all in conjunction with AACOG and our $180,000 grant 8 deal for the communications trailer and other equipment that 9 we were selected to house here. Other than that, there's 10 not much to it. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd move approval of 12 the agreement between Kerr County and the Texas Engineering 13 Extension Service, and authorize the County Judge to sign 14 the same. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 17 the agreement between Kerr County and the Texas Engineering 18 Extension Service be approved, and the County Judge be 19 authorized to sign the same. Any questions or discussion? 20 I have one question, Sheriff. If you'll recall, one of the 21 considerations that was raised was our utilization of this 22 communications trailer within Kerr County for situations 23 that may not fall under the contract that is otherwise 24 presented to us under the Homeland Security, and you 25 verified that, as the owner of that equipment, so long as it 7-28-03 17 1 doesn't interfere with their need or priority use of it, 2 that we can do that? 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, actually, they 4 don't even have any priority use of it. There's going to be 5 three of those trailers throughout the COG region. If we 6 have something going here already, then we don't have to 7 send it down there on that time. It's only if it's 8 available. It's posted -- you know, we need to try and make 9 it available, but say we have a large manhunt or whatever 10 going on here and we're using that communications trailer; 11 then they will get one from one of the other areas within 12 the COG. But we can use it for anything that we have going 13 on. We are the owners of it. The County is owner of it, 14 and anything the County has going, it's available. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. Any further 16 questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion, 17 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 does carry. Next item 22 on the agenda is to consider and discuss request to transfer 23 funds from a salary line item, being 10-551-101, to 24 Miscellaneous line item 10-551-499, to purchase two-way 25 portable radio. Constable Pickens. 7-28-03 18 1 MR. PICKENS: Good morning, Judge. Good 2 morning, Commissioners. Thank you for your time to come 3 before y'all today. I'd like to ask the Commissioners Court 4 to -- and County Judge to consider and approve transferring 5 funds from my Salary line item to the Miscellaneous item in 6 order to purchase a two-way -- two-way portable radio. This 7 would be to use for the performance of my duties while I'm 8 out serving papers, if I need to call in for assistance or 9 warrant service or something from the Sheriff's Office or 10 from the police department. Fact is that I do carry a cell 11 phone, but I was in a situation the other evening up on 12 Upper Turtle Creek where I couldn't reach out -- I couldn't 13 get hold of the Sheriff's Office. And, in discussing it 14 with the Sheriff on the portable radio, there is full 15 coverage out there -- 98 percent, Sheriff? 16 (Sheriff Hierholzer nodded.) 17 MR. PICKENS: Where I could utilize that and 18 have contact with the Sheriff's Office or the police 19 department. I checked with the County Treasurer. I do have 20 the funds; that is from the salary line item that was not 21 used when there was nobody in the office for the month of 22 September and October. And I have approximately about -- 23 almost $1,300 still left over to purchase this. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That it? 25 MR. PICKENS: Yes, sir. 7-28-03 19 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't see anywhere 2 or note or anything -- I don't see the County Auditor in the 3 room. Has he looked at this, and -- 4 MR. PICKENS: I talked to Tommy the other 5 day, and he told me to go ahead and put in for it, and see 6 if y'all -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, do you -- is 8 Tommy coming in? 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Today? 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I have no idea. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Want me to go check, 13 Buster? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, please. 'Cause, 15 I mean, I don't think we can approve something like this 16 without his approval. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got a question 18 that -- maybe more than one question on it. It doesn't have 19 to do with this item in particular, but the whole matter in 20 general of how we treat these offices. It appears to me 21 that we're not consistent about what we pay for and what we 22 reimburse between the different offices. If we -- have we 23 purchased radios for -- I know we haven't purchased one for 24 Precinct 4. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And 2. 7-28-03 20 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are we inconsistent 2 also in fuel costs and all? Auto repairs and things like 3 that? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe so. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We've been through 7 this before? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we -- I think, just 9 to give a little history, we tried to get them all the same. 10 And somehow, over the last four years, from needs, from, you 11 know, tires or -- and it was difficult to get them the same, 12 because, like, Precinct 4's constable has a -- a deputy. 13 Precinct 1 didn't want a car. I mean, it's just -- they 14 didn't -- they didn't want different things, so they put 15 money in different funds, and all of a sudden these new line 16 items have appeared and grown. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just like this right 18 here. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. To me, I would 20 rather look at this during the budget process and look at 21 the constables' budgets again, 'cause I think they need to 22 be treated the same. I'm not opposed to giving them radios 23 if they need radios, but I think the -- I know there's an 24 issue during our budget on cars for the constables, and I 25 think this goes in line with that. I think there's a -- 7-28-03 21 1 priorities need to be set as to -- and get feedback from all 2 four constables as to, you know, what's most important for 3 them. I mean, a little bit -- you know, exactly what they 4 need. 'Cause right now, we're reimbursing for -- we have 5 car allowances for some of them; we've picked up tires for 6 one of them the other day. I just think we need to be more 7 consistent. I'd like to do that during the budget process, 8 try to get them all treated the same. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay, let's do that. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Talking about the 11 categories? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, thanks for 13 coming in. 14 MR. PICKENS: Also, this is the request on 15 this portable radio, same type that the Sheriff has for his 16 deputies. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was going to be 18 my next question, if the Sheriff authorizes usage of his 19 radio system. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: For a nominal fee. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Another question, constable. 22 Have you addressed this item in your budget, or were you 23 hoping to get it resolved ahead of the budget, and therefore 24 you didn't put it in your budget request? 25 MR. PICKENS: Yes, sir, I was hoping to get 7-28-03 22 1 it resolved today. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 3 MR. PICKENS: I did not address it in the 4 budget issue. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: What you may want to do is -- 6 it appears that there's not going to be any affirmative 7 action taken on that item today -- is to possibly annotate 8 your budget request so that it would include that item, at 9 least so it's available for consideration. 10 MR. PICKENS: Okay. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Does anybody have a motion 12 that they wish to offer at this time on this item? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, but I have a 14 comment. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I have a comment. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One more comment to 17 make. And if you -- if you address it in the budget system, 18 like it -- the Judge is recommending, and I agree 100 19 percent, the line item that you were going to take that from 20 disappears September 30. 21 MR. PICKENS: I understand that. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The comment that I have 24 -- Bobby, if you would either, you know, submit the 25 paperwork to the Judge requesting that, but during the 7-28-03 23 1 workshop period, I really recommend the constables come 2 together as a group and explain what they want. And -- you 3 know, and let us try to work through this. 'Cause, I mean, 4 that's -- that, to me, I mean, working with -- one-on-one 5 with the constables or any other -- you know, where we have 6 J.P.'s, the same thing; there's four of them. I mean, it 7 makes it a lot easier for me if we're kind of trying to 8 treat everyone the same. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: An excellent suggestion. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with that. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Excellent. 13 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just one other 14 observation. And, again, this has not got to do with this 15 particularly, but just as a general policy. When -- when, 16 in a department, a job is vacant for some period of time, I 17 think that should not be viewed as a windfall we can use for 18 unbudgeted items. I think that's -- that should be viewed 19 as money that goes back into the General Fund. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would apply to 21 all departments. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause they're all -- 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What do you mean, 7-28-03 24 1 "Rusty"? I have one question that I can -- Bobby, do you 2 have a radio of any kind at this time? 3 MR. PICKENS: No, not at all. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Car or anything? 5 MR. PICKENS: No. This is the cheapest route 6 to go. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: My only concern would be 8 -- and I agree with Bobby on cell phones, 'cause we do have 9 problems with coverage -- is between now and October 1st, 10 Bobby being able to get help if he's serving papers or 11 needing something and has no radio. I have no spares at 12 this time. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I recognize that. 14 And -- but, I mean, all the constables are in that same 15 situation. I don't think -- 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Most of them have 17 radios. 18 MR. PICKENS: They all have radios. Precinct 19 3 has a portable. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Precinct 4 has got 21 not only a radio, but phone and a radar unit he purchased 22 with his own funds. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That would be my only 24 concern, is leaving an officer out there without any kind of 25 radio communication. 7-28-03 25 1 JUDGE TINLEY: 2 has a radio? 2 MR. PICKENS: Yes, sir. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which I guess he 4 does, yeah. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on this item, 6 gentlemen? Thank you, Constable Pickens. Next item, I'm 7 going to take an item out of order as an accommodation to 8 someone who's here. Item 13, if there's no objection, 9 consider and discuss seeking proposed rate change for 10 medical examiner service. We received notification from the 11 Travis County Medical Examiner's office, and it's included 12 within your materials, that they are increasing the cost of 13 their postmortem services, as well as in-court testimony in 14 connection with any of those services. I had asked Mr. John 15 Grimes with Grimes Funeral Chapels to -- who does a good bit 16 of our transporting back and forth to Austin, to be here 17 today so that we might get the benefit of the good news/bad 18 news in this particular situation, and I think what he has 19 to say may be enlightening. Mr. Grimes? If you'd be kind 20 enough to tell us your thoughts generally about operating 21 with Travis County or with Bexar County? 22 MR. GRIMES: Okay. Just that issue itself? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I think those are our 24 only two options, so that's -- 25 MR. GRIMES: Gentlemen, if you will check 7-28-03 26 1 with all four J.P.'s here -- and all four are doing an 2 excellent job; let me say that to start with. The -- the 3 problem comes every year, just like your budgets here go up, 4 and every year the Medical Examiner's fees go up and so 5 forth. The biggest problem is some of these bodies are sent 6 for autopsies, that a person, 85 years old and is found 7 dead, and a lot of times when we take it over, they tell us 8 before they start, you know, there's no need to really do 9 this. They enjoy taking your money; let me say this. But I 10 think that if a little more effort is put forth with the 11 J.P.'s and trying to contact an attending physician who 12 attended this individual prior to their death and find out 13 what they were treating them for, we'll eliminate some of 14 these bodies going to Austin. Now, I have no problem with 15 taking bodies to Austin. Let me say that my concern, as a 16 taxpayer and so forth, is that I'm paying part of that, just 17 like y'all are. 18 As far as working with Travis County Medical 19 Examiner as opposed to Bexar County Medical Examiner, let me 20 tell you these things. Number one, when the J.P. calls 21 Travis County Medical Examiner, they give us a time of when 22 to be there. They tell us 9:00, 9:30, and we're there -- 23 normally they get us either right away, or we're the next 24 one in line. We -- if you'll look back, we have charged the 25 County the same all the way through, through the years, as 7-28-03 27 1 far as the mileage situation and so forth, other than when 2 gasoline and so forth went up. You go to San Antonio, the 3 Medical Examiner there's office will not help you unload a 4 human remains, will not help you place it on one of their 5 examining tables. When you go back to get it, they will not 6 help you at that time. They won't even give you a pair of 7 gloves or -- if, by chance, you go off and forget your 8 gloves. So, they -- they don't really want to work with -- 9 and I say "us." I'm sure it's everybody, because their 10 attitude is a little bit different than Travis County. 11 Travis County will help you unload, they'll help you load 12 your stretcher or the cot back. They will take and wrap the 13 human remains in plastic, to where you don't have blood 14 seepage in your vehicle on your way back. 15 I don't know exactly what the fee increase is 16 as opposed to what San Antonio or whatever. If we take one 17 to San Antonio for some reason, you will not stay and wait 18 for it and bring it back, so then there's going to be a 19 second charge for the County to adhere, because it's not 20 a -- a family member's fault that the J.P. ordered an 21 autopsy. So, it's -- be kind of hard for you to tell a 22 family, well, Kerr County sent it to San Antonio, but 23 they're not going to pay for you to bring it back. And 24 Travis County is much better to work with. You can also 25 verify this with the J.P.'s. They will call the J.P. that 7-28-03 28 1 afternoon and tell them normally what their findings are. 2 If it happens to be one that is toxicology pending, then 3 they'll tell them right off the bat, "Well, we didn't find 4 anything that we can say that so-and-so expired from." But, 5 in my opinion, you're better off with -- with Travis County. 6 In Bandera County -- and you can check with 7 Tommy, 'cause he's the money man over there -- those J.P.'s 8 -- and they're closer to San Antonio, but San Antonio, it 9 may be, you know, a month or longer before you get a reply, 10 so a family is waiting for certified copies to where they 11 can collect on the insurance and start paying some of their 12 bills, and an insurance company will not pay on a death 13 certificate that's signed "toxicology pending." But my 14 opinion is you would be much better off, 'cause if not -- 15 another thing, where we send one man now, if we have to do 16 business with San Antonio or Bexar County, we're going to 17 have to send two men, because they won't help us. And let 18 me say this; there's a lot of us that's a little bit on the 19 overweight side, and one person can't -- can't handle a 20 human remains professionally and dignified by themselves. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you -- John, do you 22 -- if you were going -- I know you haven't used San Antonio 23 in a long time, but what about the length of time of 24 actually getting the body back in your possession and 25 returning to Kerrville? Is there a difference in the two? 7-28-03 29 1 MR. GRIMES: Yes. Because, see, we wait in 2 San -- in Austin. They'll tell us to be there a certain 3 time, and we wait for it, and normally we're back on the 4 road within a couple of hours. Occasionally we have had 5 some problems on weekends in Austin, but you got to realize 6 that their people are also going out into the field for 7 inquests, so they may not be there then. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then how long does 9 it take them? 10 MR. GRIMES: Well, if I took to it San 11 Antonio today, you probably will maybe get it back tomorrow, 12 and maybe not. I mean, their attitude is kind of like, 13 well, we're doing this as a favor for you. Well, I mean, 14 yeah, they are. But, I mean, they're getting paid for it. 15 We're not asking them to do it for free. But it's just, I 16 think that you'll have a lot of excessive charges. Instead 17 of trying to reduce charges, you're adding to it, because if 18 I have to send an extra man down with them, I'm going to 19 have to pass that charge on, and it's not 'cause I want to. 20 It's because of strictly doing the business. 21 As I have suggested before when Judge Henneke 22 was judge, you know, I had said what you need to do -- and I 23 talked to Dr. Bayardo, and he was willing to come over here 24 and talk to the J.P.'s, the police department, the Sheriff's 25 Department, and also, like, Bandera and Gillespie and 7-28-03 30 1 Kendall and Kimble Counties, and tell them, you know, what 2 to look for. If you find these things, yes, send for an 3 autopsy. If you find these things, there's no need for an 4 autopsy. Because we do a tremendous amount of autopsies 5 that neighboring counties our size don't do. Now, I can't 6 tell you why. I do know this, 'cause I've asked; that when 7 they go to -- the J.P.'s go to school, the person teaching 8 that class says if you are not satisfied or feel that you're 9 not qualified to say what somebody died for, send them for 10 an autopsy. Fine. That's fine if you're in a metropolitan 11 area, but where you're in a small county -- and I don't have 12 the figures, but I'm sure Tommy can give you -- or you may 13 have them in front of you there, as to what you spent last 14 year in autopsies. And I -- 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's a bunch. 16 MR. GRIMES: -- even suggested that, you 17 know, if you had somebody that you could subcontract, you 18 know, they don't have to be a licensed funeral home or a 19 licensed funeral director to carry a body from, say, our 20 funeral home to Austin and bring it back to our funeral 21 home, or from Kerrville Funeral Home or Wright's, you know. 22 So that if you happen to have somebody on the staff that you 23 could use, whether it be a deputy sheriff, whether it be a 24 constable, or even if one of you gentlemen wanted to be so 25 kind as to say, well, we'll rotate ourselves and -- 7-28-03 31 1 (Laughter) -- and in one month, say it's on a weekly deal or 2 on a monthly deal; it's just like the J.P.'s on their 3 rotation. I think we took probably -- maybe 20 bodies last 4 year, maybe a little bit more, so it's not a thing that 5 you're going to be going every week. But, I mean, to cut a 6 corner, you got to have a means to cut it. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, about 20 trips at 8 around $2,000, or a little more than $2,000 per trip? 9 MR. GRIMES: When you count what the J.P. -- 10 what the medical examiner charges and us -- I think our bill 11 is around $240, is it not, Tommy? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. 13 MR. GRIMES: So, if we made 20 trips at $240 14 a piece, that would almost, you know, pay for something 15 else. Now, not -- we're not going to totally wipe out 16 autopsies; let me make that clear. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right, I understand. 18 MR. GRIMES: But there are some that -- that 19 I just feel that are useless trips. And, of course, the -- 20 Travis County enjoys taking your money. They may send you a 21 thank-you card or a Christmas card at the end of the year, I 22 don't know. But that's my opinion, and I think I speak for 23 the other firms here also. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. I mean, I 25 guess the two options, or the two reasonably close areas 7-28-03 32 1 that have medical examiners are San Antonio and Austin, and 2 that's it? 3 MR. GRIMES: That is correct. And, see, San 4 Angelo brings some of theirs to Austin -- I mean San 5 Antonio, 'cause they have a contract, and evidently it's 6 cheaper. But they have a deputy sheriff that, you know -- 7 let's just say this -- this month it's your duty, if you 8 make a trip to San Antonio or not, and then they pay for 9 them to say overnight and then bring it back. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you know what the 11 charge is in San Antonio compared to Austin? 12 MR. GRIMES: No, sir, I don't. I imagine 13 y'all have -- 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's always been a 15 little less. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Always been just a 18 little bit -- 19 MR. GRIMES: But if your J.P.'s are unhappy 20 and so forth, and then people start coming to you saying, 21 "My father died and we can't get a death certificate because 22 the medical examiner in San Antonio hasn't done his work," 23 well, then, you know, it just dribbles on down. I mean, 24 whoever y'all tell us take them to, we will do that. But, I 25 mean, I can tell you we got an excellent relationship with 7-28-03 33 1 Travis County. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: What we may save in going to 3 San Antonio could very easily be eaten up by the extra man 4 that it -- 5 MR. GRIMES: And the extra trip. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: May have to make two trips. 7 MR. GRIMES: Yeah. We'll -- you're going to 8 have to send two men twice, once to take it down there, once 9 to bring it back. Because in San Antonio, the individual 10 that's there in their command center will tell you go put it 11 on an empty table, and we will not help you. If something 12 happened and your cot broke and you fell in there, well, 13 then it's up to you, because they'll tell you -- or they'll 14 send you to go get some gloves from a neighboring funeral 15 home or whatever. They make no effort to try to work with 16 you. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions of 18 Mr. Grimes? Thank you for being here, Mr. Grimes. 19 MR. GRIMES: Well, thank you. And I 20 appreciate it. And all we ask is just tell us where, and -- 21 but do bear that in mind, because the charge is going to go 22 up if we have to make two trips and send two men. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. 24 MR. GRIMES: Thank you. Any other questions? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've learned more 7-28-03 34 1 today about this topic than I really wanted to know. 2 MR. GRIMES: Well, I mean, I left a bunch 3 out. I mean, I just thought -- I was anxious to see who was 4 going to jump up and say, well, I'll take a month, you know, 5 or a week, and, you know, show how dedicated you are. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Look right behind you. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's got an Explorer. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'm glad, on some of the 9 ones he's transported, he's transporting; we ain't. It does 10 -- but the one comment I'd like to make is I agree, you 11 know, Travis County is a lot easier to work with, even with 12 us. But Bexar County has some expertise in certain areas, 13 and Vincent DiMaio is a world-renowned expert in gunshot 14 wounds. Some of those may be sent down there, where other 15 ones will be sent to Bayardo. And our -- normally, the 16 officer or the investigator at the scene and the J.P. do 17 work together. Sometimes the J.P.'s going to order an 18 autopsy if it's unattended, and there's nothing we can do 19 about it, where we think it may not need to be. But other 20 times, if we have any question about the -- the cause of 21 death, we're going to ask the J.P. to order an autopsy 22 because of evidentiary values and things that we have to 23 have, and you only get one shot at it, and it's a whole lot 24 cheaper than exhuming the body. You're always going to have 25 people wonder -- especially if it's unattended, the family 7-28-03 35 1 will always wonder. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Grimes, you 3 mentioned -- when was the last time Dr. Bayardo came and 4 talked to the J.P.'s? 5 MR. GRIMES: He's never been here. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: He told me he's going to 7 retire and come up here and live and do it part-time for us. 8 MR. GRIMES: I offered -- this was, I want to 9 say, three years ago, but about basically this same type 10 deal, and we had a trip down there, and he happened to be 11 the one doing the autopsy. And we mentioned it to him; he 12 said he'd be happy to. I even offered to pick up the tab 13 and let it -- have it like a dinner deal and let him talk, 14 and he said no. He didn't want any funeral home involvement 15 in it to where it looked like he was being -- playing 16 favorites. But he was willing to come three years ago, and 17 I feel like he would be now, because -- and he'd probably 18 bring one of his investigators, because for the police to 19 find out what they're to look for and all of this, they need 20 that investigator. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would be -- I think 22 it would be very, probably, helpful to -- you know, I 23 don't -- I mean, I'm not asking you to set it up; I think 24 that could be a perceived conflict. But either through the 25 Sheriff or just getting with the J.P.'s -- 7-28-03 36 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think we can probably 2 set up a one-day seminar. Dr. Bayardo is one of the most 3 fabulous people there is to set up, and we can have the 4 J.P.'s and him in on it. I think it would be a good idea. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We might invite other 6 counties. 7 MR. GRIMES: Yeah, invite other counties. We 8 had a situation here -- what, two years ago? -- where Kerr 9 County ended up paying for an autopsy because Real County 10 was broke. I mean, maybe not in everything, but they were 11 broke in what they had set aside for autopsies. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That was a little bit of 13 ours, one of our murder victims that got dumped in Real 14 County. So, Real County couldn't pay for the autopsy, and 15 there had to be one, so we had to pay. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, Rusty, that 17 would be very worthwhile to get Dr. Bayardo. 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think it would be 19 fabulous, and I will get our people to set one up. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you for bringing 21 that up. 22 MR. GRIMES: Like I say, it's -- let me say 23 this. If any of you are kind of queasy, I would either say 24 eat real early before you go, or wait and eat afterwards. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He doesn't show pictures 7-28-03 37 1 and stuff, does he? 2 MR. GRIMES: Well, he's liable to. I mean, 3 if you want an education, how are you going to get it? You 4 can't -- 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You'll get more of an 6 education than you want if you come. 7 MR. GRIMES: I can tell you that, but great 8 people to work with. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 10 MR. GRIMES: Thank you, gentlemen. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate it. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have one more 13 comment on the thing, and it's really not a question, but I 14 want to you to hear this, John. I would think -- and no 15 one's ever told me this, but I would think the reason that 16 the J.P.'s order so many autopsies is because of some kind 17 of liability factor, or a fear of liability. So, in our 18 workshop, it seems like -- David, you help me here -- that 19 that issue should be addressed as much as anything. You 20 know, from the legal side. 21 MR. MOTLEY: That would be okay to address 22 it, but they do have quite a bit of immunity. I think a lot 23 of times what John's talking about is right. I think if 24 they have any doubt about it, they just ought to order an 25 autopsy. And I -- I mean, I'm in no way critical. I think 7-28-03 38 1 when there's some question about it, obviously, they're not 2 doctors, and there's some times that they -- they don't 3 know. I'm sure that's what the problem is. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We send a lot of 5 autopsies out there, though. I mean, a lot. 6 MR. GRIMES: Let me just say this. If -- 7 when you call a doctor's office, 90 percent of the time he's 8 busy. You leave word for him to call. If he hasn't called 9 you back in 30 minutes or an hour, call him again. You 10 know, and then that -- then he says, "Yes, I've been busy, 11 but I've been treating so-and-so for such-and-such." Then 12 they can -- you know, 'cause you take somebody 80 or 90 13 years old; more than likely, they're going to have died from 14 a heart condition, unless they already were being treated 15 for cancer or something of that nature. So, that's my 16 criticism or whatever is, if you're trying to cut a corner, 17 that's a good avenue to cut it. And then the others, like I 18 say -- and I said that with tongue-in-cheek about y'all 19 carrying them over there, because we have some we'd be glad 20 to swap with you. Thank you. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, John. We 22 appreciate it. 23 MR. MOTLEY: Buster, I know a fellow here in 24 town whose father died out-of-county; they had a contract 25 with Bexar County. He waited over a year to get the 7-28-03 39 1 toxicology report, what John's talking about. He couldn't 2 get his insurance claims filed, get his death certificate, 3 and everything was pending, and he waited over a year. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, history -- go 5 back in history. We used to use San Antonio, and this is 6 exactly the reason that John and them moved to Austin. 7 They're very -- 8 MR. GRIMES: Well, John didn't move it to 9 Austin. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, no, that you 11 started hauling -- that we said please go to Austin. 12 MR. GRIMES: That's correct, yes, sir. I 13 don't know whether San Antonio is overloaded or what, but 14 that -- that's the thing. And for your dollars paying and 15 all, I think you're much better off with Austin, Texas. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a good area 17 of, I mean, service to the community too. I mean, it's a 18 difficult time for families when, you know, they have a 19 death. We want to make it as smooth as possible. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. 21 MR. GRIMES: Thank you, gentlemen. Have a 22 good day. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you helping us. 24 Thank you. We'll move back up to 1.8. Is Glenn here? 25 Yeah, there he is. Consider and discuss security fence 7-28-03 40 1 around Exhibit Center. Mr. Holekamp? 2 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes. I put this on the 3 agenda, and there was a memo dated July 16th, kind of just a 4 brief explanation of my reasoning behind getting a fence. 5 We have two options. One option is to close off the whole 6 grounds, excluding the Extension Office, so the public can 7 go to meetings at night and all, and then closing off the -- 8 the remaining property with a locking gate of some sort. 9 Main reason is -- well, there are two reasons, basically. 10 One is security. Weekends and nights when there are no 11 events, we have -- we have had three trailers stolen in the 12 last two years, and our Sheriff's Department has found every 13 one of them, but that's not -- one of these days we're not 14 going to get them back. Chains have been cut. These 15 trailers have been secured; they're chained and locked, and 16 they've been cut with bolt cutters and that nature. 17 My -- my request is to either secure the 18 grounds to where we can open the gates when events take 19 place, or -- or secure a yard; maybe you wish to call it an 20 area, whether it be 100-by-100, with a fence, to put 21 trailers, the dumpsters. Dumpsters, there's an abuse with 22 dumpsters that people drive on the property and they fill 23 the dumpsters up over the weekend, when there wasn't even an 24 event going. So, we need to -- and I was going to leave it 25 to the Court to really decide which direction they wish to 7-28-03 41 1 choose, you know. Because people come in at night 2 unannounced, put horses in stalls and then leave early in 3 the morning with their horse, and we're unable to police 4 that. There's a certain amount of liability, I'm sure, on 5 the County's part by letting people do it. We don't know 6 that they're doing it until we get there in the morning and 7 find a horse and don't know who it belongs to, but they 8 eventually come and get it. I guess we could lock the stall 9 up while the horse is in there, but I don't know how smart 10 that would be either. So, I'm asking direction from the 11 Court. 12 Fencing that, what I wish to use is not chain 13 link; it is not a high-security, razor wire-type fence. It 14 is a 48-inch pipe top rail with a non-climbable -- people 15 can jump over it, but I'm not trying to make it 16 people-proof. I'm trying to make it automobile-proof to 17 deter trespassing, basically, of people driving around and 18 vandalizing the property. So, there will be numerous gates 19 that would be locked that, when they're opened, the flow of 20 -- for events really should not be inhibited too much. 21 There'll be somewhat of a different way of doing things, but 22 the cost of the fence is somewhere between $10 and $11 a 23 foot, and that's based on gates and everything included. I 24 -- we could probably save money by buying the material 25 ourselves and paying any one of the two people that bid this 7-28-03 42 1 project by the hour. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Glenn, can you verbally 3 say where -- 4 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How do you plan on doing 6 this? 7 MR. HOLEKAMP: First option would be the -- 8 the beginning -- the front of the building, the entrance 9 that's closest to the Exhibit Center. If you're familiar 10 when you drive through, there's that rock sign. About 11 halfway between the rock sign and that gate, there'll be 12 a -- a fence that will go towards the Exhibit Center. And 13 before it gets to the Exhibit Center, it will take an 14 immediate right, and it will cut over there and meet that 15 new fence that the Arts and Crafts people put in. That's 16 basically that one. That will secure the Exhibit Center, 17 horse stalls, the indoor arena, and the polo fields. The 18 other option would be, say, an 80-by-100 secure fence that 19 would enclose all the horse stalls and that little grassy 20 area back there where we could put dumpsters, we could put 21 trailers and that sort of thing in there. It's in the very 22 back. It probably wouldn't be as secure, you know, but with 23 some lighting, night lighting -- more night lighting, it may 24 help us a little. Those are my two options. I really -- I 25 personally like the one up front, but I can understand that 7-28-03 43 1 it may make -- create some problems for when there are two 2 events going. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I mean, I -- I 4 like the option -- I think we need to do something, and I 5 think we need to really secure the whole facility. I don't 6 think -- building a little yard doesn't really accomplish 7 much. But I'm also trying to figure -- I don't know that we 8 would need a fence as much as -- you mentioned, you know, 9 trying to keep vehicles out. We could use, like, the -- the 10 post and cables, something like Road and Bridge used along 11 River Road and some other roads. That -- you know, I don't 12 know if it's any -- it may be more expensive; I don't know 13 what the cost of that is. But -- or just use pipe; you 14 know, go up 4 foot, do the pipe rail on it, no wire at all. 15 Something like that would work, but I'm just trying to 16 figure out a way to do it so you really don't cause a 17 problem. And what about if you came out from where the Arts 18 and Crafts gate is, on the side of the Extension Office -- 19 MR. HOLEKAMP: Uh-huh. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- and went straight out 21 towards the Exhibit Hall and then came straight up and made 22 kind of, like, a driveway out of that entrance, so you can 23 get to those -- you could get, you know, to the Arts and 24 Crafts or you could get to the Extension Office. 25 MR. HOLEKAMP: That's pretty much what I 7-28-03 44 1 meant, but I moved it a little further over for -- just for 2 illustration purposes. It is actually -- there is a power 3 line pole that sits about halfway between, and I think that 4 would probably be used as one of the lines, because people 5 can't park around it anyway. And your -- your 6 recommendation about the -- you know, we could very easily 7 put a two-rail pipe fence and would accomplish the same 8 thing, where if somebody was parking, they could physically 9 get over the fence or under the fence. And that's not what 10 we're trying to keep out, is people. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 12 MR. HOLEKAMP: I think we need to keep the 13 automobiles out, the ones that are messing around over there 14 stealing trailers and looking for something else to 15 vandalize. And it may stop some of the breaking of the 16 windows in the -- in the hog barn part. They throw beer 17 bottles through those things; they just drive around at 18 night and throw stuff through the windows. So this would 19 stop that, possibly. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How would we -- how would 21 you have it open, or -- like, a swing gate or something? 22 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes. Yeah. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Into this part, something 24 like that? 25 MR. HOLEKAMP: There would be probably three 7-28-03 45 1 or four, depending on the configuration that they were 2 needing to -- for that event. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm just trying to figure 4 out, because so much traffic cuts in front of the Exhibit 5 Hall and goes from gate to gate. 6 MR. HOLEKAMP: There would be a gate there, 7 yes. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably maybe a double 9 with a temporary post? 10 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, it would be. And with 11 the two -- two-rail pipe -- your suggestion is well-taken, 12 and I really didn't -- didn't give that a whole lot of 13 thought, but it may work, because then you can incorporate 14 your gates with the same configuration as the fence, and it 15 would look about the same. Just lay them back open, chain 16 them open. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, and you don't have 18 to look at the pricing cost between pipe versus getting that 19 half-inch cable. This is just put the pipes in the ground, 20 drill the holes, concrete -- 21 MR. HOLEKAMP: These were just prices from 22 some guys that -- I had gotten some prices just to -- to 23 kind of give us an idea what we were up against. And I do 24 know I can probably buy pipe in -- the County could buy the 25 pipe and pay someone to weld and set posts probably cheaper 7-28-03 46 1 than this price here, 'cause they mark up the -- the cost of 2 the pipe also. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think cable would be a 4 lot. 5 MR. HOLEKAMP: And the cable is a great idea. 6 I'll be glad to look into that. Two-strand cable or just 7 one? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: (Shrugged.) I think -- I 9 mean, you talk to -- I mean, I'm sure -- 10 MS. HARDIN: Those are really expensive. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The cable is? 12 MS. HARDIN: The posts and the cables, 'cause 13 you have to have -- if you do two wires, then you have to 14 have the post drilled two places. 15 MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, is that right? One might 16 be enough. But -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or one rail maybe could 18 be enough, to just put a solid rail on top. 19 MR. HOLEKAMP: Right, yes. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You give us the 21 linear foot cost. 22 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What would the total 24 cost be? 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You could get somebody 7-28-03 47 1 to do the welding and we could have inmate labor do the -- 2 the painting on the pipe or drilling or whatever it needed 3 to be, as far as that labor goes. 4 MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, yeah. 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just the welding part. 6 But it does need to be secured, that whole area. 7 MR. HOLEKAMP: And both numbers that I used 8 was approximately 400 to 450 feet. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Times 11 bucks. 10 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah, it's approximately 11 $5,000, somewhere between $4,500 and $5,000. Now, that is 12 if someone does -- brings everything in and does everything 13 based on what that wire -- that 48-inch. Now, what -- what 14 Commissioner Letz is talking about, I can do it cheaper. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You would need two 16 sets of gates? One set? 17 MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, golly. I think they're -- 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One set of gates to 19 get you into the Exhibit Center and one to get you behind? 20 MR. HOLEKAMP: That is correct. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause the stock show 22 people use that all the time. 23 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think the pipe -- 25 my idea would be that much cheaper, really, based on some 7-28-03 48 1 prices I've got recently for some other projects I'm working 2 on. 3 MR. HOLEKAMP: Uh-huh. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I just think it's 5 more security. I think if we put wire on these, it's going 6 to get torn, and if you put in, like, 3-inch pipe and do 7 2-inch rail, something like that, you could probably get 8 a -- 9 MR. HOLEKAMP: But, basically, what I did in 10 bringing this to you was -- is to try to get, you know, 11 approval, basically. The need of doing something out there, 12 I guess, is where -- and I can't -- I don't think it would 13 really work with closing the gates in the front currently 14 where they go to the Exhibit Center -- I mean to the 15 Extension Office, because they have different functions at 16 different times, and I'd be willing to venture to say they 17 won't open a gate. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You do have money in 19 Permanent Improvements out there, don't you? 20 MR. HOLEKAMP: I've got some in my -- yes, 21 sir, in my Major Repairs. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Major Repairs. 23 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir, I do. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Holekamp, I 25 recall that many years ago, that facility was more or less 7-28-03 49 1 built by donations, private funds, community labor and all 2 that. Are there any organizations left today that perhaps 3 involve the junior livestock affairs that would help with 4 the -- the cost and/or construction of something like this? 5 MR. HOLEKAMP: I don't know. I can't answer 6 that definitively, but I would say probably not. Since the 7 County took over the -- the maintenance of that facility 8 back in '94, '95, whatever it was -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The recent -- 10 MR. HOLEKAMP: -- they've chosen not to 11 really help. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the facility, you 13 know, on the interior -- on the grounds-type work, 14 Commissioner -- former Commissioner Oehler -- 15 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- built a lot of 17 fencing. I loaned one our bobcats for him to use -- or, 18 actually, he drilled all the holes for the fence at one 19 time. So, Commissioners have donated some time out there. 20 Post holes. 21 MR. HOLEKAMP: But a lot of this is -- these 22 are -- these are numbers, and I know I won't exceed it, 23 because there's a good possibility, as the Sheriff says, we 24 can utilize trustees, we can utilize community service and a 25 lot of this stuff. So, I would probably choose the hourly 7-28-03 50 1 thing, so we would maybe just be faced with someone to do 2 the welding itself. But, there again, when I come in with a 3 proposal, you know, I can't -- it's pretty hard to put a 4 number on for sure what it's going to cost. I just have to 5 cap them. I won't go over, basically. But I feel like we 6 can do it quite a bit cheaper. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Glenn, I just find 8 this whole conversation funny, I mean humorous, because here 9 we're talking about securing a facility that I've heard many 10 times in this room that's not worth having, and we're 11 leaving out a brand-new Extension Office building that's 12 very expensive and very nice, and it's just typical 13 government. That's all right. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is incongruous, 15 isn't it? 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's easy for 17 you to say. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you don't need a 19 motion? Or do you want a motion? 20 MR. HOLEKAMP: That's up to y'all. The 21 money's in the budget. It's not like I'm asking -- I'm just 22 asking kind of for approval to proceed. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I have a 24 question, Mr. Holekamp, on a related matter, before he gets 25 away, if you don't mind. I note with interest that the 7-28-03 51 1 County made an application to the City -- 2 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- for some hotel and 4 motel tax -- 5 MR. HOLEKAMP: Mm-hmm. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- money. For what 7 purpose? And when did we approve applying for that money? 8 MR. HOLEKAMP: I turned it in to -- I applied 9 for an icemaker and some other stuff, and I had run it by 10 Judge Tinley, that I was going to ask for these things. I 11 didn't bring it to the Court. And -- but I had briefed him 12 on it. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: He apprised me that he was 14 going to request it. 15 MR. HOLEKAMP: I was late getting everything 16 together. And, in fact, I was -- I was with an electrician 17 the other night at the Probation Office, and I did not make 18 it to the -- to the City Council that evening at a 19 presentation. We had some light problems over there and we 20 couldn't work on it because of computers during the day. So 21 -- but, there again, it was -- it was to improve some of 22 the -- I guess the bleachers and some things that -- if 23 there is ever some major repairs to the facility, it's stuff 24 that can be moved; it's not fixed. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, Tommy, would 7-28-03 52 1 this be considered a capital improvement? Or would it be 2 considered repair? 3 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I think -- I think it 4 would be an improvement to the facility, and it's attached 5 to the property, so I think it's an improvement. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then I think it needs a 7 motion, because we generally specifically approve capital 8 improvement -- capital expenditures. Wouldn't you agree? 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Certainly wouldn't hurt to 10 have a motion to authorize Mr. Holekamp to proceed. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to 12 authorize the Maintenance Director to put up appropriate 13 fencing to secure the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, in 14 an amount not to exceed $5,000. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that 16 motion. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 18 the Maintenance Director be authorized to cause to be 19 erected a fence or other security to secure the Hill Country 20 Youth Exhibit Center at a cost not to exceed $5,000. Any 21 further questions or discussion? All in favor of the 22 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 7-28-03 53 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Thank you 2 very much, Mr. Holekamp. We appreciate that. 3 MR. HOLEKAMP: Thank you. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: It's a few minutes after 5 10:00. We have a timed item on the agenda, and that's an 6 update on the High Water Bridge. Commissioner Baldwin. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Thank you 8 very much. A couple -- a couple of reasons I've -- I've put 9 this on the agenda. One is it's just that time for us to -- 10 to get an update on the High Water bridge. And, two, to 11 make sure that, you know, if there -- if there is something 12 that we need to discuss in our budgetary system, then now's 13 the time to come forward. But -- and I've asked our 14 resident engineer, Mr. Tucker, and his sidekick in crime, 15 Mike Coward, to come and -- and just kind of give us a brief 16 update on the High Water Bridge that we've been talking 17 about a long time. Mr. Tucker. 18 MR. TUCKER: Morning. Thank you, Mr. 19 Baldwin. Well, as far as the update goes, we're pretty much 20 on schedule as far as the latest schedule that we've been 21 on. We're there. We're -- how's that for government talk? 22 (Laughter.) Latest schedule is we expect to let the project 23 in mid-'04. I think it's targeted right now for September. 24 If we can get the project ready earlier than that, we'll let 25 it earlier than that, but we're in the process of acquiring 7-28-03 54 1 right-of-way right now. We are moving along. I understand 2 we've acquired at least one parcel that I know of, and we're 3 in negotiation stages with other property owners. It's 4 probably going to start construction in late '04. And Mike 5 has -- has brought, just to kind of refresh your memory, 6 kind of an artist's rendering our Bridge Division in Austin 7 gave us. This is not exactly the way the bridge will look, 8 but it's pretty close. There's some -- I think the lighting 9 may change a little bit from that. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where does my name go? 11 MR. TUCKER: We're going to -- that was one 12 of the things that will change. We were -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. 14 AUDIENCE: 50 foot underwater. 15 MR. TUCKER: Well, we were going to call it 16 the Buster Baldwin Memorial Bridge. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Memorial? 18 MR. TUCKER: We've -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it's going on 20 later, I hope. 21 MR. TUCKER: We've got -- well, as long as 22 it's been delayed, you know -- 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not going to happen in 24 my lifetime. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Be about six feet 7-28-03 55 1 under. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does it have bike lanes? 3 MR. COWARD: It has bike accommodation lanes, 4 which means they're wider outside lanes. Yes, it does. Has 5 sidewalks, too. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wow. 7 MR. TUCKER: You'll have an alcove -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The City will be 9 happy about that. 10 MR. TUCKER: There will be some utilities 11 accommodated on the bridge. There will -- the City -- we're 12 working with the City to look at bringing utilities across 13 the river in the bridge construction, so that should help 14 with planning and development on the south side of the 15 river. Is there anything -- 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, so, how far along 17 are we with the engineering? And the engineering's done in 18 San Antonio? Or is it being done in Austin? 19 MR. TUCKER: Actually, we're supervising the 20 engineering out of our office here in Kerrville. We have a 21 consulting firm that is doing plans, and they're doing 22 the -- let's say the roadway plans. The actual bridge 23 structure is being designed by our Bridge Division in 24 Austin. And the plans are what make -- 25 MR. COWARD: It's 95 percent complete, which 7-28-03 56 1 is essentially complete. We just have one last review to do 2 before the plans will be ready for letting. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Great. That's great 4 news. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we hold to the 6 current schedule -- 7 MR. TUCKER: Yes. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- and let bids in 9 mid-'04, when would the bridge be completed? 10 MR. TUCKER: When would it be completed? 11 MR. COWARD: It's about probably a 15- to 12 18-month project, and we'd probably -- I mean, the bridge 13 can kind of go on by itself, but we would look to go over 14 there between Goat Creek Road and 27, and get that piece 15 done early on, because of some issues with circulation with 16 the elementary school. So we'll be able to, you know, try 17 to get over there and get that one little piece of road 18 done, open to traffic, and get the signal in at 27 early on 19 in the project. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That kind of answered the 21 question. So, the plan is just going to come from the -- on 22 the outside of Thompson Drive, but it's going to go all the 23 way across the open field? 24 MR. COWARD: Yes, it is. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tie straight into Goat 7-28-03 57 1 Creek? 2 MR. COWARD: It actually lines up, and -- and 3 was planned to line up with the entrance of the elementary 4 school. 5 MR. TUCKER: One of the things that we 6 would -- I think we've been in discussions with -- with the 7 Commissioners Court and individual Commissioners over the 8 last two or three years, and I just thought we'd bring this 9 up as a reminder, that there is a demand for connecting this 10 new road, this Spur 98 extension, we call it, on the south 11 side of the river, connecting that with Bear Creek Road so 12 that people that use Bear Creek Road now to -- to come into 13 town would have access to the High Water Bridge. There's a 14 fairly short distance that would need to be traversed over 15 what's now not highly developed land, and that we see is a 16 crucial link to further develop a system of roads that could 17 -- could bring people on the outside of the river into town 18 with this High Water Bridge without forcing them to go 19 Sheppard Rees Road and ultimately to the Sidney Baker 20 Bridge. 'Cause, if you've noticed, whenever we have floods, 21 the Sidney Baker Bridge is pretty much the only way to 22 handle traffic across the river, except for the bridge there 23 on Loop 534. 24 So, we -- we feel like that's a crucial link, 25 and we would urge the County to be looking ahead to talk 7-28-03 58 1 about a right-of-way corridor. This could possibly be -- 2 have state participation, state funding in the future, but 3 we don't believe that -- looking at the cash flow picture, 4 that it's going to happen with state funds any time soon. 5 In the next five years, anyway. But we're concerned that 6 the development out there, spurred by this new bridge, might 7 close that corridor up to where the right-of-way that we 8 would need, or y'all would need, whoever, might close up and 9 become unavailable, which would be, I think, a real shame. 10 We don't have the ability to go out in front -- let's say in 11 front of the project and get that right-of-way in the near 12 term, and so it would be our suggestion that the County 13 would consider building a connecting road from Bear Creek 14 Road to this -- this Spur 98 in the near future so that 15 that -- that road corridor can be established. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd like to take 17 that a step further. We've had some conversations about 18 this, and begun to think about -- it's been discussed in the 19 past, but to move that along, connecting all that up with 20 the south side of the river road that would come back across 21 the river at Hunt. So, extending that south side concept 22 all the way to Hunt. And it's kind of like the -- the 23 Commissioner Baldwin Memorial Bridge; it's going to -- 24 probably not going to happen in any of our lifetimes, but if 25 it's ever going to happen, we need to start moving it along 7-28-03 59 1 now, probably. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What would be the 3 distance of the extension that Bill's making reference to, 4 to connect Spur 98? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Half a mile. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Half mile? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Half mile. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right through a very, 9 very nice horse ranch. Very nice horse ranch. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But this -- the 11 south side of Hunt, of course, would be another 12, 12 14 miles. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Years ago, we built -- 14 the Court built a road from Indian Creek over to Goat Creek, 15 a spur of that, and -- and if my memory serves me, we built 16 it with 120-foot right-of-ways, et cetera, for future 17 purposes. Way, way, way ahead of our -- ahead of the game. 18 But at least there is a leg already done sitting out there, 19 waiting on this long-term plan. And we're intending on 20 doing that; we're going to get to it in mid-'04. (Laughter.) 21 MR. TUCKER: Good. We'll call it -- whose 22 memorial name are we going to use? 23 (Discussion off the record.) 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if 25 everybody's aware of it or not, but this is probably the 7-28-03 60 1 last time Mr. Tucker will appear before the Commissioners 2 Court as a state employee. He's fixing to depart as a young 3 man, going to refire. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wow. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Young man. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was not aware of that. 7 MR. TUCKER: Yeah. State Legislature passed 8 a law giving an early retirement incentive, and it was just 9 too good to pass up. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just for you, personally. 11 MR. TUCKER: And a few thousand of my good 12 friends. But I'll -- I will remain in Kerrville, and 13 probably do something else. I'm too young to retire, like 14 Mr. Baldwin said. But I won't be the TexDOT area engineer 15 any longer as of August 31st of this year. Mike Coward, who 16 is my assistant and pretty much runs the operation now, will 17 at least be acting area engineer until they replace me -- 18 until they find a permanent area engineer, which may or may 19 not be Mike. But Mike will be available to you in the 20 interim, and so I don't think there will be any -- any gap 21 in operations. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bill, I don't think 23 you're replaceable. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's not. 25 MR. TUCKER: That's probably a good thing. 7-28-03 61 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I didn't say good or bad; 2 I just said you're not replaceable. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tucker and I were good 4 friends the day he went to work for the Highway Department. 5 33 years ago? 6 MR. TUCKER: Yeah. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Something like that. 8 And we've been very fortunate in Kerr County for him to come 9 over here from Austin to be with us all these years. 10 MR. TUCKER: I just feel like both of us are 11 fortunate to have survived those 30 years. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree. Okay, 13 that's all the nice things I'm going to say about you, 14 'cause you are one of my voters. Now, get out of here; 15 we're in business. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: I have a question for 17 Mr. Tucker, if I might. What is the likelihood that this 18 letting and construction schedule that you've just given us, 19 that it's going to hold? 20 MR. TUCKER: I feel it's very likely. Of 21 course, I don't have a crystal ball that's very accurate, as 22 my history will testify, but I don't see anything that would 23 prevent us from having that project ready for letting in the 24 time we've talked about, and I don't -- I don't see anything 25 keeping it from being let once we hand it over to Austin to 7-28-03 62 1 let. We never -- never know for sure if there will be a 2 cash flow problem or -- or something will -- will jump up, 3 but I can't foresee it right now. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: You're very confident that 5 it's good to go this time? 6 MR. TUCKER: Yes. 7 MR. COWARD: There should not be any issues, 8 but one of the things we've been cautioned about by our 9 right-of-way folks, it just takes one bankruptcy, one 10 divorce, one circumstance like that, and then the property 11 acquisition kind of grinds to a halt; we have to go back and 12 refigure out the title issues and all that other kind of 13 stuff. And we have to have the properties to build the 14 project, so -- but we are out actively pursuing right-of-way 15 right now. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Any 17 other questions? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One. Mike, there is 19 an ugly rumor out floating around, and simply a rumor, that 20 -- that all that property on the south side of the river has 21 just recently been sold to a church. I don't know what you 22 want to do with that, but I would track it down if I were 23 you. 24 MR. COWARD: I'll check on it. I guess we're 25 negotiating with Lewis -- Dr. Lewis right now, who is the -- 7-28-03 63 1 apparently owns it right now. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. Very good. 3 MR. TUCKER: Thank y'all. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 6 MR. TUCKER: And I've enjoyed working with 7 the Court over these years. I appreciate the courtesies 8 you've given me. Thank you. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Tucker. The 10 best to you. Next item, consider and discuss approval of 11 card to be mailed to county citizens for purpose of 911 12 address change, and the funding for the same. The 911 folks 13 are here, it appears. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Bullock is here to 15 present the card, and I'm just going to turn it over to him, 16 let him explain what we're doing here. It's been a long 17 process, and we're excited that we're to a point where we're 18 fixing to do -- I do want to make one comment. There's what 19 we're -- basically, what we're doing. If you remember, 20 historically with 911, we have been going around the county 21 and piecemealing, basically, just putting pieces together to 22 try to get everybody addressed. And within the last year, 23 we have decided -- Commissioner Letz and I are the liaisons 24 to the 911, and with Mr. Bullock's help, we've been meeting 25 regularly with the 911 staff, and we've decided -- if you 7-28-03 64 1 remember, it's been in this court -- we've decided that 2 we're going to address the entire county in one fell swoop, 3 and that's what this is about. We're going to do a mass 4 mailing September 1, and it is time to make those final 5 decisions of adopting this card that we have chosen to mail 6 out, and then our magician, Tommy, is going to help us 7 figure out a way to pay for it, I hope. So, anyway -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait -- wait, I have a 9 comment before you go, Jim. And while this looks like a 10 very simple little card here, this card is the result of, I 11 think, at least three, four, five meetings of -- large 12 meetings. We're talking about meetings of four or five 13 people to create this card, and numerous small meetings. 14 Thanks go out to the Judge, Jim Bullock, and 911. The 15 system, while it seems very simple, and it is a simple 16 process, this card is very important. The verbiage is 17 important; what's on it is important. Because one thing we 18 don't want to do -- and this is what Commissioner Baldwin 19 and I have been really striving for, is we want it to be 20 right. We got to make sure that we don't make a mistake on 21 this, and -- and you have to mesh all that to inform the 22 public and be able to pull the information from the 23 computers to print the card, and then get it printed. So, I 24 mean -- and I'm saying all that just to say that everyone 25 needs to, on the Court, really look at this and make sure, 7-28-03 65 1 you know, they understand this, because this will be going 2 out within a month. And the card idea, I think credit goes 3 to Jim and to Buster for getting away from the letter and 4 saving us a whole lot of money by using the card, which is 5 probably going to -- I think it was their idea, anyway. I 6 know it wasn't mine. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll take it. We'll 8 take it. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. But, anyway, Jim, 10 explain to us what we have. 11 MR. BULLOCK: Okay. The process of this 12 would be that we would accept a file from 911, and along 13 with a form that would be preprinted. It would be taken 14 over to San Antonio to a printer that's available that could 15 print all the variable information on the front. There's 16 not any companies in Kerrville that will accept the -- the 17 charge of printing all these variable lines on the front of 18 it that are not -- they don't have the machinery capable of 19 that. One company here in Kerrville -- I can't remember the 20 name of it, but it was -- has called a couple of different 21 printers, and they cannot handle the number of variable 22 fields that we have. The code on the front, we -- that has 23 been split up into four codes. That has been by geo-region, 24 so that we can try to help or aid 911 in all these calls, 25 and the calls coming in and the various times as set down, 7-28-03 66 1 and they would be in a general area of the county, and 2 people out there could be better acquainted with that area 3 of the county without having to jump all over the county 4 answering questions from each geo-region. And the Code 1 5 would be the geo-region southwest and south, which would be 6 in Precincts 4, 1, and 2. Code 2 would be geo-region east, 7 which would be affecting 2, 3, and 1. And then Code 3 would 8 be the north, and that's affecting Precincts 3, 2, and 1. 9 And then Code 4 is just northwest and west, and that's all 10 Precinct 4. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I might make a 12 comment, the reason we went with the code -- or came up with 13 the code, it was felt that it was too much of a possible 14 bottleneck to have everybody calling 911 at the same time, 15 and we need to break up the county. They didn't have a way 16 to break it up. They first did it by precinct, and they 17 didn't have a way to do it by precinct. Geo-region, Buster 18 and I thought would confuse everyone when you start talking 19 about geo-regions; no one knows what they are. So, they 20 created the code system based on geo-regions. So, you know, 21 all you see on the card is just Code 1, 2, 3, or 4. And, 22 you know, this is what makes up that code. 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I know this is all 24 well thought out, so -- but I ask the question so that you 25 can help me answer it when I get it. What's the purpose in 7-28-03 67 1 calling 911 to confirm the receipt? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll defer to 911. 3 MR. AMERINE: I'll address that. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is Bill Amerine, 5 director of 911. 6 MR. AMERINE: Thank you. We thought about 7 not having people respond, and what that would mean as far 8 as liability of having these new addresses going to our 9 emergency database without any kind of confirmation. And 10 there's two purposes for having them call us. One is to 11 verify that the information that we have identified for the 12 new address is correct and makes sense. We have multiple 13 sources, as I've told the Commissioners Court before, that 14 we use to come up with these addresses; U.S. Post Office 15 information, phone information, and KCAD information. A lot 16 of that source is old. And, you know, we've done the best 17 we can to come up with these addresses based upon what we've 18 seen, but we want to make sure it's correct. And having 19 them call us -- we figure these calls would take anywhere 20 from 1 to 5 minutes -- would help us verify the information 21 is correct, and also it gives us an opportunity to let them 22 know certain key things, like when this will become 23 effective, what they can expect from the Post Office in 24 January, and also gives us -- the second purpose of this 25 call is to give us a chance to try to sell to them a 911 7-28-03 68 1 sign that they can put at the entrance of their property, 2 because all this addressing, even though it's helpful, is 3 somewhat meaningless without that property sign. So, that 4 was the reason why we wanted them to call us. Now, we did 5 put a provision in this card that you're looking at that if 6 they don't call, that we're going to go ahead and put that 7 address in the emergency database on 1 January. Not 8 responding to this card is the same thing as agreeing to 9 what we've done to it. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And let me expand on one 11 thing that I think Bill mentioned. Really, one of the 12 really big draws for us is the liability issue, the 13 liability that goes to the telephone companies. They're -- 14 the telephone companies are uncomfortable with changing 15 records without getting feedback from the people that are 16 changing. And the system has to use the phones, so we're 17 kind of -- you know, they really wanted something in here on 18 getting feedback from them, and this is the way to do it. 19 But, you know, it's kind of a compromise, basically, you 20 know. We're telling people to call, but we didn't want to 21 be in a situation of not changing them if they didn't call. 22 So we said if you don't call, you know, we're going to 23 change you anyway. But it's -- that was largely the phone 24 company. 25 MR. AMERINE: They're absolutely concerned 7-28-03 69 1 about the liability changing with what -- what they consider 2 their record, just from 911, electronic feeds without having 3 customer input to that. It would be the same thing if I 4 called your electric utility as 911 and told them to change 5 physical address. They wouldn't like that without some sort 6 of customer input. That was another primary reason for the 7 calling. 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Amerine, how -- 9 how confident are we that the emergency service providers -- 10 law enforcement, fire, those -- are plugged into this to the 11 extent that it won't be confusing when names and addresses 12 have changed? 13 MR. AMERINE: I don't know how to answer that 14 question, as far as how well they're plugged into it. We 15 publicized when the effective dates are going to be for 16 these, what the citizen input period is going to be, a big 17 public service announcement to all the media here right 18 prior to the card being mailed out, with instructions on how 19 citizens should respond to the card, and also giving those 20 critical dates that between September and the end of the 21 year will be their opportunity to provide us feedback and 22 pick up their sign; that in January, that information will 23 be fed from the phone companies to our database. And then, 24 shortly after that, the U.S. Post Office -- Postmasters will 25 be sending out their confirmation saying that the citizens 7-28-03 70 1 now have from January 2004 to the end of the year to convert 2 their mailing addresses to the new physical 911 address. 3 So, I don't know how to answer your question, sir. I 4 haven't had any meetings with First Responders, law 5 enforcement folks, volunteer fire departments about these 6 dates, other than showing them the same plan I showed the 7 Court some time ago. Hopefully, these public service 8 announcements will hit everyone who needs to know. But I 9 will -- I think it's a good suggestion to go back and think 10 about having kind of a meeting of minds, perhaps, prior to 11 getting down the road too far. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Probably want to 13 meet again with KARFA before -- well, before January 1. 14 MR. AMERINE: Certainly. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question. 16 Is this a blanket mailing, or is it just going to be a 17 four-stage mailing of that correspondence with these dates? 18 MR. AMERINE: We thought about that. And we 19 did a mailing for unmapped and unnamed roads -- this is -- 20 we'll get back to your question, sir -- a couple months ago, 21 and we were actually pleased, but also shocked and surprised 22 how quickly people responded. That's why we wanted to do 23 this staged feedback. But we're still having people from 24 over a month ago respond to that card. They -- you know, 25 they set it aside, they discover it in the glove box, then 7-28-03 71 1 they get around to responding. We're hoping by having this 2 staged response, that we could get people to respond in that 3 time frame and give us an opportunity to have staff 4 available to respond to that. You know, if we did a staged 5 mailout, I'm concerned -- for instance, if I did the last 6 Code 4 area, the last geo-region, let's say the middle of 7 November, I'm worried that people wouldn't be calling me 8 until the end of December, which would be essentially too 9 late to make any change in the databases. So, by getting 10 the cards out in September, everybody will have a chance to 11 see the card and respond in that time frame, before we hit 12 the middle of December. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But you also have the 14 potential that those who you would like to respond between 15 November 10th and 28th will respond between September 9th 16 and 26th. 17 MR. AMERINE: When they do, we're going to go 18 ahead and take those calls. We don't want to say call back 19 during your code period, because if we do that, we might not 20 hear back from them. We hope that most people will read 21 this and pay attention to it and then respond, and that at 22 least segregates those calls to some degree. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other issue that 24 we -- on this is that we're afraid if we don't do them all 25 at once, a bunch of people would be calling, saying, "Well, 7-28-03 72 1 I didn't get my card,' cause they -- 'cause the geo -- the 2 code system is not logical in anyone's mind to where the 3 geo-regions are set up. You couldn't say, "Well, you're not 4 in the right precinct," try to explain geo-regions to the 5 public, and -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, you know, 8 there -- it could -- there could be a miracle come out of 9 this thing, where we're actually doing it right, and there 10 wouldn't be that many phone calls. That's what I think is 11 going to happen. There's not going to be that many phone 12 calls, because we're doing it right the first time. And 13 people -- people are smart, and they're going to understand 14 it. 15 MR. AMERINE: And a point, just for the -- it 16 really isn't germane to the discussion, but just for the 17 court record, something that our local media brought up 18 prior to the Commissioners Court. We're offering a 911 sign 19 for a nominal fee, but all we're really pushing as a 911 20 entity is that people sign their property. If they want to 21 make their own sign, if they want to do one of these 22 high-dollar, expensive, custom signs for their curb, that's 23 fine. We're making it available at a nominal fee, just like 24 the other counties. They can have a reflective sign for 25 their property for $5. 7-28-03 73 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we would like to 2 have all of them look alike, if we could. 3 MR. AMERINE: Certainly. My goal is to try 4 to get people to sign their property, because if they don't, 5 having them addressed is almost a meaningless exercise. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, Judge, this part 7 of the -- let me just say this and then get back to you. 8 This part of this agenda item, we simply want to adopt this 9 card, the Commissioners Court to vote to approve this 10 particular card. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Mailout notice. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: I've got a question. 14 Mr. Bullock, you indicated that you had made arrangements 15 with a printing firm in San Antonio, I believe? 16 MR. BULLOCK: The printing company here made 17 that arrangement. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 'Cause I noticed 19 there was a -- a quote from a local printing establishment, 20 and -- 21 MR. BULLOCK: Right. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: But the -- the printing matter 23 is being arranged through the local; is that correct? 24 MR. BULLOCK: Yes, sure is. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 7-28-03 74 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They were nice enough 2 to seek this company out in San Antonio and make all the 3 arrangements and everything. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very, very easy to 6 work with. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: That answers my question. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just one other comment, 9 just kind of also to give Dave another thing he can tell 10 people when they call, is that -- is that one of the reasons 11 when they call is they find out where to put their address 12 sign. There's -- I mean, it's exactly where to put it, how 13 to put it. And when you get out into your area and my area, 14 you have a lot of ranches. Does it go with the house or go 15 with the gate? I'm asking. That's the kind of thing that 16 they'll be able to answer, tell them what to do, and I think 17 it will be helpful to the public. Buster, did you make a 18 motion? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to right 20 now. I move that we approve this particular card that's on 21 file here; that would be our mailing to the citizens of Kerr 22 County for the purpose of 911 address changing. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 25 seconded that the Court approve the notification card that's 7-28-03 75 1 been presented to the Court as the notification to county 2 citizens for the purpose of 911 address change, and for -- 3 you're going to include the funding? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's going to be a 5 separate -- we're going to do a separate issue. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. For the purpose of 7 notification. Is there any further questions or discussion? 8 Sheriff had a question, I believe. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only comment I 10 had -- and I agree with Bill. I'm glad to see this coming, 11 but the -- the public education and that is going to be the 12 most important part, I think, to it. And I didn't know if 13 there's something stronger that the Court or 911 can do to 14 try and insure that the people do put the same type of 15 address sign up in the same type of location, because that's 16 our -- that's our most important part, you know, as far as 17 the EMS or even us, especially in the county, which is where 18 most of this is going to be, is being able to know 19 immediately where that place is when you drive up. And if 20 you give them a whole lot of choice on where they're going 21 to put the sign, or if they're even going to put a sign up, 22 it becomes like we're not doing much at all. We really need 23 to be able to find a lot of these places a whole lot 24 quicker. I don't know if there's a little bit stronger deal 25 in there to really get them to use the same type of signs, 7-28-03 76 1 whether it's one that they furnish or how they put them, and 2 trying to encourage that a lot more than just volunteering 3 to do it. 4 MR. AMERINE: What -- we're going to do a 5 couple things. When folks call or come in, we're going to 6 provide them guidelines, but we're also going to publish 7 service announcements in all the media during this time 8 frame on exactly how the sign should appear and the size of 9 the lettering, reflective, where it should be posted based 10 upon your property layout, all those things. So, between 11 the information we'll provide personally when folks call or 12 come in, there will also be multiple opportunities for folks 13 to see things in the local media. So, beyond that, you 14 know -- you know, when folks come in to pick up their sign, 15 we're going give them specific instructions in writing on 16 how to do that. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, again, I think -- 18 I think the majority -- 99 percent of the people in the 19 county are going to go for this $5 deal. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sure hope so. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I really feel like 22 they will. But you -- I see what your concern is, Sheriff. 23 But you have to remember, we're many, many miles down the 24 road compared to where we've been. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, there's no doubt. I 7-28-03 77 1 think it's the best improvement we've ever had, and I'm glad 2 to see it going forward. It's just I'd hate to see a lot of 3 people not take advantage of it. And I'd be willing to help 4 with any of the media stuff on it, because it's just -- it's 5 going to be so important to law enforcement that it's 6 unreal. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, with your 8 comments today, probably the press is going to pick up on 9 it. He's going to continue hammering it almost every week, 10 and then I think they're -- we're planning a -- a press 11 conference with all the players with -- with this thing, so 12 we're going to -- which includes us. And we keep hammering 13 it; that's all we can do. We can't -- of course, we can't 14 force them, but I think all of them will. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think they will. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 17 comments? 18 MR. PICKENS: Judge, as for Constable, 19 Precinct 1 -- and I've already talked to Bill about this, 20 and I'm agreeing with the Sheriff and with what Buster 21 Baldwin's saying about their being uniform, as far as the 22 signs. About two months ago, I had to go over to Gillespie 23 County to serve a paper, look for a guy. I had no idea 24 where I was going to go, called the Sheriff's Office over 25 there, gave them the person's name. They told me, "You go 7-28-03 78 1 8 miles out of 290 West, you'll see the road sign. You'll 2 see a blue sign with the lettering on it and the number." I 3 went straight to the house within 30 minutes. And I've 4 already talked to Bill about this, and I'm in agreement with 5 Rusty; I'll be willing to help with the media on that as 6 well. I'd have gone over there, been driving around, you 7 know, for hours. So, I mean, Gillespie County is really 8 just -- they've got theirs down pat. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Any further 10 questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify 11 by raising your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the other half of 16 this agenda item is the cost of doing all of this. And, as 17 you see in your notes that I put in the -- put in the 18 packet, the printing of the card is $1,200. The postage is 19 $3,200, which brings a total of $4,400 that we have not 20 budgeted, because we didn't know that we were going to do 21 this when we completed last year's budget. Now -- what? 22 So, I have some thoughts that I've -- that I've written down 23 here for y'all to consider, and I really think that getting 24 this thing printed -- I would think that we could go to the 25 printing company and say, "Please hold our bill until 7-28-03 79 1 October 1," and so that we can put it in next year's budget 2 and pay for the printing of this card in next year's budget 3 without having to go into any kind of reserve or moving 4 money around in this year's budget. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that what you call Austin 6 accounting? 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that's what 8 they call it. And I don't -- you know, we can break the 9 budget and all that this year if we wanted to, but I'd 10 rather not. I'd rather attempt that. And then, as far as 11 the postage is concerned, I mean, we're talking about 12 $3,200 -- coming up with $3,200 somewhere, and I don't know 13 where we come up with that. But we do have -- in the county 14 system, we have a postage meter that is large enough to 15 handle a mailing like this. I have not spoken with that 16 department -- that elected official, but if y'all felt like 17 that may be a better route for us to go, as opposed to going 18 into the budget and seeking out funds, we can certainly 19 attempt that. But other than that -- other than getting the 20 company to hold off the billing until October 1, and going 21 inside our system for mailing, we would have -- we'd have to 22 ask the County Auditor to find $4,400 to get this project 23 done that we've -- that we have committed to, and it needs 24 to be done. So, Tommy, what do you think? You didn't hear 25 any of that, did you? 7-28-03 80 1 MR. TOMLINSON: Well -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was trying to be 3 gentle for you. 4 MR. TOMLINSON: There's -- I know there's a 5 line item available for transfer out of Nondepartmental. 6 Last September, we prepaid a contract for maintenance for 7 some equipment, so we do have at least that -- at least the 8 $4,400 in that -- that account currently. And we will not 9 have any more bills to go into that account for the 10 remainder of the year. So, it's up to the court. I -- I 11 have a -- a budget amendment that's not for today's court, 12 but before the end of the year, we have a -- we do have a 13 shortfall in almost every department for health insurance 14 for -- for this year's budget. Last -- last year, when the 15 budget was finalized, we did not budget sufficient funds 16 for -- for this year. I think -- I think we already 17 probably know that because of working on next year's budget, 18 but my estimation is that, county-wide, this -- this 19 amendment will -- it's probably in the neighborhood of 20 $140,000. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 140? 22 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait a minute, don't 24 do that to him. Let me get through my issue. I'm -- you 25 may have just sunk my whole deal here. 7-28-03 81 1 MR. TOMLINSON: But I -- I've worked up the 2 estimates on what I -- what I think this -- this amendment 3 will be. I just have not brought it to the Court before 4 now, but it will probably be necessary for next court. So, 5 I will be bringing that to the Court next meeting. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, let me ask you 7 a question. Let's say that we transferred this -- this 8 $4,400 out of the Nondepartmental. 9 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you think that it 11 would be wise to create a new line in the Commissioners 12 Court, a new 911 postage line? Or -- because I really see 13 this as just really a one-time shot. I don't -- 14 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't see a need to do 15 that. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll just transfer it 17 into the Commissioners Court postage? 18 MR. TOMLINSON: There is a postage line item 19 in -- in Commissioners Court budget. I don't -- I don't see 20 that that's -- that will be necessary to establish -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If it were an annual 22 deal, I could see where we would, but I -- this is a 23 one-time deal. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, it seems 25 that we should do a -- I mean, the postage in the postage 7-28-03 82 1 line items, and do the other into office supplies. I mean, 2 those -- I mean, I don't think it all should go into 3 postage. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. 5 That's correct. 6 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we -- because it's -- 7 because it's toward the end of the year, even though -- even 8 though we might not receive an invoice for -- for those 9 cards until the prior year, from -- from generally accepted 10 County principles, for audit purposes, we would accrue that 11 bill back to this year anyway. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner -- 14 MR. TOMLINSON: Simply because we did order 15 that -- the invoice in the current year -- I mean, for 16 supplies the current year. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner, is the 18 20 cents per card postage, is that a discounted rate for 19 bulk, or is that the standard postcard rate? 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it's a 21 discounted rate for bulk, because these are the only folks 22 that came up with that actual -- that actual -- 23 MR. MOTLEY: 23 cents is the current. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Current is 23. And 25 the other folks -- other companies that we talked with was 7-28-03 83 1 23 cents. These guys say they can do it for 20; we have it 2 in writing. And that's the figure that I worked with. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: There's no possibility we 5 could get that pre -- those cards with the postage already 6 printed on them, as you very often see? It may be that, 7 using a discounted rate, you can't do that, but -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, actually, I 9 think the -- I think the folks that actually print the card 10 are going to -- is that not right? 11 MR. BULLOCK: I think the company -- the 12 printing company in San Antonio would be putting the postage 13 on it. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be putting the postage 15 on it, but they're going to charge us the 20 cents instead 16 of the 23 cents that you normally pay. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: I was just concerned about the 18 labor costs of running it through a postage meter here 19 locally, or somebody actually putting some sort of a stamp 20 on there. You've answered my question. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we need - my last 23 question; you can make a motion. The postage number is a 24 little bit variable, because on the size of the mailing, do 25 we know exactly what that's going to be yet? Or are we 7-28-03 84 1 estimating it to be about $3,200, based on -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fairly 3 accurate. It's fairly accurate. The number -- the 20 cents 4 per card postage, and how many cards? 5 MR. BULLOCK: 16,000. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 16,000 cards. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my question is, 8 what if we only mail out 15,5? Do we pay -- are we paying 9 postage on those -- on the full 16? Even if we don't use 10 some of them? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. 12 MR. BULLOCK: That would probably -- it could 13 be a little less than 16,000, so therefore it would be less 14 total as far as dollar amount. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So it would be the exact 16 number of cards we print? 17 MR. BULLOCK: Yeah, it would be the exact 18 number. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So, you make a 20 motion? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to try here. 22 To transfer $3,200 from Nondepartmental line -- do you 23 happen to have the line number? 24 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't have a line item. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nondepartmental is 7-28-03 85 1 close enough for you? To the Postage line in Commissioners 2 Court, and transfer $1,200 from Nondepartmental into Office 3 Supplies in the Commissioners Court. And I apologize, I 4 don't have those numbers. Didn't know this was going to 5 happen. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 8 we make the transfers from Nondepartmental to the 9 Commissioners Court line items as indicated in the motion. 10 Any further questions or discussion? All in favor of the 11 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: At this point, we're going to 16 take a break. A little late doing that; I apologize to the 17 court reporter for that. But we'll reconvene at 18 approximately 11 a.m. 19 (Recess taken from 10:48 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.) 20 - - - - - - - - - - 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's come back to order. 22 We'll resume the Commissioners Court meeting scheduled for 23 this date. Next item is Item 10, consider and discuss 24 proposed new O.S.S.F. Rules and Regulations and set a public 25 hearing on same. Commissioner Letz, Commissioner Nicholson. 7-28-03 86 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We discussed this at our 2 last meeting, and we're trying to basically finalize the 3 verbiage in the new -- under our new -- or what will be new 4 order for O.S.S.F. in Kerr County. And the verbiage we're 5 trying to work out is that in Section 10. You might recall 6 at our last meeting I had some language that -- basically, 7 that referred to 285, Section 285 -- Chapter 285, and 8 deleted the language related to the 10-acre exemption, which 9 was kind of the intent of the committee recommendation. The 10 problem is, T.C.E.Q. didn't like that approach. They didn't 11 like us deleting something that they felt that we had no 12 authority to delete something from 285. I mean, to me, 13 we're in a semantics period here. If we take it out, we 14 take it out. How we do it shouldn't make that much 15 difference. But, anyway, we're easy to get along with. If 16 they don't want us to do it that way, we'll do it a 17 different way. 18 And the language that is in the backup, you 19 know -- well, I understand -- well, Dave and I discussed it. 20 We did not like that language, because we thought it was a 21 little bit vague. The part that was vague refers to 22 repairs, alterations, or new installation. That "repairs, 23 alteration..." we thought was vague. Since then, we -- I 24 have talked with Stuart, and Dave may have too, and we have 25 some new language in place of that which would read -- 10(A) 7-28-03 87 1 in the backup would read, "Regardless of acreage involved, 2 any new construction, repairs, or extension of an O.S.S.F. 3 located within Kerr County, Texas, are required to be 4 permitted and licensed. The reason -- and that is the 5 recommended language from T.C.E.Q. And the reason is, new 6 construction, repair, and extension -- Stuart, is there 7 another one? 8 MR. BARRON: Alteration. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, and alterations. 10 Those are all defined terms in Chapter 285. And that way, 11 it was -- that was the reason for them wanting to use those 12 words, "new construction, repair, alteration, or extension." 13 Not that I don't trust Stuart and T.C.E.Q.; I haven't 14 referred back to Chapter 285, and those are defined terms. 15 To me, I guess it doesn't totally ease my concern about what 16 is a repair. Is it -- you know, and the definition of -- 17 I'll just read the definition of repair. It says, "To 18 replace any component of an O.S.S.F. in situations not 19 included under emergency repairs, according to Chapter 20 285.35 of this title, relating to emergency repairs, 21 excluding maintenance. The replacement of tanks or 22 drainfields is considered a repair and requires a permit for 23 the entire O.S.S.F. system." And I'm -- you know, but it 24 still refers to -- in my mind, a little repair could trigger 25 this, and I don't think that's the intent of the -- at least 7-28-03 88 1 my intent. If someone has something minor to do, I don't 2 think that should trigger having to license the entire 3 system. So, that's kind of where we are. 4 And I might -- because there are two 5 entities, being -- Kerr County being one, and U.G.R.A. being 6 the other, that have authority over septic in Kerr County, 7 and I think it is very important that our language under our 8 -- each of our orders be identical, I don't know if we want 9 to try to work out language right now or postpone this and 10 do it at our next meeting. U.G.R.A., I believe, set a 11 public hearing on some language -- other language other than 12 this for August 20th, and my recommendation would be to 13 U.G.R.A. to reset a new public hearing in September so we do 14 have the exact same language, and take no action on 15 August 20th. I mentioned this to Jerry a few minutes ago -- 16 Jerry Ahrens, U.G.R.A. Board member. He thinks that's not a 17 bad idea. 18 MR. AHRENS: Not a bad idea. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not a bad idea. So, 20 that's kind of where we are. I mean, we're moving forward. 21 We're at the point of just, really, you know, making sure 22 everyone's comfortable with the exact language. And because 23 this is an important issue, I think it's real important that 24 we have the exact language that we're talking about at the 25 time we do the public hearing. 7-28-03 89 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you a 2 question. Now, the way I understand it is that any time 3 that you change the rules, like what you're talking about 4 changing, I mean, you have to get T.C.E.Q. to approve it. 5 So, do you -- do you have the -- your public hearing first 6 in the local -- in the county of the changes, and then -- 7 then send to it Austin for their approval? Or how, you 8 know, does that work? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that's the 10 formal -- in reality, that is the way it has to work. You 11 have to have a public hearing; then we, at the public 12 hearing, adopt, approve. We're trying to get them to 13 basically preapprove the language, I mean, 'cause I don't 14 see a whole lot of point in having a public hearing and us 15 adopting something, them saying no, we can't do it. So, 16 through Stuart, we're trying to get T.C.E.Q. to preapprove 17 the language that we're now trying to get into Section 10, 18 and that's kind of where we are right now. I mean, Dave and 19 I discussed it -- don't like it, and discussed it with 20 Stuart. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you may have a 22 hard time getting that done. But -- and then -- 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Excuse me, getting 24 what done? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Getting them to 7-28-03 90 1 preapprove something. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We -- they're not going 3 to say it's preapproved. They're saying this is our 4 preferred language. That's what they've said. They said, 5 "We like this." 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They're happy to do 7 that, I bet you. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, they're really 9 happy to say what they want. But -- 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then the 10-acre 11 exemption, I -- I understand that clearly, how they would 12 balk at that, because that's state law. That's law, and we 13 certainly can't come along, and neither can they come along 14 and change anything that's in the state law. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but -- 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's a question 17 mark at the end of that. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you're right. 19 But, in -- in effect, we're changing Chapter 285 here by 20 making a modification to Section 10. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, that -- 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, I'm -- 24 I think that Section 10 allows us to be more stringent. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: With their approval. 7-28-03 91 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: With their approval. 2 Now, that's not to say that I'm in favor of -- of abolishing 3 the 10-acre -- the exemption. I'm not. But I think we can 4 do it if that's what we decide to do. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're not in favor of 6 abolishing the 10-acre rule? 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh, I think it's -- 8 you don't have -- there's little or no impact on protecting 9 our environment. If we need to -- if we need to abolish it 10 for reasons of getting agreement and -- and moving on down 11 the road with administration of O.S.S.F., that may be 12 another thing. It's unnecessary to abolish it. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree with 14 you. Seems like maybe we better find something else, find 15 some other way to come together, 'cause that -- I'm -- I'm 16 certainly not in favor of abolishing or disallowing the 17 10-acre exemption. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My turn? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At the risk of being 21 considered obstreperous or adversarial, which is not my 22 intention at all, I have grave concerns about -- about the 23 route that we're going. And where we have stated that we're 24 trying to make Section 10 more stringent than state 25 requirements, I have great doubts that we're doing that. 7-28-03 92 1 The way we seem to be headed is that we've eliminated -- 2 we're proposing to eliminate inspections prior to real 3 estate transfer. And Commissioner Letz may be happy to know 4 that you have convinced me that they are invasive the way 5 they are, but I think there's some room for finding an 6 avenue of approach that perhaps is equal to or maybe even 7 better than. We have no responsible method for knowing the 8 condition of O.S.S.F.'s that change hands outside of real 9 estate title company office purview. 10 We have not, to my knowledge, asserted any 11 water quality or other health and safety standards or 12 regulations that might be periodically examined. We have no 13 database that I'm aware of that catalogs existing O.S.S.F. 14 conditions and locations. We have access to data from KCAD, 15 but only months after O.S.S.F. may have been altered due to 16 additional construction or for other reasons. And we have 17 only the word of a property owner who, for whatever his or 18 her reasons, has transferred property to a new owner, and 19 from these transactions that they place in the title 20 company, we have no sustaining record. And those things 21 trouble me. They truly trouble me. 22 Last time we talked about this, I unveiled 23 a -- a structure of how we might at least correct the 24 ability to garner information and, if you will, build a 25 database. There seems to be some hesitation about using 7-28-03 93 1 that, because it is asserted that real estate companies make 2 a seller sign some kind of paperwork that says that things 3 are in good standing, whether it's the septic tank or the 4 plumbing or electrical or whatever. But the record goes 5 nowhere. It goes into the portfolio of the buyer, the 6 seller, and it dies there. We don't have any record that 7 goes into -- into the health records as to -- as to the 8 condition of a septic system. You may be surprised -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Speak a little bit 10 louder. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. You can't hear 12 me? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can barely hear you 14 sitting next to you. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, this stupid 16 thing in my ear makes me sound like I'm screaming. Thank 17 you. It may be surprising to you to know that people have 18 called me about it as well, and want to know why would we do 19 away with the real estate transfer section. And my answer 20 is that, despite my protestations, the train seems to be 21 leaving the station on that particular -- on that particular 22 thing. A couple folks have suggested to me certain ways 23 that we might want to deal with this topic, and my response 24 to them has been, "Put it down. If it makes some sense, I 25 will bring it to the Court for the Court's consideration." 7-28-03 94 1 I'm going to do that today. I'm going to give you two 2 scenarios that have been advanced to me about Section 10, 3 and one of them has to do with water quality, how you judge 4 the function of a system or the malfunction of a system 5 based on water quality. And the other has to do with 6 allowing the -- or requiring those who do the installation 7 and repairs to accept responsibility for what they've done, 8 and certify to the buyer and the seller that they've done it 9 correctly. 10 Does everybody have a copy? I have other 11 copies here if people want to see them. And what I would 12 like to ask our two representatives, who I again say thank 13 you for your efforts to-date, but I'd like to ask you to go 14 back to the drawing board, with the two representatives from 15 the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, and take a look at 16 these two different models. One is based on water quality, 17 and the other is based on a responsibility to the seller or 18 the -- or the buyer, whomever, in terms of taking care of 19 septic systems. I think there's too much to digest here 20 today, but I would ask you to take it back and take a look 21 at it. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You made a comment 23 earlier today about herding cats? I think that's very 24 accurate with this suggestion. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Probably right. I 7-28-03 95 1 agree. Probably -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, I was not 3 prepared to set a public hearing day. I don't think 4 Commissioner Nicholson was either, even before we received 5 this, and visiting with U.G.R.A.'s representative, I mean, 6 they acknowledge that we need a little more work. I 7 think -- I guess the question I have for the Court is that, 8 at what point, I guess, do we stop looking at it and have a 9 public hearing and, you know, move forward one way or the 10 other? I mean, you know, it's kind of -- we kind of get 11 together, and then all of a sudden we scatter again. And -- 12 and I -- I'm going to do a couple more meetings with the 13 committee, but not much more beyond that, because I -- I 14 mean, I think the committee's met as much as we can. 15 The committee is pretty much in agreement as 16 to a recommended O.S.S.F. plan, and the committee -- I mean, 17 each individual member of that committee is -- I can assure 18 you, is not 100 percent happy with that recommendation. 19 It's a compromise from many different groups, and some of 20 that -- everyone is agreeing that we have to have a 21 compromise to get something through that everyone can live 22 with and that, you know, there are the votes on both boards 23 to get through those bodies and proceed. So, I don't mind, 24 you know, going back, have one more meeting with the 25 committee, look at this information provided by Commissioner 7-28-03 96 1 Williams, and try to come up with that by our next meeting, 2 a draft language for Section 10 that both -- you know, that 3 both entities -- hopefully we can move forward with. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's all I'm 5 asking, to take a look at it. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One of the questions 7 we have to address, and one of the reasons we began this 8 process in the first place was making a decision about 9 whether we were going to continue to have a Designated 10 Representative, or if Kerr County was going to take over the 11 -- the administration of O.S.S.F. There's, I think, general 12 agreement -- just my sense of it -- that we would continue 13 to have a designated agent, but we have to make that 14 decision at a certain time frame. Are we running out of 15 time on that? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we did that 17 last time, authorized the negotiations to take place on that 18 topic, as to an agreement between Kerr County and the River 19 Authority for Designated Representative. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And those -- those 21 negotiations, I -- I expect would likely succeed. But the 22 -- in the event they didn't, we have a contract expiration, 23 don't we? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- basically, I 25 mean, I agree with Commissioner Nicholson on this point, 7-28-03 97 1 that that topic of a contract and this topic on the rules 2 are very much intertwined. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if we can't -- you 5 know, all of -- I guess, the recommendation of having -- the 6 County having a Designated Representative, being U.G.R.A., 7 to me presumes that we have the same set of rules. And if 8 we can't get to the same set of rules, all bets are off on 9 who's going to -- and, you know, I can see us quickly 10 spiraling in opposite directions, and U.G.R.A. doing rules 11 within 1,500 feet and the County doing rules in our area, 12 which I think would be a mistake for the citizens of Kerr 13 County. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with you. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, that's -- 16 you know, they are related because of that one topic. And I 17 think that the Court, you know, as a whole needs to 18 understand that we don't control the entire county on this. 19 U.G.R.A. has their rules, and if we're going to do what I 20 think is best for the citizens, we have to come to an 21 agreement with U.G.R.A. as well on, you know -- 22 (Sheriff's cell phone rang.) 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's twice. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I know. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, just -- so, no 7-28-03 98 1 action today, at least no motion from me. And then we'll be 2 back on the next agenda, hopefully, for the last time to set 3 the public hearing. Anyone from U.G.R.A. -- I see we have 4 Scott Loveland, Stuart Barron, and Jerry Ahrens here. 5 Anyone want to make a comment? I believe you had a comment 6 from Mr. Evans, also. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, Mr. Evans filled out a 8 participation form. Feel free to come up and be heard, 9 Mr. Evans. This is Von Evans. 10 MR. EVANS: My name is Von Evans. About 11 eight years ago, I had my home built out here north of the 12 interstate in Kerrville Country Estates. And at that time, 13 of course, the variation septic system was put in and it was 14 examined to see that it met all of the criteria as required. 15 And then, of course, now I have a contract with Benny 16 Harvill, who is a state certified inspector of septic 17 systems, and of course I pay him, like, $260 a year; he does 18 an excellent job. And, therefore, I'm opposed to having -- 19 to have it again inspected if I decided to resell. If I 20 have a quarterly report showing that it's being properly 21 maintained, why does it have to be inspected again? So I'm 22 opposed to the inspection prior to resale. 23 One other comment. Now, I -- I think all of 24 you are aware that I just recently bought a piece of 25 property adjacent to the one that I presently own, and I 7-28-03 99 1 paid $180 for a replat review by the Upper Guadalupe River 2 Authority, and that was in regard to the -- whether I was in 3 the floodplain or not. I'm at 1,400 feet. As well as 4 the permissibility of a septic system on that new property 5 if I ever decided to put one there, which, of course, I 6 don't intend to do. I said okay, is -- if I did this and 7 you did charge me $180 for this replat review, does this 8 constitute a permit for a septic system if I did want to put 9 one on there? No, you have to come back and apply and then 10 show what kind of septic system you're going to put in, and 11 then, of course, you're going to have to pay some more fees 12 to put in a septic system that has already been initially 13 reviewed at the point of purchase. 14 I -- I'm not saying I want my money back, 15 because I know that's not going to happen. I'm saying that 16 I think that at the time that -- that I was in the process 17 of buying the property, which Buster knows took about two 18 years, that the replat review could have simply said 19 elevation, location as to some zone in Kerr County, and do 20 you want a septic system? Yes or no. And if it was no, and 21 I'm at 1,400 feet, it would have taken about 10 minutes or 22 less to review that replat, and would probably cost me about 23 $10 or $20 rather than $180. So, I think that some 24 accommodation should be made there. And that's the comments 25 that I have. And anybody have any questions of me? 7-28-03 100 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I just have a 2 comment. I think the -- I appreciate your remarks here, and 3 I think that you've identified what this -- this process is 4 all about. It's about whether or not we're going to have 5 more government and more bureaucracy. And, if so, is there 6 a good, sufficient purpose for doing it? 7 MR. EVANS: Yes, sir. I'd like to interject 8 one humorous point. The City of Kerrville has a rule and 9 regulation that says if you buy less than 5.00 acres in a 10 subdivision within Kerrville, then you have to have it 11 replatted, and therefore they charge you $181 for a replat 12 review. They don't file it, but they replat review it, and 13 that costs you $181. So, the County says 10 acres or less, 14 you don't have to have a -- I mean, or -- anyway, I paid you 15 guys, too. But, anyway, the City said, "You don't have to 16 have a replat review because you're buying 5.06 acres, which 17 is in excess of 5.0 acres, but since the County's going to 18 require a replat, then we're going to review your replat for 19 $181." I said, "So, what you're saying is that you charge 20 me $181 to review a replat that wasn't required?" Yeah. I 21 said, "I want a refund," and got it. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You got it? 23 MR. EVANS: I did. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where's my half? 25 MR. EVANS: Huh? 7-28-03 101 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where's my half? 2 MR. EVANS: I'll talk to you about that. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Persistence pays, doesn't it, 4 Mr. Evans? 5 MR. EVANS: Absolutely. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did they make you put 7 in a sidewalk as a quid pro quo? (Laughter.) 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One comment -- I 9 appreciate Mr. -- the good attitude that Mr. Evans has been 10 able to maintain for the last two years trying to get this 11 done, and also -- and I appreciate, 'cause it has -- you've 12 been, in a very nice way, critical of our process, and I 13 think some good will come out of that. Appreciate it. 14 MR. EVANS: Thank you. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I apologize for cutting off 16 you gentlemen from U.G.R.A. That was the only participation 17 form that I have. So -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anybody else? 19 MR. BARRON: I'd like to make a comment, if I 20 could. I'm Stuart with U.G.R.A. And only comment I have 21 today is that, you know, the Court has five members on it; 22 all the members have a different opinion about it. There's 23 about 43,000 people in Kerr County, and they all have a 24 different opinion about it, too. If we can get with some 25 rules that everybody -- everybody may not agree perfectly on 7-28-03 102 1 them, but where they're acceptable to us and we can educate 2 the people in the county, I think that will go a long way to 3 making this -- not necessarily go away, but be acceptable to 4 everybody. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's called the 6 wisdom of Solomon. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Barron. I -- I 8 see a very meek hand going up back there. Is that a sign of 9 meekness? 10 MR. STACY: Yes. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Judge Stacy? 12 MR. STACY: Gentlemen, I want to remind you 13 about the 10-acre rule and the camps. Keep that -- because 14 of the septic systems that they have out there. And when 15 I -- I know that you folks didn't care about some of us 16 dinosaurs, reviewing the rules that we made, 'cause they got 17 thrown out the window, and we were never consulted by the 18 new committee. But the -- you have to remember this. Those 19 leach lines, that water evaporates up. It does not go down. 20 And that's why you have a -- a leach line. And, thirdly, we 21 got to have, from U.G.R.A. -- as you know, they took a 22 system that wasn't broke, and said it's not broke, but we 23 want you to fix it. Well, it was $6,000 worth of fixing on 24 my part that was not necessary. And the sad part was, they 25 told me about that in their office and never went out in the 7-28-03 103 1 field. So, you have to have some flexibility in the leach 2 line, the 10 acres, and have somebody who approves these 3 changes that is flexible. Flexible. And my wife reminded 4 me this morning that, as of today, there's only one person 5 that can sign off on these rules, and she was bothered about 6 what happens when that one person goes on vacation. Thank 7 you, gentlemen. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Judge Stacy. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have a 10 comment. I was just thinking about Commissioner Williams' 11 comments and presentation this morning. There's -- I 12 understand there's two issues here, one that has to do with 13 the water quality -- and I gleaned some out of here, and 14 would have to look at that closer -- but this other one 15 having to do with the installers being accountable. And, 16 anyways, I would ask the committee to take a close look at 17 that, because we're talking about accountability, not only 18 to the taxpayers, but to the governing bodies that are -- 19 that are held responsible. And, you know, any time you can 20 get an installer to put -- and we've talked about it many, 21 many times in this room -- get them to put their license on 22 the line; did they do a good job? And their licenses are on 23 the line to -- to do that, we call that accountability out 24 in the western end of the county. I just think that we need 25 to really address that. If we have an opportunity now to 7-28-03 104 1 get people to be accountable, then we need to do it. But I 2 haven't led the whole thing. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know. But let me ask 4 a -- a question. That is, of what -- what you're saying 5 basically is you're saying that, is there a way for us to 6 have additional authority over the installers beyond what 7 T.C.E.Q. currently has? Is that -- is that the question? 8 And I don't know the answer to that. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I didn't read 10 the whole thing, but what I think he's saying here is that 11 at the -- at a time of maybe even transfer, that the 12 installer says that -- are these the things? -- says that he 13 meets all of the O.S.S.F. Rules, that he meets Chapter 30 -- 14 I mean 285, and Chapter 366; that he commits that he has met 15 all the rules and regulations in a signed document. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I like that. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like that in a way, but 19 I don't like it in a way. And only reason -- I haven't read 20 it either; it's just off-the-cuff comments -- is that what 21 we're doing, in my mind, is giving the installers who are 22 licensed in the county another way to get into the 23 pocketbook of the taxpayers, because we're saying -- they're 24 going to go to the public and say, "The County says you have 25 to -- I have to do this, and to do this it's going to cost 7-28-03 105 1 $5,000." And I'm just -- you know, I need to think through 2 it a little bit more. And I -- you know, I wish there was a 3 way that we could really have a little bit more control over 4 the license of the installers, those that don't do a good 5 job, but I'm not sure that we have that authority. But, 6 anyway, we can look into that a little bit. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: I suspect, Commissioner 9 Baldwin, for a licensed installer to conscientiously comply 10 with what you're talking about and to actually sign off on a 11 strict accountability basis, that the invasive aspect of 12 that inspection will be greater than what occurs right now 13 under the existing real estate transfer rule. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Could be. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I cannot see a conscientious 16 inspector or installer making such an inspection without 17 just literally tearing that thing completely apart before he 18 signs his name on it. I could be wrong, but that's just how 19 I see it. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it's happened, 21 Judge, believe me. 22 (Discussion off the record.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody wish to offer a motion 24 in connection with this particular item? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not I. 7-28-03 106 1 JUDGE TINLEY: If not, we'll move on to the 2 next item, consider and discuss approving revisions of the 3 form contract between Kerr County and volunteer fire 4 departments located in Kerr County, and Tierra Linda and 5 Junction Volunteer Fire Departments. This would also 6 include, I think, probably as a model for Spring Lake, would 7 it not? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, as I look 9 at this, I mean, I think we need to have one contract for 10 all fire departments -- all volunteer fire departments. I 11 think, you know, I look at this as we're working on a model 12 contract, and during the budget process, we add the various 13 fire departments that we need. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner Nicholson? 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, what we have 16 here, based on agreement the last time we met, was -- is a 17 model contract, a fill-in-the-blanks contract, and it will 18 be used for all of our volunteer fire departments located in 19 the county, or those located outside the county who are 20 going to perform services in the county. And it's offered 21 with the understanding that any volunteer fire department 22 who had an issue with some language that was not applicable 23 to it, that department could strike that language. And, 24 particularly, what would happen here specifically is the 25 fire departments, including Hunt and perhaps others who -- 7-28-03 107 1 who have -- who provide their own workers compensation 2 insurance because they get their total insurance package at 3 less cost by doing that, would strike the language that has 4 to deal with requiring volunteer fire departments to provide 5 certain information to the County about workers 6 compensation. We have here with us a member of KARFA and 7 the president of the Hunt Volunteer Fire Department, Colonel 8 Dutch Hintze, and he may want to -- to comment or add to 9 this. 10 MR. HINTZE: I have no comments, sir. It 11 seems to be, you know, straightforward and fair, and resolve 12 a lot of the problems that we had with the previous 13 contract. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One -- 15 MR. HINTZE: But the one thing -- let me just 16 address Commissioner Letz' comment. And I -- I really 17 appreciate your concern about having a single contract with 18 all of the departments. The only thing that I ask you to 19 appreciate is that the conditions in each of the departments 20 vary and are different, and the more restrictive you make a 21 contract, then the more impact it has on the various 22 departments. The more general a contract can be and the 23 broader the contract -- the aspects of the contract are, 24 then the more applicable they are to the individual 25 departments. 7-28-03 108 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One -- one change to 3 the contract from the last meeting, the last one you saw, is 4 I put in some specific numbers for reimbursement of losses 5 due to equipment damage. I can't remember the term we used 6 last time, but it was objectionable, and I put in specific 7 amounts of $500 deductible and a $5,000 maximum during the 8 term of the contract. I can tell you that the members of 9 KARFA won't be satisfied with that -- that limitation, but I 10 feel like we had to have some limitation. I may have the 11 wrong limitation there; perhaps it should be $10,000 or some 12 other number, but I thought we needed to get that -- that 13 part of the contract nailed down, even though we're not 14 presently able to say what the -- what the budgeted receipts 15 for the general service would be at this time. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- probably 17 should keep my mouth shut, but I think the problem that I 18 have with that provision is that I don't see how you can not 19 budget the $5,000 for every fire department, and it's going 20 to have a pretty big budget impact. We have, like, 10, 11, 21 12 fire departments? 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just finished 23 making that note right here, that our maximum unfunded 24 liability would be $55,000. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think you have to 7-28-03 109 1 budget for the maximum, 'cause otherwise -- you know, I 2 guess you could not do it and declare an emergency, but 3 it's -- I don't know. You know, it's just a -- a concern I 4 have. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Isn't that what the 6 rainy day fund's for? For unplanned, unprogrammed losses? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I might go around a 8 little bit to answer your question, maybe, but I'm wondering 9 if -- if the Court's intent, going way back when we 10 established a subsidy to the volunteer fire departments -- 11 which goes back before my time. Increases have occurred 12 during my time, but I'm wondering if the original intent of 13 the subsidy wasn't just this, to take care of those 14 unexpected things that happen, a blown tire or this or that. 15 And, therefore, we subsidized them, and since have increased 16 that subsidy up to $11,000. Now, if my assumption is 17 incorrect -- Buster, you would know or Jonathan might know 18 if that assumption is correct or incorrect. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know that it's 20 correct. I mean, I -- I don't -- I think the intent has 21 always been for the County to help fund fire service. And, 22 I mean -- and I think my recollection is that as much -- we 23 tried to give as much discretion as possible to the various 24 volunteer fire departments to use the funds where they felt 25 they needed it, because they are all unique fire 7-28-03 110 1 departments. So, I mean, I don't -- you know, I think if 2 they wanted to use it for emergency -- or I think the old 3 word was "catastrophic" losses or equipment failures, they 4 certainly could, but as long as it was being used for 5 firefighting in Kerr County, I don't think we really care 6 where the money goes in their internal budgets. So, I mean, 7 it's -- my only concern is just how you budget for this. 8 And maybe you could do it like Dave said; just -- you know, 9 either rainy-day fund or put a contingency item of, you 10 know, $25,000. If you exceed it, declare an emergency. 11 Because, you know -- and I think it would qualify as an 12 emergency, based on some of the exposure that we are putting 13 out there that we currently don't have. The only other -- 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Excuse me. I don't 15 know how far back, you know, the original contracts would go 16 to fund -- to fund the departments. I imagine a long time, 17 maybe 30, 40 years. But a more recent one -- and we'll 18 probably have an opportunity to talk about this tomorrow 19 evening -- is -- and I've spoken with a couple of you, but a 20 few years ago, when the Kerrville South Volunteer Fire 21 Department went belly-up, and suddenly we were faced with 22 not having a volunteer fire department provide services 23 there, we -- we made a contract with the City of Kerrville 24 to do that, and part of Harper Road and a little bit more. 25 Now the City of Kerrville is asking that we increase those 7-28-03 111 1 costs from the current $100,000 a year to $125,000 a year. 2 And you might say -- it would not be untrue -- that we would 3 -- paying $100,000 maybe $125,000 soon, for the coverage 4 that is provided for one-eighth of the county area, and 5 we're paying currently $77,000 for the other seven-eighths 6 of the county, I don't know if we made a bad deal with -- 7 with City of Kerrville or if we made an awfully good deal 8 with the -- with the other seven volunteer fire departments. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know what the original 10 intent was as to whether or not the amount paid to the 11 volunteers was intended to be for operational expenses or -- 12 or -- or whether it was to be for extraordinary items, 13 losses that they incur in fighting fires. But in view of -- 14 of the comment you just made, Commissioner Nicholson, I 15 think we must view it as an operational item, because to do 16 otherwise would have the taxpayers funding the operational 17 aspect of a smaller -- of an area outside the city limits to 18 the tune of 100,000 or possibly more dollars, and asking for 19 operational funds that -- that these volunteer departments 20 go find their funds elsewhere. And that's very 21 discriminatory, and I don't think it's appropriate at all. 22 So, irrespective of what the original intent may have been, 23 I think we should look at the -- the specific amount of 24 stipend that they're receiving for operational purposes. 25 And, in response to your question if -- if we made a bad 7-28-03 112 1 deal on the one end or a good deal on the other, my thinking 2 is, I think some of both. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- just a 4 comment. As I recall, the city contract gives them primary 5 coverage in Kerrville South, but secondary coverage 6 throughout the county, and they provide service -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- throughout. I mean, I 9 don't know. The further you get to the extremes, the less I 10 think they go, but they certainly go around, you know, in 11 all of our precincts near the city of Kerrville on a pretty 12 regular basis. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: In the event they don't have 14 something that they deem to have a higher priority within 15 the city of Kerrville. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but I don't think 17 that -- I mean, I don't think it's ever been an issue. I 18 think they've always sent -- 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The other seven 20 departments do the same thing. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In fact, the 23 Sheppard Rees fire started in the city of Kerrville and 24 spread to the county. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I'm not saying 7-28-03 113 1 one -- 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They're not equipped 3 to handle something like that very well; that their 4 equipment has to stay on the pavement, and they don't draw 5 water. They have very limited capacity to get water to it. 6 So, when it comes to a fire like that, without the volunteer 7 fire departments, it would still be burning today, I guess. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not -- I'm just 9 saying that the city contract's as important to the County 10 as the volunteer fire departments are. I think any funding 11 we do for the fire -- I'm not saying I agree with the 12 $125,000 the City's requesting, but I'm just saying that 13 it's not just a -- one-eighth of the county where the City 14 of Kerrville goes and they don't go anywhere else, 'cause 15 they do go other places. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I agree with 17 you, Commissioner. Dave and I talked earlier. The two 18 important factors, one has to do with the funds; the other 19 has to do with density of the area, and the areas that they 20 probably have primary responsibility for under our contract 21 have a lot of density. Response time has to be as short as 22 we could possibly get it. However, I agree, it's two years 23 in a row now we've been asked to upgrade that contract by a 24 sizable amount of cash, and my question to them -- whether 25 it's posed here today or tomorrow, I don't care -- is give 7-28-03 114 1 us some statistics to justify that increase. How many times 2 have you gone out more this year than you went out last 3 year? Give us some justification. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're having tomorrow 5 night's conversation here. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But my -- my only 8 comment about this particular contract before us, putting 9 that number in there today is -- is not a smart thing. I 10 mean, this needs to be addressed in the budget, just like 11 Rusty's issues, to come before us and leave that -- leave 12 that figure out. I think it's way out of hand here. I can 13 see -- I could see us possibly putting $5,000 in for the 14 entire county, but asking us to come today and approve this 15 with those numbers in there is just totally out of the 16 question. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, I 18 propose, like we've done on the other numbers, we leave that 19 blank. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well -- 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Exceeding -- 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- we said all this 23 last time, and here we are again. I mean, we're here two 24 meetings in a row doing the same thing. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. You've 7-28-03 115 1 been negotiating this contract for about three years that I 2 know of, time and time and time again, and we haven't 3 brought -- hasn't been brought to a conclusion. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you're not going 5 to get my vote on these numbers, and that's the only change 6 I see between last meeting and this meeting. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm proposing to 8 strike those numbers, the $500 minimum, $5,000 maximum, and 9 make a motion that -- I make the motion that we approve this 10 contract -- the form of this contract, with the -- with the 11 amount of payment for equipment damage left blank. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just don't see how 13 you -- just don't know that that's smart business to do it 14 that way until we get the budget complete. There may -- we 15 may come to a point where Tommy says, "Y'all only have $25 16 to deal with," and here we -- all of a sudden, we have this 17 line, this sentence in our contract to fill in something. 18 You know, I just -- 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We could put a $5 20 minimum, a $20 maximum. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why don't we leave 22 that sentence out and just deal with it at the end of the 23 budget process, and then amend this contract at the end of 24 the budget process? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a couple other 7-28-03 116 1 ideas I'd like -- I'm sorry if you're not finished. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't guess I'll 3 ever get an answer, but it's okay. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a couple other 5 points I'd like for Commissioner 4 to consider, and it has 6 to do with -- with the subsidy we give. And I'm -- I'm 7 suggesting that this extra -- these extra dollars for 8 unforeseen problems that occur when they're fighting 9 outside -- fighting fires outside their district, that we 10 only -- only consider reimbursement of that if we -- if the 11 company has exceeded the amount of dollars that we 12 subsidize. After that, we would consider reimbursement. 13 I'd like for you to consider that. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It says $500 on here. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Exceed $500. That 17 comes out of each individual -- isn't that what it says? 18 Each individual fire department will go up to the $500, then 19 after the $500 is where we start kicking in. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, but -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: During the term of the 22 contract. 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. I think 24 Commissioner Williams is forgetting that the -- what is now 25 $11,000, that if these -- the equipment damage can be 7-28-03 117 1 covered within that $11,000, they don't exceed it for the 2 other things, then they wouldn't be eligible under this 3 part. I think that's what he said. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the point. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We had people come 6 in here, fire chiefs, tell us that $11,000 doesn't cover 7 20 percent of their operating budget, so there's not any one 8 of them that's going to spend less than $11,000. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Colonel Hintze, what's your 10 normal operating budget for a year out at Hunt? 11 MR. HINTZE: I wish I could tell you that 12 realistically. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Can you give us a ballpark? 14 MR. HINTZE: Our figure would be unrealistic 15 because of what we've just gone through in the last three 16 years building up those trucks; we've spent over $700,000. 17 I think the important thing for the Commissioners to keep in 18 mind is, number one, the departments are not coming in and 19 asking for more money beyond the $11,000. We're able to do 20 the job at this point with current expenses. The other 21 aspect is, this is not a subsidy or a payment; it's a 22 reimbursement that the departments have incurred for 23 expenses the department has already paid. So, we're coming 24 back to the County under the contract and requesting 25 reimbursement for those expenses. And those expenses are 7-28-03 118 1 expressly spelled out in the contract; training, 2 maintenance, parts, fuel, things of that -- and insurance, 3 things of that nature. And it expressly says, in accordance 4 with Texas state law, that none of the funds can be used to 5 pay wages or salaries. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Tommy, you 7 have something? 8 MR. TOMLINSON: I just have a question. I 9 haven't seen the contract, but does the contract address 10 the -- the department's furnishing invoices upon payment? 11 MR. HINTZE: Yes. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: I just wanted to make sure 13 that that was -- that was in there. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You pay off of 15 receipts. 16 MR. TOMLINSON: Right. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion on the floor. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you? 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, I do. Commissioner 20 Nicholson made the motion to approve the contract form or 21 format as presented, with the exception that in Paragraph 3, 22 the $500 and the $5,000 be deleted, and those just merely be 23 in the form of blanks. Is that your understanding of the 24 motion, Commissioner Nicholson? 25 (Commissioner Nicholson nodded.) 7-28-03 119 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do I have a second to 2 the motion? 3 (No response.) 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Being no second, that will die 5 for lack of a second. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question. I 7 really didn't ask this, 'cause you were asking for a motion 8 at the time. I guess I -- going back, I would like to try 9 to get this contract put to bed today, and I know 10 Commissioner Nicholson would. I don't understand why -- or 11 I guess I do, 'cause I understand what Colonel Hintze has 12 gone over about the equipment damages and it may not be 13 used. But why -- and my preference would be -- 'cause it's 14 simpler for the County to increase the subsidy through the 15 budget process, and that's really what I would rather do, 16 because that way we don't have to wait -- I understand the 17 argument that what y'all are saying is that, you know, you 18 get a -- if you're fighting a fire in eastern Kerr County 19 and you have damage, that it's kind of an extraordinary 20 event, and I hope that this court and future courts would 21 have enough consideration that if something -- you know, for 22 us to help reimburse those without being in the contract. 23 And that's just my -- you know, the reason I didn't second 24 it, is because I would think that I would probably prefer to 25 leave both zeros in both those blanks, as Commissioner 7-28-03 120 1 Nicholson's motion said, and increase the amount to let it 2 be for what it is. And -- you know, and which I don't have 3 a real problem with leaving zeros in there, but I just -- I 4 think there's an implication that if we have the blanks in 5 there, that we're going to fill them in, and I'm just 6 opposed to doing that. I would rather give the subsidy, 7 whether it's, you know, increasing -- if we do have the 8 funds, if we have to budget $25,000 or $50,000 for that 9 item, I'd rather go ahead and budget it and give them the 10 money, 'cause they need it. And I think it's one of the 11 best things we do in the county, is to fund the volunteer 12 fire departments. I think we're getting a heck of a bargain 13 for what we're spending right now. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Frankly, that's where 15 I'm coming from. I would prefer that method; take up the 16 amount that the County -- up the amount that the County 17 provides for subsidy sufficient enough to cover these 18 contingencies. And I would support that. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In other words, strike 20 that last sentence? 21 JUDGE TINLEY: We've got lots of -- lots of 22 desire to contribute on a dead issue at this point, it 23 appears. Or at least, for now, a dead issue. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I mean, the item 25 is still open; just that motion didn't pass. I don't see it 7-28-03 121 1 as a dead issue. 2 MR. HINTZE: Sir, one of the things -- and I 3 appreciate the comments that Commissioner Letz has offered. 4 One of the thought processes behind this is that, number 5 one, the incidents which the department would come to the 6 County and request reimbursement would hopefully be a 7 rarity. In other words, a large-scale event like the 8 Sheppard Rees fire. But if the County retained that money 9 in a separate line item in the budget and it was not used, 10 that would also give you the opportunity to reprogram at the 11 end of the fiscal year and use it as -- as you might see 12 otherwise fit to do. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Sheriff? 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only comment I would 15 have -- and I think everybody's in agreement that the -- the 16 volunteer fire departments we rely on a lot. They help us 17 out in a lot of cases that aren't just fires, you know, 18 where they may suffer equipment damage. And what I'd hate 19 is -- there was an incident that involved a constable about 20 15 years ago in which a constable assisted our department 21 greatly in a stolen vehicle pursuit, and shots were even 22 fired, and the constable ended up blowing a motor out of a 23 personal pickup, okay, trying to help the Sheriff's 24 Department. The Court at that time refused to help the 25 constable pay for the damage to his motor. And I hate to 7-28-03 122 1 see that, because that's a -- they're doing a definite 2 service to us. Now, there are times -- and I don't think 3 Dutch's applies to this -- where we've had cases where we 4 blocked off roads because of flooding and we told a fire 5 department, "Don't cross that," and they did anyhow and did 6 damage to their own vehicle in doing that. Depending on the 7 volunteer they have -- and which I don't think this County 8 should help them in that type of equipment where they were 9 warned not to. So, I think it's got to be looked at on a 10 case-by-case basis and come back for reimbursement and go 11 into the emergency funding or what -- I don't know if you 12 can put a limit on it, but I think they need our help. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I agree they 14 need our help, and I agree with Commissioner Letz that 15 increasing the subsidy is a -- in my view, a prudent way to 16 go. Since you haven't called the next agenda item, Judge, 17 this one's still open, I believe, under -- under Roberts 18 Rules of Order, and so I would offer a motion, and see where 19 this will go, that the -- that we establish a standard 20 volunteer fire department contract, we leave open the dates 21 and the dollar amounts for subsidy, to be talked about at 22 budget time when it makes sense to do that, and that under 23 Paragraph 3, Consideration, that we -- that we eliminate the 24 second sentence that begins, "Reimbursement for losses..." 25 and the third sentence that says, "Pursuant to Paragraph 7-28-03 123 1 5..." that has the $500/$5,000 limitation. With those two 2 sentences out, consideration in Paragraph Number 3 would be 3 acceptable to me. I offer that as a motion. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 6 seconded that the contract format as presented, with the 7 following modifications: The dates be left open -- I assume 8 you're going to use October 1 and September 30th? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Just change the year? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: And the second and third 13 sentence in Paragraph 3 be deleted. Is there any further 14 discussion or questions? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question, and I'll call 16 the question. Question. Has the County Attorney looked at 17 it? That's Part A of the question. And Part B, to be more 18 specific, there used to be a provision that was contentious 19 so some fire departments related to audit that is no longer 20 in here. Is that acceptable to both the Auditor and the 21 County Attorney, to not have an audit provision in the 22 contract? 23 MR. MOTLEY: I think there needs to be -- in 24 order to contract with the volunteer fire departments, there 25 needs to be provision -- there needs to be provisions in the 7-28-03 124 1 contract which allow the County to assure itself that the 2 funds allocated are being spent for the purposes allocated, 3 and one common way that's been done before is by having an 4 audit provision. I don't know how often any audit has ever 5 occurred, and -- but there have been -- well, there have 6 been cases in the past -- we had a department in the past 7 that there was a suspicion that they were using some of the 8 fire department resources for personal use. And I don't 9 know that the Auditor ever audited them, but, I mean, I 10 think the numbers were looked over probably by a state 11 inspector of some sort. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think our department 13 did part of an audit with that one. I think there needs to 14 be one. We did. 15 MR. MOTLEY: I've not looked over this -- the 16 final version of this. I've been talking with Danny Edwards 17 quite a bit, and I think that Colonel Hintze is really -- I 18 know he was at one of the KARFA meetings that I had 19 attended. I think they raised some real valid points, and I 20 think they -- basically, the concern that -- the issue of 21 equipment that was damaged, and specifically that Sheppard 22 Rees fire, I know there was a substantial waiting time 23 period, maybe two to three years, in which they would have 24 to wait to be reimbursed by FEMA. I thought the idea was to 25 maybe have Kerr County supply -- reimburse those funds for 7-28-03 125 1 tires and whatnot at a -- on a quicker basis, and then get 2 the money back from FEMA; you know, recover that money 3 later. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not -- 5 MR. MOTLEY: That -- I think that was the 6 original idea. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't you think, 8 David, that any time that we're spending county tax -- the 9 taxpayers' money, that we should have a right to audit any 10 time, and all we want? 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me provide a 12 different perspective. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do you think 14 about that? 15 MR. MOTLEY: Well, I think if there's another 16 way to assure -- I mean, I think it's part of the 17 consideration that we have to have in spending county money, 18 is that we can assure the funds are being -- it's not that 19 anybody, I think, distrusts the departments, that they're 20 spending it on something else. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's not the point. 22 MR. MOTLEY: Ultimately, there has to be some 23 assurance in the contract, in order to expend public funds, 24 that the funds are being expended for the purposes 25 allocated. 7-28-03 126 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've heard you say 2 that before. That's the reason I'm asking you that 3 question. 4 MR. MOTLEY: I believe so. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're essentially 6 purchasing a service from the volunteer fire department. 7 They bring in receipts for insurance, for whatever, give 8 them to the County Auditor. He looks at the receipt, he 9 pays that amount of money, and cuts them off when it gets to 10 $11,000. When we purchase services from someone else and 11 they -- they go the contract amount, are providing receipts, 12 we don't go out there and audit them. We don't have a need 13 to audit them. Volunteer fire departments -- 14 MR. MOTLEY: Well, in other words, you're 15 sort of saying that the audit occurs at the time that the 16 receipts are -- 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. 18 MR. MOTLEY: -- are brought in. And -- and 19 that may be the -- the Court might deem that to be adequate 20 assurance. All I'm saying -- I mean, there needs to be some 21 practical way -- and, ultimately, if something were to come 22 up where there was some, you know, problem with the numbers, 23 I think to reserve the right to audit, you know, is -- is 24 allowed. I know our department's audited by the County 25 Auditor's office every year, and I think all the county 7-28-03 127 1 departments are, internally. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But he's -- but the 3 VFW -- VFD is not an agent of the County. 4 MR. MOTLEY: Well -- 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're an agent of 6 the County. 7 MR. MOTLEY: I understand. I mean, I think 8 that the County Commissioners have a duty to supply, in some 9 form or fashion, under some percentage of rural fire 10 protection and coverage. I mean, I think that's part of the 11 duties of the Commissioners Court. And, so, I think that we 12 heard at the last meeting that some of the counties provide 13 a higher percentage of that, and depending on the 14 circumstances. But I hear what you're saying. I mean, it 15 may be that that's deemed to be adequate. But I think, 16 ultimately, if something had to be looked into, you know, to 17 reserve that right. Now, Tommy might have some comments on 18 this from a county perspective, but -- 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He has comments; he's 20 nodding his head. 21 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. When we first entered 22 into contracts with the fire departments, which was probably 23 8 or 10 years ago, when Stan Reid was the Assistant County 24 Attorney, this -- this issue came up about -- about the 25 audit, and at that time, that's when I asked for -- for the 7-28-03 128 1 fire departments to furnish my office with invoices, because 2 that's my means of auditing the expenditure of County funds. 3 I have -- I had a problem with going out to -- and the fire 4 departments did, too -- a problem with me going to their 5 facility, auditing their set of records, when 90 percent of 6 their funding is private. So, I mean, I don't see that I 7 have a -- any business auditing something that's not County 8 funds, and that -- and that's -- I think that's what I'd be 9 doing. And the fire departments sure had a problem with 10 that. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- 12 MR. TOMLINSON: And so that is the reason I 13 asked that question a while ago. I wanted to make sure 14 that -- that I had the chance to see the invoices as part of 15 my audit of what -- what the fire departments are actually 16 spending money for. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, providing -- in your 18 opinion, providing the invoices is sufficient audit? 19 MR. TOMLINSON: That's my opinion, yes. 20 MR. MOTLEY: If Tommy's happy with that, I'm 21 happy with that. I think the reason that the provision 22 regarding the audit was added is because we have a similar 23 provision in our contract with outside agencies. You know, 24 the different agencies -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: CASA and all those. 7-28-03 129 1 MR. MOTLEY: Right. Right. And that's -- 2 maybe that -- and that's probably because we're not looking 3 at their expenditures and paying them on a monthly basis or 4 whatever. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're paying a flat 6 amount. 7 MR. MOTLEY: That's right. So, I can see 8 that in this situation, especially if Tommy's doing an 9 audit -- basically an ongoing audit every month. So, I 10 mean, he's checking expenses. And I think Dutch has said 11 over here that they're restricted on the expenditure of 12 funds. 13 MR. HINTZE: Yes, sir, it's expressly 14 specified in the contract what we can request reimbursement 15 for. 16 MR. MOTLEY: And I also know one of the other 17 issues that Dutch had raised in the past, and I really agree 18 with, is that a lot of people give money anonymously -- or I 19 say anonymously; they don't want the fact it's published 20 revealed to the public in general, funding for these 21 purposes. And I think, you know, that's always been an 22 issue of concern on their part, and I can understand that. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was almost ready to 24 vote for it until you said -- the very first comment was you 25 haven't looked at this contract. 7-28-03 130 1 MR. MOTLEY: We'll, I've seen, I think, a 2 draft of it. I think I've seen a draft of it. I haven't 3 reviewed that one. I don't know that -- 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Only difference in the draft, 5 if my recollection is correct, is this catastrophic 6 language. Isn't it, Commissioner Nicholson? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I want to vote for this 8 motion. I just -- 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 10 discussion? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just want -- I want 12 to comment to Tommy and -- and the County Attorney. I think 13 any time -- just my opinion. I don't know; I'm not a 14 lawyer, and don't want to be. But any time that you expend 15 public money, you should have the right to look at it. And 16 if somebody doesn't want their private donations put in 17 there, don't put it in. The government has the right and 18 the authority to take a look at the books. That's all. And 19 I believe that. And you've got to agree with that, Judge. 20 You just have to. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: You want me to make a comment 22 on your desire to be a lawyer or not to be one? (Laughter.) 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner -- 7-28-03 131 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 2 discussion? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quick question. Is there 4 any provision in your motion to make sure the County 5 Attorney approves the form? 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As approved -- as 7 approved to form by the County Attorney. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's my last question. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: And you seconded the motion? 10 Buster seconded? All right. Okay. All in favor of the 11 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This has taken so 17 long that Colonel Hintze was a lieutenant when we started. 18 (Laughter.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, consider and 20 discuss authorizing RFP for information technology 21 maintenance. You've seen this before; presumably, your 22 memory is not that short. In conformity with the discussion 23 that was had last meeting, there was a -- the specs were 24 modified or additions made requiring quotes on telephone 25 consult, and secondly, requiring bonding -- that personnel 7-28-03 132 1 be bonded or insured. Other than that, there's not a lot of 2 difference in the -- in the RFP. Also attached -- I 3 requested a response to what the activity level was, and so 4 I requested from our existing information technician that he 5 provide us with his log from January 1 of this year, and it 6 appears that he has done a log of that down through the 21st 7 of this month, almost seven months. The only other comment 8 I would make is, in any RFP, hopefully, the County would 9 reserve the right to reject any and all bids. So, merely 10 putting the matter out for RFP does not mean that -- that 11 there's any definitive action that must be taken by the 12 County. Certainly, once those responses are in, why, they 13 can be considered and appropriate action then taken. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question, Judge. On 15 this page entitled "Bid on Information Technology" and so 16 forth, where we set out the parameters, are we dealing with 17 response time only in terms of an 8-hour work shift, or the 18 next day? Or are we dealing with response time a lot 19 quicker than that? Because, if that's the case, if it's 20 only within the same work day or business day, you can have 21 people sitting on a computer that may be down for an entire 22 work shift and waiting until the next day. So, that's my 23 question. What are we asking for? 24 JUDGE TINLEY: "Emergency" is defined as one 25 hour or less. You know, those -- those other items, same 7-28-03 133 1 business day, next business day, I suppose you could put in 2 any number of categories that you want; 2-hour, 3-hour, 3 4-hour, break it down to a half hour, do it any way you want 4 to. I'm not particularly married to any of -- any of the 5 specifics that I have there. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: I just -- I just think we 8 ought to -- we ought to throw it out there in the 9 marketplace and see what kind of response we get on some 10 sort of a basis. I don't know what accepted response times 11 are in the industry, if there are any. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I have a question. 14 I guess -- I-certainly like the concept, and I think I'm in 15 favor of sending it out really just the way you have it, but 16 the question I have is, how much leeway are we going to have 17 to negotiate the actual deal with someone? I mean, say we 18 get, you know, hopefully five offers and we look at the best 19 one. I can see this being a situation, because of the -- 20 the technical aspect of it, that you really almost need to 21 meet with the people and kind of have some negotiations 22 beyond this one page, after you select the person, but then 23 I'm not sure if you can do that under a competitive bidding 24 situation. That's kind of my question. I mean, are we -- 25 if we, you know, get the responses, are we married to -- is 7-28-03 134 1 this going to be it? Or is there some other latitude and 2 negotiations going in? Or can we -- 3 JUDGE TINLEY: You don't have to accept 4 anything. You may want to pitch this in the can and start 5 over and go out for an RFQ. I'm not sure RFQ is the right 6 way to do it. You're quoting on an hourly basis. There are 7 certain requirements insofar as experience and technical 8 knowledge that are plugged in there. If those need to be 9 enlarged or enhanced or more specific, certainly, you can do 10 that. But -- 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it probably would 12 work. I mean, I'm in favor of it, I think, and I think it'd 13 be interesting to see what we get back. Like you say, we 14 don't have to accept them. I think it's a good exercise to 15 go through and see what the marketplace has. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Question for 17 clarification. Do I understand that we would only have -- 18 if we got five bids, we only have two choices; either to 19 accept the lowest one, or reject them all? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not lowest. We accept 21 the one we want. Doesn't have to be lowest. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, we do have some 23 flexibility in determining professional qualifications? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The one we think most 7-28-03 135 1 closely meets the specs. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Needs of Kerr County. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we can look at 4 their -- you know, their -- 5 JUDGE TINLEY: You can look at the -- the 6 experience level, background, technical expertise, all of 7 those factors that go into it. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question, 9 Judge, of the Sheriff. Are you there, Sheriff? 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How often, in your 12 recollection, do you have computers that go down after the 13 standard business day ends? That need attention? 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, we probably have 15 computers go down after standard business day eight or ten 16 times a month. Whether those are computers that we have to 17 have until the next business day, very, very seldom, 'cause 18 normally we can move people around and let them use a 19 different one or something. And our other computers that we 20 absolutely have to have during any time of day are TLETS and 21 our State computers. There is a separate maintenance deal 22 on those; they're not in your county system. We can go back 23 to using, you know, pen and paper for a while. We've had to 24 do that in the jail at times at night until we can get 25 somebody in 8:00 to 5:00 during the next day. 7-28-03 136 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Auditor? 3 MR. TOMLINSON: In somewhat of answer to 4 Commissioner Williams' question about the time, there -- 5 there's a lot -- there's quite a bit of maintenance that we 6 do after hours, because we want to -- we prefer to do it 7 when everybody -- when the County's not using their system. 8 In other words, if we -- there's some maintenance 9 applications that when you -- when you do it, it slows down 10 the system, and so the -- the least users you have on the 11 system when you're working on it, the better off you are. 12 So, a lot of the maintenance we choose to do after 5 o'clock 13 or on the weekends. So -- I mean, and we do it as a 14 convenience to the -- to the users. Not -- not to us, but 15 to the people that are using it. So, if you -- for 16 instance, if you try to do a backup of a system between the 17 hours of 8:00 and 5:00, you're going to run into some 18 problems, because, you know, that -- that backup procedure 19 will slow the system down to where you're -- you're at a 20 crawl at some point. So -- and so it's just -- it's just 21 practical to do some of those things, you know, at night and 22 on the weekends. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, then, if I 24 understand what you're saying correctly, because we do do 25 maintenance of whatever magnitude after hours, after the 7-28-03 137 1 standard business day closes, under this bid for services, 2 that would be at the emergency rate; would that be correct? 3 MR. TOMLINSON: Well -- well, it depends on 4 the bid. I mean, depends on how the bidder looks at it. 5 But just for you to be aware that we do do that, and -- at 6 nights. And -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 8 MR. TOMLINSON: And, I mean, as -- I mean, 9 once a month, we -- we do a complete system overhaul, or we 10 go through the system and -- and delete all the people that 11 have been -- you know, have not used the system in, like, 30 12 days. Or we -- we do a -- a backup that will allow us to 13 reproduce the system. And, I mean, that's a 5- or 6-hour 14 project. And there are also times that -- that I -- I can 15 remember times when the power's gone off, or somebody's run 16 into a transformer here at the courthouse. I mean, Rusty 17 called me one time in Lampasas, Texas, on a Saturday night; 18 I was playing in a golf tournament. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Had to go wake his wife 20 up. 21 MR. TOMLINSON: And, I mean -- so, I mean -- 22 so I had to -- you know, I had to deal with it from there. 23 And there have been many times that the dispatcher's called 24 me at 2 o'clock in the morning, and, I mean, it's been a 25 situation that -- that we've had to take care of right then. 7-28-03 138 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Are you indicating that it 2 might be well to insert a category for after-hours, normal 3 maintenance, and system backup, to add that as a category? 4 Certainly, I don't think we can anticipate somebody running 5 into a utility pole or blowing a transformer. 6 MR. TOMLINSON: It does happen, and so there 7 would have to be -- I mean, the bidder would have to know 8 that that's a possibility. 9 MR. ALFORD: Normal may not be 8:00 to 5:00. 10 MR. TOMLINSON: There has to be something in 11 there that -- that would give him a chance to say, well, 12 we'll do it at this price for those times. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a -- it's 14 almost there. I mean, it says nights after 6 p.m. You have 15 emergencies, one category; then have you nights, weekends, 16 holidays. And maybe just put a sentence in there, you know, 17 normal scheduled work. I mean, it's -- 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Normal maintenance and system 19 backup after hours. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Normal maintenance and system 22 backup, and put in another category. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That will probably 24 work. 25 MR. MOTLEY: Judge, there is a reference on 7-28-03 139 1 the first page of this to a master service agreement, which 2 seems like almost anybody you have, there may be times when 3 they need to -- I don't know what we do; have an emergency 4 generator they use to test that thing after hours, or 5 certain things on electrical that I think you might have to 6 do after hours. And it might be that that could be inserted 7 in any sort of agreement that would require that sort of 8 nighttime work. Which we would never have that in our body 9 shop or auto repair or anything like that, I wouldn't think. 10 But, I mean, it may just be, if that's part of the job, 11 that's part of what they're expected to do, be put in the 12 master service agreement. Or -- you know, and I think, as 13 Jonathan just said, you could also add it right on that 14 second page. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm ready to vote. Is 16 there a motion? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move it with 18 that correction the Judge is making right there. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll second that motion. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 21 seconded to approve the RFP as presented, with the addition 22 of another category of response times and hourly rates, 23 after -- after-hours routine maintenance and system backup, 24 hourly rate under that. Any further question or comment? 25 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 7-28-03 140 1 hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, before you move on 7 to the next item on this topic, I would like -- I want to 8 thank -- I presume you're the one that asked -- or whoever 9 asked for the backup material. I appreciate whoever asked 10 for it, and I appreciate Shaun providing it. But I think 11 it -- those that read through it very carefully, we have a 12 real problem in this county with our employees, and we need 13 to address that in a pretty strong way, because almost all 14 of the workload that Shaun is doing is because of employees 15 downloading programs. And I can't think of, really, other 16 than possibly elected officials, any employees needing to 17 download anything, period. And I think we need to figure 18 out a way -- and there may be a way for us to do it 19 system-wide, where you just can't download without a special 20 password from Tommy or Shaun or somebody. Because, I mean, 21 we're just spending way too much money on fixing problems 22 that we shouldn't have to be fixing. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. Either do a 24 blanket policy, or the -- the elected official themselves be 25 held accountable in some way. They're really the ones that 7-28-03 141 1 are in charge of that office. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: The charge for any service 3 work of that type be charged against the elected official's 4 budget, rather than out of the -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's right. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I don't see that 7 solves it -- well, I think that helps, but where are you 8 going to take it out of their budgets? They don't have any 9 excess funds. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Salary. (Laughter.) 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like that approach, but 12 I'm just not sure we can legally do it that way. And -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If we have a blanket 14 policy, we do. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we can't get -- I 16 think they should do it individually, but if they can't, we 17 need to put a very strong blanket policy in place in the 18 county. Just my opinion. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Our Auditor is seeking 20 recognition. 21 MR. TOMLINSON: I would -- I know where I can 22 obtain a sample usage policy. I know the State has one. So 23 does Texas Association of Counties. CIRA organization 24 almost mirrored the State's policy, and it's very general, 25 but -- but it -- I think that everybody ought to read it; 7-28-03 142 1 give everybody the opportunity to know what the policy is. 2 And -- and I think that the only -- I think the individuals 3 have to control this. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. If you'll get 5 something like that, I'll certainly get it on the agenda, 6 'cause I'm alarmed at what I read, the amount of tax dollars 7 wasted on things that should not have been done. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. We'll look forward 10 to receiving that. Next item, consider and discuss the 11 status of the Kerr County burn ban. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Routine item, isn't it? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Routine item. I 15 recommend no action. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. We don't 17 have to -- no, we don't have to do anything, do we? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Can we move on? I'm 19 not aware of any matters that need to go into the Executive 20 Session. 21 MR. MOTLEY: I have one. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 24 MR. MOTLEY: I think it's on there; I'm not 25 sure. It's a litigation issue. 7-28-03 143 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's on there. 2 MR. MOTLEY: Should be on there. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 4 MR. MOTLEY: Supposed to be on from last 5 time, and I think we passed or something. I was out last 6 time. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, apparently they're all 9 paying attention to you; they're leaving the room. 10 MR. MOTLEY: It's a two-minute deal, tops. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, the Court will 12 go into executive, closed session to meet with the County 13 Attorney to discuss pending and possible litigation, as 14 provided by the applicable section of the Government Code. 15 (The open session was closed at 12:23 p.m., and an Executive Session was held, the 16 transcript of which is contained in a separate document.) 17 - - - - - - - - - - 18 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Does anybody wish 19 to offer a motion with respect to anything that occurred 20 during the closed, executive session? 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Being no motion offered, we'll 23 move on to the approval agenda. First matter is to pay the 24 bills. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we pay the bills. 7-28-03 144 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 3 we pay the bills as presented by the Auditor. Any question 4 or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by 5 raising your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget 10 amendments. Budget Amendment Number 1. 11 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 1 is for the District 12 Clerk. Her request is to transfer $185.95 from Lease Copier 13 line item to Microfilm Records, and then to transfer $100 14 from Employee Training, $300 from Retirement, $300 from 15 Reimbursement Travel, $100 from Miscellaneous to her 16 Conference line item. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How would you -- how 18 would you transfer retirement? 19 MR. TOMLINSON: There's -- 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Employee that went from 21 full-time, and she's -- 22 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, she has plenty of funds 23 there. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. So, the 25 original budget was $1,000 for -- for conferences. Is that 7-28-03 145 1 what you have? 2 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, that's right. 3 MS. PIEPER: No, mine -- mine went up to, I 4 think, $1,200. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Twelve? And how much 6 do you have? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Probably got minus, 8 but we'll talk about that in a minute. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We had $900. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We had nine each. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nine each, and so this 12 particular one is talking about $1,800 here this year. 13 So -- I mean, I'm just bringing it up. We've had -- it has 14 to be addressed. Is $1,000 enough? Is $1,200 enough? Or 15 are we now talking about $1,800 for the elected official? 16 MR. MOTLEY: $1,000 was a result of last 17 year's -- the budget, where it was just cut. Everybody's 18 got cut to 1,000 bucks, and those who went back and, I 19 guess, justified it got some of their moneys back. But 20 we -- we suffered a $2,000 reduction of that line item. 21 We've run out a long time ago. We have no money in that 22 item. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Same thing with this 24 group here, and not a person sitting at this table is 25 certified. 7-28-03 146 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can't go. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And thanks for 4 bringing that up, Commissioner, because the Post-Legislative 5 Conference in Austin, which is forthcoming, offers 6 Commissioners an opportunity for 10 hours so we can complete 7 our work. So, this -- this is for this fiscal year, this 8 calendar year. And I, for one, will be putting in for 9 registration. So -- 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What happens if you 11 don't meet your hours requirements? Will they cut your head 12 off in public? 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Or they start elsewhere first, 14 but -- 15 MR. MOTLEY: Can't make a motion or second or 16 anything. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't get a little -- 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Suitable for 19 framing? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, suitable for 21 framing. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: All I want to know 23 is they don't put the handcuffs on. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know the answer to 25 all that, the hidden stories to it, and it's a great story. 7-28-03 147 1 Great story. You're going to love this thing, but I'm not 2 going to take up the time here. But a lawyer's in charge; I 3 can tell you that much. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is one -- I mean, 5 and I'm tempted to vote against this, but I also feel that 6 the law says elected officials need to get their education, 7 and we should do what the law says. But I think it gets -- 8 and some have higher requirements than others, and we really 9 need to look at that in the budget process. But I think you 10 can go to the post-legislative conference for less than 11 $800. I mean -- 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- bottom line, I just 14 don't think it's necessary. You can go up there. You can 15 -- and I frequently, you know -- 16 MS. PIEPER: Does that include the 17 registration, the hotel and the meals, mileage? 18 MR. MOTLEY: Is it just one person, also? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well -- 20 MR. MOTLEY: More than one person needs to 21 go. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, this is two 23 separate conferences you're looking at here. 24 (Discussion off the record.) 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Texas District Court 7-28-03 148 1 Alliance Workshop. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Do I have a motion on Budget 3 Amendment Request Number 1? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 7 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1. Any further 8 questions or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising 9 your right hand. 10 (Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Nicholson voted in favor of the motion.) 11 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 13 (Commissioner Letz voted against the motion.) 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you vote against 15 it? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good boy. I like you, 18 Jon. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Number 2. 20 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 2 is for Justice of 21 the Peace, Precinct 4. This request is to transfer $21 from 22 Operating Equipment, $72.50 from Miscellaneous, $87.35 from 23 Janitorial, $150 from Books, Publications, and Dues, 24 totaling $330.85 to go to Office Supplies. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, I would -- I 7-28-03 149 1 want to ask a question, but of course I won't, but if I were 2 going to, it would be something like this. Isn't a 3 janitorial number set for an annual -- I mean -- 4 MR. TOMLINSON: For him, I don't think so. I 5 think he uses one -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Pay you $100 a month 7 to come clean my office once a month? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I recall that was in 9 -- that's -- (coughing.) 10 MR. TOMLINSON: I think his is as-needed. I 11 don't think he contracts with -- 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't let it choke you 13 up, Bill. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move to approve. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 17 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 2. Any further 18 questions or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising 19 your right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget 24 Amendment Request Number 3. 25 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 3 is for the Sheriff's 7-28-03 150 1 Department. Request is to transfer $223.20 from Software 2 Maintenance to Investigation Expenses. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I move it. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 6 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 3. Any further 7 questions or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising 8 your right hand. 9 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget 13 Amendment Request Number 4. 14 MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Number 4 includes the 15 County Court at Law and 198th District Court. We're 16 transferring $2,557.68 from Court-Appointed Attorney line 17 item in -- in 198th Court, transferring $100 to Special 18 Court Reporter line item for the 198th court, and $150 to 19 Books, Publications, and Dues for the 198th Court. 20 $1,827.70 goes to the Court-Appointed Attorney line item for 21 County Court at Law, $479.98 to Court-Appointed Services for 22 County Court at Law. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've got a comment. And 24 I had -- I know we have gone over this, I know, many times. 25 A lot of budget amendments I go along with, but Books, 7-28-03 151 1 Publications, and Dues is something that is not a necessity, 2 I mean, in most instances, and I don't understand why our 3 department heads and elected officials cannot budget for 4 that line item. That's my comment. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. Or bring it 6 up this time of year. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, what is -- what 8 kind of book or publication are we talking about? 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Session laws, probably. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Pocket parts and 11 things like that? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Probably session laws, since 13 it's a legislative year, is what would immediately come to 14 my mind. I don't know that that's the case here, but -- 15 MR. MOTLEY: I've got a comment on that. I 16 mean, they are essential for -- I mean, at least in our 17 office, and I'm sure Judge Brown -- they're essential to 18 him. But a lot of times, you really don't know what they're 19 going to be. We had a -- a dispute, I guess you'd say, with 20 West Law, and all our research is done online now, but -- we 21 have some desk books, but most of it's done on West Law, and 22 they changed our dues. It went up. I mean, our -- whatever 23 it was, they changed our costs. And then, plus, there are 24 times when you get books made available to you that you 25 didn't have the year before, or something -- you get a new 7-28-03 152 1 offer for some sort of book you want to include in your 2 library, and you want to add it. That's not usually a huge 3 amount, but -- and it -- the like cost of everything else, 4 it's all going up. Nothing goes down. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I understand that 6 you want to have it, but do you need to have it, based on 7 the budget is, I guess, my question. 8 MR. MOTLEY: I mean, like, Penal Codes are 9 kind of a handy thing in our office. (Laughter.) That's 10 something we need to be able to put our hand on. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. But needs and 12 wants, that's one -- it just concerns me that these are -- 13 and maybe it's just -- you know, obviously, Buster and I 14 aren't attorneys, but we can't get a handle on what they're 15 going to be charging for these. 16 MS. PIEPER: I have -- before, when we were 17 doing our last budget, I think it was mentioned that instead 18 of raising everybody's Books, Publications, and Dues up, 19 there was something said about if we needed something, maybe 20 we could code it to the Law Library fund. Just something -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. And that 22 goes -- the other comment is, when we went and set up this 23 high-tech law library online, we were supposed to get rid of 24 these -- a whole lot of these books, publications, and dues 25 for law -- for the legal departments in the county, and I 7-28-03 153 1 don't see that we've done that. And it's just -- you know, 2 if we're not going to -- if we -- there's a limit. 3 MR. MOTLEY: That was for public access, was 4 my understanding of the reason for all that online business. 5 That's a public access law library. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- so we don't have 7 to have all the books for the public. 8 MR. MOTLEY: Isn't there a cost, though, 9 associated with that for West Law to put that online? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. We're paying both 11 now. That's my problem. I mean, -- 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Jonathan, I agree with 13 what you and Jannett are referring to, because, like, in my 14 department with the legislative deal, you know, we're fixing 15 to have to order all the officers new codes and Code of 16 Criminal Procedures, which we do after each budget, and I 17 have not budgeted for that at all, because I'm going back to 18 the deal last year, that it's supposed to come out of the 19 Law Library. So I don't have any money in my budget for 20 that, but we're fixing to have to add it. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Clearly, we need to have 22 the up-to-date version of the Penal Code, things of that 23 nature. I'm not saying that, but I'm just saying that there 24 -- you know, I don't know that we need to spend as much 25 county-wide for every department necessarily to have their 7-28-03 154 1 own set. Seems to me we could use more of a joint set. 2 Maybe I'm unrealistic. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Have the books been 4 purchased and delivered? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: I suspect so. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move the budget 8 amendment. 9 MR. TOMLINSON: I'm not paying the bill till 10 we've got the amendment. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see another workshop 13 item. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Probably. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I want to second. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and 17 seconded to approve Budget Amendment Request Number 4. Any 18 further questions or discussion? 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Question, yes. I 20 see Line Item 402 on here twice, Court-Appointed Attorneys. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: One's 198th Court and the 22 other's County Court at Law. 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And my second 24 question, have those costs been accelerating the last few 25 years? 7-28-03 155 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. 2 MS. PIEPER: Yes, they have. 3 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Senate Bill 3 or 5 Senate Bill 7. 6 MR. TOMLINSON: Seven. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We blame it on 8 something. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'd like to learn 10 more about that in our workshop. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we're going to have to 12 comment on lawyer versus non-lawyer. You may not be 13 eligible to know about that. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll talk to you about 15 it. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I know, the secret 17 code. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 19 discussion? All in favor of the motion, 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. Budget 25 Amendment Request Number 5. 7-28-03 156 1 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 5 is from Justice of 2 the Peace, Precinct 3. Her request is to transfer $200 from 3 Software Maintenance to Postage. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or 7 discussion? 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Seems like somebody in 9 Precinct 3 would get it right the first time, doesn't it? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's 'cause our new 11 judge down there is sending out -- raising so much more 12 money for the county, it's increased her postage. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor, signify by 14 raising your right hand. 15 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget 19 Amendment Request Number 6. 20 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 6 is for another bill 21 from -- concerning the Hermann Sons Bridge project. I have 22 a total of $7,500. I put this as a one-sided amendment to 23 Flood Control, remembering that we paid the previous bills 24 from this fund. Is that -- I'm just bringing this to the 25 Court for approval. 7-28-03 157 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, yes. We -- but 2 my question is, this says repairs to dams. 3 MR. TOMLINSON: That's the line item that 4 they used to code that to. So -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean -- 6 MR. TOMLINSON: Just a misnomer. The name of 7 that account is that. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh. Says repairs to 9 dams? 10 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. We -- we use that fund 11 so rarely that -- that we -- we haven't changed the name. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you know what the -- 13 what the exact expenditure is related to? 14 MR. TOMLINSON: It says that -- the first one 15 is to appraisal company. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 17 MR. TOMLINSON: So, you -- it's $4,500 for 18 appraisals. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 20 MR. TOMLINSON: And then $1,500 -- well, 21 pardon me, they're all for that purpose. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. And the total 23 amount of the appraisals? 24 MR. TOMLINSON: $7,000. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Move approval. 7-28-03 158 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 3 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 6. Any further 4 questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion, 5 signify by raising your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can I make a brief 10 comment? 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. That one, we 13 did -- related to a conversation I had with the County 14 Attorney earlier, the -- we used our appraiser in Comfort, 15 Lonnie Marquardt, who -- who did the work, and did a 16 fantastic job. Very good appraisals. And they're 17 expensive, but they're well done, proper for what we need, 18 if we have to go down the condemnation road, which I hope we 19 don't. 20 MR. MOTLEY: That's what we thought, the cost 21 we'll need for purchase of -- regardless of condemnation, we 22 got to give them fair market value. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request 24 Number 7. 25 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 7 is for -- from 7-28-03 159 1 D.P.S., transfer $71 from Telephone line item to 2 Miscellaneous for the purchase of a notary bond. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't -- I'm 4 reading this wrong, apparently. It looks to me like he's 5 got an unexpended balance of 250 bucks, and expense is $71. 6 Why does he need a budget amendment? 7 MR. TOMLINSON: Apparently, there's -- 8 there's -- maybe they anticipate another bill. I -- 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, when he gets 10 the next bill, he can come back. 11 MR. TOMLINSON: I didn't actually talk to 12 Tommy about this, Mindy did, so I don't know exactly the 13 reason. I can't answer it. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whose signature is that? 15 John Syfert's signature? 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I wrote a note 17 under it, "What the hell is that?" and I'm going to mail it 18 to him. I don't know what to do, Tommy, but from the 19 appearance of this sheet here, I mean, there's plenty of 20 money there for him to spend. It does -- there's not an 21 amendment required, unless you say that -- that there is. 22 And I'm like number two here, you know. If he -- if he's 23 looking for a bill down the road, well, he needs to come 24 then. 25 MR. TOMLINSON: That's fine. 7-28-03 160 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I bet you there's an 2 explanation. 3 MR. TOMLINSON: I'm sure there is. I just 4 personally don't know what it is. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: I suspect we'll find out if we 6 take no action on it, won't we? 7 MR. TOMLINSON: Right, yeah. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody have a motion to 9 offer? Being none, we'll move on to the next item. Any 10 late bills, Mr. Auditor? 11 MR. TOMLINSON: Just one -- one near and dear 12 to my heart, to me for $79 for -- I mean $69 for a workshop 13 that I attended in Austin, the Texas Juvenile Probation 14 Commission on the 10th. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Looks pretty 16 suspicious. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's money in your 18 budget for it? 19 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion and second to approve 23 late bill and hand check to the Auditor for $69, 24 reimbursement for workshop. Any further questions or 25 discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right 7-28-03 161 1 hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge? 4 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not sure you can lawfully 5 vote from that position. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I can. I've 7 done it before. 8 MR. MOTLEY: He was tagging the top of the 9 desk. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I had my hand on the 11 book. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: I see. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See? But would you 14 give me one minute, let me go make a phone call about this 15 thing here? If that's something that they need in their 16 function over there, I'd hate to put them off. I mean, 17 we're talking about D.P.S. here. I'm asking a question; 18 y'all just sit there looking at me. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought you had to go 20 to the bathroom. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: I have couple of monthly 22 reports before me. Let the record reflect first that 23 Mr. Baldwin has absented himself from the meeting, 24 indicating he will return shortly. I have here a couple 25 reports before me, one from the County Clerk and one from 7-28-03 162 1 the District Clerk. Do I hear a motion to approve these two 2 reports as presented? 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So moved. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that 6 the reports as presented by the District Clerk and the 7 County Clerk be approved. Any further question or 8 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 9 your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. I do not 14 have any minutes before me. Do we have any reports from the 15 Commissioners, elected officials, department heads, or 16 others? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Report. Report. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Jonathan Letz, Commissioner 19 Precinct 3, has a report to render. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Actually, I have a 21 question. The workshop schedule that we have set up for 22 later this month, who -- or next month, rather, in August, 23 who is going to be designated to set up the schedule for 24 those workshops, or how are we going to come to that? Do we 25 need to -- 7-28-03 163 1 (Commissioner Williams pointed to the Judge.) 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would kind of point 3 that way, too. But, anyway, I just want to make sure that 4 we have a schedule. And do we need to put it on the agenda 5 to figure out, or just let the Judge put it together or how 6 are we going to accomplish that task? Any thoughts, Judge? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, who requested the 8 workshops? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the Court voted on 10 it unanimously. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Who requested it? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who made the motion? Is 13 that what -- I made the motion. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Originally, I believe. 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We've been talking 17 about it for a couple months. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've all requested 19 it. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're in agreement 21 that we need it. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: I've not been through this 23 drill before, so really, I'll be happy to put out the 24 schedule, but I think -- I think that I'm going to need some 25 help from some of you guys that have been there, because, 7-28-03 164 1 you know, I don't know about the time frame that these 2 things normally require, or -- you know. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I'll be glad to 4 sit down with you, go over the -- you know, a recommended 5 schedule that I think works. And then, you know -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In doing that, will 7 you keep in mind something we talked about earlier, which is 8 kind of grouping some things -- like group the J.P.'s, group 9 the -- 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Constables. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. But timing, I 12 think we may actually have a little bit -- you know, we 13 should try to get most of the workshops in -- we have four 14 days allocated for them. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In two or three days, and 17 leave one to come back and -- on specific usage. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I had suggested to 19 the Judge earlier, I thought it would be a good idea, and I 20 would like about five minutes each at the beginning of it 21 for us to say what our individual concerns and expectations 22 were for the process and for the budget. I would like to 23 talk a little bit in advance about some things that I'd like 24 to spend some money on and some of the things I'd like to 25 save some money on, so that you'll be able to see that be a 7-28-03 165 1 common thread there. I'd like to hear from each of you on 2 the same issue. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So our first workshop, 4 there'll be, like, a 30-minute period for to us kind of 5 discuss general budget items? 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And then dig into 7 the individual groups. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. All right. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you know, I'd be tickled 10 to death if Commissioner Letz would provide me with a -- 11 kind of a draft schedule, and then we'll sit down and talk 12 about it a bit and see if we can't get us a -- a proposed 13 schedule ready to go. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would you like to 15 have it in three days? Two? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Based on the process, I 17 think a lot's being done ahead of time, so really two 18 days -- either three half days or two full days, something 19 like that. It's sometimes easier to do half days; you can 20 get kind of brain-dead after -- 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think we voted to 22 start at 10:00. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, unless it's a half 24 day. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Could we schedule 7-28-03 166 1 the face time with the various elected officials, department 2 heads -- maybe you can do that in two days, and then just -- 3 at the end of the second day or the end of the third day, 4 whatever -- however long it takes, we could decide then if 5 we need to come back. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do some negotiating. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have one item, 10 Judge, real quick. It has to do with the Regional 11 Transportation Board. I'm not going to bore you with 12 details. Dietert Senior people have opted out of regional 13 transportation, which is an AACOG function, and they're 14 going to end their -- their involvement in regional 15 transportation by the end of August, I guess, or whenever. 16 So, AACOG has taken over that function, and it's going to 17 consolidate regional transportation to the best it possibly 18 can, if not completely, of 11 counties surrounding Bexar 19 County. And the rural -- by resolution at the past meeting, 20 the rural county judges are now identified, and whoever 21 represents are identified as the board of directors for 22 rural transportation issues and the operation thereof. We 23 will be soon seeing a resolution for Kerr County to opt into 24 rural transportation. We've never, to my knowledge, 25 exercised a resolution similar to that, because Dietert has 7-28-03 167 1 done it in the past, and it wasn't up to us. However, the 2 other part of this equation deals with budget. We have 3 given Dietert something like $15,000 under a support program 4 for various agencies and for various purposes, and those 5 dollars were allocated, I'm pretty sure, for regional 6 transportation purposes, underwriting our obligation through 7 them for regional transportation. So, we're going to have 8 to look at that in terms of budget, because the counties 9 that are going to participate in the rural transportation 10 are going to be asked to participate for some underwriting 11 for that purpose. So, as we get a little closer to the 12 resolution, which will be pretty soon, and when we get into 13 the budget, we'll take a look at it. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: For informational purposes, my 15 recollection of the budget is that there's two items on the 16 county-sponsored activities. One is -- these are what have 17 been funded in the past. Dietert, 15, and then there's a 18 separate transportation item for five. Now, I assume that 19 that five goes to Dietert, because they're the only one 20 providing public transportation in Kerr County, to my 21 knowledge. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If that's the case, 23 Judge, that's really the only one we've got to look at. We 24 can look at the other one if we wish, but that's the one 25 that -- 7-28-03 168 1 JUDGE TINLEY: For whatever it's worth, also, 2 Commissioner, you said end of August. One of Commissioner 3 Letz' constituents called me this morning -- I've not had 4 the opportunity to get with him on it -- that her bus 5 service -- her transportation service is going to end this 6 Thursday. That's the end of July. I -- I don't know 7 whether she's mistaken. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd be interested in 9 knowing more about that. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Must be the Alpine -- 11 JUDGE TINLEY: You got it. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I got one call on 13 this issue a couple three weeks ago. It was protesting the 14 transfer of service from one end to the other one and laying 15 off the Dietert Claim employees. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is the intent for 17 them to maintain that same level of service with the vans. 18 They're going to have to deal with purchasing the vans or 19 whatever from Dietert, and they're going to go through the 20 exercise of seeing if they want to hire the Dietert drivers 21 or not, but it is their anticipation to take care of the 22 seniors as they have, and take care of other rural 23 transportation needs and try to take care of Medicaid needs 24 as well. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: There's always some 7-28-03 169 1 pain when we're making progress, and apparently there's a 2 little bit of pain out there somewhere. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anyone have any other 4 reports or motion that needs to be brought forward? Yes? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We want to go back and 6 revisit this. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: I have an answer on the 8 budget amendment. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, we're back on Budget 10 Amendment Number 7? 11 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. We do have a bill 12 pending for the -- D.P.S. has a -- a device they call a tint 13 meter; it registers degree of tint on windows on vehicles. 14 They have to have that certified, and they had budgeted the 15 whole amount in that line item for that, for that 16 certification. So they added $71 to pay for the notary. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 20 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 7. Any further 21 question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify 22 by raising your right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 7-28-03 170 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge -- and this is -- I 3 will make it very brief; I know everyone's hungry. Back on 4 Commissioners' comments, if I may make one more comment? 5 JUDGE TINLEY: You've already been there, 6 Commissioner. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll wait till next 8 meeting. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: No, go ahead. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll wait till next 11 meeting. I'll talk next meeting about it. You want to hear 12 it? It's about the -- I'll bring it up next time, too. 13 The -- it's locally referred to in east Kerr County as the 14 Mexican rodeo, which is a -- there's two arenas down there, 15 one which has caused a little bit of problems, music being 16 played late at night. But, anyway, aside from that, they're 17 pretty interesting. A guy by the name of Alfredo Avalos 18 opened a larger one on Hermann Sons Road also, and I have 19 not been to -- I plan to attend. It is a pretty amazing 20 thing that they're doing, and it's a -- I guess they have a 21 lot of -- in Mexico, they have rodeos that are bull riding 22 and bareback riding and different kinds of pageantry and 23 things, and it's -- I mean, other events. And it's a Mexico 24 City-type caliber that they're trying to attract, and are 25 attracting them. Anyway, I'm just bringing it up because it 7-28-03 171 1 would be something pretty interesting to attend if you have 2 time. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you inviting us 4 to be your guest? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure, we can do that. We 6 can do that. We can have a Commissioners meeting down 7 there; it is in Kerr County. But -- (Laughter.) 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You got some 9 Coronas, I'll be there. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, anyway, some pretty 11 neat things to do if you go down Highway 27. If you haven't 12 seen it, it is pretty good. They're trying to run -- 13 Alfredo's running -- trying to run a first-class operation. 14 The other one, they're doing very well also, little bit 15 smaller size. Both of them are doing very well, but the one 16 on Hermann Sons, they're also trying to expand into some -- 17 I guess some female bareback riding or sidesaddle riding, I 18 guess it is as well, and they are having a -- it's either 19 national or international competition where there will be 20 over 2,000 riders there next year. I mean, the economic 21 impact to the area, what they're trying to do, is pretty 22 amazing, and it kind of -- it's what private, you know -- 23 amazing what the private sector can do in things similar to 24 what we try to do at the Ag Barn when they want to, and how 25 things can work. But private industry is doing it. And 7-28-03 172 1 maybe there may be an avenue for us to try to get some 2 things done out there, try to approach the private sector, 3 turn more of that facility over to the private sector, and 4 at the same time, protect the County interests. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, it's just 6 another picture, too -- it is truly amazing how 7 agriculture -- and I consider that a part of the 8 agricultural scene in Kerr County -- how important and how 9 big it truly is. If you was to go out and start searching 10 the byways and pathways and alleyways, you would find more 11 and more ag-related -- I'm just opening the door for you, 12 Letz. You want to jump on that? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. I'd love -- we 14 need to do more to emphasize the importance of agriculture 15 in other county-wide entities, such as the camps, to Kerr 16 County and City of Kerrville as a whole. Maybe we can bring 17 that up tomorrow night. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can see 19 Commissioner Letz and I talk about this almost every meeting 20 now for -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: If we're going to talk about a 22 meeting place, we need to get the lawyers involved, right? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if I'd go 24 that far. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay. 7-28-03 173 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we can just -- we 2 can all show up one night. And maybe -- 3 JUDGE TINLEY: De facto. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: De facto. But, anyway, 5 pretty interesting. I think they are trying to really do a 6 good job, and Alfredo's a fine man. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything further, 8 gentlemen? If not, I'll declare the meeting adjourned. 9 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 1:11 p.m.) 10 - - - - - - - - - - 11 12 STATE OF TEXAS | 13 COUNTY OF KERR | 14 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 15 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 16 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 17 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 18 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 4th day of August, 19 2003. 20 21 22 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 23 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 24 Certified Shorthand Reporter 25 7-28-03