1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Special Session 10 Monday, April 25, 2005 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 April 25, 2005 2 PAGE --- Commissioners' Comments.............................. 4 3 1.1 Approve Proclamation for National Day of Prayer...... 13 1.2 Consider rental of Kerr County Outdoor Arena, role 4 of Kerr County Extension Office and employees, and follow up on questions asked at Commissioners Court.. 15 5 1.3 General discussion on HCYEC management, policy and deficit.............................................. 31 6 1.6 Receive/Open Bids on Kerrville South Wastewater project.............................................. 53 7 1.4 Consider options for housing the West Kerr Annex..... 54 1.5 Approve renewal agreement with National School 8 Lunch Program through Texas Health & Human Services and authorize County Judge to sign same.............. 55 9 1.7 Consider a request by Hill Country District Junior Livestock Show to place steel container storage unit 10 on grounds of HCYEC.................................. 57 1.8 Progress report detailing activities relating to 11 development of a wastewater collection system for Center Point......................................... 60 12 1.9 Consider grant proposal by Texas DPS................. 74 1.10 Consider Kerr County Nuisance Abatement Program ..... 81 13 1.11 Discuss organization and oversight of all depart- ments that report directly to Commissioners' Court... 93 14 1.12 Consider Subdivision Rules and Regulations........... 97 1.13 Discuss soliciting private bids for EMS service 15 in Kerr County...................................... 107 1.14 Consider changes in Unemployment Fund's bylaws and 16 approval of updated Participation Agreement for TAC Unemployment Compensation Group Account Fund.... 114 17 1.15 Approval of the Papcon software contract used in association with hot checks collection department 116 18 1.16 Discuss judiciary guns in the courthouse............ --- 1.17 Consider Road & Bridge organization and personnel... 118 19 & 134 20 4.1 Pay Bills........................................... 120 4.2 Budget Amendments................................... 120 21 4.3 Late Bills.......................................... 129 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports.................. 130 22 3.1 Action taken on executive session matters........... 131 23 1.18 Road and Bridge & Subdivision Rules Workshop........ 134 24 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison/Committees....... 188 25 --- Adjourned........................................... 198 3 1 On Monday, April 25, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., a special 2 meeting 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 this 7 regularly scheduled meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners 8 Court scheduled for this time and date, Monday, April the 9 25th, 2005, at 9 a.m. It is that time now. Commissioner 10 Letz? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would everyone please 12 stand and join me in a moment of prayer followed by the 13 pledge? 14 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if 16 there is any member of the audience or the public that 17 wishes to be heard on a matter that is not a listed agenda 18 item, you're privileged and free to come forward at this 19 time to tell us what's on your mind. If you want to speak 20 on an agenda item, we'd ask that you fill out a 21 participation form; there are forms at the back of the room. 22 It's not absolutely essential. It helps me, however, so 23 that I don't overlook you when that agenda item comes up, 24 that -- that I'm sure to include you. But if there's any 25 member of the public that wishes to be heard on any matter 4-25-05 4 1 that is not a listed agenda item, please come forward at 2 this time. We'll be happy to listen to you. Seeing no one 3 coming forward, we will move on. Commissioner Letz, what do 4 you have for us this morning? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm just thankful that my 6 family's healthy for the first time, it seems like, in 7 months. (Laughter.) It's been a long spring. So, anyway, 8 I don't really have anything else. I'm just -- I was 9 supposed to be out of town; I don't know if everyone knew it 10 or not. I was supposed to be out of town most of last week 11 in Virginia for my 30th high school reunion, and I had to 12 cancel 'cause I came down with the flu Tuesday night. But 13 that's over and I feel much better, and ready to get going. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson? 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, all is well 16 in west Kerr County. That's all I've got to report. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Commissioner 18 Baldwin? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I've got a 20 couple items I want to talk about. One is, I see that we've 21 written another letter to the City in regards to the 22 meetings that we need to have for the budget issues. We 23 have an item on the agenda in here regarding ambulances 24 later on, and I might have -- should have saved my comments 25 till that point. But I think it -- not only do we need to 4-25-05 5 1 sit down and visit with them about it; I really would like 2 to see their proposed numbers sent over here prior to the 3 meeting so that we can do some research and thoughts and -- 4 and be prepared to carry on somewhat of an intelligent 5 conversation. I -- that would probably really muddy up the 6 water if we sent them another letter, but -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A response came from 8 them. Did you see it? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Excuse me? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's a response 11 that came in from them. Did you see it? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The letter that we 13 sent this morning? 14 (Commissioner Williams nodded.) 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's pretty 16 gosh-darn quick, I'll tell you. (Laughter.) 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just came in. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I haven't seen it. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But that's great. I'd 21 still like to have the numbers, what they propose that they 22 want from us. Item two is, I have in my hand a copy of the 23 Juvenile Board meeting minutes, and there are several things 24 in here that bother me. One is almost alarming to me, and 25 that's the one that I want to -- that I want to bring up 4-25-05 6 1 this morning. And I'll be as brief as I possibly can, but I 2 want to read some of the comments that were made in the 3 Juvenile Board meeting. This is Judge Ables: "But if we 4 know what Becky's doing, and it turns out that something 5 goes south, and there's a huge incident, the fact that we 6 knew about it puts us in maybe a role of getting sued." 7 Drop down a few lines, and he continues: "But I just can't 8 believe that we've managed to go as many years as we did and 9 didn't get sued on this stuff." And we drop down a few more 10 lines, and Judge Ables again: "Commissioners may get sued." 11 Judge Prohl says, "And Commissioners are the overseers from 12 above," which is real cute. 13 Judge Ables says, "You know, that's one of 14 the things that -- that probably -- I don't know if Bill and 15 Jonathan" -- meaning the two Commissioners -- "those guys 16 know that the more they micromanage the facility, the more 17 they want to find out about what's going on, and the more 18 they want to go back and say, you know, 'Let's tweak it this 19 way,' the better the case is against them for getting sued. 20 I mean, does -- has anybody explained that to them?" Judge 21 Tinley says, "I gather you haven't." Judge Ables says, "I 22 haven't." Prohl: "I haven't." Judge Tinley: "I haven't." 23 Judge Prohl: "Probably don't intend to." And it goes on to 24 some other things. 25 Now, what bothers me is that the previous 4-25-05 7 1 administration, the Juvenile Board, ran that facility out 2 there, and it ended up -- in my opinion, the lack of 3 oversight and the lack of management, it ended up ruining 4 the County's credit. It's cost us, the taxpayers of this 5 county, a lot of money, probably $3 million. And now 6 they're saying if you manage it, then you're going to get 7 sued. Well, that's all well and good, but my problem with 8 all that is, somebody needs to come in this courtroom and 9 tell this Court about this being sued stuff. I don't know 10 if it's the County Attorney. Obviously, Judge Prohl's not 11 going to do it. He doesn't want to do that. But you, 12 Judge, or someone needs to tell us. I think that is very 13 serious language, in my opinion. If -- if this County's 14 going to get sued and it's going to be another cost to the 15 taxpayers, then we need to know about it. We need to know 16 what that's about, because we're trying to manage -- and I 17 don't think there's any micromanaging going on. Should be, 18 but we do not do that. But because we're representing the 19 people and managing -- trying to manage that facility out 20 there, we're going to get sued, and I think that this Court 21 needs to know about it. I want to make an agenda item next 22 meeting, and somebody -- whoever's responsible for coming in 23 and briefing the Court on this suit stuff, I'd like to see 24 that get done. That's all. Have a nice day. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've been following 4-25-05 8 1 with interest the vagaries -- for lack of a better word, the 2 vagaries of the Texas Legislature as it applies to tax caps 3 and -- and appraisal caps and the net effect on county 4 government. I suspect most of my colleagues have done the 5 same thing. Recently, the House Bill 1006 by Representative 6 Carl Isett, Republican, of Lubbock has been the focus of 7 most of our attentions. And the bill has been in and out of 8 committee, and it has gone before and gone back. It's been 9 amended, it's been checked, it's been tried to be gutted. 10 Its been added to and taken away from, and the net result is 11 that it still hasn't gone away, and it's probably not going 12 to go away, because there seems to be sufficient support in 13 the Texas Legislature to put a cap on what city governments 14 and county governments have the authority to spend on 15 services that they're required by law to provide, most of 16 which in recent years have been mandated by the Texas 17 Legislature without any form of compensation coming down 18 from Austin. 19 Recently, Judge Tinley sent out the budget 20 requests, and all departments now have them in their hands, 21 including those that go to Commissioners Court, and it just 22 prompts me to say to anyone who wants to listen, this is 23 going to be a very, very difficult budget year. It's going 24 to be very hard for county government to put together what 25 it needs to put together on the revenues it has available to 4-25-05 9 1 provide the services that are required of it currently, not 2 the least of which in addition to what is going to be 3 requested of us to go forward. So, my admonition to elected 4 officials and department heads and anyone who chooses to 5 listen prior to the budget process is, you'd wetter get your 6 pencils sharp. It's going to have to be trimmed down into a 7 very lean and mean -- lean operation going forward, because 8 the dollars are obviously not going to be there. We're 9 going to face the impact of the tax freeze that was imposed 10 in Kerr County for 65-plus and disabled. We're going to 11 face a cap of some kind on revenues, which is going to force 12 back -- force rollbacks more easily than ever before. And 13 what's so troubling about all that is that Kerr County, 14 along with many other counties our size, have never been 15 guilty of -- of excessive spending with respect to new 16 dollars coming in, forcing rollback elections. We have 17 judiciously tried to avoid that. So, all I want to do is to 18 send out a little bit of warning; it's going to be a tough 19 year, and there are going to be cuts. There's probably 20 going to be some personnel reductions, as far as I can tell, 21 and folks better get ready for it. That's all I got, Judge. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, thank you. With regard 23 to the detention facility, certainly, if there are some 24 legalities about being sued or not being sued to which the 25 Commissioners Court might be a party or to which 4-25-05 10 1 Commissioners need to be aware of any exposure that they 2 have, that's a matter, of course, for the County Attorney to 3 research and to advise the Court. I've been reminded time 4 and time again that it's not my function to provide legal 5 advice to the Court -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who said that? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: -- or to any members of the 8 Court. Well, one or two might have said that on one or two 9 occasions. But having heard a comment about -- about, 10 quote, "ruining the County's credit" and "cost us a lot of 11 money," all I can do is say, where were we before and where 12 are we now? Well, before we were looking at, over a course 13 of time, amortizing 4 million -- a balance of $4,975,000 in 14 bonds at a true interest cost of slightly over 5.15 percent, 15 and where we are now is we exchanged that position for one 16 in which -- that was initiated, incidentally, by the 17 nonappropriation by the Juvenile Board, and as a result, our 18 position was exchanged for one in which we acquired those 19 bonds for 1.9 million, and the true interest cost is just 20 under 3 percent. Those are the facts from our financial 21 adviser, and it occurs to me that our position has improved 22 and our debt service cost has gone down. Now, 23 notwithstanding that, I recognize that we're going to have 24 to take a hard look at the costs to operate that facility, 25 and I recognize that we had a pretty good run for a goodly 4-25-05 11 1 number of years when that facility wasn't even on the radar 2 screen because it wasn't costing us a dime, and so nobody 3 cared. But times have changed, circumstances have changed, 4 and that thing is costing some money. And it's something 5 that -- that we need to be mindful of, and we've got to 6 budget for and provide for those costs. I'm hopeful that 7 those costs can slowly continue to be offset by revenues. 8 Time will tell. Ms. Harris is working very, very hard to 9 get the census up, to initiate new programs, and with the 10 cooperation of the Court, to get that facility where it 11 offers a broad range of -- of detention/rehabilitation 12 programs. So, I'm hopeful that we'll get there. Let's move 13 on to the agenda, if we might. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, can I make a 15 comment? I mean, one's to your comment, which I hope you're 16 not saying that it's a good thing that the County and the 17 Juvenile Board defaulted on bonds and stuck people with 18 about $3 million worth of loss that had invested in this 19 county in that facility. I don't think that is a good thing 20 to happen. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not saying that the County 22 defaulted, Commissioner, because the County did not default. 23 Notwithstanding the use of the term in two prior meetings -- 24 I think the initial characterization was made by you; the 25 press picked it up -- there was never, never a default in 4-25-05 12 1 that entire transaction. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You could put a gun to 3 the head of the investors and then tell them, "We're going 4 to give you 30 cents on the dollar, and if you don't accept 5 it, we're going to default." 6 JUDGE TINLEY: We did -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Same thing. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: We did exactly what we were 9 legally authorized to do, had every legal right to do, and 10 the documents provided for that. And, in fact, the intent 11 when the original -- original transaction was set up was set 12 up in that manner. So -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well -- 14 JUDGE TINLEY: -- the term "default" 15 shouldn't even come in here, because there was no default. 16 You can bet, had there been default, the holders of those 17 bonds would have had the blowtorch to our feet, and we'd 18 have been in the courthouse. That didn't happen, of course. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that the -- if 20 you had talked to the banks that absorbed that loss, they 21 would have a little bit different view than you're 22 presenting right now to the public. My other comment is, 23 the County Attorney is here, and Commissioner Baldwin says 24 he's going to put it on the agenda related to what they 25 said. To me, the issue is, is this Commissioners Court in a 4-25-05 13 1 better legal position not knowing what our departments are 2 doing and let them just run and put our heads in the sand, 3 or trying to know what they're doing? That's the crux of 4 what Commissioner Baldwin is saying, in my opinion. I don't 5 think it relates only to the Juvenile Board; it relates to 6 the -- you know, the Sheriff's Department; it relates to 7 Maintenance and every other department. Is -- is knowledge 8 better, or is lack of knowledge better? And I -- I can't 9 imagine that it's lack of knowledge. But that's, to me, 10 what the crux of the issue is that I think we need guidance 11 on. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: That's for the County 13 Attorney. Things kinder and gentler. Item Number 1, 14 consider and discuss the approval of a proclamation for the 15 National Day of Prayer. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we need it. 17 (Laughter.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: I was asked to put this on the 19 agenda by Partners in Ministry, who have -- who have assumed 20 this program from Clergywomen. As you might recall, 21 Ms. Fern Lancaster has -- has taken on other things, and the 22 Partners in Ministry have asked me to present this to the 23 Court. As the Court's aware, this has been done for the 24 last several years, and there have been various celebrations 25 or -- or meetings held with regard to this. 4-25-05 14 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of the 2 proclamation. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 5 approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I just want to 7 comment. I think that this particular day, which is May 5, 8 isn't it? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: May 5. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May 5 begins with the 11 Mayor's breakfast over at Trinity Baptist, and then there's 12 a couple of functions throughout the day. I think there's 13 two functions here at the courthouse, and there's folks that 14 read letters and proclamations from the President, the 15 Governor, et cetera, et cetera. So, it's a fun thing; it's 16 a good thing. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or 18 comment? All in favor of the motion, 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: That motion does carry. The 24 next item on the agenda is a timed item, and we're close to 25 being on schedule, dealing with the rental of the Kerr 4-25-05 15 1 County Outdoor Arena, role of the Kerr County Extension 2 Office and employees, and follow up on questions asked at 3 the Commissioners Court meeting of March the 28th and April 4 the 11th of this year. Commissioner Nicholson was the 5 moving force to get this placed on the agenda, and so I'll 6 defer to him. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, Teri Hawkins 8 is -- and/or Tim Cowden has provided a good bit of backup, 9 some of which you've seen before, and I think some -- some 10 is new. And it's essentially questions about policy, 11 process, procedures on use of Kerr County facilities, and 12 questions about how those policies may have been 13 established. It's a series of questions, and I can't answer 14 the questions. Or I would -- I can answer one or two of 15 them, but most of them I don't have the answer to, and I'm 16 interested in the answers. We might learn something from 17 it; I'm not sure. The -- I think the people who can answer 18 them are Glenn Holekamp and Roy Walston, the people who 19 manage the process, and so I'm going to propose that Glenn 20 and Roy prepare answers to the questions that have been 21 raised by Ms. Hawkins and Mr. Cowden. And, Ms. Hawkins, if 22 you would like to say more about this, you're welcome to at 23 this time. 24 MS. HAWKINS: Well, I just want some answers. 25 And I've been here -- this is my third time, and I'm getting 4-25-05 16 1 to where I'm starting to figure out how to -- what y'all's 2 procedures are, and getting on the agenda and that kind of 3 thing. I just need some answers to my questions that I've 4 submitted in the past. And if you're telling me that I need 5 to get with Mr. Holekamp and Mr. Walston, I mean, if that's 6 what I need to do and set them down -- do they make the 7 county policy on -- to answer all these questions? 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What I'm saying, 9 Ms. Hawkins, is they're the people that can provide the 10 answers. 11 MS. HAWKINS: Mm-hmm. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Again, I know the 13 answers to one or two of your questions, but I don't know 14 the answers to all of them. So, what I'm suggesting is that 15 those two people prepare answers to your questions and give 16 that to you and to the Commissioners court. 17 MS. HAWKINS: So you give them copies of 18 everything I've given to you, and then they will prepare 19 answers for me? 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If they agree to, 21 yes. 22 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. Without -- okay. So, as 23 of today, I'm not going to get an answer if Mr. Cowden and 24 Mr. Hawkins are going to be able to have two dates in the 25 outdoor facility? 4-25-05 17 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's one of the 2 questions I'd like for them to answer. 3 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. When? 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: As soon as they can. 5 MS. HAWKINS: I mean, we're not looking at 6 another month, are we? Or -- 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think they could 8 -- they know the answers. They should -- 9 MS. HAWKINS: Well, so far, every answer 10 they've given me is no. That's been the answers. No. But 11 there's no policy stating this, that we cannot get that 12 outdoor facility. It's been leased in the past. I was 13 given all of the information. I was given prices. My dates 14 were okayed. My insurance amount was given to me. 15 Everything was given to me, and then they were -- I was told 16 no. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think -- 18 MS. HAWKINS: And that's my -- 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think I can answer 20 that question right now. 21 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Holekamp or Mr. Walston? 23 MS. HAWKINS: Do I need to sit back down? I 24 don't know what the procedure is. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're all right. 4-25-05 18 1 MR. WALSTON: As far as from visiting with 2 our 4-H leaders, the 4-H arena is off-limits to leasing. 3 MS. HAWKINS: And who -- who authorizes the 4 4-H leaders? Is this -- is the outdoor arena -- is that a 5 County-maintained facility? Who pays the maintenance on 6 that outdoor arena? Who pays electric? Who pays the water? 7 MR. WALSTON: The County maintains the cost 8 of the outdoor arena. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think people need 10 to come up so we can hear what's going on, please. 11 MR. WALSTON: Okay. 12 MS. HAWKINS: I'll share. 13 MR. WALSTON: Yes. The outdoor arena is -- 14 was a 4-H facility. It's maintained by the -- by the 15 County, just like all the grounds. My Extension Office and 16 -- and the whole grounds out there is maintained by the 17 County. And having visited with the leaders and trying to 18 build our 4-H horse program there, they're wanting to 19 restrict the 4-H arena strictly to the horse project group. 20 So that was -- that was decided by -- by those leaders. 21 MS. HAWKINS: By volunteer county leaders 22 that were called and summonsed down there to sign a letter 23 that you submitted on the 28th, that was signed on the 25th. 24 MR. WALSTON: We visited with them before, 25 and then we -- 4-25-05 19 1 MS. HAWKINS: They were summonsed down there 2 to sign the letter. No vote was done. Y'all didn't have a 3 4-H meeting or anything else. 4 MR. WALSTON: Yes, we visited with our 5 leaders in that, and they agreed to, and I put the letter 6 together and asked them, if y'all would go along with this, 7 if this is something that y'all agree to, come in and sign. 8 If not, don't sign it. I didn't -- I didn't say that they 9 had to sign it. So -- 10 MS. HAWKINS: That's not what I heard, but -- 11 MR. WALSTON: But -- 12 MS. HAWKINS: So, it's being a 13 County-maintained facility that county tax dollars are 14 paying for and maintaining, in addition to the County 15 employees that work out there that our tax dollars pay their 16 salaries, and the Extension Office and everything else, we 17 are not going to be allowed to go down there on a date 18 that's not conflicting with the 4-H in any way. I have a 19 very good rapport with the 4-H Horse Club adult leaders, and 20 they have told me they don't have a problem with us leasing 21 it. We have already said, you know, that -- 22 MR. WALSTON: Well, they've told me 23 otherwise. I mean -- 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ms. Hawkins, help me 25 out a little bit. 4-25-05 20 1 MS. HAWKINS: Mm-hmm. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For what purpose are 3 you trying to -- what is your group, and what purpose are 4 you trying to lease the outdoor arena? Help me understand 5 that. 6 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. We had called out there 7 to put on two team ropings. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who is "we"? 9 MS. HAWKINS: I had called on behalf of Tim 10 Cowden and Jerry Hawkins. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: What's the name of your 12 organization? 13 MS. HAWKINS: CowHawk Team Roping 14 Productions. And they had asked me to call and to see if we 15 could get the dates out there, two dates. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is it a profit-making 17 organization? Not-for-profit? What particular -- 18 MS. HAWKINS: It is a profit-making 19 organization. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 21 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. And we had called out 22 there, and they had said that, yes, you can have your dates. 23 I talked to Jamie. I talked to Laurinda about some other 24 things on the concession stand and the permits, and I was 25 given insurance information. I was given all this 4-25-05 21 1 information, and everything was okay March the 1st. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Have you ever used 3 the outdoor arena -- 4 MS. HAWKINS: Yes, sir, I have. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- for this purpose 6 before? 7 MS. HAWKINS: Yes, sir, I have, 1987. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did you pay rent for 9 it? 10 MS. HAWKINS: Paid rent for it, and I know 11 several other organizations that's paid rent for it in the 12 past as well. Mr. Cowden himself has even rented it. I can 13 go on. I've got team pinners, I've got cutters, I've got 14 other team roping organizations; they've all leased that 15 county outdoor facility. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And this time you 17 were told -- 18 MS. HAWKINS: I was told no after -- two 19 weeks after we had been told that we could have it. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was the last 21 time -- when was the last time you rented the arena -- 22 outdoor arena? 23 MS. HAWKINS: It was in 1987. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: '87? 25 MS. HAWKINS: Yes, sir. And it was a 4-25-05 22 1 County-maintained facility, as it is now, and I'm not 2 understanding what the deal is. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 18 years ago. 4 MS. HAWKINS: It doesn't matter. It does not 5 matter. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me just make a 7 comment, if I might. This Court has had a policy that that 8 facility, as a priority, is to 4-H. 9 MS. HAWKINS: Yes, sir. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's where we are. 11 MS. HAWKINS: I agree. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's where we are right 13 now, and we're going to maintain that, I believe. 14 MS. HAWKINS: Yes, sir. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You have asked and others 16 have asked, and the Court agrees that we're going to look at 17 the policies over there, and this is one of them. This is 18 going to come back to the Court with a recommendation -- 19 with, you know, a recommendation from -- from me; I'm not 20 sure about Commissioner Williams, over how we handle renting 21 of that facility. You've been told that for three meetings 22 now. 23 MS. HAWKINS: Yes -- no, I haven't been told 24 anything. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, you have. You've 4-25-05 23 1 been told that there's -- we're going to form a committee, 2 we're going to develop a policy. It will be sent out to 3 everyone that wants it, and we'll get feedback. Every 4 meeting you come back and ask the same thing. 5 MS. HAWKINS: Yes, sir, because you're not 6 answering my questions. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, because we -- you 8 haven't given us a chance to do what you asked us to do. 9 And, you know, I'm not going to get -- go into a lot of 10 these things. I will say one thing, and I have refrained 11 for the last two meetings. Your first meeting, you made a 12 lot of accusations about myself. 13 MS. HAWKINS: No, I did not. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, you did. In your 15 backup, you said -- 16 MS. HAWKINS: Mr. Walston -- 17 JUDGE TINLEY: You said -- listen -- 18 (Both speaking at the same time.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: One at a time. 20 (Court reporter interrupted, asked them to speak one at a time.) 21 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You said in your backup 23 that I had an illegal meeting with another commissioner and 24 Roy Walston. That is a false statement. It is a flat-out 25 lie. 4-25-05 24 1 MS. HAWKINS: I didn't say illegal. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, you did. You said 3 there was an illegal meeting in your backup. There was no 4 illegal meeting. I talked to Roy Walston one-on-one about 5 the use of that facility, as liaison to that facility. And 6 Roy Walston talked to Commissioner Baldwin on the phone. 7 That is not an illegal meeting. You are making things and 8 statements that are not true. 9 MS. HAWKINS: No, sir, I will tell you who 10 stated that to me. Would you like for me to do that? I was 11 trying to keep names out of the Commissioners Court that 12 day, and I did. I received a phone call from Laurinda Boyd, 13 and she told me that the County Extension Agent, herself, 14 and two Commissioners had met, discussed, and voted on and 15 put that policy into effect. I wrote it down as she said 16 it. I have it documented, the date, the time, everything 17 that was said. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Boyd, did you say 19 that? 20 (Ms. Boyd shook her head.) 21 MS. HAWKINS: Yes, you did. 22 MS. BOYD: I was in Houston, Texas, in the 23 middle of a thing on the cell phone. We'd been back and 24 forth on the phone. 25 MS. HAWKINS: That is absolutely -- 4-25-05 25 1 MS. BOYD: I know what I had said, because -- 2 MS. HAWKINS: It is absolutely what you said. 3 MS. BOYD: Excuse me, I'm talking. I said 4 that Jonathan had come into the office, and that Roy had 5 talked to -- yes, ma'am, I did. And he had talked to him on 6 the phone. I most certainly did, because I know that they 7 never sat together in the office. 8 MR. WALSTON: I had visited with both of 9 them. 10 MS. BOYD: And I spoke to Roy right after we 11 had our conversation on the phone. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me -- let me -- 13 Ms. Hawkins, let me shed a little light on that. There are 14 two Commissioners appointed by this Court to work on the 15 problems associated with the Hill Country Youth Exhibit 16 Center, both indoor and outdoor arenas and everything out 17 there on that 65-acre plot of ground. Commissioner Letz is 18 one of them, and I'm the other one. Commissioner Letz had 19 some telephone -- or had a discussion, but there has never 20 been a meeting, as he has said, in which two commissioners 21 got together to plot against your interests. 22 MS. HAWKINS: And I respect that. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did not happen. 24 MS. HAWKINS: I respect that. That is not 25 what was told to me on the day that I received a phone call. 4-25-05 26 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not responsible 2 for what was told to you. 3 MS. HAWKINS: I understand that. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But I am holding you 5 responsible for what you put in the documents that you sent 6 up here for us to take under consideration, and I'm looking 7 at the language that, "How can two county commissioners meet 8 with extension agents..." and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. 9 MS. HAWKINS: Exactly. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And write -- and 11 allege that that constitutes an illegal meeting. 12 MS. HAWKINS: I wanted to know how come I was 13 told that when I was -- afterwards, when I had called my 14 commissioner, he told me that it took three commissioners to 15 put a policy into effect, and that two commissioners could 16 not do that. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It takes a majority 18 of this Court. 19 MS. HAWKINS: Well, three is what was told to 20 me. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which is three. Not 22 two plus the Extension Agent. 23 MS. HAWKINS: Correct. And that was my 24 question. How could they take those dates that was told to 25 us to be available, with all the pricing and everything 4-25-05 27 1 given to us, to be pulled away from us. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My suggestion, 3 respectfully given to you -- 4 MS. HAWKINS: Yes, sir? 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- is that we try to 6 cool this thing down and wait it out, and let us get the 7 policy drafted that we want to draft. I'm working on it, 8 and I'm going to continue to work on it. But it may come as 9 a surprise to some folks; it's not the most important thing 10 on my plate. But I will work on it, and I will get the 11 draft ready. And when I get the draft ready, it will be 12 submitted to this Court for its review, and it will be 13 submitted to other folks for comment. We may do the comment 14 part before we bring it to the Court. 15 MS. HAWKINS: Do you have any time frame? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At that point in 17 time, all the things that you have wanted to know in your -- 18 in your several pages will be addressed, and that's the way 19 it's going to happen. 20 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. Do you have a time frame 21 on -- on the availability of the first draft? Just a 22 ballpark figure? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As quickly as I can 24 get it done. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe we said 4-25-05 28 1 originally it will be about 60 days. 2 MS. HAWKINS: Was that 60 days, 30 days ago? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm. So, we're about 4 30 days away. 5 MS. HAWKINS: About 30 days away, okay. So 6 do I need to keep coming here each time, then, until I can 7 see a copy of the first draft? Or -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not unless you enjoy 9 this. 10 MS. HAWKINS: Oh, well, I'm just having a 11 blast. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you enjoy the 13 repartee, then be our guest and come on back. 14 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. So, are you going to 15 mail it? Do I need to give you my address? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When we get the draft 17 ready -- there's four of us working on the draft. You're 18 standing next to one of them. Two of them are up here, and 19 Mr. Holekamp comprises the fourth of the working group 20 that's putting together the draft. 21 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I drew the short 23 straw, and I have to write it. When I get it written, we 24 had indicated that we will send it out to all the people who 25 had evidenced an interest -- 4-25-05 29 1 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- in being a part of 3 this broader discussion. Now, we're not going to form a 4 committee in the broad sense of 25 or 30 people. We're 5 going to send the drafts out and we're going to solicit -- 6 or elicit comments, okay? 7 MS. HAWKINS: Mm-hmm. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When we get the 9 comments back, we'll take a look at all those comments and 10 see how they mesh with what we have drafted. If some of 11 those changes are good and need to be incorporated, we'll 12 certainly do that. At that point, we'll bring the document 13 to Commissioners Court, and it will be open for discussion 14 among this five. That's the way it's going to happen. 15 MS. HAWKINS: Okay. So -- 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Ms. Hawkins, when 17 that draft is ready, I'll make sure you get a copy. 18 MS. HAWKINS: That's what I needed to hear. 19 Thank you, Mr. Nicholson. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on this 21 particular agenda item? 22 MR. WALSTON: Judge, I'd just like to ask, as 23 far as -- as to the timing on this, we got this -- Glenn 24 Holekamp and I visited during the early part of the year as 25 to us taking over the -- the scheduling of the arena. At 4-25-05 30 1 that time, we hadn't had anybody interested. It was 2 strictly the 4-H Horse Club was going to be using it. And 3 this happens to be the first outside interest of anyone 4 indicating that they were wanting to lease it. So, at that 5 time, that's when I went to the 4-H horse leaders and asked 6 them, "Are y'all interested in doing that?" So, that's -- 7 that's the time frame as to why we -- as far as outside 8 leasing prior to this, we had it where -- you know, like we 9 say, we're changing times. The question I have is, there's 10 out -- there's dates available on the indoor arena. And why 11 does this group not -- are they not interested in using and 12 scheduling those -- those weekends? 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm glad you 14 mentioned that, because I was just going to ask that very 15 question. Ms. Hawkins, I'm curious as to why, for your 16 purposes, you have not tried to rent the indoor arena. 17 MR. COWDEN: We're more interested in the 18 outdoor arena, because it's cooler outside. It's better on 19 your cattle. Just a little better arena, as far as I'm 20 concerned. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, one other thing, 23 my final comment on this right now. To my knowledge, the 24 only time that we had a request prior to this one to use the 25 outdoor arena, other than the Kerr County Fair, which is a 4-25-05 31 1 little bit different, was about six or seven years ago. 2 Some -- a lady wanted to give private lessons out there, and 3 we declined. So, while I've been a commissioner for the 4 last eight years, it has not been available for leasing, you 5 know. If you were told that, I'm sorry that our booking 6 agent made a mistake, but it has not been available as long 7 as I've been a commissioner, to my knowledge. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? We'll move on 9 to the next item, -- 10 MR. HENDERSON: Commissioner? I think I'm on 11 the agenda. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: -- which is a general 13 discussion on the management, policy, and deficit. This, 14 again, refers to the Youth Exhibit complex out there. 15 Commissioner Nicholson? 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is somewhat 17 related to the previous -- previous item. Mr. Aubrey 18 Henderson has collected some information from the County 19 Auditor that analyzes the revenues and costs, the financial 20 performance of the Ag Barn over the last 10 years or so. I 21 think -- I think his issues go beyond the policy/procedures 22 for the booking. It's got more to do with how are we -- 23 what can be done to better manage costs and revenues. So, 24 with that said, I'll let Mr. Henderson talk about it. 25 MR. HENDERSON: Judge, do you mind if I stay 4-25-05 32 1 seated here? I can stand for a while. I have a spur on my 2 foot. I'll try to stand for a while, okay? 3 JUDGE TINLEY: I think everybody in the 4 audience could hear you better. 5 MR. HENDERSON: Okay, that's fine. That's 6 fine. I just have -- I want to give you some stuff. That 7 way, I don't have to come up here every time. Here, Mr. 8 Baldwin. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. Do you 10 want to just give me all of them, and we'll pass them? 11 MR. HENDERSON: Well, I can handle it. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, he wants to hand 13 them out. 14 (Discussion off the record.) 15 MR. HENDERSON: You have something at 16 10 o'clock, right, Judge? The next -- is that right? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, we do have a timed 18 item. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. Yes, we do. 20 MR. HENDERSON: Since there's a little 21 tension in the house, would it be possible to lay a little 22 humor on us, Buster, this morning? Would it be possible? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You want me to? 24 MR. HENDERSON: No, I was going to. You 25 usually -- you usually do; that's why I asked you. Is it 4-25-05 33 1 possible that I do? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tell you what; if 3 yours bombs out, I'll be right behind you. 4 MR. HENDERSON: Okay. Well, I don't think 5 this will. You like football; everybody likes football. 6 This was told to me the other day. I thought it would be a 7 great opportunity to kind of break up the slack between pro 8 and con and everything. It's about Bear Bryant. And I 9 heard this the other day, and it's about Bear Bryant, and he 10 was winning the game; it was five points, and he decided -- 11 the coach that he was, he decided -- he was on the other end 12 of the field, and he decided to tell his quarterback that, 13 "Let's just try to run out the game." And, Jonathan, you 14 love football and everything else. He told his quarterback, 15 "We're winning the game, less than two minutes. If we don't 16 score, let's let our defense win the game." So he told his 17 quarterback, "By all means, just give it to our fullback. 18 Let him run it out." 19 Each down -- first down, hands it to the 20 fullback; no yardage. Second down, he hands it to the 21 fullback; a little bit of yardage. Third down, he hands -- 22 the quarterback hands off to the fullback, and he has no 23 yardage, but in the process, the quarterback gets hit by the 24 linebacker; knocks him out of the game. Bear Bryant has to 25 go to his backup quarterback. Kid never had played all 4-25-05 34 1 year. Of course, old Bear Bryant grabbed him by the face 2 mask and said, "Son, all four down; all you got to do is 3 hand that ball off to our handy, handy, handy fullback. 4 That's all you got to do, son, but whatever you do, don't 5 throw that ball." He goes out there and he's shaking, 6 nervous. The center hikes the ball. He tries to hand off 7 the ball to the fullback, and he runs into him. Ball falls 8 out on the ground. Buster, you played for Tivy; you 9 remember that, running for your life. He grabs the ball. 10 He's running around, and his tight end's sitting there 11 waving in the end zone, "Throw me the ball." And he says to 12 himself, I can get that ball to that tight end, so he throws 13 it. 14 But what he doesn't realize, the all-American 15 free safety, fastest man in the conference, jumps in front 16 of him running the other way. Alabama's going to lose the 17 game. And the only thing, Bill, in between that touchdown 18 was that rookie quarterback. As he run behind that 19 all-conference free safety, he dove at him at the 22-yard 20 line and saved the game. The whistle brew. Bear Bryant 21 went to congratulate -- the coaches met at half-field -- 22 half field, middle of the field. And the coach said to Bear 23 Bryant, he said, "Coach, we scouted your team, and your 24 quarterback -- your backup rookie quarterback is the slowest 25 man on your team. How in the H*** did your rookie 4-25-05 35 1 quarterback catch the free safety, all-American, fastest man 2 at the conference?" And Bear Bryant looked at him, patted 3 him on the shoulder, and said, "Your all-American was 4 running for a touchdown. My rookie quarterback was running 5 for his life." It's decisions in life, gentlemen. 6 Sometimes we make the right decisions; sometimes we make the 7 wrong decisions. 8 Okay, back to business, and I'll be brief, 9 'cause I know y'all have a lot of more business. That first 10 document that you have there that you're looking at, 11 gentlemen, when I come before and I asked for one date, and 12 it shows here -- as I went to the Treasurer's office, shows 13 where all these dates were paid for 2005 and 2006. But what 14 I'm wondering about is the reason why they were paid up 15 front all of a sudden, when before, Buster, when we had 16 talked about no dates had been paid. And in the 17 documentation that I sent to you requesting -- before I came 18 to speak on March the 28th, was that we would have a deposit 19 for those dates and people would pay for those dates up 20 front. Now, Jonathan, I know that you're trying to put a 21 policy together, and I know it's going to take time. I 22 understand it, but this is why I'm presenting these 23 documents to you today, is -- is to show you that -- why, 24 one, before the fact -- and if you'll look at the second 25 page, April the 6th, all these dates, all of a sudden, like 4-25-05 36 1 Houdini, they appeared. One minute they weren't there, and 2 all of a sudden, all this money was paid up front. 3 Now, Laurinda and everybody else, they run 4 the books; they book the deal. But if it's going to be 5 policy -- and that's all I ask for. All I asked for is one 6 date. I'm not here to put a series of ropings and rodeos or 7 anything; I just asked for one date. But what's good for 8 one man is good for the other, whether it be a lady or 9 anything else, and I think that will all come out in y'all's 10 policy and your research. But don't -- don't jockey for 11 position to sit here and say, "Okay, Mr. Henderson, you 12 can't have the dates because they're not available, 'cause 13 they've all been paid for," when, really, they hadn't been 14 paid for. When you look at the dates, if it's written, 15 it's -- so it shows when these dates and when they were paid 16 for. One week prior to March the 28th. One week after 17 March the 28th. Before, those documents had not ever been 18 paid for. Those deposits had never been put. All of a 19 sudden, we end up with -- the County ends up with a bunch of 20 money because I raised my hand and I say this -- this wasn't 21 law; this was recommendations. Mr. Nicholson, all this was 22 recommendations that I gave to you in good faith to tell you 23 what I was going to come talk about, that they were not 24 policies. I didn't write policy. There is no policy. 25 That's what we're after, Buster. We're trying to get onto a 4-25-05 37 1 better deal. So, that's what that documentation is. 2 And the last thing on policies, Jonathan, I 3 want to -- well, there is one other thing. You do have it 4 there, talk about the word "bumped." If you'll look on 5 the -- let's see, one, two, three -- fourth page, on the 6 2006, it's highlighted, I think. When the kids -- we talked 7 about the 4-H kids bumped. I want you to check with the 4-H 8 leader on that date right there, and you'll see that those 9 kids were bumped for that day, according to the editorial in 10 the paper. I have it right here, and it says here, April 11 the 22nd, bumped from the indoor arena. May 6, also bumped, 12 also highlighted. I don't have five copies, but, Jonathan, 13 you can look at that. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not following your 15 thinking here. What are you talking about? I see on your 16 little notes out to the right that May 5th was a bump and -- 17 MR. HENDERSON: Okay, May 5th was the day 18 before. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's don't both talk 20 at the same time. May 5th was a bump, and May 6th is a 21 roping. 22 MR. HENDERSON: Right. Preparation for -- 23 preparation for the arena, day before. But if you'll look 24 at the -- you know, and if you'll look at the article that's 25 in that paper, 'cause that came from the 4-H there, it does 4-25-05 38 1 state May 6th. Now, that is just -- those are just 2 notations of all the dates for the 4-H to use the outdoor 3 arena. Now, outside there where it's highlighted, it says 4 May 5th. That's, I think, one day before, but I think they 5 have to prepare the arena. But what Jonathan has in his 6 hand over there -- look at the bottom, Jon. It says April 7 the 6th. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bottom? 9 MR. HENDERSON: Bottom should be highlighted. 10 April 6th, and then look at the May -- 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It says May 6. 12 MR. HENDERSON: Yeah, but two dates out of 13 seven bumped. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: April 22nd, bumped from 15 indoor arena. May 6th -- these are -- they're both bumped 16 from the indoor arena. 17 MR. HENDERSON: Right. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those two dates, but they 19 had the outdoor arena those dates. 20 MR. HENDERSON: Right. But, in other words, 21 I think -- and Laurinda can tell me -- I think they get to 22 use both arenas. I believe that's right. I think they have 23 a backup. Is that not correct? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have done that. We're 25 looking at that in the policy. The current policy or the 4-25-05 39 1 current way it's being handled, as I understand it, is that 2 due to the possibility of rain and their scheduling and the 3 difficulty of makeup, both the indoor and outdoor arena are 4 reserved for them. If they cannot use the outdoor arena, 5 which is their arena, they use the indoor arena. We're 6 looking at changing that. I don't -- I don't think that's a 7 good policy, personally. I think that we need to have some 8 makeup dates, maybe, where -- 9 MR. HENDERSON: I understand that, Jon. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, you know, so that's 11 being looked at. So, I mean, they've never been bumped from 12 the outdoor arena. They have been bumped from the indoor 13 arena. 14 MR. WALSTON: Jonathan, if you don't mind, 15 I'd like to -- as far as being bumped, those dates shouldn't 16 have ever been scheduled with them to start with, because 17 that facility wasn't set up on the indoor arena. The indoor 18 arena, we just got through having a wild game dinner there. 19 They had to take all that out. That's the reason that it 20 was a scheduling conflict. That date should have never been 21 scheduled, because the arena wasn't set up. As -- as I'm 22 sure all of y'all understand, the arena, they double-booked 23 and scheduled the indoor arena along with outdoor arena for 24 safety reasons, an area to have them to warm up in. So, 25 that's -- you know, without a facility for those kids to 4-25-05 40 1 warm their horses up, that's what the indoor arena's used 2 for. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Like I say, we're looking 4 at that issue. I think there's a way that will resolve that 5 by having makeup dates where the indoor arena is reserved in 6 case there is a second rain-out date. And -- but that 7 part -- I mean, that's part of the policy. And I think the 8 other thing that you're saying, Aubrey, is that it's the 9 scheduling and how we're handling the -- the scheduling, and 10 I think we have -- we need to improve that. We -- clearly, 11 that's what the policy is. We're looking at other venues to 12 see how they do it, because that is, in my opinion, the crux 13 of the problem, really, is that communication to the public 14 or to those that want to use that facility, and that is 15 being looked at by Commissioner Williams and myself. 16 MR. WALSTON: Jon, I would like to say one 17 other thing. Laurinda does not schedule that indoor 18 facility at all any more. Hasn't for years. 19 MS. BOYD: Long time. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 21 MR. HENDERSON: And further up on that, 22 Jonathan, that's the reason these documents are in front of 23 you. We are talking about policy, and that's the reason why 24 it -- if it's going to -- again, it has to be fair and it 25 has to be honest. And I think y'all do a great job. When 4-25-05 41 1 it's done, that's fine. But why I brought the documentation 2 to you is to show you, don't come all of a sudden out of the 3 middle of nowhere and -- and produce this. If -- if the 4 documents have -- if documents say 2000 -- let's back up to 5 2004. Then all that should show that all those deposits for 6 2004 for any venue -- if it's Rusty's roping, or if it's 7 Tim's roping or anybody, it should show documentation that 8 those -- those dates were -- had deposits down. It should 9 show without a -- in fact, we should bring you a sack of 40 10 of them where it shows that, and the County Treasurer has 11 every one of them, where those dates were. Not seven days 12 before I spoke and not seven days after I spoke, all of a 13 sudden, we -- we pay for them. That's why the policy is 14 where we need to be, is to stop this. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I couldn't agree more. 16 MR. HENDERSON: And that -- I want to talk 17 one more thing about policy, and you compare apples and 18 oranges. And I'll give you the name of the person that 19 you -- and we talk about different counties and stuff. 20 Boerne, Texas, outdoor arena. They don't have an indoor 21 arena. Now, Rose Palace right down the road has one, but 22 for their outdoor arena, Jonathan, for the day rent is $300. 23 For the night rent is $400, so that's $700. If you water 24 the arena, it is extra. If you plow the arena, it is extra. 25 So, those are things Commissioner Williams and y'all can 4-25-05 42 1 think about what other counties do and charge you. Now, I'm 2 not here to browbeat or anything, but what's fair is fair, 3 and what other counties are doing, we can learn. We can 4 agree to disagree, but we can learn from that. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a second. 6 MR. HENDERSON: I'm sorry. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let these folks get 8 seated, please. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all get up on the 10 hallelujah row up here. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Go ahead, Mr. Henderson. 12 MR. HENDERSON: That's enough on policy. 13 Quickly, go to that last page. Of course, that's the 14 numbers, and we've heard from different people about the 15 deficit and the -- there's no money being made. Buster, 16 you've been here all those years, right? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. Forever. 18 MR. HENDERSON: Forever. I mean, you're an 19 icon. I mean, you know, these numbers come from the County 20 Auditor. And -- and I hear that the facility -- and the 21 County Auditor says the facility will never make money, that 22 it will never, ever break even. What I'm here to say is, is 23 it possible that it could possibly break even, where we're 24 not looking at these figures right here that's in front of 25 me and Buster and everybody else? I mean, when I look at 4-25-05 43 1 the -- I think Mr. Williams said it the other day when I 2 talked to you; this spike at that one year of $100,000 3 between 2000 and '01, the disbursements of -- excuse me, '99 4 and 2000, an extra $100,000 in disbursements that one year. 5 I mean, Buster -- I mean, you can -- I'm going to ask you. 6 I mean, you can talk about this or you can pass. I'm just 7 curious if you have any comment about the deficit, and are 8 these numbers right or are they bogus? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if 10 they're right or not. I mean, I'm just looking at them. I 11 -- if you would have provided this in our backup like you 12 should have, I would have gone and researched them out. 13 They're probably not far off. 14 MR. HENDERSON: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But -- but I will sit 16 here as long as I'm here. 17 MR. HENDERSON: Mm-hmm. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Which may be four more 19 years, and it may be 74 more years. When it comes to 4-H 20 and the stock show, this is a drop in the bucket of what's 21 really going on with people's lives. 22 MR. HENDERSON: Right. I agree. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I'm -- 24 MR. HENDERSON: Has the -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If y'all want to go 4-25-05 44 1 calf rope, you can go down the river, far as I'm concerned. 2 Or if the facility's available to you, you can use that; I 3 couldn't care less. But these numbers -- we have to spend 4 money. 5 MR. HENDERSON: I agree. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't think that 7 you're going to be able to provide us with a facility in the 8 state of Texas that makes money. I've been to a lot of 9 them, too. 10 MR. HENDERSON: I'm not -- I said -- if you 11 listened to my comment, I said -- not about making money. 12 Is it possible that the arena -- with a new policy, with 13 revamping, new prices, is it possible that this -- I mean, 14 in the history -- wait a minute, Buster. Let's back up. In 15 the history of the stock show, has it always -- I mean, you 16 help me out. You've been here your whole life. There's a 17 lot of people here. Let's talk about, did it lose money 18 like this? Mr. Williams is new to the area; I mean, he's 19 been here the last 15, 20 years, but you grew up here. Did 20 the facility always lose money? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have no idea. Do 22 you know? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me see if I can 24 shed some light on these numbers that you provided to us. I 25 did a little research, and I -- I asked Mr. Holekamp to do 4-25-05 45 1 some more research, but I was concerned over a couple 2 illustrations where the expenses really spiked over the 3 previous year. In '94 -- between '94 and '95, they spiked, 4 almost a little bit short of being double, but history 5 reveals that that's when the County took over the facility 6 from the Hill Country District Junior Livestock Show. And, 7 obviously, it didn't have much expense the prior year, but 8 after taking it over, it had considerably more expenses. 9 Again, in '99, between '99 -- the '98-'99 budget and the 10 '99-'00 budget, it spiked almost $100,000, and there was 11 some significant changes in that time as well. We took over 12 the -- we added personnel and we took over the booking 13 function, so that contributed to some additional people and 14 some money. In '99 and 2000, we spent $84,000 on the 15 capital improvements. In 2000-2001 was almost another 16 $50,000 spent on capital improvements, and again in '01 and 17 '02, we spent additional money for capital equipment, 18 probably. So, we can pretty well account for the spikes. 19 But the point is, as Commissioner Baldwin 20 said, it has been a red-ink situation, and it has been a 21 red-ink situation because our major and first and foremost 22 commitment is to the youth of our county in terms of the 23 4-H/Hill Country District Junior Livestock Show. It will 24 remain that way. It will remain that way. The question, 25 then, to me is, how best -- after we have taken care of that 4-25-05 46 1 primary obligation, how best then can we manage that 2 facility, or can it be managed? Whether we're doing it or 3 not, how best can it be managed to bring in other events 4 that are not conflicting with our youth and stock show 5 events, and help cut this expense nut down? That's 6 something we have to take a hard look at. 7 MR. HENDERSON: I agree. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you want to speak? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wish I'd have said 10 it that way. (Laughter.) 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One brief comment, also, 12 and Bill alluded to it, that I think that hasn't been 13 brought up up till now, is that that facility was built by 14 volunteers that were coordinated through the Stock Show 15 Association, essentially. They kind of put it all together. 16 They built that, and there's a contract that this County has 17 with that association on how a lot of it -- these things are 18 done. You know, we can't just void a contract. I mean, 19 they get a percentage of the revenue, too, which -- in fact, 20 they get -- I believe it's 25 percent. I'm pulling a number 21 out of my -- 30 percent? 22 MR. HOLEKAMP: 33. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They get 33 percent of 24 all of the booking fees, so -- in the indoor arena and the 25 exhibit hall, so, you know, a third of the money that comes 4-25-05 47 1 in goes to that entity as a -- basically, as a purchase 2 price to the County. So, I think you have to look at the 3 whole picture a lot and how it was built, what the County's 4 obligation is to that association that built it, and what 5 that contract says to that association. We have looked at, 6 several times, renegotiating that contract with the Stock 7 Show Association, but those have always been precluded on 8 some major upgrades in the facility and capital 9 improvements, and we've never been able to get to a point 10 that we could do that. So, I think the -- you know, we 11 clearly need to try to minimize the red ink out there. I 12 think a lot of what you brought up and Ms. Hawkins brought 13 up gets us back on the front burner and looking at policy. 14 We need to do a better job with the policy. We need to do a 15 better job with booking, and I think we're going to do that. 16 You'll see, and I think the public will see that when it 17 comes back before this Court with a new policy. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When is that? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Within 20, 30 days. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Like I told 21 Ms. Hawkins, as quickly as I can get it done. I want to 22 make one point, Aubrey. Thank you for being here. I thank 23 you for bringing this to court and letting us have an 24 opportunity to air it. It is an important issue. But I 25 want to make one point to you. Your numbers indicate that 4-25-05 48 1 over the past little -- about 11 years, maybe going on 12, 2 the red ink at that facility is about a million and a half 3 expenses over revenue. In the same period of time, on law 4 enforcement, jail, juvenile detention, the County will have 5 spent millions -- millions more on law enforcement, the 6 operation of the jail, and the juvenile detention center. 7 And I'm here to tell you, this one Commissioner believes 8 firmly that the programs that we have in that facility that 9 contribute to the red ink are valuable programs. You don't 10 find those kids lined up in the corridors out here with 11 manacles and chain restraints on them waiting to come in and 12 see this judge who participate in those programs. It 13 doesn't happen. So, if we can save the life of one kid by 14 being involved in agricultural programs and learning the 15 value of citizenship, God love us for trying. 16 (Applause.) 17 JUDGE TINLEY: I got me one convert, didn't 18 I? How long have I been saying that? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now let's talk about 20 the Judge. 21 MR. HENDERSON: Well, anyway -- and I 22 couldn't agree more. I mean, our family has deep roots, as 23 many -- and Buster's family and a lot -- and Jonathan, your 24 family have been here a long, long time, and I couldn't 25 agree more. All I'm asking is -- time will take care of 4-25-05 49 1 policy. Policy will take care of management. Management 2 will take care of policy. But it's nothing meant -- and I 3 understand, Judge, when you have two attorneys in here and 4 they walk out and they go down to the Hill Country Cafe and 5 they eat together, it's just business. And I understand in 6 the heat of battle, and we sit here and talk among -- when 7 we may disagree and everything, it's just business. And 8 that's why I came, because it's business. But we have to 9 have a policy, so when somebody calls down there to the 10 office, if it's called central office -- I don't even know. 11 Somebody can tell them -- and that's what I came, Buster, in 12 the March 28th and I told you. If you can go to a 13 Commissioners meeting in Odessa and somebody asks you how 14 big the arena was, you have a book, just like we used to 15 have a stock show book. It had all the rules in it. If a 16 lamb weighed 78 pounds, he was sifted. That's just it, 17 policy. Thank you. Appreciate your time. I think you're 18 right on schedule. I think you got two minutes. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: I appreciate you being here, 20 Mr. Henderson. Bad news is, we've got a conflict. The good 21 news is, we need a policy, and we're going to get one out of 22 this, out of this whole process. Everything that was said 23 up here and from the audience participation I think is 24 important, because it relates to the various facets of it, 25 and also relates to the history. And I think the history of 4-25-05 50 1 this thing, how it came to be, how these facilities even 2 came into being and how they came over to the county is 3 very, very important. And the good news is, we're going to 4 end up with a policy that we're all going to be able to 5 hopefully understand, and at least the vast majority of us 6 agree with. We're certainly going to have the opportunity 7 to have input into it, and -- and that's going to be the 8 good news arising out of this thing. Ms. Calcote? Did you 9 want to say something? You've got a participation form 10 here, and I don't want to overlook you. I want to give you 11 a shot at it. 12 MS. CALCOTE: Thank you. Do you want me to 13 come to the microphone? I'm pretty loud-mouthed, so 14 everybody can usually hear me. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I think we can hear you. 16 MS. CALCOTE: Fine. First off, I want to 17 thank the Commissioners Court for their opinions. And, 18 personally, I basically approve of your input. I've been 19 here 54 years and I've seen changes, but I don't agree that 20 there's been that much change. Agricultural products have 21 and always will feed this bunch of people, the county and 22 everybody, and I'm for everything agricultural-minded for 23 that facility, but especially the outdoor arena should stay, 24 regardless, for the youth, because they're the ones that are 25 going to feed the generations to come, and if we don't 4-25-05 51 1 pamper them, a lot of people are going to go hungry. 2 And I would also like to see that the indoor 3 arena -- I agree with Aubrey up to a point, that it can -- 4 thank you, Aubrey -- that it needs to be managed. But 5 nobody is going to make a living and make money off of that 6 facility out there. It is not a business. It's something 7 like the soccer arenas; it's for the benefit of the county 8 and everybody who wants to come and see it and enjoy it. 9 And I'm proud of it, even though it needs some repair or 10 improvement badly, because everybody that's been out there 11 knows that it does need some repair. And I am against that 12 $6 million tearing it all down and rebuilding something 13 brand-new, with the hopes that we can get some big out-of -- 14 foreign country baseball -- football team in here and make 15 money. It ain't gonna happen. (Laughter.) San Antonio 16 couldn't make it happen, and we sure can't. And for pete's 17 sakes, let's don't copy San Antonio. Who wants to copy San 18 Antonio? And just keep it for the youth and 19 agricultural-minded, and get somebody that is a good 20 manager. 21 And Rusty is doing something that I'd like to 22 see more use of, and that's all of his residents out there 23 in the county or in the city -- I'm kind of hard-shelled, 24 Rusty. If I were in your shoes, I wouldn't pay them 15 25 cents worth of Mexican money for any work. I might give 4-25-05 52 1 them a day or two credit, but everybody that's able, I would 2 put them out as clean up, fix up, set up for nothing, and we 3 could cut some money, costs, expense there. Don't hire 4 anybody, but put them to work; let them know what work is. 5 Thank you, Rusty, for using part of them, anyway. Use them 6 all. (Laughter.) Okay, I've said my thing. Thank you, 7 Your Honor. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Calcote. We 9 appreciate you being here today. Commissioner Nicholson? 10 You opened this up. We're going to give you the last shot 11 at it. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Without being 13 redundant, and being very brief, I just want to say amen to 14 Commissioner Williams -- Commissioner Williams' comments 15 about facing a difficult budget year, and we're going to 16 have to look hard at what we do and how we do it and our 17 costs everywhere. Second point is, I don't think there is 18 an organization that has revenues and costs where the 19 revenues can't be enhanced and the costs contained, and I 20 don't think it's necessary for us to pay this kind of money 21 for that facility. I think we can do better. I think we 22 can have a better facility and we can contain costs. That's 23 all. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Amen. 25 MS. HAWKINS: Can I say one thing, please? 4-25-05 53 1 It's totally off the agenda. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Totally off the agenda? 3 MS. HAWKINS: Well, what it is is about 4 Herbert Masters. I don't know how many of y'all knew 5 Herbert Masters. He was killed last week, but his son 6 Jarrod was in the truck. They had a baby boy this morning. 7 And so -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Okay, let's move 10 on to the next item. It is a timed item, and that was 11 scheduled for 10 o'clock. It's a few minutes after that 12 now. The item is to receive and open bids on the Kerrville 13 South Wastewater Project. That item was advertised in the 14 local media. 15 MS. PIEPER: We had none, Judge. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: I am advised by the clerk that 17 we have no bids that were received. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If I can make a 19 comment, Judge? 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Surely. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It appears that all 22 of our local contractors are -- have all the work they can 23 handle. This advertisement and invitation for bids was 24 published twice in the local newspaper. I'm going to 25 suggest to the engineer and to the Grantworks people, who 4-25-05 54 1 prepared the advertisement, that we broaden our net a little 2 bit and see what else we can find, and readvertise it. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we need a motion or 4 anything to readvertise? Or -- 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Probably do. What do 6 you think, Judge? Well, no, I don't -- no, on second 7 thought, I don't. The authority of the Court was embraced 8 in the original resolutions to proceed on the project and 9 everything attendant to that, so this would be attendant to 10 it. We've already got the authority. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There are no bids, 13 and we'll move on right now. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll go to Item Number 4 -- 15 I'm just going to call the item now -- consider and discuss 16 options for housing Kerr County West Kerr Annex. That's a 17 matter that deals with real property interest to which the 18 County is or may be a party in contractual negotiations. 19 That would be an item that's appropriately addressed in 20 executive session, so with the Court's permission, I'm going 21 to defer action on that until we get to that point, and then 22 we'll come back to that as an open session item. I mean -- 23 MR. HOLEKAMP: Under Section 551.072. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Whatever the applicable 25 section is. 4-25-05 55 1 MR. HOLEKAMP: Thank you. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on to Item 5, 3 consider and approve the renewal agreement with the National 4 School Lunch Program through the Texas Health and Human 5 Services and authorize County Judge to sign same. 6 Ms. Harris? This is for the detention facility. 7 MS. HARRIS: On a good note, we have 30 8 residents, if that helps any. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's good. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good. 11 MS. HARRIS: I needed to bring this to -- 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How many of them are 13 Kerr County? 14 MS. HARRIS: Four. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We've hung in there at 16 four. At least we're not dropping in numbers. 17 MS. HARRIS: Yes, sir, we've got four. Yes, 18 we have four. 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's our goal? 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Four. (Laughter.) 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's our goal for 22 total occupancy? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 72. 24 MS. HARRIS: 76. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You've got a real 4-25-05 56 1 challenge. 2 MS. HARRIS: And on that same note, I have 3 received a phone call from El Paso that has shown some 4 interest in one of our programs, so I'm pursuing that. Just 5 a side note. The item that's on the agenda, this is an 6 annual renewal that we have to do with the federal 7 government in order for us to participate in the National 8 School Lunch Program. And, as you recall, we get part of 9 our food -- our grocery bill, we get that reimbursed at the 10 end of the year. It's approximately about 50 percent at the 11 end of the year, plus we got commodities. And this is the 12 annual agreement that has to be signed every year in order 13 for us to participate in that program. It's the same 14 program that public schools offer the free breakfast and 15 lunch, so -- and we would need to authorize someone to sign 16 the agreement. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move that we 18 approve the renewal agreement with the National School Lunch 19 Program through the Texas Health and Human Services, and 20 authorize the County Judge to sign same. I have a question 21 after we get a second, if we get a second. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 24 approval of the agenda item. Questions or comments? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ms. Harris, is this 4-25-05 57 1 -- are these dollars allocated on a per diem basis or on a 2 per unit basis to us, or how does that come about? How do 3 we get the dollars? 4 MS. HARRIS: It's based on the total amount 5 of -- of food costs that we have. We turn in a report at 6 the end of every month on our food costs, which I guess you 7 could say would be per resident, if you look at it that way, 8 'cause the fewer residents, the lower our food cost. The 9 higher our population, the higher our food cost. So, I 10 guess you could say that it is based on our population, yes, 11 sir. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or 14 comment? 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: That motion does carry. 20 MS. HARRIS: Thank you. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll move to Item 7, consider 22 and discuss and take appropriate action to approve a request 23 by the Hill Country District Junior Livestock Show to place 24 a steel container storage unit on the grounds of the Youth 25 Exhibit Center. Commissioner Williams, I believe you were 4-25-05 58 1 involved with this. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, as the backup 3 statement says, a member of the board, Mr. Ernie Kaiser, 4 contacted me, oh, about 10 days ago, and said they would 5 like very much to place a steel -- one of the steel 6 container storage units on the grounds, and wondered if the 7 Court would grant them approval to do that. I called 8 Mr. Holekamp and -- and asked the question of him, if the 9 Court was predisposed to do that, where would it be placed? 10 And he and I agreed that it -- if the Court goes along and 11 approves the request, that probably the best location would 12 be between the horse barn and the fencing on Riverside 13 Drive. Is that correct, Glenn? 14 MR. HOLEKAMP: That is correct. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it's a 20-footer. 16 When I wrote the backup statement, I didn't know the size of 17 it. It's a 20-foot-long steel container. I guess that's 18 the kind that rolls up and down the highway on 18-wheelers 19 or whatever. 20 MR. HOLEKAMP: They're approximately 8 foot 21 inside, I think. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 8 by 8 by 20. 23 MR. HOLEKAMP: Mm-hmm. And it would fit -- 24 it wouldn't be in anybody's way. And -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's it going to be 4-25-05 59 1 used for? 2 MR. HOLEKAMP: I imagine to store stuff that 3 they're currently -- 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I asked Ernie that, 5 and he said, "Our stuff." 6 MR. HOLEKAMP: They have -- in fact, we have 7 some of their stuff in horse stalls that they've stored 8 there, and they also have some storage units someplace in 9 town, but I don't know what they keep in there. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would -- I would 11 move approval of it, but I'd like to add that -- just kind 12 of a caveat to that; we would approve it, but if there comes 13 a time in the future when it is no longer beneficial to the 14 County for it to be in the location we choose, they're going 15 to have to move it or remove it. 16 MR. HOLEKAMP: That's a good idea, to put 17 that in there. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With that 19 understanding, I would move approval of the request. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 approval of the agenda item with the caveat or condition. 23 Any further question or discussion? All in favor, signify 24 by raising your right hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 4-25-05 60 1 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. The 4 next item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and take 5 appropriate action on a progress report detailing the 6 activities relating to the development of a wastewater 7 collection system for Center Point. Commissioner Williams? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One quickie in terms 9 of correction on my memorandum. I got so carried away with 10 this House Bill 1006, or whatever it is, I put that in 11 Paragraph 4, and that House bill I referenced should be 12 House Bill 3029. That deals with Texas Water Development 13 Board and activities for disadvantaged or small community 14 hardship program. There's a lot of things been taking 15 place, Judge, in terms of discussions about how best to 16 provide a wastewater collection system and transmission line 17 that would be for the community of Center Point. And -- and 18 so Commissioner Letz and I were talking one day not too long 19 ago, and it became obvious that all these discussions I've 20 had with various entities, it would probably be best if I 21 brought all that to the attention of the Court and let you 22 know where I've been, what I've been doing, with whom I've 23 been speaking about this project, and where we are today. 24 If you've taken the time to read the 25 document -- and I apologize for the length of it, but 4-25-05 61 1 there's been a lot of things happening, and so it had to be 2 kind of lengthy to bring you up to date. But the bottom 3 line is, we've had discussions with a lot of folks; Upper 4 Guadalupe River Authority, Texas Water Development Board, 5 the U.S.D.A. through its Rural Utility Service Program, the 6 Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, Lower Colorado River 7 Authority, and I've got down others I identified, but who 8 knows what will happen tomorrow and who we will be 9 discussing the matter with? The bottom line is, everybody's 10 interested. And -- and the question is really to the Court. 11 How would you like for me to proceed at this point? The -- 12 you've already, by resolution, given us authority to file 13 the application for pre-engineering design funding with the 14 Texas Water Development Board, and that -- as I noted in the 15 memorandum, that application is 95, 97 percent complete and 16 ready to go. Only reason they're not filing it right now is 17 because the Disadvantaged Communities Program and the Small 18 Community Hardship Program were initially set up by T.W.D.B. 19 and funded minimally, and there are a lot of other folks who 20 got in in front of us, and so there was some question as to 21 whether or not there were any funds available in this 22 biennium to take care of that particular program. 23 I met with them about four to six weeks ago 24 in Austin, and the discussions we had there indicated that 25 some members of the T.W.D.B., particularly those in finance, 4-25-05 62 1 thought that they could probably find enough money to fund 2 our application for pre-engineering design if we get it in, 3 and they were going to notify us that they thought those 4 dollars were available. If so, that would be about 5 $121,000, and 50 percent of it would be a grant and 6 50 percent of it would be a loan that would be repayable 7 in-kind, some way or other, other grants from other folks or 8 the County picking up 50 percent or whatever. So, as soon 9 as I get the letter or a telephone call from T.W.D.B., we 10 will file the application. It is ready. 11 At this point, I'd like to say thanks to the 12 Tetra Tech folks who, on a pro bono basis, at no cost to 13 Kerr County, have assisted me in preparing that application, 14 in doing the maps and all of the grunt work that goes with 15 putting together an application for funding in a program of 16 this size. This is a major project, and the estimated costs 17 are about $3.6 to $4.4 million, and that variable depends on 18 which direction we take the wastewater. If we take it west, 19 northwest to the City of Kerrville, and hook up to the stub 20 which is at Airport Commerce Park, then the cost would be 21 somewhere in the $3.6 million range. If we were to take it 22 eastward to Kendall County W.C. & I.D. for treatment in 23 their revamped and improved and enlarged sewer treatment 24 plant, the cost would be about $4.4 million. 25 And, so, you would say, "Well, that's a 4-25-05 63 1 no-brainer." Well, maybe it is and maybe it's not. 2 Relative to those costs are other things ancillary to a 3 system, such as hookup fees, capital recovery charges and 4 all sorts of things like that. And we have paid for those 5 with grant money for those fees in the Kerrville South 6 Wastewater Project, so we know they exist, and that's what 7 the City is -- the conditions the City has set up, and, you 8 know, that's the way they do business. And that's okay; I'm 9 not challenging that in the least. If we -- however, if we 10 were to go eastward to Comfort to that W.C. & I.D., some of 11 those capital recovery fees might not, at this point, be 12 attached to the hookups. But also, it does something else 13 for us if we were to take it eastward. And this is where 14 Commissioner Letz and I had a meeting recently with the 15 representative of G.B.R.A. and we took a look at the area 16 between Center Point and Comfort in terms of existing 17 hookups after you leave the community of Center Point, and 18 what might be available now, and possible through additional 19 development in that corridor between Center Point and -- and 20 Comfort. 21 And, if we were to take the line in that 22 direction, I have a strong feeling that the State of Texas 23 would participate through the Texas Water Development Board 24 for that additional cost on the transmission line, because 25 it does -- it, by their definition, enhances regionalization 4-25-05 64 1 of sewer projects and it opens up economic development 2 corridors. So, these are decisions that will come at a 3 later date, after the design engineering is completed and we 4 know exactly what the costs are going to be. The end 5 user -- cost to the end user is important, and we have to do 6 this in such a fashion so that the monthly cost to the folks 7 who -- who have hookups, replacing their failing septics 8 with sewer hookups, their end-user costs are not exorbitant 9 and they're affordable, and so all those things are part of 10 that -- are part of that consideration. 11 On the bottom last paragraph, I'm asking the 12 Court -- under the caption of what's needed, it would be 13 helpful to have an expression of support from Commissioners 14 Court with authorization to explore any and all of the 15 possibilities noted in this memorandum that could lead to a 16 memorandum of understanding or definitive agreement with 17 Kerr County for funding, construction, ownership, and 18 operation of a Center Point wastewater project. I want to 19 add one other footnote here. And I don't want to go on too 20 long, but it's a detailed subject, and we've been working on 21 it for a long time. The idea of others participating and 22 our own river authority not participating is an idea that 23 the Court needs to be aware of, and -- and express their 24 concerns or -- or support for that notion. I have had 25 discussions with Upper Guadalupe River Authority on more 4-25-05 65 1 than one occasion, and will again be before that board next 2 Wednesday saying, in effect, much of what I'm saying to this 3 Court today. 4 My earlier discussions with U.G.R.A. were, 5 "Would you have any objection to Kerr County exploring other 6 avenues for getting this project done?" And the answer I 7 got back was, "No, let's explore any and all options that 8 might be available to us." In that context, I did that. 9 One of the meetings was with the U.G.R.A. General Manager, 10 who has since resigned to go in another direction. We met 11 with the Lower Colorado River Authority, and they, of 12 course, expressed interest. I explored the same question 13 with the Guadalupe Blanco River Authority, because they have 14 a major interest in what takes place in terms of -- of the 15 sewer treatment plant in Comfort, and they, too, have 16 expressed interest. The U.S.D.A. has expressed its interest 17 as well, and that requires us to have a preliminary 18 engineering and design, and that, in effect, becomes the 19 application. 20 So, the last note of any consequence that 21 came from the Upper Guadalupe River Authority Board 22 executive committee was really the comment that the 23 president gave me, and he said, "All we'd like to do -- we 24 want to see the project happen, but what we'd like to see is 25 for the Court, in its consideration, is to give us the right 4-25-05 66 1 of first refusal." And, you know, that's quite fair. If 2 they want the right of first refusal, that really means that 3 once we get all our ducks lined up and our costs assembled, 4 if they can participate on that -- in a project of that 5 magnitude, then they have -- they have, and we should be 6 willing to accept their offer to be of assistance to us and 7 join with us in the program. If they believe that the 8 project is too large for them, then -- you know, then we 9 need to explore other options. So, that's kind of where it 10 is. I wanted to bring it to the Court, and I'm happy to 11 answer your questions and see where we go. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a question. 13 You almost wore me down. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not quite. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not quite? Let me 17 talk another five minutes. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You used the word 19 "disadvantaged community." Is that another word for 20 colonia? 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good 22 question. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Has the -- has the 24 state changed the verbiage? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: T.W.D.B. set up two 4-25-05 67 1 different programs, a Small Community Hardship Program and a 2 Disadvantaged Community Program. That may be a nice way of 3 saying colonia, but it's not the same pot of gold. T.W.D.B. 4 operates out of a separate pot of gold. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, that's answering 6 my question, then. Okay, thank you. On this U.G.R.A./ 7 L.C.R.A./G.B.R.A. issue, you know, we have always been so 8 proud -- and I heard a couple of community leaders talking 9 just last week how proud we are of having U.G.R.A. here, and 10 the reason they're here is that we can control our own 11 waters. Well, through the years, I -- we've all seen 12 G.B.R.A., one of the most powerful river authorities in the 13 state, would love to have Kerr County's water; start coming 14 into Kerr County and doing different things. I think it's a 15 major, huge, horrible mistake to allow them to come in here, 16 and I have told that to Mr. West, and to his face. The -- 17 so I'm going to be really, really, really opposed to any 18 other -- if U.G.R.A. can't handle it, I think we need to go 19 back to the drawing board. That's my opinion. It's one 20 vote. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I can make a comment 23 on that, and it's -- I've shared a lot of those feelings, 24 but the difference here is -- and I'm going back to -- I 25 have to go back to Region J. The Guadalupe River has zero 4-25-05 68 1 water in a drought for anyone to use. You may recall when 2 Judge Henneke was on the court, he and I negotiated a 3 memorandum of understanding with G.B.R.A. at the time for 4 5,000 acre feet of water out of Canyon Lake. U.G.R.A. has 5 2,000 acre feet -- 2,000 acre feet floating around, but 6 there's no water in the river. It's all taken. The only 7 way for the county or, really, the city of Kerrville, who 8 needs the water from our standpoint, to get that water is to 9 get it from Canyon Lake. G.B.R.A. is in the process of 10 building a pipeline from Canyon Lake through Bulverde to 11 Boerne. If the line goes to Comfort, it kind of -- it gets 12 that closer and it enables a lot of surface water to get 13 very close to Kerr County. And, actually, it may come up 14 under this whole same type of grant. We get the pipeline 15 from Boerne to Comfort. Then -- and, you know, then there's 16 just this little stretch, really, from Center Point to the 17 transmission line in Kerrville to get that Canyon water -- 18 which is available and we have an agreement to get, we just 19 don't have a pipeline right now -- get that water up here, 20 which I know the City of Kerrville's very interested in. 21 So, you know, I share the concern about 22 G.B.R.A. The problem is that I see that the project may be 23 too big for U.G.R.A., and they may need a partner. I -- I 24 would be a little bit reluctant -- I think I really -- I 25 guess my preference would be to have U.G.R.A. ask us to go 4-25-05 69 1 to G.B.R.A. or L.C.R.A. as a partner, and have a three-way 2 partnership, rather than us just jump over and -- you know, 3 to L.C.R.A. or G.B.R.A. I'd rather, if at all possible, try 4 to cover this major project using the local entity, being 5 U.G.R.A., but I understand that because of the size of it, 6 it may have to go beyond that bounds. And I think this is a 7 -- the other thing this project potentially does, and I'm 8 not sure if it's good or bad, and G.B.R.A.'s representative 9 asked the question, do we want development between Comfort 10 and Center Point? You know, the answer that I gave him is, 11 "Well, I think we're going to get development between 12 Comfort and Center Point whether I want it or not." A 13 sewer line and a water line connecting that will enable us 14 to have more concentrated development in areas, as opposed 15 to the sprawl that we're seeing in most of the county right 16 now. And I think concentrating development around Center 17 Point and around Comfort is preferable to having 5-acre 18 tracts all over the county, or 10-acre tracts or 20-acre 19 tracts all over the county. 20 So I think those are, you know, philosophical 21 issues that we need to wrestle with a little bit on there, 22 because it will open development up in that part of the 23 county to a different type of development than we've had 24 before. Good or bad, I'm not sure. I do know that right 25 now, because there's no sewer or water service going into 4-25-05 70 1 eastern Kerr County out of Comfort, that the growth is 2 tending to go north on Highway 87, where there is a sewer 3 line available right now and a water line available already. 4 So, I think that the -- from a taxing standpoint, a taxable 5 value standpoint, not having that infrastructure in place is 6 forcing the growth in Kendall County, as opposed to Kerr 7 County. So, we're -- you know, just another thing to think 8 about. But I think it's worth pursuing. I don't know that 9 we need any action at this point. I think that I talked to 10 you, and I said that I think the Court needs to be brought 11 up to speed as to where you are, 'cause you're moving a lot, 12 meeting with a lot of people. And I think that if anyone on 13 the Court, or the Court as a whole, has a problem with where 14 we're going, I think that needs -- the time is now to start 15 speaking up. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: I might ask for a 18 clarification, and maybe you don't know. The U.G.R.A. is 19 asking for right of first refusal, as it were. Are they 20 asking for that solely, as in its entirety? Or the right to 21 participate in some part, with the balance then to -- to be 22 partnered out somewhere else? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I think the 24 answer to that is they're not certain yet. They recognize 25 the magnitude of the project. It would be one of the 4-25-05 71 1 largest projects since the dam that they have undertaken, 2 and certainly the largest project that they would be 3 involved in since they no longer own the dam and the water 4 treatment plant. So, I think the answer is they don't know 5 yet, but they'd like to explore all these options. And I 6 agree with Commissioner Baldwin; I sat on that board also 7 for five years, and I know the history and the reason for 8 the formation of the Upper Guadalupe River Authority. It's 9 not a question of trying to cut somebody in or somebody out. 10 Question is, who is best prepared to partner with Kerr 11 County to make it happen, and to provide wastewater 12 treatment facilities for an area of Kerr County that is in 13 desperate need of that? We're talking about water quality 14 issues. We're talking about that which flows into that part 15 of our watershed. We're talking about our groundwater 16 reserves, in terms of its quality. We're talking about the 17 quality of life of individuals, and we're talking about 18 economic development for Kerr County. So, I think what I 19 want to do is -- what I'd like to do, with the Court's 20 understanding, is continue to explore these options. I will 21 bring it back to U.G.R.A., and they'll have to ferret out 22 what they think they can handle, Judge. Right now, the 23 issue is, can they come up with $60,000 to partner with us 24 for -- for the preliminary planning and engineering, that 25 half of it, or part of that? It's going to require $60,000 4-25-05 72 1 paid back of the loan, which we haven't entered into yet, 2 but that's going to be the condition if we accept it. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bill, how's the process 4 going -- you just mentioned $120,000 for the engineering 5 study. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So there's a grant and a 8 loan available to get that money, but $60,000 of it has to 9 be repaid by somebody? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my 11 understanding, Commissioner. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How long does the study 13 take? And then what's the step -- what do you do with the 14 study? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the study -- 16 the engineering will take about almost a year, probably a 17 little less than a year to get done, and then that tells us 18 what the system's going to look like and what the actual 19 costs are going to be. That document alone would constitute 20 an application, the basis of an application to the U.S.D.A. 21 for R U.S., just like they're doing in Ingram, which I 22 believe that's how they're pursuing the Ingram project. 23 Then, at that point, we'd have to find either partners, or 24 we'll have to decide -- we'll just have to decide what's the 25 best way to make it happen. 4-25-05 73 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does the study look at 2 both the option of going to Kerrville and going to Comfort? 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, it will. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we'll have real data 5 as to how viable either -- either or both or whatever. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, just 8 one question. Well, first, anything we can do to get people 9 off septic systems, I think, is -- is an appropriate and 10 good work for this -- for government, so I applaud the hard 11 work and the thorough work you've done on working on this 12 project. What I'm hearing is that we might have to pay 13 $60,000, unless we can get somebody else to pay it for us. 14 But if this winds up costing $4.4 million, how many dollars 15 from Kerr County do you think will be needed in that 4.4 16 million? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know yet, 18 Commissioner. And, again, it depends on the route we go and 19 the partners that we have. That's a lot -- that's a big 20 bucket of bucks. 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we went the 23 U.S.D.A. route, my understanding is that some of that can be 24 grants, some of it low-interest loans. Same with T.W.D.B.; 25 some of it could be grants, some of it could be low-interest 4-25-05 74 1 loans. There are also the bonding mechanisms, which would 2 be revenue bonds in this case. And so there are a lot of 3 options to explore, and we really won't know what the best 4 way to go is until the engineering study is finished. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: That pretty well fleshed that 7 one out? Why don't we take a 15-minute recess? 8 (Recess taken from 10:30 a.m. to 10:50 a.m.) 9 - - - - - - - - - - 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to 11 order, if we might. We were in recess for about 15 minutes. 12 We will resume now. Item 9, consider and take action on a 13 grant proposal by Texas Department of Public Safety. 14 Precinct 4 Justice of the Peace. Judge Ragsdale? 15 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Yes, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, is this for 17 your office only? Precinct 4 only? 18 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Mostly. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that a yes? 22 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Well, I'm not sure. I think 23 that we put some -- what it all boils down to is not just 24 the opportunity to get different software, 'cause I'd rather 25 not. That is a major, major, major pain to switch software, 4-25-05 75 1 database. The federal government is requiring local 2 entities to report violation of -- of federal motor carrier 3 more rapidly. In other words, commercial motor vehicle 4 violations. In order -- we presently, when you -- the only 5 way to do that is by hand presently. So, they have -- the 6 federal government said, "State, do it." State said, "We 7 can't do it unless the local people do it." And they said, 8 "We'll give you money," so it's a trickle-down grant. Part 9 of what -- we have wanted to -- or the County has wanted me 10 to become compliant with the rest of the county in software, 11 and this was an opportunity to do that. Included inside of 12 this software package is an electronic final conviction 13 reporting device, and I think we -- Tommy, did we include 14 the other three J.P.'s in the reporting -- electronic 15 reporting part of it? 16 MR. TOMLINSON: I can't answer that. I don't 17 know. 18 JUDGE RAGSDALE: We were trying to, 19 hopefully. Because Software Group, I think, is working on 20 their plan to solve that problem at about $500 per office 21 cost, and so we were hoping that we included enough in this 22 grant request to pay for the other three J.P.s' electronic 23 reporting box. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, the -- the -- I 25 guess the commercial carrier situation y'all are trying to 4-25-05 76 1 resolve primarily is your precinct and Precinct 3, because 2 they're the two that have probably 90 percent of the 3 interstate. 4 JUDGE RAGSDALE: All, probably. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably more than that. 6 So I really think it's important, probably, that this 7 reporting thing -- Precinct 2, I would think, would have 8 the -- obviously, the same reporting problem, so I think 9 it's really important that they get included. And if -- 10 have you talked to Judge Castillo about that? About, you 11 know, I guess -- 'cause it's -- it really doesn't make much 12 sense to me to do something that's going to hit Kerrville 13 west, but not Kerrville east. 14 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Well, let me put it this 15 way. The time for asking is over. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 17 JUDGE RAGSDALE: So, we made the request. 18 I'm hoping that we included the other three J.P.'s; 19 otherwise, the County is going to have to pay for it. But 20 it's something that's going to have to be done. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you made a comment, 22 this will make your office -- "compliant" is not the right 23 word, but the same type of computer system software as the 24 other three are using right now? 25 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Yes. Yes, it will put me on 4-25-05 77 1 Software Group. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This accomplishes what 3 we've been trying to get done for the last several years. 4 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Right. They just wanted a 5 king's ransom to do it. This just all of a sudden popped up 6 out of the blue as an offer to pay for it. I honestly can't 7 see where they're getting their finger into the pie, other 8 than they're -- D.P.S. will eventually not have to pay so 9 many employees. So, somehow or another, it's worth it to 10 them. It's not a terrific burden to do it by hand, but the 11 federal government wants more money, I guess, more quickly 12 or something. More compliance with the voter -- or Federal 13 Motor Carrier Act. But I -- what I'm saying, as far as this 14 grant, I don't think that it's going to hurt us any, I 15 guess, or allow them a finger into our business. It's just 16 going to pay for software. It's going to pay for one year 17 of high-speed internet, and -- and especially the device to 18 electronically report final convictions. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Help me understand 20 something here, Judge, please. The time for asking who is 21 over? 22 JUDGE RAGSDALE: The State of Texas. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? 24 JUDGE RAGSDALE: The State of Texas. They 25 were given a bunch of money by the federal government. 4-25-05 78 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 2 JUDGE RAGSDALE: And they sent out notices to 3 every J.P. and every municipality in the state of Texas and 4 said, "If you want money under this thing, ask for it." So 5 I did. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 7 JUDGE RAGSDALE: And I -- I -- we talked; 8 Tommy and I talked. I'm not sure, since I don't have my 9 figures in front of me. We -- I think we tried to make it 10 to where we got enough money to upgrade each of the other 11 J.P.'s also, but really, that was their problem. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that was my 13 second question. Because the -- the large paragraph at the 14 close of the letter talks about, "...authorized to bind the 15 Kerr County J.P. 4 precinct not later than May 16, 2005, in 16 order to receive reimbursement" of blah, blah, blah, blah, 17 blah. Doesn't make any mention of Precincts 1, 2, and 3. 18 MR. TOMLINSON: Commissioner, the lion's 19 share of the cost is related to his office. 20 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Right. 21 MR. TOMLINSON: So that's why the grant is -- 22 is filed that way. It -- there's a sideline for J.P. 4 to 23 be on Software Group's system that really doesn't have 24 anything to do with this. There's financial information 25 that comes off of the court system that I need for my GASB 4-25-05 79 1 report that I have not been able to get through the old -- 2 through the system that he's currently on, and so that -- 3 that'll make -- simplify the reporting for that purpose. 4 And the soft -- the software that he's on now, we've talked 5 to him, tried to get his program to give me the information. 6 Bill's prior clerk was very familiar with the program, and 7 couldn't get it out of there either. So, this simplifies 8 the financial portion of it. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What portion of the 10 $15,720 is for is the software, and how much of it is for 11 the -- I guess the transmitting capability portion of it? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: $13,000 is an estimate of 13 what the software -- 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the cost -- even if 15 the other precincts aren't included, the cost isn't huge to 16 get them -- 17 MR. TOMLINSON: No. 18 JUDGE RAGSDALE: It's about $500 apiece, is 19 what they projected. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Has the County 21 Attorney reviewed the contract? 22 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. It looks like a 23 standard D.P.S. contract. There's nothing unusual on it. 24 The only thing, the indemnity contract is -- you know, it's 25 pretty standard wording. The only really foreseeable action 4-25-05 80 1 would be if somebody just had gross negligence or 2 intentionally falsified data. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, do you see any 4 impact on future budgets? 5 MR. TOMLINSON: No, none at all. 6 (Judge Ragsdale nodded.) 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We have one no and one 8 yes. 9 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Well, it's -- the 10 maintenance for this software is higher than the one I have. 11 MR. TOMLINSON: That's true. 12 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Much higher. 13 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll make a motion 14 that we -- I move that we approve the entering into an 15 interlocal cooperative contract with the Texas Department of 16 Public Safety. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And authorize County 19 Judge to sign same. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 21 approval of the contract and authorization to sign same. 22 Any question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, 23 signify by raising your right hand. 24 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 4-25-05 81 1 (No response.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank 3 you very much, Judge. 4 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Yes, sir. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: The next item is consider, 6 discuss, and take appropriate action on the Kerr County 7 Nuisance Abatement Program. Commissioner? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. 9 This is a return of the -- of the program that we had -- 10 have been proposing now for quite some time. This is the -- 11 this is the rewrite which was done by the County Attorney's 12 office, and it is the same program we workshopped and talked 13 about in terms of the good, bad, and the ugly. And so I 14 have it in front of the Court for -- for approval, 15 hopefully, today. There was one issue in it that I don't 16 think we quite got cleared up, but I think the County 17 Attorney can shed some light on it this morning, and that 18 had to do with that section of the program and state law 19 that -- that required the full-time employee. So, 20 Mr. Emerson, would you shed a little light on that for us, 21 please? 22 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. The -- I'm okay over 23 here. I have a big enough mouth. The director that's 24 specified in the program that would be appointed by the 25 Commissioners Court, assuming that the Commissioners Court 4-25-05 82 1 approves such, would logically be Miguel, as head of the 2 Environmental Health Department. The question that comes up 3 is his ability to appoint a representative to assist him in 4 the field. The way the statutes are written, it requires a 5 full-time employee. Two part-timers put together don't 6 equal a full-timer for purposes of the statute. So, while 7 Miguel would be able to administer the program, he would 8 essentially have to carry all the duties that go with it and 9 would not be able to assign those to a representative in the 10 field for that purpose. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would that apply to 12 all aspects of the program with respect to cleaning up 13 nuisance solid waste sites that are -- that are problematic, 14 or that only applies to situations where the County might 15 have to take remedial action on its own? 16 MR. EMERSON: I think it's going to apply to 17 anything administered by this program. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Anything administered 19 by the program. 20 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 22 MR. EMERSON: Is that broad enough? 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Rex, does that mean 24 that -- that appointing Miguel Arreola to this position 25 wouldn't satisfy the intent of the law? 4-25-05 83 1 MR. EMERSON: It'll satisfy him as a 2 director, but his ability to appoint one of his staff, since 3 his investigators and his law enforcement are all part-time 4 people, he would not be able to do that. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they could bring back 6 -- they could find a situation, bring it back to Miguel, and 7 then he could himself go out and investigate it? 8 MR. EMERSON: Correct. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you for 10 that enlightenment. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got some 12 questions. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me see if I understand. 14 These part-timers could do the preliminary legwork, as it 15 were, bring it to Mr. Arreola, and then he could pick up the 16 ball and run with it from there? Is that what I'm hearing? 17 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. That's my 18 understanding. 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: These -- this 20 program applies to subdivisions in the county outside the 21 municipal city limits, and it exempts something like less 22 than five lots or something like that, so it applies to most 23 subdivisions. What is the impact on solid waste issues that 24 are outside of platted subdivisions? 25 MR. ARREOLA: I think it applies to also 4-25-05 84 1 platted subdivisions, as long as it's outside the city 2 limits. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we're out on 1340 4 or Goat Creek Road, and we've got a solid waste issue that 5 the violator is not in a platted subdivision, this program 6 doesn't apply to that? 7 MR. ARREOLA: It does. 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It does? 9 MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Applies to any -- 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Page 1 the application, the 14 enforcement paragraph, reads, "Policies and procedures shall 15 apply to all the unincorporated areas of Kerr County." 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Platted or unplatted. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it looks like to me 19 that either -- we have two options here. One is that Miguel 20 comply with the state law, or we wait and deal with this in 21 the budget if we're going to have to have a full-time 22 employee. 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think Miguel can 25 deal with it now. Or we can adopt the policy and Miguel can 4-25-05 85 1 deal with it on the basis that the County Attorney outlined, 2 and we can correct that deficiency -- the other deficiency 3 about one of his representatives at budget time. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that correct? 5 MR. ARREOLA: We can do that. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Page 3, Number 10, I 8 think that's just a typographical error there. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whereabouts, 10 Commissioner? 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Page 3, Item 10. 12 "This section does not apply to," colon, "a site or facility 13 that is," colon. Shouldn't that be -- 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That should -- "site 15 or facility" should be part of the opening sentence under 16 10. Is that the way you read it? That's the way it ought 17 to be. Take out the first colon, take out the sub (a), and 18 make it all part of that first sentence under 10. 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Back to this 20 representative issue, for example, could -- could the four 21 constables be appointed as a representative? 22 MR. ARREOLA: I think the law says we could 23 appoint anybody that is employed by the County and is 24 full-time. Has to be in writing. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good 4-25-05 86 1 question. Let's ask that -- direct that question to the 2 County Attorney. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is a good 4 question. 5 MR. EMERSON: I think it was answered 6 perfectly. Any full-time employee of the county. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So we could, by court 8 order, designate all four constables to act in this capacity 9 for solid waste environmental cleanup issues? 10 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Page 6, top of the 13 page, (D) -- this is just a procedural thing. If we do an 14 investigation and they find that there's not a violation, 15 the matter will be logged as closed, and no further action 16 is required. I'd like contact with the complainant. I'd 17 like either a letter or a phone call to whoever complained, 18 unless it's me, to -- to say we've looked into it and 19 there's no violation, so there's some -- 20 MR. ARREOLA: That's standard procedure right 21 now. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- closure to it. 23 MR. ARREOLA: We do that all the time. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you want that 25 language added, Commissioner? 4-25-05 87 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think so. 2 Just -- 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just an 4 understanding? 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. Well, I -- 6 Page 7, hearings. I guess we'll -- we're making this Court 7 a -- a place where the disputed matter is tried. I guess 8 we're okay with that? That -- 9 MR. EMERSON: For what it's worth, that's the 10 way the statute's written. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. So, that's 12 not an option. 13 MR. EMERSON: No, sir. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We can't delegate 15 that to J.P.'s. Thank you. That's all my questions. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I want to go back 17 to the neighbor -- the issue -- the first question about 18 where this is applicable. That first paragraph says, you 19 know, that it's anywhere in the county, but then when you 20 get to -- under (H) on Page 2, nuisance, Paragraphs (1), 21 (2), (4), and (6), you have to be in a neighborhood for it 22 to apply, and a neighborhood is defined as a platted 23 subdivision or 300 feet near it. So, much of the -- the 24 refuse portion only applies to a subdivision, and so those 25 vehicles and refrigerators and all that, and furniture, I 4-25-05 88 1 mean, much of the guts of it only applies to a subdivision, 2 though there are parts of it that do apply to the county as 3 a whole. Am I reading that right? 4 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, there's nothing -- 6 this doesn't give us any additional authority to clean up 7 junk vehicles, old refrigerators and other things on Goat 8 Creek Road that are not in a subdivision. 9 MR. ARREOLA: Only if -- if they are within 10 300 feet of a public street, yes, we can. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So, if they're 13 next to a street -- 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Wait a minute. Four 15 says in a neighborhood, and we've defined "neighborhood" as 16 being -- 17 MR. ARREOLA: It says -- 4 -- 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- subdivision. 19 MR. ARREOLA: After neighborhood, 4 says 20 within 300 feet. 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But, again, Miguel, 22 we've defined neighborhood as being in a platted 23 subdivision. 24 MR. ARREOLA: Mm-hmm. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Under Number 2 there, 4-25-05 89 1 Commissioner, keeping, storing, so forth, in a neighborhood 2 or within 300 feet of a public street. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 4 MR. ARREOLA: Either way. 5 MR. EMERSON: I think it's important here, 6 maybe for clarification, not to confuse this Nuisance 7 Abatement Policy with somebody illegally dumping solid 8 waste, which they can enforce under other statutes. 9 MR. ARREOLA: Separate. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So -- 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. It's an 12 and/or, as the Judge pointed out. 13 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If my neighbor, Dr. 14 Bacon, parks a junk car in his front yard and we're not in a 15 platted subdivision, this -- this policy won't apply, but 16 the other health and safety law code will apply? 17 MR. ARREOLA: May apply. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is that what we're 19 saying? 20 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The other one implied 22 situations where you may have some shade-tree mechanics out 23 there dumping crank case oil on the ground. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That happens. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is -- does the statute 4-25-05 90 1 say that we have to define neighborhood the way it is? 2 MR. EMERSON: That's straight out of the 3 statute. I -- 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And nuisance has to be 5 defined that way, 'cause we don't have a whole lot of choice 6 on those items. 7 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What we're hearing 10 is an assurance that adopting these regulations do not 11 impair our ability to enforce solid waste violations outside 12 of subdivisions. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. It 14 should enhance this. Judge, I would move approval and 15 adoption of the Kerr County Nuisance Abatement Program as 16 proposed. And we don't need you to sign it, do we? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And do we have to make 18 the appointment of Mr. Arreola? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah. I want to 20 add that we appoint Mr. Arreola as the director. 21 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And to authorize 23 Constables 1, 2, 3, and 4 to act in the capacity of 24 representatives, as defined by state statute. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You sure you don't 4-25-05 91 1 want to talk to them first? (Laughter.) 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If they see it, they 3 can report it. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second the motion. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any 6 -- any question? Comment? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm a little concerned 8 about this constable bit. I mean, if they don't have a 9 problem with it, I don't either, but I think -- my 10 preference at this time, anyway, is just to have business 11 with Miguel, and let Miguel visit with the constables and 12 see if they would like this added to their responsibilities. 13 I don't know that we have the authority to mandate that they 14 do it. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I don't know 16 that we're mandating, but we're authorizing their -- their 17 appointment. And I think you're right; he should meet with 18 them and talk about it, but by that time, we've -- we will 19 have approved it, and that can happen if they have agreed to 20 do it. 21 MR. ARREOLA: Yes. It has to be in writing 22 anyway, so -- 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Has to be brought 24 back every year. 25 MR. ARREOLA: Yeah, once a year. 4-25-05 92 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My preference would be to 2 not -- I mean, we don't have any authority to tell them to 3 do it. So, I mean, we're -- you know, seems a little bit 4 odd, to me, to be -- 5 MR. EMERSON: Even if you choose the 6 constables as your representatives, they still have to be 7 designated in writing by Miguel as a representative. 8 MR. ARREOLA: That's right. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: All you're doing is 10 recommendation. You can't tell them what to do. 11 MR. EMERSON: If you tell them to do it, and 12 he doesn't designate in writing, well -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're making it 14 possible, but other things have to happen. 15 MR. ARREOLA: Right. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, what's wrong 17 with this verbiage of contingent upon their agreement or 18 something like that? 19 JUDGE TINLEY: I think what I'm hearing is 20 the motion could be that it would also authorize the 21 director to designate those constables as representatives, 22 as that term is used in the statute, based upon their 23 approval. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your hearing is 25 right, Judge. That's exactly what I said. 4-25-05 93 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's what I 2 seconded. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can go along with that. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll third that 5 motion. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or comment? 7 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 8 hand. 9 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's 13 go to Number 11, consider and discuss the organization and 14 oversight of all departments that report directly to the 15 Commissioners Court. Commissioner Letz? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda 17 again, as I said I would, after we discussed this briefly at 18 our last meeting. And, Judge, in thinking about it a little 19 bit more and visiting with some of you, if not all of you, 20 on the Court about what your thoughts were, I -- you know, I 21 have come down that I think the -- what I'd like to 22 recommend is that we, once a month at our first meeting, 23 invite four departments to come in and visit with us at a 24 designated time, being 2 p.m., go over what's going on in 25 their departments. And the list shows the things -- review 4-25-05 94 1 department organization, status of budget, review employees, 2 and long-term projects and goals. That's just kind of a 3 starting point. And we have four of them come one month and 4 four the next month, and back throughout the year. So, 5 basically, we'd have each department head come to us in a -- 6 a discussion-type format to discuss their departments six 7 times a year. I think that would give us a lot better 8 oversight. And I'm not sure that I want oversight any more, 9 from earlier comments today, but it would give us more 10 oversight, and also give us, I think -- or give me, anyway, 11 a better -- just a knowledge and feeling as to how our 12 departments are doing and where their needs are. I think it 13 would help us in the budget process and personnel and 14 everything else. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I like it. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- 17 JUDGE TINLEY: It's called communication, and 18 there's never too much. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So I don't know if we 20 need a motion to do this. I think we can just probably put 21 it on the -- we can, but I think we can probably just send 22 out a memo. Just, you know, the Judge, myself, anybody else 23 can pick out which of the four departments to come. I would 24 think that it would make sense to have Road and Bridge and 25 Juvenile Detention Facility on alternate months, just from 4-25-05 95 1 the standpoint they have the larger staffs and larger 2 budgets, and that way it would -- you know, we don't handle 3 the two real big departments at the same time. And see how 4 it works. If it doesn't work, if it's a waste of time, we 5 can always cancel it, but we can at least try it for a 6 couple months. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You might see this as 8 something brand-new, but I remember about this time of the 9 year eight years ago, Commissioner Letz was talking about 10 basically this exact same thing, with emphasis on the status 11 of budget and long-term projects and goals, which I think is 12 an excellent, excellent idea. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, county government's 14 moving along at the rapid click of eight years, we finally 15 get to do it. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm surprised he could 17 remember that far back. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you think we need a -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I think you 22 need a motion. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I'll make a motion 24 that we implement a policy that the eight departments that 25 report to the Commissioners Court, being Information 4-25-05 96 1 Technology, Road and Bridge, Facilities and Maintenance, 2 Collections, Animal Control, Juvenile Detention, Extension 3 Office, and Environmental Health, be invited to come on a 4 bimonthly basis at 2 o'clock to visit with Commissioners 5 Court the first meeting of the month. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. Would you 8 change "invited" to "required"? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, required. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Question. What is 11 the formal reporting relationship between the Extension 12 Office and county government? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I hope we'll find that 14 out. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I was wondering if 16 that might not be the answer. For the timely reports, 17 that's an organization issue; we can talk about it. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's the reason I 19 kind of -- kind of put "Review of department organization." 20 Some of these, obviously, we understand, but that is one of 21 the more difficult because of the relationship with the 22 state office and the state Extension Service. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second? 24 MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or 4-25-05 97 1 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 2 your right hand. 3 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 4 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 5 (No response.) 6 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I'll thank 8 Ms. Mitchell for all the work in preparing this and doing 9 all the legwork to get this done. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: The next item, Item 12, 11 consider and discuss Subdivision Rules and Regulations. 12 Commissioner Letz. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think everyone has in 14 their backup a draft of drainage, and let me tell you to go 15 ahead and throw that away. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Throw it away? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Throw it away. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All that homework for 19 nothing. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we're getting a new 21 one. And there's some extra copies, if anybody -- I know 22 Leonard may want a copy. Rex, anyone over there, if anyone 23 wants one. After rereading this -- well, let me first go 24 back to a little bit of the philosophy. I met with some of 25 the local engineers that read our rules, looked at our other 4-25-05 98 1 county rules, and our rules, the way they were written, were 2 very difficult to enforce, and they were -- if you read 3 them, I guess they were somewhat vague. And I think 4 engineers, when you get a vague rule, err on the side of 5 being very strict, if they're going to follow the rule, or 6 they don't do anything. I mean, they kind of -- the problem 7 was that we had a provision in there that says you can have 8 no additional runoff from a drainage area after development 9 of a subdivision than they do prior to it, and there's no 10 allowance for size, amount, quantity, or anything like that. 11 So, what that meant was you may have a tenth 12 of an acre going into a little drainage ditch, and that's 13 predevelopment. Then you do the development, and you may 14 add a couple of gallons of water during a flood event down 15 through that drainage. Well, our rules said that we had to 16 go in there and put a drainage ditch across there, a bar, 17 and channel it and do all kinds of -- I mean, basically 18 destroy the whole little area to stop the water from 19 leaving, when that clearly wasn't the intent. The intent is 20 to keep, you know, basically, floods from happening or 21 enhancing floods. So, what I tried to do is come up with a 22 set of rules that basically say that there is a certain 23 amount of allowance in real small drainage areas; you can 24 have additional runoff after -- from a post-development 25 standpoint, but not a significant enough amount to cause, 4-25-05 99 1 hopefully, any damage. 2 The numbers that I chose are somewhat 3 arbitrary. You know, I just kind of -- you know, I really 4 don't think these are fixed, and we really aren't at the 5 point that we're trying to approve this today. I would like 6 to get more feedback from Road and Bridge and the 7 engineering community whether a 20 percent increase, you 8 know, 5 acres or less area, is good or bad. I mean, I'm not 9 knowledgeable enough on the engineering side to know that, 10 but it's more of the concept that I'm looking at. The 11 change in the draft that I handed out today versus what was 12 handed out in the -- in the packet was I realize that when I 13 wrote it, I was thinking more of 5-acre lot sizes, and I 14 feel that we ought to have a provision -- you know, 15 obviously, we do have provision in our Subdivision Rules to 16 have 1-acre lot sizes under community water systems and 17 sewer systems and such. Well, I think it's -- those are 18 very different. You have a lot more impervious cover being 19 added through roads and driveways and homes and all that in 20 those smaller or higher-density subdivisions. 21 So, I divided it into two categories. 22 Subdivisions with 5 acres or greater have basically the rule 23 that was set forth in the original handout, and then I added 24 a 2, which is subdivision drainage calculations for 25 subdivisions with a minimum lot size less than 5 acres, and 4-25-05 100 1 I made them a little bit more strict interpretation. The 2 language is the same; I just made it a little bit stricter 3 on the amount of increased flow that you could have. And, 4 again, the numbers I chose are arbitrary, and kind of my 5 best guess. I think we need input from the engineering 6 community as to what is a good number there. We also added 7 in the first paragraph, Paragraph A, a requirement that the 8 -- either the developer or the engineer signs the final plat 9 that says that the drainage plan was followed and it was 10 installed, you know, according to plan -- substantially 11 according to plan. I use the word "substantially" because I 12 don't -- you know, I don't know that you can ever do things, 13 you know, within reason, exactly like you draw. I mean, 14 there's going to be a rock ledge somewhere, you know, 15 10 feet over or something. So, "substantial" I think is 16 what we want. If they're in substantial compliance. 17 Any other key points on this -- on the 18 frequencies to use, I left it the way it was. It was a 19 5-year -- all calculations were as to 5-year frequency, 20 10-year, and 100-year frequency. Some of the engineers 21 thought that that was a little bit overkill. Still, they 22 say if you're going to be over on one, you're probably going 23 to be over on all of them. I asked the question, how many 24 frequencies are there? As it turns out, I believe there's a 25 2-year, a 5-year, 10-year, a 15-year, a 20-year, 25-year, 4-25-05 101 1 50-year, and 100-year frequencies that they can get numbers 2 for. Interestingly, Kendall County requires all 3 calculations for every one of those frequencies. I left it 4 at three. I think 5, 10, and 100 are okay, but I really 5 wouldn't have a problem with 5 and 100 or, you know, maybe 6 5, 20 and 100. I don't know what the best numbers are. 7 Again, I'd like the Road and Bridge Department and the 8 community of engineers we have to give us the best numbers 9 there. 10 And then the last paragraph is the last thing 11 I'll really draw attention to. I'll just read it. 12 "Subdivisions with a minimum lot size of 20 acres or total 13 number of lots less than five shall be exempt from Sections 14 C, D, and E," which is where all the major calculations are 15 done. And the drawing as to guts of the proposal, I don't 16 know if we want to do that or not. I think that if you're 17 in a large subdivision, I clearly think you should be 18 exempt. We've had some small subdivisions that have been 19 pretty contentious brought before us, one out in Buster's 20 area not too long ago where, you know, that 5-acre exemption 21 may have caused a problem. So, I don't know that we really 22 want to give a -- you know, a new number, 'cause you can do 23 a lot of damage on one or two lots. 24 On 20-acre lots, I guess it's conceivable 25 that you could do it, but we're not exempting them totally. 4-25-05 102 1 We're still saying they have to follow the basic parts of 2 the rule, but I just don't see the point in requiring 3 developers to spend a whole lot of money on engineering with 4 a lot size big enough that, really, the roads and the 5 infrastructure is not going to have an impact on the 6 drainage to speak of. So, again, those are a little bit 7 arbitrary numbers. It's more the concept I tried to put in 8 writing. You might notice that -- the press night notice 9 that we've gone from about half a page to three pages on 10 drainage. I don't know that that is a whole lot stricter. 11 I think this is really where the intent is currently, but I 12 think it is clearly a -- hopefully a lot clearer to the 13 developers and the engineers that have to do the work. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner, do you 15 intend to address this this afternoon? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not really in detail. I 17 think where I plan to go with Subdivision Rules, I think we 18 have one more section, the road layout, I want to take a 19 hard look at, and I'll get with Leonard on that. And after 20 that is done -- I'm not sure if there will be changes or not 21 in that section. If there are, I'll probably bring that 22 section back to the Court to go over like we are here, and 23 then the meeting -- you know, either the next meeting or two 24 meetings from now, I think we'll try to incorporate all this 25 into a new set of rules and bring that back to the Court and 4-25-05 103 1 go, you know, into a public -- more public meeting, get it 2 out to the public. This afternoon, I'm really hoping that 3 it's more on the process as to how, procedurally, the 4 platting process is working, whether we need to make any 5 changes there, both between Road and Bridge Department and 6 the Court, Road and Bridge Department and the development 7 community, and Road and Bridge and the County Clerk's office 8 to make sure what procedural things we need to make 9 modifications on, and try to bring those to life this 10 afternoon. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One of the -- one of 12 the things you had listed, I think, for the afternoon 13 discussion calls into question the need for professional 14 assistance. I think this -- this paragraph begs for our 15 ability to have hydrological studies and drainage flows 16 calculated and understood -- calculated and approved by a 17 professional engineer. So -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have sent -- I have 19 forwarded this to at least one engineer in the current form 20 to review. I always get very concerned when I start writing 21 rules for engineers when I'm not an engineer. And I truly 22 want to get feedback, and I'd like to get this out to more 23 engineers to find out what they think about it. This is a 24 layperson's attempt to put down a rule that meets the needs 25 of the citizens and protecting them, you know, from a runoff 4-25-05 104 1 and drainage standpoint, and also get something that doesn't 2 work before the engineering community that does the work. 3 So, you know, I really hope we do get some feedback from 4 engineers. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good work. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, it is. One of 7 the issues that sometimes comes up, Jonathan, is if a 8 developer strictly adheres to our current rules on drain 9 water runoff, building these channels, detention structures 10 or devices may tend to cause a worse problem on the 11 neighbors than it -- than there would be if you didn't do 12 that. Does this deal with that? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It gives a -- a latitude. 14 It doesn't address it totally. And along with what you just 15 said there, you know, if it's a 25-acre basis -- which is, 16 again, an arbitrary number -- it says there will be no 17 additional runoff out of that area. You know, you put in -- 18 and I never really thought previously as to how -- what this 19 says, what the engineering community -- how they interpret 20 that. And how they interpret that means that they take all 21 the water and channel it to one spot to stop it for a while, 22 but what that does, that creates a ditch. One, you're 23 moving water to a central spot. Then you're getting rid of 24 the sheet flow and getting a channel flow, which, in a real 25 big flood event, when you get a channel flow, that may be 4-25-05 105 1 worse. So, there may be room that we want to have a little 2 bit more latitude under the 25 acres and larger areas as 3 well, so that there's a little bit of excess that can come 4 off. 5 You also have a situation that -- and there's 6 one that's come up out in Dave's area, Cypress Springs. I 7 know I was talking with the engineer on that, going over all 8 these rules, and there's a neighbor that -- they want the 9 runoff. He has a stock tank down below it, and he wants -- 10 he's ecstatic that they've increased the drainage a little 11 bit into his -- but our rules don't allow for that 12 situation. I don't know how you -- and I didn't address 13 that. I don't know how you do address that. I think you 14 just kind of figure out what's the best rule for most 15 people. But I think this is a lot better than we currently 16 have. I think it's a little bit more reasonable, gives a 17 little more flexibility, and I think it also protects the 18 people a little bit in neighboring areas. 19 And the other thing I didn't bring up, this 20 rule -- and I don't know. I don't think any rule that we 21 can ever put forward prevents what the individual -- once 22 the lot's sold, what that individual does with that lot. I 23 mean, they can go in there and put a big terrace across it 24 and put all the water at one spot, and our Subdivision Rules 25 aren't going to have an impact on that, and I don't know how 4-25-05 106 1 you stop that. I don't know that we want to stop it or that 2 we have any authority to. So, the fact that we have -- you 3 know, we're just trying to make sure that the subdivision 4 itself is not causing adverse situations to the neighbors. 5 That doesn't mean there's not going to -- something can't be 6 done on the subdivision that's going to make things work 7 somewhere. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's just sort of 9 living in the uphill country -- I mean the hill country, is 10 that anytime you address any kind of drainage problem here, 11 you're going to create something for someone down here. It 12 just -- I think Leonard will probably agree with that 13 statement, that you try to -- we try to fix problems on one 14 piece of property, and you're creating a problem for 15 somebody else downstream. Or affecting them, anyway. And 16 so you're not going to hit it perfect. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And the other 18 thing -- and -- well, anyway, I think enough said. I think 19 it's a reasonable -- you know, hopefully reasonable. More 20 reasonable than we currently have. A little more explicit, 21 explains what we require. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Water goes downstream, 23 doesn't it? 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Goes downhill. 4-25-05 107 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Goes from here to 2 there. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, this will be 4 incorporated -- if I don't hear any great clamoring against 5 this approach, this will be incorporated into our new rules, 6 and we'll see it again in about a month. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: And those rules, of course, 8 there will have to be public notice, public hearing and all 9 sorts of things. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, they will be 11 available to the public, and for certainly 30 days or so. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on that 13 particular agenda item? We'll move on to Item 13, consider 14 and discuss soliciting private bids for EMS service in Kerr 15 County. Commissioner Letz? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda 17 kind of after thinking -- or after some statements made at 18 the last several meetings when we were talking about 19 renegotiating contracts with the City of Kerrville, who 20 currently provides EMS service, and the fact that we were 21 quickly approaching our -- our budget time and had not met 22 with the City on this topic. I probably would have pulled 23 this item if I would have been able to get hold of the City 24 Manager last week, but based on what the paper's shown, I 25 think he was probably in the process of being hired to a new 4-25-05 108 1 position and resigning from his current position, which is 2 probably why he was out of pocket a little bit. But, 3 needless to say, I was not able to get hold of him last 4 week, and -- but we did receive a letter from the City 5 Manager this morning stating that they -- the City has the 6 numbers related to EMS currently, and it will be on the 7 council meeting, I guess, tomorrow night to review those 8 numbers and appoint a councilman to meet with the 9 Commissioners Court, whoever we choose to have meet with 10 them and go over this issue. 11 So, I think that's a lot of the reason I put 12 it on the agenda, because we had lack of word from the City. 13 I don't know that we need to pursue this actively. At this 14 time, in my opinion, I think it would be -- well, it depends 15 a little bit on what the City's numbers show, how much of an 16 increase it's going to have. I know Mark Beavers is in the 17 audience from the City right now. But I think that, really, 18 it's probably pretty premature to go out for soliciting 19 private bids since we are about to get the numbers from the 20 City. It appears we ought to get those, and at that point, 21 if we do want to go out and solicit for private bids, I 22 think we can do it at that time. It's just a matter of -- 23 you know, that's just kind of what my thoughts are. I don't 24 know what the rest of y'all's thoughts are on that. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do we know whether 4-25-05 109 1 or not other counties that are about our size, whether or 2 not any of them use a private contractor? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not aware of any 4 county near us that uses a private contractor. The -- my 5 understanding is before I became a commissioner, that the 6 City of Kerrville and Kerr County used a private service, 7 and it was not a very good -- it was not a good situation, 8 and that evolved into the creation of the current EMS system 9 that we currently have. I think Commissioner Baldwin might 10 have been around at that time. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So I think that, you 13 know, it's a -- 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It was ugly. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was ugly. But -- so I 16 don't know. Really, I don't even know what's out there. I 17 don't know how you even go about finding any private 18 companies. I'm sure there are some. But I think my first 19 preference is to -- I mean, this current service, the 20 quality of service we currently have is outstanding, and if 21 we can work out a deal with City of Kerrville, that would be 22 my first choice. And if we can't, you know, we have to look 23 at other options. And this was really more of a concern 24 rather than -- more than anything else, whether or not 25 there's satisfaction with rather than dissatisfaction with 4-25-05 110 1 the service. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm very excited to 3 see what the City of Kerrville -- what numbers they come 4 with. And -- and I'm sure that they're going to provide us 5 with some data that -- that they've used to arrive at that 6 number; i.e., number of runs out in the county and 7 percentage of runs compared to the inside the city. And, 8 you know, the age-old question; do you travel -- when an 9 ambulance goes, does the fire truck go with it, and does 10 that mean that there's two runs or, you know, what? You 11 know, that kind of information, which they've been very, 12 very good at providing that kind of information to us. But 13 I'm assuming that -- you know, does this letter -- I 14 apologize for not reading it. I guess it's privileged 15 information; I don't get it. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's in your box. 17 MS. MITCHELL: It's in your box. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's in my box. All 19 right, don't pick on me. But does it -- there's no sense in 20 me reading it now. I've got a question. What -- they are 21 going to appoint a City Councilperson to come over here and 22 work with the Commissioners Court? Or are we going to 23 appoint a Commissioners Court person to visit with that 24 person? Or -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Their sentence 4-25-05 111 1 reads, "Additionally, the Council has an item on their 2 agenda for Tuesday night to authorize a Council member and 3 me" -- being Ron Patterson -- "to meet with representatives 4 of the County to present to you the proposed contract." 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Representatives of the 6 County, okay. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So I would suspect -- and 8 my recollection is that you are the EMS guru for the Court, 9 so I would take it that you are the appointee of the Court. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would think that 11 too. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Looks like you have a 13 meeting coming up. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So that's, you know -- 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd better get my 16 letter. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So I think it's up to you 18 and a Council member and the City Manager to -- to take the 19 first stab at resolving this. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Probably -- do we have 21 an indication of the time frame on this, when that meeting 22 might be? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, tomorrow night 24 they're going to make the appointment, or consider making 25 the appointment. 4-25-05 112 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. So, there will 2 be two of us. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, be one. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, there will be two. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who's the other one? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. Y'all 7 are going to have to figure that out. I are one. They're 8 going to have two; we need two. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm pleased to see 11 the response from the City, 'cause it's a -- it's a very 12 important issue. And the last time we had correspondence 13 from there, needless to say, it scared me to death, so I'm 14 happy to see that we're going to sit down -- Commissioner, 15 you're going to sit down with somebody, and you're going to 16 work your way through this issue. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think we ought 19 to go ahead and pick the second person now. I think 20 Commissioner Nicholson would be a good choice. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. One and 22 four. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's nodding his head, 24 I think. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll do it. 4-25-05 113 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on that 3 particular agenda item? 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, on a related 5 item, seems like it's been a couple months ago now, we gave 6 the City notice that -- that we wanted to renegotiate the 7 Animal Control contract, and asked them to -- to identify 8 someone who would -- from the City who would deal with that, 9 and we haven't heard from them. It's been quite a while. 10 I've told Janie Roman to -- that while we're confident we 11 will continue to provide that service to the City of 12 Kerrville, that there's some possibility that we might not, 13 so that she should not make -- not make any -- take any 14 actions that would impact a decision, either by Kerrville or 15 by us, not to do that in the future, such as when she hires 16 somebody, to tell them, "I've got a job for you now; I may 17 not have a job for you come October 1." So, I just wanted 18 to pass that on to you. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, before we leave, 20 Mark, do you have any comments you want to make related to 21 the City? 22 MR. BEAVERS: No. Mark Beavers, Assistant 23 Fire Chief. Just here to listen to your comments and make 24 sure that you're aware that tomorrow night at Council, the 25 proposed contract's going to be put before Council, and also 4-25-05 114 1 the City Manager and a Councilperson, if authorized by the 2 Council tomorrow night, would like to meet with your 3 representatives to work this out. So -- 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Well, thanks for 5 coming. 6 MR. BEAVERS: Thank you. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here. 8 Anything else on that particular agenda item? Let's move to 9 Item 14, if we might, consider and discuss changes in the 10 Unemployment Fund's bylaws, and approval of an updated 11 participation agreement for Texas Association of Counties' 12 Unemployment Compensation Group account funds. This was 13 forwarded to me by the representatives of TAC. They have 14 already made amended bylaws to insure that they were 15 consistent with other TAC funds, and the way the -- to 16 change the way their board is selected, and the quorum in 17 their meetings, and to allow the allocation of their 18 penalties back to the members responsible for causing the 19 penalties, which seems a little -- meets itself coming back 20 type of provision. If you're going to penalize somebody and 21 then turn around and give the money back, why, I don't see 22 the rationale in that. But -- but they've already taken 23 these actions, and they need for us to approve it. And they 24 have asked us to approve those changes to the bylaws. Some 25 of them are just housekeeping amendments, and the modified 4-25-05 115 1 participation agreement to take into account those changes. 2 I don't know whether the County Attorney's had an 3 opportunity to review this or not. 4 MR. EMERSON: No, sir. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Apparently not. I wasn't sure 6 the distribution on it. Court may want to defer taking any 7 action on it, or take action subject to the County 8 Attorney's review and approval. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this a 10 time-sensitive matter, Judge? 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think so. They took 12 the action early last month, and they've -- they haven't put 13 a fuse on it that I can find in their communication to me, 14 so I can't see that another couple of weeks would be any 15 great detriment. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My favorite part here 17 is that it's going to "help ensure proper composition of the 18 board to help ensure a quorum." (Laughter.) Whoo, this is 19 government. This is really big, good government. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: "At least once on an 21 annual basis," which even makes it worse. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: The sense I'm getting is that 23 you -- you gentlemen are going to let the County Attorney 24 take a peek at it, and we'll bring this back next time. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I'd vote for it 4-25-05 116 1 now if you can -- if -- you know, if we can get everybody 2 else. I mean, it's not that big of a deal. It's -- all 3 we're doing is ratifying something that's done. We don't -- 4 I move for approval. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 8 approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? 9 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 10 hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's 15 move to Item 15, seeking approval of the Papcon software 16 contract used in association with Hot Check Collection 17 Department, County Attorney's office. Mr. Emerson? 18 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. This is the software 19 program that's used to collect our hot checks, and it 20 allocates fees, merchants' fees, and restitution to the 21 clients. The contract -- the last contract we had with this 22 provider, from what I can tell, was 10 years old, so I felt 23 like it was probably time for a new contract. The rate 24 that's been provided on there is $412 per annum for the 25 software program, which is relatively inexpensive. There is 4-25-05 117 1 a separate maintenance clause that's in there, but to the 2 best of my knowledge, from what I can tell from reviewing 3 records, that's been used few -- few and far instances in 4 between. We have very -- in talking to the two employees in 5 the department that work with hot checks, we have very few 6 problems with this software program, and it would be a 7 tremendous detriment to us to have to change to a different 8 software program and move all the data. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rex, is this $412 per 10 year, is this a new $412, or is that what we're presently 11 paying? 12 MR. EMERSON: That's what you're presently 13 paying. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does it come out of 15 the Hot Check fund? 16 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What does the software 18 do? 19 MR. EMERSON: Correlates -- correlates it. 20 You have a merchant fee, the bank fee that would be attached 21 to it, the amount of the actual check, and then the fee 22 that's calculated by statute that goes into the Hot Check 23 Fund, and it correlates all those items, allowing you not 24 only to track it and input communications, but at the end of 25 the month you can run an auditing report enabling you to 4-25-05 118 1 print out your disbursement checks to your merchants, 2 including the check that goes into the County's Hot Check 3 Fund. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 7 approval. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the 8 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 9 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. The 13 next item we're going to reserve for later. We'll go to 14 17 -- Item 17, consider and discussion of Road and Bridge 15 organization and personnel. Commissioner Letz? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I put this -- I 17 mean, Road and Bridge was advised that was going to be a 18 1:30 item, so that may be partially in executive session as 19 well, so I think we'd better -- I would rather wait until 20 1:30 for that. So, we can go back, hit the other executive 21 session item, or other items, in my opinion. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other member of the 23 Court have anything they wish to offer on that? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Probably the best thing 4-25-05 119 1 to do at this juncture would be to recess until 1:30. When 2 we come back at -- 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Huh-uh. Before you 4 recess, 'cause I'm not sure if I'll be able to get back, one 5 thing I just wanted to advise the Court of, one of our 6 employees named Hal Roth, who was my training sergeant for 7 the jail for the last number of years, passed away this 8 weekend due to cancer, so I thought the Court ought to know 9 that. I'll advise them when the funeral arrangements are 10 made. But we did lower our flags, because he was an 11 employee at the Sheriff's Office, at half-staff. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did you tell the 13 Court about the guy that was caught? 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Mr. Haines was caught 15 last night about 8:30, sex offender that we were looking 16 for, out of Helotes by Bexar County Sheriff's Office. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, while we have a 19 little bit of time, why don't we get rid of bills and budget 20 amendments and all the rest of the stuff before lunch? 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good idea. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we could do that. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That way we won't get 24 rushed at our workshop or something. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Why don't we move to Section 4 4-25-05 120 1 of the agenda, payment of the bills. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we pay the 3 bills. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second that emotion. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 6 pay the bills. Any question or discussion? All in favor of 7 the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget 12 amendments. Budget Amendment Request Number 1. 13 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 1 is for the jail, 14 from -- from the Sheriff, to transfer $174.76 from Cooks 15 line item to Radio Repairs. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What kind of radio 17 repairs? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Our hand-held radios in 19 the jail. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Inside the jail? 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Inside the jail. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that exactly the 23 same kind of hand-held radio we have out in the streets? 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, they're different. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I thought. 4-25-05 121 1 So moved. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 4 approval of Budget Amendment Request Number 1. Any question 5 or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by 6 raising your right hand. 7 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 8 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 9 (No response.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget 11 Amendment Request Number 2. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 2 is for the 216th 13 District Court. The request is to transfer $145 from 14 Court-Appointed Attorney line item to Court Transcripts. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that, but 17 I want you to explain it to me. 18 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we -- in the budget 19 process, we -- we lowered the amount for court transcripts. 20 We've been out of money in there for some time. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just like the 22 transcripts that our reporter here does for us? 23 MR. TOMLINSON: Right. It would be for -- 24 probably for an appeal. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And -- 4-25-05 122 1 MR. TOMLINSON: That's when most transcripts 2 are done, is for -- is for appeals. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember that now. 4 I appreciate you bringing that up. Is that -- who actually 5 does it? Is there a -- 6 MR. TOMLINSON: The court reporter. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's in the 8 courtroom? 9 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That we pay -- just -- 11 I've always had a problem with that. That we pay the court 12 reporters a pretty good salary up there. I think this 13 particular one is 27,000 plus a few dollars, and any time 14 that there's any kind of -- I think Commissioner Williams 15 recently had -- had requested a -- some printout of some 16 proceedings of some sort, and was charged for it, and I 17 just -- I struggle with that. I mean, I can't -- I can't 18 seem to get my mind around it. We have a salaried employee, 19 and then we turn around and pay extra for -- 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Services. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- the work. I don't 22 -- I just can't get that. Is -- is transcripting outside 23 the job description? Or -- I mean, I -- 24 MR. TOMLINSON: I think it's a statute -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not fussing or 4-25-05 123 1 anything. I just cannot understand that. 2 MR. TOMLINSON: I think it's a statutory 3 issue concerning the creation of transcripts. I can't tell 4 you what the -- what the chapter and paragraph is, but I -- 5 that's my understanding. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well -- so, we -- we 7 should be paying our reporter, then, extra for sending us 8 copies of the minutes. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I -- I'd like to 10 follow up on what Commissioner Baldwin is asking about, 11 'cause it -- when that happened, it was really kind of 12 disturbing. 'Cause I -- I thought that -- as he did, that 13 that particular court reporter was on -- was a salaried 14 employee, and all of a sudden, a week or so later or 10 days 15 later, got a bill for the pages of the transcript that I 16 requested. And your answer kind of befuddles me even more, 17 if it's a statutory thing, and I'd like the County Attorney 18 to shed some light on that. You know, is -- is that 19 something that's statutorily required, if we ask a court 20 reporter other than our own for some pages out of a -- of a 21 proceeding, we have to pay for that on top of -- 22 MR. EMERSON: That's correct. It's 23 statutorily allowed for. They have a good lobby; that's all 24 I can say. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is it possible -- well, 4-25-05 124 1 what about when I ask Kathy for -- to do a little research 2 and find a copy of a transcript awhile back? Should we be 3 paying her additional? 4 MR. EMERSON: I don't know the answer to 5 that. I didn't research that specifically. 6 MS. PIEPER: I think she's just nice and does 7 it. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand. 9 MR. EMERSON: I researched it from the 10 standpoint of the County Attorney's office. Back in January 11 we got a bill from a court reporter for providing a 12 transcript for us to use on an appeal. 13 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What you said, 14 though -- 15 MR. EMERSON: I had a serious question about 16 a county department paying another county employee to 17 generate paperwork, and it's allowed for in the statute. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You said it was 19 allowed. Is that different than required? 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 21 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They're allowed to 23 collect that compensation, but -- 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is different? 25 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 4-25-05 125 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we don't have to pay 2 them. 3 MR. EMERSON: I think you're probably going 4 to have to renegotiate their contracts. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's -- well, that's 6 what I'm saying. I mean, under the -- the current contract, 7 this is the way it's done, but there's not a requirement by 8 law that we have to do it this way. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What contract? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess our -- our 11 employment -- you know, whatever the personnel -- 12 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Policy. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The job description. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's getting murkier 15 and murkier. 16 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, you know, a lot -- a 17 lot of transcripts go to attorneys that are appealing -- 18 that are representing the person on appeal, so we get -- we 19 get funds in those cases sometimes. And -- and through -- 20 through the indigent defense mechanism, we do get reimbursed 21 somewhat for -- for their services. Not totally, but we -- 22 we can include the cost of that as a -- as a cost to provide 23 indigent defense to -- to a defendant. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I understand 25 that, you know, outside attorney making a request or 4-25-05 126 1 whatever. I think that's quite legitimate to make that 2 charge. But another person within the county government -- 3 realm of county government? That just seems a little 4 unusual. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wanted to ask Rex 6 one more question. 7 MR. EMERSON: I'm sorry. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Forgive me for 9 interrupting. That applies to the district court level. 10 Your -- the law that you found -- 11 MR. EMERSON: District and County Court at 12 Law. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And County Court at 14 Law. 15 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, if -- we need to 17 pay Kathy more if that's -- if that's the case. She does -- 18 she does a lot more -- I'll bet you, a lot more of that type 19 of work than anybody else. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: I know she does. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: I know she does. 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's sort of akin 24 to one government agency that contracts with another one 25 requiring a Freedom of Information Act request to find out 4-25-05 127 1 what the details of the business are. That -- that seems 2 like -- government entities are paid for by the same 3 taxpayers; we ought to be able to do better than that. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree with 5 you. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or 7 discussion? Do we have a motion? 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thought I'd ask. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: We don't have a motion? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I made a motion. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, and I seconded 12 it. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He seconded it. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We have a motion 15 and second. Any further question or discussion on the 16 Budget Amendment Request Number 2? All in favor of the 17 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. 22 Budget Amendment Request Number 3. 23 MR. TOMLINSON: I just handed you Number 3. 24 It's for -- a request from Road and Bridge to transfer 25 $1,100.80 from their Contingency line item to Operating 4-25-05 128 1 Equipment to purchase some hand-held radios. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is this -- do they -- 3 hand-held radios? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are these the same ones 5 that they use in the jail? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the question. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I hope not. 8 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't have the details on 9 that one. Leonard's not here. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do they have hand-held 11 -- I mean, I can see these guys now with a shovel in one 12 hand and their little radios up here. Do they have 13 hand-held radios today? Is this brand-new? 14 MR. TOMLINSON: I think it is, yes. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we're going to do 16 it outside the budget. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I kind of have that 18 question. I mean, they have radios in their trucks, but I 19 don't -- maybe they're -- I mean, I wouldn't have a problem 20 if they were replacing those radios with hand-held radios, 21 you know, slowly upgrading, but I don't know why they would 22 need truck radios, hand-held radios, and cell phones. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't we hold it 24 up until we get the answer from Road and Bridge? 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There could be times, 4-25-05 129 1 like during all the work that was done down at Hermann Sons, 2 if they're on opposite sides of the river, they're in 3 different locations, truck's only at one location. 4 Hand-held radios are -- are very nice to be able to have to 5 communicate to each other farther down and farther apart, 6 where you're not real close together. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, when you can 8 spend a million dollars on them like you did. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We didn't buy any radios 10 there, Buster. We just got towers, remember? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We didn't buy any 12 radios? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's hold this one and 14 ask Leonard where we are, if this is new. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Do I have a motion on Budget 16 Amendment Request Number 3? Hearing none, we'll move on. 17 No other budget amendment requests? 18 MR. TOMLINSON: No. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any late bills? 20 MR. TOMLINSON: I have one, to Office Max 21 Credit Plan for $89.97. The reason this is late, the bill 22 had -- had -- sales tax was included, so we held it until 23 they -- they removed the sales tax, and it's now due, so I'd 24 like to go ahead and -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 4-25-05 130 1 MR. TOMLINSON: -- issue a check. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 4 payment of late bill to Office Max for $89.97. Any question 5 or discussion? All in favor? 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed? 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. I have 10 here before me monthly reports submitted by Justice of the 11 Peace, Precinct 1, as amended; Justice of the Peace, 12 Precinct 2; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3; Justice of the 13 Peace, Precinct 4; Road and Bridge; and Information 14 Technology. Do I hear a motion that these reports be 15 approved as presented? 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So moved. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any 19 question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify 20 by raising your right hand. 21 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 23 (No response.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll 25 stand in recess until 1:30. At 1:30, we will go into 4-25-05 131 1 executive session. 2 (Recess taken from 11:53 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.) 3 - - - - - - - - - - 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come back to 5 order, if we might. We were in recess for the lunch period, 6 and due back at 1:30. It's that time now. At this time, 7 because we have some executive session items to go into, I 8 will recess the open, public session of the meeting, and it 9 is now 1:33, and we will go into executive or closed 10 session. 11 (The open session was closed at 1:33 p.m., and an Executive Session was held, the 12 transcript of which is contained in a separate document.) 13 - - - - - - - - - - 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back into 15 open, public session. It's now 2:47. I think we have one 16 more item on the agenda -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can I make a motion out 18 of -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Just -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not yet? 21 JUDGE TINLEY: First off, let me inquire if 22 we have any motion or anything to be offered by any member 23 of the Court concerning any matters considered in executive 24 session? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, Judge. I make a 4-25-05 132 1 motion -- pursuant to Item 1.16, which is listed as 2 judiciary guns in the courthouse, I'll make a motion that 3 the Commissioners Court permit members of the judiciary and 4 state's attorneys to carry guns in Kerr County Courthouse, 5 Kerr County Courthouse Annex, and Kerr County Law 6 Enforcement Center, as long as they have concealed handgun 7 licenses. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any 10 question or discussion on the motion? 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: That motion does carry. One 16 remaining item on the agenda, unless I've missed something 17 here. I assume there's no more motions concerning executive 18 session? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, but there is 20 an item -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Late bill or budget 22 amendment. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It was something to do 24 with the bills in Road and Bridge. Handguns -- I mean, 25 hand-held radios. 4-25-05 133 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Radios. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can y'all explain that, 3 what they're for? 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, appreciate you reminding 5 me about that. There's a budget amendment to transfer funds 6 over to Operating Equipment from -- from Contingencies to 7 acquire hand-held radios. 8 MS. HARDIN: We -- most of our trucks have 9 radios in them, but we bought a new distributor -- water 10 distributor, several pieces that do not need a radio in them 11 full-time. They only need it in there when they're being 12 driven, and so the hand-held radios are on the same 13 frequency and can be taken from one piece of equipment to 14 another, and that's what it's for. 15 MR. ODOM: And it just saves money. It's 16 more productive than buying them for each piece of 17 equipment. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 21 approval of Budget Amendment Request Number 3. Any question 22 or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right 23 hand. 24 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 4-25-05 134 1 (No response.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I'll inquire again. Any other 3 action to be offered or motions to be offered in connection 4 with items considered in closed or executive session? We'll 5 move to Item 1.18, which was a timed item for 2 o'clock. 6 Would you like to go ahead and finish out 1.17 first? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which one -- why don't we 8 call both at the same time? I mean, call both at the same 9 time; we'll talk about the organization part as well. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I'll also -- Item 18 11 was a timed item scheduled for 2:00. Obviously, we're late 12 getting to it, and that's Road and Bridge and Subdivision 13 Rules workshop. I'll call, in connection with that, Item 14 17, consider and discuss Road and Bridge organization and 15 personnel. I think the organizational aspect is what you've 16 got in mind. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner Letz? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. On the 20 organization aspect, I didn't really list it under the 21 workshop, but we kind of -- we did some reorganization when 22 we changed the -- got rid of the County Engineer and 23 restructured Road and Bridge Department a little bit. And 24 if there's any improvements that y'all can recommend or 25 changes we need to make, you know, sometime during the next 4-25-05 135 1 -- this workshop, or probably next workshop would be a good 2 time to do it, if it relates to subdivisions. I don't 3 particularly have anything in mind, but if there is any 4 changes that you think, you know, may be needed, we can talk 5 about that as well. But the work -- the purpose of the 6 workshop as a whole is to kind of go over the process that 7 we go through, and which is a lot of -- it's just flow of 8 information and communication in the whole subdivision 9 platting process. 10 And I've listed, I think, nine questions. I 11 think everyone received a copy. They're related to various 12 things that I noted and had questions on. And I'll start 13 with the first one, and we can go down. And anyone, 14 including Mr. Harvey or Mr. Voelkel, if y'all have any 15 comments, feel free to give them as well. The concept plans 16 and the original contact by developer. I mean, is the 17 current process working? Is there any major changes or 18 changes that are needed in that process? And I'm really 19 asking, probably, Truby and Len more than anything else. I 20 mean, the way -- we added concept plans in 2000, and it 21 seems like they're working. But it also seems like that I'm 22 probably -- this is really more before y'all were doing it. 23 When Franklin was doing it, I was out of the loop a lot 24 during the concept plan portion. I think I'm more in the 25 loop now. But I think it's real important that the 4-25-05 136 1 Commissioners be in the loop as soon as possible, because we 2 frequently get phone calls from someone along the line in a 3 platting situation. So, I just want to make sure, you know, 4 that if we need to make any changes in the verbiage, that 5 now is a good time to go over that. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is your routine 7 when a developer contacts you about a concept plan? What is 8 your basic routine from the get-go, from the time you get 9 the call? 10 MR. ODOM: Let's just take Voelkel and J.J. 11 Lane. What we'll try to do -- 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is there any other 13 project besides that one? (Laughter.) 14 MR. ODOM: No. 15 MR. VOELKEL: Thank you, Commissioner. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Think real hard. 17 MR. ODOM: I'll count to 10. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Backwards. 19 MR. ODOM: Yeah. And -- but in that case, we 20 try to contact the Commissioners before we do that. They'll 21 call and we'll say, "We need to set up a time. Do you have 22 a time that's available that you can make..." You know, 23 "What is available?" And we'll try to contact the 24 Commissioner. Now, it's difficult, because it's not a set 25 time that you're here. Mr. Nicholson's here normally 4-25-05 137 1 Tuesdays, and I try to arrange things or meetings -- concept 2 meetings around that time. Buster is here, and I -- between 3 you and Mr. Williams, sometimes, you know trying to balance 4 it. But once we get it, then they present that and we sit 5 down and we go through and we discuss that concept and the 6 things we sort of need, or what are they trying to do? If 7 we can get enough data -- in some cases, we just don't get 8 enough information; we have to dig it up ourselves. 9 J.J. Lane. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We were just talking 11 about -- basically, I think the question has to do with the 12 original contact via developer. What is that process? He's 13 going to make sure he knows what that process is. 14 MR. ODOM: Well, normally it's us, and they 15 come to us saying that they want to set up a meeting and to 16 look at a plat of some kind. And then we contact the 17 existing -- or the Commissioner that's involved in it and 18 try to set up a time that we're all together at one time. 19 We don't try to meet outside here; we try to have a 20 Commissioner in the loop. We think it's working. But, Lee, 21 you've done it several times. Is it working or not working? 22 MR. VOELKEL: I think it is working. The 23 concept plan, I'm trying to think -- I'm kind of leaning 24 toward maybe the concept plan coming before the entire 25 Court, though, every time, as opposed to intermittently when 4-25-05 138 1 there might be some problems or something, just to have 2 everybody on the Court familiar with what's going on. I 3 don't know if that's something all the Court members would 4 want to know about. But the main thing is to involve the 5 Commissioner in that precinct; there's no doubt about that, 6 and to meet with -- with Mr. Odom on a preliminary basis to 7 go over things and kind of familiarize them with where the 8 property is and what the developer wants to do. To this 9 point, I think that concept plan is working. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think it's 11 important that it comes to the Commissioner first from -- 12 from them before it comes to court. 13 MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir. Yes, sir, I think 14 so. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: On presenting the concept plan 16 to the court, if there's not some extraordinary things that 17 you might have some gray areas or maybe some variances that 18 you're going to be looking at, and it -- everything else is 19 pretty much by-the-numbers, so to speak, would -- would 20 there be any need to bring that one before the Court for 21 review to just kind of get an informal feeling of the pulse? 22 MR. VOELKEL: The way we've been handling it, 23 Judge, is we haven't been. In other words, if there weren't 24 any problems and everything -- everybody was on the same 25 page, we just proceeded forward with preliminary plat and 4-25-05 139 1 brought that in. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 3 MR. VOELKEL: I don't really think it's -- 4 unless y'all really want to know, and unless Buster wants to 5 know what's going on in Mr. Letz' precinct on the concept 6 plan level, I mean, we're going to get to it on the 7 preliminary plat eventually, so it might be saving y'all 8 some time not to do that. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's what I'm 10 thinking. If there's not some gray areas or some -- 11 MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: -- some extraordinary issues, 13 or maybe a variance that is going to be out there that you 14 may want to get kind of a preliminary read on, I wouldn't 15 think it would be necessary, as long as the Commissioner of 16 that precinct is brought into it from the get-go. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I look at it a 18 little bit differently, and it's probably because I tend to 19 get called into these more than anybody else, other than 20 Commissioners. I'd say it seems that in the past year, two 21 years, I get asked for an opinion or an interpretation of 22 Subdivision Rules all over the county. And I don't mind 23 doing it. Commissioner Nicholson and -- well, probably all 24 the Commissioners probably rely on me, 'cause I wrote a lot 25 of the rules and spent probably more time on subdivision 4-25-05 140 1 rules. You know, it puts me in a difficult situation when 2 I'm asked and, you know, when I go into -- like J.J. Lane, 3 which is a great example today. Commissioner Williams -- 4 it's in his precinct, and I'm asked to go look at something. 5 And I'm glad to do it, but it gets into an awkward 6 situation. And it may be the way to resolve that is -- 7 well, another one, one in Cypress Springs on drainage, in 8 Precinct 4, and I think everyone was aware -- I think Dave 9 was aware that I was looking at that as well. But it may 10 not be a bad idea to bring them all to court. We don't do 11 that many subdivisions, or have -- you know, at least on a 12 very quick version. I mean, I'm tossing that out because 13 it's -- it seems that as we -- when we get more active in 14 subdivisions, like we have been for the past six months, 15 more so than we were the prior six months, I just get an 16 awful lot of calls. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't have any 18 problem at all with the concept plan coming. You know, say 19 a developer contacts Road and Bridge and says, "Hey, I want 20 to sit down and talk about this project." They contact the 21 Commissioner and they review it, and it's still in the 22 concept stage. I don't have any problem at all. I think 23 it's -- as a matter of fact, I think it's probably pretty 24 good policy to bring it here, because each of you can see 25 things that I -- I, perhaps, can't or didn't see. And at 4-25-05 141 1 that stage of the game, anything you can do to help, you 2 know, smooth out -- smooth out the process or the -- or the 3 course of action, to me, makes sense. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think -- on a 5 revision of plat, I don't think it's necessary. I think on 6 a revision of plat, you do not need to, but I think any new 7 subdivision is probably -- and we don't -- like I say, we 8 don't get that many of them, I don't think. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I don't -- I 10 don't see it the way y'all do, but that's fine. It's not a 11 big deal. It's not a -- we're not wasting a lot of time or 12 anything like that as far as the whole Court's concerned, 13 but I don't care what you're doing in your precinct. If you 14 and -- you and Leonard and the engineers work it out, you 15 work it out, as far as I'm concerned. I don't have to look 16 at it until it gets to the second stage. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The problem comes -- I 18 think that if you're at a concept, and I've told the 19 developer that this is the direction I want to go, and 20 there's something that you think is absolutely -- you're not 21 going to go along with, that developer is investing quite a 22 bit to get to that preliminary stage, and then to have one 23 of the Commissioners say no, they don't like it. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That -- in my 25 limited experience, I've seen that not all developments have 4-25-05 142 1 come in with concept plans. They go directly to step two, 2 and that when they come in with a concept plan, I think I 3 see that that heads off a lot of problems later on. They 4 get to it earlier; probably saves them some time and money. 5 So, I -- I think requiring a concept plan is important. 6 Whether or not it needs to be reviewed by the full Court, I 7 don't have any opinion on. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was going to 9 suggest that we set -- instead of making it mandatory to 10 bring it to court, let that be at the Commissioner's option. 11 If he wants to bring it, he can. If he doesn't, he doesn't 12 have to. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And see if -- excuse 15 me just a second. If there's something -- we see a concept 16 plan, and there's something questionable about it, or maybe 17 this will work or won't, that's when I talk to Jonathan, 18 'cause if I don't talk to him before court, I'm going to 19 talk to him in court when -- when they bring it in for 20 approval. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, sir? 22 MR. HARVEY: From the -- from the developer's 23 point of view, almost on every occasion when a developer 24 will meet with a single member of a governing board, when he 25 leaves that meeting, there's always the question in the back 4-25-05 143 1 of his mind, "Well, what is everybody else going to think?" 2 Before -- as Commissioner Letz mentioned, he has to get to 3 some point to where he's comfortable investing the time, 4 money and effort to move to the next level. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: What I'm hearing is that your 6 comfort level would be greater -- 7 MR. HARVEY: As a developer -- 8 JUDGE TINLEY: -- if you had a quick 9 consensus? 10 MR. HARVEY: As a developer, I would be more 11 comfortable going to the next level if every Commissioner -- 12 if the entire Court had at least one opportunity, in the 13 infant stages of a development, to voice all of their 14 concerns. Even though the development may be in one 15 precinct, the other Commissioners may want to ask a 16 question, or they have concerns maybe from past experience 17 of developments in their precinct. So, it -- it might 18 behoove the Court, and I think it would help the developers 19 if you might term it in any future rules that the initial 20 contact is just the initial development conference with the 21 Road and Bridge staff. And at that point, Road and Bridge 22 can inform the developer he needs to prepare a concept plan, 23 bring it to the Court, and even in the initial development 24 meeting, the Commissioner of that precinct where the 25 development is going to be could be in the initial meeting, 4-25-05 144 1 just to have a member of this body in from the very first 2 meeting. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think 4 there's -- I -- some judgment has to go into that. I mean, 5 I think it's -- if someone comes into Road and Bridge with a 6 plat in their hand, they want to talk about it, they can't 7 say, "No, we're not going to talk to you. We have to get 8 the Commissioner here." I mean, that's not reasonable, 9 either from their standpoint or our standpoint. But I think 10 it is very important that Road and Bridge get with the 11 Commissioner, if they're not at that initial meeting, or one 12 of the first -- if there's a second meeting and they're not 13 there, I think Road and Bridge should visit with the 14 Commissioner about the concept plan before -- I think it 15 needs to go to the Commissioner before it gets to court. 16 MR. HARVEY: Right, before the concept plan 17 comes before the full Court. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 19 MR. HARVEY: The applicable Commissioner has 20 been brought up to date on what the County staff has met 21 about. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You also run a -- and 23 that's a good plan. There's nothing wrong with that 24 whatsoever, but you run a risk of -- the possibility, if you 25 come before the whole Court with a concept plan -- and I'm 4-25-05 145 1 going to have to redefine -- or define "concept plan" in my 2 mind -- but come before the Court, and the Court says, 3 "Yeah, that's a pretty cool deal," you know. "We'll see you 4 down the road." And he comes back in with his preliminary, 5 and then to this full Court for official vote, and we spot 6 some things that are possibly wrong. Then that developer 7 says, "Well, what the hell's wrong with you, man? You 8 approved it in the concept plan." You know, you've already 9 -- you've already said this is a good deal. Now what are 10 you doing? Why are you trying to change it at this point? 11 I've seen that happen here before. That's not a regular 12 deal, but you have that opportunity for that to happen. 13 MR. HARVEY: Yes, sir, that's true, if the 14 Commissioners Court wants to take an administrative -- for 15 lack of a better word, take the administrative posture that 16 you approve concept plans. You -- as far as I'm concerned, 17 you don't have to approve it. You can just have no 18 objections to what they have presented so far. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right. I mean, 20 I'm not talking about an official vote or anything on the 21 concept plan. It's just by not taking objections, it's a 22 nod. "Yes, this is a good plan; go with it." Just a minor 23 point I wanted to make. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: I think the point he's making 25 is, it's better to have too much communication than too 4-25-05 146 1 little. 2 MR. HARVEY: Yes, sir. And it can be -- it 3 can be very -- it can be made very clear to a developer in 4 the concept stage presentation that the Court's not 5 approving your concept plan. They're not rejecting it. We 6 just want to see what you have in mind. But, remember, if 7 your preliminary plat comes in, in your opinion, 8 substantially different from the concept plan, then we have 9 a lot more to discuss. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, Leonard? 11 MR. ODOM: That would work theoretically if 12 you went down the line and you had a concept plan. But 13 let's go back to a week or so ago where you get hit all of a 14 sudden with somebody selling property, and you don't have 15 this length of time. You're talking about concept, going to 16 the Court to get your initial on it, going onto an agenda, 17 and then the other times for a preliminary plat. So, 18 you're -- in the case of this -- in this J.J. Lane, you 19 know, you were being pushed for time. It doesn't work. I 20 mean, ideal would be that way, but that's not the situation 21 all the time in this court. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Smile, Leonard. 23 MR. ODOM: I am. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, of course, that one may 25 have a little -- little extraordinary timeline. 4-25-05 147 1 MR. ODOM: It does, but it's happened several 2 times with them coming in all of a sudden, really hitting 3 and trying to get something in with the time frame that 4 we're directed by the Court to do now. It's not that we 5 can't do that, but, again, they're going to be being pushed. 6 They'd say, "I got to plat it; got a contract on it." 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's no timeline 8 that applies to the first contact with the concept plan as 9 to -- as leading up to a preliminary plat. That can take 10 six months to develop the concept. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think Leonard's 12 saying if they come to us with the information, we've got, 13 by law -- 14 MR. ODOM: 21 days prior. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- 21 days to act, yes or 16 no. 17 MR. ODOM: And -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Once they get everything 19 before us. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's on a 21 preliminary? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, to get to final. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Preliminary to final? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's what I'm 25 saying. If they come with everything right there, we have 4-25-05 148 1 to be able to act real quick, and if we have all this -- too 2 much process and procedures to get through, we can't do it 3 that quick. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it may be best to 6 -- I'll work on -- I'll tinker with the language and 7 probably go back to what Commissioner Williams said; leave 8 it to the Commissioner or the developer to request it get on 9 the Commissioners Court, because that gives a little more 10 flexibility, where on some of the smaller ones that are 11 rushed, maybe we don't have a concept plan before the whole 12 Court, but the rule on a new subdivision would be that it 13 would come before the full Court. The second item is pretty 14 much -- I think we dealt with that, too. It's coordination 15 between the Commissioners and Road and Bridge. That was 16 just more to get the Commissioners involved as early as 17 possible, which I think is going -- is being done right now. 18 Third is the certifications on the final plat, and I'll just 19 go down some of them that I have a real question with, see 20 if anyone has any comments right now. There's a 21 certification by the County Engineer. I assume that the 22 Court intends to have Mr. Odom sign the plat? Or just 23 recommend the Court -- I mean, we obviously don't have a 24 County Engineer any longer, so do we want a certification 25 that -- 4-25-05 149 1 JUDGE TINLEY: That the -- that the Road and 2 Bridge Administrator approves it? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know that it's 5 necessary. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Under what -- I mean, 7 I don't see the authority there. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, I'm just 9 looking -- I mean, it's pretty -- I don't know what the 10 authority for the other one was, either. It just says a 11 certification by County Engineer. 12 MR. ODOM: Are you saying the -- define 13 "certification." 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's on the plat. It's 15 on the plat where you sign. 16 MR. ODOM: I understand that. Are you saying 17 a certification needs a professional engineer? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I'm saying I don't 19 know that it needs either County Engineer or anybody else. 20 I mean, I don't know why we need a -- 21 MR. ODOM: As long as the Judge signs it. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 23 MR. VOELKEL: I think what they have been 24 certifying to is that all the requirements of the Kerr 25 County Subdivision Rules have been met. 4-25-05 150 1 MR. ODOM: Yeah. 2 MR. VOELKEL: And that's -- it's either -- it 3 has been Kerr County Engineer, and now it's designated Kerr 4 County official, which I think is appropriate also without 5 an engineer. I think either one can do it. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 7 MR. VOELKEL: But I question the -- I guess, 8 do they need to certify to that? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's -- by the 10 time we vote on it, doesn't make any difference if you 11 certify it or not. Our vote -- our vote's what counts, not 12 the certification. 13 MR. ODOM: And it does say in the rules that 14 even if we miss something, it's his responsibility to make 15 sure that all the requirements of the subdivision plat are 16 fulfilled. So, the engineer or the surveyor has to -- he's 17 responsible. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The surveyor and 19 engineers will continue to. I don't think it's necessary, 20 personally, to have an in-house person sign the final plat. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: If the Court's got to 22 ultimately approve it anyway. 23 MR. ODOM: That's right. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I think you're 25 right. Once we approve it and the Judge signs it, that's 4-25-05 151 1 the authority of the Court, and that presupposes that all 2 the rules have been followed and variances have been 3 granted. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or they're noted. Next 5 we have a certification currently for Headwaters. I don't 6 see any reason for that. Under the current -- under the new 7 Water Availability Requirements, they're not involved in our 8 water availability requirements at all. That's how they 9 were -- why they were on the plat. I think they've been 10 refusing to sign them for some time, anyway. So -- 11 MR. VOELKEL: Correct. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think we can delete 13 that. We have certification by Kerr 9-1-1 as to road names 14 and that. Again, I don't know that that one makes any sense 15 any more. I think Road and Bridge works with, I think, 16 9-1-1 under the current system. That may be changed 17 sometime in the near future, but, I mean, the road names are 18 done. By the time they get approved, we're comfortable with 19 those names. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: That's something that Road and 21 Bridge handles as part of their process. 22 MS. HARDIN: Not on a new plat. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How are the names getting 24 on the plats? Are they worked -- 25 MS. HARDIN: 9-1-1 is actually -- 4-25-05 152 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're doing them still? 2 MR. ODOM: They're approving them. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: We need to leave them. 4 MS. HARDIN: But if they're not going to do 5 addressing, then -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we'll leave them 7 there for the time being, just so it doesn't run out. 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're the only ones 9 that have the authority to establish a road name, so we're 10 just talking about the process. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: How it gets to us. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How it gets to us, how 14 it's picked the names and they're approved. 'Cause, 15 obviously -- 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the authority 17 is to -- just to determine that there are no duplications 18 and it meets their basic criteria, right? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For addressing. I 21 don't understand that. They don't have any, do they? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: No, we actually assign the 23 road names, but they certify that they're not duplicitous 24 and they meet their criteria, I think is what that 25 certification does. 4-25-05 153 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 2 MS. HARDIN: Actually, on the new plats, 3 they've been assigning road names; we haven't. That has not 4 been a separate thing for the Court. It's just been done on 5 the plat. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Under Texas law, 7 we -- we have the responsibility, duty, and the authority to 8 assign road names. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I think someone 10 -- we need to -- I don't -- again, this is another one of 11 the things -- I'm not sure this needs to be on the plat 12 itself. I think we need to make sure that the road names 13 are run through, but it can -- in my mind, it can be an 14 internal memo or e-mail between Road and Bridge Department 15 and 9-1-1, you know. What I'm trying to do -- basically, I 16 don't see the point in developers running all over town 17 trying to get signatures that are for something that's a 18 waste of time. 19 MR. VOELKEL: Amen. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which is -- you know, and 21 I don't -- I don't know if the current system is working. I 22 don't want to change the current system; I just don't know 23 that it makes sense on final plat to have to run back out to 24 9-1-1 office again. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you've got to 4-25-05 154 1 know, though, if it's a -- if that road name is going to 2 fly. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but can't Road and 4 Bridge work that out on their routing slip? And they can 5 just have it checked off, yes, they've been approved, and 6 put that in the file. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How are they going to 8 know? Are you going to call 9-1-1 and say, "Hey, is Jack's 9 Drive cool?" 10 MS. HARDIN: Mm-hmm. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And they'll say yes, and 12 then it will be a problem. 13 MS. HARDIN: The thing about them seeing the 14 plat, though, it helps with the addressing and knowing how 15 many numbers they're going to have to assign and that type 16 of thing, because they go by how many feet on the road and 17 that type of thing. So, them actually seeing the plat is 18 useful for their -- for their purpose. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They may want the plat 20 still. And they're -- this conversation is almost -- 21 MR. HARVEY: 9-1-1 systems typically use a 22 recorded plat, and they go out and drive the road -- 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 24 MR. HARVEY: -- and physically assign a 25 number. But for them to have to certify to those -- to that 4-25-05 155 1 addressing on a plat, it's unnecessary, 'cause typically 2 they don't -- they don't drive the road to assign numbers 3 until they have a final plat. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 5 MR. HARVEY: It's kind of a premature 6 certification that really serves no purpose. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, that's what I'm 8 thinking. They need to get the plat on the distribution, 9 but I'm not sure they need to certify on it. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, all I want to 11 know when the plat hits here is if that road name is not a 12 duplication. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you're going to ask 14 the same questions of the same person that you currently do, 15 which is Leonard or Truby, I guess, up here, and say, "Are 16 these road names certified by 9-1-1?" They'll say yes or 17 no. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. I don't 19 -- I don't care, long as somebody tells me that it's -- that 20 it's not a duplication. I don't care who it is. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In my -- to me -- I'll go 22 on to the next one. Next one is utility companies. To me, 23 it's the same thing. For the life of me, I can't understand 24 why utility companies have to sign the final plat. I think 25 they should be distributed the final plat. And I know they 4-25-05 156 1 balk at this, but I don't see anywhere in Section 232 that 2 requires utility companies to sign a plat. I don't see that 3 they're even mentioned in the platting, you know, business. 4 And, to me, a lot of these people should get copies of the 5 plat after it's approved, and then a courtesy copy on the 6 preliminary so they're aware that it's coming down the pike, 7 but I just don't see where they have to sign the 8 certification. And we're not unique in that; other counties 9 do the same thing. Electric companies especially want to 10 sign off on them in advance, and I just -- you know -- 11 MR. ODOM: Just for planning purposes, I'm 12 sure their engineering department gets it and wants to take 13 a look at it, and for budgetary purposes, where they may be 14 coming online. I don't know, but I would assume that would 15 be a working -- 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That doesn't benefit 17 this Court. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In eight years, I have 19 never recalled us making any kind of a change on a plat 20 because a telephone company or electric company has asked us 21 to. 22 MR. VOELKEL: And generally all they want on 23 that plat is that little paragraph that provides easements 24 down each property line. Other than that, there's nothing 25 for them to look at. 4-25-05 157 1 MR. ODOM: That's right. 2 MR. VOELKEL: Now, our problem here in Kerr 3 County is, we have an electric company in Bandera; we've got 4 one in Fredericksburg. We've got a telephone company that's 5 in Ingram, and we -- well, we still do have an electric 6 company that's in Junction. Coordinating those people on 7 signatures on a plat, gentlemen, is very difficult. And we 8 have two utility companies that only have one person that 9 will sign the plat, and if they're out of town or sick or on 10 vacation, the plat doesn't get signed. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Sometimes it takes two of 12 them, too, doesn't it? 13 MR. VOELKEL: It does, and that's the 14 difficult part of it. And, again, I've never had any 15 feedback from any electric company or utility company that 16 has gotten a preliminary plat. As long as they're seeing 17 that paragraph on there, they're satisfied, and they'll sign 18 the plat. It's just a cumbersome deal to run around, as Jon 19 put it, to get those signatures on there. 20 MR. ODOM: So we should have that in the 21 rules, then, that that statement -- we have a standard 22 statement, whatever we're using. Or does each entity use a 23 different -- 24 MR. VOELKEL: The good news is, they all use 25 the same one. 4-25-05 158 1 MR. ODOM: Same language? Then that should 2 be part of our Subdivision Rules. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We put it in the rules. 4 And I think that when it comes from Road and Bridge and it's 5 recommended for approval, they've already gone through 6 the -- made sure the road names are there, made sure the 7 electrical language is on the plat and all the other 8 language. It can be done in-house, which is kind of being 9 done that way already, but it's saving a lot of time running 10 around and wasting -- wasting money. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, whatever we can clean 12 off there, let's do it. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Those are the 14 certifications that I saw that I thought were -- serve no 15 real purpose. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Any others that you -- 17 MR. VOELKEL: At this point, O.S.S.F. -- if 18 there's any tract that's -- if there's no tracts smaller 19 than 3 acres, they are not signing the plats either. They 20 were putting a note on the plat, but they don't sign the 21 plat. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I believe -- I talked 23 with Miguel on this, and he said, by state law, he has to -- 24 he's supposed to -- 25 MR. VOELKEL: Okay. I think it would be a 4-25-05 159 1 good idea, but I think the way our rules read presently -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The rules say he doesn't, 3 but by state law, he does. This needs to be left on. 4 MR. VOELKEL: Bring them back into the loop. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? 6 MR. VOELKEL: Can I offer this? And just -- 7 I'll just throw this out; it has to do with the routing 8 slip, and -- and it will go back to the certifications. 9 Presently, on preliminary and final plat, we -- "we" being 10 either the developer or the developer's surveyor or 11 engineer, is delivering the copies of plats to all these 12 entities, and we have a routing slip that they sign. The 13 routing slip finally, I think, has gotten to a point where 14 people will accept it. At first we didn't have -- we had 15 people that wouldn't even sign the routing slip, because 16 they felt like they were approving the plat by signing the 17 routing slip. I think we've about finally gotten over that 18 lump. But what I envision in my mind to be more efficient 19 would be for a developer to deliver his preliminary plats 20 and final plats to the Road and Bridge Department, and have 21 the Road and Bridge Department distribute those to everybody 22 that needs the plat. And I think it can be done by mail. 23 There might even be some cases where they could e-mail the 24 files, but I think if they were the central unit to 25 distribute the plats, then, first of all, they would know 4-25-05 160 1 that everybody that was supposed to get a plat has gotten a 2 plat. And in their distribution -- hang on -- they would 3 ask those entities to respond back to them if there's a 4 problem with the plat. At this point, I never have anybody 5 call me as -- as far as having any problem with the plat; 6 that the plat looks good, the plat looks bad or anything. I 7 have no feedback from these people that we're delivering the 8 plats to. We just send them out there, and then a month or 9 two later, we go out and have them sign a final plat. I 10 think it would be well to have a paper trail, so that these 11 people or these entities respond to -- in this case, what 12 I'm recommending is the Road and Bridge Department, that the 13 plat has on it the essentials that they need to approve the 14 plat. And then I don't think that there's any need for them 15 to sign a plat as long as they have given the Road and 16 Bridge Department or somebody that affirmative action that 17 they have seen the plat and agree to it. I'm just trying to 18 eliminate some of the running around that we're having to do 19 with the routing slip and with signing the plats. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you -- I don't 21 think you're solving anything other than making Road and 22 Bridge run around. 23 MR. VOELKEL: Well, it can be done by mail. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know. But, I mean, 25 people aren't going to handle it, and it's going to -- 21 4-25-05 161 1 days is going to come up, and we're going to be up against a 2 -- you know, they're going to be up trying to -- I just 3 think it's -- 4 MR. VOELKEL: Okay. I can understand that, 5 sure. I was just trying to get away from it. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You tried. Okay. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Any -- any other -- 8 MR. HARVEY: I don't mind adding one thing to 9 that, too. That, you know, this may be -- we may all be in 10 here chuckling, viewing that this as a shift of one 11 administrative procedure to another entity. But utility 12 companies and the different agencies that these plats -- 13 these plats are routed to, they are much more inclined to 14 respond to the County than they are the developer or the 15 developer's surveyor or engineer. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that may be -- 17 MR. HARVEY: That happens all the time. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- but, I mean, I look at 19 that as that if they're not required to -- if we take some 20 of these people off -- the utility companies off of the 21 final plat, they can't hold it up anyway, even if they want 22 to. They'd better be more proactive if they're going to 23 have input, and -- 'cause we're not going to wait on them 24 any more, you know. And that's just kind of how I look at 25 it; they go hand-in-hand. I think we can simply tie it a 4-25-05 162 1 lot -- make it a lot easier from y'all's standpoint and from 2 the developers and for us. I mean, the less certifications 3 we have to worry about getting, the easier the whole process 4 is. 'Cause we are under a legislative time frame to get 5 these things in and out. But I'll make a -- I mean, this 6 isn't the last chance everyone's going to have to look at 7 these. I just got to figure out how to incorporate these 8 into the next draft. Anything else on certifications? 9 The next one's a pretty quick one. Revision 10 of plat currently requires submission of subdivision 11 covenants and restrictions. I don't see the need for that, 12 other than, you know, if the -- we never -- I never know if 13 we have the current covenants and restrictions for a 14 subdivision, and I don't think we need to waste our time to 15 make sure if we do or don't. If they come to us and get 16 approval, that doesn't mean we don't override them and they 17 don't override us. I don't know why -- I really don't know 18 why we have it in here right now. I thought we got this out 19 in most areas. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Question. Suppose you've got 21 covenants in place that say a tract may not be subdivided 22 into tracts smaller than -- whatever size. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: And you're brought a plat 25 separately and apart from that to revise by chopping up a 4-25-05 163 1 tract, and it is smaller than the -- I realize we don't have 2 any liability, but I'm just thinking we might avoid a 3 firestorm if we have those covenants in-hand. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I look at the 5 situation -- if you go into a new development, generally 6 there's rules and restrictions filed. Then there's a clause 7 that says a developer can do anything he wants until 8 75 percent of the lots are sold, and which means that, you 9 know, they submit this -- and we've had this happen on the 10 Court before. We get those and say, "No, you can't do it," 11 or one of the other residents says, "You can't do it," but 12 the developer plays his trump card and says, "I can do 13 whatever I want." So, I just think that it puts us in a 14 situation of having to -- well, basically, we're going to 15 have to send them down to the County Attorney to read them 16 every time. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We don't use them, 18 do we? I don't -- 19 MR. VOELKEL: Can County Commissioners 20 enforce deed and plat restrictions? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. 22 MR. VOELKEL: Well, then, again, why are we 23 asking for the deed restrictions? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It may -- just like a 25 deed restriction; same thing. You mentioned deed 4-25-05 164 1 restrictions. If there's a deed restriction that says they 2 can't divide, and they do it, you know, we're not saying 3 that as a legal -- that we're going to rule on what they're 4 doing. Maybe we need language on the plat to indemnify us, 5 so to speak, that this doesn't -- you know, that we have 6 to -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kind of a disclaimer. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, disclaimer. 9 MR. ODOM: Would you not have a ministerial 10 duty to recognize those covenants? Other than judgment 11 call? I mean, we're -- I can understand where we're going, 12 but -- but I'm sort of like with the Judge. If you -- and 13 Rex -- is Rex here? You know, is -- does the Court not have 14 a ministerial duty to recognize those covenants? 15 MR. HARVEY: No. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know for what 17 reason. I mean, we don't -- we don't have any authority 18 over them. If -- if someone breaks a covenant, they go to 19 J.P. court; they don't come to this court. 20 MR. ODOM: It's a civil matter. But I'm 21 saying for us to take a new plat or a replat in some way -- 22 let's say it says that you can't be any less. Whiskey 23 Canyon was a good example. In the last couple of months we 24 had one; it was done right. But they could be subdivided no 25 less than 25-acre lots. That was -- that was -- they were 4-25-05 165 1 splitting it. We revising the plat. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They don't come to us 3 looking for approval for the development stage of those 4 covenants and rules, deed restrictions, so, you know, what 5 say do we have over them? It's a civil matter. If they're 6 violated, they go to court. 7 MR. ODOM: It would be a civil matter. But 8 are we drug into something if we -- if we approve a revision 9 of plat? You know -- 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Guy right there with 11 the tie on, ask him. 12 MR. ODOM: That's what I'm asking. That's 13 why I think you're -- 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Common sense would say 15 that we comply with the state laws and rules and 16 regulations, and not -- we shouldn't be concerned with 17 something outside of that, private property covenants. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: I hate to be going back the 19 other direction. We're just trying to clean up the plat, 20 and now we're talking about putting a disclaimer on here 21 that the approval of this plat, you know -- 22 MR. ODOM: Vacates. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: -- cannot be meant to be 24 construed as -- as that they're in conformity with any 25 applicable covenants or restrictions or whatever. But I 4-25-05 166 1 think that would solve it. I just -- my only thought was, I 2 know we can -- we can do nothing about it, because that's 3 private property rights, but I just don't want to get in a 4 firestorm that we can avoid, if we can. But I don't want to 5 -- I don't want to muck up the process to get there. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex, what's your thought 7 on it? Should we be in the business of reviewing 8 subdivision covenants when we're looking at a revision of 9 plat? 10 MR. EMERSON: Two things come to mind very 11 quickly on that. First, I would say that you schedule it 12 for an open hearing; you have an open hearing, and anybody 13 from the subdivision has a right to show up and contest it 14 if they don't like it. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 16 MR. EMERSON: And the second thing would be 17 that the Judge is absolutely right. I mean, that's private 18 property rights, and the homeowners' association has every 19 right in the world to pursue their own civil remedies, and I 20 don't think the county government needs to be in the middle 21 of it. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think your first 23 point -- I'd forgotten about the requirement under state law 24 and our rules that there's notification going to them if we 25 revise a plat, to all the people in the subdivision, plus 4-25-05 167 1 it's posted. So, they're at notice that we're -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If our rules say that 3 it's 5-acre minimum, and someplace in the covenant says it's 4 a 10-acre minimum, then they need to fuss about that amongst 5 themselves. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not us. 8 MR. VOELKEL: And you'll approve the 5-acre 9 if it complies with all of the county rules? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 11 MR. VOELKEL: Is that what you're doing? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 13 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think we 14 need them in there. I don't think we're using them now. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you're -- 16 you're just opening up something that shouldn't be -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wrote down "delete." 18 MR. ODOM: So, we would eliminate that for 19 revision of plat, then? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not require them. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I don't know that 22 we've ever -- that's ever come up. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think one -- 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I remember one time 25 we asked the question, were the covenants and the deed 4-25-05 168 1 restrictions satisfied. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You did. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Next is a -- 5 should revision of plat be treated differently than a new 6 subdivision plat in the platting process? And the reason 7 I'm bringing this up right now, the language is that they 8 have a little separate section or do things a little bit 9 differently on notification and hearing and all that for 10 revision of plat, and that's state law. But we also have a 11 clause that says that they have to abide by all the other 12 rules. That includes drainage studies; that includes all 13 kinds of things, you know, that they may or may not have to 14 do. And if they're just doing a -- splitting a tract from 15 one to two, which is normally what happens, you know, I 16 don't know that we should require them to do a whole lot of 17 additional expense. And that's -- I think you've had, 18 probably, Buster, more complaints in this area than anyone 19 else. If all a guy wants to do is get rid of a lot line and 20 combine lots, he has to jump through all these hoops and all 21 that. And I'm not sure how we make it simpler and, you 22 know, how we have a separate set of rules for them without 23 really making it a very confusing set of rules, but at the 24 same time, I don't know that we should require them to do 25 everything that a new subdivision has to do. 4-25-05 169 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry, I don't have an 4 answer for you right off the top of my head, but I agree 5 with you. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we can just think 7 about that. And, you know, I might look at it, 'cause I 8 really don't have a way to solve that one, any kind of 9 recommendation. The next is when, if ever, do we need to 10 hire a consulting engineer, and what process do we use to 11 hire an engineer? We haven't had any issues up till now, 12 but when we start looking at drainage plans, I think that if 13 we're going to have any kind of a disagreement or agreement 14 with them, really looking at them in any kind of depth, I 15 think that we're on pretty shaky ground if we don't have an 16 engineer advising us. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Recommendation of the 19 Road Administrator? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't know if 21 it's -- if it's -- you know, I'm not trying to pick on 22 Leonard here, but I don't know that Leonard has the 23 qualifications to look at a hydrology plan and -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I mean to alert us 25 that it -- "Gentlemen, you need to hire somebody to do 4-25-05 170 1 that." 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So, are you saying 3 we pass it off on Leonard to say, "Hey, y'all need to hire 4 an engineer"? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's what I 6 was saying. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, if we require, 8 by Subdivision Rules, of a developer a drainage study and/or 9 a hydrology study, isn't it an automatic, we have to have an 10 engineer to review it? 11 JUDGE TINLEY: No. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No? You want to 13 certify that those calculations are correct without the 14 input of an engineer? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the engineer 16 that's done it is certifying that it's correct. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Les, you're an engineer. 19 Can you do this type of work -- I mean, could a layperson 20 receive one of your hydrology and drainage studies, and just 21 by looking at it, understand it? 22 MR. HARVEY: Probably not. Now, I don't mean 23 that derogatory by any stretch of the imagination, but 24 please understand what technology is like nowadays. There's 25 hardly a thing I can do in road design, hydrology, or 4-25-05 171 1 hydraulics that is not some sort of computer application 2 that has a very specific input and output file. You know, 3 it all depends on when -- and this is just something to 4 consider. When an engineer -- any engineer submits a signed 5 and sealed drainage report to Kerr County, what do you want 6 to do with it? I don't expect an answer. What do you -- 7 what does this body and the Road and Bridge Department want 8 to do with it? Do you want to file it away, just for pub -- 9 just for public record? Do you want to approve it? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll give you a good 11 case in point, The Homestead next door to The Woods. That 12 has been an issue in terms of hydrology studies, good, bad, 13 or indifferent, and the findings and the results since the 14 get-go, and you know it. I can't think of a better 15 illustration. I've been out there half a dozen times with 16 the County Engineer, when he was in our employ, and we 17 stepped through it, and I venture to suggest to you the next 18 big rain that comes up, you can go back out there and the 19 arguments will be revisited all over again that the 20 hydrology study prepared by a registered engineer was wrong, 21 was faulty; it didn't do what it was supposed to do, or 22 misrepresented. Now, you know, how do you -- how do we get 23 ourselves off of that hook so that when we approve the plat, 24 which contained the hydrology study and the whole bit, 25 drainage flow, the whole bit, that we are, in fact, 4-25-05 172 1 certifying that it was done properly and to whatever 2 satisfaction? Now, help me out with this one. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Bill, another good 4 example was Bumble Bee Hills, where we had a developer's 5 hydrology engineer saying, "Here's the deal. Everything's 6 okay on this lot." And then we had some of the neighbors 7 hire their own engineer and a qualified hydrologist, and he 8 said, "No that's not the way at all. It's completely 9 different." Now, what -- what do people like me and you do 10 then? Flip a coin? Go for two out of three? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess that's why 12 I'm asking that, yeah. 13 MR. ODOM: One engineer will use a certain 14 type of analysis versus feeling. I think that -- I think 15 that when we look at the rules, that we should set a 16 standard that people can do. I don't know what he -- what 17 Les uses, but HEC-2, you know, is not used any more by FEMA, 18 so there's certain standards. Everybody can design 19 something different. Bumble Bee's an example of that. They 20 can use different criteria, different ways they do it, and 21 unless you really come into this and set standards, the 22 design is going to be based upon that computer program. 23 MR. HARVEY: You can't -- you can't set 24 standards telling an engineer what method to use for 25 hydrology and hydraulics. 4-25-05 173 1 MR. ODOM: I can say that FEMA uses this, and 2 that's what we're looking at, is the FEMA standards, 3 whatever that standard may be, Les. Then we're on the same 4 page. 5 MR. HARVEY: No, I couldn't -- I couldn't 6 disagree more. 7 MR. ODOM: Well -- 8 MR. HARVEY: Because FEMA -- FEMA only deals 9 with what's called HEC-1 and HEC-2, and the new one is 10 HEC-RAS. 11 MR. ODOM: That's right. 12 MR. HARVEY: Those are for very large 13 drainage basins, solely for the establishment of floodplain 14 elevation and the limits of the floodplain. That's the 15 purpose -- 16 MR. ODOM: That's the purpose. 17 MR. HARVEY: -- of HEC-1 and HEC-2. Now, 18 when you get into drainage analysis for a brand-new 19 subdivision, depending upon the size of that subdivision, 20 there are several different hydrology methods that you can 21 use. Those individual methods are subroutines of the FEMA 22 program. You can use -- FEMA does not apply to subdivision 23 drainage; it's not apples and apples. There are various 24 methods that an engineer can use to do the hydrology and 25 hydraulics for culvert design, for drainage channels, 4-25-05 174 1 parallel bar ditches. And one method, depending upon the 2 size of the drainage basin -- it may be if one drainage 3 basin is 100 acres, there are several methods you can use. 4 If the size of the drainage basin is 500 acres, some of 5 these methods over here are not to be used with that size 6 drainage basin. So, you can't set a standard for doing 7 hydrology and hydraulics. 8 But, to respond to your comment a minute ago 9 about The Homestead, I myself could think of no better 10 example of that being a problem. And that -- that was 11 probably a case -- and I know the engineer that did the 12 study. That was probably a case where that study was done, 13 and it was simply filed away by the County. To use your 14 trigger comment a minute ago of, How do we get the County 15 completely off the hook of those future possible situations? 16 You hire you an engineer that knows all of these different 17 methods, that can review the results that are sent in on 18 just about any case. And if he doesn't understand -- if -- 19 if he doesn't understand the method that a submitting 20 engineer is presenting to the County, then he asks for an 21 explanation. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Les. That 23 was the response I was looking for. Appreciate it. 24 MR. HARVEY: Well, it's the truth. But, I 25 mean, there -- there's no other way to get the County off of 4-25-05 175 1 that future hook. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know that I want 4 to get the County -- I mean, I don't have a real problem 5 with getting -- hiring an engineer who's a hydrologist as 6 well to look at the drainage studies, but I've never looked 7 at our Subdivision Rules as approving the drainage study. 8 We're approving that they have submitted the drainage study 9 that meets our requirements and state law. And if it's a 10 bad study, and it's sealed, I look at that engineer as 11 responsible that sealed it. And the problem goes if the -- 12 The Homestead problem comes up, well, someone should see 13 that engineer that did it, being The Woods. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it comes 15 back -- Commissioner, it comes back to the argument that's 16 been, you know, laid on me at least -- at least three times. 17 The County approved the plat, period. And here's the 18 problem. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I understand that. 20 But I'm saying that the -- we're going to start driving the 21 costs very, very high if we basically, I mean, go out and 22 hire an engineer to get the level of comfort that we know 23 that everything's okay. It's going to start costing us a 24 whole bunch of money that we don't have. And I don't know 25 that -- I don't know how we ask the developer -- I don't 4-25-05 176 1 know that we can really ask -- pass that on to the 2 developer, and I don't think the rest of the taxpayers 3 should pay for it. I mean, I think there's a certain amount 4 that has to go with the -- the developer and the engineer 5 that does the subdivision, that they're the ones on the 6 hook. I don't want the County to be on the hook. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I don't either. 8 I want us to find a way to get us off the hook. 9 MR. HARVEY: Just one follow-up to this 10 discussion of being on the hook. I will be the first to 11 admit that you can hire all of the hydrology and hydraulic 12 experts you want to review submissions to the County, and 13 that's not -- and that is not going to stop John Q. Public, 14 when he has a problem in the future, to come running to the 15 County. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. 17 MR. HARVEY: That won't stop him. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're right about 19 that. 20 MR. ODOM: And it won't stop a 25-year 21 frequency coming off the E.T.J. over there till 5-year or 22 2-year that's in The Homestead or over there in The Woods. 23 So that's part of it, is -- is you've got the City standards 24 that are higher than ours, and you've got runoff coming out 25 of -- out of those things, and it's greater than whatever we 4-25-05 177 1 have. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know how the 3 City plays in this one. 4 MR. ODOM: Well, the City had to do with that 5 up above, that land right there. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, but Homestead 7 was there before Comanche Trace was. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know that we have 9 an answer to that question. 10 MR. VOELKEL: Commissioner, can I just throw 11 this in about -- I hope there are not any developers here. 12 Plat review fees, I think, would be something that the 13 County ought to look at as far as collecting those fees for 14 preliminary plat. Of course, we collect fees now. They're 15 very minimal; I think preliminary plat's $50. But I know 16 the City of Kerrville, they have fees that add up, and it's 17 just something developers have to bite, for reviewing those 18 plats. And maybe that can be -- if you do hire people to 19 look at it, that would take care of some of that expense, 20 and not take it out of taxpayers' dollars. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: What you're suggesting is that 22 we add as part of it maybe an engineering review fee? 23 MR. VOELKEL: Correct. And collect -- but 24 collect that from everybody. And some of the projects may 25 not have any engineering review at all, but you're still 4-25-05 178 1 collecting that money for that -- for that when you do need 2 it. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good thinking, Lee. 4 MR. VOELKEL: I think it's something -- like 5 I say, I hope there's no developers here watching me. I 6 think it's something that we need to look at to maybe get 7 some of those fees for -- for the County, to keep it from 8 other taxpayers having to pay that. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I like that. 10 Commissioner, I think we ought to give some more thought to 11 identifying a consulting engineer and making a contract with 12 him or her that's based on, you know, "When we need you, 13 will you be available, and will you sign a contract with us 14 and we'll pay you 'X' dollars an hour?" 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was our intent 16 when we changed the system up. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'll revisit that. That 19 may not be directly part of the Subdivision Rules. More of 20 a policy. 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Alternate plat approval 23 process. Want to leave that? If I can figure out what it 24 is. That's on small -- 25 MR. VOELKEL: It lets us eliminate 4-25-05 179 1 preliminary plats on, I think, tract -- subdivisions of four 2 tracts or less. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Four tracts or less. 4 MR. VOELKEL: So we can go straight into the 5 final plat. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's worked pretty 7 well. I mean, tends to -- 8 MR. VOELKEL: I think it has. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: You think it's worked good? 10 MR. VOELKEL: I think that's been effective, 11 and I think that the Commissioner's involved to a great 12 extent there. And, of course, if the Commissioner feels 13 like he needs to take it to court, he has that option. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Next, 8, potential 15 illegal subdivisions, and how do we handle these? 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's the 17 definition? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a subdivision that 19 is put in when we have the current rules or have had rules 20 in effect, and they were put in in violation of those rules. 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, it's somebody 22 that's out there and is going by metes and bounds and 23 selling property, and they don't have the -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Someone in my precinct 25 recently sold 6 and a half acres to a friend of mine. 4-25-05 180 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Really? 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Definition wouldn't 3 include -- 4 MR. ODOM: How did he get through? That 5 would be the question. Why would a title company give a 6 policy for something like that? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He paid cash. 8 MR. VOELKEL: Plus title companies will 9 not -- they'll exclude that in their policies now. They'll 10 say, "It's not our responsibility. You're both supposed to 11 follow all the rules. If you don't do that, it's your own 12 fault." But they're putting that in there. 13 MR. ODOM: Can you not have a court order 14 that would change a lot of utilities -- no hookups for 15 utilities, no O.S.S.F.? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know. That is 17 one probably for Rex. A lot of -- 'cause you're probably 18 going to be the biggest recipient of this problem. 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One is what we do, and 21 then how we start tracking them. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- would that 23 definition include somebody who buys a piece of land that he 24 intends to use for a development, and goes out and starts 25 moving the mountains around, pushing dirt, and without going 4-25-05 181 1 through any approval process? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If they're -- if they're 3 moving the dirt around with the intention of avoiding 4 platting, yes, I think. But if they're just out there doing 5 a ranch road, I'd say no. You have to look a little bit 6 what it is to get in some gray areas. But, I mean, there 7 are -- I mean, we have kind of two issues. One are kind of 8 current forward illegal subdivisions, and we still have them 9 going in. I know of two in my precinct right now, possibly 10 three. And then there's old ones, trying to pick up all 11 these old ones. Some of them, you know, start trying to 12 figure out how to fix the problem. It's a huge problem. 13 It's a huge number of people involved, and it's a huge cost, 14 and no one's willing to pay the cost. We had one -- I'm not 15 sure; I think Lee brought it to us not long ago. I kept on 16 asking the question, and it was because the lot to the 17 south -- it was an illegal subdivision. One guy was trying 18 to correct his part of the problem, but he wasn't about to 19 pay for the other people around him to do their surveying. 20 And we -- he fixed his problem, but we know that every other 21 lot in that subdivision is illegal right now, and we've done 22 nothing. And I don't know -- you know, I don't know what 23 you do. I don't know -- you know, people have this land for 24 20 years, maybe -- or maybe not that long; 10 years. And, 25 you know, it's a problem. And then, if we don't do anything 4-25-05 182 1 there, all we've done is tell someone in my precinct -- you 2 know, "Why should we follow the rules? They don't do 3 anything. They had an illegal one in court the other day; 4 they just let it go right on through." So, I think it's 5 a -- we have to figure out a way to stop them, and we have 6 to figure out a way to go after them and make them comply. 7 But I'm not sure how far you go, because some of them are 8 real hard to fix. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Maybe the County 10 Attorney can shed some light on that for us. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Some of the -- like, the 12 ones -- the three that I have handed out, the new ones in my 13 precinct, I mean, they're all pretty simple. They're all 14 real small. One of them, he has a letter from a State 15 Senator that says he can do what he did, which I disagree 16 with. But -- 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A former county judge 18 from another county. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, former county 20 judge, to boot. But, anyway, he sent a letter to this guy 21 saying he can do what he wanted to do, and he did it. And 22 the other ones, I think, are being solved, hopefully. But 23 how far -- I think there's two issues. One is, you know, I 24 think we have, in our current rules, all this authority that 25 we can do all this mean stuff to these people, but in eight 4-25-05 183 1 years, we haven't done anything to anybody. And I think 2 it's real frustrating to people that we make jump through 3 all kinds of hoops, like J.J. Lane, when he's trying to do 4 it right. He's come to -- at least he's trying to go 5 through the process. And there's somebody else who's doing 6 something illegal, and we just turn our head the other way 7 and go, "Well, you know, that's the way it goes." So, I 8 think that's something we have to come, really -- and, 9 really, again, this is not a subdivision issue, per se, as 10 from rules and regulations, but I think we really need to 11 come to an understanding as to how we're going to pursue 12 that. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hopefully, at some 14 point in the near future, we can compile a list of those 15 illegal subdivisions. I have three, just off the top of my 16 head. And we have a separate workshop with the County 17 Attorney. You know, those older ones, I just -- what do you 18 -- what do you do? Slap them on the hand? Tell them 19 they're naughty boys? 20 MR. ODOM: What's the statute of limitations? 21 MR. EMERSON: I don't know, off the top of my 22 head. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But, you know, I know 24 that we cannot issue them a septic tank license and those 25 kinds of things. That will slow them down. But I never 4-25-05 184 1 have -- never have heard a legal point of what can be done. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that point right 3 there is probably the -- the best method; maybe O.S.S.F., 4 because we do have a lot of authority in that area. And -- 5 and Rex is looking into what Kendall County is doing on 6 their affidavit of location, which is basically using 7 O.S.S.F. to determine if every land sale is a subdivision or 8 not. Inspection process. That's really a -- I don't know. 9 You know, it's an internal thing with Road and Bridge. Is 10 the inspection system working? Are we getting them 11 inspected? Do we need to make any changes in that area? 12 MR. ODOM: As we go into the process, yeah, I 13 thought about it. And -- and I'm going out as much as I can 14 get out to look at -- two of them is all I got going now. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 16 MR. ODOM: One of them's almost complete on 17 our part, and we've seen it there. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- you know, 19 I plan to get with Leonard and probably Truby to go over 20 these issues, make sure that we find these. And also, I 21 mentioned to the Court -- I don't know if you were here at 22 the time, Leonard -- about going over road issues, road 23 layout, that section of the rules, make sure we have any 24 changes there. 25 MR. VOELKEL: Well, you -- when you speak of 4-25-05 185 1 inspection, are you talking about roads? Is that -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Roads and drainage. 3 MR. VOELKEL: Without submitting anything 4 engineering-wise on how a road is to be built, what is there 5 to inspect? Other than getting compaction tests or -- I 6 mean, as far as grade, as far as all the engineering design 7 of a road, there's -- there's none -- there's no inspection 8 of that going on. 9 MR. ODOM: But we have no issues we have 10 to -- drainage ditches, we just try to make sure that it's 11 there. We need to do something about that. I -- 12 MR. VOELKEL: That's a whole 'nother thing. 13 MR. ODOM: When we first put this together, 14 we tried to do that, and it was nil and voided out at the 15 time years ago, that we had no control of verticals, 16 horizontals. There's no cut sheets. It's going out and 17 building a road. Now, there's a difference between new 18 construction and road betterment. I don't think we ever 19 looked at the difference in what we -- what we do versus a 20 new construction, and so we -- we kept -- kept it the same 21 like it's road betterment. You go out there; you just make 22 it a little bit better. But you're right, we don't have the 23 grades, elevations. We don't have a lot of that. 24 MR. VOELKEL: So, inspection now is basically 25 the compaction? That you inspect the -- 4-25-05 186 1 MR. ODOM: It's drainage and -- making sure 2 that you've got some kind of drainage in there, and -- yeah. 3 But that's -- it's just like it has been for 14 years, Lee. 4 Hasn't changed a bit. 5 MR. VOELKEL: Thank you. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I hear both -- I think I 7 hear both sides saying we need stricter rules. 8 MR. ODOM: We need stricter rules. 9 MR. VOELKEL: I think it would be easier to 10 inspect if you had something, if you're building a road 11 by -- either he built it right or didn't build it right. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. I see heads 13 nodding, people bored. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a juvenile 15 court to handle. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I think we've 17 accomplished a lot of what I wanted to do. Y'all were not 18 here when we talked about drainage here earlier. The Court 19 pretty much went along with the direction we're going, 20 though we have a new draft since either one of you have seen 21 it. 22 MR. VOELKEL: I have just one last question. 23 Where do we stand on E.T.J. plats? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: E.T.J.? 25 MR. VOELKEL: Seems like that there was a 4-25-05 187 1 state mandate that the City and the County work it out, and 2 one body -- somebody do it, and not both, and yet we're not 3 at that point. I just didn't know. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're getting closer. As 5 soon as we can get a map out of the City; the City has 6 promised us for some time. We are -- or I've met with them, 7 visited with Ron, I think. And Buster -- I don't know if 8 he's met, but I've talked to him. The E.T.J. is being 9 divided up -- of the city of Kerrville is being divided up 10 into two areas. One will be the County's responsibility; 11 one will be the City's responsibility. 12 MR. VOELKEL: Okay. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They have appointed their 14 person, I believe -- well, of course, if we don't have a 15 meeting pretty soon, he may not be around as to -- 16 Councilman Brown. Depends how the election goes. Maybe he 17 will be around, but we'll see. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Don't count him out. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't know when 21 City Councilmen -- when do they take office? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 7th. 23 MR. VOELKEL: So we're still working on that. 24 That's all I needed to hear. Yeah, that's fine. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 4-25-05 188 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Next day or so. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, anyway, Councilman 3 Brown was appointed by the City Council to meet with 4 Commissioner Baldwin and I and the City staff to finalize a 5 plan. I've looked at one, the first draft of it. 6 MR. VOELKEL: Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But if -- 8 MR. VOELKEL: Thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- there are changes over 10 there, it may get delayed again. 11 MR. VOELKEL: I understand. I understand 12 that, sure. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: What else we got on that? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's it. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Item Number 17 -- is that it? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on to the last 18 portion of the agenda. Reports from Commissioners? 19 Liaisons? Anything, gentlemen? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Anything I had, I've 21 forgotten by now, Judge. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Walston? No, we haven't 23 forgotten about you. 24 MR. WALSTON: I knew you hadn't. Getting all 25 kinds of education today. 4-25-05 189 1 JUDGE TINLEY: As most of you gentlemen 2 remember, we have an opening in the Family and Consumer 3 Science -- 4 MR. WALSTON: Yes, sir. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: -- Extension slot out at the 6 Extension Service, and that's what Mr. Walston wants to talk 7 to us about. 8 MR. WALSTON: We've got a -- we've got an 9 applicant, and I hope everybody has gotten her resumé, Donna 10 Edwards. Cheryl Mapston, our district director, has been 11 kind of, during the last week -- last couple weeks, been 12 tied up and hasn't been able to get finalized, but she's 13 checked with Ms. Edwards again, just checking to see if 14 she's still interested in the position, and which she said 15 she is. And, basically, as far as I interviewed with her, I 16 guess it's been a couple weeks ago, my visit went real well. 17 She's -- she's very experienced, with 24 years -- I guess 18 she's been in since '81, so you have 24 years experience in 19 Extension. She started in Meridian County in Extension -- 20 or Bosque County in Meridian. She started there, and she's 21 been there ever since. So, as far as her Extension 22 experience is -- is really good. As far as what I can 23 guarantee, she lacks probably five, six years maybe before 24 she retires. There's no guarantee she'll be here a year, 25 two years, five, ten years. Extension offers early out. We 4-25-05 190 1 don't know if that's going to happen; never do. So -- but I 2 don't think if -- even if we had somebody with less years 3 than that, we could guarantee how long they're going to be 4 here or the productivity that we're going to get out of 5 them. I just -- you know, all we can do is go on their 6 background and recommendations. We're still -- I'm going to 7 visit with her coworkers there and see how -- how 8 everything's going there as we get closer. If y'all would 9 like, we could set up a time for y'all to visit with her and 10 kind of get a little more personal idea as to what -- what 11 kind of individual she is. And that time frame, just let us 12 -- let me know what will work for y'all. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would like that 14 opportunity. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that'd be fine. 17 That's probably the proper way to do it. However, she has a 18 great resumé, I think. 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's Commissioners 20 Court role in this selection process? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We -- we hire her, don't 22 we? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We affirm the 24 appointment. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We hire her, but the 4-25-05 191 1 salary is paid for partly -- majority of it, I guess, by the 2 State. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: She's actually a state 4 employee, but we get input into the process. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: More than input. We 6 make a decision. 7 MR. WALSTON: Y'all make the final decision. 8 As Ms. Mapston mentioned, we want y'all's input. If there's 9 any question at any time along the way, we won't know up 10 front before we bring her to court. We don't want to get 11 into court and not have her approved. And I think that's -- 12 you know, y'all let us know if there's ever any question, 13 and we'll shut things down, and -- 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You might recall there 15 was -- another individual was recommended for the position, 16 and we said no. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I saw the resumé 18 too, and it really does look good. My -- my concern is not 19 who is hired, it's whether or not we should hire someone. 20 So, that's -- you wanted input. There's my input. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you do hire -- if 22 we do hire her, will you brief her on the outdoor 4-H arena? 23 MR. WALSTON: She will be in charge of it. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. (Laughter.) 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good. 4-25-05 192 1 MR. WALSTON: No. I think -- you know, as 2 far as her experience, I think, you know, that's one of the 3 things in Extension we're able to -- with her Extension 4 experience and committees, and working with our various 5 committees, it's a big plus just having somebody coming from 6 internally. So -- but like I said, I'd appreciate anybody's 7 input. And if -- you know, as far as the question as to 8 whether or not we should have one, there's no question. I 9 can tell you, I can't operate it on my own. So -- 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Roy, you know we meet 11 every other Monday. And we met -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Today. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- today. And so it 14 will be two weeks next. Pick one out, and let's rock and 15 roll. 16 MR. WALSTON: Okay. Y'all want to meet with 17 her in court? Or you want to meet with her prior to court, 18 before we -- I'd like for you just informally just to come 19 in and -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's a good day. 21 I would recommend that she comes in and -- like, at 1:30, 22 and we can just meet her and visit with her a few minutes. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In this kind of a 24 setting. Not in the regular Commissioners Court. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not in the courtroom. 4-25-05 193 1 Then we can go back to the business that we have, but have a 2 set time, like at 1:30, a timed item where we can ask any 3 questions and just meet her. And then -- but not make a 4 decision right there on the spot. 5 MR. WALSTON: Yeah. Yeah. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It would be the 7 second -- second Monday in May. 8 MR. WALSTON: Second Monday in May? 9 JUDGE TINLEY: We're due to -- or at least 10 tentatively scheduled to meet with the City on May the 4th. 11 I don't know how that's going to work out. In the 12 afternoon. A specific time hasn't been set. I was thinking 13 that if we firm that up, maybe we could get her down here, 14 say, somewhat earlier than that. That's on a Wednesday. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: On the 5th? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: 4th. 17 (Discussion off the record.) 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. Either one 19 of those dates will work for us, whichever works with 20 y'all's schedule. 21 MR. WALSTON: Okay. Well, I'll see 22 Ms. Mapston in the morning -- or tomorrow, and I'll get with 23 her and let her know, and she'll see if she can't get her 24 down here one of those days. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We appreciate it, Roy. 4-25-05 194 1 MR. WALSTON: Thank y'all. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Anyone -- anyone else have 4 anything to offer? 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. The head 6 honcho of the Kerr County Emergency Service District Number 7 2 is here. Wave your arm, Corky. Got anything to say to 8 us? 9 MR. HENSON: No, sir, I'm just here to absorb 10 wisdom. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's all I got. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other? A couple of things 13 I'd like to mention -- yeah. We -- we've got a vacancy on 14 our Alamo Senior Advisory Committee. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: And we've had that since, I 17 think, late February. And I -- I apologize for not 18 mentioning that when we had our press rep here so that we 19 could get a little publicity on it, and I'll try and make 20 mention and would ask that y'all do that also. We're 21 looking for somebody to serve in that capacity. We've 22 actually got two of them, I think, on it, but we've got a 23 second slot that we need to get -- 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Harris resigned. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. The other item is, 4-25-05 195 1 I've given one -- as y'all have noted, one tentative date 2 for meetings with the City. Do we have other dates that I 3 can pass along to them in the event that date is not 4 acceptable? I'd like to have the benefit of that so I can 5 get it to them. I want to give them as many options as 6 possible. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: May 4th is a Wednesday? 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, that's a Wednesday. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What are we meeting 10 with them on? EMS or some other purpose? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a joint meeting. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That thing said 13 they're going to send the City Manager and one Council 14 person over here to talk. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was the first and 16 second paragraph. The third paragraph says they want a big 17 meeting, of their newest letter. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Process meeting. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, what was that 20 date? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 4th. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: The one I tentatively cleared 23 for them by a majority of the Court, that Ms. Mitchell was 24 able to clear, is the 4th. The afternoon of Nay 4th. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. 4-25-05 196 1 JUDGE TINLEY: But I'd like to have a couple 2 of other dates. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How about the 11th? 4 That's a week later. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm available all -- 6 any time that week that includes the 4th. But I think I'm 7 gone on the 11th, and for the rest of the week. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: What about Friday, the 6th? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Friday, the 6th? I know 10 I've got a Region J meeting that week; I can't remember what 11 date it is, but I don't have to be at the city meeting. 12 (Discussion off the record.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Following week is not good for 14 you, Nicholson? Okay. What are your thoughts, Buster? 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The following week. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Either of those. How about 17 the Friday before? The 6th? 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Far as I know, I'm 19 okay. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Region J's -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is Holocaust 22 Remembrance Day. I don't know that we can meet on that day. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Good news. I appreciate you 24 bringing that to my attention. I'd have never suggested it 25 had I known that. 4-25-05 197 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry, I can't 2 meet on that day. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm okay. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thursday, Cinco de 5 Mayo. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Cinco de Mayo. 7 That's on Wednesday, right? The 4th? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, the 5th. That's why 9 it's Cinco de Mayo. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's why it's 11 "cinco." 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Cinco, five. It's 13 been a long day. Let's try for Wednesday, Thursday, or 14 Friday. You can probably get a majority. Friday, the 6th. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does it have to be 17 late in the day on Friday? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: No, it can be morning. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's got to be morning on 20 Friday. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can start at your 22 house for breakfast. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's rock and roll. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: The following week, how about 25 Tuesday afternoon? 4-25-05 198 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're going to force 2 me to go get my electronic brain. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tuesday afternoon is 4 good with me. That would be the 10th? 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. That's 7 plenty of dates. If they can't pick one of those -- 8 JUDGE TINLEY: I'll pass those two along to 9 them -- 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: See what happens. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: -- and we'll see what kind of 12 response we get. Thank you, gentlemen. I appreciate it. 13 Anything else to come before the court? Hearing no further 14 business, we will stand adjourned. 15 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 4:05 p.m.) 16 - - - - - - - - - - 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4-25-05 199 1 STATE OF TEXAS | 2 COUNTY OF KERR | 3 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 4 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 5 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 6 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 7 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 2nd day of May, 2005. 8 9 10 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 11 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 12 Certified Shorthand Reporter 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4-25-05