1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Special Session 10 Monday, November 28, 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 November 28, 2005 2 PAGE --- Visitors' Input 4 3 --- Commissioners' Comments 6 4 1.1 Consider approving interlocal agreement with Dallas County for holding their forensic 5 commitment hearings 10 1.2 Consider adopting new voting system in compliance 6 with the Help America Vote Act 10 1.3 Consider approving rental fee for electronic 7 voting equipment as per Texas Election Code 12 1.4 Consider approval of Electrical, Plumbing, HVAC 8 and Pest Control bids 21 1.5 Consider authorizing Employee Health Benefits 9 insurance consultant to advertise and solicit bids for stop loss insurance for 2006 25 10 1.6 Consider advertising for bid to lease two backhoe loaders 35 11 1.7 Consider final revision of plat for Lots 21 & 22 of The Horizon, Section One, Precinct 1 40 12 1.8 Consider setting public hearing for revision of plat for Tract 152-A of Spicer Ranch No. Three, Pct. 1 40 13 1.9 Consider setting public hearing for revision of plat for Lots 5-9, Block 8 of Greenwood Forest, Pct. 4. 43 14 1.10 Consider Kerr County Subdivision Rules & Regulations 45 1.11 Consider Kerr County Water Availability Requirements 49 15 1.12 Consider possible project nominations from Kerr County to the Statewide Transportation Enhancement 16 Program (STET) 71 1.13 Consider approving form contracts with County- 17 sponsored entities, authorize County Judge to sign 76 1.14 Consider approving form contracts with volunteer 18 fire departments, authorize County Judge to sign 78 1.15 Consider/discuss construction project at the Animal 19 Control Facility 88 20 4.1 Pay Bills 89 4.2 Budget Amendments 94 21 4.3 Late Bills -- 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 97 22 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee 23 Assignments 98 5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department Heads 101 24 --- Adjourned 108 25 3 1 On Monday, November 28, 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: Good morning, ladies and 7 gentlemen. Let me call to order the regularly scheduled 8 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled for 9 this date and time, Monday, November 28th, 2005, at 9 a.m. 10 Commissioner Williams? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Please rise and join 12 me in a word of prayer followed by the pledge of allegiance. 13 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Merry Christmas. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Kind of like -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ho, ho, ho. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Appears that Commissioner 19 Baldwin's getting himself positioned to be Santa this 20 season. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, he's got his 22 beard ready. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm ready. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Have they hired you 25 at Belk yet? 11-28-05 4 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm shooting for 2 Walmart. Going to the top. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Walmart. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, if there's any 5 member of the audience or the public that wishes to be heard 6 on an item that is not a listed agenda item, you're 7 privileged to come forward at this time. If you wish to be 8 heard on an item that is a posted and listed agenda item, 9 we'd ask that you fill out a participation form. It's in 10 the back of the room. It's not essential. It helps me to 11 not overlook you when we get to that item. But if you don't 12 get one of those filled out and you feel like you have some 13 input to a listed agenda item, when we get to that item, get 14 my attention in some form or fashion, and we'll be sure and 15 give you an opportunity to be heard. But if there's anyone 16 who wishes to be heard on any item that is not a listed 17 agenda item, please feel free to come forward at this time. 18 MS. MITCHELL: As you all know, I'm -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Name and address, please. 20 MS. MITCHELL: Kathy Mitchell, Kerrville. 21 411 Peterson. I'm the Vice President of the Kerr County 22 Child Service Board that y'all appointed me to, and what we 23 are doing this year for the kids, we have 85 at this time -- 24 85 Kerr County children under the supervision of Child 25 Protective Services, so what we're doing is we are asking 11-28-05 5 1 for sponsors to sponsor a child or whatever. So if you know 2 of anybody or you want to sponsor somebody, just get with 3 me. Thank you. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sponsor to do what? 6 MS. MITCHELL: Buy Christmas presents for the 7 children. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you have a -- is 9 there -- have y'all set an amount, or -- 10 MS. MITCHELL: Yes, we have. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- a suggested amount? 12 MS. MITCHELL: Yes, we have, $25. What we 13 have is, we have -- we have the children listed as numbers, 14 since it's confidential, and we've gotten a list from them 15 what they would like for Christmas. And if you decide you'd 16 like to sponsor one, we will give you an envelope with a 17 child's age and male or female, and what they would like. 18 Or you can choose -- you can just send the money, and then 19 we'll go out and purchase the presents. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That sounds better. 21 MR. ODOM: Put me down as one. 22 MS. MITCHELL: I will. Thank you. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Is there any other 24 member of the public that wishes to be heard on any item 25 that is not listed as an agenda item? Seeing no one else 11-28-05 6 1 coming forward, we'll move on. Commissioner Williams, what 2 do you have for us this morning? 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought the 4 Christmas parade was a very good one this year. Gets better 5 every time we go, and particularly for the little folks who 6 work their way to the front of the crowd and enjoy the 7 lights and all that good stuff. And the people who decorate 8 the courthouse and put together the parade are to be 9 commended, 'cause it's -- a lot of hard work goes into it, 10 and it's a nice way to set off our season. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner 3? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: First, I think there was 13 a Christmas in Comfort -- so I was told, anyway. I did not 14 make it this year, but I heard it was a great success, as it 15 has been. The parade was great, a lot of folks in town 16 spending money. And on a personal note -- 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Ah. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- the birth of my second 19 son. There he is right here. (Showed photograph.) He was 20 born -- he's one week old today. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hold him up. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank goodness he 23 doesn't look anything like Letz. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's right. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He does have that red 11-28-05 7 1 tint to him. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, he does. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Blockhead. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: His name is Augustus 5 David, and he will go by Gus. 6 MR. ODOM: How big was he? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He was 9 pounds, 13 8 ounces, 21 inches long. 9 MR. ODOM: Good size. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And his brother is 11 adjusting. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Slowly. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Football. He's going to 14 be a football player. Think so. 15 MR. ODOM: I think so. Going with A & M, 16 right? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: For what? For what 18 reason? (Laughter.) 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will have to say a note 20 on that. My brother-in-law, who, if you know him, is a 21 rather big Aggie -- strong Aggie supporter, decided that he 22 had to determine whether Sam, my oldest son, was going to be 23 an Aggie or a Longhorn, so he put two batting helmets on the 24 floor of the living room at his house and told him to go 25 pick one, and he picked the Aggie helmet, unfortunately. 11-28-05 8 1 So, we -- 2 MR. ODOM: Good child. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're not sure if that's 4 a very reliable test or not, but after the weekend, I'm sure 5 he's changed. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: After you threw it 7 away, right? 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Have we found a more 9 scientific approach? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, the score. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I see. Anything else? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Nicholson, do you 14 have anything for us this morning? 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. The Hunt 16 Volunteer Fire Department had one of its several fundraisers 17 this last week where it cooks and sells turkeys, hams, and 18 briskets to raise funds. I went by there. I'm reminded 19 that throughout the county, and particularly in west Kerr 20 County, we've got a really good, fine group of volunteers 21 that provide a lot of protection at a real reasonable cost 22 to the county. We've got three good fire departments in 23 west Kerr County. That's all. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner 1? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll just pick up on 11-28-05 9 1 these two guys. The Ingram Warrior basketball team is 2 ranked number one in the state, so -- and they play -- I go 3 out and see them a couple of times a year. They play real 4 quality basketball. If you like the upbeat, fast-paced 5 basketball, that's the place to go. These guys up here are 6 a little bit slow. What's interesting is, years ago, there 7 was a -- Ingram had this kid; the last time they won the 8 state championship, they had this kid by the name of Troy 9 House that is still the all-time leading scorer in Texas 10 basketball history. And the coach out at Ingram is the 11 number three all-time leading scorer, so it's kind of a -- I 12 mean, there is some quality basketball out there. Hunt 13 Elementary has a game tonight, and then the Comfort Bobcats, 14 football. They play in the semifinals this week, and I'm 15 here to tell you, when you -- when you reach the semifinals, 16 you're getting down to serious -- the kids go home. That's 17 some pretty serious stuff. So, we're real proud of our 18 local Kerr County kids. That's all. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. I also want to 20 express my appreciation to anyone that had anything to do 21 with the -- the courthouse lighting project and -- and the 22 event that took place here a week or so ago. It was attend 23 by seemingly a much larger number of folks this year. It 24 seems to get a little bit bigger every year, and that's what 25 it's all about. It's for the citizens and the children of 11-28-05 10 1 the area, and I'm glad to see it improve every year. But, 2 particularly, I want to thank the courthouse lighting group 3 that spends a lot of time and a lot of money, by the way, in 4 making sure all these lights are up to snuff and get put up 5 every year. Let's move on with the agenda, if we might. 6 The first item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and 7 take appropriate action approving the interlocal agreement 8 between Kerr County and Dallas County for holding their 9 forensic commitment hearings. Ms. Pieper. 10 MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, generally my deputy 11 just sends out the mental health commitment hearings to all 12 the counties, but Dallas County felt it best to, I guess, 13 have an actual forensic commitment contract, so their County 14 Attorney sent us a contract. It has been approved by our 15 County Attorney, so now we're requesting your approval. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 19 approval of the agreement. Any question or comment? All in 20 favor that motion, signify 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. Let's 25 move to Item 2; consider, discuss, and take appropriate 11-28-05 11 1 action to adopt the new voting system in compliance with 2 Section 301(a)(3)(B) of the Help America Vote Act. 3 Ms. Pieper? 4 MS. PIEPER: I'm getting ready to send in our 5 preclearance to Washington, and in doing so, I found a law 6 that says that the County Commissioners need to adopt our 7 voting system. So, I'm asking you to adopt the eSlate and 8 eScan, which is also known -- and the Ballot Now system, 9 which is known as Hart's Voting System. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, you're asking us 11 to approve the electronic system? Is that what you're 12 asking? 13 MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir, the one that we've 14 already purchased. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The specific one, though, 16 right? Correct? 17 MS. PIEPER: Yes, the one that we've been 18 working on for several months in getting. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 approval of the new voting system as per the agenda item. 23 Any question or comment? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think on this, I 25 just -- my only comment is, I think we need to be more 11-28-05 12 1 specific as to exactly the system that we're doing, 'cause 2 this is -- voting is a pretty important issue and can 3 certainly have national ramifications, as we're all aware, 4 so I think we need to be real clear that we're -- that the 5 motion, when it's written, specifically says that eSlate, 6 voting system accessibility, and eScan voting system, which 7 is general HAVA compliance, for in-person voting on election 8 day and during early voting by personal appearance, and the 9 Ballot Now system for early voting by mail, an integrated 10 system known uniformly as the Hart Voting System. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I gather you're suggesting 12 that the motion should be amended to provide exactly that? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have any objection to 15 that, Commissioner Williams? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I have no 17 objection to it. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Very well. The motion as 19 modified, any question or discussions? All in favor of that 20 motion, signify 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: The motion does carry. Let's 25 move to Item 3; consider, discuss, and take appropriate 11-28-05 13 1 action approving the rental fee for the electronic voting 2 equipment as per the Texas Election Code. Ms. Pieper? 3 MS. PIEPER: Well, Section 123.032 and 4 123.033(e), that is attached for your information, it 5 states -- and I have it underlined for you as well -- that 6 the rental price for the entities that -- let me give you 7 the list of entities. This does -- the entities would be 8 the Kerrville ISD, Kerrville city, Ingram ISD, Ingram city, 9 Center Point ISD, Hunt ISD, Headwaters, the Republican 10 party, Democrat party, and Divide ISD, which I have not got 11 ahold of Divide yet. But this 123.032(d) states that we can 12 charge 10 percent of the purchase price for each day the 13 equipment is leased. So -- and then for just the primary, 14 it will be $5 for each unit of the electronic voting system. 15 So we need to -- basically, the -- we need to discuss what 16 percentage we're going to charge the entities. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me see if I can 18 understand this. When we're speaking of 10 percent of the 19 purchase price, does that mean that all of those entities, 20 as a group, pay 10 percent? Or that each one of them -- 21 MS. PIEPER: Each one individually. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, how much would 23 Divide ISD, that might have a handful of voters, pay for 24 the -- 25 MS. PIEPER: In trying to figure out what 11-28-05 14 1 they may rent, I'm thinking probably just one eSlate machine 2 and one D.R.E. machine; that would make them compliant, and 3 that would probably be $700 total. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For an election? Or 5 per -- 6 MS. PIEPER: No, 10 percent per day. It's 7 going to be $700 a day, so that's what -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I look at it -- I 9 mean, I think we should recoup a portion of it, but I don't 10 think we should make money out of this, and it appears to me 11 that we're getting to the point that we can make money out 12 of it if we charge the full 10 percent. 13 MS. PIEPER: Right. That's why we need to 14 discuss -- I've talked with other clerks to find out what 15 their court is doing. Some are doing as low as 2 percent. 16 Some are doing 5 percent. I mean, it's just -- there's a 17 different amount all over the state. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think you 19 have to have a cost that covers your cost of handling, and 20 hopefully build up some reserve for replacement or repair. 21 MS. PIEPER: Exactly. Because I don't 22 know -- the Secretary of the State, I'm trying to work with 23 them for the rental contracts, and I'm not sure if -- if one 24 of our machines was to break, if they're going to be liable 25 for that. 11-28-05 15 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The state? 2 MS. PIEPER: No, the entity renting the 3 machine. Or if that will fall back on Kerr County. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it should be -- I 5 mean, it would have to be Kerr County. We have to build it 6 into it. Unless they -- unless they break it intentionally, 7 you know, by negligence or something along that line. I 8 mean, just wear and tear, it happens to break on their 9 watch, they shouldn't have to buy it. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go back to Commissioner 11 Nicholson's example on Divide. If they're holding an 12 election for their district, they obviously are going to 13 have an election day for whatever number of residents 14 they've got. What about early voting? Would they be using 15 those machines during the early voting period? 16 MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I think -- you 18 know, and I haven't really thought through this at great 19 length, but a fair way to me would be to take the -- we know 20 the total number of registered voters in the county, and 21 then take a percentage of -- we can figure out how many are 22 in the Divide school district or all these different 23 entities; we can figure out the number of voters that are in 24 that entity and just take a fractional percentage and 25 multiply that fraction by 10 percent or 5 percent or some 11-28-05 16 1 number. That way, Divide is paying a much smaller 2 percentage of 10 percent, and whereas the county-wide 3 elections are paying a much, you know, larger -- City of 4 Kerrville will be paying a larger amount than Divide. And 5 that, to me, is fair, and kind of helps recoup the cost. 6 And I guess I'd like to have this back on the agenda and 7 kind of figure out, under that scenario, how much money we 8 would -- are talking about charging. I'd like to see a 9 dollar figure, 'cause I don't want us to get to the point -- 10 'cause I don't know right now as to whether it should be 10 11 percent, 5 percent, or 1 percent. I need to look at the 12 cost of the machines versus how much money we're -- 13 MS. PIEPER: Well, I have that attached also. 14 But in this Schedule A that -- that shows all the prices, I 15 don't know what -- I don't know enough about the system or 16 had the training on the system to know exactly what they 17 will be using. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, typically -- we 19 use Divide as an illustration because it's small, but 20 typically, what would K.I.S.D. utilize for a school board 21 election? 22 MS. PIEPER: They will have early voting. 23 They would probably have one D.R.E. machine and one eSlate 24 machine as well, and then during election day, they normally 25 have three polling locations. 11-28-05 17 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Now, another option might be 2 to utilize a ratio of taxable property values, as opposed to 3 registered voters. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Divide gets hurt 5 pretty bad on that. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, either 7 one will work. I'd rather do it with -- I think it's 8 probably fairer to use the registered voters. But I think 9 we need to look at -- you know, I guess what I'd like to see 10 is what the cost of one unit is or one -- or a D.R.E., and 11 what's the other one? 12 MS. PIEPER: eSlate. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: ESlate. What each cost, 14 and then a general estimation of how many that each of these 15 entities would use. 16 MS. PIEPER: During early voting, I'm 17 estimating they will have one eSlate and one D.R.E. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And one machine 19 is 60,000? 20 MS. PIEPER: One -- it shows one eSlate is 21 2,500. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 2,500. 23 MS. PIEPER: And one eScan is 4,500. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm sure we've been 25 all over this debate before, but this Help America Vote Act 11-28-05 18 1 has all the characteristics of an unfunded mandate. Somehow 2 we struggled along for 149 years in this county without 3 Washington's help. Now, all of a sudden, we -- we need a 4 complex electronic device to get through our elections. But 5 we've already talked about that. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, how long -- early 7 voting generally lasts -- 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Ten days. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- ten days for these 10 entities? 11 MS. PIEPER: Yes. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, those machines are 13 7,000 -- 700 a day times 10 would be the minimum. We're 14 talking about 7,000 for early voting, you know. And then on 15 the election day, it would be whatever the -- that amount 16 is. I just think you need to look at that; need to know the 17 ratios. 18 MS. PIEPER: Right. If we -- because if the 19 price is too high, they won't contract to rent from us; 20 they'll go directly from a vendor. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I mean, I think 22 -- and they're all -- everyone is -- you know, we're all 23 taxpayers in the same community. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I go back to 25 what you said. I don't think we need to make money. I 11-28-05 19 1 think we need to cover our costs. Do we currently charge 2 anybody for any voting apparatuses, or -- 3 MS. PIEPER: No, sir, we don't. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With no -- nothing? 5 MS. PIEPER: Nothing. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we're taking a 7 leap in a direction we've never been before. I think we 8 have to be justified -- be prepared to justify our costs, 9 our handling costs, and a small amount for repair and 10 replacement. And beyond that, I think we shouldn't go. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, could you have 13 a -- at our next meeting, put this back on the agenda and 14 bring both the ratios based on registered voters and 15 property values, and let us take a look at that and see how 16 it breaks down for each of the entities? 17 MS. PIEPER: Yes. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That would be good. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, I'd like to 20 see also the numbers run on 10 percent and 5 percent. See, 21 5 percent, in my mind, is going to be more palatable to the 22 whole thing. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, and I think I 24 would agree in that direction, maybe even less than 25 5 percent. 11-28-05 20 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. The -- and she 2 could get it back in here today, maybe. How big of a hurry 3 are we in now? 4 MS. PIEPER: We're not. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, okay. 6 MS. PIEPER: Not until May, when the school 7 board elections. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: The other consideration might 10 be, rather than having it on a per-diem cost, it could be a 11 per-election cost. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Per-election cost. 13 MS. PIEPER: Right. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Just a single cost. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And my last comment, 16 Jannett, on this, we ought to list Headwaters as Headwaters 17 Groundwater Conservation -- the full name or an acronym for 18 the full name. 19 MS. PIEPER: Normally, with them, I contract 20 to do their elections. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm just saying, from the 22 name standpoint, we don't want to say "Headwaters," 'cause 23 they're -- we ought to use their legal name, 'cause we're 24 using the ISD's and all that. 25 MS. PIEPER: Okay. 11-28-05 21 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And not that I -- I can't 2 think of, really, a time when we would do an election for 3 Upper Guadalupe River Authority, but it sure would be good 4 to include them in here in case they, for some reason, do 5 something, so we don't have to go back and scramble. 6 MS. PIEPER: Well, basically, the order that 7 y'all produce for the rental will be for any entity, other 8 than the primaries. The primaries, it's a flat $5 fee. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. All right. That's 10 good, thank you. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Let's 12 move on to Item 4, if we might. Consider, discuss, and 13 consider approval of electrical, plumbing, HVAC, and pest 14 control bids. Mr. Holekamp. 15 MR. HOLEKAMP: Good morning. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Morning, sir. 17 MR. HOLEKAMP: Y'all have any questions on 18 the bids or proposals? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about the HVAC's? 20 MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay. HVAC's, I would -- they 21 all have their positives. As y'all did last year, you -- we 22 accepted all three of them, or whatever it was last year, 23 and let me choose. Because one -- one particular vendor is 24 much better at one facility versus another, as far as 25 knowing the equipment and where it's located and what it 11-28-05 22 1 serves. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Same thing with pest 3 control? Or -- 4 MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, pest control is a little 5 more difficult. It -- there again, as we have a vendor 6 that's been here three years, I know their practice record, 7 but they are not the low bid. Low bid is Hill Country Pest 8 Control. There's a couple of things there that -- the 9 questions that, if we go with the low bid, I need to get 10 answered as far as they -- they have a little note in here 11 that any additional service per month or certain pests, 12 there would be an additional charge, but it doesn't say what 13 the additional charge is. So, Terminix's track record with 14 us is very good, and so is Starkey's. Hill Country Pest 15 Control, there's no reason why they won't perform at the 16 level that any other pest control in this town can do -- 17 could be, and I would probably select them based on it's the 18 best bid. But I would really like, before we -- I would 19 like to be able to sit down with those folks and find out 20 exactly what that additional charge would be. I think 21 that's real important. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do either of the 23 other two also have additional charges? 24 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, but they spell them out. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 11-28-05 23 1 MR. HOLEKAMP: They spelled them out in the 2 bidding. Like, Terminix is $30 for extra service for 3 unlisted pests, and Starkey has an attachment showing 4 warranty on services. He -- he really didn't indicate in 5 Starkey's an additional charge, but all of them have it, as 6 you have listed pests that -- that are covered. So, at this 7 time, I would probably recommend Hill Country Pest Control. 8 This, again, is -- I would -- if it doesn't work out as far 9 as the -- I get the answers that I need, and also the 10 background check on the person that's going to be doing the 11 exterminating, because over in the jail there are some 12 sensitive areas that they'll have to go, and I -- I have to 13 be real careful about who goes back there, and I think the 14 Sheriff would appreciate us being kind of careful on who we 15 turn loose with the sprayer back there. So, those are 16 little question things that I -- I feel like that we -- we 17 have a right to cancel a contract if it doesn't work out, 18 and/or vice-versa; if they don't like the terms that we... 19 On the plumbing, we only had one bid, and those folks have 20 done us an excellent job. I would see no change. Same 21 thing with electrical. D.W. Electric of Kerrville has done 22 an excellent job with providing service that we need. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I'll make a motion 24 that we accept D.W. Electric for our electrical -- 25 contractor? 11-28-05 24 1 MR. HOLEKAMP: Mm-hmm. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Electrical contractor, 3 Whelan Plumbing for our plumbing contractor, Hardin Heating 4 and Cooling, Compton's, and Trademark for HVAC to be used at 5 the discretion of the Maintenance Supervisor, -- 6 MR. HOLEKAMP: Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- and Hill Country Pest 8 Control first, Terminix second, and Starkey third for pest 9 control services, based on further communications from the 10 Maintenance Supervisor. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 13 approval of the bids as indicated in the motion. Any 14 question or discussion? 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just a comment, that 16 I -- particularly on the pest control service, I think we 17 ought to have a very good and specific reason if we decide 18 not to go with low bidder. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or 21 comment? All in favor of that motion, signify by raising 22 your right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) ( 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 11-28-05 25 1 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. The 2 next item on the agenda is Number 5; consider, discuss, and 3 take appropriate action to authorize the employee health 4 benefits insurance consultant to advertise and solicit bids 5 for stop loss insurance for the 2006 employee health 6 benefits program. I put this back on the agenda. There 7 were some members of the Court that had some questions, and 8 Mr. Looney is here with us today, and he would be the 9 gentleman that would be able to answer. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What were the 11 questions? 12 MR. LOONEY: Good morning, Judge, 13 Commissioners. I am impressed; thank you very much. This 14 is -- 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're actually 16 early. 17 MR. LOONEY: I'm very impressed. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What were the 19 questions? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One of the questions 21 was, is the local agent service included in this bid? 22 MR. LOONEY: Local agent services? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 24 MR. LOONEY: The stop loss insurance, when 25 you bid stop loss coverage, an agent is associated with that 11-28-05 26 1 contract, and that's part of the negotiation. Now, you have 2 to understand, there's two parts to the contract; we have an 3 administrative portion of it and we have the underlying 4 insurance portion of it. So, when we go out for bids right 5 now, we're -- all we're bidding for is that underlying 6 insurance portion of it, but associated with that is the 7 services provided by the agent to provide the services for 8 that portion of the contract. Does that make sense? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that local agent 10 one who is selected by the underwriter, or by Kerr County? 11 MR. LOONEY: By the County or by the 12 underwriter? Typically -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who selects the local 14 agent? 15 MR. LOONEY: The local agent, typically, when 16 a bid goes out and we submit a bid to the industry, we ask 17 the insurance company to name a single agent that will 18 represent that product for this particular area, and then 19 that agent then -- if that contract is awarded, that agent 20 is assigned to service that contract. We typically don't 21 get in a position where we have multiple agents assigned to 22 one bid. That puts the emphasis back on the Court to select 23 the agent, then, in relationship to that contract. If you 24 want that responsibility, then when we write the request for 25 proposal, we'll allow all agents to be assigned to that 11-28-05 27 1 particular product. They have to be licensed with the 2 company. They have to be accepted by the company, certified 3 by the company as to be eligible to participate with that 4 company. However, after an award is made, then it would be 5 your selection as to who the agent would be to service that 6 contract. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Looney, can you -- 8 okay, we're doing, I understand, the stop loss coverage, but 9 only that. Does that mean that our -- our agreement with 10 Wallace and Associates is part -- is already -- I mean, that 11 relationship is going to pass on regardless of who we have, 12 or is it -- or are they the -- 13 MR. LOONEY: They are the agents assigned to 14 the administration portion of the Mutual of Omaha, 15 administrative services portion of the contract. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which we're not bidding. 17 MR. LOONEY: Which we're not bidding. That's 18 a three-year contract. We -- we agreed to three years, and 19 we have specific rates in our contract for a three-year 20 period. The stop loss underlying insurance contract can 21 vary. Even though we do have a three-year renewal portion 22 at our option under the Mutual of Omaha contract, we have 23 that option, but that is not -- we were going to put it out 24 for bid to determine whether or not that underlying 25 insurance product was properly priced going forward for next 11-28-05 28 1 year. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How -- I guess I'm 3 confused. I guess I have a difficult time envisioning how 4 you change the stop loss carrier without changing the 5 underlying insurance, because it seems they have to work 6 together. 7 MR. LOONEY: They do work together, but it's 8 a reporting function. The claims administration, you have 9 claims administration that handles the claims on a daily 10 basis. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. We've done that 12 for three years. 13 MR. LOONEY: We got that on Mutual of Omaha 14 for three years. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 16 MR. LOONEY: They collect the data on the 17 claims, the volume of the claims, whatever they experience 18 the exposure is, and then that data is transferred to the 19 insurance company to determine whether or not there is 20 anything at risk or any losses incurred. Very same product, 21 very same situation that you had in the past with other 22 carriers, because you've changed stop loss carriers a number 23 of times in the past. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 25 MR. LOONEY: The impact is that there's no 11-28-05 29 1 impact on the employees, because they have the same 2 networks. They're dealing with the same administrative 3 people on the claims side of it, so there's not any impact 4 on the employee going forward, with the exception if you 5 make changes in the employee contributions. The same 6 physicians are available and so on. The only impact is on 7 the insurance for the specific, which is the individual 8 deductible or the aggregate -- which is the deductible and 9 its aggregate. So there's no, really, impact on the 10 employee. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The difficulties 12 that we've experienced over the past year generally are in 13 -- in the areas of enrollment and claims administration and 14 complying with ERISA, administrative kind of things. And so 15 I think what I'm hearing is that the local agent for the 16 stop loss insurance doesn't have any role in that. 17 MR. LOONEY: Not very much at all. Very 18 little role. They're agents assigned to the underlying 19 insurance coverage, and there's really not much more than 20 the awarding of the contract to them on being the low bid in 21 a situation. Very little service required of them. The 22 service generally is between the insuring company and the 23 administrator. That's where the service element on that 24 piece of it occurs. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, any difficulties 11-28-05 30 1 we're experiencing in those areas I mentioned, we need to 2 deal with Mutual of Omaha? 3 MR. LOONEY: Correct. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And in that area, going a 5 step further, I mean, there's been some personnel changes at 6 Mutual of Omaha, as I understand it, that we think will 7 help, maybe. Mr. Ochoa, I think was the gentleman's name, 8 is no longer with Mutual of Omaha. If they're -- if the 9 County still experiences problems between -- somewhere 10 between Wallace and Associates and Mutual of Omaha, -- 11 MR. LOONEY: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- what is our recourse? 13 MR. LOONEY: Your recourse there is to go to 14 the market and request for proposal, request for 15 qualifications for an agent to service your Mutual of Omaha 16 contract. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we can do that 18 without changing our three-year commitment with Mutual of 19 Omaha? 20 MR. LOONEY: Correct. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess that gets me 22 back to my original question. Why wouldn't we do that now? 23 MR. LOONEY: There's -- you can do it now if 24 you'd like. You can do it at any time you want. Now, the 25 difference is, you have -- there's certain processes that we 11-28-05 31 1 go through when we do a request for proposal. As I stated a 2 while ago, one of the things that we do is we ask the 3 insuring company, the stop loss insurance, to name a 4 specific agent. That's what -- in the past, that's what 5 we've done, so that there's only one agent associated with 6 one proposal. If you don't want to follow that track, you 7 can request for proposals and then have a separate request 8 for agent qualifications, and then you assign the agent to 9 that particular proposal format, or if you want to assign 10 that agent to the entire package of insurance, then you can 11 do that also. It's not required that you do that at an 12 annual anniversary date; you can do that at any time. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, at any time during 14 the year -- I mean, I understand Wallace and Associates has 15 made changes and so has Mutual of Omaha made some changes, 16 and if things are working better than they did a good part 17 of last year, you know, I would not be in favor of making 18 any change. If they are not, I'm going to want to make a 19 change, and I don't want to wait for another year. 20 MR. LOONEY: You can do that at any time. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We just have to do a 22 request for -- 23 MR. LOONEY: A request -- request for 24 qualifications is typically what we do, 'cause we do an 25 analysis of the individual based on the qualifications, as 11-28-05 32 1 opposed to a product itself. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 3 MR. LOONEY: There is the concept of -- you 4 know, the term is "award" a contract, when we award 5 contracts. So, in the past, we awarded the contract to 6 Mutual of Omaha and to the agent. The agent, Mr. Wallace, 7 brought Mutual of Omaha to the table. He's the one that 8 brought them to the table. We awarded him the contract as 9 an agent and the contract to Mutual of Omaha as an award. 10 Now, what you're talking about the possibility of doing is 11 taking that award away -- that product away from the 12 individual that brought it to the table and moving it to 13 someone else. To do that, the basis for that movement is 14 the definition of service. If you don't feel that you're 15 getting the qualified service from that other particular 16 agent, then the award can go to another servicing agent. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is the local agent 18 under contract to Kerr County or under contract to the 19 insurance company? 20 MR. LOONEY: The award -- the contract that 21 you award would be to a particular agent. The agent would 22 be paid by the insurance company based on a certain 23 certification or qualifications of that particular agent, 24 but the Court would make that award. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 11-28-05 33 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to 2 authorize the Kerr County employee health benefits insurance 3 consultant to advertise and solicit bids for stop loss 4 insurance for 2006 employee health benefits program. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 7 approval of the agenda item as indicated. Any question or 8 discussion? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just want to make a 10 comment. Our present -- god, I've lost his name again -- in 11 Seguin. 12 MR. LOONEY: Don Wallace. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Wallace has hired 14 a local agent, and we have sat down with him a second time 15 in this room with Mr. Wallace and the local guy, and the 16 local guy is not only on call to us, but he is scheduled in 17 this building once a week. So, to put some of the fears to 18 bed, I think we need to let that run for a little while and 19 see if that's going to work. And I feel confident that it 20 is, so it's going to be okay. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or 23 comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 24 your right hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11-28-05 34 1 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank 4 you for being here, Mr. Looney. 5 MR. LOONEY: Thank you, gentlemen. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: When -- when might we expect 7 the ability to take some action on your -- on your 8 solicitation? I realize we're running a little late. 9 MR. LOONEY: We're running late. This is 10 going to be a quick turnaround. We hope to have it totally 11 completed in three weeks. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, what we need to 13 probably be looking at, then, is the last -- last meeting of 14 the year, I suspect, or second meeting, fourth Monday in 15 December? 16 MR. LOONEY: Yes. 17 MS. MITCHELL: Tuesday, December 27th. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: December 27th? 19 MR. LOONEY: We do have a contract in place, 20 and it is renewable, so it's not -- it's not as if we would 21 be without coverage if we don't, you know -- 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 23 MR. LOONEY: -- have another bid that's less 24 than. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Appreciate you pointing 11-28-05 35 1 that out. 2 MR. LOONEY: Yes. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. The next item 4 on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and take appropriate 5 action to advertise for bid to lease two backhoe loaders. 6 MR. ODOM: What I passed out was some 7 supplemental information. There's a bid packet that I 8 didn't have for Monday. Monday came up quick for me, and I 9 wanted to verify specifications. The current ones I had 10 were 426, and this is a 420; nomenclature changed a little 11 bit, so I wanted to make sure I had it all right from the 12 last five years ago. Basically, what had happened -- well, 13 what I wish to do, and I asked the Court to allow us to go 14 out to bid for two backhoes. Originally, I thought about a 15 914 loader. We're having problems with having backup in the 16 yards, particularly Spur 100. There's an old W-11 backhoe 17 which is probably 25 years old, somewhere around 1980 model, 18 and it's obsolete and you can't get parts, so I'm down. So, 19 we originally thought about changing a five-year lease for a 20 914 and bringing in the 910, but the more I thought about 21 it, I -- which is a loader in -- Douglas' loader, and which 22 I would have -- and that is a 1990 or '91 loader. But we've 23 spent money on it in that interim, from the time I 24 originally proposed to do the exchange or thought about it 25 in the budget process, and we spent money on it, so we feel 11-28-05 36 1 like we can accomplish what I want to do with two backhoes, 2 and the lease money is there. They're four-wheel drives. 3 They're currently the same that I have in the yard with the 4 hammer. And then I can change out Douglas' old backhoe -- 5 it's 21 years old -- and still have my backup in the yard to 6 load asphalt base, different things like that in Spur 100. 7 But there are times that we're down. And I have the money; 8 it's there. It is also an option of which I can put a 9 swivel on it. It is a power tilt situation on the end of 10 the backhoe, and I would almost have a Gradall. I could do 11 the things that I can do with Gradall with a whole lot less 12 money. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you're wanting to 14 add -- 15 MR. ODOM: I'm wanting to lease two backhoes. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- two backhoes? And not 17 do -- 18 MR. ODOM: Not do the 914 at all. And I'd 19 still do it with the same money. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have any problem 21 with doing that and authorizing the agenda item, but we need 22 to come back at our next meeting for a budget amendment, 23 'cause this is changing Capital Outlay. And I don't see a 24 problem; I just think that we need to keep our budget clear 25 that we're deleting one item in Capital Outlay and adding 11-28-05 37 1 two new ones. 2 MR. ODOM: Well, this was a lease. It wasn't 3 under Capital Outlay items. This was a lease item. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not Capital Outlay? 5 Okay. 6 MR. ODOM: It was a lease item. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But you're trading in 8 one? 9 MR. ODOM: I'm trading one in, and which 10 is -- she gave you the supporting documents Monday. She 11 forgot to put in the trade-in on that backhoe, and that's 12 the reason I'm showing a difference. I wanted it to be 13 clear to the Court that I wanted to trade in and use that 14 money toward the payment -- knock down the note on those two 15 loaders. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Leonard, is it -- just 17 for fun here, -- 18 MR. ODOM: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- does the extension 20 of the dually -- is that about the same? Or do you -- 21 MR. ODOM: The extension -- the depth of 22 work -- I mean the depth of that bucket will stay the same. 23 What I'm talking about is a power tilt. That -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah. 25 MR. ODOM: -- gives you the ability to take 11-28-05 38 1 that bucket and turn it 90 degrees and sit there and pull 2 out where we're behind mailboxes things like that, that they 3 can't get in now. The only thing we can use right now is a 4 JCB, which is open -- you know, it's running an hour, and I 5 work on it two hours. And -- but I'm thinking that I can 6 have that ability to use it instead of having -- still allow 7 Gradalls to do the work that I want them to do. But it 8 would give us -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Things have changed, 10 Gordon. 911's, 924's, Gradalls, et cetera, et cetera. I 11 doubt if there's anybody at this table that knows how to 12 start one of those things, much less know what you're 13 talking about when we get from the 911's and the 914's. 14 MR. ODOM: There's a nomenclature for a 15 loader, and that's what I'm saying. It just changes the 16 sizes. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll take your word 18 for it. I want to go riding on it, though. 19 MR. ODOM: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: After I get through 21 with our ambulance. 22 MR. ODOM: But I would ask the Court to give 23 us permission to go out for this five-year lease, and then I 24 will run this past Rex and all, but it's the standard that 25 we've been using for the last several years for backhoes and 11-28-05 39 1 12-H's, the motor graders. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Essentially, what you're 3 saying is that rather than acquire one loader, you can 4 acquire these two backhoes for the same money by -- 5 MR. ODOM: That's right, sir. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: -- trading in a piece of 7 equipment that's pretty well obsolete when it comes to 8 repair? 9 MR. ODOM: Comes to repair. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: And still have the same 11 capability, plus some more? 12 MR. ODOM: Plus some more. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: And more versatile type 14 capability? 15 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval to 17 authorize Road and Bridge to advertise for the bid to lease 18 two backhoes instead of one loader, as was specified in the 19 budget discussions. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? 23 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 24 hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11-28-05 40 1 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's 4 move to Item 7, if we might; consider, discuss, and take 5 appropriate action for the final revision of plat for Lots 6 21 and 22 of The Horizon, Section One, as described in 7 Volume 6, Page 323, Plat Records, located in Precinct 1. 8 MR. ODOM: I would ask the Court to grant 9 final platting for this revision. It is taking two lots and 10 bringing them into one and creating 15.65 acres, and I think 11 that is -- is a good move. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 16 approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? 17 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 18 hand. 19 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 20 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's 23 move to Item 8, if we night. Consider, discuss, and take 24 appropriate action to set a public hearing for revision of 25 plat for Tract 152-A of Spicer Ranch Number Three, as set 11-28-05 41 1 forth in Volume 3, Page 85, Plat Records, and located in 2 Precinct 1. 3 MR. ODOM: Before you, you have the proposed 4 revision of the plat. This piece of property falls under 5 the Kerr County Subdivision Rule 1.03.B as exempt from 6 platting as a family division of property. However, the 7 owner prefers to plat. What has happened is that two 8 brothers -- and you can see two structures on this property, 9 and what you have is the Scottows -- Bill and Edith Scottow 10 wish to subdivide this, even though it falls under that 11 exemption, because they have a brother, and in case 12 something should happen to the brother, they felt like this 13 would clear some -- you would have a situation with an 14 outside party, so they wanted to plat this. We see no 15 problems of platting this. It has a water supply by Aqua 16 Texas system, and under the new rules proposed, the 5.01.D, 17 5B, that it would be 3 acres, so two lots would be 18 acceptable, and we would ask the Court for permission to set 19 a public hearing for January the 9th, 2006, at 10:15 a.m. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Leonard, just for my 21 own edification, on the plat here we have Tract 152-A -- 22 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- and B on the 24 original plat, and now we've gone to R and S. Now, why is 25 that? Why not a C and a D? Is there -- 11-28-05 42 1 MR. ODOM: Well -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- some magical 3 reason? 4 MR. ODOM: 152-B, which is not part of -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right. 6 MR. ODOM: -- not part of this piece of 7 property. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right, I understand 9 that. 10 MR. ODOM: And I don't know. You have -- you 11 would signify them one way or another in the -- I guess they 12 chose that number. I -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I don't have any 14 problem with it. I just wondered if there was some magical 15 something going on here. 16 MR. ODOM: No. You had an A and a B, and 17 that B is totally a separate entity. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right. 19 MR. ODOM: And so, you know, that's probably 20 appropriate. I don't know of any reason technically why 21 that would not be acceptable. Jonathan may know something I 22 don't, but -- 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Letz, do 24 you see any problem with the family issue? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. I think anyone has 11-28-05 43 1 an option to plat whenever they want. They just don't -- in 2 this case, they're not required to. I see no problems with 3 it. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we set a 5 public hearing for this item for January 9th, 2006, at 6 10:15 a.m. in this courtroom. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion -- excuse me. Did you 9 second that, Commissioner Williams? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 12 set a public hearing for revision of plat for Tract 152-A of 13 Spicer Ranch Number Three, as set forth in Volume 3, Page 14 85, and located in Precinct 1, for January the 9th, 2006, at 15 10:15 a.m. before this Court. Any question or discussion? 16 All in favor of that motion, signify by raising your right 17 hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. The 22 next item is consider, discuss, and take appropriate action 23 to set a public hearing for revision of plat for Lots 5 24 through 9 in Block 8 of Greenwood Forest, as set forth in 25 Volume 5, Page 92, Plat Records, and located in Precinct 4. 11-28-05 44 1 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. This is a revision of 2 plat. By doing this, we're taking five lots and making them 3 into four. We're increasing the size of them from 4 approximately a half acre to about eight-tenths of an acre. 5 A little bit more frontage, from 100 to 125, and I would ask 6 the Court to set a public hearing for this alternate plat 7 process for January the 9th, 2006, at 10:20 a.m. 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One question. Is 9 January the 9th the soonest we can hold a public hearing on 10 this? 11 MR. ODOM: Has to be 30 days. And I think 12 Truby probably worked this with Kathy, so -- 13 MS. MITCHELL: No, she hadn't, but let me 14 look real quick here. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would be. It's going 17 to be -- 18 MS. MITCHELL: Mm-hmm. 19 MR. ODOM: It should be, yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is the 21 direction we'd like to go, turning five lots into four, so I 22 don't see that there can be any problems with it, so I'm 23 going to make a motion that we set a public hearing for 24 revision of plat for Lots 5 through 9, Block 8 of Greenwood 25 Forest, Volume 5, Page 92, Precinct 4, and that hearing be 11-28-05 45 1 held on January the 9th at 10: -- 2 MS. MITCHELL: 20. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- 10:20 a.m. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 6 set a public hearing as indicated in the motion. Any 7 question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify 8 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. Let's 13 move to Item 10; consider, discuss, and take appropriate 14 action on Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations. 15 Commissioner Letz? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I'm not quite as 17 far along as I had hoped to be, mainly because of Augustus 18 being born. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's no excuse. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No excuse. I thought 21 I -- I received comments from Miguel, and also received 22 comments from Leonard. I don't -- a lot of those are 23 more -- are basically minor-type changes. They're nothing 24 real significant; just a couple of them with Leonard are -- 25 have a little more substance to them, but still, they're not 11-28-05 46 1 great changes. And I have not had time to get with Rex, so 2 I would really just like to pass on this one today. And I 3 would say, you know, if anyone has any written comments, I'd 4 like to get them, and I can try to incorporate those, or if 5 anyone has any comments of things that they think I'm 6 getting way off the deep end on these new rules, let me 7 know, and at our next meeting we'll have a revised draft. 8 There are two members I see in the public 9 that I suspect may be here for this item. I'll make a 10 comment on the process. What we're doing at the moment is, 11 we're -- I've pretty much taken it upon myself to rewrite 12 the subdivision rules. At our next meeting, hopefully they 13 will come back before the Court and be approved by the 14 Court. Then they will go out to the public for a 30-day 15 period, at which point that will culminate with a public 16 hearing on them, and then any comments from the public 17 during that period or at the public hearing will be taken 18 under consideration by the Court. And then after that 19 public hearing, bring them back before the Court for final 20 approval, so there's going to be ample amount of time to -- 21 for, you know, the public to get -- to look at them and give 22 us input. We're just -- we're trying to -- and, certainly, 23 anyone is welcome to get a copy of the draft we're working 24 off of right now. But rather than get a bunch of drafts out 25 there before the Court, at least if we can get the five of 11-28-05 47 1 us and Rex and Leonard in agreement, it's probably easier to 2 let us hash it out for a while and then get comment from 3 everyone else in the community. So, that's the process. 4 But at our next meeting, we will -- probably we will make a 5 number of copies available at a nominal charge, if any 6 charge at all. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner, this is 8 not the working draft, is it? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are you looking at? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I mean -- 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, that's the 12 working -- which one? Is it -- does it say 11-13-05 on top? 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, it does. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the working draft. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, is there any 16 way we can figure out how to either interline or red-line 17 these so we know what the changes are? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The Judge asked that last 19 time. The problem is that there are so many changes. I 20 mean, I'd say over 50 percent of the paragraphs have been 21 modified, and the changes may be very small. But I could go 22 back and highlight the paragraphs, I guess. But I don't 23 know if any one of y'all have used the correction mode on 24 Word. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Takes forever. 11-28-05 48 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It gets so confusing, you 2 end up with so many notes and so many lines, and, you know, 3 one's in blue ink and one's in red ink, that to me, I can't 4 follow it any more. And at this point, I've changed it so 5 many times that I don't think Word can catch up to what I've 6 done. I really -- I mean, I can -- I'll be glad to 7 highlight where the major changes are, but there -- it's 8 literally -- I mean, I think Leonard -- he's, I know, read 9 it word by word, based on his comments, and there's changes 10 throughout. I mean -- 11 MR. ODOM: There's changes. It's better -- 12 and it is better. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. So it's -- 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it something that 15 we need to consider having a workshop, and sit down and go 16 over -- all of us go over line by line? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we do that at 18 our next meeting? That's a good idea. If I can get the 19 comments in, I think Commissioner Nicholson has a lot of red 20 stickies on his copy. I can incorporate those that I can 21 in, and then I can go through and -- 'cause, like I say, I 22 really need to get with Rex as well before that, and then at 23 the workshop at our next meeting, maybe that afternoon we 24 can do it. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that would be 11-28-05 49 1 helpful, because, frankly, I'm lost. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I really don't have 3 very many comments, Jonathan, and they're -- maybe one or 4 two of them are. Would it be okay if I just gave you this? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would be great. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't -- most of 7 them are questions. They're not really suggestions. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The questions, though, I 9 really -- I like getting those, because it means that 10 something's not clear to you, usually. That's what a lot of 11 Leonard's comments were. You know, "Is this what you're 12 trying to say?" And that's probably as helpful as anything 13 else. But I think we can certainly go through a workshop 14 and go through it page by page and get -- you know, kind of 15 highlight where the changes are. Incidentally, I -- 16 Commissioner Baldwin and I are meeting with the City on the 17 ETJ issue again, and we're also trying to look at -- they're 18 looking at our rules and their rules to see if we can get a 19 little bit closer in some areas as well, so that might be an 20 adjustment. So, that's kind of where we are. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other member of the Court 22 have anything further to offer on Item 10? We'll move 23 forward. Item 11, consider, discuss, and take appropriate 24 action on Kerr County Water Availability Requirements. 25 Commissioner Letz again. 11-28-05 50 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This one, if I can find 2 my stack of stuff -- 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This one's different. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This one's different. We 5 have -- we have made some changes. I'd like to hand out a 6 new draft of this one, and I will explain what the change 7 is. 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is since -- the 9 change is since the last one we -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- we saw? Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's a couple other 13 copies. Give one to Rex, too. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here's an extra one. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oops, I need one copy 16 back, Rusty. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here you go. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I need a copy. The -- 19 we'll get you copy. I had quite a bit of contact with some 20 members of Headwaters Board. Their board has not taken a 21 definite position, to my knowledge, but I am listening -- 22 I've listened to several of the members that have -- have 23 provided me comments, primarily by e-mail, and they're -- 24 you know, and I guess a lot of that goes down to whether or 25 not we should implement a portion of -- I call it Chapter -- 11-28-05 51 1 TAC 230, and I think everyone received a copy of TAC 230 2 last week, which is about a 20-some-page document, I 3 guess -- 15-page. And after talking primarily with Jim 4 Hayes about this at some length, I came up with a kind of a 5 solution and changed the wording quite a bit based on a lot 6 of his comments, and hopefully I made it a little bit 7 clearer. 8 Under water availability requirements, 9 there's now two options for the developer. One option is to 10 go with minimum county-wide acreage and lot size 11 requirements, which are the same as we had previously. 12 Option two, I've just termed it individual subdivision water 13 availability. Under this, the developer, at his option, may 14 choose or can choose to prove water availability under 15 Chapter 230. If they do that, you know, the way I read the 16 rules, a couple of things happen. One is a comment that I 17 think Headwaters is going to need to take formal action on, 18 if it's included, that they may grant higher pumping limits 19 in this situation because there's a water availability 20 study. I'm not sure if they can do that. That was a 21 suggestion from Mr. Hayes. 22 The other option is that the -- or other item 23 is that, to me, if we're asking developers to go out and 24 drill wells and get a geologist or engineer to prove water 25 availability, that is the water availability, then, and our 11-28-05 52 1 county-wide minimums no longer hold. So, the acreage -- the 2 lot size limits are going to be based on that water 3 availability study. You know, I don't -- in my mind, I 4 can't understand how you can require a developer to go out 5 and do a -- a full water availability analysis on a piece of 6 property and then say, "We're glad you did that, but now 7 you're going to use the county-wide rules." You've got to 8 -- whatever that study proves is what that subdivision 9 should be -- lot size should be based on. And I tossed the 10 ball back to Headwaters and said they've got to figure all 11 that out, because I don't think we're equipped with the 12 knowledge to look at a water availability analysis such as 13 Chapter 230 and know what it really says. Personally, I 14 can't imagine a developer wanting to do that, because 15 they're going in, they're spending a lot of money with no 16 knowledge as to what they're going to get at the out -- at 17 the back side of it. But if they want to do it, I have no 18 problem with letting them do it, and if that helps 19 Headwaters, that's great. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tell me why, again -- 21 I think you just explained it, but I can't get my brain 22 wrapped around it -- why you would want to give anybody the 23 option to adopt 230. I mean, I -- I can't find anything in 24 here I like, anywhere. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can't either, but some 11-28-05 53 1 people -- I mean, and I would say some of Headwaters Board 2 like it. Evidently, not that we want to be like other 3 counties, but Kendall County, Gillespie County, and Bandera 4 County have adopted a form of 230, parts of it. What I 5 don't understand in those counties is that they also have 6 minimum acreage requirements, and I'm not real sure how you 7 do the two things. I mean, if you require a water 8 availability study, that should be the determining factor. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't see how you can 11 ask them to do a water availability analysis and then say 12 King's X, we're going to use our county-wide -- what we want 13 to do anyway. So it's kind of, you know, an option that 14 some on Headwaters thought was a good idea. I'm not sure 15 all of them do. And -- 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, Jon, I -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- it is -- 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- I see this 230 19 thing as a way to control growth. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, 'cause nobody 22 can do this. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I look at -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't understand 25 how -- 11-28-05 54 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I look at 230 as two 2 things. One, I don't know how an engineer or geologist 3 would be comfortable ever signing off on that. That's one 4 -- you know, assuming -- but that assumes that all 5 consulting engineers and geologists are ethical and good 6 people, and when you wave -- when you put dollars in front 7 of them, I can see consulting engineers and geologists 8 potentially signing off on something. And I think that 9 that's what I see as a big problem with it, is that the -- 10 it gives the consulting engineers and geologists the ability 11 to say what water availability is. And, yes, they're 12 signing off for a 30-year term, but in reality, what's that 13 mean? 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What does that mean? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. It means that if 16 there's no water in five years or 10 years or 30 years, 17 water runs out, it means that someone can file a complaint 18 with their governing state licensing board and try to get 19 their license revoked. It doesn't help the people at all; 20 maybe some civil damages they can go after or something 21 against the geologist, but I don't -- you know, I mean, I 22 just -- I don't have a lot of confidence that the State's 23 going to ever jerk a geologist or engineer's license because 24 they missed on a water availability study that no one -- I 25 mean, it's so vague. I mean, how would you know what's -- 11-28-05 55 1 how much water is actually there? And it's -- and Chapter 2 230 has covered it by saying in their opinion. Well, as 3 soon as you put the word "opinion" in there, you know, it 4 opens it up. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Couple points. One, 6 in my way of thinking, that the minimum acreage rules that 7 we have had in the past and currently have do serve to 8 protect water availability issues, but they're also, in 9 addition to that, a way of managing growth, as Commissioner 10 Baldwin said. Controlling growth. And I think that's 11 desirable. If -- I'm thinking if you go to 230, that 12 introduces a whole lot of subjectivity into it. The minimum 13 acreage rules are pretty straightforward, pretty cleancut. 14 We occasionally get a complaint about -- about them, but 15 they're easier to administer, I think, and fairer, and have 16 less subjectivity than allowing case-by-case determinations 17 of water availability. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, in -- I don't 19 want to say in -- "in defense" is probably not the right 20 term, but in support of Headwaters' position, and their 21 rationale is -- and I don't want to speak for them, 'cause I 22 know there's several of the members here today, one general 23 member and one board member. I think they're very accurate 24 in saying that drilling test wells and observation wells is 25 the best way to determine water availability in a specific 11-28-05 56 1 location. I mean, I think there is a value to that, and I 2 think they would like to get the science from that. I mean, 3 it'll help in a county-wide mapping project that they are 4 working on at Headwaters. So, I mean, there -- and there 5 are areas of the county where our county-wide rules may be 6 too stringent or may be too lax, and I think if you do 7 drill -- or go drill some test wells on an individual 8 subdivision, you have a better understanding of that 9 specific area. And that's why -- you know, so I don't have 10 a problem with leaving it in here at all. I don't think a 11 developer is going to probably do it, but if they do, they 12 can. 13 And where I can see that it would be a help 14 to a developer, or where a developer may do it, there are 15 some recent very large wells been drilled in the Trinity up 16 in the Ingram area generally. A developer may be able to -- 17 or think they can go into that area and do a much higher 18 density development than our county rules allow, because 19 there may be -- there's argument, anyway -- there's enough 20 water in that area, based on some recent wells, to justify a 21 higher density. And, you know, the developer may want to do 22 that. The question comes back, in my mind, is that I don't 23 want the Court -- or I don't want myself, anyway, as a 24 Commissioner, to be the one to have to look at these studies 25 and see what the minimums should be. So, I -- 11-28-05 57 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- I'm tossing it back to 3 Headwaters, on them to decide that. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me give you an 5 example. You know, like, the number of proposed houses, the 6 average number of people per house, the amount of water used 7 per household, and we kind of know all that stuff. Kind of. 8 But can you imagine you and I sitting down and deciding the 9 characteristics of the aquifers, plural, and their hydraulic 10 relationships? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are they dated? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are they -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On a day-to-day 14 basis. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, I mean, 16 who -- who's going to decide the hydraulic relationships 17 between two aquifers? I know there's people that do that. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But do they live in 20 Texas? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think the -- I 22 mean, the answer is they do, but that's why I also said 23 that -- that reviewing that data and making the intelligent 24 decisions isn't going to come from the Court. From this 25 Commissioner, anyway. 11-28-05 58 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: From here either. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So I think it needs to -- 3 if we're going to have something like that, it's got to go 4 to the groundwater conservation district. That's what our 5 neighboring counties have done; they've given it back to the 6 groundwater conservation district to, you know, review it. 7 And that's what I attempted to do here, is saying that if 8 they're doing a water availability analysis, that they're 9 going to have to work with Headwaters and come to basically 10 an agreement as to what that analysis shows, and then if 11 it's a higher density or a lesser density, that will be what 12 it is. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's the 14 underlying issue. You and I have both had a lot of 15 discussions with the same board member from Headwaters, and 16 probably may know, chapter and verse, what his concerns are, 17 and one of those concerns has to do with a much greater 18 availability of water in the western part of the county than 19 perhaps in the eastern part of the county. And some of the 20 development that we've been talking about or anticipating is 21 taking place in the eastern part of the county, and that 22 creates a concern. What I'm wondering, of course, is -- is 23 whether or not Headwaters is willing to accept those extra 24 responsibilities that would be -- that are sort of embodied 25 in this three-page memorandum that we both got. And -- and 11-28-05 59 1 what are those standards that are being referred to? 2 How could we, for example, enter into a 3 memorandum of understanding with Headwaters for a period of 4 ten years, having reviewed it after the first two years, 5 with any -- any reasonable knowledge that whatever that MOU 6 is going to say will hold forward for the remaining eight 7 years? Because you don't know what the -- whether or not 8 we're ever going to have another drought of record or how 9 things are going to change. But the one thing in this 10 memorandum that I think deserves some consideration -- I'm 11 not saying -- I think it all deserves consideration, but the 12 one point that keeps being made over and over again has to 13 do with full disclosure. That seems to be a high-priority 14 item in the mind of some folks about our setting the rules, 15 so that the buyer of property has the opportunity for full 16 disclosure as to whether or not water is available under the 17 piece of property that buyer is contemplating purchasing. 18 I'm not sure how we deal with that. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, Commissioner, on 20 that point -- well, first of all, a lot of that memorandum 21 -- I read it. I thought about it for a couple of days, and 22 I incorporated it and reworded -- I mean, a lot of that 23 memorandum just doesn't work. I mean, I'm not doing a 24 memorandum of understanding for ten years, or even one year, 25 for that matter. 11-28-05 60 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The whole -- the 2 memorandum is based on 230. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, anyway, I wasn't too 4 hung up on that. I tried to -- you know, I thought about it 5 and made some adjustments based on the overall reading. I 6 did add -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In your new draft? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In the new draft, on the 9 last page, the new section titled "Plat Certifications." 10 And this goes back to that disclosure statement that you 11 mentioned. "All subdivision final plats shall contain the 12 following certification: 'Kerr County Commissioners Court 13 does not certify that complying with Kerr County Water 14 Availability Requirements insures the developer or 15 prospective lot owner that adequate groundwater is available 16 under any subdivision or lot.'" That will go on every plat 17 from now on. And B is, "All subdivision final plats with 18 lots that are served by community water systems shall 19 contain the following certification: 'Individual water 20 wells shall not be permitted on any lot in this 21 subdivision.'" That gets from the point that if someone is 22 -- and it gets to a -- and these are both points that 23 Headwaters brought up. 24 On this one, they could have a water system 25 in a subdivision, and then there's nothing that says they 11-28-05 61 1 can't go drill their own individual water well, and you get 2 into a double-dipping situation on pumping limits and 3 allowables and all that, and also on lot size. I mean, 4 we're -- we're doing our lot size driven on water 5 availability, so I think those -- those certifications 6 support that. In the water availability requirements, 7 there's other language several times about no warranty, and 8 also of -- you know, we're not saying there's water 9 anywhere. And there's another provision in here that 10 clearly states out the fact that -- well, that Headwaters 11 has pumping limitations, and under -- in some aquifers, and 12 the fact that they are drilling a well doesn't mean they're 13 going to be able to pump unlimited water. I mean, 14 basically, I'm putting them on notice of saying there are 15 pumping limits based on Headwaters' rules that we have 16 nothing to do with, and that may limit the amount of water 17 in a subdivision, even if you go with the county minimums. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Even though in one 19 location of the county, the volume of the well may be much 20 greater than it would be in another location? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And -- yeah, and 22 I'm not changing anything. I'm just putting people on 23 notice -- developers, 'cause I think more people will 24 probably read this from a developing standpoint -- of 25 Headwaters' rules. We're just saying be aware that 11-28-05 62 1 Headwaters does have pumping limits on certain aquifers, and 2 I left it as broad as possible in case they add new aquifers 3 or change pumping limits, 'cause that -- I think the pumping 4 limits are under Headwaters' control, and that may affect 5 what you do on your lot. So, anyway, this is the same 6 situation as the other Subdivision Rules. Everyone can read 7 it. If we leave this as it is currently, I think we do need 8 an order or a -- I guess a court order or whatever you call 9 it from Headwaters agreeing to this, because they are 10 mentioned, you know, under -- that if a developer chooses to 11 use 230 under water availability. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we'll bring it back. 14 Well, they have a copy; they can kind of mill it around, 15 look at it a little bit. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: As the Commissioner indicated, 17 we've got some representatives from Headwaters. Do you 18 gentlemen wish to weigh in at this time? 19 MR. MORGAN: I think I do. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Come ahead. 21 MR. MORGAN: Gordon Morgan, representing not 22 the board, but only as a member of the board. We've had 23 this come before the board in an original draft. We have -- 24 as a board, have not looked at this draft. Under B, the 25 Individual Subdivision Water Availability, 1, 2, and 3, 11-28-05 63 1 there are about three things that I'm concerned about as an 2 individual board member. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're speaking from 4 the new draft, Mr. Morgan? 5 MR. MORGAN: Yeah -- yes, sir, on the new 6 draft. Number one, it says, "Shall not be subject to 7 acreage requirements set forth in Section 1.03." I think 8 there has been a lot of effort put in over the years past to 9 establish the acreage requirements, and I think that has 10 been agreed upon by previous boards. I think it had been 11 agreed upon by previous Commissioners Courts. I would 12 question throwing that away, which that section indicates it 13 could be. The second one, it talks about Groundwater 14 Availability Certification for Platting. I'm not really 15 sure what you're asking Headwaters to do to certify and how 16 they're going to certify it. I think the track record on 17 that has not been real great in the past. I wouldn't want 18 to hang a whole lot on that. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two, if I can just make a 20 comment on that, that is the terminology used in Chapter 21 230, and it is -- basically, the intent here is for 22 Headwaters to approve the water availability study presented 23 under 230. 24 MR. MORGAN: Under 230, okay. And the third, 25 it says, "Headwaters may grant greater pumping limits." I 11-28-05 64 1 think that opens the door. That would be very, legally, 2 hard to defend. In your comments, Mr. Letz, speaking about 3 if they can prove the water's there, who's going to have the 4 legal ability to restrict them from using it? That's 5 certainly debatable. No one at this point in time even 6 knows who owns the water, so I think that is a -- a 7 statement or a result of that one section that I think would 8 be detrimental. As a suggestion, if you all want to proceed 9 further on it, you might consider taking individual 10 subdivision water availability, that B section, and make 11 that subject to approval by Headwaters Board. The 12 Headwaters Board has not seen this, so, you know, if you 13 want to take action or do anything in a positive manner on 14 the rest of it, but leave that one section subject to the 15 approval -- which is kind of what you said at the end, 16 approval of Headwaters Board. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, we're certainly 18 not going to take any action today on this. I would -- my 19 view is that if we leave B in, Individual Subdivision Water 20 Availability, Number 1 and Number 2 have to be in, from my 21 standpoint. Three can be deleted, because we're getting 22 into something -- really, I'd probably rather delete it, 23 because it's not our business what pumping limits are. 24 That's your business. So, I would probably agree that 3 25 under B should be deleted, probably in its entirety. 11-28-05 65 1 MR. MORGAN: But in extensive discussions and 2 in-depth discussions, I'm not sure what the board will 3 ultimately decide to do. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 5 MR. MORGAN: Since it's never been presented 6 to the board. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. So that's just -- 8 you know, this is a different option. But I think that the 9 -- you know, I think it's -- I think we need to be very 10 careful in this county. And I'm, you know, really speaking 11 to both Headwaters and Commissioners Court. All I speak for 12 is Commissioners Court, is that our rules follow the law, 13 because I think that we have found out in recent months that 14 as development goes on in this county at the pace it's gone 15 on, if we're not following the law, we're going to get 16 challenged on it. And we've had some threats in that regard 17 in recent months, and that's why I think that it -- if we do 18 Chapter 230, you have to get rid of the minimum lot sizes. 19 You have to let it go, and I don't see how you can. To me, 20 they're not consistent. You have to either have one or the 21 other, and if you go under 230, I just think that you have 22 to let that acreage -- that water availability study 23 determine the lot size, and I think it is a dangerous road 24 to go on, because I think you're going to get developers 25 that will potentially -- 11-28-05 66 1 MR. MORGAN: And in a positive manner, I do 2 want to thank you for all your work. I think this is an 3 improvement. It does help with some questions and problems 4 that Headwaters had. We want to thank you for it. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My intent is real clear 6 on this. My intent was to get the ball back in Headwaters' 7 court and let them really understand what they're asking us 8 to do. 9 MR. MORGAN: We appreciate that. Thank you. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, this 11 Part B, you're presenting this as an option; you're not 12 necessarily endorsing it? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. I wanted -- I 14 wrote this to get this before Headwaters, 'cause several of 15 their board members -- and they haven't voted, to my 16 knowledge, but it's more than one -- like Chapter 230. So, 17 as I read 230, this is what 230 means, and -- from the 18 County's perspective. And I wanted to know what 19 Headwaters -- and if Headwaters likes that, I really don't 20 have a problem with it. But I just can't imagine that they 21 would want it, but anyway -- 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think I'm going to 23 have a real problem with losing the acreage requirement 24 rules. I think that's served us well. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 11-28-05 67 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But I'm open-minded. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I do think -- I'll -- 3 my final comment or note on this is that I think the plat 4 certifications were not on here before; I think those are 5 good. And I think the wording has changed quite a bit, even 6 though it is -- hopefully doesn't say anything different, 7 but I think it's a lot clearer. And I made those changes 8 based on the comments that I received from certain members 9 of Headwaters Board, so I appreciate their comments. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: You're going to bring this 11 back? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This will be back on our 13 next meeting, and we'll hopefully have this -- we'll have 14 the same track through approval as the Subdivision Rules. 15 And, Judge, before we leave this item, I want to go back to 16 the other one real briefly, if I may. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do we have anything 18 further on the water availability? Commissioner Letz wants 19 to go back and revisit Item 10 briefly; consider and discuss 20 and take appropriate action on Kerr County Subdivision Rules 21 and Regulations. Let's do that quickly. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I can find my draft of 23 it -- thank you. In this draft, when I started working on 24 it, we didn't have a -- Len doesn't have a title as it 25 relates to subdivision rules, and I created one for him. 11-28-05 68 1 But there's no more pay. And I can't remember what I called 2 it. It's a County Subdivision Administrator or something 3 like that. 4 MR. ODOM: Administrator designee. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: County Subdivision 6 Administrator is a term that I think, if we go through with 7 this draft, it makes so sense until we formally take court 8 action to appoint Len as that person. But I thought it -- 9 it didn't, you know, make sense to name in here Kerr County 10 Road and Bridge Administrator into that slot. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's a function 12 he's already performing? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's already performing 14 it. He's already doing it; it's just to make it simpler to 15 the public. And that way, if we change it from the Kerr 16 County Road and Bridge Administrator, we can just give that 17 designation to another person. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where is it noted in 19 here? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's throughout, but it's 21 on Page 11. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, Len would have 23 two titles. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Under 3.02 -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Three. Floodplain 11-28-05 69 1 Administrator. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Floodplain Administrator, 3 too. 4 MR. ODOM: Floodplain. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's the first sentence 6 there, the County Subdivision Administrator. So, anyway, I 7 just wanted to point that out. The other thing that I 8 wanted to briefly point out, a while back, I asked Rex to 9 research something for me, and it was based on something 10 that was done in Kendall County that I thought was a pretty 11 good idea, and I will pursue it if the Court thinks it's a 12 good idea. It's a -- for any time a tract of land is 13 divided, whether it's in a subdivision or outside a 14 subdivision, an affidavit has to be filed of record that 15 advises the -- and file it in the Deed Records, that advises 16 that this division took place. And it's a -- with it comes 17 a plat of the piece of property. This is just one that was 18 done in Kendall County. There is a location plat, and then 19 this is just an area plat. And the purpose of it is to -- a 20 couple things. One, when they go to get an O.S.S.F. permit, 21 they've got to have this, and this gets it out of the way 22 early on. 23 The other thing it does, it is a way for us 24 to look at county road entrances and access to it and let us 25 have some input as to where those roads get located. Road 11-28-05 70 1 and Bridge has some say in that. It also is a tipoff that, 2 hey, this is an illegal subdivision. We'd be tipped off at 3 that point. It's an interesting idea. Rex has looked at 4 it. We do have the authority to do this, in his opinion. 5 And if y'all would like to look at it, I can get with Kathy 6 and we can come up with a version for Kerr County so y'all 7 can look at it a little bit more. If you think it's a 8 stupid idea, I'll just throw it away. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I don't think 10 it's a stupid idea. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What would a 12 subdivider be required to do if they follow that, as opposed 13 to what we're doing now? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is in addition. 15 This is more -- this would go more to the property owner. I 16 mean, the subdivision plat would be all it is. Really, this 17 -- this catches divisions outside of subdivisions, so if you 18 were just to -- 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Would it increase 20 costs to the seller or the buyer? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. They're going to 22 have to get -- I mean, all of the data is already available, 23 and if they are going to apply for a well permit or a septic 24 permit or any other, they're going to have to do the same 25 thing, so it's kind of getting all that done at that point. 11-28-05 71 1 But if they're just buying a piece of raw land, there is a 2 little bit of costs that they wouldn't -- you know, that 3 they're going to have to have. But, you know, the cost of a 4 survey is, you know, not really -- the survey's going to 5 already be done. It's just really having a surveyor prepare 6 a plat. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Normally done anyway. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it's normally done 9 anyway. I really don't think -- it's a minimal extra cost, 10 in my opinion. I heard one "continue looking at it." 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I think we ought to leave it 12 as an option. We may not end up with it, but certainly 13 leave it as an option. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will get with Kathy and 15 we'll get something on our next agenda specific to Kerr 16 County. Okay, that's it. Thank you. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Why don't we take about 18 a 15-minute recess. 19 (Recess taken from 10:24 a.m. to 10:41 a.m.) 20 - - - - - - - - - - 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to 22 order, if we might, from our mid-morning recess. We'll go 23 to Item 12 on the agenda; consider, discuss, and take 24 appropriate action on possible project nominations from Kerr 25 County to the Statewide Transportation Enhancement Program. 11-28-05 72 1 Project nominations will be received by TexDOT between 2 November 1, '05, and April 28, '06. Commissioner Williams? 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I put this on the 4 agenda, Judge, just to advise the Court that the Texas 5 Department of Transportation is encouraging applications for 6 a Statewide Transportation Enhancement Program. The goal of 7 the program is to encourage diverse modes of travel, 8 increase community benefits of transportation investment, 9 strengthen partnerships between state and local governments, 10 and promote citizen involvement in transportation decisions. 11 If that's not heavy enough for a Monday morning, I don't 12 know what is, but the purpose of it is to tell everybody 13 about it. If you have projects that you'd like to place in 14 the nomination, they will be received by TexDOT anytime 15 after November 1, which is now, and closing opportunity is 16 April 28th, 2006, and then they weigh all those and make 17 some decisions as to whether or not they're worthy of 18 consideration. 19 I went up to their web site and pulled down 20 the Statewide Transportation Enhancement Program for your -- 21 for your review and edification. If you know of some things 22 that you need to have considered, they do consider provision 23 for facilities for pedestrians and bicycles, provision for 24 safety and education activities for pedestrian and 25 bicyclist, acquisition of scenic easements and scenic and 11-28-05 73 1 historic properties, scenic or historic highway programs, 2 landscaping and other scenic beautification, historic 3 preservation, rehab and operation of historic transportation 4 buildings, structures, or facilities, including historic 5 railroad facilities and canals, et cetera, et cetera, et 6 cetera. And if have you any, you know their address. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you -- I had a 8 question, then it disappeared all of a sudden. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a comment. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Canals. I got lost on 11 the canals. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got drowned in the 13 canal? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bill, I'm glad you 15 brought this. I think that this is one of the tools that 16 TexDOT uses to put together their long-term plans. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And secure funding. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I know that former 21 local engineer Tucker was really, really good at these -- 22 with these things, and he has secured large amounts of money 23 to be used in this -- in our local district, including Kerr 24 County. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're absolutely 11-28-05 74 1 correct, Commissioner. And these are some interesting 2 categories that we should really think about. And if we -- 3 we have time to think about them, and if they are worthy of 4 consideration, the Court can officially nominate them and 5 send them forward. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: About a year ago, we 7 met with TexDOT representatives -- seems like it was up in 8 the courtrooms, and we were doing some prioritization of 9 needs for Kerr County, and they wrote up a list. And one of 10 the -- as you know, one of the projects I've got involved in 11 is fixing the Cade Loop low-water crossing by either raising 12 it or building a bridge on the other side. It wound up on 13 the priority list somewhere, third, fourth, fifth; I don't 14 know. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As did your south 16 side river project on 39. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That could be 18 connected together. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: But this -- this 21 program is not -- that sort of thing doesn't qualify. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, these are 23 enhancement-type programs that sort of tie to general 24 transportation needs or priorities, but they're not part of 25 that original prioritized list. 11-28-05 75 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bill, a question I had, 2 are these generally funded 100 percent by TexDOT, or is 3 there some sort of a county match on them? 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Frankly, 5 Commissioner, I don't know. I believe they're funded by 6 TexDOT. I've not seen anything that indicates the county 7 has to put up a match. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I appreciate you bringing 9 it, 'cause one of the things that I -- as you were reading 10 out that 10-point or 12-point list, things that perked my 11 interest is the right-of-way enhancement for scenic 12 easements and things. We have many right-of-ways that are 13 very, very narrow throughout the county on county roads. 14 I'm not concerned -- some of them are on TexDOT roads. I'm 15 thinking more on county roads. And, you know, in my 16 precinct, I've taken the practice that if we can -- if a 17 landowner comes to us about a problem, we'll get with Road 18 and Bridge and try to figure out a way to improve the 19 right-of-way, trade out land for fencing or something along 20 that line. And I'm wondering if some of those projects may 21 be eligible for this, and that we could go to some of the -- 22 or, you know, most of these bad problems are in scenic 23 areas. Because -- 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. One that comes 25 to mind is C.P. River Road. 11-28-05 76 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Scenic drive, but it 3 also has some problems. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, that might be an 5 area to pursue if it is 100 percent TexDOT-funded. Even if 6 it's 90 percent. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: The program information 8 indicates "eligible for reimbursement of up to 80 percent of 9 allowable costs," with county being responsible for the 10 remaining portion of the cost share, including any overruns. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see it now. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That may be -- even at 13 that, it may be worthwhile pursuing some of these roads 14 where we're spending some money every year on improving 15 right-of-way, and maybe getting them on the list. I'll get 16 with Leonard and maybe we can submit some. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. That's what 18 it's there for. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on that 20 particular agenda item? Let's move to Item 13, if we might. 21 Consider, discuss, and consider approval of form contracts 22 between Kerr County and the County-sponsored entities, and 23 authorize the County Judge to sign same as they are 24 returned. I put this on the agenda. We have the 25 County-sponsored agencies or entities in our budget, and we 11-28-05 77 1 have tried to have them on a contract each year. The County 2 Attorney has approved the form of contract in order for 3 these entities to be funded. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of the 5 contract between Kerr County and the County-sponsored 6 entities as presented. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. 9 Does that -- I assume that includes, on return, my 10 authorization to sign the same? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any question or 13 discussion on the motion? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question, Judge. A 15 question was brought to my attention during the break time, 16 and that is, do we release any funding before the contract 17 is all complete and signed and in our hands? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: I would think not. 19 MS. MITCHELL: No, we do not. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the same question 21 would be for the next item with the fire departments. 22 MS. MITCHELL: No, no funds are released. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that the answer? 24 MS. MITCHELL: That's the answer. We do not 25 release any funds. 11-28-05 78 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm very happy. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I think we need the ground 3 rules for the funding. And that would make -- 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: -- make every bit of logic to 6 not release it until we have those ground rules agreed to 7 and established. Any further questions or comments? All in 8 favor of the 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: That motion does carry. Let's 13 move to Item 14; consider, discuss, and approve form 14 contracts between Kerr County and the volunteer fire 15 departments and authorize County Judge to sign same. Again, 16 as with the last agenda item, we have form contracts that we 17 have had each year with the various volunteer fire 18 departments, in connection with the funds which we have 19 budgeted for release to them. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 23 approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question, 25 related to the exact same question I asked on the last one 11-28-05 79 1 about the funding. Do we have a contract with Junction? 2 MS. PIEPER: No, sir, it's not been returned. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did we release any 4 funds to them -- 5 MS. PIEPER: Not to my knowledge. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- this last year? 7 MS. MITCHELL: No. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 9 MS. MITCHELL: According to Mindy, the funds 10 were not released. Until we get the contract back and put 11 in writing that they are requesting the funds, like it 12 states in the contract, the funds are not released. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Buster, let me ask a 14 question to see if I understand what your -- what your look 15 of puzzlement is. Junction is responsible for serving far 16 western Kerr County. That means that far western Kerr 17 County doesn't have fire service? That's -- I mean, if they 18 won't sign the contract, they don't have volunteer fire 19 service. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, here we jumped 21 through all these hoops and had great debate and gnashing of 22 teeth, if I remember, and either they're covering it and 23 don't need any money -- I mean, I don't get it. Everybody 24 else is beating the door down wanting money. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I can't -- 11-28-05 80 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wasn't the debate 2 over emergency services? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm, and fire. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And fire? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And fire, correct. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Did we budget money 7 for Junction? Or -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I thought we just 10 had a mutual aid agreement with them and we didn't pay them 11 anything. My memory's not good? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that may be the 13 case. That may be it. I thought -- I thought we put money 14 there, which I'm sure we did. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I was thinking -- 16 MS. PIEPER: Either way, we didn't get a 17 signed contract back, and I mailed it out three or four 18 times. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, the important part 20 today is we don't have a contract. 21 MS. PIEPER: Correct. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We need to have a 23 contract with them, or they don't have any -- Y.O. Ranch 24 doesn't have coverage. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll help you with 11-28-05 81 1 that. Is Lee -- 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Lee Hall? 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Lee Hall fire chief? 4 MS. PIEPER: One of the Halls are. I don't 5 know which one. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's Lee. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. I'll look at 8 that. Another issue is -- and we've been over this 9 before -- the Paragraph 3 that requires a list of volunteer 10 firefighters who are eligible for workers comp. Hunt Fire 11 Department, under its umbrella policy, provides its own 12 workers comp, so they'll just tell us you don't need a list. 13 And somehow I wish I could get the other fire departments to 14 consider whether or not they ought not to have a similar 15 policy, so we could also get their firefighters off the 16 workers comp list. But, anyhow, that's an aside. Hunt 17 found that it -- for the same price as the other coverages, 18 they get workers comp, so they don't go on our list. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, I would 20 think that if the -- if they don't provide the list of the 21 employees, then they're not covered. It doesn't void the 22 contract or anything. I mean, it's -- 23 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's what I -- 24 that's my thinking. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it is, and I 11-28-05 82 1 don't -- 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They're probably 3 just -- 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wonder if any of the 5 fire departments are sending in a list of their employees. 6 Some of them are? 7 MS. PIEPER: Some of them are. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would suspect others 9 are doing exactly what Commissioner Nicholson is saying, is 10 that they're just being covered under their own policy. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They just don't 12 mention it. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And don't mention it. 14 'Cause I think Comfort falls in that category. I don't 15 believe they sent a list in. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Isn't that something 17 that we need to know? If -- 18 MR. EMERSON: Just means they're not covered. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If they do not send a 20 list in, they are not covered? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it doesn't -- 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that what you're 23 saying? 24 MR. EMERSON: That would be my guess. 'Cause 25 if a county doesn't have a list of employees, we can't very 11-28-05 83 1 well cover them. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's fair. We 3 ask them for them. If they don't want to be covered... Oh, 4 lord. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or 6 comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 7 your right hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was reading -- as I was 14 raising my hand, I was reading this, and it says here, under 15 Consideration, "Kerr County shall provide workers comp 16 coverage." 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under this contract. I 19 mean, that sentence doesn't have anything about -- the next 20 sentence talks about a list. Shouldn't that be changed, 21 then, to say we may? 22 MR. EMERSON: That's fine with me. I mean, I 23 used the form contract that Kerr County's had in existence 24 for a long time, and that's a policy decision for y'all on 25 whether it's "shall" or "may." 11-28-05 84 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, to me, it should 2 say may provide, and then the last sentence should be 3 modified to say that if the volunteer fire department sends 4 in a list, they shall be covered. 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, that would 6 clear it up. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would clear up that 8 sentence, to me. Can we -- 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If I make a motion, 10 I'll modify it to include those changes to Paragraph 3. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let me see where we 12 are. We've approved it. You're moving to modify the form 13 contract to provide that -- 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: In Paragraph 3, it 15 will say, "Kerr County may provide workers compensation," 16 and then the last sentence will say -- 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll make that 18 conditioned, then. If we're going to say we may provide it, 19 it has to be conditioned on something, so we may provide it 20 only if the volunteer fire department provides a list of its 21 employees in a timely fashion. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or we can say "shall" by 23 saying, "shall provide it if we receive the list." 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whichever. 11-28-05 85 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let's change it from 3 -- let's use "will." Kerr County will provide it. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like "shall." 5 MR. EMERSON: "Will" and "shall" mean the 6 same thing. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Contingent upon 8 receiving a list of eligible firefighters, something like 9 that. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We have a motion. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got that, Rex? 12 MR. EMERSON: Sure. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What -- just for 14 clarification, what do we do with the previous order that we 15 just passed? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This one modifies it. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: This will modify it. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This actually 19 modifies -- 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Modifies the form of 21 agreement. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How about -- should we 24 rescind -- should this order rescind the previous one, and 25 then do a contingent? 11-28-05 86 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In my opinion, that's 2 the way you would do it, to clean it -- get it completely 3 cleaned up. I don't know. I thought the County Attorney 4 would jump all over that, but I don't know. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's busy making 6 notes. Will, may, or shall. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner Nicholson 8 made a -- we have a -- the first one was made and voted on. 9 This one -- 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me make this 11 one. It's a motion to rescind the previous order and make 12 this order. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second 15 to rescind the previous order relative to the volunteer fire 16 department contracts, and to modify that contract as 17 indicated in the motion to the County Attorney, and upon 18 approval by the County Attorney, authorize the County Judge 19 to sign same. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, sir. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now -- now, does that 22 modification go out for -- to the fire departments for their 23 approval or head-nod, sign-off? Or, "This is it, buddy; 24 take it or leave it"? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is it, buddy. 11-28-05 87 1 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I see the County 2 Judge sending them, saying, "Here's the deal, and here's 3 what's changed. Money's the same as last year, and we've 4 changed this paragraph." 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see it that way as 6 well. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or 8 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 9 your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One more question. 15 I see the Auditor's here. Do you know offhand if all the 16 contracts have paid out -- if all the fire departments have 17 asked for -- 18 MS. WILLIAMS: For last budget year? 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah. 20 MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir, I believe there was 21 one that didn't get paid out because we never got a contract 22 back. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who was that? 24 MS. WILLIAMS: I believe it was Junction. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We just talked about 11-28-05 88 1 them. 2 MS. WILLIAMS: I can verify that, though. I 3 can go check it to make sure. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Good. Well, you 5 don't need to do that right now, but we're going to work on 6 that. 7 MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll get back in 9 touch with you. 10 MS. WILLIAMS: All right. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 15, consider, 12 discuss, and take appropriate action concerning the 13 construction project at the Animal Control facility. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, again, I 15 don't have anything to offer on this. I put this on here in 16 case there were recent developments that needed a decision 17 made, so I'll just pass on that. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you update us on what 19 the City decided to do on their permit? Or do we know? 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We got a permit a 21 couple weeks ago. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did it -- are sidewalks 23 in the permit or out of the permit? 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm told they're in. 25 I haven't gotten a copy of the permit yet. 11-28-05 89 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just curious. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm going to learn 3 more about that. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Was it reciprocal or 5 paid for? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Paid for. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't have 8 anything to offer on that, either. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just want the press to 10 be aware that as soon as the City does any upgrades in the 11 sewer plant, we expect sidewalks in front of that sewer 12 plant. (Laughter.) 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause all we're doing, 15 we're just making a modification to the building. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would that sidewalk 17 be next to the one at the Animal Control shelter? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, connected to our 19 sidewalk. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Does any member of the 21 Court have any items that they feel necessary to go into 22 executive or closed session about? Let's move on to the 23 approval agenda, if we might. Payment of the bills. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the 25 bills. 11-28-05 90 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and second to 3 pay the bills. Any question or discussion? On Page 16, 4 Indigent Health Care -- we don't need to actually look at 5 anything specific there, but were we not modifying our 6 procedures where our -- our claims verification was going to 7 be done in-house? 8 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, that's what we're 9 planning on doing this budget year. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 11 MS. WILLIAMS: We've run into a bit of a 12 problem. The contract with our third-party administrator is 13 a two-year contract. The County Attorney has looked at it. 14 If we were to cancel that contract, we would have to pay her 15 out her percentage for what we would pay during the year, 16 and at this point, I don't think that's very feasible, so we 17 are probably going to have to run it this year. And I need 18 to get with you, because I think you were saying you were 19 going from the date that it was accepted. I think it says 20 on there the date of commencement, which we put as 21 September 1st of 2004, so I'm hoping that the contract will 22 run out September next year. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's VeriClaims? 25 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 11-28-05 91 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And so we're just 2 going to keep running this, then? 3 MS. WILLIAMS: We're going to have to keep 4 running with her, I think, because I honestly don't think 5 that it's going to be cost-effective for us to cancel the 6 contract now and pay her out -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I don't want -- 8 MS. WILLIAMS: -- her percentage. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't want to do 10 that. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How does that affect 12 the budget, Mindy? 13 MS. WILLIAMS: We had, I believe, $12,000 set 14 aside for the program that we were looking at. We will have 15 to move that up to our Third-Party Administrator line. That 16 gives us about 22,000. We're probably going to be a little 17 bit short, but we'll just have to play it by ear and see 18 where we are at that time. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Any suggestion been made about 20 maybe finding some accommodation or middle ground on the 21 claims administrator releasing the balance of that contract? 22 MS. WILLIAMS: I have not mentioned anything 23 to her yet, for the simple reason that when the gentlemen 24 were here showing us the program that we were interested in, 25 there was a mention made that I believe they have taken 11-28-05 92 1 quite a bit of her business already, and I don't think she'd 2 be too happy with us. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: This is Indigent Health Care 4 Solutions? 5 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: What about the jail? Are we 7 obligated to cover the jail medical through the Indigent 8 Health Care program? Or are we able to do that separately 9 and apart right now through Indigent Health Care Solutions? 10 MS. WILLIAMS: I think we're doing it 11 separately and apart. I don't believe -- when -- when an 12 inmate goes in, I believe if they are needing medical, they 13 apply for indigent health care, and our person at the 14 hospital tries to work them through as soon as possible. 15 They're either eligible or they're not. So far, we've been 16 doing pretty good. I think we've been paying it through 17 Indigent Health Care instead of having to pay it out of the 18 Sheriff's budget. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Some are eligible, and 20 they do -- we try and get them qualified for it, or apply 21 for indigent health care as soon as they come into the jail 22 and have any kind of medical, 'cause it also affects our 23 prescription medications. But if they don't qualify, which 24 a lot of them don't, then yeah, we're stuck with hospital 25 bills. Enormous hospital bills. 11-28-05 93 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mindy, general question, 2 just on the M.D. Anderson item. Is there -- are hospitals 3 beginning to use more of a policy of charging back to the 4 counties, or is this just because it's a large -- fairly 5 large bill, that M.D. Anderson is choosing to bill this back 6 to Kerr County? 7 MS. WILLIAMS: To be perfectly honest, I'm 8 not sure about that one. I probably need to check with our 9 Indigent Health Care Coordinator over at the hospital, but I 10 believe that this person was approved for indigent health 11 care. I do not know if she was at M.D. Anderson when 12 something else was diagnosed, discovered, whatever, that the 13 services were rendered down there instead of it being done 14 here locally. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If a -- and this is a -- 16 if you know the answer to this. No, I'd better not ask it. 17 It's not an agenda item; we're getting off the agenda. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That person definitely 19 is a citizen of Kerr County? 20 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A resident of Kerr 22 County. 23 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the -- I mean, the 25 rule is, though, that the County pays for it where the 11-28-05 94 1 person lives, correct? If it's indigent? 2 MS. WILLIAMS: Right. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, whether they go to 4 Bexar County or wherever, it can be billed back, but 5 usually it's -- usually they're not, it doesn't seem. 6 MS. WILLIAMS: They try to keep them local. 7 If they can get the services here, they should be taken care 8 of here. Like I said, I don't really know the whole 9 background on this person that went to M.D. Anderson. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or 12 comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 13 your right hand. 14 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 16 (No response.) 17 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget 18 Amendment Request Number 1. 19 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. Okay. This was an 20 invoice that we received in our office the 14th of November 21 for the facility. It was a September invoice, but since we 22 have already closed our books for last budget year, we 23 cannot encumber it back at this point. They had purchased 24 two refurbished Motorola mobile radios to use as base radios 25 in the facility, so that they're portables, where they can 11-28-05 95 1 talk to each other. They turned this bill in, and they were 2 asking our Maintenance Department to pay for it, and I had a 3 little bit of a problem with that, because it's really not 4 maintaining the facility; you are adding equipment. So, I 5 was going to ask the Court to allow us to move money out of 6 the Detention Facility's Miscellaneous line item, and create 7 an Operating Equipment line item within their budget to pay 8 for this invoice. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 12 approval of Budget Amendment Request Number 1. Any question 13 or comment? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with the way 15 you're handling it. 16 MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree 100 percent 18 with how you're handling it. My only question is, what was 19 the reason that it wasn't turned in properly to affect last 20 year's budget? 21 MS. WILLIAMS: I don't know. I think it 22 probably slipped their mind. They turned it in with a bunch 23 of other bills; they didn't realize there was a September 24 invoice date on it. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 11-28-05 96 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or comment? 2 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 3 hand. 4 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) ( 5 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 6 (No response.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget 8 Amendment Request Number 2. 9 MS. WILLIAMS: This budget amendment, we got 10 the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality water rights 11 bill in, and it had gone up a little bit from the previous 12 year, and we just didn't budget enough money. So, I would 13 like to have the Court's permission to move $6.20 out of 14 Nondepartmental Property Insurance line item up to County 15 Water Rights line item so we can take care of the bill. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 19 approval of Budget Amendment Request Number 2. Any question 20 or discussion? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. Was it -- 22 did we fail to budget $6.20, or was there -- was it -- what 23 was the actual figure that it went over what we had 24 budgeted? 25 MS. WILLIAMS: $6.20. The bill was actually 11-28-05 97 1 $231.20. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you. 3 MS. WILLIAMS: You're welcome. And that's 4 all I have, gentlemen. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. No late bills? 6 MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 8 MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: I have been presented monthly 10 reports for -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We need to vote on 12 that, I think. Did we vote on that? 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. 14 MS. THOMPSON: We need to vote on it. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I apologize. Budget 16 Amendment Request Number 2, we have a motion and a second. 17 Any further question or discussion? All in favor of the 18 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 19 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 20 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. We have no 23 late bills, according to the Auditor. I have before me 24 monthly reports for the District Clerk, revised September 25 '05, District Clerk for October 2005, and the County Clerk, 11-28-05 98 1 not designated. I assume that's October '05. Do I hear a 2 motion that these reports be approved as presented? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 6 approve the designated reports as presented. Any question 7 or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by 8 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. Does 13 any member of the Court have any report in connection with 14 their liaison or committee assignment or otherwise? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I do, Judge. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Took the opportunity 18 the other day to again visit the construction site at 19 Kerrville South wastewater project, and had an opportunity 20 to talk at great length with the city inspector, who was out 21 there working with the contractor. This contractor is 22 moving forward beautifully. All of the major pipes are in 23 the ground in all the streets, Loyal Valley, Shannon, George 24 Muck, and Frederick, and he's now putting in the manholes, 25 and the next step will be to take the service lines to each 11-28-05 99 1 of the property fronts. And when that's completed, then the 2 City will run the testing on the lines as they are today. 3 Then they'll begin construction very soon on the forced main 4 that takes the -- takes the wastewater up to the trunk line 5 that goes from Nimitz to the city's main trunk. So, 6 basically, he's well on schedule. Hasn't had any rain 7 delays. The rain that came this weekend probably won't 8 delay him. It came while he wasn't on the job, so all 9 things are looking pretty good out there. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Anyone else? 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, library. I'm 12 told that -- that the Kerrville City Council has reappointed 13 David Wampler as their Councilman representative to the 14 Library Board. And they've named their two other members of 15 the board, and I don't -- they're -- I'm told they're 16 current board members, but I don't know their names. Next 17 time the board meets, on -- whatever; the second Tuesday, I 18 think, in December, or one of them, and I expect that the 19 new board will begin their process of trying to organize 20 their business and carry out their charter. That's all I 21 know about that. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, if I could go back 24 to an item, several months ago we appointed a committee of 25 old geezers. 11-28-05 100 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: March. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: March? Can we get an 3 update, do you think? Do they -- are they far enough along, 4 to your knowledge, Commissioner, to give us an update? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do not have an 6 answer to that. I've been thinking about that. I don't 7 have an answer to your specific question, but I would -- I 8 would think that they -- yes, they have -- they can report 9 some. I know they've done some things. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would be -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My memory is March, 12 though, is when they come back with their full report. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can't remember. 14 MR. EMERSON: I think that's right. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can't remember how far 16 it was. I just think that it would be -- if we're going to 17 be meeting with the City in the first couple of months of 18 '06, it would be nice if they could have this thing hurried 19 up to have that done prior to that meeting. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, I'll take care 21 of it. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. I gather that 23 Commissioner Baldwin is the official liaison to the old 24 geezers? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 11-28-05 101 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He kinds of looks like an 2 old geezer. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Getting there. I 4 communicate well. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Certainly appropriate. Any 6 other reports from elected officials? Department heads? 7 MS. PIEPER: Me. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: County Clerk, Ms. Pieper. 9 MS. PIEPER: My election equipment is going 10 to be delivered December the 19th. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Merry Christmas. 12 MS. PIEPER: Thank you. Staff training will 13 be December 20th through 22nd, and we will start mock 14 elections and testing of this equipment on January the 3rd. 15 But my problem is, is I don't know where I'm going to put 16 this equipment. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Juvenile Detention 18 Facility? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: May have an opening 20 at the J.D.F. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How big is it? How many 22 machines do we get? Put it that way. 23 MS. PIEPER: Well, we're getting 24 eSlate 24 machines and 21 D.R.E.'s. I mean, it's going to be a pretty 25 good size. And -- 11-28-05 102 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would -- I don't -- 2 have not been in that storage room kind of back behind 3 the -- across the hall from the Environmental Health. 4 There's a room back in there with some storage space. I 5 think that that would be a good location, if there's room in 6 there. And maybe you can get with Glenn and see if he has 7 enough money his budget to build a secure area for those 8 machines. I mean, that would be the first thought of what I 9 would say to do. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Have you talked it 11 out with Glenn? 12 MS. PIEPER: No, I haven't. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You might get with him. 14 MS. PIEPER: I mean, months ago I came in and 15 we had talked about -- well, last year. I think it's more 16 than months. Last year. Because at one point, I -- 17 under -- going downstairs, I had -- the County Clerk's 18 office used to have a storage room there, but the Historical 19 Commission society took that over a couple of years ago. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd get with Glenn and 21 see -- I think this clearly has to be in a very secure 22 location, wherever it goes. We don't want someone -- you 23 know, they're not supposed to ever touch these machines. 24 'Cause I suspect -- 25 MS. PIEPER: Right. And after an election, 11-28-05 103 1 then the ballots have to stay locked up for 22 months. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd get with Glenn and 3 maybe come back at our next meeting and see -- if it's going 4 to require some direction from the Court, we can do it at 5 the next meeting. If not, maybe we can just get something 6 working. 7 MS. PIEPER: Okay. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Anyone else? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have an issue 10 I'd like to -- I'm glad the Sheriff's here with us today, 11 and I wanted to bring up an issue and see if we couldn't get 12 an update report. A couple of weeks ago, we had this -- an 13 alarm go off with regards to the Treasurer's office and the 14 Social Security issue. And I had the great honor and 15 privilege to sit down with the Sheriff and the County 16 Attorney and some other folks, and to talk about this issue, 17 and I think the Sheriff was doing somewhat of an 18 investigation on it. At least that's the way I would 19 categorize it. And I'm just wondering if you'd bring us an 20 update on what you've done and what you're going to do. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, and I think, as 22 you stated, yeah, I did an investigation. I felt I had to, 23 because after the last Commissioners Court, and it was 24 brought up, and I called Social Security to find out what my 25 earnings were for the year 2004, and found out I didn't have 11-28-05 104 1 any, or it didn't show it. And I couldn't find out the rest 2 of my employees. So, I believe the next day was payday. I 3 put a memo in the paycheck saying to contact -- for them to 4 each contact Social Security office and find out what their 5 earnings were, 'cause it had showed the last time I had any 6 was in 2003. Well, once that memo went out and everybody -- 7 95 percent of employees started calling Social Security, it 8 didn't take 35 minutes before I got a call from Austin from 9 Social Security saying, "What's going on?" And -- and that 10 started the investigation. She told me that no employees of 11 Kerr County, you know, y'all included, showed any earnings 12 since 2003, unless you had other jobs or other employment. 13 And what it turned out to be is -- is it 14 wasn't a money situation. The money was taken out of our 15 checks -- everybody's check. All Social Security -- it was 16 all paid, everything. And by March of each year, the 17 Treasurer's office is supposed to file a report to Social 18 Security and a W-2 report, and it gets accepted, and that's 19 how it gets verified then by Social Security, and that's how 20 it goes onto your -- your paychecks -- or into your earnings 21 report. And in doing my investigation, I found that, number 22 one, the report had been sent in January, before the 23 deadline. So, the Treasurer's office -- Ms. Nemec did file 24 it with Social Security Administration. But it's an 25 electronically submitted report and everything. Then it's 11-28-05 105 1 checked for errors at Social Security, and it was returned 2 in March -- in April, and it had not been returned back to 3 Social Security, so they were showing no earnings. It 4 concerned me, especially since there was an employee who had 5 just left the Treasurer's office, as y'all recall, at that 6 same time, and because of the other prior mistakes that we 7 had all run across. I was concerned over, could we possibly 8 have an embezzlement? Could we possibly have any criminal 9 activity going on in the Treasurer's office? So that's 10 where I initiated my investigation from. 11 I had to -- we met with -- two of the 12 Commissioners and I met with the County Attorney and our 13 outside auditors to see what it is exactly I should be 14 looking for, or with the type of system Kerr County has, is 15 it very easy to embezzle money from Kerr County? And we 16 found out, one, it's very difficult to embezzle money 17 because of the way the Treasurer's office and Kerr County 18 has all our accounts set up. It's almost impossible, unless 19 you go back to a comment that Commissioner Nicholson had 20 made in the last agenda stuff, was that unless you had a 21 phantom employee or a temporary employee that was paid too 22 long, or two employees in cahoots with each other, it would 23 just about be impossible to embezzle money. So, I focused 24 the investigation on that type of situation, and after 25 meeting with our outside auditor, he agreed that that was 11-28-05 106 1 the best place. And so I got all the employment records -- 2 or not employment; payroll records for the last year from 3 January 1st, 2005, through September 30th, 2005, and started 4 looking at every paycheck, every payday, all the overtime, 5 everything else that was ever done. Employment dates, 6 whether somebody could have been paid more or -- or anything 7 like that. And I found in that no inclination at all that 8 there would have ever been any kind of criminal activity, 9 embezzlement, so I felt real comfortable with that. 10 The Social Security report has since then 11 been submitted. We had to get -- Ms. Nemec was very 12 cooperative with me in the investigation, gave me anything I 13 wanted, all the reports. She actually does some 14 documentation that I was surprised to find. Her office 15 keeps a three-ring notebook of every employee, and if there 16 is any kind of change in a paycheck, it is handwritten in 17 that employee's sheet in that three-ring notebook on what 18 the change was, how much money was changed and why. And 19 that's every pay period on every employee, and that's 20 hand-documented, not computer. I was really surprised to 21 see that; I didn't realize that. And then some things -- 22 she's even had our Auditor, or Mindy at that time, when they 23 were making the report for Social Security, getting the tax 24 rate set, she would have -- she would put it in and then 25 have somebody else in the Auditor's office also doublecheck 11-28-05 107 1 her work, and then they both initialed each employee's sheet 2 in that three-ring notebook to make sure it was done 3 correctly, and they verified each other's by 4 double-checking. And I visited with Tommy at that time, and 5 Mindy, and we really came out pretty well. 6 Now, there is one aspect that I think this 7 County and the Commissioners should seriously look at and 8 seriously start considering some things at, and it wouldn't 9 be on a theft deal, so I would -- didn't look at it. But 10 being a department head and knowing overtime, I was shocked 11 to see that there was one department that, for that year, 12 the County's overtime spent was about $89,000 for last year 13 from January to September. Over $56,000 of that went to one 14 department, and that concerned me. And it was not the 15 Sheriff's Office or the jail, combined. I thought I had a 16 lot of overtime in the Sheriff's office and jail. That 17 combined was $25,000. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: May I ask what 19 department? 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Juvenile Detention. And 21 that was before the hurricanes, before any of that. This 22 was till September. That's a whole -- and you had some 23 employees that had some very large paychecks for overtime. 24 And I just -- I know how my department does overtime; we 25 scrutinize it extremely seriously, and my budget for that is 11-28-05 108 1 very little. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that overtime, 3 Sheriff, or compensatory time? 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Far as I can tell, it 5 all goes in as overtime. But that would be where I'd be 6 concerned. But as far as the Social Security stuff, I think 7 all that checked out real well. I think, yeah, there were 8 some -- some lax in getting the report resubmitted. I did 9 find where the former employee had made a lot of notes on 10 paper about how to get it submitted. The former employee 11 had been dealing with the lady that I talked to in Austin 12 with Social Security. But it was all the former employee's 13 notes, and was not our Treasurer's notes. Which do show a 14 lack in either supervision, or the former employee didn't 15 let the Treasurer know exactly what was going on; I don't 16 know. But all the handwriting that I found in regards to 17 Social Security was under the former employee, okay? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Anything else? 20 Any other business? We stand adjourned. . 21 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:25 a.m.) 22 - - - - - - - - - - 23 24 25 11-28-05 109 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 30th day of November, 8 2005. 9 10 11 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 12 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 13 Certified Shorthand Reporter 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 11-28-05