1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Regular Session 10 Monday, March 13, 2006 11 9:00 a.m. 12 Commissioners' Courtroom 13 Kerr County Courthouse 14 Kerrville, Texas 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge 23 H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 24 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 ABSENT: DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X March 13, 2006 2 PAGE --- Commissioners' Comments 5 3 1.1 Consider/discuss 150th Anniversary Parade options 6 4 1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to authorize 6-month review of '05-'06 Kerr County 5 budget at workshop March 27, 2006, at 1:30 p.m. 10 1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action 6 certifying to Secretary of State ownership by County of Turtle Creek Cemetery 13 7 1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve Final Revision of Plat for Lots 5-9, 8 Block 8, Greenwood Forest Subdivision 18 1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for 9 exemption from platting for approximately 249 acres off Upper Turtle Creek 19, 63 10 1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to set a public hearing for Revision of Plat for Lot 51, 11 Kerrville South Ranches Two, Precinct 1 26 1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to set 12 a public hearing for revision of Lots 117A & 116D of Falling Water, Precinct 3 27 13 1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for approval of Cooper Cove Addition, Precinct 2 28 14 1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to grant a variance from platting and/or a concept 15 plan for 16.07 Acres, Precinct 4 32, 72 1.23 Update public and Commissioners Court on 16 Kerr County vs. EBA lawsuit 35 1.24 Consider/discuss potential litigation/liability 17 regarding Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility (Executive Session) -- 18 1.5 Public Hearing concerning Regulatory Signs in Kerr County 38 19 1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to increase speed limit on Klein Branch Road from 20 30 MPH to 45 MPH 40 1.7 Public Hearing concerning Revision of Plat for 21 Lots 3, 4, & 5 of Japonica Hills, Precinct 4 42 1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for 22 Revision of Plat of Lots 3, 4, & 5 of Japonica Hills, Vol. 5, Page 199, Precinct 4 42 23 1.9 Public Hearing concerning Revision of Plat for Lots 4 & 5 of Byas Springs Ranch, Precinct 4 43 24 1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for Revision of Plat for Lots 4 & 5 of Byas Springs 25 Ranch, Vol. 5, Page 250, Precinct 4 44 3 1 I N D E X March 13, 2006 2 1.11 Public Hearing concerning Revision of Plat for 3 Lots 79 & 80 of Cypress Park, Precinct 3 45 1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for 4 Revision of Plat of Lots 79 & 80 of Cypress Park, Vol. 3, Page 45, Precinct 3 46 5 1.18 Consider & approve bylaws of Advisory Board of Butt-Holdsworth Memorial Library; consider & take 6 action on recommendation by the Board that the 2005-2006 agreement be amended 47 7 4.1 Pay Bills 85 8 4.2 Budget Amendments 89 4.3 Late Bills -- 9 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 99 10 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee Assignments 103 11 1.19 Public Hearing on Subdivision Rules and 12 Regulations & Water Availability Requirements 113 1.20 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 13 Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations 134 1.21 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 14 Kerr County Water Availability Requirements 134 1.22 Reports from the following Departments: 15 Information Technology 152 Road and Bridge 154 16 Facilities and Maintenance 159 Collections 168 17 --- Adjourned 170 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 1 On Monday, March 13, 2006, at 9:00 a.m., a regular 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 gentlemen. 7 Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the 8 Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled and posted for this 9 time and date, Monday, March the 13th, 2006, at 9 a.m. It is 10 that time now. Commissioner Baldwin? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. If you'd rise and 12 have a word of prayer with me, and I wanted to let you know 13 that it is not my turn, but I'm going to pray anyway, because 14 it's an honor. But I get -- in two weeks, I'm up again. 15 Okay. That's -- I just wanted to make that clear and get it 16 on the record. Pray with me, please. 17 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. If there's anyone present 20 who wishes to be heard with respect to an item or a matter 21 which is not a listed agenda item, you're privileged to come 22 forward at this time. If you wish to be heard on an agenda 23 item, we'd ask that you wait until that item is called, and we 24 would also ask that you fill out a participation form located 25 at the back of the room. It's not essential, but it helps me 3-13-06 5 1 not miss someone that may want to be heard on an item. But if 2 there's anyone who wishes to be heard on an item that is not a 3 listed agenda item, feel free to come forward at this time. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Seeing no one coming forward, we'll 6 move on. Commissioner Baldwin? What do you have for us this 7 morning? 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just want to remind the 9 Commissioners Court and all the masses of Kerr County that we 10 will be out of town next week. Most of the week, I guess. 11 And I think all -- everybody here today will probably be gone. 12 So, beginning -- I'll be out there on Monday, and I guess 13 y'all are coming on Tuesday? Is that the plan? But I've 14 always heard that it -- it's safe on the general public when 15 the government body's out of town. So, that's all. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner 2? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is -- is that by way of 18 saying Wichita Falls is not burning? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, I don't know. I forgot 20 to check on that. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I want to express my 22 congratulations to Judge Tinley on his re-election, and 23 Barbara and all of the other candidates who were re-elected 24 for another term on the Republican primary. I want to thank 25 all those who ran. Putting yourself out there for what I term 3-13-06 6 1 or call the silly season, and doing that for the better part 2 of six months, that takes a lot of -- a lot of doing. I 3 commend everybody for their efforts, and particularly commend 4 those who were victorious. I look forward to having the 5 opportunity to work with you, Judge, for another four years. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. I appreciate that. 9 Commissioner Letz? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was just going to echo what 11 Commissioner Williams says. Congratulations to all 12 candidates, especially those that won. And it'll be kind of 13 like when I first got on the Court, with -- Commissioner 14 Oehler will be next to me starting in January, which is -- I 15 look forward to that as well. That's the only comments I had. 16 Hope we get some rain this week. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. I, too, wish to 18 congratulate all of those who participated in the process, and 19 particularly those that received their party's nomination; 20 Ms. Nemec, Commissioner Williams. And maybe we can get on 21 with the serious business at hand now. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could be. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Thank you. Let's get on with 24 the agenda, if we might. First item, consider/discuss the 25 150th anniversary parade options. Commissioner 2, what do you 3-13-06 7 1 have for us there? 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, when last we spoke 3 about the sesquicentennial parade, I shared with the Court 4 pictures of a couple vehicles that were restored, one of which 5 was a 1922, I believe, T-model Ford paddy wagon. Commissioner 6 Baldwin and others didn't particularly want to be hanging off 7 the side of that, and I guess I can understand that, as we're 8 tooling down the street. So, I mentioned to the Sheriff that 9 it would be perfect for the Sheriff to be seated next to the 10 driver in this vintage paddy wagon, and he sort of took to the 11 idea, so I've arranged for that, for Sheriff Hierholzer and I 12 to go out, take a look at it, see where the signage could go. 13 And as far as the Commissioners Court is concerned, if we're 14 going to end up on a trailer, I do have one option available 15 to us. The same gentleman has a 1952, I believe, Farmall Cub 16 Cadet tractor restored in vintage condition, which he would be 17 willing to allow us to use in the parade and pull a trailer. 18 And he says that even I could drive it, so I know if I can 19 drive it, Commissioner Baldwin can drive it. And if he had on 20 his overalls -- I don't know about the beard, but that might 21 not be a bad float. Those are the options I've got. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I still think that some of the 23 Commissioners ought to wear black and white stripes and get in 24 the back of the paddy wagon. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A couple of them could. 3-13-06 8 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought you would be in the 2 paddy wagon in the stripes. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'll be in the front seat 4 wearing a star. Y'all have to be in the back. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. (Laughter.) 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Baldwin and I made a 7 pact; we're going to remain silent about what we know about 8 the other to avoid being in the back of the paddy wagon. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly right. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I just thought Buster would 11 feel like home away from home or something. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: That's not the issue. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does lock, the back, and 14 it does have bars over the windows. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, does the 16 individual have a trailer as well? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He has a trailer, 18 Commissioner, but it's not in all that good of shape. I 19 thought perhaps our friend Charlie Bierschwale at Back 40 20 might be persuaded to let us borrow a trailer. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know I talked -- the trailer I 22 was thinking of needs a tire, but I'm sure I can persuade the 23 individual to fix that, being a local developer and my 24 neighbor, Mr. Crenwelge. He has an old -- he has, like, a 25 hayride-type trailer which would probably be pretty 3-13-06 9 1 appropriate. There's another one I can probably get in 2 Comfort, but when I saw the price, I didn't need the trailer. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Speaking of a hayride 4 trailer, I also know where there's one, a hayride-type 5 trailer. I think we can find one. The question is, who's 6 going to decorate it? How are we going to decorate it? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think hay bales and a few 8 things like that. I think, you know, keep it pretty simple, 9 and hope for good weather. But I've talked to Dale; I'll talk 10 to him again about his trailer. And also, to me, I think a 11 tractor's a good idea. That's kind of -- I think that's 12 appropriate, to be pulled by a tractor, and some sort of a 13 trailer that's from the appropriate period, if possible. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I can certainly arrange for 15 a tractor. Are you cool with that? 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, I am cool with that. I 17 like the tractor. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Now, is -- the other thing, 19 Harry Seidensticker has an old -- I think it's a Case 20 bulldozer, basically like the size of a trailer. It has 21 rubber cleats on it. I have not talked to him, though. I 22 know it's pretty neat, too, but a tractor's fine. We're 23 probably better off just going ahead and making a decision and 24 going with it. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Especially if it's an antique 3-13-06 10 1 that's painted up pretty, and probably the original colors and 2 all that. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think so. All spiffied 4 up. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Tractor and trailer seems like -- 7 like it's doable. I'm not sure about Buster driving it, 8 though. That gives me the willies. (Laughter.) 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, me too. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can certainly flip for 11 that. It's not going to be me, I can tell you that. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If I drive it, I want a sign 13 on it that says, "Here's Commissioner Baldwin pulling the load 14 again." 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That takes care of that. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or, "Still pulling the load." 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You let him drive, and he'll be 18 in that paddy wagon before the end of the parade. (Laughter.) 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I saw where Kinky got popped 20 for drinking in a parade. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. If that's what the 22 Court likes, I'll see if we can finish up the arrangements. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on the to the next item, 24 if we might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action 25 to authorize a six-month review of the '05-'06 Kerr County 3-13-06 11 1 budget at a workshop to be held March 27th of this year at 2 1:30 p.m. This is the off-season drill -- 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: -- that we've heard about? 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This would be about midterm 6 for the budget. And my thought would be the second meeting of 7 the month, and a workshop setting, beginning at 1:30. I'll 8 make that in the form of a motion. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to hold a 11 work -- budget workshop to review -- hold a six-month review 12 of the '05-'06 Kerr County budget to be held on March 27th, 13 '06, at 1:30 p.m. Any question or discussion on the motion? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm thinking that 15 Commissioner Nicholson had started a list of issues, so we may 16 want to touch base with him at some point to -- I'm not real 17 clear in my mind if that's true or not, but seemed like he had 18 said something like that, that he was starting a list of 19 things to discuss. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We also have that survey that's 21 out which will be back. I think we asked -- 22 MR. ODOM: 20th. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- for it back on the 20th. 24 MR. ODOM: The 20th, I believe. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think that'll be an 3-13-06 12 1 appropriate thing to go into, look at that as well, 'cause 2 it's all budget-related. I think probably we could look at 3 that under the posting as a budget workshop, because I think 4 it -- maybe we ought to add organizational budget, just to 5 make it real clear, if Commissioner 2 doesn't have an 6 objection. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Can I ask what the purpose is 8 of that survey, as far as -- all it really asks is what are 9 constitutional duties and what are non-cons -- I don't -- I 10 don't understand what you're really asking me to provide the 11 Court. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For you, your office, I don't -- 13 I think it's probably virtually nothing. 'Cause I think -- I 14 think it goes into some of the things that Barbara's office 15 does, just like -- at least my understanding -- or Linda. 16 Linda Uecker's probably the simplest one. Passports. That's 17 not something that the Constitution says Linda Uecker needs to 18 be doing, so it's something I think the County needs to be 19 doing or someone in the county needs to be doing. I think 20 that's the only spot -- only individual. And I think 21 there's -- like, I don't believe the Treasurer's 22 constitutionally responsible for personnel. But, it's that 23 type of thing, just to see who's doing what. Because every 24 year we get into looking at budget and personnel, and -- and 25 there's -- you know, the law says, as I understand, that we 3-13-06 13 1 need to fund what constitutionally needs to be done, and some 2 of these other things, maybe we do or don't need to do them. 3 That's the purpose of it from Commissioner Nicholson and my 4 standpoint. So, I think from your office, there's a minimal 5 amount -- 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- that -- I mean, I can't think 8 of anything you do that's not constitutional. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't do anything that's not 10 constitutionally required. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments on 12 the motion? 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: That motion does carry. Item 3, 18 consider, discuss, and take appropriate action certifying to 19 Secretary of State ownership by the County of Turtle Creek 20 Cemetery. 21 MR. EMERSON: Morning, gentlemen. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Morning. 23 MR. EMERSON: Sometime back, a question of the 24 Turtle Creek Cemetery was presented to this Court. Subsequent 25 to that, I met with Commissioner Baldwin and Mr. Neunhoffer, 3-13-06 14 1 and we discussed that cemetery. And the issue, what it boils 2 down to, is in April 1977, K.I.S.D. deeded the land for the 3 cemetery and the schoolhouse to Kerr County. Subsequent to 4 that, the State passed a statute in the Health and Safety Code 5 that exempted pub -- or that said that public funds could not 6 be used for cemeteries, except for cemeteries that were owned 7 during a very specific time period from September 1st, '76 8 through January 1, '79. This cemetery was acquired during 9 that time period, and in order for the County to be able to 10 spend public funds on that cemetery for maintenance, we need 11 to send a declaration to the Secretary of State that says we 12 acquired it during that time period, and that's what I'm 13 asking the Court to do today. I'm trying to go back and 14 slowly clean this thing up. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Is it your opinion that the County 16 did not need to own it for the entire period inclusively, but 17 only to have acquired it during that time -- at some point 18 during that time and then own it presently? 19 MR. EMERSON: Correct. That's what the Attorney 20 General opinions state, -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 22 MR. EMERSON: -- is that so long as we acquired it 23 during that time period, then we're grandfathered. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 25 MR. EMERSON: Any time in that three-year period. 3-13-06 15 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have any problem with 3 doing this, but I thought that we had decided we weren't going 4 to spend our funds for maintaining the cemetery. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, the attorney says that 6 we need to take this action here, but we're -- we're having 7 ongoing meetings and ongoing negotiations with the community 8 out there of where we're going to end up with this thing, and 9 we are -- the surveyor is looking into defining the actual 10 property boundaries, and -- and, actually, I'm -- I'm trying 11 to talk the community into forming a cemetery association 12 under another law that would -- I don't know about giving them 13 ownership, but certainly the ability to maintain and -- and do 14 all the things that a cemetery needs. Otherwise, I'm 15 thinking -- and Rex and I visited about this some -- if they 16 don't do the cemetery association and the county government 17 strictly takes over the ownership, I don't think the 18 community's going to like what's going to happen out there. I 19 mean, we're really and truly going to take over, and -- and 20 decide who's buried there, and you can't -- you can't restrict 21 it to the community people only and that kind of thing; you 22 have to open it up to every -- I mean, just all kinds of 23 things happening out there that I don't think that that 24 community out there is going to like. So, we're just -- we're 25 still in that process -- 3-13-06 16 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- of going -- but, Rex, 3 you're saying that we need to -- we need to take this action 4 today? 5 MR. EMERSON: We really do, in order to clarify 6 the -- this probably isn't the right wording, but to clarify 7 the title. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 9 MR. EMERSON: Right now, we're kind of in a gray 10 area. K.I.S.D. deeded it to us, but we've never told the 11 Secretary of State that we accepted the deed and acquired the 12 cemetery, even though we have a court order that says we did. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we do that. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 16 of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just have one quick 18 question for the Commissioner. In what state of maintenance 19 is it -- is it currently? 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Condition? 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question is, I think we need 24 to clarify a little more the agenda item. I mean, I -- I 25 think what the -- I think we need to be voting on that we are 3-13-06 17 1 certifying or requesting certification be made to the 2 Secretary of State that we took ownership of the cemetery 3 April 25th of 1977. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good, sir. Thank you. 5 MR. EMERSON: And that's -- the Commissioners Court 6 order that I attached basically says that. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. We may be -- if we don't do 9 this, even spending any -- utilizing any County employees or 10 spending any funds to even survey it, we might be acting 11 outside the law. Is that correct? 12 MR. EMERSON: That's correct. We'll be in direct 13 violation of the statute, and the Attorney General, in 14 multiple opinions, has stated that. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good point. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or discussion? 18 All in favor of the motion as restated, signify by raising 19 your right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank you, 24 Mr. Emerson. 25 MR. EMERSON: Thank you. 3-13-06 18 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Mr. Emerson. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 4; consider, 3 discuss, and take appropriate action to approve the final 4 revision of a plat for Lots 5 through 9 in Block 8 of 5 Greenwood Forest Subdivision located in the Ingram ETJ, 6 located in Precinct 4. 7 MR. ODOM: Good morning. On this item, the public 8 hearing for this revision was January the 9th, 2006. The 9 property's located in Ingram's ETJ, and they do not wish to 10 sign the plat. They were supposed to have signed the plat and 11 sent it to us, and they haven't done it. They asked for us -- 12 for the Court to sign it, and then they would sign off on it. 13 This is the property where the new Dollar General store was 14 built, and they are waiting for approval to operate the 15 O.S.S.F. At this time, we ask that you approve the plat as 16 presented, and we ask that the County Clerk's office notify 17 Ingram the plat is ready to be signed. And what we're doing 18 is taking five lots and reducing them down to four lots. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 22 of the agenda item. Any further question or discussion? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question -- or comment related 24 to this. Does the Court -- anyone on the Court recall -- I 25 mean, I know this is the ETJ. We're -- it's in the -- I 3-13-06 19 1 believe in violation of some statutes right now that we don't 2 have an agreement worked out with Ingram on the ETJ. And I -- 3 I'm trying to recall who's trying to resolve that as a 4 precinct -- 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I do remember a conversation 6 when Mr. Danny Edwards was present in court, and I thought I 7 understood or remember understanding him saying that -- that 8 they would be willing to agree to whatever our rules are and 9 so forth, and they're -- well, I don't remember him saying 10 that we could do it for them. That's what I don't remember. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I mean, that's -- okay. 12 Well, we need to -- I think Commissioner 4 was the one that 13 was going to pursue that with Danny. We'll check on that. 14 Okay, Rex is nodding. That's what my recollection is. We 15 just need to make sure this happens. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments on 17 the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 18 your right 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 move to 23 Item 13, consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for 24 exemption from platting under Section 1.03.C of the Kerr 25 County Subdivision Rules for approximately 249 acres off Upper 3-13-06 20 1 Turtle Creek between Downing and Colinas Roads. 2 MR. ODOM: I was asked -- I'll just briefly say a 3 little bit. I don't -- is Charlie Digges here or Mr. Mayo? I 4 guess not. They had asked -- they were supposed to get in 5 touch with me and asked, if they hadn't set anything, to pass 6 on this. But for general information, this is a subdivision 7 that was proposed. Mr. Baldwin and I met with them in a 8 concept plan, and that they were wanting to divide it in 5 9 acres. They've changed it up to have larger acreage of 10 10 acres, but the question has to do with Downing Road. 11 They're calling the road a driveway that was up in there, and 12 if Commissioner Baldwin remembers, we asked the engineer, 13 Vordenbaum Engineering, to certify and to see if it was built 14 to standards, which it is not. As I see it, anyway, size and 15 all. But at this time, I don't know whether they wish to go 16 forward, and I would ask the Court to pass on this 1.13 to 17 another time if they wish to proceed with it. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. Mr. Mayo 19 called me over the weekend, and I was out of town, so I have 20 not returned his call. I thought that this would be an 21 appropriate place for you and the County Attorney and I to 22 drive to, to take a look at this road. 23 MR. ODOM: All right. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And look at the cemetery on 25 the way. 3-13-06 21 1 MR. ODOM: Okay, sir. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This week, if possible, 3 'cause I'm going to be gone next week. 4 MR. ODOM: I have no problem. I just have -- in the 5 morning, I have, I know, two meetings in the morning, and 6 other than that, at this time I'm open. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, anyway, we're passing on 8 this thing now. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a question. I mean, is 10 this plat -- does this mean anything? Are those lot lines? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know what that is. 12 The question -- I think they're kind of okay with the way the 13 thing's laid out and the size of lots and that kind of thing. 14 It's just -- it's just this road. He's calling it a road, and 15 we're calling it a -- 16 MR. ODOM: Driveway. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- a driveway and not road. 18 And that's what we have to clear up before we can do anything. 19 MR. ODOM: Before we go anywhere. This was not 20 built to any standards. We have nothing there that is a road, 21 even by 9-1-1, when I had Truby look at it. What the 22 gentleman has is probably a 12- to 14-foot pavement in here, 23 and he's not wanting -- when we met before in a concept plan, 24 he was wanting to call that a road and not bring it up to 25 standards. And even at this point, he's not -- he is saying 3-13-06 22 1 that's a road. It's a driveway. And now he's wanting to go 2 under 1.03.C, I believe it is; it's 10 acres or more. Maybe 3 it's D. And which, if this was construed a road, then he 4 could subdivide this property off of it without having to 5 build it if he could use that, just that this road meets 6 standards. Which it is just a driveway. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. We'll deal with it. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's -- what's the 1.03 -- C? 9 MR. ODOM: It's either C or D. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's not D. 11 MR. ODOM: I'm sorry, let me pull it; we'll see. 12 10 acres or more... 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Rex, can you look at 14 this? And the reason I brought this up, Senator Wentworth, 15 who is the author of the current rule, sent a letter to one of 16 my constituents saying that our interpretation of this was 17 wrong, and I disagree with Senator Wentworth's interpretation. 18 But that doesn't mean anything. He said -- and I think it's 19 very pertinent to this. He said that under C, it can be any 20 kind of a road. It can be a driveway, it can be a trail, and 21 that it qualifies under that exemption. I disagree. I think 22 that road has to be built to the standards for the number of 23 lots that are being served by it under our -- under the 24 County's rules. Senator Wentworth sent a letter to a 25 constituent of mine as to, no, you do not have to plat this if 3-13-06 23 1 you have access to it by a road. And I think we need 2 clarification as to that language, as to whether a road is 3 defined as we define it in our subdivision rules or whatever 4 the individual who chooses to do it is defining as a road. 5 So -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm with you. I 7 disagree with Senator Wentworth as well, that -- former County 8 Commissioner Wentworth, on top of that -- that you can't -- in 9 your wildest imagination, you can't build a subdivision off of 10 a goat trail. That's crazy. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I'm -- and while I've seen 12 the letter he -- Senator Wentworth wrote, I'm not sure he was 13 provided the true facts. So, you know, I'm not saying that -- 14 you know, I don't know, but I think we need clarification as 15 to exactly what that C exemption is. 16 MR. ODOM: Right. And when it's ambiguous, and 17 sometimes they are ambiguous, at that point you have to 18 have -- to me, you provide that higher law. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 20 MR. ODOM: And that's our subdivision rules. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are there any clear-cut 22 distinctions between what was cited to Senator Wentworth that 23 caused him to write the letter in this particular situation? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Very similar, almost the exact 25 same situation. The other one was a driveway that got to a 3-13-06 24 1 back lot, and it was -- and subsequently he sold that lot to 2 another person, and they wanted to use that driveway that was 3 never platted or -- you know, it was clearly a private 4 driveway. But -- 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We had one of those. We had 6 one of those in Precinct 2 involving that property out -- and 7 Jay Colvin was involved. Same thing. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, anyway, it's a question I 9 think we need to resolve once and for all. And, you know -- 10 well, we probably need to go back -- depends on how the County 11 Attorney responds. We may need to go back to this individual 12 off Wilson Creek Road as well. 13 MR. ODOM: Well, I have another one, too, that Lee 14 Voelkel brought to me that is off a piece of property that was 15 40 foot and goes into theirs, and easements have been granted, 16 utilities, and -- and it's a driveway. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 18 MR. ODOM: You know. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, wouldn't the better -- 20 or one alternative be, as we're now in the middle of our 21 subdivision rules, merely providing that -- that it be served 22 by a road which conforms with -- however we've got it defined 23 there, referring to a particular section? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think that's -- we 25 could clarify that more, but the letter from Senator Wentworth 3-13-06 25 1 basically said state law trumps county law, and he said that 2 if they're exempt under state law, under the law that he 3 wrote, we can't do anything to it. 4 MR. ODOM: That opens a large can of worms. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I agree. 6 MR. ODOM: Our precedent has been that it was a 7 road, even -- it may have been a trail. I wasn't here then, 8 but I had -- while I have been here for 15 years, one came up, 9 but it was an old road in Precinct 4 that did go through back 10 over -- the wildlife and all back off by Hunt there. But it 11 was an old road, and it was abandoned. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that the -- to me, my 13 interpretation is that when it talks about a road, it means a 14 road as defined under our rules. 15 MR. ODOM: Under our rules. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we just -- I just think we 17 need clarification before we pursue this. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What we're talking about is 19 providing ingress/egress to citizens. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 22 MR. ODOM: Which will be subdivided -- 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Someone purchases a piece of 24 property and expects to get there. 25 MR. ODOM: Health, safety, and welfare. 3-13-06 26 1 MR. EMERSON: I was just going to say, for what it's 2 worth, our subdivision rules mirror exactly the state statute 3 language in 232. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whose do? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ours. 6 MR. EMERSON: Ours. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, it's interpretation. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's interpretation of what a 9 road is; a road as may be defined under our rules, or a road 10 as may be under some other law. I don't know how you define a 11 road. I've never come up with a definition of a road anywhere 12 from a legal standpoint, and that's the problem. 13 MR. ODOM: We have used public road. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We've used the meaning that it's 15 got to be a road under our subdivision rules. 16 MR. ODOM: That's right. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, that standard. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Which is the way it should be 19 and the way we should do. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, I agree. But, anyway, I 21 think this is a good -- probably a good time to look at this. 22 MR. ODOM: To do something, yeah. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's move to Item 14, if we 24 might; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to set a 25 public hearing for revision of plat for Lot 51, Kerrville 3-13-06 27 1 South Ranches Number Two, located in Precinct 1. 2 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The division of property, what 3 you have before you, this plat, is -- falls under exemption 4 1.03.B, the family division. However, the owners choose to 5 file a plat. Therefore, we are doing the revision of plat 6 under the alternate plat process, and ask that you set a 7 public hearing for April the 24th, 2006, at 10 o'clock. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to set a 11 public hearing on the agenda item for April the 24th, '06, at 12 10 a.m. 13 MR. ODOM: That's correct. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Any question or discussion on the 15 motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your 16 right hand. 17 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 19 (No response.) 20 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to 21 Item 15, if we might; consider, discuss, and take appropriate 22 action to set a public hearing for the revision of Lots 117A 23 and 116D of Falling Waters located in Precinct 3. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This may be where our parade 25 trailer comes in. 3-13-06 28 1 MR. ODOM: This is a revision of plat done under the 2 alternate plat process. Requires a public hearing. 3 Therefore, request the public hearing be set for April 24th, 4 2006, at 10:10 a.m. It is taking two lots, removing that and 5 reducing two into one lot. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 10 of the agenda item, to set a public hearing for April the 11 24th, '06, at 10:10 a.m. Any question or discussion on the 12 motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your 13 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. Let's go to 18 Item 16; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for 19 approval of Cooper Cove Addition located in Precinct 2. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When did this come about, 21 Leonard? 22 MR. ODOM: Sir, this has been an ongoing thing that 23 was brought to us by, I believe, O.S.S.F. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Headwaters. 25 MR. ODOM: Headwaters. 3-13-06 29 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Headwaters? 2 MR. ODOM: Headwaters. And what they did was take 3 this -- the original plat, that Lot 1, Block 1. They added 4 this 208 feet to this property. They originally had 5 103.5 feet, and they added this triangle to it, and so it was 6 illegal division of property. We were trying to rectify it. 7 Something had been sold to some people, and when they removed 8 this here, we're trying -- we're trying to get it platted. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What does it give you, total 10 acreage now? 11 MR. ODOM: I'm sorry, I don't have -- 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 3.38 plus 10.63? 13 MR. ODOM: No, sir. No. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It' part of the 10.63. 15 MR. ODOM: Just part of 10.63. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got you. 17 MR. ODOM: 208 by five is 10,000. A quarter of an 18 acre, probably, additional to that. Half of that's -- half of 19 a quarter, so thirteen-hundredths of an acre, maybe. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How do they -- how do they get 21 to this lot? 22 MR. ODOM: Sir? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where's the access to the lot? 24 MR. ODOM: The access is right up on the state 25 highway at Stubblefield Road. 3-13-06 30 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 2 MR. ODOM: We abandoned that back to the property 3 owners at one time. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, it's that right here, that 5 road? 6 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, that dotted is the road right 7 there. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. One person owned the 9 whole thing? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They abandoned it, 11 Stubblefield Road back to the property owner? Is -- 12 MR. ODOM: That's correct. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And now they're proposing 14 what? The incorporation of it into this lot? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's adding acreage into the 16 -- they're basically making a larger lot. 17 MR. ODOM: Larger lot. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, yeah. I'm trying to 19 understand where. 20 MR. ODOM: See the residence right there? 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 22 MR. ODOM: That's what they're adding, that triangle 23 part, that 208 feet. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The triangle right below it that 25 goes to the river. 3-13-06 31 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got you. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 3 MR. ODOM: It was real narrow. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 9 of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, hold on a second. Tell 11 me, clear in my mind -- clear up my mind about what Headwaters 12 thought was illegal about it. They cut it up, sold some of it 13 off, and we haven't approved it? 14 MR. ODOM: What they had was a water system, and I 15 guess they called and wanted to clarify, because it was not a 16 platted lot. We get that sometimes from Headwaters or 17 O.S.S.F. That this was not platted; they just sold it by 18 metes and bounds, and so when they went for water and all, 19 that was how we ended up. They called Truby over there; we 20 started investigating, Eric Ashley. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is -- 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've seen it before. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is an alternate plat 24 process? 25 MR. ODOM: Right. 3-13-06 32 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Coming through at one time? 2 MR. ODOM: Mm-hmm. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions? Comments? All 5 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go to 10 Item 17; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 11 grant a variance from platting and/or concept plan for 12 16.07 acres located in Precinct 4. 13 MR. ODOM: Well, this is -- Mr. Carswell is the one 14 that requested this. I don't know if he's here or not. He 15 presented a plan to us, and we told him that it would not work 16 because there was only 16 acres, and he was trying to divide 17 this -- I believe it was 4 acres, I think. I'm sorry, I've 18 got so many -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't see how you tell. 20 MR. ODOM: And Truby's not here. Anyway -- 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here comes somebody. Is 22 that who you're looking for, Leonard? Is that the gentleman 23 you're looking for? 24 MR. ODOM: I'm not sure. Are you Mr. Carswell? 25 AUDIENCE: No, sir. 3-13-06 33 1 MR. ODOM: Okay. Well, part of the reason was that 2 I wanted a cul-de-sac at this end, and that there would be a 3 variance on this. He would like an exemption from platting 4 off an existing road, but each lot will not be 10 acres. In 5 other words, he was trying to come to us at 16 acres and 6 divide this up into two -- two sections. He has an existing 7 road easement down the face of that first lot, and then he was 8 trying to make this neck, so we told him under 1.03.C, that it 9 would not go as far as 10 acres are concerned, and that he 10 would have to come to the Court to get a variance. And I 11 don't see how you can give a variance off that 1.03. It has 12 to be 10 acres, state law says. So, also, that I felt like 13 maybe if he did this, he could subdivide this and put a 14 cul-de-sac in here at the end, maybe, if the Court would go 15 with that. And he could bring this lot at 5 acres or more, 16 still possibly do that. I would not give a variance off that 17 1.03.C, and he would like for you to consider his concept and 18 allow him to proceed with the plat -- what that concept may 19 be, I'm sorry. I -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not sure I understand where 21 any roads or anything is. 22 MR. ODOM: Well -- 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's hard to figure out. 24 MR. ODOM: Let's see. This -- that's a private 25 easement. This comes in up here at High Point, where High 3-13-06 34 1 Point -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Here's the road. 3 MR. ODOM: That's an existing, and that's another 4 easement. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And he wants to sell off -- 6 MR. ODOM: He wants to buy. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wants to divide the piece of 8 tract -- 9 MR. ODOM: The gentleman that owns this, 10 Mr. Carswell, I think, wants to buy part of this 16 acres. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I bet we should wait and let 12 Number 4 do this. 13 MR. ODOM: I would like to hear what he's got. 14 Other than if he's trying to go off 1.03.C, just no way. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If there's no objection on this, 16 we'll pass. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We need to wait and let 18 Commissioner 4 be here, I think. 19 MR. ODOM: Okay. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Any member of the Court have anything 21 further to offer on Item 17? Okay. Okay. Mr. Emerson, do 22 you have an idea about how long it's going to take on 23 and 23 24? I was thinking we could go ahead and -- 24 MR. EMERSON: 23 would be probably two minutes at 25 the most in public session, and executive session, five 3-13-06 35 1 minutes. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 3 MR. EMERSON: 24, I don't know. Maybe ten minutes 4 at the most. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. In the interest of time, I'd 6 prefer not to go into executive session too early, but where 7 we are time-wise, we've got -- got some things to do. Let's 8 go to Item 23, update public and Commissioners Court on Kerr 9 County versus E.B.A. lawsuit. Mr. Emerson? 10 MR. EMERSON: This Court, a while back, had stated 11 that they had received a lot of questions about exactly where 12 the E.B.A. suit stood, and that the public was interested. 13 And, from a very generic standpoint, because it is pending 14 litigation, you know, I'd like to give an update on that. 15 January 4th of '05, Union Labor Life was pled in as a 16 third-party defendant, meaning that we're now suing E.B.A. and 17 Union Labor Life. December 15th of last year, our attorneys 18 filed the demand for a jury trial before the court, and on 19 February 23rd of this year, we were countersued by Union Labor 20 Life, basically alleging a number of different items that are 21 in public record. Where we stand at this point is that we 22 have an agreed scheduling order between all parties concerned, 23 and agreed scheduling order is as follows: 24 All discovery will be complete on or before 25 August 1st, 2006. All motions will be filed with the court on 3-13-06 36 1 or before August 1st, 2006. Deadline for mediation in this 2 case is July 3rd, 2006. The final pretrial conference is set 3 for September 1st, 2006, at 9 a.m., and we are scheduled for 4 jury trial on September 25th, 2006, at 9 a.m., barring a 5 settlement prior to -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rex, where is this court? 7 MR. EMERSON: District Court. 198th District Court 8 upstairs. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In Kerr County? 10 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 12 MR. EMERSON: And that's about the limit of what I 13 can say in public because of the pending litigation. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What -- can I -- I'll ask a 15 question. If you can't answer it, I understand. Where is 16 E.B.A. in this? Didn't they dissolve? I mean, we're -- 17 sounds like it's -- now it's between Union Life and the 18 County. 19 MR. EMERSON: Be happy to talk to you in executive 20 session. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. All right. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else have any further 23 questions of Mr. Emerson at this point? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Boy, he clams up real good. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Like an oyster. 3-13-06 37 1 JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, we will recess the 2 Commissioners Court at 9:43, and we will go into closed or 3 executive session to talk about a couple of items that are 4 listed on the agenda for that purpose, so those of you who are 5 present in the courtroom, other than the court personnel and 6 the reporter and Mr. Emerson, if you'd be kind enough to -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff also remain. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: You want the Sheriff? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do you want him here for 23 11 also? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, I didn't want him here 13 for 23. 24 only. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, it's going to be executive on 15 23. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just for 24, is all I'm -- 17 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll give you a holler, Sheriff, 18 when it's time for you to join us. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sounds good to me, sir. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Don't go too far. 21 (Discussion off the record.) 22 (The open session was closed at 9:44 a.m., and an Executive Session was held, the transcript of which 23 is contained in a separate document.) 24 - - - - - - - - - - 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go ahead and break until about, 3-13-06 38 1 oh, 10:35, and then we'll take things up. Let me open it up 2 into open session first, and we'll be in recess until 10:35. 3 (Recess taken from 10:20 a.m. to 10:35 a.m.) 4 - - - - - - - - - - 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order. We 6 were in recess. Let's come to our timed item for 10 o'clock. 7 I will now recess the Commissioners Court meeting and open a 8 public hearing concerning regulatory signs in Kerr County; 9 specifically, the one for which public notice was given 10 relating to the speed limit on Klein Branch Road in Kerr 11 County. 12 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:37 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open 13 court, as follows:) 14 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public 16 that wishes to be heard with regard to the regulatory signs 17 regarding Klein Branch speed limit here in Kerr County? Any 18 member of the public wishing to be heard on that item? 19 Mr. Harris? Please come forward and give your name and 20 address, and we'll be happy to listen to what you have to say. 21 MR. HARRIS: My name is Larry Harris, 4192 Klein 22 Branch Road, Harper, Texas, 78631. Basically, I just want to 23 raise the speed limit to a reasonable and prudent speed on 24 Klein Branch. It's set at a 30 -- a speed limit of 30. I 25 consider that extremely too slow. The rest of Klein Branch 3-13-06 39 1 Road is 45. And that's really all I've got to say. It's a 2 good, straight road. Mr. Odom and has taken good care of the 3 road. There's one thing I wanted to talk to him after the 4 meeting, but I think he takes good care of the roads out 5 there. We've had some problems with illegal dumping, but 6 we're trying -- trying -- I'm trying to catch it. I'm trying 7 to help it out. It's my home. It's my front yard, and we all 8 try to take care of our houses. And that's basically all I 9 got to say. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're saying you have an 11 illegal dump in your front yard? Is that what you're saying? 12 MS. HARRIS: No. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's not what you're 14 saying? 15 MR. HARRIS: No. There was some illegal dumping 16 going on, and, actually, I think maybe we've got -- I would 17 like to -- this isn't anything to do with it, but I would like 18 to see if we can get a camera or something, somehow or 19 another, to -- to help catch these people that are doing 20 dumping. I -- you know, I find it very offensive, all the 21 trash on the road, and I try to clean it up. I actually get 22 -- get a plastic bag and walk around and clean the roads up, 23 and I enjoy doing it. And they have a son that takes his 24 four-wheeler down the road, cleans up. We care about our 25 community. We care about our area out there. And, you know, 3-13-06 40 1 we constantly -- it's a trash problem. I wish people wouldn't 2 do that. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Harris, well, we can 4 tell you more about that when we get out of the public 5 hearing. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 7 MR. HARRIS: Pardon me? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can tell you more about 9 that issue when we get out of the public hearing. 10 MR. HARRIS: Okay, good. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Harris. We appreciate 12 your comments. Any other member of the public wishing to be 13 heard with regard to the regulatory signs, specifically speed 14 limit on Klein Branch Road? Seeing no one else coming 15 forward, I will close the public hearing, and I will reconvene 16 the Commissioners Court meeting. 17 (The public hearing was concluded at 10:40 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was 18 reopened.) 19 - - - - - - - - - - 20 JUDGE TINLEY: And I will go to Item 6; consider, 21 discuss, and take appropriate action to increase the speed 22 limit on Klein Branch Road from 30 miles per hour to 45 miles 23 per hour. Mr. Odom, the publication notice was given as 24 required by law to that effect? 25 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. 3-13-06 41 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval, Judge. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 4 of the agenda item, to increase the speed limit in Kerr County 5 on Klein Branch Road from 30 mile an hour to 45 mile an hour. 6 Any question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the 7 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, just let me address 13 Mr. Harris' -- 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- point, 'cause he brought 16 the point to us before with respect to illegal dumping on 17 Klein Branch Road, which has been a problem. I became aware 18 that some grant funds were available through the Resource 19 Recovery Committee -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This isn't an agenda item. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's just information. I 22 can't talk about it? I'll talk to you later. 23 MR. HARRIS: Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: I had the same thought. Thank you. 25 Appreciate it. 3-13-06 42 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You'll never know what the 2 answer is. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: That's right. At this point, I 4 will -- I will recess Commissioners Court hearing -- meeting 5 and open a public hearing concerning the revision of a plat 6 for Lots 3, 4, and 5 of Japonica Hills, as set forth in Volume 7 5, Page 199, Plat Records, located in Precinct 4. 8 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:42 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open 9 court, as follows:) 10 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public 12 that wishes to be heard on the revision of a plat for Lots 3, 13 4, and 5 of Japonica Hills, as set forth in Volume 5, Page 14 199, Plat Records, and located in Precinct 4? Seeing no one 15 coming forward, I will close the public hearing. 16 (The public hearing was concluded at 10:43 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was 17 reopened.) 18 - - - - - - - - - - 19 JUDGE TINLEY: And I will reconvene the 20 Commissioners Court meeting and go to Item 8, which is 21 consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for the 22 revision of plat of Lots 3, 4 and 5 of Japonica Hills, as set 23 forth in Volume 5, Page 199, Plat Records, and located in 24 Precinct 4. 25 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. I would move that the Court 3-13-06 43 1 would approve this revision of plat. It is three lots. Still 2 be into lots, but Lots 5 and 3 were reduced to make 4 a little 3 bit bigger. They're still nine -- 9- to 8-acre lots. So, ask 4 for approval of them. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 8 of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? All in favor 9 of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. I will now 14 recess the Commissioners Court meeting and open a public 15 hearing concerning the revision of plat for Lots 4 and 5 of 16 Byas Springs Ranch as set forth in Volume 5, Page 250 of the 17 Plat Records, and located in Precinct 4. 18 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:44 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open 19 court, as follows:) 20 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public 22 that wishes to be heard concerning the revision of a plat for 23 Lots 4 and 5 of Byas Springs Ranch as set forth in Volume 5, 24 Page 250 of the plat Records, and located in Precinct 4? 25 Seeing or hearing no one to be heard, I will close the public 3-13-06 44 1 hearing. 2 (The public hearing was concluded at 10:44 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was 3 reopened.) 4 - - - - - - - - - - 5 JUDGE TINLEY: And I will reconvene the 6 Commissioners Court heating meeting and go to Item 10; 7 consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for the 8 revision of plat for Lots, 4 and 5 of Byas Springs Ranch, as 9 set forth in Volume 5, Page 250, Plat Records, and located in 10 Precinct 4. 11 MR. ODOM: This was a -- I guess before I start, 12 I'll ask the direction of the Court. Right now, I do not have 13 the mylar, and that Gary Brandenberg asked me if we could 14 pass, but I'm wondering if we couldn't go ahead and have a 15 contingency to have that. He had to send that mylar to 16 California, and for the owner to sign it and to get it back, 17 and it's not back. So, do you wish to pass on it until we, I 18 guess, get that signed? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If it were me, I would want 20 to pass on it, and let's do it -- do it right and up front. 21 MR. ODOM: That's what he asked to do. Just ask the 22 Court to pass on it, then. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any member of the Court have 24 anything further to offer on Item Number 10? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who is the owner of that 3-13-06 45 1 property? I can't figure it out. I see Jack Clark's name 2 joining there, and I see Syfans joining, but I can't -- I 3 can't tell exactly where that is. 4 MR. ODOM: Should have a signature. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, is this it here, 6 McClintock? 7 MR. ODOM: Yes. It has a signature block in there, 8 I'm sorry. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Never heard of him. 10 MR. ODOM: California. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-oh, get a rope. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I will recess the 13 Commissioners Court meeting, and I will open a public hearing 14 concerning the revision of a plat for Lots 79 and 80 of 15 Cypress Park, as set forth in Volume 3, Page 45 of the Plat 16 Records, and located in Precinct 3. 17 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:46 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open 18 court, as follows:) 19 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public 21 that wishes to be heard concerning the revision of a plat for 22 Lots 79 and 80 of Cypress Park, as set forth in Volume 3, Page 23 45 of the Plat Records, and located in Precinct 3? Seeing or 24 hearing no one wishing to be heard on this, I will close the 25 public hearing. 3-13-06 46 1 (The public hearing was concluded at 10:46 a.m. and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was 2 reopened.) 3 - - - - - - - - - - 4 JUDGE TINLEY: And we will go to Item 12; consider, 5 discuss, and take appropriate action for the revision of plat 6 of Lots 79 and 80 of Cypress Park, as set forth in Volume 3, 7 Page 45 of the Plat Records, and located in Precinct 3. 8 MR. ODOM: Okay. This was two lots. We're not 9 increasing anything. We're increasing the size of one and 10 reducing Lot 79A. There was -- my understanding from 11 Mr. Schwartz out of Boerne is basically, this is bringing this 12 lot line closer to the well. The gentleman in Lot 80 had 13 owned this, but it was clearing it up as far as platting was 14 concerned, was taking that strip of land, and I'd ask the 15 Court to approve this revision of the plat. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One well serves two lots? 17 MR. ODOM: Pardon me? 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One well serves two lots? 19 MR. ODOM: No. Well, one well belongs to another 20 gentleman. You just decrease that property. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we -- basically, we're 22 moving a lot line. We're -- 23 MR. ODOM: Clearing -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- getting the well further in 25 -- further off the property line. 3-13-06 47 1 MR. ODOM: That's right. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 5 of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? All in favor 6 of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 7 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 8 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 9 (No response.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. 11 MR. ODOM: There's another one, Judge. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 18, consider and 13 approve the bylaws of the Advisory Board of the 14 Butt-Holdsworth Memorial Library and consider and take action 15 on a recommendation by the Board that the '05-'06 agreement 16 between Kerr County and Kerrville be amended. This was placed 17 on the agenda, apparently, by -- by Commissioner Nicholson, 18 who was unable to be with us today because of a death in the 19 family. We do have other representatives here that have an 20 interest in this matter. Mr. Lipscomb, I believe you're the 21 chairman of the Library Board; is that correct, sir? 22 MR. LIPSCOMB: That's correct. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Is this a matter that you wish to 24 address the Court on? 25 MR. LIPSCOMB: Well, I can. Yes, be glad to. 3-13-06 48 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Please feel free to come forward. 2 Give us your name and address for the record and proceed. 3 MR. LIPSCOMB: My name is John David Lipscomb. I 4 reside at 909 Lake Drive here in Kerrville. After the 5 reconstituted board met the first of this year, one of our 6 early objectives was to look at the bylaws and -- and try to 7 come up with some changes that we felt were meaningful and 8 needed, and that is what we have passed on through 9 Commissioner Nicholson to you today. Just highlighting a 10 couple of points, one thing we incorporated was the -- under 11 Section -- Article II, Section 2, the definition of -- as we 12 had pulled, I believe, from the agreement, on how the 13 expenditures were going to be divvied up, so to speak. We 14 also made changes relative to the -- to the board members and 15 to the chairperson and vice chairperson, as to we now have a 16 succession. Should the chairperson fail to -- to perform 17 duties for some reason or another, then the chairperson can 18 step in to get these things lined out. We've also drafted a 19 section in here about setting up commissions. If we need some 20 special action taken, we can now form a -- a sub group of the 21 board members to go off and study and come back with a -- to 22 the full board with recommendations. Anyway, these are all 23 changes that we feel like are -- are helpful and good for the 24 board, and so we've -- we've come to you today to ask for your 25 approval of those. I'll be glad to answer any questions, 3-13-06 49 1 should there be any. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question with 3 respect to the note that Commissioner Nicholson wrote to the 4 Court in introducing the item. Maybe you can enlighten us a 5 little bit and help us understand a little better. He says to 6 the Court to take note of the next-to-the-last sentence of 7 Article II, Section 2, which he goes on to quote, "Shared 8 operational expenses exclude any capital expense in excess of 9 $5,000, with the exception of expenses for the purchase of 10 library materials and any other projects City and County may 11 individually negotiate." In your discussions in trying to 12 determine that language and its meaning, what falls in that 13 category, essentially, of 5,000 or under? 14 MR. LIPSCOMB: Well, I believe -- and Antonio can 15 possibly correct me if I'm wrong. I believe the $5,000 was 16 the criteria set by the City on what constitutes a capital 17 budget item. Is that it? 18 MR. MARTINEZ: That does represent the City's 19 capitalization threshold, $5,000. So, 5,000 and above would 20 be considered capital items in the City budget. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, where are we in terms 22 of purchasing books, manuscripts, and other media for use in 23 the library? And -- and what do you typically budget for that 24 line item each year, average? 25 MR. MARTINEZ: We've been doing 90,000-plus for 3-13-06 50 1 library materials. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And you're going to continue 3 to consider that as a capital expenditure? 4 MR. MARTINEZ: That's required by accounting 5 practices. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, I heard a yes and saw a 7 no. Now, where are we here? 8 MR. MARTINEZ: Library materials are considered a 9 capital expense. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They're going to be 11 considered a capital expenditure? 12 MR. MARTINEZ: Right. And that's why the statement 13 here says except for library materials. Exclude any capital 14 expense with the exception of expenses for the purchase of 15 library materials. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go ahead, I'm sorry. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- I'm unsure, based on 20 Commissioner Nicholson's comment, whether he thinks that this 21 is a -- maybe y'all can enlighten me. He agrees with the new 22 bylaws? Or if he thinks the bylaws are -- 23 MR. MARTINEZ: I think his question -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- are contrary to the agreement 25 that we have with the City? 3-13-06 51 1 MR. MARTINEZ: His question, as I understood it, 2 was, is the County's capitalization threshold 5,000, or is it 3 different from the City's? That was the question I heard him 4 express. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: I think our capitalization threshold 6 is normally to be considered at 1,000. However, the -- the 7 problem I'm having with it is from an accounting -- from an 8 accounting standpoint, standards of accounting. Certain items 9 are capital; certain items are expense or operational. The -- 10 and, certainly, we can agree -- the City and the County can 11 agree that, irrespective of where they would otherwise fall, 12 we can agree as to particular items or category of items, to 13 characterize them differently. I don't see the need to put 14 any threshold amount in there. Exclude -- operational 15 expenses shall exclude capital items, except, one, books and 16 other educational items, or whatever the contract provides, 17 and two, those other items that the parties to the agreement, 18 or that the City and the County may mutually agree upon shall 19 be considered as operational. I don't think we need to even 20 talk about this threshold in there, because capital is 21 capital; operational is operational. And if we're going to do 22 something different, we need to agree on it. 23 MR. MARTINEZ: Well, previously, the question had 24 come up due to the City's requirement for calling it capital. 25 Now, if I could give a little background on that, the sum 3-13-06 52 1 total of the library's collections -- books, tapes, 2 whatever -- have to be capitalized due to general accounting 3 office requirements. The individual items as they're 4 purchased are not capital, but the sum total of what is 5 purchased becomes a capital item in the City's accounting 6 procedure. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with the Judge. I, 8 frankly, don't think we've solved that issue. I think a 9 subsequent Court's going to look at this and is going to look 10 at the court precedent in terms of our capitalization, and 11 they're going to see 90,000, or perhaps a number even greater, 12 and the argument's going to continue as to whether or not our 13 intention was to fund the basic purchase of library materials; 14 books, manuscripts, et cetera, and other media that's used in 15 the normal course and the conduct of library business. So, 16 I'm not so certain we've solved the problem, is kind of what 17 I'm saying. We may have confused it even more, in my mind. 18 MR. MARTINEZ: Well, I certainly -- 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Am I -- maybe I'm the only 20 one confused; I don't know. 21 MR. MARTINEZ: I certainly don't disagree with the 22 Judge's evaluation of -- you know, if you get rid of that 23 5,000, then the rest of the language is clear to me. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Now, if -- if the Court wants to make 25 a decision -- the current contract between the City and the 3-13-06 53 1 County, the current provision of the contract, if it provides 2 that the purchase of books and -- and similar educational 3 materials, notwithstanding the requirement under accounting 4 practices that they be capitalized, shall be considered as 5 operational expenses for purposes of shared expenses, I think 6 that's got it covered. 7 MR. MARTINEZ: Well, in the opinion of the Board, 8 the agreement did not very clearly specify that library 9 materials were included. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Current agreement or 11 proposed agreement? 12 MR. MARTINEZ: The current agreement. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with that. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. I think the issue is -- what 15 we're talking about is, do we need to go back to the drawing 16 board between the City and the County to clarify that issue? 17 And I think at that point, it's going to resolve -- it's going 18 to resolve your situation, then, would it not? 19 MR. MARTINEZ: Well, again, you know, what I heard 20 the Board saying was this proposed addition to Section 9 would 21 clarify the language in terms of library materials are 22 included. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Section 9? 24 MR. MARTINEZ: Do you have -- I'm not sure what you 25 have. 3-13-06 54 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Section 9 of the new 2 proposed? I don't have that. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: No, no, it's the agreement with 4 the -- 5 MR. MARTINEZ: To the agreement. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: It's on Page 2 of the City/County 7 contract. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I guess the thing I'm 9 having trouble with on this is that I understand why the Board 10 needs bylaws, but I think it's going to get things really 11 confused if you start talking about dollars and budget issues 12 under the bylaws, when those are really governed by the 13 agreement between the City and the County. 14 MR. MARTINEZ: The bylaws are part of the agreement. 15 That's the way it was drafted. 16 MR. LIPSCOMB: There was an attempt to -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 18 MR. LIPSCOMB: -- define some terms. 19 MR. MARTINEZ: The bylaws are an intrinsic part of 20 the agreement. They don't stand separately. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it hasn't cleared the 22 situation -- cleared it up for me, where we are right now. 23 So, I can't vote for it right now, 'cause I just don't -- I'm 24 confused on it still. Maybe Commissioner Nicholson will -- 25 could enlighten me. What's -- 3-13-06 55 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I want to ask a question 2 about this document you just handed us. This is a proposed 3 amendment to the existing agreement? 4 MR. MARTINEZ: Right. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it would -- based on my 6 initial reading of it, it would clear up the question that's 7 in front of us about how we categorize the purchase of 8 library-type materials. I see that happening in here. Which 9 then prompts me to ask another question. Why do we need it in 10 the bylaws if it's strictly a contractual issue? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what my view is. 12 MR. MARTINEZ: It was the Board's desire to really 13 express their charge clearly, to be very clear as to what 14 they're responsible for doing. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, to me, the way I see it 16 is that the Board is responsible for coming up with the budget 17 for the library. And I think you have to look to the 18 agreement between the City and the County as to the guidelines 19 there. I mean, I think it's a -- if there's clarification -- 20 if you're saying that we need clarification on that, I think 21 the amendment is the way to clarify it, but I still don't 22 think it needs to be in the bylaws. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think it's in there, 24 and I think what you're saying in Section 2 is sufficient. 25 Section 2 says, in the new language, on or before June 30 of 3-13-06 56 1 each year, the Board shall present -- that's your board -- the 2 Board shall present a proposed operational expense budget for 3 the next fiscal year to Commissioners Court and City Council, 4 including a forecast of fines and fees to be collected by the 5 library. That's fine and dandy. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, period. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That covers it. Because 8 what you're saying to us is that the issue of the purchase 9 of -- of books, manuscripts, and other medias that are 10 normally used in the conduct of library business is going to 11 be included in that budget, correct? 12 MR. MARTINEZ: Well, now, again, all I can say is, 13 you know, the Board and Commissioner Nicholson did want very 14 clear language stating that there are no capital expenses 15 included in any of this; that there are no expenses for the 16 history center or any other facility, so all those things are 17 -- are reflected in the language of -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I mean, I don't disagree 19 there. I just think that it's even cleaner to have it in one 20 document. I think it should be in the document between the 21 City and the County, not in the bylaws. I think the bylaws, 22 you know, properly say that y'all -- the Board's going to 23 prepare the operational budget, and you're going to look to 24 the guidance of the agreement between the City and the County 25 as to what is included or not included in that operational 3-13-06 57 1 budget. 2 MR. MARTINEZ: Well, and, again, I don't disagree 3 with that. But the way the City and County Attorney prepared 4 this originally, bylaws and agreement are one document, and 5 were approved as one document. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But I guess what I'm 7 saying, Antonio, is that we're talking about $5,000 here -- 8 we're talking about here. If we have -- it's just confusing 9 to have it in more than one spot. I think it should be listed 10 once. 11 MR. MARTINEZ: I don't disagree. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, I see what you're 13 doing. 14 MAYOR SMITH: Pardon me, gentlemen. I'm Gene Smith. 15 I'm a Councilperson and Mayor for the City of Kerrville. I 16 agree wholeheartedly with the Judge that this should be a 17 matter taken care of in the joint agreement between the City 18 and the County. It looks like being in the bylaws, we're 19 going at it backwards, and I think we'll be able to -- it's on 20 our agenda, too. I think that we'll be able to clarify it 21 with the other Councilpeople. I'm just one vote on our 22 Council, but I think I can relay the discussions that we've 23 had here and clarify it by an amendment to our joint 24 agreement. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 3-13-06 58 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Frankly, Mayor, it is in 2 this first -- proposed first amendment. That's exactly the 3 way it is in here. 4 MAYOR SMITH: Thank you. 5 MR. LIPSCOMB: For completeness, should -- do you 6 think the bylaws should reflect a ref -- make a reference to 7 the contractual portion of the -- of this agreement? No? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't think that's 9 necessary. I think you've done fine with it in Section 2. 10 MR. LIPSCOMB: Okay. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just delete the period -- put a 12 period after the -- just delete the last part of it, to me. 13 Then I think it's clear under the amendment. I think do a 14 clarification. Everything else is really good in the bylaw 15 revisions. 16 MR. MARTINEZ: At what point did you want the 17 statement to stop? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, there's two different points at 19 which it could stop. 20 MR. MARTINEZ: In the bylaws. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: About, oh, a little more than halfway 22 down where it says "Library," period, out on the left margin. 23 MR. MARTINEZ: Mm-hmm. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: You could have that read, "Proposed 25 operational expense budget as provided in the agreement 3-13-06 59 1 between City and County," and ends with "Library." Or you 2 could include that next sentence and say, "except as may be 3 expressly provided in the agreement between City and County. 4 Neither capital improvement expenses for the library...," and 5 finish that sentence out. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I personally like Option 1, 7 personally. 8 MR. MARTINEZ: Well, perhaps we could get your 9 language relayed to us, and we'll carry that forward. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The reason I like the first one, 11 I think, really, the less said about the details, the better. 12 That way, if something gets changed in the future, we can 13 change one document. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. If you incorporate -- if you 15 refer to the agreement between the City and County, I think if 16 your budget is in accordance with the agreement between City 17 and County, and that'll certainly do it. You could -- 18 whatever that agreement floats back and forth as being, why, 19 that's the charge of the Board, then. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge? 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, sir? 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I notice in the styling of 23 the agenda item by Commissioner Nicholson, he -- he does -- he 24 is asking the Court also to take a look at this first 25 amendment to the library agreement, talking about the '05-'06 3-13-06 60 1 agreement between Kerr County be amended. Is that -- I'll put 2 it in the form of a question. Is that this document that was 3 just handed to us by Mr. Martinez? 4 JUDGE TINLEY: It would appear that the styling of 5 the agenda item would permit that agreement to be amended. 6 Would you agree with that, Mr. Emerson? 7 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Other than the fact that y'all 10 want to probably get on working with the budget, can this wait 11 till the next meeting for us to look at it? I mean, is there 12 -- I'd rather have Commissioner Nicholson present as our 13 liaison, and he couldn't be here due to a death in his family. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: As would I. I think that would be 15 very helpful. 16 MR. MARTINEZ: As the mayor stated, it is on their 17 agenda for tomorrow evening, so they will be also considering 18 it, and he's going to take forward what he heard here. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. We can just do it on our 20 next agenda. I don't see any problem. 21 MR. MARTINEZ: But, yes, they are moving forward on 22 budget. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Good. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate the work the Board is 25 doing. 3-13-06 61 1 MR. LIPSCOMB: Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else by any member of the 4 Court? Mr. Benham, you had -- I don't know whether you want 5 to come in here late, but you had signed a participation form. 6 MR. BENHAM: Thank you. 7 MR. LIPSCOMB: Thank you for working with us. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 10 MR. BENHAM: For the record, I'm Joe Benham, 522 11 Rolling Green, county taxpayer, proud to be a county resident. 12 I'm the representative to government entities, among others, 13 of the Friends of the Butt-Holdsworth Library. I am neither 14 an attorney nor an accountant, and I have no -- make no 15 pretense of being able to come up with the precise wording 16 that you gentlemen need to have in order to act on what's been 17 brought before you. I would, however, urge you to, now that 18 the election is over -- I stayed out of your hair, 'cause I 19 knew you -- two of you were rather busy getting reelected, but 20 now that the election is behind us, I would urge you to 21 proceed with work on -- or investigation of long-range 22 solutions to library funding. I'm sure nobody, including the 23 four of you and the person who will be in the new -- the new 24 person in the seat over there on the end, wants to go through 25 the kind of difficulty we had during the past year over 3-13-06 62 1 defining who owed what to whom and how much. So, I -- I think 2 we're off to a very good start. I commend the Court and the 3 City for the efforts to mend the breach that had opened up, 4 but I don't think we're completely there yet. We still need a 5 long-range solution to the problems of funding the library on 6 both sides, and I would simply urge you to revisit that as -- 7 as promptly and as thoroughly as you can. And, as I've said 8 in the past, the Friends as a group, and I as an individual, 9 are certainly at your disposition for any help that we can 10 provide. And I'm grateful for your time. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Benham. We appreciate 12 you being here with us today. Is there any other member of 13 the audience that wishes to be heard on this particular issue? 14 We appreciate it. Anything further from any member of the 15 Court? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a comment I'll make to 17 Dave. When I read the first amendment -- it's really more of 18 a question. Do we need to add language that if there is a 19 capital expenditure that we want to jointly fund, we shouldn't 20 be precluded from doing it? And I don't think that we are. 21 It talks about an exclusion. 22 MR. MARTINEZ: I believe that language is there. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is it in the agreement? 24 MR. MARTINEZ: Next-to-the-last sentence. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other projects City and County 3-13-06 63 1 may individually negotiate. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: That -- impliedly, you've got that 4 any time you want to amend an agreement between two parties. 5 So -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: -- that certainly would be an option 8 with regard to any particular agreement, even if it contained 9 no similar language. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I believe that takes care of 12 our agenda. We can now go to -- we've got to go back and pick 13 up a couple items here. 14 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Going to return to Item 1.13. 16 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that correct, Mr. Odom? 18 MR. ODOM: Mr. Digges and Mr. Mayo, I believe -- 19 Mr. Mayo, I haven't got your -- how are you, sir? 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me go ahead and recall the item. 21 That's consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for the 22 exemption from the platting under 1.03.C, Kerr County 23 Subdivision Rules, for approximately 249 acres off Upper 24 Turtle Creek between Downing and Colinas Roads. 25 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayo and Mr. Digges, we 3-13-06 64 1 had discussed it before and y'all weren't here, and just 2 passed on it, but let me tell you basically what -- what that 3 item was. It's the definition of a road, okay? The driveway, 4 what you consider -- I call a driveway -- as a road. And, so, 5 the Court directed the County Attorney to look at the 6 definition, see what Mr. Wentworth's definition was versus 7 Kerr County's road. You know, we -- when we say "road," we 8 say a County-built road up to the standards with the number of 9 lots. You and I have discussed that, and I haven't had that. 10 So, basically, that's where it's at. We're looking for an 11 opinion of the County Attorney as far as the definition of a 12 road. We can construe it to be a county -- it would be 13 brought up to county standards, whatever that number of lots 14 are based upon the use of new subdivision rules and all. So, 15 I'll basically turn it over -- Commissioner Baldwin is in your 16 precinct, so if you have any questions, maybe, to Buster or -- 17 or Mr. Letz as far as that's concerned, I would ask you at 18 this time, probably, unless you wish to pursue it, till we get 19 an opinion. You may be correct, but we think that our 20 definition of a road is built up to a certain standard. 21 MR. DIGGES: I've got some evidence to provide, 22 if -- I guess, if I can have a chance to do that. I want to 23 provide y'all with some pictures. This is the road itself. 24 It is a paved highway. And here is what's considered a road 25 just -- just adjacent to this property. It's basically the 3-13-06 65 1 same, same width roadway. The pavement does not -- is not 2 quite as good condition. I'm Charlie Digges. I reside at 105 3 Larry Lee. And there is currently already a -- a defined 60 4 foot wide right-of-way that this tract is -- this roadway is 5 used for. There's a 110-acre tract to the -- to the south 6 here at the bottom of the page, and this -- this road is 7 contained within that defined right-of-way. It's a private 8 right-of-way at this time, and it would be for these other 9 members that would use the lots within this subdivision. So, 10 it would be a gated community in a -- in a roadway that's 11 already defined. There is a legal description of that 12 roadway. It wasn't that he just created this -- this 13 driveway, you know, three months ago. This -- this road's 14 been there a while. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's no -- the issue is the 16 standards of that road. And this has ramifications to many 17 subdivisions throughout the county, two in my precinct right 18 now, as to the -- whether any road, whether it's a good road 19 like this one, maybe, or a goat trail, is -- is -- does that 20 exempt you from having to put a road to county standards under 21 our current rules. 22 MR. DIGGES: Well, you said you're going to go, I 23 guess, to Mr. Wentworth. That's -- that was the senator? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Senator Wentworth wrote a letter 25 to a constituent of mine -- which is irrelevant, not related 3-13-06 66 1 to this at all -- about his interpretation of that, and we're 2 trying to clarify, really -- 3 MR. DIGGES: Okay. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- what the intent of the state 5 law is. That's why Senator Wentworth's name was brought up. 6 He's not going to look at this one, I don't think. It's more 7 of a County Attorney issue to look at state law, and does it 8 mean any road or does it mean a road that's contemplated by 9 county subdivision standards? 10 MR. DIGGES: Okay. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Also, this week, the County 12 Attorney and the County Engineer and myself will drive out 13 there and take a look at that road. I want to get out on the 14 ground and take a look at it and see what it looks like, and 15 measure this and measure that and have a visit. And, Charlie, 16 can have I this? 17 MR. DIGGES: Sure. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And use that type of 19 material to just kind of assist the -- evaluate what it is and 20 what you have out there on the ground, and -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other -- 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- then we'll come back and 23 talk. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other point on this is, 25 depends on who has access to that road right now. If you're 3-13-06 67 1 granting new people access, that's a change; that's not exempt 2 under how I read state law. I mean, if it's -- if that's a 3 road and its built to I-10 standards, and it's going to 4 someone's house, and all of a sudden you're about to sell lots 5 off of that road, you're changing the character of that road. 6 You're changing who can use it, and that's the way we've 7 looked at it for our subdivision rules. Once you change, you 8 know, who has a right to use it, that's like saying the road 9 goes to my house; well, because there's a road there that's 10 deeded to my house, even though I own all the property right 11 around it, that I can go ahead and start letting lots off of 12 that, even though it's just a dirt caliche road. That's not 13 the intent of our subdivision rules. 14 MR. MAYO: Let me clarify something that might help, 15 'cause what my intent -- 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Give your name and address, please, 17 sir. 18 MR. MAYO: Okay. I'm Robert Mayo, and what my 19 intent is, is to put very few tracts in there; that there'd 20 only be, I think, seven that would front on -- you know, on 21 that road. There's a whole lot of county road frontage 22 existing already, and it would be a gated community. Most 23 counties that I -- I'm a developer. Most counties allow an 24 exemption for -- for a few lots on a -- on a road; even a few, 25 like, on caliche-type deals. I don't really have a problem 3-13-06 68 1 platting it or -- you know, I just -- and trying -- and get an 2 exemption for that. I have no problem with that. You know, 3 he just thought that we might be able to just do it this way. 4 And -- and I still have no problem platting it, even doing it 5 this way. So, I just want to get y'all's opinion. Can I go 6 forward with something like that? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Our -- our policy has been that 8 we don't give an exemption to a road. The road has -- if 9 you're going to -- it's basically -- under our subdivision 10 rules, it's five lots. If it serves less than that -- well, 11 it still has to be built to standards. It still has to be 12 built to our minimum standards. 13 MR. ODOM: Minimum standards. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And your road, it may be there 15 already. If it's to that minimum standard already, we just 16 need an engineering report that it's currently at that minimum 17 standard, and then it would just be accepted. But if it's not 18 to minimum standards, it has to be brought to minimum 19 standards. 20 MR. MAYO: Okay. I guess I don't know what your 21 minimum standard is. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In our subdivision rules -- 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're fixing to find out. 24 Senator Wentworth's been a good friend of mine for a long 25 time, and he's a wise guy and a lot smarter than me. And, of 3-13-06 69 1 course, he's a lawyer and he's a lot smarter than everybody, 2 but I disagree with him on his -- his assessment of this bill 3 that he had written. So, that's what we want to do, is we 4 want to go out there and look at it. And my whole thing is -- 5 as a Commissioner and elected by the people, is that whoever 6 buys your lots has ingress/egress. I want them to be able to 7 get in and out of there, and I don't want them to have to go 8 down a goat trail, as the Commissioner said, to get in and out 9 of their property. So, that's where I'm at today. Until we 10 take a look at it and -- you know, we'll assess it, and -- 11 MR. MAYO: It's a real good road. It was put in, 12 crushed base and everything and two course top; doesn't even 13 have holes in it. It's been there ten years, so it's a real 14 good road. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll -- 16 MR. MAYO: It's just not as wide as a typical county 17 road. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll let you know about it, 19 I can tell you that. 20 MR. MAYO: Okay. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on that particular 22 item? Item 13? 23 MR. ODOM: May I sort of reiterate what Commissioner 24 Letz said? Basically, that 1.02 says that, "shall be required 25 to be prepared by the owner if the tract of land is subject to 3-13-06 70 1 the jurisdiction of Commissioners Court, divided into two or 2 more parts to lay out streets, alleys, parks," and so on and 3 so -- et cetera, et cetera. A division of a tract includes a 4 division, regardless of whether it was made by metes and 5 bounds in a deed of conveyance or in a contract for deed, by 6 using a contract of sale or other executory contract to 7 convey, by using any other method, which is C. All the lots 8 of the subdivision are more than 10 acres, and the owner does 9 not lay out a part of the tract as described in 1.02.C. So, 10 therefore, what Commissioner Letz is saying, even though that 11 would be one piece of land, you're still dividing into two or 12 more parts. 13 MR. DIGGES: Yes. 14 MR. ODOM: And you're using that street. You're 15 conveying that to the owners of that, even though it may be 16 10 acres. So, the problem we had before when we discussed it 17 was upgrading the road to that standard, whatever that may be, 18 whatever it comes to. 19 MR. DIGGES: I guess we interpreted it as being laid 20 out as it's already laid out. They act like it's going to be 21 something that you're going to do in the process of this, and 22 our opinion is, it's already there. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Our -- we have operated under 24 our former County Attorney; I don't think this County Attorney 25 has ever given us an opinion on it. "Lay out" also means 3-13-06 71 1 giving you access to use the land. 2 MR. ODOM: Giving someone else access to use that. 3 You're dividing that into two or more parts. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's not the physical -- the 5 physical construction of the road has nothing to do with 6 laying out. It's -- giving the right to use the road is an 7 equal part of laying out. And we have other roads where 8 there's an easement and no road. 9 MR. DIGGES: Yes. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We have a lot of those. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- 12 MR. DIGGES: Take a look, Buster. See what you 13 think. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're going to do that. 15 We'll do everything we can to meet your needs. 16 MR. DIGGES: Pretty rural setting, too. 17 MR. MAYO: I just want to say one other thing. If I 18 do have to build a county spec road, the lots will have to go 19 to 5 acres. I mean, I'll have a lot more tracts in there, 20 so -- just from an economic standpoint, that's the only way it 21 works. And I wanted to keep it large, you know, 20 acres and 22 one 70-acre tract, one 30-acre tract. I wanted to keep it 23 large. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Other developers have found it 25 economical to build a road to county standards for large 3-13-06 72 1 tracts. 2 MR. MAYO: They didn't pay the current prices. 3 Today's a lot different. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll get back to you. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: -- on this particular item? Okay. 7 Any -- any other items you wanted to revisit, Mr. Odom? 8 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Mr. Carswell's here on Item 9 1.17. This had to do with Shalako and High Point up there, 10 that road next to it. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 12 MR. ODOM: I believe -- Mr. Carswell? Do you 13 have -- how about the others? Do you have -- let me hand 14 those out to the court. 15 MR. CARSWELL: Yeah, mm-hmm. 16 MR. ODOM: There's only a few of them. He didn't 17 bring -- I think there's two more. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One will work, probably, for the 19 Court. 20 MR. CARSWELL: One? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 22 MR. CARSWELL: Mm-hmm. 23 MR. ODOM: What Mr. Carswell envisioned before was 24 1.03.C, 10 acres. And I explained to him that it doesn't fit 25 that type of criteria; that the lot is only 16 acres. What he 3-13-06 73 1 showed me here while y'all were in executive session is a new 2 layout, and I was telling him that I don't see a problem, 3 other than maybe some type of cul-de-sac on the end. This 4 road is paved. This is up there at High Point, and the road 5 keeps going straight. That has been paved up there. It goes 6 down and takes a 90. This Enchanted Valley Drive goes all the 7 way through; it goes down into the bottom. My thought was on 8 this to present it to the Court as a concept plan; that that 9 is a -- already a named -- an existing road, and that if he 10 could put a cul-de-sac, if the Court would go with that, then 11 this could be divided up, and -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm confused. If the road goes 13 on past, why would you need a cul-de-sac? 14 MR. ODOM: Right. Right. Well, it goes down to the 15 end and it ends down here. And I was thinking up on top, 16 since there's only -- how many people living there? 17 MR. CARSWELL: There's the -- Kay Jones and then the 18 Jenschkes are the only people that live past me. When you -- 19 when you -- by the way, my name is Gary Carswell. I live at 20 129 Enchanted Valley in Kerrville. At the entrance to High 21 Point, where you -- you go straight there, that is a private 22 drive, and it's -- it's been named under the 9-1-1 Commission. 23 It's -- it is Enchanted Valley. 24 MR. ODOM: If you went up -- 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Is the entrance to High Point coming 3-13-06 74 1 in off Lot 2 right here? I thought it was further back here. 2 MR. ODOM: It's further back. 3 MR. CARSWELL: The entrance -- no, the sub -- the 4 entrance to High Point subdivision is -- 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Down here, isn't it? 6 MR. CARSWELL: Right there where you're putting your 7 pen is where the entrance is. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm familiar with the property. 9 MR. CARSWELL: This man that owns Number 4 lot, if 10 you look at the line that separates the two tracts, that line 11 is basically the bottom of the canyon, okay? There's a high 12 side below him on 4, and there's a high side on my side. And 13 the view down through the canyon to the Guadalupe River basin 14 is right down that line. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where are you, Mr. Carswell? 16 Which one is you? 17 MR. ODOM: Lot 3. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Lot 3? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 2. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: He's on 2. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're on 2. Okay, thank 22 you. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you -- 24 JUDGE TINLEY: This road is not a public road, is 25 it? 3-13-06 75 1 MR. CARSWELL: No. 2 MR. ODOM: It's a private road. 3 MR. CARSWELL: Private. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What you own -- I'm trying to 5 figure out what you're even trying to do. This is one lot 6 right now, correct? 7 MR. CARSWELL: That's 16.07 acres, one lot. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You want to divide it into two? 9 MR. CARSWELL: My neighbor that owns Number 4 in 10 High Point Subdivision, his house is right on my fence line. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 12 MR. CARSWELL: And he wants to buy that piece of 13 property just to protect the view down the canyon. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He wants to buy Lot 1? 15 MR. ODOM: Lot 1. 16 MR. CARSWELL: Lot 1. 17 MR. ODOM: See, what he wanted to do was not to plat 18 it. 19 MR. CARSWELL: I was trying -- 20 MR. ODOM: Trying to go under that exemption at 21 1.03.C, 10 acres or more on a private road. But it won't -- 22 doesn't -- 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If he owns this and he's not 24 trying to -- he doesn't access it down this road. Or does he? 25 MR. CARSWELL: Well, that is -- 3-13-06 76 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How do you get to Lot 4? 2 MR. CARSWELL: Through the entrance to High Point. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: You go here and go back down this 4 way. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't you just sell him 6 right there? Divide the lot right there and let him -- 7 MR. CARSWELL: And not have the easement? Well, 8 he -- he had expressed interest in having that. You know, 9 that -- and that's the main reason that I came to the Court, 10 is to discuss what the options might be. I -- Edmund Jenschke 11 owns the property across Enchanted Valley Drive, okay, and 12 he's got, I think, 33 acres. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds right. 14 MR. CARSWELL: And his three granddaughters -- I 15 think he divided it between the three of them, and two of them 16 live there. And the one that lives at the bottom of the hill, 17 Kristen and her husband, and then the Joneses are the only 18 people that live past me. That's the very, very end of the 19 road, right past my house. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where does -- now, this road 21 exists? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 23 MR. CARSWELL: Yes, it does. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Stops here or keeps on going? 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Keeps on going. 3-13-06 77 1 MR. ODOM: Keeps on going. 2 MR. CARSWELL: It goes all the way, about another 3 500 yards, maybe 400 yards, then it dead-ends at the very 4 bottom. And he has no interest in selling this. He's buying 5 that piece of property just to protect his view down the 6 canyon. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And this is all in High Point 8 Subdivision. To me, it's got to be platted any way you do it. 9 It's less than 10 acres, which requires, under state law, a 10 platting. There's two ways it can be done; kind of what 11 you're doing here, or you can just do a revision of plat and 12 kind of change the lot lines between Lot 4 and Lot 1. I mean, 13 you can kind of -- 14 MR. ODOM: He's not going to have 200 feet. He's 15 going to have -- oh, you might even say 199.98, but he's in 16 that road easement. So, that's the reason I was thinking of a 17 cul-de-sac, some type of -- pull a radius off that road. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why does he need a -- if 19 Enchanted Valley is already a road, just a road that goes 20 there, then there's access right there. 21 MR. ODOM: I'm thinking that a trucker gets down 22 there and he gets to the end, and you can't back out of it. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's not the entrance, 24 though. 25 MR. ODOM: No, the entrance is on back up here, 3-13-06 78 1 probably 500, 700 feet. 2 MR. CARSWELL: The drive entrance is right at the 3 entrance to High Point Subdivision, right there. 4 MR. ODOM: Right there. 5 MR. CARSWELL: Now, would a privacy gate -- being 6 that the Jenschkes are -- are thinking about putting up a 7 privacy gate, a keypad gate, would that have any bearing on 8 what I'm trying to do? 9 MR. ODOM: No. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not really, no. 11 MR. ODOM: Go ahead, I'm sorry. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm still not convinced -- I 13 don't -- so this road goes on down here, but Mrs. Jones owns 14 all this? 15 MR. CARSWELL: Ms. Jones. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Jones owns all this, but the 17 road continues through here. Is it -- 18 MR. CARSWELL: It dead-ends right there. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Comes down here and loops around like 20 that. 21 MR. CARSWELL: That's what it does. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But is it -- I mean, is she the 23 only one that has access to the road on her property? 24 MR. ODOM: No, there's -- 25 MR. CARSWELL: The Jenschkes have to -- 3-13-06 79 1 JUDGE TINLEY: The Jenschkes can utilize the road to 2 get to this property down here. 3 MR. CARSWELL: Right. Those are the only other two 4 besides myself. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: What about the hookup with Ingram 6 Hills? Isn't there a roadway that -- albeit private, isn't 7 there a way out through Ingram Hills off the Jones property? 8 MR. CARSWELL: No. 9 MR. ODOM: I don't think so. 10 MR. CARSWELL: No, there's no road there. All the 11 roads that come off of that loop off of it, off the Ingram 12 Hills Drive, they just go down there and dead-end into 13 portions of Ingram Hills that are larger tracts, 10-, 12-, 14 15-acre tracts. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I think the -- the Kuene tract comes 16 and dead-ends at the fence, up against the Jones property. 17 MR. CARSWELL: The Kuntz? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Kuene. Lance Kuene. 19 MR. CARSWELL: Yeah. 20 MR. ODOM: Kuene over in Ingram Hills. 21 (Several people speaking at once. Court reporter asked everyone to please speak one at a time.) 22 - - - - - - - - - - 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, your -- where's your idea 24 for that cul-de-sac, Leonard? 25 MR. ODOM: Right there. 3-13-06 80 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Triangle thing? 2 MR. ODOM: In this triangle thing. And -- and not 3 that he necessarily needs to build it as it is laid out, that 4 no one could fence anything off. And it doesn't have to be a 5 full cul-de-sac. My point is, here's two -- less than 6 200 feet against this property line right there. If you pull 7 this back, he's not going to have the 200-foot frontage. So, 8 I'm thinking if I had a cul-de-sac, that this right-of-way is 9 60 foot. Am I correct? 10 MR. CARSWELL: Mm-hmm. 11 MR. ODOM: That that -- if we had a cul -- a half 12 cul-de-sac down there, that it would meet subdivision rules as 13 far as this right-of-way still at 60 foot. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Your -- your potential buyer out of 15 High Point up here, he's -- he's pretty solid on wanting this 16 additional access way, other than coming through his place? 17 MR. CARSWELL: I think his real estate broker 18 advised him to -- to do that so that it wouldn't be 19 landlocked. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So he could sell it if he needed 21 to. 22 MR. CARSWELL: Do you have the file of the -- what I 23 gave Truby to send up here? 24 MR. ODOM: Whatever I sent in the packet here. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do you need? 3-13-06 81 1 MR. CARSWELL: I was going to show you -- there's a 2 map in there that kind of gives -- 3 MR. ODOM: That's where this is coming from, is to 4 have that option. 5 MR. CARSWELL: Yeah, this is it right here. This 6 may, you know, show you a little bit more about the -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It doesn't. I guess -- I mean, 8 I'm trying to figure out why we need the cul-de-sac. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So am I. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I understand what you're 11 saying from an access standpoint a little bit, but the 12 cul-de-sac needs to be down at the end of the road, it seems 13 to me, not up there. Because -- I mean, I'm looking at it -- 14 I look at from it a future development. Yes, there is a 95 -- 15 92-acre tract Ms. Jones owns, and Jenschkes own 33 acres. 16 What if they subdivide? You know, that's kind of, I guess, in 17 my -- what if they start selling and we start getting more 18 lots? I mean, other than the -- I agree with Leonard, the 19 200-foot issue that it's -- 20 MR. ODOM: You got to give a variance. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have to give a variance on 22 that, which we're not very inclined to do. So, it's kind of a 23 way to put a cul-de-sac in there, which would help, I guess. 24 It gives a spot to turn around on that road somewhere. Little 25 bit of an odd spot for it, in my mind, but it does give a -- 3-13-06 82 1 you know, a place to make the turnaround. But a better spot 2 for the cul-de-sac would be down here, but that doesn't help 3 this issue. 4 MR. ODOM: That's a real steep hill right there. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Are you still up on top right here at 6 this point, or is that where it drops off? 7 MR. CARSWELL: You're -- exactly on that corner 8 right there where -- where your pen is, is where the hill goes 9 straight down. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: There's a -- 11 MR. CARSWELL: Big hill. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 13 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. 14 MR. CARSWELL: Yeah. That's why -- I was telling 15 Odom, that's why the -- Joe Ed Jenschke name's there. 16 Jenschke's daughter moved down at the bottom of the hill, 17 Kristen. She -- she does a lot of horse work, and she 18 couldn't get up that hill. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: With a trailer? 20 MR. CARSWELL: With a trailer, 'cause no traction. 21 So they came in and -- and we -- I pitched in seven or eight 22 grand, and we just -- we came from the entrance to High Point, 23 which it used to be just caliche, and we paved it to the 24 bottom of the hill. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's good to have a contractor 3-13-06 83 1 for a neighbor. 2 MR. CARSWELL: Ain't a bad deal. 3 MR. ODOM: The hill's right there. This was -- if 4 someone came in -- this just made it work, and it made -- the 5 cul-de-sac made the 60-foot right-of-way work without a 6 variance. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I -- I wouldn't -- to me, 8 the options are to go with what Leonard's recommending, 9 putting a cul-de-sac in this odd spot, or cut it off there and 10 combine the two lots, and revise -- 11 MR. ODOM: Two lots. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, that's -- either one 13 works. 14 MR. CARSWELL: If we cut it off right here -- 15 JUDGE TINLEY: But you'd eliminate this. 16 MR. CARSWELL: If you eliminate that right-of-way, 17 and you tie in from Tract 4 onto Tract 1, would it have to be 18 still -- would it still fall under the subdivision rules? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, it would be a revision of 20 the existing subdivision plat. You'd change the lot lines. 21 MR. CARSWELL: Now, what if the gentleman that's 22 going to purchase this property still wants that right-of-way? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. You can do the 24 cul-de-sac; I think that meets our rules, too. That works. 25 Commissioner Baldwin looks perplexed down there. 3-13-06 84 1 MR. CARSWELL: He's ready to go to lunch. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Doing good. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Very perceptive. 4 MR. ODOM: Any questions? I mean, thank you. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Makes this a lot clearer than it 6 was earlier this morning. Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. 8 MR. CARSWELL: Thank you for your time. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't realize they paved that 11 road. Last time I was down there, it wasn't paved. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not bad having Joe Ed as a 13 neighbor, or Edmund. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Joe Ed's daughter's at the bottom; 15 that's why he got stuck with it. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that who that is? 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. Okay. Looks like, 18 gentlemen, we are down to the approval agenda. I've asked our 19 coordinator to call Mindy down, and -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Want these to go out and look so 21 you can find your road? 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, isn't that cute? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: That'll help you find where you need 24 to go. 25 (Discussion off the record.) 3-13-06 85 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Williams. 2 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We're to Section 4, payment of 4 the bills. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He does have -- he has bills. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: The bills did not come in. They got 7 them compiled late Friday, and I've got them in two different 8 formats. Maybe that was the reason for the delay. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is this? 10 MS. WILLIAMS: The one that is bound is the new 11 system that we're on. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh. 13 MS. WILLIAMS: So we decided we'd go ahead and give 14 both of them to the Court so you can kind of compare old 15 system, new system. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mindy? 17 MS. WILLIAMS: Little bit different. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May I ask you a question? 19 Why is it I don't get either one? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In your box. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's in your box. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's in my box? 23 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. Would you like me to get 24 it for you? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I can handle it. I can 3-13-06 86 1 do my own job. They pay me well for this. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are we going to get the 3 bound volume from now on? 4 MS. WILLIAMS: We are still working on what we're 5 going to wind up bringing to court. Since we were training 6 last week, this is kind of a rushed, thrown-together type 7 situation. Hopefully our next court date won't be quite so 8 haphazard. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, I need to look in my box 10 every five minutes. 11 MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir. Hopefully, we'll have them 12 before Monday morning. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. What is this 14 propaganda here? Bound -- it's a new system? 15 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you going to explain it, 17 or are we just going to accept your word and go on? 18 MS. WILLIAMS: I can try to explain it. Basically, 19 it's the same information as what was on the old TSG fund 20 requirements report. It is a little bit different, as this 21 report today actually has the check numbers on it. We had to 22 run the A.P. checks in order to test that portion of the 23 program, so when we ran this department payment register, it 24 picked up check numbers. Now, hopefully, the next one will 25 not have check numbers on it until after the bills are 3-13-06 87 1 approved by the Court. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: But the information is the same? 3 MS. WILLIAMS: Basically, it is the same. We check 4 the totals. The copy that the Court has is within the same 5 guidelines as what we used before. Before, on the old TSG 6 system, we were able to pick and choose the funds that the 7 Court has authority over approving bills. We didn't include, 8 like, the Adult Probation Department; those are state funds. 9 Some of the Juvenile Probation, because those are state funds. 10 On the new system, we're not able to exclude those funds at 11 the present time. We're still working on trying to figure 12 that one out. So, what we sent today is basically what the 13 old report had on it, as opposed to giving everything. Now, 14 if the Court would prefer, when we run our reports, we can run 15 everything, which would include the excluded funds that y'all 16 really don't say yea or nay on paying the bills. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about -- I'm not 18 interested in that, I can tell you for sure, and I'm not 19 interested in check numbers. What about -- where's the 20 Commissioners Court? 21 MS. WILLIAMS: It would be probably -- if you look 22 at the top of the report, the left top corner, -- 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh. 24 MS. WILLIAMS: -- it will have the fund number and 25 the department number. 3-13-06 88 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh. 2 MS. WILLIAMS: Commissioners Court is Department 400 3 -- let's see, 401. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. 5 MS. WILLIAMS: County Judge is 400. It just so 6 happened we didn't have any bills for you guys this time. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly right. And 8 that's my question. Is that something that you would add into 9 this report, even though it shows zero? 10 MS. WILLIAMS: No, only -- what's on this report is 11 only the bills that we are processing for payment for those 12 departments. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. That was just a 14 question. 15 MS. WILLIAMS: Right. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So let's hear that again. 17 Commissioners Court did not generate any bills this month, 18 right? 19 MS. WILLIAMS: Correct, because we had an early 20 cutoff period. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Nor did the County Judge. 22 MS. WILLIAMS: Nor did the County Judge. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This will work fine from my 24 standpoint. Same information, little bit different format. I 25 move approval of the bills. 3-13-06 89 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve 3 the bills. Any question or discussion? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mindy, do you like this? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not yet? 6 MS. WILLIAMS: Well, I'm reserving my comments. I 7 think it's going to be a lot nicer. It gives us a lot more 8 flexibility, I believe this program does, so it's going to 9 take a while to get used to it. We're so used to doing it the 10 old way. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 12 MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah -- but, yeah, I think I am going 13 to like it. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, good. That's what 15 matters to me, is that you're happy. 16 MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or comment? All 18 in favor of the 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: The motion does carry. Budget 23 Amendment Request Number 1. 24 MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. This budget amendment, it's 25 similar to the one we had last court date. We have a bill 3-13-06 90 1 for -- I believe it is -- let me look at it. It was some 2 interpreting, or -- well, they've got -- I can tell you right 3 now, the description on the budget amendment line item is 4 wrong. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Should be Court-Appointed Services, 6 shouldn't it? 7 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, it is. And what it was, 8 they had to bring in an interpreter, I believe, on a case 9 where they had an individual who was deaf -- hearing-impaired, 10 so we have this bill out of the 198th District Court. And, 11 unfortunately, that line item for Special Court Services is 12 zeroed out, so we're moving $325 out of the 216th District 13 Court line item up to 198th so that we can get this bill paid. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 17 of Budget Amendment Request Number 1. Any question or 18 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 19 your right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget 24 Amendment Request Number 2. 25 MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. This budget amendment, we have 3-13-06 91 1 received a bill from -- I'm trying to remember the -- 2 JUDGE TINLEY: H.E.B. 3 MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir, it's not H.E.B. Gold Star 4 Food Service. I believe it's a commodity service that the 5 detention facility uses to get some of their foods from. We 6 received the bill, and basically, I think it's, like, a 7 commodity charge, for $41.30. And the line item in the 8 Juvenile Detention budget for food is zeroed out at this 9 point. We need to move the $41.30. I'd like to move from it 10 Marketing up to Food to be able to take care of this bill. We 11 will have the same situation next court date. As soon as the 12 bills come in, we'll have a better idea of how much money 13 we're going to have to do a budget amendment for. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Far as I'm concerned, you can 15 move the whole Marketing money over there to the food, 'cause 16 that's what it's going to take. It's going to take that and 17 more, looks like. 18 MS. WILLIAMS: From the looks of it. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And if I had to make a 20 decision whether -- the difference between feeding those kids 21 and us going out -- or our people going out and marketing the 22 facility, I mean, that's a no-brainer to me. I'm serious. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with you. What are 24 you talking about, "a commodity," Mindy? What are you talking 25 about? 3-13-06 92 1 MS. WILLIAMS: I believe this facility -- it's kind 2 of like a government commodity program, where they can get 3 foodstuffs through them at a much cheaper rate than they would 4 buy from someone else. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I got you. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The old cheese program. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Do you need a hand check on that 8 also? 9 MS. WILLIAMS: It would be nice, but not really 10 necessary. I mean, we can, but we can just throw it in the -- 11 in with next court date. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, do you want to take 14 action on this, Judge? 'Cause I do have a comment I want to 15 make relative to what Commissioner Baldwin said. 16 MS. WILLIAMS: If you'd like to change the amount 17 that you want us to transfer, we're open to that. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it's not -- you don't 19 have that budget amendment in, but I guess what I was going to 20 say was, we're going to do a six months review coming up in 21 two weeks. 22 MS. WILLIAMS: Correct. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And I think that would be an 24 appropriate time to really seriously consider it. 25 MS. WILLIAMS: Address it? Okay. 3-13-06 93 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think I've got a motion on 3 this one yet. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 7 of Budget Amendment Request Number 2. Any 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. Budget 14 Amendment Request Number 3. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Another whopper. 16 MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah. We have a bill that the 17 District Clerk's Office had to put an ad in the paper for -- 18 I'm not sure what reason. Anyway, we've come to this time in 19 her budget where she just doesn't have enough money there to 20 pay this bill, so we need to move $4.60. She suggested moving 21 it out of her Part-Time Salary line item, which I have no 22 problem with, and moving it up to her Books, Publications, and 23 Dues line item so we can pay the bill to Kerrville Daily 24 Times. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 3-13-06 94 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 3 of Budget Amendment Request Number 3. Any question or 4 discussion? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I want to point out a 6 rule that we have in the county, and that is that if an 7 elected official is going and -- knowingly going to spend more 8 money than what's in the budget line, they need to come get 9 permission from the Commissioners Court. No one has ever done 10 that. Ever. But the rule is there to try to get -- try to 11 get everybody to try to get a handle on their budget and hold 12 onto it. But there is a perfect -- perfect place for that. 13 If you run an ad in the paper, you know the ad's going to cost 14 you $80 and you have $70 in there, you know -- 15 MS. WILLIAMS: If I could make one statement? With 16 this new system that we're going on, there is what they call a 17 purchase order program. And what it will do is, for instance, 18 just as you were saying, they get ready to put an ad in the 19 paper, or they get ready to order supplies. They can go in 20 and put in that GL code, and it will go out there and it will 21 look at that line item, and what it does is basically take the 22 amount of money that you're putting in there, and it sets it 23 aside over here and takes it out of that budget to where you 24 cannot, like, double-dip. If you don't have enough money in 25 that line item, when you try to issue that P.O., it's going to 3-13-06 95 1 tell you. It won't let you issue it. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's good. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Forced compliance with policy. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I like the other 5 one -- I like the new one. 6 MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah. Like I said, it's going to 7 give us a lot more flexibility, I think, once we get 8 comfortable with it. It won't be overnight. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 10 (Discussion off the record.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, signify 12 by raising your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget 17 Amendment Request Number 4. 18 MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. This invoice was from 19 Compton's, and it was for repairs done at the Juvenile 20 Detention Facility. It looks like they had something 21 repaired. My copy is so light, I really can't read it very 22 well. Has to do with a freezer, I believe, that's located out 23 there. The line item that we needed to take this out of, that 24 10-515-451, only had $76.53 left in it, so I spoke with 25 Mr. Holekamp, and he agreed that we could move the money out 3-13-06 96 1 of his Maintenance and Custodial Supplies line item, which is 2 10-512-350. The amount we need is $933.52. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 6 of Budget Amendment Request Number 4. Any question or 7 discussion? 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me see if I'm 9 understanding this completely. It's a repair to a freezer, 10 and the actual bill is over $1,000? 11 MS. WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. Yes, sir. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Food freezer? 13 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes. From what I -- from what I can 14 gather off this invoice, "Checked walk-in freezer, found dual 15 pressure, control shorted." And I think they had to 16 replace -- the parts were $374.67. Labor was over $600. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good lord. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unfortunately, my experience 19 with walk-in coolers, this is not a lot. 20 MR. ODOM: They're expensive. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the alternative is bad 22 food and a lot of hospital bills. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion? 24 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 25 hand. 3-13-06 97 1 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 3 (No response.) 4 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We have 5 another one? 6 MS. WILLIAMS: I do have one more; it came in late. 7 Oh, backwards. I gave it -- 8 MR. ODOM: Judge? 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request Number 5. 10 MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. On this one, since we have two 11 full-time district court reporters now, the $1,100 that we 12 budgeted for their court reporter expenses, which encompasses 13 their supplies, things like that, paper, cartridges for their 14 printers, whatnot, is just not going to carry us through. 15 What I'd like to do, with the Court's permission, is move 16 $1,000 out of the Juror Fee line item up to Court Reporter 17 Expenses. Just as an after note, we do bill the other 18 participating counties in those two districts for their share. 19 The problem is, with the 198th District, there's only one 20 other county sharing our expenses, which is Kimble County, and 21 their percentage is very low; it's less than 10 percent. So, 22 we bear the brunt of this court reporters' expenses. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tell us why -- why there's 24 only one county. 25 MS. WILLIAMS: The other -- 3-13-06 98 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about Menard and Brady? 2 MS. WILLIAMS: The other counties have their own 3 court reporters. This happened some years back. Prior to 4 that, we were billing -- let's see. I believe there's four -- 5 there were four counties in the 198th, and there were five in 6 the 216th. But some years back, for some reason, the other 7 two counties pulled out, got their own court reporter. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good for them. The -- and 9 we -- we pay for all the materials that Kathy needs -- our 10 court reporter needs? 11 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, mm-hmm. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. If we haven't made a 13 motion, by gosh, I'd like to make one. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go ahead. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we approve Budget 16 Amendment Request Number 5. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve 19 Budget Amendment Request Number 5. Any question or 20 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 21 your right hand. 22 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 24 (No response.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Any further 3-13-06 99 1 budget amendments? 2 MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir. No late bills. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Any late bills? 4 MS. WILLIAMS: No late bills. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly 6 reports from the Sheriff's Department; Constable, Precinct 3 7 for January and February of this year; Justice of the Peace, 8 Precinct 3; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2; Justice of the 9 Peace, Precinct 4; Constable, Precinct 1; Juvenile Facility, 10 Ilse Bailey, Special Prosecutor; and Kerr County Emergency 11 Services District Number 1. Do I hear a motion that these 12 reports be approved as submitted? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I second that motion, but 15 I've got a question. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 17 of the reports as submitted. Any question or discussion? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, is that -- in that 19 group of reports you have there, is that the regular monthly 20 reports, or does that include these racial profiling stats? 21 Or is this a separate -- we want to deal with this in a 22 separate way? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: This does not include the racial 24 profiling stats. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 3-13-06 100 1 JUDGE TINLEY: As best that I can tell. These are 2 the regular reports that are furnished to us as a part of 3 regular monthly business. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that could -- I mean, the 6 racial profiling could be -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we want to include this in 8 the -- somehow, somewhere, in the monthly -- in the reporting? 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Would you prefer that that be done by 10 a separate motion, or would you -- do you want them included 11 there? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm asking you that. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: I'll do it either way you want to. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's include it in. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Very well. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In the one motion. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I've also been submitted 18 Constable, Precinct 1 citations as required under the law for 19 racial profiling reporting purposes, and -- and the racial 20 profiling statistics from the Kerr County Sheriff's Office 21 from March 1, 2005 through February 28, 2006. And for 22 purposes of the report submitted to me -- did you make the 23 motion? Who made the motion? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I did. 25 MS. THOMPSON: Commissioner Letz made the motion. 3-13-06 101 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Does your motion include the 2 approval -- 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, it does. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: -- of those racial profiling items 5 just enumerated? 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, it does. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: And the second, I assume, was -- 8 MS. THOMPSON: Commissioner Baldwin. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any further question or 10 discussion on the motion? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question on the racial -- racial 12 profiling portion of this. These are required by law, 13 Commissioner Baldwin? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a timing -- is this for 16 the -- these are for the last year summary, or is it -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, and they're -- I think 18 it was March 1st, I think, was the due time. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: March 1, '05 through February 28, 20 '06. Which, of course, -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: -- they could only be submitted 1st 23 day of March at the very earliest. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does this -- I guess my question 25 is, does this mean that Constable 3, 4 and 2 are late in 3-13-06 102 1 getting them to us, or they just haven't got them to us yet? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know anything about 3 it yet. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two's in. We didn't take 5 court action. It's in; I saw it. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you're supposed to -- 8 I think you're supposed to go to Commissioners Court. You're 9 -- the law says that you present -- they are to be presented 10 to the Commissioners Court. And I think that we just accept 11 them; we don't do anything fancy. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But -- 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two's was presented, 'cause 15 I saw a copy of it. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can do them on the next one 17 if we need to, the other ones. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion on 19 the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 20 your right hand. 21 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 23 (No response.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Any reports 25 from any of the Commissioners in connection with their 3-13-06 103 1 liaison, committee, or other assignments? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to remind you guys 3 that the EMS -- EMS report you should have, and Dr. Morgan has 4 kindly offered his services to sit down with you one-on-one to 5 visit with you about it if you have any questions, and I 6 highly recommend that you do that. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are they going to be presenting 8 their report at the next meeting? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: At that time, when it -- 10 there he is now. The next meeting is the 27th, and that 11 afternoon we have the 1:30 off-season budget workshop, and I 12 wanted to do the EMS that day as well, that afternoon. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we do that? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I mean, that's what we 15 need to do. So, what I -- we say what we had always agreed to 16 do is on this particular day, and I want to do it in a 17 workshop setting so that we can have the -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dialogue. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- the dialogue back and 20 forth, and -- and don't take up Commissioners Court agenda 21 time. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: In terms of time, what do you -- what 23 do you anticipate? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thirty, 40 minutes. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 3-13-06 104 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If we -- if we individually 2 look at the report, and if we can get with Dr. Morgan, 'cause 3 there are some questions in there, and get with Dr. Morgan and 4 let him try to explain. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: What about the off-season budget? 6 What do you anticipate that's going to take, Commissioner 7 Williams? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I wouldn't think more than 9 30 minutes to an hour. Wouldn't take more than that. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that county-wide? I guess it 11 depends on the format of what we're given to work off of. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll get with Mindy on that. 13 But I thought it was the Court's desire to look at everything. 14 Some departments may trigger more comment than others. 15 That's -- I suspect some will. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we schedule -- you'll 17 have 3 o'clock juveniles, more than likely? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Yeah, probably. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we set the -- we have 20 a 1:30. Do the other one at 2:30. That gives us an hour for 21 the first and 30 minutes for the second. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: No problem. I think what I'll do is 24 tell them to schedule my detention hearings starting at 3:30 25 or 4:00. 3-13-06 105 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that's wise. 2:30 2 for the EMS report? 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Yeah. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cool. That's cool. Just by 5 way of reminder; I just want to remind you guys. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: I appreciate you doing that, 7 Commissioner. Okay. Anybody else have anything they -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a couple quickies 9 here, Judge. At the AACOG Board meeting this past week -- 10 there's some information I think I'd like to share with the 11 Court. This is -- what I handed out is the Kerr County 12 workforce profile. I'll be happy for members of the press to 13 get a copy if they like as well. It details all of the 14 breakdown of the workforce in Kerr County. Last year was the 15 first time they did one of these, and there's some breakdowns 16 in terms of population, household income, educational 17 attainment, population as it continues to grow, and how our 18 workforce is broken down. I think it's a useful pie chart for 19 your study. Mr. George Holekamp was nominated by the Soil and 20 Water Conservation Districts within the AACOG region to serve 21 on the Economic Development Environmental Review Committee, 22 and he was approved to do that. 23 We were told at the Rural Judges meeting and again 24 at the board meeting that the level of funding for workforce 25 for both adult and youth and dislocated workers and so forth 3-13-06 106 1 and so on in the rural counties surrounding Bexar County is 2 going to be reduced this next fiscal year by about 2.2 to 3 four -- $4 million, and that, of course, results in a 4 discussion -- resulted in a discussion as to what's going to 5 happen with the workforce centers. And Mr. Miller, who's 6 Executive Director of -- of Alamo WorkSource, reported that he 7 and his board are going to be looking at various and sundry 8 ways to accommodate the services based on this cut in funding. 9 And both the AACOG board and the Rural Judges committee, which 10 I represent Kerr County on, let him know in no uncertain terms 11 that we were not interested in seeing a -- a workforce center 12 eliminated, put an X, marked through, but there are several 13 different options. Out of this workforce center are satellite 14 operations in Bandera County, Kendall County, Gillespie 15 County. However he deals with that, he'll have to figure that 16 out and get back to the board -- to the rural judges at AACOG 17 Board. 18 But it's important, because almost two and a half 19 million dollars of funding is going to be reduced, which 20 suggests that the level of funding at these rural workforce 21 centers is going to be reduced as well. But it seems to me 22 there's more than one way to accommodate this -- this problem. 23 In terms of workforce centers, we have four regional centers 24 in 11 counties that surround Bexar County, and ours happens to 25 be one of them. We have the satellites that operate out of 3-13-06 107 1 it. Within Bexar County, there are maybe five of these 2 things, so if he has to restructure services, it seems to me 3 to be not inappropriate for him to look at how he restructures 4 all of the services so that we can continue to have the type 5 of services that are provided out of this center. That's not 6 only a service to people who are looking for a job. It goes 7 to workforce training, goes to employer services as well, 8 looking for employees. So, it's really -- it's really very 9 important. 10 While we're losing some funding in that regard, we 11 are gaining some more funding in the Homeland Security 12 department by about an extra $3 million that's coming into 13 AACOG region for Homeland Security initiative. We'll see how 14 that gets all nailed down. I couldn't tell a while ago about 15 the grant, but we did get the grant for -- for the 16 surveillance -- for surveillance equipment. It came through 17 the Resource Recovery Committee and recommended down, and 18 approved by the AACOG Board, which means that Mr. Arreola's 19 application for equipment will be funded, and he can start 20 finding out who's dumping this trash illegally on Klein Branch 21 Road and other places like that. This is just kind of an 22 F.Y.I. This came from the Economic Development Environmental 23 Review Committee, which looks at all these proposals. I 24 thought it was kind of interesting. The Kendall County 4-H 25 Horse Club proposed a 4-H ag outdoor learning center and arena 3-13-06 108 1 to the tune of $400,000, and the funding agency would be 2 U.S.D.A. Community Facilities Loan and Grants Program. And it 3 received a favorable review and is moving forward. Does that 4 ring any bells about things we might want to do? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: End of report. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, back on this 8 report, the Workforce report, where did that come from? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The WorkSource people do 10 this. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: At AACOG? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, out of Alamo WorkSource. 13 They did it. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They did it last year for 16 the first time and provided originally only Bexar County. We 17 said, "Hey, what about the rest of us?" So they went back and 18 did it. I shared this with you last year. This is the second 19 time they've done it. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess my comment is, I -- and 21 I guess you're the right person to get feedback the other 22 direction. I see one category missing. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's that? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Agriculture. If I was to read 25 this, I would say we had no agriculture in this county. And I 3-13-06 109 1 don't know if they're calling it Other Services or Leisure and 2 Hospitality or what they're calling it, but somewhere -- I 3 don't think it's unclassified, 'cause I think we have more 4 than 20 people doing it. That's a category that they need to 5 look at as to how -- where these people are that are working, 6 because I suspect we have a -- this would be a pretty big 7 piece of that pie. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good point. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, to me, ag -- 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you have a feel for what 11 this might be? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would call it anything from 13 hunting operations -- 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I mean in terms of numbers 15 or percentage of our population. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Large. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Large. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll bring it to their 19 attention. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would say -- I would think 21 there would be, certainly, 300, 400, 500 people at a minimum. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And anywhere from ranch managers 24 at a pretty high level to people, you know, that may be 25 working on the ranch as laborers that are pretty low level, 3-13-06 110 1 salary-wise. But I just think it's a broad spectrum. And I 2 think, you know, some -- like, fence builders, probably that 3 would be construction. A few things like that would have a 4 real problem with that, but I do have a problem with the ag 5 being missing completely on this. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll call it to their 7 attention. Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. I wanted 9 to ask you about -- are you saying that they're downsizing 10 their workforce operation? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I'm saying they're 12 having to take a look at what they do, because they're -- the 13 amount of money coming in from the feds through the Texas 14 Workforce Commission is going to be about almost two and a 15 half million dollars less than we had last year. Now, the 16 rural -- the rural workforce centers are under contract to an 17 AACOG subsidiary to run them, which means that AACOG -- the 18 A.A.D.C., that corporation was just about to put out a -- 19 respond to the RFP's for services for the ensuing year. 20 They've got to go back to the drawing board in terms of what 21 services. But -- and Mr. Miller reports from WorkSource that 22 this money is going to be missing in his next budget year. 23 He's saying we don't know what the net impact is going to be. 24 Our response is, "Well, you better take a look at it, but 25 closing rural centers is not one of those options." 3-13-06 111 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. You know, I remember 2 when the program came into play. They were put in place to 3 eliminate welfare programs. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's part of it, yeah. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it looks and sounds to me 6 like we're going to go back to food stamps -- Food Stamp 7 program and this cheese thing I heard about a while ago, 8 and -- I'm serious. Is that what we're going to go back to 9 now? Is all money going to Homeland Security these days? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What they gave us was 11 Congress recently passed a federal appropriations bill for 12 Fiscal Year '06. Although we're still analyzing the impact 13 the appropriations bill will have on the local workforce 14 system, the following is a preliminary estimate of likely 15 funding cuts projected by the Texas Workforce Commission. 16 Workforce Initiative Adult, 7.9; Workforce Initiative Youth, 17 Workforce Initiative Dislocated Worker program, 1.7, for a 18 total of 2.244. Cuts would impact operations beginning July 19 '06. WIA programs pay for a significant percentage of our 20 career center infrastructure costs. The estimated funding 21 cuts shown above represent about 90 to 95 percent of the total 22 cost of operating the career centers; rent, utilities, 23 janitorial, communications. They also support the majority of 24 our resident customer enrollments into occupational training, 25 on and on and on and on. So, it's something we need to watch 3-13-06 112 1 very seriously -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- and not be impacted. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a couple of brief comments. 5 One is just an interesting general comment. Kendall County, 6 on water issues, is -- Kendall County Water District Number 1, 7 which is primarily the Comfort area, and the County 8 Commissioners Court are at quite odds over who has control 9 over lot sizes and water and water availability, which -- and 10 I believe it's going through the Attorney General. It will be 11 an interesting determination. And I think it's part of a 12 statewide issue of the -- the emergence of underground water 13 districts, and then having their rules in conflict with 14 municipalities, MUDs and other districts, since it's the 15 different -- who's really in charge of underground water? So 16 it's some interesting things that may impact us at some point. 17 The other thing is related to the airport. The 18 Court probably is aware of the -- how the board's made up, but 19 there's a -- Commissioners recommend an at-large member, and 20 our at-large member, Granger MacDonald, has resigned. 21 Commissioner Williams and I are looking at recommending a -- 22 probably at our next meeting, recommending a new replacement 23 to Mr. McDonald. He's served us well; sorry to see him leave. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll have a resolution 25 thanking him for his support next time. 3-13-06 113 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further? We will be in 2 recess till 1:30. 3 (Recess taken from 12:10 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.) 4 - - - - - - - - - - 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come to order again. We 6 were in recess for the lunch period. The 1:30 item is dealing 7 with Subdivision Rules and Regulations and Water Availability 8 Requirements. At this time, I will recess the Commissioners 9 Court meeting, and I will convene a public hearing on 10 Subdivision Rules and Regulations and Water Availability 11 Requirements. 12 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 1:31 p.m., and a public hearing was held in open 13 court, as follows:) 14 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I have one participation form. I 16 assume that's for the public hearing or the agenda item or 17 both. That's Mr. Wiedenfeld. Mr. Wiedenfeld, please come 18 forward and tell us what's on your mind. If you'll state your 19 name and address for the benefit of the record? 20 MR. WIEDENFELD: Charles Wiedenfeld, 133 Center 21 Point River Road, representing Wiedenfeld Water Works, a 22 public investor-owned utility -- water utility. I've got 23 revisions that I'm proposing, and I'll just speak on some of 24 these real quickly and briefly -- you know me, I'm never 25 brief. And I also apologize that I didn't get involved, and 3-13-06 114 1 probably should have made some comments probably a long time 2 ago already. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this the same deal, 4 Charles? We got two different documents here. 5 MR. WIEDENFELD: Well, there's one -- there's 6 only -- I only gave you two documents. There's a -- there's 7 two copies of the one on water availability, which that 8 addresses most all my concerns. The other -- the issues in 9 the Kerr County Subdivision Regulations are very minimal. And 10 what I would like to just recommend on the Subdivision 11 Regulations, that I would like to see something be addressed 12 on the reserve utility easements in platted subdivisions, in 13 that I believe that the reserve utility easements ought to 14 only be along the frontage of the road and down one lot line, 15 and not encumber all lot lines. I believe that takes up a lot 16 of the personal property there, and it's unnecessary. During 17 the platting requirements and stages, preliminary plat, all 18 utilities can pretty much know which utility where -- which 19 road frontage and which lot line they're going to use when 20 they put in their utilities, and so we don't really need to be 21 encumbering the other two lot lines, and that's why I'm having 22 -- and it comes into play when we're doing septic systems and 23 trying to get them on these smaller lot sizes, and also being 24 maybe the only site that has suitable soils or the best soils 25 on a piece of property, and rather than having to put in 3-13-06 115 1 aerobic units somewhere else on the site rather than using a 2 soil absorption system. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Take you a deep breath and 4 let me ask you a question here. Do you consider yourself a 5 utility? 6 MR. WIEDENFELD: No. I do consider myself a 7 utility, but on-site sewage facilities are not considered a 8 utility. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 10 MR. WIEDENFELD: A public utility. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. And my other 12 question is -- and you and I have had this discussion before, 13 and it may be a legal question; I'm not sure. Who makes 14 that -- does this Court make the decision of where the utility 15 easement runs? You're talking about down one side and across 16 the front, not all the way around or anything. Do we make 17 that decision in where utilities -- 18 MR. WIEDENFELD: It's my understanding that approval 19 of the plat is y'all -- is done by y'all and becomes final at 20 that time, and becomes a permanent, reserved utility easement 21 along all property lines. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And what would be wrong with 23 you being considered a utility, to where you can go into that 24 easement and do some of your work? 25 MR. WIEDENFELD: Well, again, from the utility side, 3-13-06 116 1 like I am, I will already know at the time, or during 2 preliminary plat, which utility line I will have my services 3 on, and I don't need and will never, ever need the other 4 easements. I'll be using the front right-of-way, the road 5 frontage, and I will be placing a meter on one common lot line 6 to serve two lots, which is my understanding how the electric 7 utility operates. And at this time, you have your phone 8 services also attached to the electrical service. So, again, 9 we have no -- I see no need to be encumbering other lot lines 10 for reserve easements that never, ever will be used, only that 11 they restrict the owner's use of that land. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you have -- is it -- do you 14 have specifically what he's -- where he's talking about, the 15 page? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just trying to find out. 17 MR. WIEDENFELD: Yeah, there's only one copy of 18 that. I'll provide more. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You've given me a copy of 20 something that has both subdivision and water in it, and I'm 21 wondering if we're talking about in terms of utility reserve 22 easements, are you talking about Page 17, where you penciled 23 in something under 5.01.F, you penciled in, "Utility reserve 24 easements, 10 feet along the front and side"; is that what 25 you're talking about? 3-13-06 117 1 MR. WIEDENFELD: Yes, sir, that would cover it 2 there. And I really don't know exactly where -- in what 3 section this would fall under, but I just wanted the issue 4 brought to -- brought out. This is where we talk about 5 utilities. I think there's another area in there where -- I 6 think you do have something on easements in another section, 7 and I think I would have put it in both. And it's just a note 8 for y'all's consideration at this time. And -- 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you talking about 10 5.04.C? That's another place where I see you've marked it. 11 MR. WIEDENFELD: Okay. I have -- 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Looks like Page 20 of the 13 Subdivision Rules. 14 MR. WIEDENFELD: Yes, sir. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that correct? 16 MR. WIEDENFELD: Yes, sir. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 18 MR. WIEDENFELD: Just providing some language that I 19 feel would be acceptable. Now, I'll go to the Kerr County 20 Water Availability Requirements, acronym which is Kerr County 21 WAR. That's what y'all did well with that, and that's kind of 22 how I proceed with this. And there's two copies up there, and 23 I knew Jonathan was the -- Commissioner Letz was the writer, 24 and I at least have one for there, and then one for the other 25 side of the table. But I'll start off with getting them 1.02, 3-13-06 118 1 Water Availability Requirements. I have a problem in that 2 several places in here, y'all indicate compliance with water 3 availability, and especially on -- okay, let's go to 1.02.A, 4 Minimum Countywide Acreage and Lot Size. "A subdivision that 5 meets the minimum acreage requirements as set forth in Section 6 1.03 below shall be deemed to have satisfied these Water 7 Availability Requirements." And also -- and then up above, in 8 1.02, it says, "All subdivisions in Kerr County where 9 preliminary plat approval is granted after the approval date 10 of these Water Availability Requirements shall comply with the 11 provisions as set forth herein." This indicates that 12 compliance must be with 1.02.A and B. When you're in 1.02.A, 13 the verbiage indicates as long as you just meet 1.03, you have 14 met the requirements for water availability, as I read it. 15 So, I'd like maybe some attention placed on that. You have my 16 copies in front of you of where I've got some language in 17 there. 18 The other issue I would like to see some work on is 19 that we specify the difference between where we have sole 20 source as groundwater, versus having a combination use of 21 surface water and groundwater for the development of a 22 subdivision. I believe we need to have some language in that. 23 And also then that would restrict any language when it came to 24 strictly surface water, because I believe that being on 25 strictly surface water is dangerous development of a 3-13-06 119 1 subdivision, in that we all know that the river's going to go 2 dry and there is not going to be surface water available at 3 all times. And, thus, it's -- if we're going to develop Kerr 4 County, I think we're all -- and with the use of surface 5 water, we're -- it will be in conjunction with groundwater. 6 Plan to use groundwater. And I think if we can get that kind 7 of language into the county subdivision regulations, and/or 8 Headwaters, we also will be better off. That is the idea on 9 that. 10 And, again, then on 1.02.B, monitor well 11 requirements, I don't know if they're necessary or 12 unnecessary, based upon what was the previous language, but I 13 would personally say that the monitor well requirements, or -- 14 they're nice to have. I believe that is a function of the 15 groundwater district, and if anything, if you're going to have 16 something in your subdivision regulations, you may have 17 developers provide a -- an area in the easement, reserved; 18 i.e., utility easement to the groundwater district, for the 19 purpose of drilling monitor wells if they ever decide to have 20 one. As y'all have proposed, you need -- y'all desire to have 21 a monitor well on every 20 acres. Well, in Kerr County, we'd 22 have almost 500 monitor wells in -- or, essentially, it's 23 every four lots will have a monitor well. Plus y'all want to 24 put it right in the middle of the road. "Such a well location 25 shall be a minimum 50 feet by 50 feet in size, and shall be 3-13-06 120 1 located within a road right-of-way." Well, if your roads are 2 60 foot wide, that would put the monitor well somewhere out in 3 the middle of the pavement. My next question is, who's going 4 to own that well? Is that the County's property? Going to 5 maintain a well? Roadways don't appear to be good areas for 6 monitor wells, subject to the contamination that goes down the 7 -- goes down a road. I must not be reading this correctly. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think you're reading 9 that very well. 10 MR. WIEDENFELD: Well, if one person reads it that 11 way, I guess maybe two can. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you talking about -- back to 13 my question I have is that the -- what this says is that 14 Headwaters -- we're providing a location -- a spot, requiring 15 a developer go to Headwaters and say, "You want this location 16 here?" If they say yes, they're going to drill the well; 17 they're going to own the well. We're just saying you have to 18 get the land. If Headwaters doesn't want a monitor well, 19 they're going to say no. They're not going to want one every 20 20 acres, I'm quite confident. They can't afford to drill 21 them. 22 MR. WIEDENFELD: Well, then, in my assumption, then, 23 you're going to do away with monitor well requirements. Other 24 than -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're going to do what it says 3-13-06 121 1 here. We're going to let -- we're going to make the developer 2 go to Headwaters, and if Headwaters thinks it's an area they 3 need a monitor well, they get a location. 4 MR. WIEDENFELD: And what is the 50 feet by 50 feet? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's just the location outside 6 the easement. It's part of the road easement; they have to 7 extend the road -- roadway. You put up 50 foot by 50 foot off 8 on the side. 9 MR. WIEDENFELD: But that conflicts with the rules 10 on well spacing. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's Headwaters probably, not 12 the County. We're just having the developer -- 13 MR. WIEDENFELD: Y'all would intentionally write 14 rules that conflict with another rule? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, they don't. 16 MR. WIEDENFELD: I don't see it that way. Okay. I 17 feel like that just definitely needs a lot more -- a lot more 18 consideration in that area, because I don't think that is 19 anywhere close to what you intended it to be. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't want monitor wells, 21 you're saying? 22 MR. WIEDENFELD: I believe I'm a hundred percent 23 that monitor wells are necessary, but I don't think every 24 20 acres. And I think that, again, yes, if the developer gets 25 with Headwaters and they say, "Let's put a well; I'll allow 3-13-06 122 1 you an area over here. You don't have to own it or anything, 2 but I'll give you an easement, perpetual easement to reserve 3 that you can drill a well if you ever so choose." I think a 4 20-year -- after 20 years, if that easement's not been used, 5 then it reverts back to the owners -- the landowners around 6 it. You know, something to that effect. I just -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I don't -- and I'm not 8 being argumentative; I'm trying to figure out what you want 9 here. We're trying to make it simple. Trying to write out a 10 perpetual easement, we don't want -- I don't want to go down 11 that road. I mean, I want it to be as simple -- that's why we 12 picked a county right-of-way, that there's a -- it's right 13 there. It's off the side of the road. They have access to 14 it. It's 50 foot by 50 foot, which they say is plenty of room 15 to drill a well. 16 MR. WIEDENFELD: And another thing is, you know, 17 you'd have to have 150 foot around this well for any property 18 owner to put a septic system in. So, again, if an easement 19 would be a 100-foot easement radius, then he would not -- when 20 a person owned that well or bought that -- bought this, he 21 would already know that he had -- it's encumbered on. And 22 otherwise, I don't know that it's -- you know, it needs to be 23 -- 50 by 50, to me, whoever -- that may be the ownership of 24 the property, but the easement needs to be described, like, 25 100 foot around a well for septic purposes and for a lot of 3-13-06 123 1 the other purposes. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think when they permit the 3 well, if they decide to drill -- I don't want to encumber all 4 the property with an easement if a well's never going to get 5 drilled. 6 MR. WIEDENFELD: But if they have the right to drill 7 a well, I'm not -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One-time shot. They either say 9 yes or no, and that developer -- 10 MR. WIEDENFELD: Okay. Well, then, there's nothing 11 on it after that. Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 13 MR. WIEDENFELD: Not going to provide it if they 14 change their mind. Okay. Well -- 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll probably be calling you on 16 some of your others, just to make sure I understand what 17 you're saying. And one point I see, I agree with it, a word 18 you added that I think we need to add. 19 MR. WIEDENFELD: Well, I just -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 21 MR. WIEDENFELD: Okay. Now we're back to 1.03 22 again, Acreage Requirements to Meet Water Availability. 23 Again, it says 1.03.A and 1.03.B must be satisfied -- must be 24 complied with to satisfy the requirements. Why not 1.03.C? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is no 1.03.C. 3-13-06 124 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: High density. 2 MR. WIEDENFELD: Again, I know in your earlier 3 draft, it is high density area -- development area. Was it -- 4 it's designed, I guess, for just surface water. But, I 5 mean -- and that's why I think if you look at all this, if you 6 rethink it, let's look at surface water being also involved. 7 We're not just writing water availability based on 8 groundwater. Surface water -- and "surface water," I know, 9 means aquifer storage; it can mean rainwater. It can mean a 10 lot of things, so that's why I think "surface water" -- the 11 word is in there. And y'all see a lot of my notes that -- on 12 when it comes to lot size, if groundwater's going to be the 13 sole source of the potable water in the total subdivision, 14 then I think your lot sizes, you know, are appropriate. But I 15 would like to propose that, you know, in -- we're going to go 16 to Page 3 of the Water Availability, which is Section 1.03.A. 17 The total number of lots permitted in any 18 subdivision that uses community water system and groundwater 19 as the sole source of potable water shall not exceed the total 20 acreage in the subdivision divided by 2 acres, is what I would 21 like to propose. The numbers work out from what I -- 22 groundwater production limitations, public drinking water 23 standards. We can make it with 2 acres. Or, I mean, this -- 24 number of lots in a subdivision divisible by two meets all -- 25 or I recommend that, because it does meet all the regulations 3-13-06 125 1 that I could come up with. And then also, then on 1.02.A.3, 2 total number of lots permitted in any subdivision in an area 3 designated as a high density area, as defined herein, shall 4 not exceed the total acreage of subdivision divided by one. I 5 propose to have that in half, and one. 6 Okay. Going down to B, then, the minimum lot size 7 to meet water availability requirements, I -- I'd like to 8 propose a 4 acre in 1 -- B.1, for lots where individual water 9 well is planned. And I have earlier in my notes, if we 10 indicate individual water well, does that also equate to the 11 district's exempt well category, or what is in Texas Water 12 Code, Chapter 36? Shall we not be putting, maybe, "exempt" 13 behind the word "individual"? And when we're talking about 14 public water system, we refer them -- in addition to being 15 nonexempt wells, continuing with B.2, I propose that we have 16 one-half acre lots when the public water system is a community 17 and served by a septic system. And, again, I'm recommending a 18 half acre because that's what is in our -- currently in our 19 septic -- y'all's county septic regulations. It's a half 20 acre. And I think without changing the septic regulations, 21 this would -- would work here. And I'm not saying that all 22 the lots in the subdivision are going to be a half acre, 23 because it can't be. If have you a 100-acre tract of land, 24 there's only so many of them can be half-acre tracts. So many 25 can be 1-acre, 2-acre, and the rest -- the balance of the 3-13-06 126 1 acreage -- and, again, it meets district -- groundwater 2 district philosophy in that we have just so much density per 3 an area. At least -- I'm not speaking on behalf of the 4 district, but my understanding of their regulations. 5 Okay. And then on B.3, I propose one-quarter acre 6 for lots to be served by a community or public water system 7 and a community sewage collection system. And a subdivision 8 located in the density high -- designated high density 9 development area, I think if somebody's gone to the extreme of 10 putting a community water system in, a community sewer system, 11 one-quarter acre lots, which you have in parentheses "1/4," 12 and you have elsewhere referenced one-quarter acre lots. But, 13 as you see, you started the sentence off with one-half, but I 14 believe one-quarter. And then also, leaving the wording on 15 there that Commissioners Court may approve on a case-by-case 16 basis other lesser acreages. That's all -- that's very well 17 and good. Okay. Going down to C -- 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask you, first -- come back to 19 A. 20 MR. WIEDENFELD: A. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: The number of lots permitted. What 22 changes were you proposing there? 23 MR. WIEDENFELD: Two acres on A.2. The total number 24 of lots permitted in any subdivision that uses a community 25 water system and groundwater. And I'm inserting "and 3-13-06 127 1 groundwater" as the sole source of potable water shall not 2 exceed the total acreage in a subdivision divided by 2 acres. 3 So, for a 100-acre subdivision, you have a possibility of 50 4 lots in that. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: But the other -- the other two, 6 you're not recommending any changes? 7 MR. WIEDENFELD: Yes, sir. I'm recommending, then, 8 that we -- on A.3, we would -- high density development area 9 is divisible by one, 1 acre. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: And A.1 remains the same? 11 MR. WIEDENFELD: A.1, I recommend to be the same. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 13 MR. WIEDENFELD: But, again, when I come down to the 14 minimum lot size, I'm recommending 4 acres, based on the 15 minimum lot size in that -- you're going to lose a lot of 16 acreage to roads and parks and other stuff, and so some 17 acreages less than 5 acres, I think, fits the plans. Again, 18 high density development area, I would like to see it 19 reiterated in C that it is a -- public water and wastewater 20 systems are required in those -- in those developments. And 21 you don't have to -- it's not considered on-site central 22 wastewater systems can be put in the county. Permitting is 23 just done through a different section of T.C.E.Q. Okay. 24 Then, when you're defining the high density development areas, 25 C.3 in particular, I would like to recommend that we define 3-13-06 128 1 the Center Point area as a 1-mile radius of the intersection 2 of Farm-to-Market 1350, which is China Street, and F.M. 480. 3 I feel like that is more centrally located in the city of 4 Center Point. Y'all have been -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I already received that. 6 I agree, that's a better location. 7 MR. WIEDENFELD: And then, further on down on that 8 sentence, in that section -- 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, if you know -- excuse 10 me. If you know, does -- does the -- establishing the point 11 of 1350 and 480, does 1 mile take us out to Verde Creek? 12 MR. WIEDENFELD: You're right at Verde Creek, yes, 13 sir. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 15 MR. WIEDENFELD: Again, in that last paragraph, I've 16 -- see again where we've omitted the exclusiveness of just 17 groundwater. That I think just take the word "ground" out and 18 we just say water availability, which indicates all sources of 19 water that somebody can find. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Charles, just for your 21 information, not looking at the rules again, water 22 availability requirements came about because of groundwater. 23 MR. WIEDENFELD: They came about -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the statutes talk about 25 groundwater. They don't talk much about surface water, so I 3-13-06 129 1 suspect that's the reason we used groundwater a lot more here. 2 I don't disagree with you, but they -- that's the reasoning 3 that it's -- you have to look at the -- what gives us the 4 ability to do this, and it's groundwater. 5 MR. WIEDENFELD: Well, I believe, you know, 6 flexibility and diversity is stability, in my opinion. And I 7 think y'all would have more flexibility in the rules if you 8 were to allow this to say water, and that could be anything. 9 I mean, I know y'all have been hammered by rainwater 10 collection. I -- you know, and you know that's coming in the 11 future, and more surface water is coming. And -- and -- but 12 surface water can be ASR water. So -- so, you know, without 13 pipelines, we can have surface water, ASR. You know, there's 14 a lot of different mechanisms. So, I'm thinking the rules 15 would have better flexibility if you would try to eliminate 16 the word exclusively groundwater. But when it -- when you're 17 developing lot sizes, I think -- and if that's how you're 18 basing all your stuff, is on groundwater, then that -- this 19 would be fine. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 21 MR. WIEDENFELD: Okay. And then, down in the plat 22 certifications, you have me saying 1.05.B, I'm questioning. 23 "Individual water wells shall not be permitted on any lot in 24 this subdivision." Is that a statement that has any validity 25 or legality to it? And I'm just going to leave it at that. I 3-13-06 130 1 think it needs to be researched a little further. Also, and 2 then 1.05.C, "All subdivision final plats shall contain the 3 following certification. Blank subdivision shall be limited 4 to a maximum of blank lots pursuant to the Kerr County Water 5 Availability Requirements." I'm recommending we eliminate 6 that section, too, based on what the surface water does come 7 in, and y'all have regulations a little bit different with 8 surface water. Again, what if it's aquifer storage that's 9 coming in subsequent to these rules? 10 You know, and if you got a lot of 10-acre lots out 11 there that people are going to come in and want to subdivide, 12 and if the developer can show there is adequate water, and if 13 it also meets the district's groundwater production 14 requirements, even if they meet those production limitations 15 with further platting of the subdivision, then I think that 16 that is something that needs to be into -- again, we want to 17 offer diversity, and that if you put this statement in, it's 18 got -- kind of who's going to enforce it, is number one, or 19 one of the big questions. But then the next one comes in, you 20 know, it's -- it just does not allow for people to subdivide 21 their property, and we each -- we know everybody's going to 22 try to subdivide. And just -- we have a rule in here that 23 would be hard to enforce, in my opinion, if we put that 24 statement in. 25 I thank you. You have my comments, and there's a 3-13-06 131 1 lot more there than I know y'all want to hear. And -- but the 2 draftee -- or drafter has time to look at it, and -- if he 3 chooses. I hope he does. And I'm always available. And I 4 know you know how to get hold of me. Thank y'all for your 5 time. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Charles. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Wiedenfeld. Is there 8 anyone else that wants to be heard with regard to the 9 Subdivision Rules and Regulations and Water Availability 10 Requirements? Does anyone -- yes, sir? Mr. Voelkel? Please 11 come forward give your name and address. 12 MR. VOELKEL: I'm Lee Voelkel, 212 Clay Street. 13 There were just two issues, gentlemen, that I'd like to have 14 you look at. And I apologize if these have already been 15 addressed and corrected. I'm not sure if I have the most 16 updated version of the rules, okay? The first one is in 17 6.03.C.3. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page? 19 MR. VOELKEL: I've been asked by -- Les Harvey could 20 not be here today, to bring this one up if you still have in 21 there Certification by Registered Engineer for Accuracy of 22 Topography. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page are you on, Lee? 24 17? 25 MR. VOELKEL: This is on page -- well, mine's on 27, 3-13-06 132 1 Mr. Williams. I'm not sure, again, if I have the most 2 updated -- 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe it's -- yes, it's 4 still in here. It's on 6.03.C. It's on Page 28. 5 MR. VOELKEL: There were two comments that he had on 6 that, and I'll have to agree on one of them, but I'm not an 7 engineer, so I can't agree with the other one. The first one, 8 he says that engineers do not certify to topography. Most of 9 the time, the topography that's used by the engineer is an 10 aerial -- aerial photography which is done, and that those 11 contours are adequate for their design. So, he really -- not 12 really any -- any engineer really can't certify to the 13 topography. But also to note that this is under final plat, 14 this Section 6, and topography is not even required on final 15 plat. So, those are two points there made on that one. The 16 only other one I have does deal with me and some other 17 surveyors that I have talked to, which is on the next page, 18 6.03.D.10, Certification by Registered Professional Land 19 Surveyor registered in the state of Texas, to the effect that 20 such plat represents a complete and accurate survey. We would 21 like to see it stopped there. The other language that's in 22 there says it meets all Kerr County Subdivision Rules and 23 Regulations, and we feel like surveyors are just not 24 certified -- are not qualified to do that. I think presently, 25 it's done by the county official or the -- it was the County 3-13-06 133 1 Engineer putting that certification on there, but the 2 surveyors I have talked to, and including myself, would like 3 to see that taken out. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're the highest 6 vote-getter in Kerr County. 7 MR. VOELKEL: No, sir, I'm sorry. I was -- there 8 were more. I didn't -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You didn't? 10 MR. VOELKEL: I didn't go out door-to-door this 11 year, which I normally do, so I'm not any more. But that's 12 okay. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought maybe you'd want 14 some of this authority. 15 MR. VOELKEL: No, sir, I don't. I don't want that 16 authority at all. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. 18 MR. VOELKEL: Those are the only two comments I had. 19 Thank you, sir. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. Thank you. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Anyone else that wishes to be heard 22 with regard to the Subdivision Rules and Regulations or the 23 Water Availability Requirements? I keep trying to invite the 24 Headwaters people in on this thing, but -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're going to stay away. 3-13-06 134 1 JUDGE TINLEY: -- I'm not getting any action back 2 there. Anyone else? Seeing no one else trying to get my 3 attention to be heard, I will close the public hearing and I 4 will reconvene the Commissioners Court meeting. 5 (The public hearing was concluded at 2 p.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) 6 - - - - - - - - - - 7 JUDGE TINLEY: And I will call Item 20; consider, 8 discuss, and take appropriate action on Kerr County 9 Subdivision Rules and Regulations. Mr. Letz? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put both this and the next 11 item on there so we could act on them. Really, in my mind, 12 more to go on to the next step. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask you if it would be well if 14 I were to call the other item so we could discuss them 15 jointly. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, it would, sir. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let me also call Item 21; 18 consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on Kerr County 19 Water Availability Requirements. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In addition to the comments 21 received today, I have received some prior to this, and also 22 I've looked and continue to look at other counties. At our 23 next meeting, I propose that I bring a final version back, and 24 it will be with -- it will be able to have a highlighted 25 version also of any changes made from this draft that we've 3-13-06 135 1 worked off of. I'd like to look -- spend a little bit more 2 time with Mr. Wiedenfeld's comments. Some of them -- at quick 3 glance, some of them I think are good. Some of them I'm not 4 sure I agree with, but there's some input there. And I think 5 both of those that Lee Voelkel made I would tend to agree 6 with, and I have some others. Pretty minor things so far. I 7 mean, I don't -- no one has contacted me with any real big 8 concerns, with the exception of Bruce Motheral has met with me 9 related to drainage a little bit, and I really want to go over 10 that with the County Attorney again on issues related to state 11 law. And I think we're on pretty good ground, but I think we 12 may want to add a little bit of additional language in that 13 area, too. But they're pretty minor changes, pretty easy to 14 do. So, the plan will be to bring them both back at our next 15 meeting, and hopefully finalize them at that time. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner, I've got a 17 couple questions. Charlie brought up an excellent question, I 18 think, under the monitor -- monitor well requirements. I just 19 -- I can't see, in my mind, this easement over to the well 20 site. Well, first, it says that all subdivisions with a total 21 acreage of the subdivision more than 20 acres shall be 22 required. That language bothered me just a little bit. I 23 think that's where Charlie was coming from. It sounds like to 24 me that if you have a subdivision with more than 20 acres, 25 you're going to -- there's going to be a monitor well there. 3-13-06 136 1 That's what it sounds like. Shall be required to provide a 2 monitor well location within the central portion of the 3 subdivision. That bothered me a little bit. And then this -- 4 I'm not -- I'm not real sure about this -- this easement, who 5 owns the easement, who maintains it. You know, all those 6 kinds of things. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the first point, the -- 8 about -- I think your reading is correct, but there's -- the 9 last sentence of that second paragraph, Headwaters may waive 10 the requirement by providing -- providing the developer with a 11 letter. So, I mean -- so, yes, they shall do it, but it can 12 be waived. And the -- I think some -- the ownership issue and 13 the responsibility issue, I think that goes with Headwaters. 14 If they get the -- if they decide that they want the monitor 15 well, they're responsible for it, and I think I'll probably 16 add some language to that effect. I agree that it needs to be 17 clear that if they want the monitor well location, then it's 18 their responsibility -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- for maintenance and drilling 21 the well. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I bet that makes you happy, 23 Gordon. No? Okay. Page 3, just a real simple thing here. 24 The high density development areas. City of Kerrville ETJ 25 subject to interlocal agreement. City of Ingram subject to 3-13-06 137 1 interlocal agreement. Tell me where we are in those inter -- 2 having interlocal agreements with those two communities. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have one with the City of 4 Kerrville. We do not have one for the City of Ingram, and I 5 believe Commissioner 4 is working on that with Ingram. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We discussed that earlier 7 today. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we think that that's 10 going to happen with Ingram? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think state law says it 12 will happen with Ingram. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, state law says a lot of 14 things. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, state law also said it 16 should have already happened. And -- but talking with Ingram 17 City Attorney -- I believe that's Mr. Edwards' title -- I 18 don't see a problem in getting this matter -- getting it 19 formalized. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Looking through some of my 22 notes, Commissioner, I noticed somebody had sent me a map or 23 two depicting the area regarding the Highway 27, 1350, and 480 24 and so forth with a radius drawing, and the 1-mile radius that 25 we're talking about, while it does hit parts of Verde Creek, 3-13-06 138 1 it doesn't hit all of it. And some of our contemplated 2 plans -- you can see by this drawing, some of our contemplated 3 plans, we talk about going all the way out to as far as Verde 4 Creek where it crosses 480, to begin with. So, maybe we need 5 to think about that in terms of maybe a mile and a quarter or 6 something like that, would take that in. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I'd have to look at 8 the language again exactly, but we may want to do something 9 like if it's -- part of that area is within the 1 mile. Of 10 course, it may exclude some people. Or maybe add some 11 language that it can be, you know, adjusted. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, perhaps, but there are 13 some -- there are some contemplated developments being 14 discussed that go out Elm Pass Road in this general vicinity, 15 and -- you know, and part of the developer's plan would be a 16 future wastewater collection system. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. We need to look at that 18 a little bit more. I mean, obviously, 1 mile's a little 19 bit -- somewhat of an arbitrary number; it can be a mile and a 20 quarter, a mile and three-tenths. But, I mean, wherever you 21 draw it, there's always going to be a line and there's going 22 to be right next to the line on the outside of it. So, I 23 mean, I have no problem with -- 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- trying to look at what we 3-13-06 139 1 have right now, but I think it's -- probably a better way to 2 approach it is give us the flexibility to modify that around 3 the high density areas. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't disagree with that, 5 and I'm not looking for precision in terms of measurement. I 6 just want to be sure we get it out as far as Verde Creek, 7 where it's important to do so. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you're going to change one 10 to a mile and a quarter, wouldn't you want to do both? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. Or whatever, yeah. 12 Make it consistent. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Make them consistent with 14 each other. I've got another question on Page 1, the acreage 15 and lot size requirements. I stay up with you here pretty 16 good for a while. The second sentence, minimum county-wide 17 acreage requirements are based on an average family. That's 18 2.8 people or something like that, if my memory serves me. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, okay. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Average family or household 21 in rural areas based on census data. I understand what census 22 data is. And average daily consumption is reasonable for this 23 county based on accepted regional criteria. Well, now, what 24 in the world is that? Is that your regional study? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's -- the average daily 3-13-06 140 1 consumption number varies a little bit, whether it's 150 or 2 100 -- about 150 gallons a day to 250 gallons a day. And 3 there's a number -- I mean, there's no magic number there, so 4 it's just staying -- basically, we're saying that there's a 5 range in there, somewhere in that area. The current -- the 6 new Region J plan, I believe, is -- I think it's 200. It was 7 250 under the current one, but I think it's come back a little 8 bit on the newest plan that's up in Austin right now. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is Region J regional 10 criteria? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It -- it's part of regional 12 criteria, but Headwaters may use a different -- I mean, 13 it's -- basically, it's entities' criteria that are in the 14 area. Trying to say we've looked at other -- at the data 15 around of people that look at regional water use. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It comes under Water Development 18 Board, a lot of it, Water Development Board and some Region J 19 and some, obviously, Headwaters and -- if it -- the problem -- 20 the reason I made it very vague is that there's -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He admits it; it's vague. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's intentional. Is that 23 there's not an authority -- a stated authority that, okay, 24 this entity decides what the average daily consumption is. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can't get specific. 3-13-06 141 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There isn't -- there's a bunch 2 of state and local agencies that throw out a number, but one 3 of their numbers is -- I mean, one number's no better than the 4 other number. They're all based on -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It says -- yeah, but you say 6 it's based on accepted regional criteria. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, accepted -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is Region J accepted? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Region J is accepted, but 10 Headwaters' is accepted by Headwaters. City of Kerrville's 11 may be accepted by City of Kerrville. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You are still within the 14 minimum pumping allowance of Headwaters, right? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That 200 gallons per family, 17 per day? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Our numbers are -- I 19 mean, mesh fairly closely. I mean, as closely as -- you know, 20 with Headwaters' numbers on their pumping limits and our 21 acreage limits; they all fit pretty close. And they -- which 22 gives me a little -- I guess a reasonable level of comfort in 23 that they came about their numbers independently of us, and 24 basically -- which we -- 'cause most of mine came from Region 25 J, and they come out with pretty close to the same number. 3-13-06 142 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: On Page 3, at the top -- 2 let's see, this would be 1.03.A. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Subdivision or water 4 availability? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Water availability. The -- 6 that first sentence, is that a real sentence? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably not. Total number of 8 lots permitted in a subdivision to meet Water Availability 9 Requirements where groundwater's the source of potable 10 water -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that maybe referring back 12 to something previous? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a poorly written sentence. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jon's getting honest this 15 afternoon, isn't he? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Not a full admission on that one, 17 though. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Caught him with a full 19 stomach. All right. That's all I have, Commissioner. Thank 20 you so much. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, I'm glad to see 22 that you read this closely. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I marked it all up. Didn't 24 make any sense when I first got it. Still doesn't. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you found grammatical 3-13-06 143 1 errors. Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't have any comments I 3 haven't already talked about. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we're getting close. Next 5 meeting, I think we'll be done. And if anyone else in the 6 public has comments, feel free. Just because the public 7 hearing, so to speak, was today, I'm also -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you one more 9 question. You're going to wait two more weeks, and we're gone 10 all next week. Are you going to write this thing while we're 11 out in west Texas? Is that what the deal is? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the plan. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's the earliest we 14 can get back in here. I just feel -- I feel an urgency about 15 adopting this stuff and getting it going; I really and truly 16 do. I think we've wagged it around long enough. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's starting -- I would agree 18 with that, and it's just that there are some changes, and when 19 I reread it, your comment about that sentence, I just -- I 20 don't want to adopt something until it's the actual version 21 that we're going to use. And have a leeway -- I think two 22 weeks is sufficient. If we do it first, if it's on the agenda 23 early, then everything we do at that meeting will be subject 24 to the new rules anyway. We're not acting -- we're not going 25 to meet after this for two weeks, so -- 3-13-06 144 1 MR. ODOM: Leonard Odom, Scenic Hills. My 2 question -- 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're acting as a citizen 4 here? 5 MR. ODOM: As a citizen. Where is the point, 6 Jonathan, that we would get down -- if we lowered our 7 standards -- I don't mean standards, but is it 5 acres or 3 8 and a half? And at what point do we jeopardize, with the 9 growth that we have probably in the future over the next 10 10 years, that we might end up with all people with wells would 11 have a meter on it? Is that possible in this county if we get 12 the acreage too small for water rights? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can't answer that, but it's 14 not our -- it's not the County's responsibility to put meters 15 on wells, and it's not going to be. If another governmental 16 entity chooses to put meters on wells, that's their -- I mean 17 it's not the County's business. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're not talking about 19 monitor wells, are you? You're talking about somebody -- 20 somebody ordering a meter on a well? 21 MR. ODOM: I'm talking about the possibility of 22 having -- everyone who has a well having a meter, saying that 23 we only have so much availability of water, if we lower it to 24 a certain point. I'm not saying the Commissioners Court has 25 that -- 3-13-06 145 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Won't come out of this 2 Court. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. I mean, I think that if you 4 look at other counties around us that have similar water 5 situations, they take different approaches. Kendall County 6 has annual fees that are pretty large for all water wells. 7 'Cause -- I think they're large. I think any fee is large for 8 a water well. But, you know -- but that's a -- a water 9 district issue more than a county. All our -- you know, we're 10 looking more at infrastructure, and then we have the ability 11 to base our lot sizes on water availability, which is what 12 we've done, and that's granted to us by the Legislature. So, 13 I think all we can do is look at what legal authority we have, 14 make our rules the best we can, and hope we're doing the right 15 thing. But if other governmental entities do things, that's 16 their business, not ours. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Leonard, are you talking 18 about you have a fear of taking, like, the pumping rights that 19 the Watermaster requires you to have your -- what did you call 20 it, a gauge or a -- 21 MR. ODOM: A meter. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Meter. 23 MR. ODOM: You have so many gallons that you're 24 going to be allowed to have, and then after that, you'd be 25 charged. 3-13-06 146 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Taking those and putting them 2 on people's homes? 3 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I -- that wouldn't 5 surprise me. I doubt if it will happen anytime soon, but, you 6 know, the great state's very, very wise. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- all I can say is that 8 in any drafting of these -- this document, I think the county 9 has enough water to sustain this kind of density. 10 Groundwater. 11 MR. ODOM: Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it will be a relief from 13 surface water down the road, whether it comes through ASR, 14 whether it comes from other sources of -- possibly coming 15 through a pipeline through Boerne. And those are really our 16 two alternatives for surface water, because Charlie Wiedenfeld 17 was very accurate in saying we can't count on the river, not 18 locally within the county, for additional water, 'cause it 19 isn't there in a drought. But ASR is surface water, and then 20 there's -- Boerne area has more of a problem than we do with 21 water, and they are looking to solve that with the pipeline 22 issue out of Canyon Lake and some -- and -- not really unused, 23 but unaccounted for water coming out of Canyon Lake, so those 24 are the options, I think. But I think if we were to develop 25 based on the acreage limits that we have here, based on the 3-13-06 147 1 water we -- availability that we are aware of now, we have 2 that much water in the county. 3 MR. ODOM: All right. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what -- future courts 5 will have to look at the same thing and modify the rules 6 accordingly in the future, as science gets better. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: You smoked him out. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's meters that did it. 9 MR. MORGAN: Gordon Morgan, citizen. I live pretty 10 close to Len. Member of Headwaters Board, speaking only for 11 myself. I think we -- at least my thoughts have been that 12 this is a generalized type of concept of how to manage 13 subdivisions and water availability. I don't know that we can 14 ever get to the point to where we can do gallons or just a 15 quarter of an acre or anything that specific. But I think, 16 from a general concept, it has been for a number of years, and 17 I think the board itself would feel positive towards the fact 18 of the 5 acres. The 5 acres is generally accepted as the 19 amount of acreage that will -- underneath that will have 20 enough water to supply a family, and that's basically what 21 we're talking about. 22 There will be, as time goes on, individual 23 situations, in either parts of the county or individual 24 aquifers, where certain things will take place that will 25 possibly change the amount of water that is safe to take from 3-13-06 148 1 that aquifer, or that is available from that aquifer for an 2 individual family, but I don't think you can make an overall 3 rule for the county that addresses all of those individual 4 things that are possibilities. So, I think as long as the 5 subdivision rules addressed the 5 acres to see that that 6 amount is set aside for water availability, then the other can 7 be handled on an individual basis when a subdivider comes to 8 the Court, comes to Road and Bridge, and when -- at that point 9 in time, there's enough research and enough science that one 10 can feel confident in making a decision that will require a 11 subdivider to either make bigger lots, or even in some cases, 12 possibly larger lots that could even be broken up into smaller 13 lots at a later time. All of those things are possibilities. 14 But you all certainly have a challenge. If you can 15 try to foresee that intricate specifying in the subdivision 16 rules, that's a toughie. I think, from our standpoint, if -- 17 as long as we can overall keep 5 acres, have certain entities 18 where we use the river water, that is certainly part of the -- 19 of water availability. Headwaters will be allotting water 20 based on acreage, underground water. That will be set by a 21 certain amount that they feel is adequate for that aquifer. 22 Now, it's going to be the problem of the County to approve a 23 plat. It will be the problem of the subdivider to see that 24 whatever his family will need for water will be provided. 25 That can be from surface water, it can be from underground 3-13-06 149 1 water, it can be from rainwater cachement and all the things 2 that have been talked about today. So, I think -- and that's 3 what you addressed when you have the on-site wastewater 4 systems to be built into the -- into the program. But I 5 commend you for what you've done. I have empathy for you in 6 trying to get everybody satisfied, because that's going to be 7 a hard thing to do. But I think as long as everyone keeps the 8 idea that it's an overall plan, that we'll try to take care of 9 the needs of everyone, and it can be worked with and 10 individualized for certain circumstances, that then I think 11 that y'all have a program that you can have everybody approve 12 of. If you have any questions you think I might answer, I'm 13 -- I guess I'm up here; I'm ready. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would you care to comment on 15 monitoring wells, Dr. Morgan? 16 MR. MORGAN: I think that we don't need 500. 17 There's a question in my mind, whose responsibility is that 18 going to be? If it is inserted into a subdivision as a 19 requirement, I think it would be essential that the decision 20 made would be at that very time, whether or not Headwaters is 21 going to drill that well, accept the responsibility, maintain 22 it, and gain the information from it. And if they're not 23 willing to commit themselves to do that at that very time, 24 within a set period of time, then that should not be continued 25 on as a long-term easement or anything. That's sort of taking 3-13-06 150 1 away land from that subdivider. So -- but if -- if there's a 2 real need, if Headwaters or any entity can justify the need 3 for a 50-by-50 or 150 by the setbacks and that sort of thing, 4 then I think even the subdividers would be willing to 5 participate in that, simply so that they will know in the 6 future, in the next subdivision, what they can do. But I do 7 think it's essential that it should be some -- have a time 8 frame. They have one month or three months or whatever, some 9 time to either drill their well or vacate their property. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 11 MR. MORGAN: Anything else? Thank you. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Dr. Morgan. Mr. Richter? 13 MR. RICHTER: Larry Richter, 152 Oak Wood Road. 14 Jonathan, in your draft, if you are so stating that this 15 developer needs to provide a designated area for a monitoring 16 -- monitoring well, if I'm a developer, I so choose to develop 17 "X" amount of acreage, and that subdivision's going to be 18 served by a central water system which I'm going to drill, or 19 turn to Mr. Wiedenfeld, as a person in the water business, and 20 say, "You drill and take over the system; you'll have 'X' 21 amount of connections," what purpose would -- and that's going 22 to be through groundwater district, a nonexempt well. It'll 23 have a meter on it. So, what additional information would you 24 need from a second well that would mean the developer has to 25 provide area for another well? You've already got a -- a well 3-13-06 151 1 there that is permitted through the district, groundwater 2 district. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- I'm not going to 4 speak for Headwaters; we have two board members present on it. 5 I think there's a great deal of difference between a monitor 6 well and a well that you can go test. A monitor well -- 7 MR. RICHTER: Draw down. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Draw down. There's other 9 scientific instruments in that well measuring things. That is 10 basically receiving a picture of what the other wells that are 11 producing are doing in that area, so it's a different purpose. 12 MR. RICHTER: Okay. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it's -- but I agree with 14 what Dr. Morgan said. I think that -- you know, and we can 15 tighten up the language a little more. There needs to be a 16 time period. We need to maybe clear up exactly as to who's 17 responsible for it. I think that who's responsible if there 18 is a monitor well is Headwaters, 'cause they're the ones that 19 would have it. But have it that it's a, you know -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. If Headwaters wants the 22 well, they should drill it. I'd probably go up to 12 months 23 to drill. I think wells are expensive; you can not -- it's 24 unreasonable to think that y'all are going to have a -- you 25 know, jump out and drill a well within a month. But I think, 3-13-06 152 1 you know, that a well needs to be drilled within 12 months or 2 it goes back to the landowner or -- you know, or the property 3 owner where the property is. I'll get with Rex a little bit, 4 whether it's better to do it now, whether they do an easement, 5 or -- I put it in the county right-of-way to get rid of this 6 whole issue of whether it was an easement on this property and 7 all that. But I'll get with Rex a little bit more about the 8 best way to designate the area. I think we do need to set 9 forth, as Mr. Wiedenfeld said, that there are additional 10 setback requirements beyond -- you know, put people on notice 11 that there are setbacks from the monitor well, if it's 12 drilled, and that will have some impact on property and 13 potentially where you locate a house, septic field, or an 14 additional well. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further? Why don't we move, 16 then, to our 2 o'clock scheduled item. We have some 17 department reports for the Court to consider. I.T. We've got 18 a written report that was submitted. I think everybody got 19 the report, did they not? 20 MR. ALFORD: Your Honor, he was called to go fly 21 fire watch, and he appointed me to take your questions, to 22 report back to him just as a liaison. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who's that? 24 MR. ALFORD: Trolinger. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. 3-13-06 153 1 JUDGE TINLEY: He submitted a written report. I 2 think we all got a copy of -- 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who was that? 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Information Technology. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, I did. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He had to go do what? 7 MR. ALFORD: Fire watch. He flies Civil Air Patrol, 8 and they called him this morning begging him to go fly fire -- 9 'cause of red flag and stuff. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I didn't know he did that. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't either. 12 MR. ALFORD: Excuse me. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We weren't aware that he was 14 part of that program. 15 MR. ALFORD: Yes, he is. He's one of the -- I 16 guess, one -- he's called me a couple times in the last 17 several months, so I don't know how active he is, but 18 obviously -- 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fairly. 20 MR. ALFORD: Yeah. 'Cause he even asked them, "Do I 21 have to? I have a 2 o'clock meeting." They're, like, "You're 22 the bottom of the totem pole," apparently, as far as the only 23 one they could get ahold of. So, that's why he asked me. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the comment I have, he's 25 been communicating with us pretty regular with this whole 3-13-06 154 1 conversion to the new computer system, so -- 2 MR. ALFORD: Okay, thank you. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: He's always been responsive to any 4 questions or concerns that I've had. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Me too. I have no problem. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 7 MR. ALFORD: I'm not going to tell him that. I'm 8 going to tell him y'all tore him up, okay? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Please. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Road and Bridge. 11 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. With the unusually warm 12 weather, the crews have gotten a lot done towards this year's 13 program, as well as we've been able to spend some time 14 there -- we take about a week out of a month and work those 15 down, so that's been very helpful for this fine weather. On 16 the other hand, as I reported last time in January, that I 17 have a lot of brush. Getting roads ready means cutting brush, 18 and -- and it has not rained that we can burn. So, a lot of 19 the things we would like to do, or that I would like to do, 20 you know, we've had to spend a lot of time to haul or chip, 21 which is a slow process, but most cases are stockpiled up 22 waiting for some rain, and once we get the word on that, we 23 can -- we can burn. Also on projects, preliminary plats, the 24 Center Point School and Waugh Acres have expired to report to 25 the Court in that. 3-13-06 155 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The school had to do with 2 their building the houses on Highway 27? 3 MR. ODOM: That's correct. They have not even 4 started on the road yet, so I don't know if they finished that 5 first house or not. But -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. Just about, yeah. 7 MR. ODOM: -- I would assume that they would want to 8 come back to the Court, and my suggestion is, is build the 9 road before they go on with another house. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 11 MR. ODOM: And Waugh Acres, that project was 12 completed. It was a good project, but they didn't want to do 13 the drainage study. So, that is sort of dead in the water. 14 As a matter of fact, the year's expired, so we bring that to 15 the Court's notice. You also have a list of the subdivision 16 plats, the concept plans, meetings that we've had on 17 floodplain. I can -- looking at all of them, maybe if there's 18 a specific question about it, I'll try to answer. And all our 19 employees are back to work and have no new injuries, so we're 20 happy about that. No worker's comp. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leonard, in your code, when you 22 say "P" for preliminary, is that the preliminary has been 23 approved or the preliminary is working? 24 MR. ODOM: Should be preliminary -- that's a good 25 question. 3-13-06 156 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the only reason I'm bringing 2 it up -- 3 MR. ODOM: Privilege Creek is -- is working; it's 4 preliminary. That's -- we're using the word preliminary as 5 working, or it's in the preliminary process. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: After it has been -- preliminary 7 has been approved, then it gets an "NF" which is Needs Final? 8 MR. ODOM: That's right. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And my question -- I know it 10 puts your office in a real difficult situation with our new 11 subdivisions, how they're going to be -- it looks like it's 12 pretty firm, two weeks from now. Rex, what's the best 13 guidance as to what our -- what goes under which set of rules? 14 I've always just kind of thought it was preliminary plat. 15 Once we get preliminary plat, anything we have a preliminary 16 on is under our old rules. But concept plans, it's -- 17 MR. EMERSON: Concept plan doesn't mean anything 18 until they submit the preliminary plat. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- okay. I just wanted -- 20 mainly, I brought that up just for you to -- you just need to 21 let people know that anything coming on the next agenda for 22 preliminary approval is probably going to be under our new 23 rules. 24 MR. ODOM: Let me ask you, if we have an existing, 25 as -- let's take Privilege Creek, and we want to revise Lot 7, 3-13-06 157 1 okay? Just take that, because I've sat down with the owner -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 3 MR. ODOM: -- after you and I met, you know, and 4 all. But that one there would still be an alternate plat 5 process on a road. The question would be, where does that 6 road fit? Because there's 11 lots, and that's outside the 7 parameters of a -- of a country lane. So, are we going to, 8 you know -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's -- it's going to be 10 a difficult -- a little bit gray on some of these things a 11 little bit on -- I mean, 'cause you can't just stop work and 12 wait for us to talk. But it's hard for you to give -- tell 13 people what to do on a what-if situation, 'cause until we 14 approve our new rules, you can't. 15 MR. ODOM: Right. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think any new -- any kind of a 17 major new subdivision coming in at this point needs to be told 18 we got to follow state law from a timing standpoint in our 19 rules, but I don't think it's a good time to rush a new 20 preliminary up to us until after our next meeting. Little 21 alternate things, I think there's a certain amount of 22 discretion that -- you know, that would be acceptable. I 23 mean, if you're -- if you've been talking and they're carried 24 on your list, like Privilege Creek -- I'm not even sure what 25 the thing is there, but it's the -- if it's a minor -- some 3-13-06 158 1 sort of a minor revision, I don't have any problem with 2 putting it under the old rules. But it's just a -- tread 3 lightly for the next two weeks on new preliminaries. 4 MR. ODOM: It's been -- the last month or two, it's 5 been a -- you can see how many we had today. You can see 6 what's out there, so -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 8 MR. ODOM: And we're basically telling everybody 9 we're going by the new rules. However, I'm not quite sure 10 exactly -- 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What the new rules -- 12 MR. ODOM: -- what the new rules are. I can assume 13 that, and I bring out the new ones to the people. But I -- I 14 have that problem, because some of these coming to us that 15 might be an alternate plat won't fit the same -- I got a 16 square trying to fit a round hole. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Leonard, on your list, on 19 Page 2, meeting concerning concept plan, and that's really 20 what this is, you list the Mosty home place as waiting for 21 preliminary. We're going to do -- put a concept on for the 22 Court to take a look at at the next meeting. 23 MR. ODOM: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Prior to our getting to this 25 preliminary stage, okay? 3-13-06 159 1 MR. ODOM: I haven't seen anything, but I -- that's 2 the reason we had it. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I've seen it, 'cause I 4 had the -- 5 MR. ODOM: We had the concept plan. I just don't 6 know where it's at. Don't want to set anything. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Leonard. Maintenance. 9 MR. HOLEKAMP: Good afternoon. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Good afternoon, sir. 11 MR. HOLEKAMP: Did y'all get the copies of the 12 monthly report, Exhibit Center, indoor arena, Union Church for 13 the months of January and February? In addition -- 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is there a printed report, 15 Glenn? Or -- 16 MR. HOLEKAMP: I'm sorry, they were printed. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're in our box. 18 MR. HOLEKAMP: I'm sorry, they were put in the box. 19 In addition to this here, months of January and February, we 20 did a remodel job over at the Sheriff's Office on a -- the 21 proposed task force offices -- office, I'm sorry. We redid 22 the floors. If anybody's had the opportunity to go over to 23 the Sheriff's office, we've got those floors done, and we are 24 sealing them and waxing them starting tonight. And, of 25 course, as y'all well understand, when remodeling is done and 3-13-06 160 1 the juices are flowing amongst the -- the office holders and 2 employees, they -- they -- we need this and we need that. It 3 would be nice if we could have this. And so, you know, the -- 4 the mind-set is to make it a little nicer, and which there's 5 nothing wrong with that. So, we've been preoccupied with 6 buildings and tables and shelving and that sort of thing for 7 the Sheriff's offices, and to kind of make them feel pretty in 8 a lot of ways. And I don't blame them. I think it's healthy 9 to -- to take an interest in your work space. So -- and then, 10 of course, if you have an opportunity to look at those floors. 11 We've had a rash of -- and it seems kind of strange, 12 being February and March, but air conditioning issues. It 13 shouldn't be, but it is. This year, for some reason, we've 14 had more and more calls on air conditioning problems, and 15 we're trying to chase them all down. Part of it is age on 16 these units, especially over at the Sheriff's Office. Those 17 are, what, 10, 11 years old now, and we've run into some 18 compressor issues and that sort of thing. But it keeps us 19 hopping, and we're pretty much getting back to full staff. As 20 y'all knew that Shane was out for quite some time, and he's 21 back. He's not throwing 100-pound boxes yet, but he can do 22 his work, and that's been a real plus for us. Any questions 23 of the court? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Glenn, I was down there in 25 your place this morning talking -- you and I were talking 3-13-06 161 1 about Mrs. Stone's lamp and all that stuff. I don't want to 2 go there; I just want to say that's the reason I was down 3 there. But we had -- you brought up about the working on the 4 front doors in the courthouse. Can you tell -- I know the 5 Judge is well aware of it, 'cause -- 6 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes. We -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- he probably -- 8 MR. HOLEKAMP: We finally found a product that we 9 could use on those -- it's a restorer. Not a stain, a 10 restorer. Because stains, with the sun on them, they bleach. 11 This is a restorer, and we're going to try to put about two or 12 three quarts -- layers on it, and then hopefully we can put a 13 sealer on it. But I'm hoping that's going to be all 14 accomplished in the next two weeks or so, that we could get 15 that done. And the other thing is, is -- and I know y'all 16 have asked me about pressure washing this building. It is 17 scheduled for March 25th. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I got one more I want to 19 throw in the application here. 20 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir? 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know you probably didn't 22 think about it when you did your budget, 'cause you might have 23 added some extra money, but this is our sesquicentennial, and 24 we're going to have some folks here all the way up through and 25 including the governor, and I'm wondering if we can maybe get 3-13-06 162 1 the windows washed in the courthouse. 2 MR. HOLEKAMP: We are going to make an attempt at 3 it, sir. We -- it's already been scheduled. I wanted to get 4 the pressure washing done first, because there's going to be a 5 lot of splattering that's going to get on the windows. It 6 would be pointless to do it prior to that. That's the reason 7 I've been pushing to get the pressure washing done, so that we 8 can do the windows. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In addition to the pressure 10 washing and the windows, are you doing any landscape 11 improvements, like flowers, possibly, for the governor? 12 MR. HOLEKAMP: I want to try to get some plants put 13 in. I had a lady that was supposed to do it. She probably 14 still is, if I can rouse her again. It's a community service 15 worker. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: She's been working on Sundays. 17 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah. But I told her I didn't want 18 anything planted until at least the 15th. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 20 MR. HOLEKAMP: Because of issues with the water, and 21 we have to really put the water on it. But that is in the 22 plan to -- 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 24 MR. HOLEKAMP: -- do some -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My final comment was -- 3-13-06 163 1 MR. HOLEKAMP: -- flowers. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seeing former Commissioner and 3 now future Commissioner Oehler in the audience, that eight 4 years ago, when he was here, thereabouts, we were talking 5 about problems at the jail and air-conditioners, and we're 6 still doing it today. 7 MR. HOLEKAMP: Just a different day. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only thing that changes is 9 the date. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Still slow. 11 MR. HOLEKAMP: The governor issue, I -- with him 12 coming, I've talked to Mr. Herring on it, and I would really 13 like some ideas as to how we're going to put 150, 200 chairs 14 out here in this driveway. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I haven't figured that part out yet, 16 either. I saw the number. 17 MR. HOLEKAMP: I'd really like some help from the 18 Court, because I'm not sure I can -- there's -- there's some 19 elderly folks that are going to have trouble seeing if we wrap 20 it all the way around the side of the building here. So -- 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Unless you have some sort of 22 a platform out there. Elevate the governor a little bit. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, god, don't do that. 24 MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, that takes up so much of the 25 space, I'm afraid, if you use a stage-type issue. 3-13-06 164 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe you could open the windows 2 upstairs and you could speak from the windows. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That balcony up there. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, balcony right up above the 5 doors. 6 MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Step out of a window, but -- 8 MR. HOLEKAMP: Y'all have any other ideas? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can't put chairs out 10 there on the grass? 11 MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, they'll sink into the -- 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can't put some kind of 13 flooring out there to put the chairs on? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a way to -- 15 MR. HOLEKAMP: I guess I could. I mean -- 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What about -- I mean, I know 17 it's not the traditional way, but -- or the spot, but what 18 about the employee parking lot, using that for a seating area, 19 and shift it over to that side? That's -- I mean, it seems 20 that that's a bigger hard area -- hard-surfaced area than the 21 area right out here in the circle. And also, that area over 22 there gives you a little more room to go to the parking lot 23 over there and for overflow. It's a little bit more space. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, how long is this 25 function? 3-13-06 165 1 MR. HOLEKAMP: Ten minutes. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ten minutes. 3 MR. HOLEKAMP: The governor said he had 15 for us. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, 10 minutes. 5 MR. HOLEKAMP: Ten, 15 minutes, something like that. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's going to take you 7 longer than that to introduce Clarabelle and all of her 8 friends. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, that's true. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the thought was that we would 11 proceed on the -- on the assumption that the governor's going 12 to be late. 13 MR. HOLEKAMP: That is the assumption at this point. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: It sure is. They could do all that, 15 and when he gets here, why, go into the regular program, and 16 then resume that other when he goes back. 17 MR. HOLEKAMP: As soon as he leaves, I think they're 18 going to hand out the rest of the certificates, as I 19 understood. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: You really think the chairs would 21 sink into the ground? 22 MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, I've got a couple other ideas, 23 but I need to really put a -- yes, they would. If you -- 24 90-plus age people are going to use every bit of that chair to 25 get up and down. One thing we don't want is one going over 3-13-06 166 1 backwards off the side. You need a pretty stable floor. I 2 have that indoor/outdoor carpet out at the Ag Barn. I was 3 thinking we could roll some of that out and set it on there, 4 but it's going to be kind of uneven. I don't know if that'll 5 be even worse. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Think about it. 7 MR. HOLEKAMP: If y'all got any ideas, I'd welcome 8 them. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd measure that area out there, 10 see if that's a good -- 11 MR. HOLEKAMP: Now, sun's going to be an issue over 12 there at that time of day. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What time? 14 JUDGE TINLEY: 1 o'clock. 15 MR. HOLEKAMP: 1:30, 2:00, something like that. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe it will be cloudy. 17 MR. HOLEKAMP: Maybe it will rain. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The reason I was asking what 19 time or how long -- 20 MR. HOLEKAMP: Thirty minutes. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- the thing is going to go 22 on -- 23 MR. HOLEKAMP: Thirty minutes or so. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can seat a whole bunch of 25 folks in chairs on the pavement area out there, and then 3-13-06 167 1 everybody else can stand up for a little while. 2 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah. I -- I kind of agree with you. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want a chair. But, you 4 know, old coots can stand up. 5 MR. HOLEKAMP: I agree with your statement. I can 6 get them in, but it will be kind of a wraparound effect. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. 8 MR. HOLEKAMP: As long as everybody is patient. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're all very patient up here. 10 MR. HOLEKAMP: I understand that. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: By the time the governor 12 finally gets here, their patience may be expired. 13 MR. HOLEKAMP: That is my thoughts at this moment. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: While we're adding things to 15 your list of things we need to spruce up -- 16 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- just add one more to it. 18 MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The hand railing going in on 20 the -- on the Earl Garrett side of the court, you got 21 community service to scrape the old -- scrape the rust and the 22 paint off two years ago, and it hasn't been painted yet, so 23 just put it on your list. 24 MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, this -- this brass rail? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whatever it is out there. 3-13-06 168 1 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah, it's brass. Okay. Anything 2 else? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Get a haircut before you come 4 back in here. (Laughter.) 5 MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay, got 'ya. But if y'all have 6 some other ideas -- what I was told by Mr. Herring is that 7 Ms. Snodgrass had identified 150 minimum of 90-year-olds or 8 above. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think she's going to get them 10 all here. 11 MR. HOLEKAMP: Well, I don't think so either, but -- 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, this thing's coming up 13 in April; that list could change. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 15 MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah. We could have some more 16 90-year-olds. Is that what you're saying? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. May be some additions 18 to that list. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On both ends. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Holekamp. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you again. 22 MR. HOLEKAMP: Thank you. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Collections. 24 MR. ALFORD: Any questions? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Is collection -- I 3-13-06 169 1 mean -- yeah, is "collections" and "paid" the same thing? 2 MR. ALFORD: Yes, sir. They -- 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Be sure to confuse it as much 4 as possible. 5 MR. ALFORD: Well, I try to. I like to leave y'all 6 in a daze when I leave so y'all don't know if I was coming or 7 going. The Assessed is what the judge imposed as fines and 8 court costs. The Paid is what the defendant has actually 9 paid, the cash. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you're 3 percent ahead 11 this time last year? 12 MR. ALFORD: Correct, sir. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We want better. 14 MR. ALFORD: I'm trying, sir. I mean, considering 15 in 1998, you were only at 28 percent; you know, you're at 16 62 percent now. Come on, Jonathan, give me a break. I'm 17 trying. That's a 40 percent increase. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Look how many years it took 19 you to get there. 20 MR. ALFORD: I know it. But, see, I just now got 21 rid of Russ, so things are picking up the last couple of 22 years. I didn't say that. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You can't win. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're going to be with Russ 25 next week. 3-13-06 170 1 MR. ALFORD: Yes, I'm so glad y'all will be with 2 Russ next week. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything -- any other questions for 4 Mr. Alford? Thank you, sir. 5 MR. ALFORD: Thank you, gentlemen. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate it. Anything else, 7 gentlemen? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not from me. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: We stand adjourned. 10 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 2:50 p.m.) 11 - - - - - - - - - - 12 13 STATE OF TEXAS | 14 COUNTY OF KERR | 15 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 16 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my 17 capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court 18 of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place 19 heretofore set forth. 20 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 20th day of 21 March, 2006. 22 23 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 24 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 25 Certified Shorthand Reporter 3-13-06