1 2 3 4 KERRVILLE CITY COUNCIL 5 and 6 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 7 Joint Workshop 8 Monday, March 5, 2007 9 8:00 a.m. 10 KPUB Meeting Room 11 2250 Memorial Boulevard 12 Kerrville, Texas 13 14 15 16 17 18 Kerrville City Council: 19 EUGENE C. SMITH, Mayor TODD A. BOCK, Mayor Pro Tem 20 CARL MEEK, Councilperson, Place 2 T. SCOTT GROSS, Councilperson, Place 3 21 CHUCK COLEMAN, Councilperson, Place 4 PAUL HOFMANN, City Manager 22 23 Kerr County Commissioners Court: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge 24 H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 25 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X March 5, 2007 2 PAGE 3 1.1 Presentation and discussion with City Council and City staff with respect to operation and 4 funding of joint City and County projects, including, but not limited to: 5 Library funding issues 3 6 Animal Control contract 33 7 Fire/EMS funding 51 8 Status of efforts of Economic Development 9 Study Committee 86 10 Joint City/County Airport Board 90 11 Joint and/or cooperative efforts of law enforcement in dealing with and handling 12 mental health cases 114 13 --- Adjourned 133 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 On Monday, March 5, 2007, at 8:00 a.m., a joint workshop 2 of the Kerrville City Council and the Kerr County 3 Commissioners Court was held in the KPUB Meeting Room, 2250 4 Memorial Boulevard, Kerrville, Texas, and the following 5 proceedings were had: 6 P R O C E E D I N G S 7 MAYOR SMITH: We might as well call to order the 8 joint meeting of the Kerrville City Council and the Kerr 9 County Commissioners Court on March 5th, 2007, at 8:17 a.m. in 10 the Kerrville Public Utility Board Meeting Room. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: And, Mr. Mayor, I likewise will call 12 my agenda to order at that same time and place, at the posted 13 time and date, Monday, March 5th, 2007. The agenda that I 14 have posted, Mr. Mayor, has kind of a generic discussion. 15 Your agenda comes down by item, so probably in order to stay 16 on track, why don't we just follow your order here, and we'll 17 go from there. 18 MAYOR SMITH: Okay. The Agenda Item 1 is library 19 funding issues. I don't know exactly how you -- how we're 20 going to handle these. Do you -- City Manager, will you want 21 to -- where's Paul? Do you want to -- did you want to 22 discuss -- 23 MR. HOFMANN: Mayor, I can give a brief introduction 24 and overview on where we are on this, and John David Lipscomb, 25 the chair of the Library Board, is here. He's prepared to 3-5-07jwk 4 1 address the City Council and the County Commissioners as well. 2 And this -- this subject is a bit of a follow-up to the 3 discussion we had on this topic six months ago in this room, 4 the last time we had a -- we had a joint meeting. And not -- 5 not to go into a lot of the details; you're all here and you 6 remember the conversation. The -- the participants at that 7 meeting, County Commissioners and Council members, asked that 8 we evaluate the creation of a -- of a library district, and to 9 look at funding issues for the library. And it was also 10 discussed that we should spend some effort looking at the -- 11 the vision for the library itself. 12 And a bit of -- a little background that the City 13 Council certainly knows, and -- and the County Commissioners 14 may not be as fully aware of, is that the City Council 15 budgeted in this year's capital plan some funds to do a 16 facility study, programming study for the library, that would 17 include not only the current building, but the other buildings 18 across the parking lot out at the library, and do a full 19 library complex study. And it's -- it was our thought that 20 before we embarked on a study like that, that we ought to wrap 21 our hands around what -- what is the vision and the future for 22 the library. 23 Mr. Lipscomb has previously reported to both the 24 County Commissioners Court and to the City Council his board's 25 recommendation on the creation of a library district. I'm 3-5-07jwk 5 1 sure he is -- he can repeat some of that presentation if you'd 2 like to hear that, and answer any questions you have about 3 that, but I think he's probably most prepared to update both 4 bodies on where his board is on coming up with a vision for 5 the future programming facilities of -- of the library. And 6 so, unless there are questions for me, with that, I'll ask 7 Mr. Lipscomb to -- you should probably find a place at the 8 table here. And -- 9 MAYOR SMITH: Judge, Mr. Lipscomb made a 10 presentation on the library district, and, as I understand it, 11 they're not making a recommendation. Do you want him to go 12 full-length on the -- I think he made a presentation to you. 13 Do you want him to go full-length on the pros and cons of 14 forming a district at this time? 15 JUDGE TINLEY: He made a presentation to the Court a 16 few months ago, as I recall, and he may just want to hit the 17 high points of that. And we've got some written material that 18 he's provided from his group, so whatever he needs to do in 19 order to keep it cohesive, and so that there's better 20 understanding. 21 MAYOR SMITH: Fire away. 22 MR. LIPSCOMB: Okay. Well, in your -- I think in 23 your packets, there's some recommendations, and let me just 24 give you a little bit of history on that. This is the most 25 recent item out of the Advisory Board. There were some 3-5-07jwk 6 1 missions and roles for the library formulated, and -- and with 2 respect to those missions and roles, the board thinks the 3 library is -- as far as the future, as far as a vision goes, 4 the library that you see today is probably going to be a lot 5 like the library of tomorrow, in that you'll still have books. 6 We may be -- the library of tomorrow may be a little more into 7 information technology, more computers, more digitized books, 8 that kind much thing, but the basic services of self-help, 9 learning, and community involvement are still going to be 10 there in the future of the library. 11 And so, with those things in mind, the board 12 provided recommendations -- I think there's eight 13 recommendations here -- relative to things that -- that we 14 might like to see in the library of the future. And, as -- as 15 the City Manager just alluded to, first -- first one has to do 16 with looking at the whole library complex, the buildings, and 17 how could those current building facilities be better utilized 18 for the library functions? And then the second recommendation 19 has to do with perhaps procuring some kind of a group or an 20 individual with expertise to -- to look at the buildings 21 themselves, and could they just be better organized? Could 22 you rearrange things to improve the efficiency or improve 23 floor space? Perhaps take in some of the existing buildings 24 to increase the floor space, but not necessarily increase 25 the -- the footprint of the building. 3-5-07jwk 7 1 I think one of the underlying things that most board 2 members talked about in this area is that they didn't really 3 want to spend a lot of money on an old building. Because 4 that's what it is; it's a 40-year-old building that needs a 5 lot. So, we didn't think it was prudent to just put a lot of 6 money into refurbishing an old building. But if you could do 7 some of these things to -- and in kind of a short term to 8 improve the library and to make it a better place for the 9 community, it might be worthwhile. So, that's -- that was the 10 reason behind encouraging yet another study. But, again, let 11 me say this study would be on all of the buildings in the 12 complex, and not just on the old building, which is what the 13 previous studies have been. 14 Then the other recommendations have to do with 15 creating some -- some quiet areas, some areas strictly for the 16 teens that would be isolated, some isolated areas for the 17 children's library, to look at parking. Could anything be 18 done there without spending a lot of money? And -- and one 19 example was the creation of perhaps some compact spaces so 20 that you might be able to get a few more spaces in, or the 21 total number of cars. And then there was even a suggestion -- 22 a recommendation here dealing with something that really 23 wouldn't cost much money or take much effort, and that's just 24 create a web page for the teens off the library's web page, 25 something that would be of interest to them; books relative to 3-5-07jwk 8 1 their -- news relative to the teens, that kind of thing. To 2 just -- I think we all grew up -- I know I did -- with not 3 much activities -- organized activities for the teens, so I 4 think if the library could be a -- a focal point for that, 5 that would be a good thing. So, that's what the 6 recommendations have to do with. I'd be glad to answer any 7 questions about that, if anyone has any. Yeah? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not as much on the 9 recommendations, but just going back to the library 10 district -- I don't want to get in a big discussion on this; I 11 know the recommendation. Can you just summarize why the 12 Advisory Board does not feel the library district is a good 13 idea? 14 MR. LIPSCOMB: Sure, be glad to. Let me go back and 15 do a little bit of history. In 1997, the Texas Legislature 16 passed, as part of the Local Government Code, a 17 multi-jurisdiction library district legislation, Chapter 326, 18 and in Chapter 326, a library district can be created and 19 administered by elected officials that collect their revenue 20 off sales tax. And -- excuse me -- in fact, in '98, the first 21 library district was formed, the west -- West Bank Community 22 out of Austin, and it still exists today. It's been quite 23 successful. In fact, there are a total of, I think, today, 15 24 library districts across the state that have been organized 25 under Chapter 326. Again, that's funded with sales tax 3-5-07jwk 9 1 revenue. All right. Since this area is at sales tax max, 2 that's not an option for us. 3 In 2005, Chapter 336 was approved, and that allows 4 for a similar type district with appointed members rather than 5 elected, to collect property tax revenues to the fund. Now, 6 to this date, there have been no library districts formed 7 under Chapter 336, and so looking at all of that, the board 8 felt like it's -- our only option, the 336, was not really a 9 good choice, for several reasons, and one of them being the 10 fact that the officials that -- that would run the district 11 formed under 336 would be appointed. And -- and you look 12 around, and the two bodies here, City Council and 13 Commissioners, they're elected people that pull revenue off of 14 property tax. You have school districts; you have some 15 emergency service districts out in western Kerr County. Those 16 are all elected, and this one would be appointed, and we just 17 wondered about the -- how the people would feel, how the 18 voters would feel about having appointed members rather than 19 elected. So, that was one issue. 20 The other issue was, forming a -- a district is 21 going to cost really a lot of money, more money than is being 22 spent right now. And I realize that sounds kind of strange, 23 but if you think about it, right now, since the City owns the 24 library building and library staff people are city employees, 25 a lot of the administrative costs associated with -- with 3-5-07jwk 10 1 running the library are handled by the City, just as part of 2 their services, 'cause those are city folks. But if you go 3 off and form a library district, you're going to have to -- 4 the district would have to be responsible for the legal, the 5 payroll, the administration; all those additional costs would 6 have to be passed on to the -- to the people in the district 7 that would pay for that. So, those were some of the -- the 8 main reasons. 9 And -- and since we're talking about cost, I might 10 point out, too, that right now, of course, a portion of the 11 city residents' taxes -- property taxes go to support the 12 library, and a portion of the -- those people who live outside 13 the city, a portion of their county taxes go to support the 14 library. So, if -- if a district was formed, the City, of 15 course, would no longer be putting in that money, so that 16 portion of money would have to be distributed over everyone 17 else in the county. And we could see that, basically, the -- 18 of course, I realize city people live in the county too, but 19 in -- those who live in the county would really see a higher 20 cost. When I say that, I mean -- I'm talking about the people 21 who live outside of the city. 22 So, those folks -- let's recap. I think I've done 23 badly with this. The people that live outside the city would 24 pay additional because they would have to pick up that portion 25 of the city that would no longer be paid. Probably thoroughly 3-5-07jwk 11 1 confused y'all by now. I think those are the main points. 2 There were some other issues, but there was just a lot of -- 3 of concern about these issues, and one of them being that -- 4 that if -- if the Butt Holdsworth Library was to create a 5 library district under the property tax legislation, they'd be 6 the first. And -- and I think I pointed out in a presentation 7 back in November-October that it's not easy forming a 8 district. This West Bank Community that was the first one, 9 they kept all their information and put on it a web page of 10 what all the -- the hoops they had to jump to get a library 11 district formed, and it's not an easy task, and there's a lot 12 of cost and overhead up front before it's even approved. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: John? 15 MR. LIPSCOMB: Yes? 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you saying that under 17 336, the board is appointed? 18 MR. LIPSCOMB: Yes. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that board levies taxes 20 and collects them, possibly, et cetera? 21 MR. LIPSCOMB: They have the responsibility to 22 determine a tax rate which, of course, goes before the voters, 23 and they approve it or don't approve it, yes. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I can tell you how the 25 public will feel about that. 3-5-07jwk 12 1 MR. LIPSCOMB: That was our feeling, too. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm -- 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is 336 set up as an 4 appointed board, just as the first board, with the subsequent 5 board being elected? Or is it -- 6 MR. LIPSCOMB: No, it's an appointed board all the 7 way through. Under 336 -- excuse me, under 326, they're 8 elected for two-year terms. And the other thing is, it calls 9 for a seven-member board, with four from the lead government 10 entity and three from the other. So, in this case, it would 11 be four people from the city and three people from the county, 12 similar to the situation we have right now with the Library 13 Advisory Board. We have three -- basically three people 14 representing the county and three people representing the 15 city, and then one kind of an independent of The Friends. 16 MR. MEEK: I have a question. Who would appoint the 17 members? Would it be the Legislature or the local -- 18 MR. LIPSCOMB: The government entities, the City and 19 the County. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Paul, I'm curious about your 21 comment that the City has budgeted in your long-term fund, 22 or -- 23 MR. HOFMANN: Yes, sir. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: To do -- to do what? For a 25 study? Or was there other things? 3-5-07jwk 13 1 MR. HOFMANN: No, it -- it would be a study. And 2 recognizing that there have been previous studies of the 3 library -- The Friends of the Library commissioned a study a 4 while back. I don't think that study has ever been completed 5 and finally presented. There have been architectural reviews 6 and studies of the library building that -- that were intended 7 to come up with some recommendations for how to add space to 8 it. But, as Mr. Lipscomb said, and as we've had discussions 9 with the Library Board over the last several months, not to be 10 overly critical of those previous studies, 'cause there's a 11 lot of benefit and some good findings in those studies, but 12 one -- one recurring shortcoming in all those studies was that 13 they only looked at the existing building. And I think, and I 14 think it's the opinion of the Library Board as well, that if 15 we're going to consider the future of the library from both a 16 physical standpoint and a programming standpoint, that it 17 makes sense to consider the building that currently houses the 18 Parks and Recreation facility, for example. And, again, you 19 can't separate the -- the physical from -- from the 20 programming. 21 Again, as Mr. Lipscomb said, and why I think it 22 makes a lot of sense to step back and think about the future 23 of the library from a programming needs standpoint, while -- 24 while we have a -- I think a pretty decent children's program 25 out there right now, I think it's also true to say that when 3-5-07jwk 14 1 you think about the youth of the community in general, we 2 don't offer a lot, and we don't offer a lot at the library. 3 And some of that -- certainly, not all of it, but some of that 4 has to do with a lack of space. And so we thought we would 5 give the City Council the opportunity to -- to study that 6 question. Now, we budgeted $50,000. I don't think that the 7 study we're -- we would be describing here would cost $50,000, 8 necessarily, but that's what we've set aside from -- from 9 funds previously donated. The money we have budgeted for this 10 isn't -- isn't coming from the City's general fund. And I 11 think -- and this is -- this is not up to me, obviously; it's 12 up to the City Council -- that the Library Board has done an 13 excellent job here of laying out some recommendations that 14 could be turned into a scope of work for that kind of 15 analysis. At least that's the thinking. 16 MR. GROSS: If I could add to that, I think we need 17 to step back, way back. There's nothing that would -- that a 18 little soap and water wouldn't hurt that building, as a little 19 aside. But if you put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig. 20 And our library now is just totally inadequate, and the 21 facility is in bad shape, and I really think what we need to 22 do is think a little bit broad -- more broadly. If we fail to 23 think broadly, we're going to fail the library and people who 24 use it. I think the first place to begin is with a facility 25 study for the entire city, and maybe even the county as well. 3-5-07jwk 15 1 I think we need to start with a clean sheet of paper and say, 2 "Is this where we want the library?" Maybe it's the wrong 3 spot. Maybe something else ought to go in that building. 4 Maybe -- you know, maybe we need to think about it 5 globally. We talk about comprehensive planning, and then 6 we -- then we plan little pieces. We have a comprehensive 7 plan that's not really comprehensive. So, I think we need to 8 think broadly, and we need to think what a library looks like 9 in 2020 or 2030, and build to that. And I'm afraid that if we 10 were to use the Parks and Recreation building in addition to 11 the current facility, we're just spreading our problem out; 12 we're not fixing it. I think we need to fix it. And as for 13 the taxing district, it's still a tax. Somebody -- somebody 14 somewhere is going to have to pay the freight. And if we say, 15 "Well, we didn't raise city taxes; we didn't raise county 16 taxes," but we created a library district, it's still a tax. 17 So, we have to be really, I think, good stewards of the 18 taxpayers' money, and not -- not try to hide a tax by giving 19 it another name. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with a lot of what 21 Scott's saying on long-term, on thinking out of the box, but I 22 think there's two components that -- and they can go on 23 simultaneously, in my mind. I think the community needs to 24 know and have -- and visualize what kind of library they want, 25 regardless of if it's city/county, city or county. Shouldn't 3-5-07jwk 16 1 make any difference. It's the facility of some sort that 2 needs to be there and that needs to be determined. The second 3 thing is funding and the current relationship, how, you know, 4 that is going to continue in the future. And, obviously, it 5 doesn't work real well. The more I look at the facility, the 6 worse the relationship is. Not from us getting along. You 7 have the genealogy center now as part of the complex, which is 8 city only. You have the Parks and Rec building, which is city 9 only. Then you have the library, which is a city building the 10 County helps fund, and it's just really become an unmanageable 11 item, and really hard to tell exactly what it's even costing, 12 in my mind. 13 The -- one of the things that I recall Paul bringing 14 up at our last meeting was trying to figure out what legal 15 requirements were placed on the City and the County by the 16 Butt family -- Holdsworths, I mean, when it was originally put 17 together. I mean, I don't think anyone had a good answer at 18 the last meeting as to, can it be split up? Can one entity 19 take it over? I mean, how is that all done? If the library 20 moves, does that property revert back to somebody? Can you -- 21 you know, I mean, there's just a whole lot of questions that 22 kind of go along with that -- what Scott was talking about, as 23 to what can be done with that facility and what can be done 24 with the current joint relationship. 25 MR. HOFMANN: Well, I think we can answer the 3-5-07jwk 17 1 question about the legal requirements. And, Mike, jump in if 2 I leave something important out, but the bottom line is, there 3 is no ongoing legal obligation on the County to continue 4 funding participation in the library at any level. There is 5 no ongoing requirement there. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: What about the use of that property 7 for library purposes? Is there any sort of a problem? 8 MR. HOFMANN: Again, Mike, tell me if I stray here, 9 but no, there's no -- there were no stipulations on the 10 long-term use. No legal stipulations, anyway, on the 11 long-term use of that property. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just did some research 13 into some of the court orders going back in terms of funding, 14 and I didn't find anything either. I found the original court 15 order which set up the County's contribution, but there was 16 nothing behind that court order that indicates it's -- it's 17 forever. Just a court order that we can do it, and cited that 18 way. And there was a certain taxing limitation put on it by 19 the initial Court; it should never go above five cents per -- 20 per $100 valuation. Obviously, it's gone beyond that. But 21 there is no permanent indication or commitment, from my 22 research. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, it would appear to be 24 more important, in my -- in my estimation -- and I think the 25 Advisory Board, if we had more time, we'd talk about it -- to 3-5-07jwk 18 1 spend money to do research on what -- what a new library would 2 cost, space necessary to accommodate all the -- all the 3 functions of the library from now into the future, rather than 4 spending it on the old facility that's obsolete. And I -- I 5 would really hate to see anybody spend an enormous amount of 6 money on the old facility, knowing that it's obsolete. Money 7 would be better spent going toward a new facility and a new 8 place that is accessible. The library is not accessible to 9 the public. You have no parking. What parking -- what little 10 parking you have is downhill from the library. A lot of 11 elderly people use it; it's hard for them to get in and out. 12 You have children that are using the library; they're being 13 bused there. They're stopping on the street and dropping them 14 off on the street. That is a safety issue. You know, I think 15 we just need to really look long and hard and face the fact 16 that the thing is obsolete, and look forward into building a 17 new place somewhere. I believe it can be funded with grants. 18 It wouldn't necessarily have to all be funded with -- with tax 19 dollars. And -- but that would be my -- that's my thought on 20 the thing, from my short time of being on the library this 21 time, and from years past. This is an ongoing issue; it's not 22 going to be resolved by throwing $50,000 a year into doing 23 minor renovations that accomplish nothing. That's my thought. 24 MR. GROSS: And, by the way, grants would give us 25 capital funds, but operational funds -- if we incorporated 3-5-07jwk 19 1 some of the new technology, like RFID, for example, we could 2 operate much more efficiently in terms of payroll. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Exactly. And, too, when you 4 have three separate buildings, you have staffing problems that 5 cost more than they should, in my opinion. Do it all under 6 one roof. 7 MAYOR SMITH: I'm inclined to agree with you. I 8 don't see how all those three little buildings -- if they 9 could be connected with a walkway or something like that, 10 might have some utility, but you couldn't -- it would be -- 11 you know, it would just be good money after bad if we tried to 12 do much. You could temporarily do something, but long-range, 13 you need to do something a lot better than just adding three 14 little structures on. A lot of money would be spent modifying 15 those to make them useful. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And, too, you're going to have 17 to -- to incorporate A.D.A. into this if you start doing some 18 major renovation, and we all know what that costs. 19 Cost-prohibitive in an old building. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think what y'all have talked 21 about, I mean, is a study to come up with what is a good plan, 22 and I think that takes part of the long-range vision in place. 23 The other part of the -- probably a more difficult thing is 24 how we operate it and -- and that relationship. I mean, I 25 think I was pretty explicit at our last meeting of my view of 3-5-07jwk 20 1 continuing down the road that we're at, and I haven't changed 2 my view on that. I just think that it is not working well. 3 It is a situation where, as long as I've been a Commissioner, 4 it's essentially -- the County has had very little input, 5 other than being members on the Advisory Board, to the 6 operation of the library, and if we're going to fund it, I 7 think that's not correct. And I don't -- and I think my view 8 is probably going down a -- a route where the County will let 9 it be a City-run facility, and the County give a contribution. 10 And it's not tied to anything, other than -- I mean, I think 11 a -- you know, a level should try to be targeted, so there's 12 -- from a planning standpoint, but, you know, somewhere in the 13 neighborhood of what our funding level is now. Probably leave 14 it at about that, maybe some escalation, and just give a -- 15 $400,000 the County contributes to it, and that's it, or 16 whatever the number is, and let it be a City-run facility. 17 MR. HOFMANN: How is that different from the 18 current -- 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause we argue about 50 percent 20 all the time. I think we just said it's a flat fee. 21 MR. HOFMANN: I see. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: As opposed to -- we're not a 23 partner. It's a city library, and for the county residents to 24 be able to use it, the County provides a -- an amount. And I 25 think the County needs to be willing to commit over, you know, 3-5-07jwk 21 1 increments of time. 2 MR. HOFMANN: So, a flat number, maybe with a 3 reasonable adjustment on how to fund the operations. And, if 4 I might, it -- am I hearing that if we were to do this study, 5 that the study shouldn't be limited to the complex, as 6 Mr. Gross said? We ought to start with a blank slate, and as 7 Mr. Oehler said, we should look at -- at least analyze the 8 alternative of starting over brand-new, new building. Is that 9 an overstatement of what is being described here? 10 MAYOR SMITH: Let me ask Mr. Lipscomb a question. 11 Now, your first recommendation is studying the three 12 buildings. That wasn't too -- your committee wasn't too 13 excited about that, I imagine. 14 MR. LIPSCOMB: Well, excited with respect to prior 15 studies had just focused on the main building. And -- and if 16 you're really looking at all the facilities to get the library 17 work done, it only made sense to look at all the buildings 18 that are there, how they could best be utilized. Understand, 19 we were looking at this for short-term, you know, solutions. 20 This is -- 21 MAYOR SMITH: Well, that wouldn't be a -- 22 MR. HOFMANN: Short-term. 23 MAYOR SMITH: -- long-term recommendation. 24 MR. HOFMANN: Like, ten years. 25 MR. LIPSCOMB: Or less. 3-5-07jwk 22 1 MR. HOFMANN: Or less. 2 MR. LIPSCOMB: Yes. 3 MAYOR SMITH: Okay. 4 MR. HOFMANN: And that's an important point of what 5 the Library Board has been thinking through, is their planning 6 horizon here is 10 years. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One other comment; then I'll be 8 quiet. On what I'm talking about, turning it over to the City 9 totally, it's not just that -- it's -- to me, it is a 10 city-used facility. It's not -- I mean, most county 11 residents -- I mean, it's including, obviously -- those in the 12 city are obviously county residents, but those people outside 13 the city limits or the ETJ, Kerrville central, they don't use 14 it a lot. I mean, my constituents in the eastern part of the 15 county don't come over here. I don't know about the west, 16 but -- occasionally some usage, but it's predominantly a 17 city-used facility, and that's why I think it should be a city 18 facility. 19 MR. GROSS: And part of that is shame on the library 20 for not having the programming that would attract the folks in 21 the county. It needs to be worth -- worth it. When people 22 make a buying decision these days, they evaluate it in terms 23 of, is it worth it? Is it easier to sit at home and get it 24 off the internet, or can I buy a novel at Costco? We need 25 programming that attracts folks and is relevant and pertinent 3-5-07jwk 23 1 to the lives of people in county life. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you're right to a point, 3 but I think the other part of it is, there's a library in 4 Comfort that's -- that's a private library, and it's funded 5 similarly by Kendall County, but it's a small-town library; it 6 gets a lot of community support. I mean, those -- you get 7 Center Point and Ingram, there's -- they have another 8 alternative. I don't think it's just that they don't want to 9 use the library. There's other alternatives out there. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm sorry. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm done. 12 MR. COLEMAN: Jonathan, one thing, I don't think 13 it's boundary-restricted only. I think it's a demographic 14 thing, to the extent that we have retirees in the city or 15 retirees in the county subdivisions. I think that retiree 16 demographic utilizes the library more than other groups. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably true. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Based on my recommendation 19 of utilization statistics -- and they may have changed; I 20 haven't talked to Commissioner Oehler about it -- they 21 pondered uses from people who live within the city limits. 22 MR. HOFMANN: About 70 percent of users are city 23 residents. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That supports my 25 recollection. Other counties and cities face the same. We're 3-5-07jwk 24 1 not plowing new ground here. One of the solutions that others 2 have reached is that if it's a City-owned facility, it's 3 operated that way, and people who live outside the city limits 4 buy a library card, period. 5 MR. GROSS: I really have trouble with that. I 6 don't think that encourages people to use the library. I 7 think it's a little bit discriminatory for the lower economic 8 folks. I think we -- I think we owe it to our community to 9 make the library welcoming -- welcoming to everybody. I get 10 your point. It's a good point; it's well made and well taken, 11 but I don't think, philosophically, that's what we would want 12 to do. I think that the library ought to be like a church. 13 The door is open; come in. 14 MR. MEEK: It was also given by the Butts as a free 15 library, and their legal terminology -- perhaps you could help 16 us, Antonio, on what that means. You can charge a nominal 17 fee -- is that right? -- for library cards? But you can't -- 18 MR. MARTINEZ: Well, there are various ways to 19 structure a library, right. Operating as a free library under 20 state laws means you can only charge for certain kinds of 21 things. Parking, for instance. A fee for parking is allowed, 22 but you cannot charge for -- as we're established, we cannot 23 charge for people walking in the door. 24 MR. COLEMAN: Paul, the study that you referred to, 25 the funding is in place through grants now? 3-5-07jwk 25 1 MR. HOFMANN: Donations. 2 MR. COLEMAN: Donations. 3 MR. HOFMANN: But, yes, sir, funding is in place. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, neither the City or County 5 would have to contribute money? 6 MR. HOFMANN: It's in the City's budget. It's not 7 the general fund. No tax dollars would be used. 8 MR. COLEMAN: And then that study would concentrate 9 on what John just went over, which is -- 10 MR. HOFMANN: Well, that's the question. 11 MR. COLEMAN: -- short-term. 12 MR. HOFMANN: That's the question. And that's 13 really -- before we proceed on with that study, we need to 14 achieve some consensus about a scope. And is that scope -- is 15 the question of that study, what do you do with the library 16 complex? Or do you add the question, what about starting all 17 over with a blank slate? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Bruce's comments on that 19 were very good. I agree with that myself. 20 MR. HOFMANN: And so that's the question, is just 21 how would you scope that analysis, and to what extent are you 22 willing to look at starting completely over? 'Cause I think 23 that changes the nature of that study significantly, and it 24 just -- how open do you want that analysis to be, is the 25 question. 3-5-07jwk 26 1 MR. GROSS: And we're totally wasting our time -- 2 I'm talking in terms of short-term fixes -- other than washing 3 the windows and sweeping. 4 MR. COLEMAN: This study could potentially include 5 grants for either capital, or -- or potentially some of the 6 operating -- 7 MR. HOFMANN: It absolutely could. 8 MR. COLEMAN: -- technology. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My view is -- I mean, I think -- 10 I think you need to look at it all. I think you need to look 11 at a new facility, what can be done at that facility, and -- 12 but I still go back -- I think we need to figure out how it's 13 going to work operationally. I mean, I think -- and I think, 14 you know, they can be done simultaneously, and I think I would 15 be willing to support -- even if the scope of the project and 16 the study is larger, I mean, I think the County -- you know, I 17 would -- I would support funding that. I think that's an 18 important thing to do, and it's part of the long-range 19 direction where that library needs to get. But I still 20 think -- I think also, one parallel, we can look at where 21 we're going as a partnership, or lack of partnership. 22 MR. MEEK: One thing I would like is some direction 23 from this body, is do we still consider the library district? 24 One -- one attraction to that is, it gets away from the double 25 taxation, which I think is a significant factor here. As far 3-5-07jwk 27 1 as -- as far as the operation -- or the administrative support 2 costs no longer being provided by the City, that would be up 3 to the district to go out and contract the best services for 4 the lowest cost. It might be the City as a provider of it; 5 might be someone else. But before we get totally away from a 6 library district, I'm just curious; I would kind of like to 7 hear from some of my colleagues around this table. Do we want 8 to explore that further? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've long supported it, as 10 you know. And Mr. Lipscomb and I have had this discussion 11 before, and I think a couple things come to mind. If Chapter 12 336, as he says, limits the board -- or provides for the board 13 being an appointed board, and there have been no library 14 districts formed under that chapter -- and probably because of 15 that, because it's a good point; you can't go to the voters on 16 an appointed -- with an appointed board structure and expect 17 that board to levy taxes and have the voters accept that. I 18 -- I appreciate that. I think that's accurate. There's no 19 reason to believe that you could not take that point to the 20 Legislature and point out to them that, in their wisdom, since 21 they enacted this law, none have been formed, and there is 22 probably a pretty good reason why they haven't been formed 23 under this chapter, and that while you could appoint a 24 board -- the first board, all subsequent boards had to be 25 elected, and that's a change for the Legislature to tweak to 3-5-07jwk 28 1 make it a more workable section of law. 2 Secondly, you and I have had this discussion before 3 with respect to costs, and the point you're making is that 4 while some of those costs are not visible to the general 5 public, because the City picks up those costs of either 6 administrative or mowing the grass or whatever, they're still 7 costs. They may be hidden from public view, but they're still 8 costs. So, why not get them all together, put them on public 9 view, and say, "This is what it takes to fund your library." 10 And you do that through history. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In addition to -- you mentioned 12 Legislature. It could also go through as a local bill to 13 change just for Kerr County. I mean, which is -- if the City 14 Council and the Commissioners Court supported that, I would 15 suspect -- 16 MR. MEEK: Jon, could you repeat the first part of 17 what you said? Changing what? The Kerr County -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It could be a local bill, only 19 in Kerr County. 20 MR. MEEK: Okay, got you. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That way, I think, as long as 22 the City Council and Commissioners Court support it, I would 23 think Senator Fraser would probably support it. Probably. 24 MAYOR SMITH: I'd like to correct a statement that 25 was made earlier. There are actually technically more county 3-5-07jwk 29 1 people that use the library than city people. And the -- the 2 city is part of the county, so everybody -- so you said they 3 were talking about that. Y'all -- everybody should remember, 4 the city is part of the county. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I said that -- I said if you 6 take out the city limits separately. 7 MAYOR SMITH: Okay. I apologize, then. But it -- 8 but, technically, there's more county people using the 9 library. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You want the County to run the 11 library? 12 MR. MEEK: Would you like to? (Laughter.) 13 MAYOR SMITH: Want approval immediately? 14 MR. MEEK: Do you want that in the form of a motion? 15 MAYOR SMITH: Actually, long-range, we have to do 16 something about the library, and so we can talk about a few 17 years, but there's -- something needs to be done. 18 MR. BOCK: Commissioner Williams, would you say 19 about the library district, after the recommendation came back 20 from the Library Board being against the library district, 21 it's just -- and I know there's some logistic issue, but it 22 just seems to me that -- that there -- that there is a place 23 somewhere for a library district, in my mind, and it's still 24 trying to work it all through. I don't have support for one 25 or the other, but it -- and I've stated, too, it just seems to 3-5-07jwk 30 1 me for the long-term viability of the library, a library 2 district gives more focus on what the library could be 3 someday, and sets some future planning structure for what the 4 library can be, instead of what -- for the past two years, 5 we've been on a -- basically, a year-to-year funding agreement 6 that really, in my opinion, causes the library to have to 7 shorten its focus and its course, and doesn't give it any 8 long-term viability. 9 I also, too, think that by looking at the study of 10 all the buildings -- and Councilman Gross has said this 11 numerous times, that maybe this isn't the best place for the 12 library. We're getting ready to review our comprehensive 13 plan, and we're going to focus on that comprehensive plan. 14 We're fixing to appoint here in the near future a committee to 15 steer that comprehensive plan, and that's something that, you 16 know, a good firm direction from these bodies would really 17 help that organization when they look at what downtown is to 18 look like in 10 to 15 years from now, and it may not include a 19 library. So, with this study running in conjunction with our 20 review, our comprehensive plan I think would be very 21 important, because that group is going to need some sort of 22 focus to determine, what are we looking at? Are we looking at 23 a downtown with a library, or are we looking at a downtown 24 without a library? 25 JUDGE TINLEY: I get the clear consensus here that 3-5-07jwk 31 1 the study should look a good ways out, Mr. Hofmann, and also 2 how it's going to interplay with the short-term use of those 3 buildings, and then the longer term use of them. Of course, 4 that's something that the City will want to incorporate in its 5 plan, as Councilman Bock indicated. Okay. Have we pretty 6 well wrung that one out, Mr. Mayor? 7 MAYOR SMITH: I believe so. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have, but I don't have any 9 idea as to where we're going. 10 MR. MEEK: Direction. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We've talked a lot. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: I -- the sense I get is that the 13 study that the City is about to get launched with its 14 privately contributed funds is going to be a longer-term 15 study; look at short-term use of that library complex, but 16 with a view of what the long-term solution is, with possibly 17 an entirely new facility, and together with what funding 18 avenues may be available for that -- for a new facility, if 19 that's the direction that's gone. 20 MR. HOFMANN: Thank you for that, I think, excellent 21 summary of what's been discussed, Judge. And unless someone 22 would like to correct it, I see that as the direction I think 23 we're heading in. 24 MR. MEEK: I would suggest exploring Bill's idea 25 with the Legislature to give one more avenue of suggested 3-5-07jwk 32 1 change in legislation. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe we could make a 3 case before Representative Hilderbran, as Commissioner Letz 4 points out, the local bill, and cite the reasons why, the 5 current elements for forming a district. 6 MR. MEEK: The point being, you could get a change 7 and still not go that direction. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right, exactly. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're talking two years down 10 the road to get it done, anyway. It will be the next session, 11 so we're looking at -- 12 MR. HOFMANN: You can certainly put an item on the 13 City Council agenda for the Council to consider making that 14 request. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the other part of the 16 study, and what I heard the Judge say, kind of, is to look at 17 how it's going to get funded long-term. 18 MR. HOFMANN: Yes. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 20 MR. HOFMANN: And -- and correct me -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: As Option 3. 22 MR. HOFMANN: Correct me on this if I overstate it, 23 but in the short term, in terms of preparing a budget for 24 fiscal '08, we'll -- we'll prepare a budget for fiscal '08 25 that looks at holding the County's contribution constant, from 3-5-07jwk 33 1 a -- to use your words earlier, flat. Okay. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Everybody happy at that? I guess we 3 go on to the Animal Control situation. Mr. Mayor? 4 MAYOR SMITH: Okay, that's our next agenda item. Do 5 you want to -- 6 MR. HOFMANN: Mayor, I -- the City Council received 7 a few days ago, and the County Commissioners received in the 8 packet recently, a memorandum from Charlie Hastings to 9 overview some statistics about use of the Animal Control 10 facility and how that relates to relative funding. And, 11 Charlie, if you don't mind, I'd like to overview your 12 findings. 13 MR. HASTINGS: That's fine. I've been asked to 14 research some of the history and the statistics and gather 15 data from the Kerr County Animal Control facility. They keep 16 logs of all the animals that come in, where they come from, et 17 cetera. And the history is that, historically, Animal Control 18 service has been provided by the County, and the City has been 19 sharing 40 percent, while the County is participating at 60, 20 and that there was dead animal pickup. Now, I've looked at 21 some data all the way back to 1999 that deals with that, and 22 more recently, in 2004 and 2005, the City was, in fact, 23 responsible for about 40 percent of the animals, whether they 24 were live, dead, and the City was paying about $75,000 a year 25 in those years. In fiscal year '06, and again in '07, the 3-5-07jwk 34 1 dead animal pickup was removed from the services, and the cost 2 share went up from 40 percent to 60 percent. 3 If you look at the data, the City's actually -- 4 especially now that dead animal's been removed, is responsible 5 for less than 30 percent of the work that's generated out 6 there, and in '06, it was 27 percent. And to-date in '07, 7 it's 28 percent. At the end of the year, we'll know if it's 8 going to be higher or lower, but we anticipate it ought to be 9 about what it was last year, somewhere less than 30 percent. 10 Removing dead animals has resulted in a hardship to the city, 11 to the tune of $27,000 for us to pick up those dead animals, 12 so the City's paying more from both ends. As far as the 13 service goes, the service is not really responsive, 14 particularly at the end of the day. There's no Animal Control 15 officer available after 5 p.m., and they will not pick up 16 stray animals unless they are posing a threat to the public. 17 These are just some of the facts and issues. We're 18 not asking you to negotiate anything, I think, at this moment. 19 I think the Council has a spring retreat later; they can 20 probably sit and talk about these issues in more depth. 21 The -- the '06 amount that the City paid, again, it went -- 22 from '05 to '06, it went from $76,000 to 128, and for '07, 23 it's $148,000. I know there's a -- a memo in there that talks 24 about how much we're paying for this year. I think there was 25 a typo listing last year's amount, but this year it's 3-5-07jwk 35 1 $148,000. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm making a couple of comments. 3 On the dead animal pickup, I mean, I think I don't disagree at 4 all, but the reason I think is very important. You can't put 5 dead animals in the same vehicle, without totally sanitizing, 6 that you can put live animals in. And it becomes an issue 7 of -- of -- you know, I don't think it was that the County 8 wouldn't do it. It's that the County's -- City's going to 9 have to pay for it one way or the other, because our Road and 10 Bridge does it in the county. Animal Control doesn't do that 11 service in the county either, and it's because of the issue of 12 having dead animals and live animals in the same truck. So, 13 they're -- that was the reason for that. It wasn't -- it was 14 an arbitrary thing. And it's handled differently in the 15 county, and it makes more sense to do it the same way in the 16 city as it is done in the county. 17 On the -- the other portion of the funding, I mean, 18 I would -- I hate to say, I agree with Charlie. I mean, I 19 thought the ratios had switched when we made the change last 20 year, but I think the rates -- the cost should be done 21 proportionally. And if the numbers are saying that they're -- 22 the City's paying too much, I think the City should pay less. 23 I think they should pay their proportionate part, based on 24 pickup, and that's the best -- you know, best measure, in my 25 mind. The -- on the after 5:00 issue, that's, again, an issue 3-5-07jwk 36 1 of funding. I mean, that can be a service, but that means 2 increasing staff, substantially. And, you know, it's a -- if 3 the City wants that, that can be built in, but that's going to 4 certainly be a cost borne by the City to do that. So, that's 5 just a -- that's a -- you know -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cost of business. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, cost of business. I mean, 8 you know -- 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Also, if you add the unknowns 10 that you have listed as 39 percent, it gets real close. If 11 you split those two out and add them -- add them into each one 12 of our lines, that's almost a 50/50 split. And also, the 13 Animal Control facility has been doubled in size over the last 14 year. We're going to probably have to add another -- another 15 person out there to take care of additional duties, and just 16 more responsibility and more hours are required to maintain 17 that facility in the coming year. I don't think we can 18 continue to do it with five people; I think it will take six. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The split under this year is 20 60/40 or 50/50? Under the current -- in 2007? 21 MR. HASTINGS: From what we understand, it was -- 22 from '06, it was 60/40. From '07, I don't know what the split 23 was. I don't know how much the County's contributing. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We paid 60 in '06? 25 MR. HASTINGS: We did, the City. 3-5-07jwk 37 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, according to Bruce, it 2 should be about 50/50. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, it's looking to me, if 4 that's the numbers -- I assume they are -- you know, we can 5 adjust that accordingly, I would think. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks -- you know, 50/50 split. 7 The other issue is just whether y'all want the service or not. 8 I mean, it can be done; it's just a matter of the cost of it. 9 MR. MEEK: I was surprised to see -- you're saying 10 there's no stray animal pickup unless they're a threat? 11 MR. HASTINGS: Unless they're a threat. 12 MR. MEEK: That -- that raises some real important 13 questions. We've had stray pickup, at least in the city, for 14 a very long time, as long as I can remember. It seems to me 15 that is a big problem that is not being addressed here. If it 16 falls on law enforcement, and there's some allusion to that 17 here, that's a cost also. And I don't think your regular 18 patrol officers or Sheriff's deputies are crazy about rounding 19 up either little animals or big animals. I'm seeing a couple 20 smiles -- one smile back there. Isn't that a function of 21 Animal Control that we should be considering here? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I think you have to 23 go back to what we want. The more you pick up, the more you 24 euthanize. The more you euthanize, you get into a lot of hot 25 water. Y'all don't get the brunt, but, I mean, it's a -- you 3-5-07jwk 38 1 know, we have euthanized a number of pets, and it's not a 2 pretty scene when that happens. It happens on at least an 3 annual basis, a couple times a year. If you get really 4 aggressive on the pickup side, the facility gets filled up; 5 you've got to do something with the animals. That just kind 6 of goes into what the public wants. Most of those cats that 7 are strays are pets; they're not true strays. I mean, in the 8 county, they're taken care of in another way, but -- at least 9 in the eastern part of the county. But -- 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They're not all feral. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, I think there's -- 12 there is a mechanism to -- for -- cats are probably worse than 13 feral animals, or -- put out traps and all that. But, boy, 14 you get neighbors against neighbors and you get, you know, 15 Fluffy put to sleep, and it's a -- it's not a fun situation. 16 And I think it's a matter as to how aggressive both the City 17 and the County want to go after stray animals. I mean, the 18 County's tried to put in some registration requirements and 19 things of that nature, but it's -- it's kind of been largely 20 on a voluntary basis, even though it's a rule. And I think, 21 you know, if the City wants to get real hard-nosed about it, I 22 think the City needs to be prepared for the consequences of 23 being real hard-nosed about it. 24 MR. MEEK: The alternative is, I mean, they're just 25 out -- well, they're breeding. Without the spay and 3-5-07jwk 39 1 neutering, they're breeding anyway. But what is preferable? 2 Just happening out there on its own, or -- or being proactive? 3 It's a good question. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't disagree with you. I 5 just wanted to point out the other side of being aggressive in 6 that area. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No matter how proactive you 8 want to be, you can be picking up somebody's dog that just got 9 out of the yard and took off down the street. He may go back 10 to that yard in an hour. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If the pickup -- I'm sorry. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Go ahead. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If the pickup of dead 14 animals is an issue -- I can understand why there's some 15 concern on the part of the City. Certainly, in the next 16 budget, you can consider jointly funding a vehicle just for 17 that purpose. I can't imagine our Road and Bridge Department 18 would object to not having to pick up dead animals any more. 19 'Cause if we took that out -- 20 MR. MEEK: Well, they're not picking up on -- oh, 21 you're talking about in the county. They're not picking up -- 22 the City's picking them up in the city. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the County's -- Road and 24 Bridge picks them up in the county. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But if they had a vehicle to 3-5-07jwk 40 1 pick up dead animals and a staff person dedicated to that 2 purpose, both the City and the County, and fund it 3 accordingly, that might be an answer. 4 MR. MEEK: What's the worst -- can one -- one 5 vehicle and one person, or whatever that is, handle the whole 6 county? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Don't know. We can find 8 out. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would suspect so. 10 MR. COLEMAN: That's a good idea, Bill. That's one 11 thing we've talked about last meeting, I think, is maybe the 12 City donating a used pickup to -- to the Animal Control; that 13 they could use that without having to sanitize it every time, 14 and then address whatever labor would be necessary. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Might be part of the 16 solution. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't know how many animals 18 that is every year annually. But the highways aren't picked 19 up, because all of the state highway stuff is picked up by the 20 State. The County picks up all the county stuff, County Road 21 and Bridge does. And so I don't know how many of those you 22 actually have in the city. 23 MR. COLEMAN: And, Bruce, you missed -- 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Give me an idea. 25 MR. COLEMAN: You missed our last meeting. I 3-5-07jwk 41 1 started telling the story about a dead doe across the street 2 from me, and everybody almost took me to jail when I picked it 3 up and took it off. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, I don't know how many 5 animals we're talking about. Is it enough to fund a full-time 6 person or a half-time person, or what would it be? You 7 wouldn't think there'd be that many animals that couldn't be 8 picked up at least in a couple of hours a day inside the city. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Could be a morning. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Most of them are pretty well 11 taken care of. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Be a morning. I would think it 13 would be a morning. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: First thing in the morning. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: You could probably combine the 16 numbers from our Road and Bridge and the numbers that 17 Mr. Hastings has that he's developed since they've been doing 18 it within the city, and the combination of those numbers would 19 give you at least a good start toward it, I would think. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- 22 MAYOR SMITH: Once again, when we're talking about 23 Kerr County and Kerrville, we're talking about Kerr County 24 outside the city limits. And, you know, if we're going to 25 divide things, that seems like -- when the -- when you live in 3-5-07jwk 42 1 the city and you pay county taxes, you ought to stay in the 2 city. Because the county guys pay a certain amount to have 3 their animals picked up; the city guys don't get any benefit 4 out of it, so we ought to have an adjustment in taxes. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I live in the city, Mayor, 6 and I'm not complaining. 7 MAYOR SMITH: Well, I know you're not complaining, 8 but you complain enough anyway. (Laughter.) 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, what's wrong with the 10 city work crews picking it up? 11 MAYOR SMITH: No, it -- I just want to make sure we 12 understand what -- when we're talking about city and county, 13 we're talking about city is a -- is inside the city, and the 14 county is outside. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, if we took that kind of 16 approach, then the County would have to pay 100 percent of 17 everything that's -- of all the cost of everything that's 18 done inside the city, too. But you haven't incorporated the 19 city -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Mayor, you need to take 21 your issue to Harvey Hilderbran. 22 MAYOR SMITH: That's worse than talking to Bill 23 Williams. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know. Obviously, Bill's 25 not going to listen to you any more. (Laughter.) 3-5-07jwk 43 1 MAYOR SMITH: That's right. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, seems to me that 3 the funding should be adjusted, it appears, to 50 -- more 4 50/50, and that if the City wants additional service, it can 5 be done. 6 MR. COLEMAN: I'm a little confused. Charlie, the 7 unknown origin category, why is that? What is that? Is that 8 -- could that be city? Could that be county? Is that just 9 where the paperwork is not -- 10 MR. MEEK: When you drop your doe off and don't tell 11 them you did it. 12 MR. COLEMAN: Maybe I need to start billing here. 13 MR. HASTINGS: I -- you know, I asked that question 14 of Janie Roman, I think, probably six months ago, and I -- I 15 couldn't remember what exactly -- it was something like that. 16 They just didn't know where it came from. There was an animal 17 got dropped off; could have come from the city, could have 18 come from out of the city, could have come from out of the 19 county. They do -- I know that last year, they accepted a 20 fair number of dogs from out of the county. When you look at 21 the statistics, you go, "Wow, that jumped from 1 percent to 7. 22 What happened?" She said, "Well, there's a bunch of 23 facilities outside of our county that found out that we could 24 -- we could handle their animals in a humane way, and they 25 couldn't, so they brought them to us." 3-5-07jwk 44 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I need to find out about that. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not good. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We don't need to be taking any 4 out-of-county animals. 5 MR. BOCK: So, Charlie, you're saying the unknown 6 origin is like a citizen bringing in -- bring in and drop off? 7 MR. HASTINGS: I think it's a drop-off that you -- I 8 don't know enough of the details, but it's unknown. I mean, 9 it is exactly what it says; it's -- they don't know where it 10 came from. 11 MR. BOCK: Okay. 12 MR. HASTINGS: Maybe someone brought it in, and 13 they -- they said, "Well, I don't" -- you know, "I just found 14 this in the" -- 15 MR. COLEMAN: That might be like our landfill. You 16 all might want to, for out-of-county, raise the rate on that. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Part of -- 18 MAYOR SMITH: The solution is to tell people to run 19 over animals on state highways. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Part of what happens with that 21 percentage that you're talking about, I -- this is one of the 22 things I've inherited since I've been back on the Court, is 23 Animal Control. A lot of what happens is, you have a lot of 24 surrenders. That's what it's really called. People -- older 25 people can't take care of animals any more. They bring them 3-5-07jwk 45 1 in and just surrender them, and the County takes them, and you 2 don't know whether that came from a city person or a county or 3 where it came from, and then the County deals with it. Animal 4 Control deals with it. 5 MR. COLEMAN: There are a couple of pretty strong 6 organizations for pets, lost animal rescue -- 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. 8 MR. COLEMAN: Do they work with you at all? 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. Even the Humane Society 10 picks up animals periodically that they think are more 11 adoptable; they'll take them in, or animal rescue will take 12 some. Or if they get one that they can't -- you know, that's 13 too wild for them to handle, or too mean, they'll actually 14 work with us. But it's a hard deal; you don't know. If 15 anybody needs a white mule, we happen to have one at Animal 16 Control right now that was surrendered the other day. It's 17 not a motorized white mule; it's a real white mule. So, if 18 you know anybody in need of one, we have one. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what Rusty needs. 20 Rusty, you need that white mule. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Be Rusty's new patrol car. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Bobby Johnson. 23 MR. HOFMANN: All-terrain. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How big is it? 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: About 13 and a half hands. 3-5-07jwk 46 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh my god, Rusty, that's -- 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's a racing deal. You could 3 use it to go for the 4th of July races. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can see us now. 5 MR. COLEMAN: Smarter than horses. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. Anyway, you do have a 7 lot of surrenders. And, incidentally, Animal Control is not 8 -- is adopting out a lot more animals than what they used to. 9 I think it's up to about 75 percent. 10 MR. COLEMAN: That are adopted out? 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That are adopted out. And 12 with the larger facility that now we have more capacity, we 13 don't have to euthanize as often or as many, so it is doing 14 much better than it was originally. But it is going to 15 require a little more staff to be able to do that. I mean, 16 there's just more work. There's more kennels to clean, 17 there's more feeding, there's more to do recordkeeping on. 18 And it's -- it's doing very well, I think, and it's going to 19 do better. The new H.R. Director and I are working pretty 20 closely with Ms. Roman, and things are going to get better. 21 It's a hard job for them. 22 MR. MEEK: Can someone summarize the direction we're 23 going here in this meeting? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think funding is a -- 25 readjusted to what the usage is, which appears to be 50/50. I 3-5-07jwk 47 1 mean, that's -- and then I think it's a City Council decision 2 whether they want dead animal pickup, to really look at how to 3 accomplish that through the animal facility, what that cost 4 would be to the City. And those are the main issues. The 5 level of service, I think Bruce mentioned that. 6 MAYOR SMITH: How does the State pick up their 7 animals? Is this something that you could get the State to 8 take it over with some kind of compensation? You know, 9 allocation between entities all over the world is just nothing 10 but a constant argument, unfortunately. So, it would have to 11 be a settlement or compromise of some kind or other. 12 MR. MEEK: The one thing about -- if there is some 13 vehicle in place to pick up stray animals at some level, I 14 think you -- that will encourage people to keep their animals 15 up, instead of risking having them picked up. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's a good point. I 17 think that the -- it's -- could be looked at, though, and 18 Bruce talk to them and say, "You got a dog that's out all the 19 time; it gets picked up." 20 MR. MEEK: Kind of like the speed limit; right, 21 guys? May not get caught every time, but do you want to risk 22 it? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Charlie, while they're 24 flapping their gums, I got a real question for you. Under the 25 issues negotiation points, that last item, "Animal Control 3-5-07jwk 48 1 will not pick up stray animals unless it's a threat to the 2 public." Do you understand that to be after 5:00, or anytime? 3 MR. MEEK: Anytime. 4 MR. YOUNG: Normally, it's after 5:00. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sir? 6 MR. YOUNG: Normally, it's after 5:00, Commissioner 7 Baldwin, and weekends. During the day, when Animal Control is 8 there, they respond to stray pickups on our call, but after 9 5:00 is the issue. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 11 MR. YOUNG: And right as it's getting close to 5:00, 12 because of their staffing level. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I think these are -- 14 Animal Control officer after 5:00, and then this other item 15 here I think is something that we need to talk about a little 16 bit amongst -- 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well -- well, do you want to 18 put kind of a time -- time limit on what time you basically 19 stop picking up those animals? I mean, I don't think that 20 anybody's going to want to do that 24 hours a day, unless 21 there is a threat to the public health and safety. Because, 22 you know, what's the point in somebody getting up at 1 o'clock 23 in the morning, and they've got a barking dog that's staying 24 on the street corner; call Animal Control to come pick them 25 up, and that's not -- that, to me, is not cost-effective or 3-5-07jwk 49 1 reasonable. We need to have some cutoff time of whenever -- 2 you know, unless it's an emergency, it isn't going to happen. 3 MR. GROSS: Well, it's not safe to the guys doing 4 the pickup. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Do what? 6 MR. GROSS: Its' not safe to the guys doing pickup 7 either, 1 o'clock in the morning, to go chasing somebody's 8 dog. I don't think so. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Sure not, 'cause whoever is in 10 the next house or over there might think there's a prowler and 11 shoot the Animal Control person. So, you know, you got to 12 think about them, too. 13 MR. COLEMAN: Well, I agree with Jonathan's 14 statement that we ought to -- we ought to be on a usage fee 15 basis. I don't have a problem with that. I look at the 30 to 16 40 percent of unknown origin, and that -- that's kind of high. 17 I'd like to see everybody work to get that identified. But if 18 it ought to be 50/50, I think I'm probably okay with that. 19 I'm still not sure about the dead animal pickup. If we 20 donated a -- a used truck to Animal Control, would they be 21 able to absorb that duty for us? 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. That, or we could 23 furnish you one and you could do it. (Laughter.) 24 MR. COLEMAN: I jumped out there first. 25 MR. MEEK: Did you just volunteer? 3-5-07jwk 50 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I always like to put a shoe on 2 one foot and the other, see if it's equal. 3 MR. GROSS: How many animals are we talking about? 4 MR. HASTINGS: Five to ten a week. 5 MR. GROSS: One or two every day. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What did you just say? I 7 didn't hear. 8 MR. HASTINGS: Five to ten a week. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Dead animals? 10 MAYOR SMITH: Inside the city. Doesn't include the 11 county. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Inside the city limits? 13 MR. HASTINGS: Inside the city limits. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, if we get an extra 15 person I would think that we're going to have to have, maybe 16 we could designate their time -- or the manager could 17 designate their time with the city vehicle to going first 18 thing in the morning, before their other duties start, and go 19 pick up dead animals, and then come back to the facility. I 20 mean, that's a possibility, I would think. 21 MR. COLEMAN: I would agree with that. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Certainly, the contribution of the 23 vehicle could keep the overall cost down, no question about 24 that. At least initial capitalization. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Can we stop by and fill up 3-5-07jwk 51 1 once a week over at your -- 2 MR. COLEMAN: No, no, wait a minute. (Laughter.) 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I shouldn't push it. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bruce, hang in there, buddy. 5 MAYOR SMITH: John, do your patrolmen report dead 6 animals? How are they reported? Your people report them? 7 MR. YOUNG: And we get a lot of calls from citizens, 8 particularly in neighborhoods, particularly if there's a deer 9 that's struck in the neighborhood, that lands in the road, and 10 we'll get a call pretty quickly. 11 MAYOR SMITH: Like the Judge said, we've beaten this 12 horse pretty well. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: We pretty well thrashed that one. Do 14 you want to go on to the next one, Mr. Mayor, Fire and EMS? 15 MAYOR SMITH: Right. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 17 MR. HOFMANN: Mayor, this is -- thank you, Charlie. 18 This is another follow-up item from your last August meeting, 19 where most of the -- most of the discussion amongst the County 20 Commissioners, you might recall, suggested that we look at 21 some options for increasing EMS fees, and Raymond and his 22 staff have done exactly that, and have prepared a few options 23 and alternatives. And if it's okay, I'd like for Chief 24 Holloway to give us an overview of that amount. 25 MR. HOLLOWAY: Good morning. Like the City Manager 3-5-07jwk 52 1 said, going back to some of the comments that were made at 2 this meeting last year, we are looking at some of the things 3 that would help us go toward some of the things that the 4 County asked us to look at, and one of the things that came up 5 during the conversation was charging more for the county 6 residents; come up with some kind of way to do that, as 7 opposed to the city residents. One way we looked at -- we 8 looked at several, and y'all have some of that information, 9 but one was to increase the mileage rate. If we increase the 10 mileage rate, we double it, that would increase the cost to 11 the citizens about 6 percent, and it would increase the cost 12 to the people in the county, I think, by 60 percent. So, 13 we're looking at recommending to increase the mileage. 14 Another thing that the County asked us to -- y'all 15 asked us to do was the possibility of y'all taking over the 16 billing, and we -- we looked at some of those options, and we 17 -- and also the committee that y'all formed last year looked 18 at those same options, and they felt like that we were doing 19 everything that we could to make sure that we get all the 20 revenue from billing, as much as possible. Also, during that 21 period, we -- I was told that your billing people really 22 didn't want to do that. One of the differences between, you 23 know, collecting for fines or stuff like that, if people don't 24 pay the fines, you put them in jail. Kind of hard to put 25 somebody in jail if they can't pay a medical bill, so -- we're 3-5-07jwk 53 1 not allowed to do that. So, all we can basically do is send 2 it over to a credit agency and have them do what they can to 3 collect it. And we do have a collection agency that -- that 4 that's all they do, is they collect for EMS operations, so 5 they're pretty familiar with that kind of -- type of 6 collection. 7 There was some mention about doing an ESD also for 8 the entire county, and, you know, the City, I think, would be 9 opposed to that, 'cause we already have the ability to -- to 10 tax residents to help pay for this fee. Now, if the County 11 wanted to take outside the city limits, that would be one way 12 maybe to help pay for some of the costs. But one thing you 13 need to remember is that an ESD is their own entity, and I'm 14 not sure if they would be willing -- I'm not sure how that 15 works, but willing to collect in their area and turn that 16 money over to help pay for this operation. I'm not sure how 17 that would work. And the last thing that we looked at was 18 increasing the fees in order to help offset some of the costs. 19 One of the Commissioners said that it should be a user-pay 20 only system, and that would be pretty great if we could do 21 that. Part of the problem is that with Medicare and Medicaid, 22 they'll only pay a certain amount of money, and when 23 70 percent of our patients that we pick up are Medicare and 24 Medicaid, then that really makes this proposition pretty much 25 a losing proposition. 3-5-07jwk 54 1 MR. MEEK: Can I ask you a question right there? 2 MR. HOLLOWAY: Sure. 3 MR. MEEK: I'm sure you've run these numbers 4 backwards and forwards, but I don't fully understand the point 5 of diminishing return on a rate increase. 70/30. Okay, 6 30 percent either have the ability to pay themselves, or their 7 medical insurance will pick it up. Is there a maximum amount 8 the insurance will pay the ambulances? 9 MR. HOLLOWAY: Generally, insurance companies will 10 -- you know, I know when I go to the doctor, I get a bill back 11 that shows what the charge was and what insurance will allow, 12 which is generally less than what the doctor charges. And 13 then they'll only pay an 80 percent rate. 14 MR. MEEK: But do you know, on ambulances, as far as 15 insurance is concerned, is there a maximum in there that they 16 will allow? And would it make sense to go up to that maximum? 17 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, actually, we're above what the 18 insurance companies would normally allow -- will normally pay 19 for that -- for that charge. 20 MR. MEEK: So, then you look to the individual on 21 top of that? 22 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yes, sir. 23 MR. HOFMANN: Raymond, you might help answer 24 Mr. Meek's questions in terms of that chart. Carl, what is 25 allowed for each of these individual fees is depicted on the 3-5-07jwk 55 1 chart. 2 MR. HOLLOWAY: This is -- this is what Medicare will 3 allow under the -- in the second row. That's what Medicare 4 currently will pay. No matter what you charge, that's what 5 they'll pay. 6 MR. MEEK: Row or column? 7 MR. HOLLOWAY: Column, where it says the EMS 8 allowable. 9 MR. MEEK: Okay. 10 MR. HOLLOWAY: On non-emergency call, they'll only 11 pay 80 -- $180. Emergency is 289. And you can see on the -- 12 on the two-tier current fees, that those are the fees that 13 we're currently charging. So, the non-emergency, we're 14 currently charging 83 percent more than what Medicare will 15 allow. And what ends up happening on the Medicare portion of 16 it, your disallowed -- the more you charge, the more your 17 disalloweds will be. 18 MR. MEEK: Raymond, I've heard you say that a number 19 of times, but it's immaterial, the amount. If they disallow 20 $1 or they disallow $100, anything above their set amount is 21 disallowed. 22 MR. HOLLOWAY: That's correct. 23 MR. MEEK: You don't get the payment, so it doesn't 24 matter what the disallowables are. 25 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, but that works against -- and 3-5-07jwk 56 1 I'm not a finance wizard, but that works against the budget. 2 See, that shows as a loss. That shows up as a loss in your -- 3 in your revenues. 4 MR. MEEK: Well, that may be. That's not a genuine 5 loss. The -- what I am wondering is, if we're -- if we charge 6 -- if we significantly raise those rates, it doesn't matter; 7 we're already above the -- already have disallowables. It 8 doesn't matter on the Medicare part. 9 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well -- 10 MR. MEEK: What you do is collect more money from 11 private folks with or without insurance. 12 MR. HOLLOWAY: That's -- well, that is correct. 13 MR. MEEK: And every dollar you collect there is 14 less that these two bodies have to make up. 15 MR. HOFMANN: Mr. Meek, you make a good point, and 16 -- and you guys correct me if I'm wrong. There's a difference 17 between the disalloweds and the bad debt. And in these 18 different -- 19 MR. HOLLOWAY: I was getting to that. 20 MR. HOFMANN: And in these different rate increase 21 scenarios, you -- you do make a good point. I don't think 22 we're assuming a higher rate of disalloweds with the increased 23 rates, but we are assuming a higher rate of bad debt. So -- 24 MR. MEEK: Okay. 25 MR. HOFMANN: -- your point is well made, but -- 3-5-07jwk 57 1 MR. MEEK: That's a good point. 2 MR. HOFMANN: -- I think we've made that assumption. 3 MR. MEEK: But -- go ahead. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't -- maybe the 5 Chief can go through and look, 'cause you're recommending a 6 change, or a possible change. 7 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yes, some options for change. 8 MR. MEEK: Thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, as I understand it, 10 we're going to get somewhere down that road. Not at far as we 11 want, but.... 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Chief? Is it not true, though, by 13 increasing the rates, you increase the ability for those that 14 have supplements to their Medicare coverage? 15 MR. HOLLOWAY: No, that's incorrect. The supplement 16 only pays the 20 percent that Medicare doesn't pay. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 18 MR. HOLLOWAY: So -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Private pay is the only place, if 20 you're going to pick up some slack? 21 MR. HOLLOWAY: That's correct. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 23 MR. HOLLOWAY: Private pay. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Private pay and private insurance. 25 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yes, sir. And the thing that was 3-5-07jwk 58 1 kind of unknown to us is the bad debt. We don't know how 2 much -- the more you raise the rates, the more the bad debt. 3 You know, people are just not going to pay the bills. And 4 right now, we're estimating -- what, 21 percent? So, we're -- 5 we don't know, if -- if we really put a -- jack them up there 6 pretty high, how much more bad debt we're looking at. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But you're going to generate 8 more revenue, 'cause they're -- not everybody's on Medicare. 9 Not everybody's on Medicaid. 10 MR. HOFMANN: You will generate more revenue. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what we're trying to 12 do, I believe, is generate more revenue to cut the subsidy on 13 both entities. 14 MR. HOFMANN: Right. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm curious about that 16 estimate of bad debt running from 13 to -- to 20, 21 percent. 17 That's a 62 percent increase. That's a heavy, heavy increase 18 on bad debt ratio. I'm also curious as to how -- part of your 19 recommendation, Chief, states that you have to study the data 20 on bad debt from three to five years. 21 MR. MEEK: That's a long time. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think in three to five 23 years, you'll find out the bad debt ratio will go up. 24 MR. HOLLOWAY: We would look at that on an annual 25 basis, of course, but we were looking at an average. The 3-5-07jwk 59 1 reason we were saying that is an average of how much the bad 2 -- I mean, next year, if we did next year, the bad debt might 3 be 40 percent, and then next year it could only be 20 percent, 4 and so we were looking at an average over a three- to 5 five-year period. 6 MR. MEEK: Chief, what you just said, instead of 7 waiting -- and, Bill, instead of waiting three to five years 8 to hit, you know, a significant increase, on the assumption -- 9 why not do that in this next budget year and see what happens? 10 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, that's entirely up to the 11 Council on how high we raise the bills. These are just 12 recommendations on what we feel like would be the best way to 13 go. But if y'all want to raise the rates higher than that, 14 that's y'all -- up to y'all. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would suggest that you would 16 raise them pretty soon and have a test run between now and 17 budget time. Is that possible to do, to raise the rates at 18 any particular time? Or does it have to wait till budget 19 time? 20 MR. HOLLOWAY: It would have to go through Council 21 for a budget amendment. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand that. 23 MR. HOFMANN: I think our -- the point you're making 24 is a good one. I think the -- I think the reason we 25 recommended the Option 2 and not the Option 3 is because we're 3-5-07jwk 60 1 a little bit concerned about rate shock if -- for lack of a 2 better way of putting it, for a $20,000 benefit. We have that 3 opportunity, but we -- we're trying to pay attention to what 4 other services in the region charge. And for a $20,000 5 additional revenue, which in the grand scheme of things isn't 6 a lot, that's a very, very significant rate increase. It's 7 not going to eliminate the subsidies from the general 8 government by any stretch, but as Raymond said, that's 9 ultimately up to the City Council. 10 MR. MEEK: Paul, I'd like to point out, ambulance 11 service is different than other items that are -- would 12 probably be more price-sensitive. You don't anticipate -- I 13 would think the general population is not going to anticipate 14 a ride in any one calendar year to a hospital in an ambulance. 15 MR. HOFMANN: Right. 16 MR. MEEK: You know, I just want to point that out. 17 It's a whole different service that we're talking about. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, also, people that I've 19 talked to that have had to, unfortunately, go in an ambulance, 20 whether it's here or anywhere else, they have sticker shock 21 already. I mean -- 22 MR. MEEK: Here's the thing. If this is going to 23 safe my life, how much is too much money? 24 MR. HOFMANN: Okay. Well, we can certainly prepare 25 a -- a fee increase that looks at Option 3. 3-5-07jwk 61 1 MR. HOLLOWAY: I would like to hire an extra person 2 for complaints, though. We got a lot of complaints right now 3 under the current bills. But, yeah, it's -- and we'll be glad 4 to do whatever y'all would like for us to do. I think that 5 the citizens out there that actually is riding the ambulance, 6 30 percent of them are going to carry a big load to increase 7 the revenues $70,000, $80,000. And these are estimates, by 8 the way. But, yeah, if y'all would like for to us do that, we 9 can prepare that and bring it back to the Council for y'all's 10 approval. 11 MR. MEEK: Raymond, I don't know much about the 12 medical practice, but I think that's the case in doctors' 13 offices right now; I think you have the non-Medicare, 14 non-Medicaid subsidizing the others. And I think you'll see a 15 number -- you see a number of doctors in this community that 16 limit their practice so they can. 17 MR. HOLLOWAY: We've discovered that there are some 18 doctors that won't see Medicare and Medicaid patients. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That certainly is the case 20 with respect to hospitalization, emergency room fees, a charge 21 for people who can't afford it. They're picked up by 22 increasing fees to everybody who's in the hospital or Indigent 23 Health Care, which the County funds to the tune of a million 24 bucks a year. 25 MR. MEEK: Sure. 3-5-07jwk 62 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And in general, I'm probably in 2 favor of Option 3. But, you know, I'd like to see those 3 numbers, but I think you're going in the right direction. I 4 think we need to increase our fees, and I think the mileage -- 5 I totally support that. I mean, the county people are paying 6 more, and they should pay more, the longer distance. So, I'd 7 like -- I want to get to, if we're done with that, a more 8 philosophical discussion on where we're going. And I've 9 talked to Mr. Holloway about this. He knows the Falling Water 10 situation in the far eastern part of the county, and some 11 areas that don't even have good access in -- or any access in 12 Kerr County are getting a lot of development now. We need to 13 figure out a plan as to how we handle those. 14 Two developments going in off Ranger Creek Road, 15 potentially. I don't know how that's going to happen out 16 there, but, you know, you're going have a situation there 17 where you don't even have, at the current time, any access. 18 People live off that road in Kerr County right now that don't 19 have access. How do we handle those areas? There's more 20 developments going in right around Gillespie County, Kendall 21 County line, totally in Kerr County, but you can't get there 22 from anywhere very easily. Falling Water situation, I think 23 everyone is aware that we're working on a situation where 24 Kendall County's going to be the primary responder there, and 25 I would suspect that this same issue is out there. 3-5-07jwk 63 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Same thing in Kimble and Kerr, 2 the Y.O. Ranchlands, and even that whole area out there. 3 There's more development out on 83, that Kimble County can get 4 there much quicker than -- than Kerrville EMS can. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I think I'd like -- you 6 know, long range, I'd really like to see the City look at how 7 they would put, if they need to serve the county, a facility 8 towards Center Point or in Center Point. You know, that's the 9 area that would cover the eastern part of the county. I don't 10 know if it makes sense to put another facility out in far west 11 Kerr County, if that's even an option with the population 12 density. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not sure far west, but I 14 don't believe it would be a bad thing to consider in Ingram, 15 'cause that puts you closer to a lot of those other areas. 16 And then, also, you can respond to the west side of Kerrville 17 from there, too. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think my view is, I mean, the 19 level of service, the quality of service, absolutely no 20 complaint. I don't want to make a change from the City of 21 Kerrville. But I think other side of that is, we need to 22 see -- if the County's willing to make that commitment to the 23 City of Kerrville EMS, then we'd like to see -- I'd like for a 24 commitment from the EMS to expand beyond the sections -- 25 somehow beyond the city limits. 3-5-07jwk 64 1 MR. HOFMANN: We can -- well, we can certainly look 2 at what -- we can certainly come back with a report on what 3 that commitment would be. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 5 MR. HOFMANN: Because -- and I appreciate your 6 comment about the quality of the service. But it's a big 7 county, and it's a developing county, and the only way you're 8 going to deal with lingering response time issues is to build 9 facilities out there. And, sure, we can look at the cost 10 associated with that and report back to the County 11 Commissioners and the City Council. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's the only way 13 we're going -- you know, long term, how we're going to handle 14 some of the other areas of the county. 15 MR. HOFMANN: Right. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It may be that it won't work to 17 continue in some areas without doing something different. And 18 the other side of that is, areas like Falling Waters, which is 19 a -- I mean, there's going to be a fee that Kerr County's 20 going to be paying Kendall County. I think that that fee 21 should be reduced -- I mean, should be reflected in the 22 eastern part of the components of our actual cost. I mean, if 23 we're removing a piece of Kerr County out of it, I think there 24 should be some reflection. You know, it's a very confusing 25 situation. They're also a backup. 3-5-07jwk 65 1 MR. HOLLOWAY: We're not totally out of the 2 situation. 3 MR. HOFMANN: And a backup first responder is -- I 4 mean, as I understand that, and -- and there'll be an 5 agreement that's ultimately brought before the City Council 6 and the County Commissioners. They will have an opportunity 7 to talk about it. And, certainly, you make a good point about 8 we need to look at reducing the amount of the County 9 contribution. I think it would be a better point if we 10 weren't still the primary responder to that area, and we have 11 to treat Falling Waters as if we have to respond. And so I 12 think it's something we have to look at. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think the first responder 14 issue is a -- is being removed from this, so that first 15 responders of Kerr County are still under Kerr County First 16 Responder program, even though the likelihood is that in 17 Falling Waters, the first responder is very likely to come out 18 of Kendall County, because most of them come out of the fire 19 department there. And those residents are probably 50/50 as 20 to who the volunteers are; some are Kerr County and some 21 Kendall County, but they both respond up there to work in the 22 fire department. 23 MR. HOFMANN: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anyway, I mean, just something 25 that, like you said, will be brought before the City Council 3-5-07jwk 66 1 and Commissioners Court again, hopefully before too long. And 2 Paul and I have talked. 3 MR. HOFMANN: Thank you. 4 MR. HOLLOWAY: Any other questions? 5 MAYOR SMITH: You know, if you stationed EMS, say, 6 at Ingram or something, I know you like the policy of sending 7 a fire truck along. 8 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, in the county, we have first 9 responders that respond. 10 MAYOR SMITH: Okay, so that's taken care of. 11 MR. HOLLOWAY: First Responder program, and Eric's 12 in charge of that, and they're stationed in the county at 13 different -- not stationed, but they're located in different 14 parts of the county and help respond with the ambulance and 15 assist those guys. 16 MAYOR SMITH: I think it was mentioned somewhere how 17 our rates are comparable to other areas. That -- would Option 18 1, 2, or 3 be more comparable to similar situations? 19 MR. HOLLOWAY: Probably Option 3 would be closer to 20 other areas. 21 MAYOR SMITH: So, in other words, if we'd go to 22 Option 3, we're not getting out of -- of a fair market value, 23 you might say? 24 MR. HOFMANN: No, we're not. 25 MAYOR SMITH: So -- so there's some logic in going 3-5-07jwk 67 1 to Option 3. 2 MR. HOLLOWAY: And we -- 3 MAYOR SMITH: None of them are going to solve our 4 problem. 5 MR. HOLLOWAY: We were recommending to go to Option 6 3 eventually, you know, anyway, but we'll look at doing that 7 sooner. 8 MAYOR SMITH: I think, Jonathan, you mentioned you'd 9 prefer to go to Option 3, or Bill, one or the other. 10 Everybody -- 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think everybody. 12 MAYOR SMITH: -- pretty much likes Option 3? 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, in fact, if it couldn't 14 be Option 3, I would say it should be equal to whatever the 15 surrounding counties are charging. That may be as close as 16 you can get with Option 3, but that would be my suggestion. 17 MR. COLEMAN: Chief, did we have a retiring 18 ambulance unit that we were going to look at donating to 19 the -- 20 MR. HOLLOWAY: That was the rescue truck. 21 MR. COLEMAN: Okay. 22 MR. HOLLOWAY: And we should get our new rescue 23 truck either this month or next month. 24 MR. COLEMAN: So that we're still -- 25 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yes, we're going -- I'm going to 3-5-07jwk 68 1 bring it -- come to the Council with that and see what your 2 pleasure would be on it, how to get rid of that pickup -- that 3 piece of equipment. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm glad you brought vehicles 5 up. I wanted to know, how is our half of the ambulance doing? 6 (Laughter.) 7 MR. HOLLOWAY: No, your half -- we had to get rid of 8 it, Buster. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you allow us to buy 10 another half? Please? 11 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, if we look at putting satellite 12 EMS operations out there, that may be something that we'd have 13 to look at, because we're talking about an ambulance and at 14 least six additional people. 15 MR. MEEK: Raymond, would you give him a ride in the 16 fire truck? 17 MR. HOLLOWAY: I don't think he really wants a ride 18 in the ambulance. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I don't. 20 MR. HOLLOWAY: He's ridden on the fire truck. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When you talk about 22 satellites, don't forget my part of the county out south. 23 I've got Kinky Friedman out there. What are those -- those 24 three ladies that -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dixie Chicks. 3-5-07jwk 69 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Dixie Chicks. And I use 2 "ladies" loosely. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're across the line, though. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you never know. You 5 never know when we're going. But I just wanted to commend 6 Chief Holloway. I wanted to commend Chief Holloway and the 7 City, and his staff for at least moving toward what we had 8 been requesting, and our way of thinking. I appreciate that 9 very much. 10 MR. HOLLOWAY: Thank you. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're moving toward a good 12 relationship here, I think. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Are we ready to move to fire now? 14 Mr. Mayor, if we could, I've got a reporter here that probably 15 needs to take a break. If we could -- if we're at a 16 convenient break point, if we're through with EMS module, if 17 we could take us about a 15-minute break here, why, I think we 18 got plenty of time, based on what I see we got left. 19 MAYOR SMITH: Mighty fine. 20 (Recess taken from 9:49 a.m. to 10:05 a.m.) 21 - - - - - - - - - - 22 MAYOR SMITH: I think we'd better get back to work. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Are you ready to come back to order, 24 Mr. Mayor? 25 MAYOR SMITH: Come back to order. Our next item is 3-5-07jwk 70 1 Agenda Item 5, status of efforts of the Economic Development 2 Strategy Committee. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Mayor, I don't think we finished 4 up 4. We still got the fire component of it to go. 5 MAYOR SMITH: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Trying to 6 get over that. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: I believe that's right, isn't it, 8 Chief Holloway? 9 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yes, sir. 10 MAYOR SMITH: I'm sorry. Thank you, Judge. 11 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, I'd like to show you the map I 12 have here. It shows the county, the city limits of Kerrville, 13 the Kerrville South fire district, and -- not fire district, 14 fire area. And then, of course, the two ESD's that are in the 15 county right now. We -- the Kerrville South Fire Department 16 is a volunteer fire department. About 15 years ago, they went 17 defunct, and -- well, they just disbanded; I'll put it that 18 way. And at that time, we were asked by the County if we 19 could take over the Kerrville South area for fire protection, 20 'cause there wasn't currently anything there, and we said yes, 21 we'd do that. And after a period of time, we -- it appeared 22 that the Kerrville South Volunteer Fire Department was not 23 going to come back into existence, so we met with the County 24 and started charging to cover that area as the first 25 responder. 3-5-07jwk 71 1 And what -- the difference between the blue area and 2 the rest of the county is that we will immediately respond to 3 anything in that area with a fire truck or a brush truck, 4 additional personnel. The other areas, we don't respond 5 immediately unless we get a call from one of the volunteer 6 departments requesting us to come out there, or we don't hear 7 a response from one of the volunteer fire departments within 4 8 minutes, and at that time, we assume that there's not any 9 volunteers available at that time, so we'll go ahead and 10 respond. And, as you can see, the Kerrville South area is -- 11 you know, a lot of people think of Kerrville South as south of 12 the river, but it actually covers a lot of the north portion 13 of the county above the city, all the way to the Gillespie 14 line, and it even covers a little area out here past the 15 airport, Shady Grove, Guadalupe Heights and a lot of the other 16 areas, and so we respond immediately to those areas. Our 17 general response is with -- if it's a structure fire, is with 18 a pumper. We also send, most of the time, a brush truck and 19 additional personnel, and one of our battalion chiefs will 20 respond out there, but we just send one truck. So, as you can 21 see, there's a huge, huge area that we're covering here. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Chief, before you -- I have a 23 quick question on that. You send one truck. What if more 24 trucks are needed? How is it covered? 25 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, we call for volunteer backup. 3-5-07jwk 72 1 If there's a structure fire, and we -- we know that it's a 2 burning structure, we call for the -- some of the volunteer 3 departments to help us, mostly for water supply, 'cause our 4 pumpers don't carry a whole lot of water as compared to some 5 of the volunteer units. And also, the tankers -- county -- 6 county road crews have water tankers that they sometimes send 7 out. Just depends on how large the fire is. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- so, in that area -- well, 9 it's handled just like the other volunteer areas? I guess 10 they all have agreements, or -- I mean, just -- are there 11 formal agreements that all volunteer fire departments help 12 each other, or how does that work? 13 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, yes and no. It's -- because we 14 have a contract with the County, we don't have any separate 15 agreements with the volunteer fire departments. It's pretty 16 much a blanket agreement with the volunteer -- with them to -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They just all respond as needed? 18 MR. HOLLOWAY: Everybody helps everybody else. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mutual aid agreements. 20 MR. HOLLOWAY: Not -- we don't have a mutual aid 21 agreement inside the county. Now, we have mutual aid 22 agreements with the surrounding counties. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Raymond? 24 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yes, sir? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I really think it would be 3-5-07jwk 73 1 wise to change that name from Kerrville South district. 2 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, I kind of -- that's just what 3 it was being called when they had it out -- you know. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know. But when we -- 5 MR. HOLLOWAY: We can call it anything. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When we think -- or I used to 7 think that when I was dealing with the budget and dealing with 8 you, and -- and, you know, what kind of coverage we're getting 9 and how much we're paying for and where you're going and all 10 those things, you -- I thought Kerrville South. 11 MR. HOLLOWAY: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know? 13 MR. HOLLOWAY: Right. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we need to get away 15 from that and start thinking in real terms of a particular 16 area, which includes all the way north to Gillespie County and 17 covers Commissioner Letz' as well, not -- not just me. 18 MR. HOLLOWAY: Right. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I don't know what -- you 20 might even consider -- Letz talked about ETJ, or something 21 like that, area. But -- 22 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, we can look at renaming that. 23 You know, I don't really have a problem with renaming it. 24 That's just what it's always been called since we've been 25 taking -- and the reason for that is, that was the Kerrville 3-5-07jwk 74 1 South Volunteer Fire Department. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. 3 MR. HOLLOWAY: And they were located in the south 4 side of town. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. 6 MR. HOLLOWAY: And it just covers part of their -- 7 of that area. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's call it the Kerrville area 9 district. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's call it something. I 11 just think that with those words, it just -- you know, you 12 immediately draw a picture in your mind, and it's the wrong 13 picture. 14 MR. HOLLOWAY: Right. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it's misleading to the public 16 when they -- when they read about it in the media and they 17 talk about the Kerrville South fire contract, for example. 18 MR. HOLLOWAY: Right, yeah. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Covers a much, much larger area. In 20 fact, Kerrville South -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is a small part. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: -- did have a -- 23 MR. HOLLOWAY: Right. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: -- did have a station -- a unit 25 stationed at the top of the hill on the Schwethelm Ranch north 3-5-07jwk 75 1 of town on Highway 16 for a long period of time. 2 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yeah, and there was actually one in 3 the -- what did they call that, Rattlesnake Creek? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 5 MR. HOLLOWAY: Volunteer Fire Department, which was 6 on the north side of town. We will change the name. 7 MAYOR SMITH: You might mention -- briefly mention 8 Fire Station 4, since it'll be severing that area. 9 MR. HOLLOWAY: Actually, our new fire station -- we 10 opened bids last Wednesday for Station 4, and it's going to be 11 built on the north side of town, just south of the interstate. 12 And that -- that truck would be responding on the north side 13 of town. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Maybe you ought to call it 15 Kerrville-Kerr County or Kerrville North and Kerrville South. 16 MR. HOLLOWAY: We'll call it something. 17 MAYOR SMITH: How about Kerrville East? 18 MR. COLEMAN: Surrounding. Chief, what happens to 19 the gray area out there? What -- 20 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, this is all the -- Center Point 21 has a volunteer fire department. Actually, it's out here -- 22 out here. And Turtle Creek has a volunteer fire department, 23 and then Hunt, and -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ingram. 25 MR. HOLLOWAY: -- Divide. 3-5-07jwk 76 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ingram. 2 MR. HOLLOWAY: Of course, this is Ingram right here. 3 And -- 4 MR. AMERINE: Also Elm Pass. 5 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yeah, Elm Pass has a volunteer fire 6 department. They have a little, small department. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Eastern part of the county, 8 primarily Comfort and Center Point, kind of have assistance. 9 MR. HOLLOWAY: Right. They have an agreement to 10 help cover different parts of the -- Comfort Volunteer Fire 11 Department covers some of those. 12 MAYOR SMITH: You can kind of point out the area 13 that the EMS is not serving now. 14 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yeah, there's a little section out 15 here -- where is that? 16 MR. AMERINE: Up. 17 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yeah, up here. Right up here, out by 18 the Y.O. We're not covering that right now. That's the only 19 thing that we're currently not covering inside the county with 20 EMS. 21 MAYOR SMITH: That can be handled adequately with 22 the new arrangement? 23 MR. HOLLOWAY: I think so. I haven't heard any 24 complaints from the people out there. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The residents out there told 3-5-07jwk 77 1 me that everything's working fine, and that they also have 2 a -- a contract with the Lifeflight helicopter, whatever -- 3 whatever that service is. 4 MR. HOLLOWAY: But this is the area we're kind of 5 talking about right here. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Falling Water. 7 MR. HOLLOWAY: Falling Waters. You have to go into 8 Kendall County and then go up 83 to get to that area. 9 MR. MEEK: 87. 10 MR. HOLLOWAY: I mean 87, yeah, excuse me. Now, the 11 main thing we have to remember is that, you know, it only 12 takes a couple of seconds for a fire the get out of control, 13 and so it's very important you have someone that first 14 responds to those areas, of course, whether volunteer fire 15 department or paid department. And the first-in company is 16 really critical to being able to knock down a fire to keep it 17 from spreading, and also possibly saving residents in those 18 fires. So, what we're now -- we assist the volunteer fire 19 departments, and we talked about that a little bit. And, you 20 know, every time we send a fire truck out of the city limits, 21 it puts a pretty good burden on the city, because you -- if 22 you don't think about it, you think, well, we send a fire 23 trick out there, but what it does, it leaves the city with two 24 fire trucks, and that doesn't give us adequate protection with 25 the new -- some of the new laws that have come in for fighting 3-5-07jwk 78 1 structure fires. So, we generally call in off-duty personnel 2 to man the backup pumper. 3 Now, one thing that will help us is when we get the 4 fourth fire station, that will leave us with three fire 5 stations, so that will -- that will help us a lot. Last year, 6 we presented y'all a chart that showed an allocation for the 7 county fire contract, and that isn't in your -- your material 8 this year. And what we did is, we took the -- the total cost 9 of -- well, the cost of one fire station, and we took the -- 10 depreciated the fire -- I mean the equipment and the personnel 11 from one station, which was nine people, and that came up with 12 a total cost of $705,711. We looked at the population 13 statistics and divided that, and came up with 14 and -- $14.94 14 per person, you know, for fire protection, both in the city 15 limits and outside the city limits. So, when we use the per 16 capita, that showed that the County's portion of that was 17 $369,451 per year. 18 And the main reason we showed you that is, that is 19 what it actually costs us to provide fire protection into the 20 county. And we're not prepared to actually talk about any 21 numbers right now, but the County -- you know, the County 22 currently is paying $125,000. That has not been increased for 23 several years. With the growth in the county and the city 24 both, but it seems like the county is -- population is 25 growing, and it would seem appropriate that we would increase 3-5-07jwk 79 1 the current $125,000 fire contract. We're going to meet in 2 April in budget work session, and that'll be one of the things 3 that we will discuss at that time. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you give me a ballpark? 5 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Same question I asked you the 7 other day when we were -- 8 MR. HOLLOWAY: Right. Well, I'm not sure we're 9 prepared to really give a real ballpark figure until we all 10 meet together. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you're talking -- 12 MR. HOLLOWAY: It would be more than it is now. No 13 matter -- you know, and it could be $150,000, all the way up 14 to $200,000, Buster. It just depends. We'd have to see what 15 the County's -- 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're not talking about an 17 increase of 150,000? 18 MR. HOLLOWAY: No. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're talking about 25,000 20 or 50,000, somewhere in there? 21 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, somewhere in that neighborhood, 22 but it could be even more. I mean, I'm not going to sit down 23 here and tell you that's what it will be. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, we got to stop you 25 somewhere. (Laughter.) 25 or 50; can we just kind of hang in 3-5-07jwk 80 1 there a little bit? 2 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, you can hang on by your 3 fingernails. 4 MR. HOFMANN: Well, I think that the point Raymond 5 is trying to make is that this isn't -- this isn't a 6 discussion we've had with the City Council since -- since last 7 year. And last year, the number we presented to the County 8 Commissioners was about $307,000, based upon what we think it 9 requires in terms of being -- having the capacity and the 10 system necessary to serve that area; that we thought that 11 $370,000 number was defensible and made sense. I'd like the 12 opportunity to visit more on that subject with the City 13 Council. We haven't prepared a budget yet, and we're not -- 14 and, Mr. Baldwin, you asked a good -- a good question, and we 15 don't mean to be evasive here, but $125,000 for the huge area 16 that we are responding, based upon the way we're looking at 17 how those costs ought to be all allocated, is -- is awfully 18 short, and that's the message. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tend to agree with you, to 20 be honest with you. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the other -- and the 22 other side of that, though, I think I probably brought up six 23 months ago or a year ago. 24 MR. HOFMANN: Right. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Was that, yes, you're -- I don't 3-5-07jwk 81 1 have any problem with what you look at; however, the volunteer 2 fire departments that we fund also back up the city, and I 3 think -- and especially in a bad situation. I think if you 4 look at the Saddlewood fire, a great example, we had pretty 5 much every volunteer fire department in the county in the city 6 limits fighting that fire. So, I think that there's a dollar 7 value to the funding that we're giving the volunteer fire 8 departments in the City of Kerrville, and there's a value 9 going the other direction. 10 MR. HOLLOWAY: Actually, Mr. Letz, that was in the 11 county. Saddlewood's in the county. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's close. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's close. 14 MR. MEEK: Jonathan, we'll give you a take-back on 15 that. 16 MR. COLEMAN: I do personally think -- I like the 17 idea of having a good, logical, business-based calculation to 18 determine whatever it is, if it's Animal Control or library 19 or -- or EMS or fire, whatever it is, and I think there was a 20 good attempt last year to do that, although I understand there 21 is a great deal of sticker shock there. And we do want to be 22 logical. And -- and if there's a better way to do the 23 calculation, you all help us out with that. Show us. 24 MR. HOLLOWAY: And we only took one fire station, 25 not all the -- you know, my budget -- fire budget's about 3-5-07jwk 82 1 $3.4 million, and next year it's going to be closer to $4 2 million when we add the new fire station. So -- so, we only 3 took one fire station, and we -- and we took the depreciation 4 into account also. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Chief, when do you hope to have that 6 new fire station online? 7 MR. HOLLOWAY: Oh -- 8 MR. HOFMANN: December. 9 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yeah, probably somewhere after the 10 next budget year in November, December. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Just coming into the new 12 budget year? 13 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yes. They're supposed to start 14 construction this month or first part of next month. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What Chuck said, I mean, I think 17 I agree with having a way to look at it, defensible. But I 18 think that if you could write down how you come up with it and 19 then get it over to the County, we could look at it, because 20 the level of service you're putting in this area that you're 21 covering is not as great as the level of service put in the 22 city limits. And that's fine, but I don't think -- you can't 23 really look at it on a per capita basis, because it is a 24 different level. So, I think some adjustments need to be 25 made, but I agree with Chuck that it would be nice to be able 3-5-07jwk 83 1 to have a, quote, formula to work off of. 2 MR. COLEMAN: That made good, logical business 3 sense. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I think, too, there's 5 one hope I think we could all have, is that whenever -- we all 6 know there's going to be increases every year, but trying to 7 keep those increases to a reasonable level. All at one time, 8 if you -- say if we're paying $125,000 now, to in -- to double 9 that in any one year, that's pretty hard to deal with, or EMS 10 contract or any of that sort of thing. I mean, you -- you all 11 expect to pay more for service every year, but you can't 12 double one year and then start to do 10 percent. You've got 13 to kind of work your way into it slowly so that all the tax 14 dollars match up with all the expenditures. 15 MR. MEEK: So, you want to go back retroactively and 16 phase it in? 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, that's not what I'm 18 saying. (Laughter.) 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Raymond? 20 MR. HOLLOWAY: Yes, sir. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When you get your new station 22 in, you said you were going to use -- use that station to 23 cover the north end up there? 24 MR. HOLLOWAY: What we currently do is -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then -- and then what 3-5-07jwk 84 1 would -- station would you use to cover the south area? 2 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, it depends exactly where it is. 3 Station 3 out here off the loop currently covers everything on 4 the south -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, that would remain the 6 same? 7 MR. HOLLOWAY: Right. And then the one on the west 8 side of town, Station 2, covers everything west and part of 9 the south, now that that new loop is opened up. 10 MR. HOFMANN: Just real quickly, to make sure 11 everybody understands, the cost allocation methods we put 12 together last year, we don't allocate every bit of the fire 13 department budget. We allocated the cost of -- of one truck 14 and one crew to man that truck, the logic being when we 15 respond out in the county, it's with one truck. So, it's an 16 allocation of the cost of the system needs necessary, and so 17 your costs aren't going to go up just because we added Fire 18 Station 4. The City's costs are going up because of Fire 19 Station 4, but if we were to follow that allocation method, 20 your cost wouldn't. 21 MAYOR SMITH: I'll give you the opportunity to pat 22 yourself on the back. You might mention the medallion that 23 was honored the EMS, very briefly. 24 MR. HOLLOWAY: Well, I think most of y'all read in 25 the paper where Air Evac recognized the City of Kerrville EMS 3-5-07jwk 85 1 as a Helping Hands Partner. And what that is, they have 11 -- 2 Air Evac is in 11 different states, and they've got I don't 3 know how many different EMS operations that they deal with, 4 but we were nominated along with 60 other EMS operations, and 5 we were selected as the EMS provider of -- for that month. 6 And there are organizations, and they made a coin -- do y'all 7 have the coin with you? They made a -- they stamped a coin, 8 and on the coin it has this patch on one side, and on the 9 other side, it has "Air Evac." And they're distributing that 10 coin among all the other recipients in the 11 states. So, it 11 was a pretty good honor for us. We're very proud of that. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Raymond, is -- in that -- 13 kind of in that same vein, the Air Evac, is that the company 14 that offers the contract to private citizens out -- 15 MR. HOLLOWAY: They are doing that with some of the 16 county residents. I'm not sure exactly how that operation 17 works. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't exactly know how it 19 works either, but what I do know about it, I just don't 20 believe there are not more people talking about that and 21 taking advantage of that. That sounds like a -- a super deal. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, Falling Water, six of 23 the residents of the households have subscribed to an air evac 24 service. I don't know if it's the same service, but they have 25 a service. 3-5-07jwk 86 1 MR. HOLLOWAY: I think it is. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And if we're going to talk 3 about Falling Waters, they need to get a first responder 4 program in there and get some of those people certified. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Congratulations, Chief. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 7 MR. HOLLOWAY: Thank you. Appreciate it. 8 MAYOR SMITH: That medallion, if it was in New 9 Orleans, would be called a doubloon. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Doubloon. 11 MAYOR SMITH: Doubloon. Okay, back to where I was a 12 while ago. We're ready for Agenda Item 5, which is the status 13 of efforts of the Economic Development Strategy Committee. 14 And I believe you're the -- Judge, you're the chairman of that 15 committee. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The -- as I'm 17 sure everybody recalls, there was a joint resolution to 18 establish this joint Economic Development Strategy Committee 19 by both the City Council and Commissioners Court, and we got 20 that established late last summer, and we went to work the 21 first time in October. We very quickly reached the consensus 22 that it was going to be necessary to have available to us a 23 comprehensive economic development study in order to go 24 forward with the committee's work. That being the case, we 25 enlisted the aid of Kerrville Economic Development Foundation, 3-5-07jwk 87 1 who agreed to make a presentation on our behalf to the 2 Economic Improvement Corporation for the cost of that study. 3 Since the committee has no funds and no source of funds, KEDF 4 was kind enough to do that. February 26th, the public hearing 5 was had before the Economic Improvement Corporation, and they 6 approved the funding for that study through KEDF up to 7 $100,000, and it's pending funding agreement. That'll again 8 come before the committee and subsequently before the council. 9 I think it's scheduled to come back before the economic 10 committee -- excuse me, Economic Improvement Corporation March 11 the 19th, I believe, and we're hopeful that shortly after that 12 we can get the study commenced and get moving. 13 But we have an active committee. We've got a number 14 of excellent resources. Our resources include virtually every 15 component of what it -- what they should include, and we're 16 gathering more as we go. We're very, very confident that 17 after we get that study in-hand, we're going to be able to 18 present something meaningful to both of these bodies, the 19 Council and Commissioners Court, a strategy for consideration 20 and hopeful adoption in some singular conceptual form, so that 21 we can go forward with a strong economic development plan here 22 in Kerrville and Kerr County. I -- I appreciate the help that 23 the Council has given. I appreciate the help that all of the 24 resources, a number of whom are from City offices -- they've 25 been a wonderful help to the committee, and there has been a 3-5-07jwk 88 1 unity of purpose on that committee that has really been 2 encouraging, and I think anybody that's observed it is really, 3 really pleased with how it's going. I'm a little displeased 4 that we've got this delay to get the study, but that's part of 5 the necessary evil, I suppose, to get to the end of the road. 6 But that's pretty much it in a nutshell, Mr. Mayor. 7 MR. COLEMAN: Judge, you're doing an excellent job 8 keeping all those ducks lined up on that committee. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I -- 10 MR. COLEMAN: We're all pointed the same direction. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I've got all the rest of you guys 12 doing all the work, and I'm just kind of pointing and 13 hollering, I guess. That's, I guess, one of the benefits of 14 being the chairman. But everybody is really, really working 15 hard, and once we get this study in-hand, we're going to -- 16 we're going to be hammering out something really, really 17 meaningful. 18 MR. BOCK: Judge, I'd like to stress the unity that 19 you spoke about, having all the different taxing entities and 20 all of the different -- the big umbrella with all of our 21 economic partners involved, and everybody -- everybody along 22 the same page with the same goals and the same desires as -- 23 as everyone, and I think that's what's making this go so 24 swiftly and so smoothly. And I think the biggest part of this 25 in being -- being a part of it and being on this -- this 3-5-07jwk 89 1 committee is the end results, and 5, 10, 15 years down the 2 road, with the increasing of the business community and 3 helping to expand local opportunity for local businesses as 4 well. It's very exciting. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Any of you guys got any questions? 6 I'll -- 7 MAYOR SMITH: Mr. Williams, we've heard from our two 8 city guys. You're not going to let us get ahead of you two to 9 one, are you, without saying something? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you for that 11 introduction, Mayor. (Laughter.) No, I -- I fully support 12 what my colleagues have said and what Judge Tinley has said. 13 This is a unique and extraordinary opportunity for us to 14 advance our economic development goals and aspirations, and it 15 will certainly give us the guidelines we need. I'm really 16 anxious to see the study. I think it's going to be very, very 17 revealing; going to point out some things that we thought we 18 knew, but undoubtedly didn't know. And I -- I'm sure that -- 19 in my mind, it will help guide us coming up with incentives 20 that Council and Commissioners Court can approve. 21 MAYOR SMITH: I think we're heading in the right 22 direction. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When do y'all see the study 25 being completed and coming to the bodies for approval? 3-5-07jwk 90 1 JUDGE TINLEY: The -- the study should take -- 2 hopefully we'll be able to get it done within four months or 3 slightly more than that, according to the estimate given to us 4 by the -- the provider that we're all leaning towards. 5 There's already been presentations made; due diligence has 6 been made, and just as soon as the funding is approved, I 7 think we're in a position to go forward on that, and they can 8 get started more quickly. But about four months or slightly 9 more than that. Once we get that information, that's when the 10 hard work of the committee will begin to try and cobble 11 together a unified strategy for both City and County in the 12 way of -- of incentives to be offered for economic development 13 deal, expansion of existing business or attraction of new 14 business. So, I'm going to say probably at the earliest, you 15 might expect something about six months after they start the 16 study. That may be a little optimistic, but possibly that 17 late. 18 MAYOR SMITH: Any further discussion on that agenda 19 item? Let's go to Agenda Item 6, joint City/County Airport 20 Board. 21 MR. BOCK: Mr. Mayor, if you don't mind, I'll take 22 -- I'll take the lead on this one to start out with. I had 23 requested this to be put on the agenda for this -- for this 24 meeting for these two governing bodies to have the opportunity 25 to discuss our happenings out at the Airport Board, and what I 3-5-07jwk 91 1 would like to focus on is, go back up to Number 5, which is 2 the economic development strategy that we're looking to come 3 up with. A large -- and largely, one of the areas, in my 4 opinion, to make this a success is our airport itself. I 5 think our airport is -- is key to large economic development 6 growth, job opportunities for the county and the city. And 7 what I would like to see as a -- as a Council member and a 8 representative of the City is to see the airport start to 9 flourish. 10 It seems to me that when you look back many, many, 11 many years, regardless of the structure of the Airport Board 12 or the structure of the airport, it's never been -- in my 13 opinion, that I have seen in the past two years and looked 14 into, it's never developed into what it could. And don't know 15 what the hinder is there, and hopefully, as we've discussed, 16 this economic development strategy will create some options. 17 And I know there's a lot going on at the airport right now. I 18 know that the airport is looking to do a master plan. I know 19 that the -- the master plan, hopefully -- which will be a 20 portion of TexDOT's funding; is that correct? -- will be able 21 to work with the economic development's strategic -- that 22 we've hired, which is TXP out of Austin, to work together to 23 come to some sort of mutual agreement or mutual aid in order 24 to help that area flourish. 25 And what I would like to see -- and I've seen some, 3-5-07jwk 92 1 not being able to go to some of the meetings because of the 2 structure of the board, having the two and two, and you can't 3 have a third there representing either other body. I will 4 say, it is -- it's -- I think it's taking a step in the right 5 direction by having a -- I believe there's going to be a 6 retreat, if I'm not mistaken, out at -- out at your ranch, I 7 think, Commissioner Letz, and I really like to see that 8 happening. I like to see -- I would like to see that board 9 come together and be more focused; united, focused group, to 10 come together to -- to put all their efforts into increasing 11 the airport's use in the county and in the city. 12 And I think if -- if we'll all just work together 13 and come up with some sort of common ground and a direction 14 for that airport, it would really help the airport grow. It 15 just seems to me year after year after year, we all agree that 16 it is our diamond in the rough, but it doesn't seem to -- 17 doesn't seem to go anywhere after that. And this is not just 18 recently, this is many, many, many years. It doesn't seem to 19 -- I would like to see some sort of -- of analysis done by the 20 Airport Board to show, for example, in 1980, this was the 21 revenue generated and the taxing benefit of the airport, to 22 today. And -- and I don't know if you're going to see that 23 sort of growth like it should be. And don't know what the 24 reason is for it, but I would like to see that grow in the 25 economic development area. 3-5-07jwk 93 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Councilman, let me follow up 2 on what you're saying. Certainly, we do have a community 3 purpose here -- unity purpose. If you look at the document 4 prepared by the City with respect to the contribution of the 5 City and the County in support of the airport, we're still 6 jointly funding the airport operations to the tune of almost 7 $400,000 a year. The goal which we've all expressed uniformly 8 is that we get the airport to the point where that doesn't 9 have to happen any more, which it seems sometimes we take a 10 step forward and we take a step backward, most recently being 11 the departure of B.A. Products. That doesn't seem all that 12 significant if you weigh it in the context of the airport, but 13 it is, because it is a blow to the budget, but more 14 importantly, it's a blow to the economic development of the 15 city and the county, because those are lost jobs. Forever 16 lost, until something happens to recreate them. 17 A couple things. You mentioned a master plan. We 18 have a master plan. What we're working to do and are going to 19 approve probably at tomorrow's meeting is the business 20 development plan. And that, I believe, as you believe, needs 21 to work conjunctively with what we were talking about before, 22 and Judge Tinley, in our larger task force. We can't go off 23 half-cocked in terms of the business development plan for the 24 airport, to the exclusion of what it is we're trying to plan 25 on the long-term for economic development in the city and the 3-5-07jwk 94 1 county. It has to work conjunctively. And I'm hopeful that 2 if we approve it tomorrow and ask TexDOT to put out a scope of 3 work for bids and proposals and so forth, that we will be able 4 to convince the two consulting groups to really sit and work 5 together. Because, you're right, it is a jewel in the rough, 6 and it's not going to go anywhere independently. It's going 7 to go someplace, hopefully up, because we make it go that way, 8 and in conjunction with all of our other interests. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wish I'd have said that. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you could. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you read back the... 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have anything else to 13 add. I agree with everything that Todd said. I think there's 14 lots of -- an example of why we need both the economic plans 15 is -- just one issue I want to bring up, and that will be 16 it -- is taxing of aircraft. A couple years ago, the Airport 17 Board, we thought doing the right thing, really got -- you 18 know, through -- I think through City Council and 19 Commissioners Court going to -- aggressively going to tax 20 aircraft that should be taxed so we can get the revenue to the 21 airport that should be allocated to the airport. The 22 consequences of that was ticking off a bunch of aircraft 23 owners into sending aircraft from here to Llano to Burnett and 24 all over the place, that probably weren't being taxed here 25 anyway. And they weren't being taxed here, but we did -- but 3-5-07jwk 95 1 we were -- at least had some fuel sales. Now we're getting 2 nothing. 3 And I think that's one of the things you got to look 4 at, is, unfortunately, the Tax Code is sufficiently vague, and 5 relies on people -- you know, on good faith and good effort. 6 There are some aircraft that are clearly business aircraft, in 7 my opinion, the majority of use, but they're not taxed that 8 way, and they went to other airports because we were 9 threatening to tax them. And that was not a -- you know, I'm 10 not sure if it was a good or bad thing that we did there, but 11 I think we need to have a cohesive plan to really understand 12 that type of an approach before we go off and do something 13 again along those lines. And that's why I'm looking towards 14 both the -- both the economic development plan and the airport 15 business plan. I think they hopefully will be tied together. 16 I think they have -- you know, they would give us a good road 17 map to how to get more going on at the airport. 18 MR. GROSS: I think one of the key points the 19 Airport Board needs to keep in mind is, with an aircraft, 100 20 miles is nothing, and there needs to be a reason to stop here. 21 And there is no real reason to stop in Kerrville. I mean, 22 nice people; the weather's nice. That's fine. But as -- as a 23 former pilot, and I had an airplane out there -- it was $3,600 24 a year, by the way, just in case you want to know. If you're 25 looking for fuel and you're in Mooney, you're doing 200 miles 3-5-07jwk 96 1 an hour, you don't have to stop because you're at a half tank. 2 You can go another 100 miles, 200 more miles. If you're 3 looking for a hotel room, you have to stop in Kerrville and go 4 find one on the other side of town. You can go to El Paso, 5 and there's one right at the airport. If you're looking for 6 an instrument landing system and the weather's bad, you're not 7 coming to Kerrville; you're going to land in San Antonio. So, 8 I think there's some things there about the airport -- we have 9 a beautiful airport, beautiful facility, and approaches are 10 good. We need to make ourselves a little more attractive to 11 the folks who have an option. There's -- if you're flying 12 across country, I'm not stopping in Kerrville for lunch. 13 Really no place to go, other than the Burger Barn. Which I 14 happen to like, by the way. But -- but it's -- as a pilot, 15 there's no reason to stop in Kerrville. We need to work on 16 that. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Point well taken. 18 MR. COLEMAN: Mr. Chairman? I think, personally -- 19 I'm going to throw out some unusual recommendations. I -- I 20 think, personally, we've had a lot of dissension problems with 21 the Airport Board. We're not a unified group working toward a 22 common goal for the last couple months. And I -- and I 23 attribute a lot of that to the difference in structure between 24 maybe the Commissioners Court versus City Council, but we 25 haven't been that unified group, without a doubt. And that 3-5-07jwk 97 1 bothers me. That bothers me for a whole lot of reasons. I 2 feel like -- I feel like the previous 12 months, everybody had 3 worked very hard to try to achieve that, and then somehow, we 4 -- we lost it. And I think the meeting out at your ranch, 5 Jonathan, our work session, I hope will help us reattain that. 6 But I almost think, because of the difference in the 7 structure, it might be better for us to rethink our whole -- 8 our whole approach. Maybe, rather than -- than trying to do 9 50/50 on the airport, because of the structural differences, 10 we can never get to where we have a good, strong unity. Maybe 11 we ought to explore the possibility of the City or the County 12 taking over the entire operation of the airport, and maybe it 13 could be done. I personally think -- and I'm not opposed to 14 either one taking it over if it will help overall. I 15 personally think the City's probably a little more geared 16 toward doing that, with its infrastructure for administration 17 and what-have-you and those services. It may be, as -- as a 18 part of that step, maybe the City also begins to take over the 19 library on a phased basis, like maybe over a four-year period, 20 25 percent each year, to relieve the County of that burden. 21 And -- and in that -- again, it's almost like the airport, to 22 where you have to have more administrative support to -- to 23 take care of that. And maybe that would help both the City 24 and the County achieve their common goals for both of the -- 25 both of the institutions. But I throw that out as something 3-5-07jwk 98 1 to think -- for us to think about. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't -- I think it's 3 good to talk about it. I -- I personally think that the setup 4 of the board, if we figure out how to operate -- how to use 5 that board, should work. And I think -- and I'm still 6 optimistic that, you know, the problems that we've had, we can 7 get through. I think the -- I guess one of the reasons I see 8 the airport by all -- is a -- is it's almost a regional 9 airport, or potentially regional airport. It's, you know, 10 granted, it's just in the county, but it certainly goes beyond 11 the city limits of Kerrville. And I think it's important if 12 we can -- if we can make the partnership work there, I think 13 it benefits the airport, as opposed to having one and two of 14 the other. I just think it's a -- it's very dissimilar to the 15 library, which is primarily used by the residents that live in 16 the city limits. 17 The airport is a -- is certainly county-wide, 18 city-wide, and regional-wide, potentially. A lot of people in 19 Comfort and Kendall County, Bandera County also use this 20 airport, so I think that it's very different. And I just -- I 21 think that we can figure out a mechanism to work -- to make 22 that Airport Board work properly, 'cause it is a separate 23 governmental entity, and it -- I don't -- and that's where we 24 have the difference. You mentioned a difference in 25 Commissioners Court and the City. Well, my view is that it's 3-5-07jwk 99 1 not a Commissioners Court or it's not a county function or 2 city function; it's a separate entity. And one that is 3 another entity that I -- you know, that I thought of recently, 4 not dissimilar, is KPUB. KPUB was set up by the City 5 originally as kind of an entity, as I understand it. It's not 6 run by the City; it's run by its own board, and that's how I 7 think the airport should be run, as a separate entity. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, that's a good point. 9 And I think the fact that that Airport Board is a separate 10 entity is crucial. The government and management issues that 11 have occurred out there in recent months, years, I think have 12 been perceived at least as being detrimental to the 13 development out there, and I think that may have been acting 14 as a retarding force. But I think if we take it out of the 15 political arena and let the Airport Board manage the airport, 16 and let the Airport Board control that airport, we might be 17 surprised what occurs, just like occurs here at KPUB. And 18 one -- one way to achieve that, I see, is to have that be a 19 totally independent board, and not have members of either body 20 as active voting members of that board. Have that board in 21 charge of that airport, as it's contemplated to be under the 22 law. It would choose its own manager. It would contract for 23 and provide for its own services that it may need. As owners, 24 the City and the County would be obligated to provide the 25 funding for those operations. Lacking that, I suppose we 3-5-07jwk 100 1 could rejuvenate that airport authority that we got 2 legislative authority and voter approval of, but never pulled 3 the trigger on. But I think a truly independent joint Airport 4 Board with an independent board would -- would be a wonderful 5 thing. 6 MR. COLEMAN: Judge, I -- 7 JUDGE TINLEY: I think it'll solve the problem. 8 MR. COLEMAN: I would not be opposed to that, 9 either. I think everybody needs to realize that our expenses 10 on both sides would probably go up to achieve that. However, 11 that might be money very, very, very well spent in terms of 12 furthering economic development. 13 MR. BOCK: I think, Chuck, I agree with that too. 14 And I think what we're fixing to come out of these two 15 studies -- I have a feeling will point us directly in that 16 direction. I -- I think that some things you look at as a 17 business investment. It's not always about, let's see how 18 much, you know, we can save, but let's see what we can invest, 19 and what kind of return can we get on that. 20 MR. COLEMAN: What that will return. 21 MR. BOCK: Exactly. Exactly. I agree with that 100 22 percent. And I think what we're going to find out here real 23 soon is when these studies come together, it will show us, and 24 then I think it will also show us that -- that our airport may 25 be a bigger asset than we all think, and I think it'll give us 3-5-07jwk 101 1 some direction on how to go with that. But I think we do -- I 2 think we need to make our airport a -- a business conduit, and 3 just funnel the business and funnel expansion to its facility. 4 And -- and you've got to make it in a -- in an environment 5 which is conducive and friendly to business. 6 MR. COLEMAN: I agree with that 100 percent. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, in the context in 8 which you speak, on the Airport Board agenda tomorrow is a 9 proposal that we've worked out -- mayor and I have worked out, 10 along with Guy Overby, in which the scope of work for the 11 consultant who's going to do the business plan for the airport 12 will be expanded upon, and we're going to ask him to review 13 all documents by and under which the airport operates, which 14 starts with the governance agreements and goes all the way 15 down to the least of the leasing agreements or whatever. And 16 the consultant that we have chosen is one who has broad, broad 17 experience in the United States of America in terms of airport 18 operations, and so if we can compare all of our documents and 19 review them and come back with recommendations, that would be 20 welcome. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: That's part of the business plan that 22 TexDOT is funding that you're speaking of? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Good. Good. 25 MAYOR SMITH: Okay. I haven't said anything, and 3-5-07jwk 102 1 I'm also a member of that board. It's a very awkward 2 situation we're in. The County has certain ideas; the City 3 has certain ideas. And I was a little disturbed when one 4 member of the Airport Board suggested that criminal charges be 5 placed against the Airport Manager and that he be terminated. 6 I thought that was very inappropriate. And -- but, anyway, 7 that was said. Also, there was accusations from the County 8 people that we bid things illegally, and the City is under one 9 code, the County's under one code, and the County Attorney 10 failed to do his homework very well, because he suggested 11 that -- he suggested that it was illegal for what we did. 12 Well, the section that he appointed -- that he mentioned 13 applied to county governments and not to city governments. 14 So, the City -- the City has been the operator and used the 15 Municipal Code that was applicable. 16 So, there -- I don't want to start an argument, 17 but -- all over again, but I think we'll be able to resolve 18 these things. But this business plan should go in, and I 19 wouldn't be a bit surprised if the business plan would suggest 20 that one person or the other take over the operation of the 21 airport, because you have different rules that apply -- that 22 are state laws that apply to counties; you have different 23 rules that are state laws that apply to cities. And if you 24 have a joint thing happening here, I don't see how we can -- 25 you know, unless there's more compromise between the people, I 3-5-07jwk 103 1 don't know where we're going to go. 2 MR. MEEK: The mayor makes a real good point here. 3 And I was sitting here sketching some things out. We're 4 involved in a number of things; library, EMS, airport, 5 dispatch might be in there somewhere, Animal Control. I think 6 this body ought to look at, is one entity or the other better 7 suited? And perhaps we divide these up. You know, one 8 possible way of dividing these up would be City take the 9 library and EMS; we have the EMS now. The County look at 10 taking the airport, dispatch, Animal Control. Just throwing 11 this up in the air, guys. But you would -- you wouldn't be 12 having the territorial differences. If we -- if we can some 13 way figure out how to divide these up instead of having so 14 many joint operations. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that makes sense. 16 MAYOR SMITH: I agree with that, too. And going 17 back to the -- to the taxes on aircraft, the City -- the 18 Airport Manager got blamed for that. I was the guy that said 19 that, because we had a Challenger and everybody was saying, 20 "Well, we're going to get all this new revenue, ad valorem tax 21 revenue." I said, "Well, how much do they pay?" They weren't 22 paying. They weren't on the tax rolls. So -- so, the Airport 23 Manager got the tail numbers of some of these aircraft and 24 gave it to the proper authority that -- that appraises 25 aircraft. And -- and if a private -- a private plane is not 3-5-07jwk 104 1 taxed, but a corporate aircraft is taxed. And a lot of the 2 corporate aircraft left our airfield and flew somewhere else, 3 and to me, that was a violation of the -- the tax laws of the 4 state. But if they want to fly from airport to airport to 5 avoid taxes, that's their business. I'm not a -- I'm not a 6 law enforcement person. 7 MR. GROSS: Well, with all due respect to both 8 parties, I think one of the problems with the Airport Board -- 9 I don't attend because of the Open Meetings Act, but I do 10 listen to the tapes, and it's an outstanding entertainment 11 source. (Laughter.) Cheaper than Hastings. But I think part 12 of the problem is -- and please don't be offended. I think 13 the mayor said the City has certain ideas of what ought to be 14 done with the airport, and the County has certain ideas, but 15 neither party has much ground in aviation. Some of the things 16 that you've done out there, although well-intended, made -- 17 make no sense in the context of how an airport really works. 18 And I think we are about to experience a revolution in air 19 transportation with the very light jets, the taxi-on-demands 20 or charter-on-demand. Could be a huge thing for Kerrville, 21 because you can avoid all the crowded approaches of San 22 Antonio. 23 I think we're -- one of the things that needs to be 24 done is that whichever entity takes over, or if we don't have 25 a division, you need to be thinking in terms of what the 3-5-07jwk 105 1 airport operations demand, not where the City and the County's 2 going to end up. And one of things that we need to do 3 aggressively is to protect the approaches. I happen to live 4 at the end of an approach to Runway 12, and a lot of airplanes 5 go over my house. But I'm a pilot, and I sort of expect 6 airplanes to fly the approach. I don't expect them to avoid 7 my house. But we're going to have more and more development 8 out there, and we need to have those approaches protected, 9 'cause one of these days, somebody from Comanche Trace is 10 going to say to you, "How come all these planes are flying 11 over my house? We got to do something about it." We can 12 really choke our airport to death. So, I think we need to -- 13 if we're going to have a consultant, let's get one that 14 understands aviation, and let's listen to him or her, and -- 15 and this diamond in rough won't be so rough. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. It's really either to 17 Mike Hayes or to Rex. Two people have said that people can't 18 attend -- that other councilmen cannot attend that meeting 19 because of violation of Open Meetings Act. It being a 20 separate entity, and if you y'all sit there and don't 21 participate, I don't see why y'all can't attend. Am I wrong 22 on how I read the -- 23 MR. MEEK: You can post it and we can attend. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: I think -- I think that probably 25 arises from -- I think Buster was just an interested listener 3-5-07jwk 106 1 at a meeting down at City Council on one occasion, and someone 2 took him to task for -- I think somebody asked him a question, 3 and -- and having been asked a question, I think he very 4 briefly responded, and somebody got all bent out of shape and 5 took him to task for violating the Open Meetings Act, because 6 there were two other commissioners present at the time. So, 7 you can stretch those things to absurdity, but I think that's 8 the precautionary mind-set that's been put into place. You 9 know, there's some of those meetings that I'd like to attend 10 too, and to just kind of get a better understanding, but you 11 run that risk, and you just decide, I don't want to face the 12 heat. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. 14 MAYOR SMITH: I didn't answer your question about 15 the business plan. Bill and I were on the committee that 16 selected the people that are going to work on the business 17 plan. They're probably the best entity in the United States 18 evaluating airport business plans. They were head and 19 shoulders above the other people that bid on it, so we will 20 have experts working on our business plan. And the Judge is 21 right; we have too much politics in the Airport Board. And 22 the -- the four county -- well, there's two county and two 23 city; none of them are airport -- are airplane owners or 24 pilots or anything like that. So, we have -- we have four 25 politicians on there that are not qualified as to -- as to how 3-5-07jwk 107 1 an airport should be run. They're -- so maybe you're right. 2 Maybe -- maybe we have the wrong makeup of an airport board. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't -- I don't like 4 kind of what the Judge said of having a totally independent 5 board, or reduce to it one and one, possibly, to get a 6 minority, as opposed to a majority, coming from the entities. 7 But I think it's very important that you keep non-aviation 8 people also on that board. I don't care if they're city -- 9 where they come from. If that's -- I mean, I think you risk a 10 greater problem if you have only airplane owners on that 11 board. I think you need to have community as well, all 12 facets. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. Operation of an airport is a 14 business, and it's like any other business. I didn't mean to 15 imply that only aviation people were qualified for the board. 16 My whole point was to make that board totally independent 17 of -- of political control. Now, reducing to one and one, if 18 you have any representation, my thinking is they ought to be 19 ex-officio -- not sure I even like that too well -- for a 20 truly independent board that's looking after one operation, 21 and that's the airport. Who hires that manager; that 22 manager's responsible to that board. And as owners, the City 23 and the County would be responsible for the funding mechanism, 24 as we are already. And absent that, you -- you create the 25 authority and give it the power to impose a tax, which 3-5-07jwk 108 1 authorities do. I assume they still do under state law. 2 Haven't checked recently; I know they used to. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what was intended 4 originally when the authority issue was passed years ago. The 5 only problem with that was the board was never populated, and 6 secondly, we didn't have a companion bill to give that board 7 taxing authority. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So it foundered, if you 10 will, from the beginning. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What y'all are talking about 13 here is eliminating a good opportunity for a good fight, and I 14 don't know if I agree with all that or not. (Laughter.) But 15 some of it made sense. Some of it's crazy. But my question 16 is, the TexDOT study and your study, you keep talking about 17 bringing them together and dovetailing them. How are you 18 communicating? How are the two studies going to communicate 19 to see that you're basically riding the same horse? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I'm not sure. I'm not 21 -- I'd like to take a shot at answering your question, because 22 the mayor and I have sort of a disagreement about that issue. 23 The way -- when -- when it was -- go back to the task force 24 and the big study. When it was approved and decided to go 25 ahead, and -- and got EIC funding in the conduit and all that 3-5-07jwk 109 1 good stuff, then we did our second one, which was the airport 2 development plan. At that point, it was suggested that 3 perhaps we delay the start of the airport development plan by 4 maybe 30 to 60 days, 30 days particularly, so that the other 5 one could get up and going, and the two consultants could have 6 the opportunity to sort of work together. And we brought that 7 issue back to the Airport Board at the same time we talked 8 about expanding the scope of work. So, the mayor and I worked 9 out the -- the language on expanding the scope of work. He 10 expressed his preference being we move the plan forward 11 immediately. The board hasn't weighed in on that, but it will 12 weigh in on it tomorrow. Personally, I think it makes a 13 little sense to have that one delayed by just 30 days, and let 14 the other bigger plan -- the other weigh in, and the two 15 consultants get their heads together and figure out how 16 they're going to integrate these issues. But -- 17 MR. COLEMAN: I agree with that. The airport plan 18 will need to utilize the information that TXP's coming up 19 with, and vice-versa. I mean, they're going to impact one 20 another. They all have to be like a clock -- wheel of a 21 clock. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: The probable provider for the 23 comprehensive study is already on notice that this other is in 24 the works, the airport business plan, and that there will need 25 -- necessarily need to be coordination with that, so that end 3-5-07jwk 110 1 of it is covered, to coordinate. We don't know -- the other 2 end, I assume, is being coordinated from the airport and 3 TexDOT. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: TexDOT is not unwilling to 5 delay the start. We talked to them about it -- Guy Overby and 6 I both talked to the TexDOT people who handle the grants and 7 all this other good stuff, and they are not unwilling to delay 8 the start. They're looking now back from us for the scope of 9 work expanded, and then they will put that out for bid. And 10 they would be just as happy to delay the start to coincide 11 with the other. That's fine. 12 MAYOR SMITH: Of course, Bill and I disagree about 13 that. And I hate to disagree with anybody; I'm such an 14 agreeable person. But to hire an outfit that's an expert in 15 airports, and have them -- I think that study is independent 16 of -- of what the overall study is, but this study would be 17 added onto -- to the -- the overall study of the area. But 18 you're doing -- you're making a study on one specific part of 19 the overall county operation, and I think -- and the -- the 20 outfit that -- as I understand it, the outfit that's doing the 21 overall study has admitted that they have no expertise in 22 airport management, so I don't -- I don't see that -- I'd like 23 to see the airport business plan done as an airport business 24 plan; then that plan can be integrated into the overall thing. 25 But I don't think that the airport plan should be under the -- 3-5-07jwk 111 1 the overall committee evaluating the whole city. So, I think 2 the Airport Board voted the last time that it would be handled 3 independently. 4 MR. COLEMAN: I agree with that, too, 100 percent. 5 My comment a while ago goes to TXP developing a lot of 6 demographic growth and economic development growth that the 7 airport study would need to be able to provide for within 8 their study. 9 MAYOR SMITH: Yeah. 10 MR. COLEMAN: Or use the parameters. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm confused as to how -- going 12 back to kind of what Todd said early on, if the biggest 13 economic generator for the city and county is the airport, and 14 the airport plan's being done not by the people doing the 15 economic development plan, how are they going to -- I mean, 16 what if one plan comes up with saying, you know, the airport 17 plan says that you go down A, B, C as to how you get the 18 airport moving. And the other plan changes -- says, no, 19 that's not what you need to be doing? I mean, they have to 20 be -- 21 MR. BOCK: The economic plan will offer suggested 22 incentives to help that airport operations plan. The airport 23 plan will -- will come down to an operations type of 24 structure. And the TXP, the develop -- economic development 25 plan will offer -- will be able to offer that plan the type of 3-5-07jwk 112 1 incentives and the type of help -- you can have a plan without 2 the incentives. We're hoping to put an incentive package 3 together, sort of like Chuck has said before, tools in a tool 4 chest, and hand that airport the tools in the tool chest in 5 order to make that process more efficient, or -- or some 6 criteria. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we're talk -- so the airport 8 is not going to talk about the incentives or any kind of 9 development of the airport? We're going to leave that to the 10 other plan, airport business plan? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We don't know. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, I'm -- I see 13 getting two sets of rules, two sets of answers. If they don't 14 -- if they're not pretty closely meshed to know what the other 15 one's working on, I don't see -- 16 MR. COLEMAN: They've got to coordinate. 17 MR. BOCK: Well, they have to -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the mayor said the vote was 19 to have an independent. 20 MAYOR SMITH: Well, they're going to make their -- 21 the business plan is going to be done by people that are 22 experts on business plans for airports. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But not economic development. 24 MR. COLEMAN: Jonathan, at one point there was 25 discussion about having TXP do both of them. I think that's 3-5-07jwk 113 1 where maybe some of the confusion is coming in. The decision 2 was later made, I guess, that, no, we needed an expert 3 aviation-type consultant to do the airport. And TXP strictly 4 did economic development. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No question, that's what 6 we've done. 7 MR. COLEMAN: Which is very good. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The only issue here is the 9 delaying the start of the airport business development plan by 10 30 days or so. 11 MR. COLEMAN: To allow the coordination. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that they can work 13 together a little more cohesively. It's not a question of 14 whether one's going to do the other or what. We're taking two 15 separate consulting groups, two separate tasks and scopes of 16 work, and asking them to work together, one to delay 30 days. 17 MAYOR SMITH: Why delay one if they're going to work 18 independently? That's what -- that's the dumbest thing I've 19 ever heard. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 21 MAYOR SMITH: Somebody say -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is a good example of what's 23 happened at the Airport Board. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's an Airport Board issue, 25 Mr. Mayor, and I'm going to leave that to them. 3-5-07jwk 114 1 MAYOR SMITH: Well, Bill doesn't like the way the 2 airport's being run, so you can take everything he says under 3 that context. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You like everything the airport 5 does? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay -- 7 MAYOR SMITH: Not -- no, I didn't say that. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Mayor, you said he 9 doesn't like anything, so you like everything. 10 (Several people speaking at once.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Hold it, I got a reporter here. 12 Okay. Have we -- have we whipped that dead horse? Okay. Are 13 we ready to go to the next item, Mr. Mayor? 14 MAYOR SMITH: Yeah, I think so. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 16 MAYOR SMITH: Okay, Item 7, joint and/or cooperative 17 efforts of law enforcement in dealing with and handling mental 18 health cases. And I think -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Which one of you guys wants to run 20 with this ball? 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You put on it the agenda. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, I see. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't mind saying -- are you 24 going to extend it to your -- your agenda item's a little bit 25 broader than his. But -- but as far as if we stay with the 3-5-07jwk 115 1 mental health, I can make it real simple. The Chief of Police 2 and I met last Friday and we worked out all of our issues that 3 we had, and we're back on track with where we should be, and I 4 don't see any problems with us. I would ask that, 5 individually, the Commissioners Court and the City Council -- 6 and I think the Chief will join me in this, is that y'all help 7 us by -- through state means, legislative means, whatever it 8 is, to get local beds for local people. There's no sense in 9 us having to take people all the way to Lubbock, and Lubbock 10 having to bring them people all the way here, depending on 11 which one has beds open. They need to reserve some beds 12 locally so that it doesn't drain our law enforcement. We're 13 not big cities like Dallas or Houston or San Antonio, and it 14 kills us on our local law enforcement to have to send an 15 officer all the way to Lubbock, both of us. 16 MR. YOUNG: Right. And that's what we really need 17 from both Council and Commissioners, some support, that when 18 we -- if we do take this to either Harvey Hilderbran or to 19 Lamar Smith or to the Legislature, that we have some support 20 from our local governments that we need to do this. From 21 September of '05 through -- to the end of last month, the 22 combination of the county and the police department, we did 73 23 transports to remote locations, and that could have been San 24 Antonio, Austin, Lubbock, Big Spring, wherever the case may 25 be. If our state hospital goes on diversion and we have a 3-5-07jwk 116 1 mental health patient, once the emergency detention order is 2 issued, and it's issued either through the Sheriff's Office or 3 the police department, we're obligated to take that individual 4 in. And for us to transport a mental health patient to Rusk, 5 Texas is highly inappropriate. I don't think that the -- the 6 intent of the legislation was ever for that person to go clear 7 across the state, but that's what it's developed into. 8 We do have some local acute care beds here, but 9 obviously, we don't have enough. And I think Harvey 10 Hilderbran has got some legislation out there that will 11 increase that, but we're not sure if it's increasing it by the 12 number that's in the deal, or if it's just maintaining those 13 numbers that we have. We're not the only ones having these 14 problems, but most of the rural counties have these problems. 15 Hildago County, other counties are really having some issues. 16 There may be a time that we have to transport them to El Paso. 17 That's 503 miles one way, and you lose -- you lose a deputy 18 and you lose a local law enforcement officer, use of a car, 19 the cost of taking them up there. You need to feed them if 20 you're en route, and you need to make sure that you stop en 21 route to make sure that they use the restroom or things of 22 that nature. And the liability issues that you put in -- you 23 put on the table, I think, are just too great. 24 I don't know what the answer is, whether it's 25 regionalization of how these patients are kept, but there's a 3-5-07jwk 117 1 disconnect between what happens with M.H.M.R. and what's 2 available by the State Hospital. So, we need some support, 3 that when we write these letters to the -- to the legislators 4 and they start asking questions, that I think there's some 5 support from local -- local government. I think what it costs 6 is about $1,000 round-trip in just overtime usage to take 7 somebody to Lubbock and back. Plus you -- you just lose the 8 bodies. You lose the people for that -- that distance of 9 time. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The 15 beds here that they have 11 now, acute beds, are actually serving the 22-county cachement 12 area at Kerrville State Hospital. And it just -- every time 13 we have one ready, you know, some other county already brought 14 one, and now we're having to be diverted somewhere else. And 15 it is -- it's really taxing on our law enforcement, 'cause you 16 can't do it with just one. Because you already -- you are 17 dealing with mental cases; they have to be treated 18 differently, because technically they're not criminals. 19 They're not under arrest. Whether you can even handcuff them 20 when you transport them is an issue. You know, you're -- 21 you're not -- all our officers on both sides are -- are 22 trained in dealing with mental people, but we are not mental 23 caregivers. We're law enforcement officers. And having to 24 take these people this far is really hurting our law 25 enforcement efforts in this county, and city. 3-5-07jwk 118 1 MR. YOUNG: It stretches us rather thin, for the 2 most part. Like I said, we did -- we did 73 outside. But 3 Kerrville alone did 121 transports to K.S.H. from September of 4 '05 through February of '07, so those were ones that we picked 5 up at local mental health facilities over here and just took 6 them up to the State Hospital. So, there's a lot of time 7 utilized to do that. 8 MR. MEEK: Would our first step be to talk to -- 9 Stephen Anfinson, I think? Is he the local manager here at 10 the M.H.M.R.? Would that be our first step in -- 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That is superintendent of the 12 State Hospital. 13 MR. YOUNG: He's at the State Hospital. 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Superintendent at the State 15 Hospital. And then the -- the head of M.H.M.R. here, and I 16 don't know if they can -- if they can do it. But there's got 17 to be some way to keep some beds locally here so that we don't 18 have to transport these people all over the state. We don't 19 have -- 20 MR. YOUNG: One of the things we found, too, because 21 we're located 62 miles from San Antonio, we have a lot of 22 people come here for mental health care, and they stay here. 23 And then they -- we have issues with them, and they're back 24 and forth and they're in and out of the State Hospital. I 25 think that's one of the reasons we deal with so many -- so 3-5-07jwk 119 1 many of those folks that other places don't. You know, you 2 see that in big cities, whether it's Dallas/Fort Worth, 3 whether it's Houston, whether it's Austin. Local 4 municipalities very seldom handle those unless they get a call 5 for service in trying to get a voluntary commitment, or if 6 they have to get an emergency detention. But there's plenty 7 of facilities available in those areas, where we don't. But, 8 you know, Lubbock, El Paso, Rusk, you know, that's -- that's 9 an overtime issue; that's a vehicle issue. That's a lot of 10 time. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think what we're saying 12 overall is that, unfortunately, Kerr County, City of 13 Kerrville, all of us have gotten kind of behind the ball on 14 mental health issues. None of us really looked at it, and 15 it's whether the ones that are out on the street there are 16 going to end up sleeping in the bushes, behind the curbs, like 17 you see in Washington and Dallas and that, or whether it's -- 18 such as there's a law that says I shouldn't keep them in the 19 jail once they've been found mentally incompetent. I have 20 about four or five in jail right now that we're dealing with 21 throwing urine, throwing feces, that are mentally incompetent, 22 and been found mentally incompetent, but to get them in even a 23 forensic unit, which Kerrville turned into, is a six-month 24 waiting period from the time the papers are ready. So, you're 25 talking six months for them to be found mentally incompetent, 3-5-07jwk 120 1 and then another six months to get them in, and the jail 2 staff's having to deal with this for a year before we can get 3 them out of this facility, and I think it's becoming a very 4 serious issue for Kerrville and Kerr County. 5 MAYOR SMITH: Did the change in the attitude -- or 6 the type of patients they have at the State Hospital cause 7 this problem? 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. They started taking just 9 forensics, which I understand. Just -- like I say, it's 10 taking six months to get them out of there just into a 11 forensic unit. But when they did that locally, it in essence 12 killed us being able to treat just the mental health patients 13 that are not criminals, but need to have some inpatient 14 services. If you can't get them locally, you're going to have 15 to take them to Lubbock, and in a police car. 16 MAYOR SMITH: So, when they started taking the 17 forensic cases in, you lost -- you lost beds for -- for people 18 that you have to haul elsewhere? 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: For a while, you lost more than 20 beds; you lost the entire State Hospital. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Mayor? 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They opened up 15 beds 23 temporarily. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me give you the history on this 25 thing. Prior to January '05, Kerrville State Hospital had 43 3-5-07jwk 121 1 civil commitment acute care beds. The remainder of them -- 2 139, I believe -- were forensic beds. Immediately prior to 3 that, there were some factors, driven primarily out of the 4 Dallas area with some lawsuits that they had, with criminal 5 commitments, forensic commitments, that caused there to be a 6 good deal of pressure to increase the number of forensic beds 7 in the state. 8 In January of '05, summarily, all of the beds at 9 Kerrville State Hospital were reclassified as forensic beds. 10 Now, fortunately, by the efforts of Representative Hilderbran 11 and Linda Werlein, who's the Executive Director of the 12 Community M.H.M.R. Center, who handles the outpatient and a 13 lot of the transitional to the inpatient, they got -- they put 14 their heads together for an interim solution, and we got, 15 depending on who you listen to, either 12 or 16 beds out at 16 Kerrville State Hospital. Well, that's significantly less 17 than what we had, but we've been getting by as best we could 18 on those. But frequently, those beds are full; as a 19 consequence, they're having to transport these people that are 20 on emergency detention to the next available facility. Even 21 if -- even if we're not full, and somebody comes in from the 22 cachement area, they call it, the -- I think it's a 19- or 23 20-county area that -- that Kerrville State Hospital 24 comprises, they're as entitled to those beds, as well as 25 overflow from other hospitals that are full. Lubbock, for 3-5-07jwk 122 1 example, they'll send theirs down here if there's a bed 2 available in our system. 3 Now, the immediate solution before us in this 4 Legislature is House Bill 654. Representative Hilderbran has 5 introduced that, which would allow the local Mental Health 6 Authority to have an acute psychiatric inpatient treatment 7 unit at one of the unused buildings at Kerrville State 8 Hospital. Initially, it would be activated for 16 beds, I 9 believe. That's all they're talking about now. You -- you 10 get a half a loaf at a time when you go to the Legislature, as 11 you know. I've been to Austin on two or three occasions now 12 to testify for the benefit of that bill. But once we get this 13 hopefully new stand-alone facility, it will have the ultimate 14 capacity of approximately 40 in that one unit, and hopefully 15 we'll be able to use that. The pressure for the forensic 16 beds, the criminal commitments, the lawbreakers and the 17 ne'er-do-wells, they're getting all the beds. The law-abiding 18 citizens are losing their beds. And I don't think it's 19 because mental health is declining in the state of Texas. 20 It's the federal courts that have done this, ultimately, I 21 think. 22 But the -- the immediate solution is to try and get 23 support for House Bill 654 and the funding that needs to go 24 with that. In order to get a more permanent solution for our 25 acute care civil commitment beds, they're actually -- they're 3-5-07jwk 123 1 calling it a crisis stabilization center. There's some 2 connotation that that's more short-term than psychiatric 3 inpatient -- civil psychiatric inpatient. 4 MR. HOFMANN: What's the status of that pending 5 legislation? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: It's in committee. And I testified 7 on it -- I believe it was last week, last week or week before. 8 MR. MEEK: Is there time to get support, something 9 from the City? 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. I'd 11 recommend you contact Representative Hilderbran's office and 12 get all the information on it. 13 MR. HOFMANN: Yeah. If the timing works, we can get 14 a resolution of support on the Council's next meeting, which 15 is a week from tomorrow. And -- but we'll coordinate with 16 Representative Hilderbran's office just to make sure of what 17 they need. And if that works, we can certainly do that, 18 Councilman. 19 MR. COLEMAN: And, Judge, once a patient goes into 20 that stabilization bed -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm? 22 MR. COLEMAN: -- is that a State-borne cost at that 23 point? 24 JUDGE TINLEY: It's a tricky formula, because 25 there's an allocation of those costs. They have what they 3-5-07jwk 124 1 call trust funds that are transferred back and forth from the 2 State Hospital to the community Mental Health Authority. It's 3 mainly moving from one pocket to the other, in large measure, 4 so I -- so it's been indicated to me. Now, there are going to 5 be some additional costs up front to ready that facility, but 6 certainly it'll be less cost than to build, you know, on bare 7 dirt, additional beds, because we've got the facility there. 8 The County has -- has agreed to help with some infrastructure 9 that's going to necessitate in order to get that facility up 10 and running. But it's really, really important that we get a 11 more permanent solution to what we got now, because -- 12 MR. COLEMAN: I agree. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: -- the pressure for more forensic 14 beds -- I think the number that I saw week before last, for 15 current needs, 731, and -- and they project the need for 16 800-plus. Well, guess what? They're fixing to take away our 17 16 that we've got on an interim basis. That's coming. So, we 18 just got a part of a temporary solution, but we need a more 19 permanent solution. 20 MR. BOCK: Judge, if -- 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, if we weighed in on 22 it as Commissioners Court in favor of that legislation -- 23 JUDGE TINLEY: If I'm not mistaken, we've already 24 passed a resolution on it. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't recall. 3-5-07jwk 125 1 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm almost positive that we have. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I recommend that once you 3 do that and you get a document of some sort, that you find 4 out -- and I think Harvey will tell you the same thing; you 5 find out what committee that bill is in, and -- and they'll 6 give you a list of the committee members, and make sure that 7 they, each and every one of them, get a copy of your concern. 8 That's the way it works. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There's one other issue that 10 really does affect the citizens, too. You take -- take a 11 person that we have to transport all the way to Lubbock, and 12 for his loved one that cares about him or anything else to see 13 him, now he's not even out here at the local state hospital 14 where they could help deal with the doctors and everybody 15 else. They're going to have to go to Lubbock too, and so it's 16 a -- it just kind of snowballs and becomes a very large 17 problem real quick for all of us. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, this issue that 19 we're talking about today is just a part of the problem, too. 20 One of the biggest problems statewide for county government is 21 these type of folks that are filling up our jails. They're 22 not our -- the way I see it, and the way county government 23 sees it, they're not our patients. They're the State's 24 patients. And the short-term thing is simply a short-term 25 thing. They need to build a large hospital or 100 large 3-5-07jwk 126 1 hospitals or something, and get those people out of our damn 2 jails. They are costing a lot of money, and they do not 3 belong in there. They're mental health people; they're not 4 jail people. But that's -- and, see, that's a difference in 5 what we're talking about. This is an issue for Dallas and 6 Fort Worth and Houston, and all of us county-wide -- counties. 7 It's an issue for everyone, it doesn't matter what size. It 8 is very, very expensive. And that's -- that little war's 9 being fought in Austin. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A lot of those areas also have, 12 like, Parkland Hospital or Brackenridge in Austin, where they 13 have the regular hospitals that have full wings to treat 14 these. You know, we don't have anything other than Kerrville 15 State Hospital. And if you don't have the beds there, you're 16 going to haul. 17 MR. YOUNG: Often, I think they only hold them for 18 24 hours for initial evaluation; then they can get a family 19 member to come pick them up or whatever they need to do. We 20 don't have that luxury. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Put them on a treatment plan. 22 MR. YOUNG: Right. 23 MR. BOCK: Sheriff, I got a question for you and the 24 Chief. You -- you had -- when we started talking about this 25 agenda item, you had indicated that you and the Chief have 3-5-07jwk 127 1 gotten together and worked out a plan for the transportation 2 of mental health. Is -- is that in some sort of a policy 3 plan? Or would you like that policy adopted by the governing 4 bodies here, or a gentlemen's agreement? 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I think it's always been 6 a gentlemen's agreement since 2000, and what it is, is -- I 7 think most of y'all have heard of it, is we each furnish an 8 officer, and we rotate cars. And it has worked out, 'cause at 9 times there are things going on; City may have something major 10 going on and cannot, and we have the leeway to do it. But 11 it's -- it's a gentleman's agreement that normally, yes, we 12 are going to stand by our agreement. And there was a little 13 hiccough in it, but that's been resolved. That's what our 14 meeting was over. And I am very comfortable that we don't 15 need the -- either one of the governing bodies to get involved 16 in how we work that out. We just need y'all to get involved 17 in helping us get -- 18 MR. YOUNG: Helping us on the other side. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Solve it. 20 MR. MEEK: While y'all are standing up and getting 21 along so well, how about a little update on the dispatch? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Good planning. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There hasn't been any meeting 24 called. And I don't know if we can talk about that yet in 25 this agenda item, unless the Judge calls his agenda item, as 3-5-07jwk 128 1 far as -- 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I've got Item 3, which includes 3 "and/or other joint city and county law enforcement issues." 4 If -- if dispatch falls under law enforcement issues, we're 5 okay. 6 MR. EMERSON: I think the problem you have, Judge, 7 is the Sheriff can talk about it, but it's not on the City's 8 agenda. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: No, I posted it as a joint agenda, as 10 did the City. We both posted a joint agenda. 11 MR. EMERSON: The top one? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 13 MR. EMERSON: Or did the City post the second one? 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Can I have the Chief as my 15 guest to talk about it? 16 MR. EMERSON: Sheriff can talk about it all he wants 17 to. It's Mike's problem on the City side. 18 MR. HAYES: Yeah, go ahead and give the report. I 19 think that's okay. But -- 20 MAYOR SMITH: Didn't all the Council members get the 21 Judge's -- 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Agenda. 23 MAYOR SMITH: -- agenda item? 24 MR. GROSS: I'm sure we must have. 25 MR. EMERSON: Go for it. 3-5-07jwk 129 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Do you want me to say anything? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Tell us what you know. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Number one, we have not had any 4 committee meeting, as the two entities have agreed to have, 5 and I think that the Chief would agree with me, you know, we 6 can have those. There are some -- some audio tapes of 911 7 calls in the past that I think that committee ought to be 8 aware of on how the two work together. I think if we can all 9 throw politics out the window and work together, I think it 10 would be great. But, personally, I think you're going to have 11 to have a separate location. You know, I've always had an 12 opinion -- and City Council don't like this -- that the County 13 has 17 acres here where we got dispatch in one area, and we 14 have law enforcement winged out this way and the jail winged 15 out to the back. And the City's had some issues about when 16 their police department's outgrowing its current area and 17 location. Plenty of room. I think the police department 18 could be totally separate, can wing out the other way, so you 19 have a joint law enforcement center. You got the jail local, 20 you got your warrants local, and even though it's in one large 21 area, the dispatch is different, but common. Because in my 27 22 years here, the key to effective law enforcement is getting 23 the street officers visiting, talking, just passing on 24 information. There's not a crook in the world that cares 25 about city limit signs or county signs. If you can have 3-5-07jwk 130 1 everybody separate, but yet to where we can share things, I 2 think you'll come up, but that's my opinion. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Rusty, that makes so much 4 sense, it probably won't happen. 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. You're probably 6 right. 7 MR. MEEK: Were you talking about just dispatch, 8 or -- 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I'm talking about the 10 whole -- all of your law enforcement area. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to say that the -- I 12 think at our next meeting -- our next Commissioners Court 13 meeting, that the Commissioners are going to appoint our side 14 of the committee to get that thing going, to get it rocking 15 and rolling. Are we about through? Can I -- I've got a -- 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Go ahead. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got an announcement to 18 make. Some of you know that our association, the 19 Commissioners Court association that we belong to is the West 20 Texas County Judges and Commissioners Association, and we will 21 have -- we will be hosting the annual conference at the end of 22 this month. Mayor Smith is jointly going to participate with 23 us, the welcome from the City of Kerrville. And they're going 24 to be here approximately four days, and that association 25 consists of 118 counties. Very large. And could have 118 3-5-07jwk 131 1 commissioners courts and their families here in Kerrville at 2 one time, and we'll be close to that. So -- and one of the 3 functions that we will have during that week, we'll be going 4 out to the Star -- what do you call that thing? 5 MR. BOCK: River Star? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: River Star up at the Ag Barn. 7 And the host court, our court, will be throwing a little party 8 for everybody, and we wanted to invite the City Council to 9 come and be a part of that. Bruce is cooking catfish for us, 10 and have some refreshments along with that. And -- but please 11 consider this an invitation for that evening. And I think -- 12 22nd? 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 21st. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 21st of that -- March 21st of 15 that week. And we'll be out there about 6:30, and we'll have 16 a little entertainment and catfish and et cetera and so forth. 17 And you're welcome to come out to the Y.O. Hotel and hop on a 18 bus and be transported out there, if you drink too much. If 19 you don't, you drive. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know it will be fun, because 21 Buster's president. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm the president. 23 MR. COLEMAN: Well, thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm looking forward to the 25 end of March when I'm not president. 3-5-07jwk 132 1 MAYOR SMITH: It's a great honor for your 2 organization to meet in our city, our county. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A great honor for the city to 4 have our organization, you're exactly right. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I believe there's going to be 6 about 750 people in Kerrville that week. 7 MAYOR SMITH: That's great. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That are not normally here. 9 MR. COLEMAN: You got that much fish lined out? 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We do. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One caveat, Commissioner. 12 Typically, at the end of a session, the Texas Association of 13 Counties' attorney gives a really good summary of what's going 14 on in the Legislature. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And if you guys want to 17 listen to it and hear his perspective on what's going on, 18 what's good, what's bad, what's indifferent, it will be a good 19 session just to look in on. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Also work in agreement with 21 Municipal League. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They do. He covers -- in his 23 talks, he covers specifically county government, but he gets 24 over into the city stuff as well, so it's very, very 25 interesting. He's a bright guy. Y'all are welcome to that as 3-5-07jwk 133 1 well. So -- 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Mayor, we got else anything else 3 today? 4 MAYOR SMITH: No, I think that's all from our side. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll be adjourned. 6 MAYOR SMITH: Okay. 7 (Joint City/County workshop adjourned at 11:36 a.m.) 8 - - - - - - - - - - 9 10 11 STATE OF TEXAS | 12 COUNTY OF KERR | 13 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 14 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my 15 capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court 16 of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place 17 heretofore set forth. 18 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 9th day of 19 March, 2007. 20 21 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 22 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 23 Certified Shorthand Reporter 24 25 3-5-07jwk