1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Special Session 10 Monday, April 23, 2007 11 9:00 a.m. 12 Commissioners' Courtroom 13 Kerr County Courthouse 14 Kerrville, Texas 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 24 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X April 23, 2007 2 PAGE --- Commissioners' Comments 5 3 1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action regarding 4 rates County pays to funeral homes for cremations, transportation fees, and first call charges 7 5 1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to accept 6 Misty Lane in Megan Manor for County maintenance, with no obligation to be responsible for drainage 7 easements and/or detention structures 22 8 1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action concerning final plat of Pirate Place for Center 9 Point Independent School District 24 10 1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action concerning final plat of Infamous 1169 25 11 1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action regarding 12 approval to enact a weapons policy for retired law enforcement officers 29 13 1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 14 approve contract with Hunt Volunteer Fire Department; allow County Judge to sign same 36,42 15 1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 16 approve resolution of proclamation designating July 1-4, 2007 as "The American Family Reunion" 37 17 1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 18 approve resolution of proclamation designating May 3, 2007, as "National Day of Prayer" 40 19 1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 20 approve Bill of Sale and assignment of certain wastewater improvements constructed in Phases II 21 and III, Kerrville South Wastewater Project, as provided in agreement with U.G.R.A.; authorize 22 County Judge to sign same 40 23 1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve interlocal agreement with Bexar County 24 to participate in Bexar County Regional Public Defender's Office; authorize County Judge to 25 sign same 43 3 1 I N D E X (Continued) April 23, 2007 2 PAGE 3 1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to authorize independent or outside audit, in whole 4 or in part, of affairs, activities, and/or transactions by or with County Treasurer's office 5 and/or other offices as applicable or necessary 53 6 4.1 Pay Bills 83 4.2 Budget Amendments 84 7 4.3 Late Bills -- 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 90 8 1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to review 9 applications for open position in Environmental Health for an inspector (Executive Session as needed) 91 10 1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action regarding 11 transferring employee from Road and Bridge to Maintenance (Executive Session) 91 12 3.1 Action as may be required on matters discussed in 13 Executive Session 92 14 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee Assignments 95 15 --- Adjourned 110 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 1 On Monday, April 23, 2007, at 9:00 a.m., a special 2 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the 3 Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, 4 Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: 5 P R O C E E D I N G S 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. 7 Let me call to order this regular meeting of the Kerr County 8 Commissioners Court scheduled and posted for this time and 9 date, Monday April 23rd, 2007, at 9 a.m. It is that time now. 10 Commissioner Baldwin? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Would you stand 12 and join me in a word of prayer, and then we'll have the 13 pledge of allegiance. 14 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if there's 17 any member of the audience or the public that wishes to be 18 heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item, feel 19 free to come forward at this time. If you wish to speak on an 20 agenda item, we'd ask that you wait until that item is called, 21 and in order that I can be apprised that you want to speak and 22 not pass over that item too quickly, if you'd fill out a 23 participation form at the back of the room, I would appreciate 24 it. You can bring it up here after you've filled that out. 25 If, for some reason, you haven't filled out a participation 4-23-07 5 1 form and want to be heard on an agenda item, just get my 2 attention in some manner, and I'll see that you have an 3 opportunity to be heard. But at this time, if there's any 4 member of the public that wishes to be heard on any matter 5 that is not a listed agenda item, please feel free to come 6 forward at this time. Seeing no one moving forward, we'll 7 move on with the agenda. Commissioner Baldwin, what do you 8 have for us this morning? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nothing. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Amazing. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, it is. I thought we 12 quit doing this part of the -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We did last week -- last 14 time. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- agenda. No, I don't have 16 anything. Yippie skidoo. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner Williams? 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll talk more about it 19 later, but I had the opportunity to attend the 25th Annual 20 Aviation Conference in Corpus Christi, and the first person I 21 bumped into walking out of the hotel, walking to the meeting, 22 was Scott Tinley. Sure glad I was by myself. He says, "Is my 23 father here?" I said, "I don't think so." 24 JUDGE TINLEY: He didn't tell me he was going. I 25 had no idea he was there. 4-23-07 6 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, he was there, but so 2 was I. I'll talk about it later. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have anything this 5 morning. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, all I can say is I guess 7 kind of a report, but not really. It's on the Highway 39 and 8 1340 bridge projects. The committee had their last meeting on 9 Phase 1 last Tuesday. We all came out in agreement with the 10 first phase of the project. There'll be a public meeting on 11 May the 3rd at the Hunt School from 6:00 to 8:30 for everybody 12 to attend that would like to and ask questions. And I think 13 that TexDOT has really, really done well working with the 14 committee, and made a lot of concessions, and actually 15 redesigned every one of the bridges because of committee 16 input. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that public input meeting 18 that's coming up just for the bridges in Precinct 4, or is 19 that for all of them that they're going to be doing in this 20 project? 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is only bridges that are 22 on 39 and 1340. And there are nine total bridges, and the 23 first three is Phase 1, which would be the two Smith 24 Crossings, one-lane, and Hope Crossing, which is just this 25 side of Camp Waldemar. That will be the first phase. And 4-23-07 7 1 TexDOT assures us that there'll be one contractor doing all 2 three simultaneously, so that was good news for us. We had 14 3 TexDOT members show up at our last meeting; every specialty 4 that TexDOT's had was represented at that meeting to answer 5 questions and to give information on the projects. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Seems like it's moving along well. 7 Anything else? 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Not at this time. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: By way of information to the Court, 10 the Court will recall that I was previously authorized to 11 initiate and file claims on the former Treasurer's official 12 bond. Last week I filed with the bonding company two claims 13 on that bond as previously authorized by the Court, each of 14 those claims being in excess of $12,000, so I'll keep you 15 apprised of where that goes as it progresses. Anything else 16 before we move on, gentlemen? Okay, let's move on with the 17 agenda. Item Number 1; consider, discuss, and take 18 appropriate action regarding rates Kerr County pays to funeral 19 homes for cremations, transportation fees, and first call 20 charges: Mr. Grimes? We've got two Mr. Grimes here. Are you 21 going to let him do the heavy lifting, John? 22 MR. JOHN GRIMES: I've been to the dentist, and I'm 23 all numb. (Laughter.) 24 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Probably lucky. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, we are. If you'll give us your 4-23-07 8 1 name and address, and proceed. 2 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: I'm Johnny Grimes with Grimes 3 Funeral Chapels. On behalf of the funeral homes in Kerr 4 County, we're represented by Gene Allen, Kerrville Funeral 5 Home, and our funeral home, John Grimes and Johnny Grimes. 6 Cynthia is not here this morning. Invited her, but she didn't 7 show up, so -- with Wright's Funeral Home. There's three 8 agendas that we'd like to address with you. One is the -- the 9 county cremations. Anytime there's a pauper burial, anytime 10 they're indigent, we have some paperwork that we fill out to 11 present to the Judge, and those charges have been $600 for 12 years, and we'd like it to be raised to at least $750. The 13 other agenda would be transportation of human remains to 14 Austin to the medical examiner. Those charges have been 15 currently $230. Each funeral home has different charges. 16 Kerrville's is $250, and I'm not sure what Wright's is, but 17 that -- I've been in business 10 years, and I haven't seen 18 that price increase in 10 years. And y'all know the price of 19 gas and employee wages and so forth. Anytime we take a body 20 to medical -- or to the medical examiner, there's at least a 21 four- or five-hour wait for them to do the autopsy. And if we 22 could raise that price to $350 flat fee across the board for 23 every funeral home. 24 The third thing I'd like to bring to your attention 25 is the first call. Anytime that there's a death -- unattended 4-23-07 9 1 death in the county, the J.P. or Sheriff's Office or police 2 office gives a funeral home a call, and in Kerr County, we're 3 all on rotation call, so if we get the call today, Kerrville 4 or Wright's will get the call tomorrow and so forth. Texas 5 Funeral Service Commission has brought to our attention that 6 the County is responsible for those charges. They say -- 7 they're saying that we cannot pass that on to the family if 8 the family's not present. So, if Jack Jones was killed in a 9 car wreck and there's no family to be contacted, and they 10 contact us, we can't pass that charge, which is $350, on to 11 the family. The county is responsible for that charge. And 12 I've submitted the information to y'all on that. If there's 13 anything I can explain to you, I'll be glad to. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Johnny, that $350 that you're 15 talking about right there, is that -- now, is that -- what is 16 -- what's covered in that fee? 17 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Okay. What that is, is we call 18 that a first call charge. Every funeral home has that, and 19 every funeral home has that itemized on their price list. 20 What that is, if we make a removal to a hospital, a car wreck, 21 a murder scene, anything that we're transported out to, we 22 make that removal, bring the body back to our location. 23 That's called a first call. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's even though y'all may 4-23-07 10 1 not handle the funeral. 2 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Correct. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It might be done by a different 4 funeral home. 5 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: And how that's been brought to 6 our attention as well is, if -- if there's a passerby on the 7 interstate, and they live in San Antonio and they pass away in 8 Kerr County, the Sheriff's Department calls us, Kerrville, or 9 Wright's out; we make the removal, bring it back here, and 10 then a funeral home in San Antonio calls us and says, "We're 11 going to accept the body of Jack Jones. We're not responsible 12 for any charges, because there was no family contact." In 13 return, it's never been brought to our attention that Kerr 14 County is able to pay that charge, because we didn't know 15 about that. So, in this case, we're bringing it to y'all's 16 attention that, legally, we're not able to charge that funeral 17 home for that charge. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Another funeral home? Or 19 the -- 20 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Or family. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Family, okay. 22 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Correct. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And that could add up to be 24 substantial, because normally there is not a first family 25 contact, or family contact prior to that funeral home getting 4-23-07 11 1 the call and getting that -- the deceased person. Because you 2 don't contact the family when the body's still out there on 3 the side of the road or in a car wreck or anything. They 4 normally will wait, D.P.S. or whoever, and get the crime scene 5 or the wreck scene taken care of. 6 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: And I think a lot of that might 7 be common sense as well. Let's say somebody passes away, and 8 Rusty knows that they're good friends of -- of us. Obviously, 9 they're going to contact the spouse or a child and say, you 10 know, "Dad passed away. Do I need to contact Grimes or 11 Kerrville or Wright's?" And in that case, if he can't get 12 ahold of anybody, I would -- I would think that you would know 13 to contact somebody if you -- if you know that. If you know 14 that they're friends of ours or -- or friends of Gene's or 15 friends of Cynthia. But in a lot of cases, that doesn't 16 happen, so it sure is a gray area. But as the law states, it 17 says any unattended death, which could add up quite a bit. 18 And the only time that we've run into that problem is whenever 19 it's an out-of-town funeral home. Gene and I have a -- you 20 know, a good working relationship. We're -- in the past, 21 we've just always observed a -- you know, taken that cost in 22 the hip. So, the only time it's really been an issue is 23 whenever it's out-of-town funeral homes that have this in 24 place. And San Antonio is one where, you know, they're 25 saying, "Look, we're not going to pay you anything for that," 4-23-07 12 1 and we just absorb the cost. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask you this, Johnny. Is the 3 nature of your request, the -- the $350, for, one, 4 transportation anytime there's an inquest order or -- or 5 autopsy, rather, and two, to cover first call charges 6 generally in those cases where you're called for removal? 7 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: No, sir. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 9 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: That'll be additional. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 11 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: $350 is for us just to -- 12 transportation charges to Austin. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. To -- to the medical examiner 14 for autopsy? 15 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Correct. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: When you talk about first call 17 charges, you're talking about miscellaneous charges that -- 18 that may accrue prior -- when removal of a body is directed by 19 anybody acting under authority of law under the statutes, all 20 charges which accrue up to the time that a family may take 21 responsibility for it? 22 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Correct. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 24 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: And those are two separate 25 charges. First call, we understand what that means. But what 4-23-07 13 1 that really means is actually physically going out and making 2 the removal and bringing the body to us. That is a $350 3 charge. On top of that, if we have to transport the body to 4 Austin, that's an additional $350 charge. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex, have you looked at the law? 7 Do you -- first, I mean, on the first call charge, if the 8 County's obligated for that, we're obligated for it; I think 9 we should start paying for it. But I'd like Rex to look at it 10 to make sure he concurs that we're obligated. The other one, 11 I don't have a real problem with the increases, except that 12 it's out of our budget cycle, when we do budgets. It's 13 hard -- I don't know that this would qualify as an emergency, 14 which means that we really don't have any funds in our budget, 15 and my preference would be if we could wait to do that during 16 our budget cycle, increase the fees. I don't have -- I think 17 that your -- the request is legitimate, that your costs have 18 obviously gone up. 19 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: So, effective -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would be effective 21 September -- or October 1. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: October 1. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I don't have a real problem 24 with that. Just -- it's real hard. We just can't -- 25 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Justify? 4-23-07 14 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- pull money out of thin air. 2 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: The first call charges would be 3 effective immediately? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If -- 5 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: And then the other charges would 6 be effective September 1? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would be -- I mean, I don't 8 know that -- if everyone agrees on those being the correct 9 charges, that's how I would look at it. But on the first call 10 charges, I want Rex to make sure that he thinks the County is 11 responsible for that. Not that -- I mean, you know, if we 12 have an option of taxpayers eating it or you eating it, I'd 13 rather you eat the cost. But if we don't have -- 14 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Appreciate that, yeah. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But if we don't have that 16 option, you know, we'll -- I think we need to -- we're 17 obligated to pay it. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Been there before, huh, John? 19 MR. JOHN GRIMES: Yes, sir. The main thing -- one 20 thing Johnny didn't cover, if our funeral home handles that 21 service, then y'all are not billed the $350 for the first 22 call. This is for calls where a person is not, say, from here 23 or whatever, and there's no way they can find out who to 24 contact. Then they call the rotation situation, and that's 25 where the $350 will be charged. If it's a firm that -- say 4-23-07 15 1 Gene Allen's going to handle it. Well, then you're not billed 2 that $350. If we handle it, you're not billed that $350. If 3 Wright's handles it, you're not billed the $350. Now, we're 4 talking about first call, and that's mandated, and y'all have 5 a copy of what the law is, and that's been in effect for a 6 number of years. But we've always kind of embarrassed the 7 funeral home on the other end, saying, "Look, we're a small 8 country town and we don't have a contract like what Dallas, 9 Houston, San Antonio has." But it's mandated by the -- by the 10 State of Texas that that be paid. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: What you're saying, John, is that -- 12 MR. JOHN GRIMES: Sir? 13 JUDGE TINLEY: -- that families can voluntarily 14 assume that obligation; they're not required to, but they can, 15 and very often in a local context, more often than not, they 16 do? 17 MR. JOHN GRIMES: Ninety-nine and nine-tenths 18 percent of the time. But, you know, the problem that we have 19 is with our J.P.'s ordering an autopsy, and then we have to 20 take it to Austin, and we stay and wait for it, and there's 21 times that we've waited as long as five or six hours. You 22 know, what the other firms do, I can't say. I can't speak for 23 them. But -- so we stay and wait. But normally, we're told 24 to be there by 10 o'clock, and then we may not fall to -- our 25 body that we brought, till maybe 4 o'clock that afternoon. 4-23-07 16 1 JUDGE TINLEY: That's a separate issue that we need 2 to address, as we've talked about before. 3 MR. JOHN GRIMES: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. But, I mean, 4 we're here -- I, personally -- I -- the first call situation, 5 you know, is one thing. I realize y'all don't have the funds 6 and you're going to have to -- you know, and we're not here 7 raising cain, saying, "Well, the law says you're supposed to 8 pay it, and you've had four or five years free ride." No. 9 We're just -- as common courtesy, we're coming before you to 10 let you know that we have a problem. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I need to understand, a 12 little clarity. John, the $350 charge that you're talking 13 about would then only be levied or billed to the County in 14 situations where the body was destined for another location 15 and another funeral parlor or whatever, right? 16 MR. JOHN GRIMES: Yes, sir. Somebody passing 17 through town or whatever, killed in an accident, has a heart 18 attack or whatever, and they rotate the funeral home that's 19 on -- on call. If it's in one precinct, it's another, you 20 know, judge. So, all four J.P.'s need to be aware of this, 21 and they -- when we gave you this little short form about the 22 first call charge, that's been mandated -- I don't know. Rex, 23 you may can tell us when it was officially started, but I know 24 Fredericksburg has been doing it for a couple of years. 25 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: But it's such a gray area, 4-23-07 17 1 because the first sentence in the paragraph states the funeral 2 home's not authorized to pass the cost for transportation and 3 storage of the dead body on to the family or person 4 responsible for funeral arrangements when that person did not 5 directly request the funeral home to transport or store the 6 dead body. So that is pretty much straight across the board, 7 even if it's a local family here that couldn't be accounted 8 for, or a transient that's going through town. So, it's kind 9 of a gray area, saying we got to do it straight across the 10 board, or we hand-pick it, and it's really not fair to 11 hand-pick it whenever -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, it sounds 13 like -- I mean, if families will voluntarily pay that fee, 14 great. That's to everyone's benefit. If they won't, it 15 appears that the County may be obligated for that. If that's 16 the case, if were obligated, we're obligated. We'll pay it. 17 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: And Rusty might answer it a 18 little better. I don't think it happens that often. I would 19 probably say once or twice a month, maybe. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think that's probably pretty 21 accurate on when. The only concern is -- the only question I 22 have, say it is a -- a deceased person that's living here and 23 has some family here, okay? But they don't know what funeral 24 home they want to use, and the J.P. uses the rotation. Then, 25 when that family actually gets together, they decide they 4-23-07 18 1 really want that person buried in their old hometown of -- you 2 know, in Arkansas or wherever. Is that a first call charge 3 type situation, where y'all aren't going to handle it then, 4 but yet he died here and had family here? To me, that would 5 be too, and that's where you're going to start adding up even 6 -- even more of those. It's going to be a pretty good expense 7 eventually, but there -- I agree with y'all; there's no choice 8 in the matter. 9 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: And in the past, it's always 10 just been a common courtesy between funeral homes. Where this 11 got brought to our attention is on Bandera, for instance, 12 where it's close to San Antonio, we get hit with that every 13 month, where the San Antonio funeral homes are saying, "Look, 14 we're not going to pay you for that $350." We just absorb it, 15 because we can't argue with them because Bandera or Kerr 16 County do not have this in place. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm only going to go back to 19 it one more time. Let's assume that a Kerr County resident is 20 involved in a traffic accident on a freeway in San Antonio and 21 is killed, and the body is removed from the expressway to a 22 funeral parlor in San Antonio. 23 MR. JOHN GRIMES: Goes to the medical examiner. 24 See, we don't have a medical examiner situation here. If we 25 had a medical examiner situation here, they -- M.E. would go 4-23-07 19 1 out to the scene and he would have either a contract with 2 somebody in town, or he would have a vehicle where they would 3 transport the body from the scene of the death to the M.E.'s 4 office. But we don't have that here. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What happens to the $350 6 charge in the situation like we talked about? 7 MR. JOHN GRIMES: Up there? 8 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: There is no charge. 9 MR. JOHN GRIMES: There is no charge. 10 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Because we go straight to the 11 county coroner or the medical examiner in San Antonio. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, say that person dies in 13 Brown County. 14 MR. JOHN GRIMES: In what county? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Brownwood. I presume they don't 16 have a medical examiner. 17 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: We go to that funeral home and 18 make the removal, and then if that county has this in force, 19 then they bill the county. If not, then we just bring a check 20 as common courtesy and say, "Jack Jones Funeral Home, what is 21 your charge?" And they tell us $200 or $500; we write them a 22 check and pass that on to the family. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But you just said something 24 else here, Johnny. You said if that county has this 25 particular law in force. Is this selective in enforcement, or 4-23-07 20 1 is this universally enforced? 2 MR. JOHN GRIMES: It's supposed to be universal, but 3 not everybody -- an example is Fredericksburg. One funeral 4 home adheres to this; another funeral home there does not, but 5 this is the law. This is not a gentleman's agreement 6 situation. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Bottom line of what I'm hearing here 8 is that on this first call issue, is that in those situations 9 where it's feasible, reasonable, and you guys -- any one of 10 you here locally are in charge of -- of the situation, more 11 often than not, the family picks that up, it's handled, and it 12 doesn't become an issue. Only when it becomes an issue 13 because of out-of-county issues or -- or maybe some other 14 extraordinary circumstance, at that point you're going to have 15 to come to the County and say, "Under the law, this is your 16 obligation." 17 MR. JOHN GRIMES: That's correct. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other questions? Gene, 19 you got anything to throw into this mix here? 20 MR. ALLEN: No, sir. We just need help. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Thank you, sir. Appreciate 22 it. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is almost not fair to 24 have both Grimes guys here at the same time. Not fair to -- 25 MR. JOHN GRIMES: I came out of curiosity. I didn't 4-23-07 21 1 know whether I'd be able to talk or I'd be through -- I've 2 been at the dentist's office since 8 o'clock. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We need that number; I need 4 to talk to your dentist. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Numb him up some more? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll take a look at it and have the 8 County Attorney verify that, and I think you've got a good 9 sense of where we are on it. 10 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: So, we're looking for September 11 for the other charges? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. And we're looking -- 13 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: October? 14 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll consider these in our upcoming 15 budget, and then the other issue, we're going to get Rex to 16 take a look at it, and then we'll go forward. 17 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: You'll be in contact with us? 18 All right. Thank you, gentlemen. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And if we go -- go through 20 this scenario here where you come back and make a presentation 21 again, John, I really think we need to talk about the autopsy 22 issue. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One more time. 25 MR. JOHN GRIMES: We're ready to talk about it. 4-23-07 22 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. 2 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: And one thing that we'd -- we've 3 talked about, too, is getting the medical examiner to come 4 down to talk to the four J.P.'s or to the Sheriff's 5 Department, whoever needs to be in -- and maybe not enlighten 6 them, but just give them some explanations on when and why 7 and -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 9 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: -- on how to order autopsies. 10 And maybe where it won't be -- you know, 'cause then y'all's 11 budget -- I think y'all spend about $50,000 a year on 12 autopsies and transportation. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hm. 14 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Maybe we could cut that down on 15 that end of it. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think so too. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You might be watching during the 18 budget process to make sure we don't overlook this. 19 MR. JOHNNY GRIMES: Okay. Thank you, gentlemen. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 21 MR. JOHN GRIMES: Thank y'all. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Any member of the Court have anything 23 further to offer on that particular issue? Let's move on to 24 Item 2. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 25 accept Misty Lane in Megan Manor for County Maintenance, with 4-23-07 23 1 no obligation to be responsible for drainage easements and/or 2 detention structures. Mr. Odom? 3 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Megan Manor was recorded in 4 Volume 5, Page 231, March the 26th, 1986, but was never built. 5 Back in September of '05, we were contacted by Vordenbaum 6 Engineering as agent for a new owner about what was needed to 7 develop it and have the County maintain the road. We checked 8 with legal and were told they could build it as platted. 9 Therefore, I've been working with Kevin Spraggins with 10 Vordenbaum, and Wayne Wells on the drainage and the road 11 construction. The road and drainage has been completed. 12 Signs are in place. We have a two-year maintenance bond. All 13 the engineering fees have been paid. We have a letter stating 14 detention structures are to be the responsibility of Lot 16 15 and 17 owners. Therefore, we ask the Court to approve adding 16 Misty Lane to the list of County-maintained roads, accepting 17 no responsibility for drainage easements and/or detention 18 ponds -- structures. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: With your -- just curiosity. 20 Was the road built to '84 standards or current standards? 21 MR. ODOM: Current standards. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Current standards. 23 MR. ODOM: With base. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 25 MR. ODOM: Looks sort of like the same type of 4-23-07 24 1 design that was in Falling Waters with the ribbon. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm. 3 MR. ODOM: Looks nice. Hot mix. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I move that we accept Misty 5 Lane and Megan Manor for county maintenance, with no 6 obligation to be responsible for drainage easements or 7 detention structures. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 10 of the agenda item as indicated. Any question or discussion 11 on the motion? All in favor of that motion, signify by 12 raising your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to 17 Item 3; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action 18 concerning the final plat of Pirate Place for Center Point 19 Independent School District located in Precinct 2. Mr. Odom? 20 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, just a second. I'm 22 aware of the issue -- part of the issue that Mr. Odom has 23 placed on the agenda with respect to the letter of credit and 24 so forth. We're not completing the plat within a certain 25 period of time. I am not aware of -- was not aware of any 4-23-07 25 1 environmental problems until I returned to my office at 2 5 o'clock -- or about 3 o'clock on Friday afternoon, and found 3 the memorandum from Environmental Health Department addressed 4 to Mr. Wiedenfeld with respect to certain environmental 5 issues. I'd ask to pull this today, bring it back on a 6 subsequent meeting, and give Mr. Odom and I an opportunity to 7 meet with Mr. Voelkel and Mr. Wiedenfeld and find out where we 8 stand on this entire issue. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Seems reasonable. Any other member 10 of the Court have anything to offer? Let's move on to Item 4; 11 consider, discuss, and take appropriate action concerning 12 final plat of Infamous 1169 located in Precinct 4. 13 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The concept for the plat was 14 done under Rockin' Bar S, and the Court approved for the plat 15 to be done under the alternate plat process. Mark has 16 obtained a letter of credit to assure the roads are built to a 17 privately maintained country lane. Item 6 of the General 18 Notes states, "In accordance with Kerr County -- Kerr County 19 Subdivision Rules and Regulations, this subdivision is 20 permitted for a maximum of 233 lots." Mr. Voelkel placed -- 21 and Don didn't do anything wrong, but he placed this statement 22 on the plat because of 6.03.C.5.a; "Statement as to the total 23 number of lots permitted to the subdivision required on all 24 final plats." The owners stated that the lots will be no 25 smaller than 125 acres, and there will be covenants written to 4-23-07 26 1 that effect, and the road is being built with those sizes in 2 mind. It seems inappropriate for the statement to be on this 3 particular plat, but we were not sure how you would want to 4 address this issue. Since then, I had talked to Mark last 5 week; he does have the restrictions and covenants drawn up by 6 his attorney, and in Section 8, that is addressed, that it is 7 exactly -- that it will be no smaller than 125 acres per lot, 8 so I don't have a problem with that. The plat meets all -- 9 all the requirements of Kerr County Subdivision Rules; 10 therefore, I recommend the plat be accepted as presented. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mr. Odom, do you think we need 12 to have that section taken out where there's a maximum of 233 13 lots? That seems to be -- if they have covenants, you know, 14 stating what the lot sizes will be? 15 MR. ODOM: I think that it's probably appropriate to 16 do that, but I hate to -- if we could be contingent on having 17 the mylar and all change, that gives -- the problem is, he's 18 got everybody signed on it. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 20 MR. ODOM: I think with the record, we would -- 21 since this is going to be part of the record, we would have it 22 there that we could address it. And the restrictions and 23 covenants state, in fact, right in Section 8, that they cannot 24 subdivide less than 125 acres. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 4-23-07 27 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, I mean, the intent of 2 that is from a water standpoint, water availability. It's 3 supposed to be all lots; it has nothing to do with what's 4 actually being done out there. This is a number that's for, 5 kind of, Headwaters. 6 MR. ODOM: That's a Headwaters issue -- 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 8 MR. ODOM: -- that we looked at. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, that basically would 10 allow -- that would be water availability, how many lots could 11 have wells on them, I guess, if that -- 12 MR. ODOM: That's correct. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, if they divide it up. 14 It's not -- I mean, the fact that there's other restrictions 15 that are more restrictive doesn't -- I mean, those are the 16 ones that are going to govern. And it also says -- I mean, 17 covenants can always be changed, and this also says that 18 that's -- it's putting in that maximum on there, so I would be 19 in favor of leaving it on there. I think it's supposed to be 20 on all plats. 21 MR. ODOM: It helps us in the future. We could look 22 a year or two down the road and I could keep up with the 23 number of lots, look at it, and that's what I've had a problem 24 with in the past. We have no earthly idea; you have to try to 25 research and find. But I think with that -- with the way it's 4-23-07 28 1 worded and all, that had to do with Headwaters, and I think 2 that it would be acceptable. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. Just checking. I move 4 that we approve the final plat for Infamous 1169. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 7 indicated. Any question or discussion on that motion? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a question. This is just 9 more of a thought about those lots. The right-of-way's 60 10 foot? 11 MR. ODOM: We have that mile and a half of 30 foot. 12 Y'all gave them permission to go ahead with that 30, because 13 they didn't own any more land. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But they did build the road to 15 county specs? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 17 MR. ODOM: But inside it is 60 foot. Inside the 18 subdivision, that 1,100 acres, is 60 foot, and that mile and a 19 half or mile, whatever it is, is -- is the 30-foot easement 20 that was essentially done under 1.03. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: What's the access road that serves 22 that subdivision? 23 MR. ODOM: That is -- we call it Love Road. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Love Ranch Road. 25 MR. ODOM: Yeah, and they have a name change. It's 4-23-07 29 1 Love Ranch Road. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other questions or 3 comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your 4 right hand. 5 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 6 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 7 (No response.) 8 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to 9 Item 5; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action 10 regarding approval to enact a weapons policy for retired law 11 enforcement officers. Our Sheriff. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this the -- just to make 14 sure, is this the same thing you have an Attorney General 15 opinion requested on? 16 MR. EMERSON: Yes. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Part of it, okay? The thing 18 is, there's federal law and there's state law, and there are 19 some differences in it, but I'm trying to write our department 20 policy that adheres and fits both so that we don't have to 21 worry about whether there was a federal officer retired or 22 state officer; I have a department policy on how we handle it. 23 It can be more restrictive. And that way it just sets us -- 24 it doesn't matter, as long as he's retired. The law does 25 allow -- under federal law, it allows that a person who has at 4-23-07 30 1 least 15 years or more of law enforcement and is eligible to 2 receive benefits can be considered a retired peace officer. 3 Doesn't matter that he's retired or not; he's eligible to 4 receive it -- or doesn't matter if he's actually receiving it 5 under federal law. It says that that certificate is only good 6 for one year. 7 Under the state law, it says that the person must be 8 receiving benefits from retirement, okay? And that the 9 certificate is good for two years. What we have done is, I'm 10 writing a policy -- and part of y'all's, I did change one 11 section in there, is our firearms proficiency policy shall 12 read that they must be receiving benefits, already be retired, 13 and all certificates must be renewed annually, so every year. 14 That way I'm covered under both federal and state, and we can 15 allow, you know, retired officers to get a certificate of 16 qualification so that they can carry concealed handguns or 17 carry weapons -- continue to carry them in our jurisdiction, 18 which I think is good. I have a couple that are -- are 19 retired, such as Brown Stokes, okay, and he wants to be able 20 to carry his. I've been approached by a couple from other 21 states. They have to provide all the documentation and that. 22 And then the other part of this is, it says that the 23 department -- the head of the state or local law enforcement 24 agency may collect fees -- may set fees to recover expenses in 25 doing this. And what the expenses would be, we -- we aren't 4-23-07 31 1 making special arrangements for retired officers to come in 2 and want to qualify, and then take them out to the range on a 3 special day. That doesn't happen. They can go out to the 4 range the same time we qualify either new employees or our 5 yearly qualification, and go out and qualify at that time. 6 So, your expenses at that time are the target itself and the 7 -- what we call the old pasties that you tape up on the target 8 after you shoot it and things like that, and just the 9 instruction part, and probably a little portion of our range 10 fees out at -- at Jack Burch's place. So, we're looking at 11 charging about a $25 fee for these officers to get -- for us 12 to qualify them. But the main thing that this says, under (g) 13 under the state law, is it does say a county law enforcement 14 agency must obtain approval of the program authorized by this 15 section from the Commissioners Court of the county before 16 issuing certificates. That's why it's brought to y'all, okay? 17 That's the whole reason. It says that I must have y'all's 18 permission before I can institute this type of program. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty, what is the difference 20 in -- in Brown Stokes carrying a sidearm and a concealed 21 weapon program? 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Probably really isn't that big 23 of a difference, other than not having to go through the state 24 when carrying concealed weapons. And law enforcement officers 25 normally, if you are under both federal and state, you can 4-23-07 32 1 carry anywhere in the United States, and there's some places 2 in the U.S. that do not recognize Texas' concealed handgun 3 license. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Concealed or always -- for a 5 law enforcement person, always in the open, right? 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It doesn't matter. You can -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Doesn't matter? 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If he's carrying it open, he's 9 got to have identification on him so you don't scare people 10 half to death. But the main thing on this is, I just have to 11 have y'all's approval to have my -- my program. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, let's look at Page 5 of 7 of 13 your draft policy, middle of the page. 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, the draft policy also 15 covers all my firearms policy. It's not just the -- 16 JUDGE TINLEY: I understand. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- the retired. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: But this is just under the 19 paragraph -- beginning paragraph under Retired Peace Officer 20 Proficiency Certification. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Are you with me? 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: I tried to read that and understand 25 what it meant, and it is stilted, in my opinion. First -- 4-23-07 33 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The first paragraph says, "Kerr 2 County Sheriff's Office will allow honorably retired peace 3 officer or federal criminal investigator under article, and 4 honorably retired federal criminal investigators under 5 article" -- well, I left out the federal article; it's 6 actually House -- Federal Bill 218. I can add that back in 7 there. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think it's 218. I have it 10 right here. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: The matching up of your verbs here -- 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just the matching -- 13 JUDGE TINLEY: -- and your nouns and whatnot, if 14 you'll take a look at that. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe I can get you an English 17 teacher in here to help you. (Laughter.) 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You'd be surprised how many 19 people in my department think they're English teachers when it 20 comes to writing policy. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: I see. Okay. Maybe I can use one of 22 them. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. Oh, I'm sure I will 24 hear -- 25 JUDGE TINLEY: It just didn't read smoothly -- 4-23-07 34 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. It just -- 2 JUDGE TINLEY: -- and understandably to me. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This federal bill, H.R. 218, 4 that's the only thing that ought to be -- 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- typed in there under the 7 first criminal investigator under article. And the difference 8 is, a federal officer, FBI agent, you know, and those are not 9 considered peace officers under the definition by the state of 10 Texas, except in a breach of the peace or an immediate, you 11 know, deal to squash crime. They can't just go out and arrest 12 people in the state of Texas. Most of them don't, so that's 13 why have you the two different ones. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How would you know about 15 Number 3 under psychological? Physical, yeah, you can 16 determine, but how would you know under psychological 17 disability? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Under their requirements, they 19 are required to show that; we're not. Every agency that's 20 ever hired officers, okay, has to have a psychological done on 21 every officer you hire, and there has to be proof of that. 22 And if that officer from, you know, New Mexico or wherever 23 wants to qualify for that, he has to show us that proof. We 24 don't have to, you know, go out and get it done. He has to 25 show it. 4-23-07 35 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd move for approval. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 5 of the agenda item. Any question or discussion on the motion? 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the Sheriff's going to 7 consult with an English teacher on that paragraph? 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Absolutely. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. And this is the one other 10 one that I said in there, and I believe you have it in here. 11 Let me find exactly where it states that. Because in the 12 firearms policy, it has -- it does show two years, I believe, 13 and that has been changed to one year. They renew it every 14 year, and not every two years. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: It's going to read "expires on the 16 first anniversary date" rather than the second anniversary 17 date on Page 7 of 7? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any other questions or 20 comments on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify 21 by raising your right hand. 22 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 24 (No response.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll go to 4-23-07 36 1 Item 6. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And first, real quick, before 3 you get totally off that, it doesn't say that the Court sets 4 that fee, okay? And the official fee, I will ask that it be 5 set during regular Sheriff's Office fees in the budget, okay? 6 But I don't hear any negatives of setting a fee of about $25 7 for that type of cost? 8 JUDGE TINLEY: That's your approximate cost? 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Long as it doesn't cost us 10 anything, that's fine. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Good enough. Thank you. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll then go to Item 6; consider, 13 discuss, and take appropriate action to approve a contract 14 with the Hunt Volunteer Fire Department and allow County Judge 15 to sign same. Our contract from Hunt Volunteer Fire 16 Department came back. The cover letter which transmitted it 17 noted that the workers compensation coverage portion of it was 18 deleted, since they do provide their own. Secondly, they 19 indicated that they had modified Item 5. I don't see that 20 they've modified it. Did you, Mr. County Attorney? 21 MR. EMERSON: I haven't seen a copy of the return, 22 so I don't know. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay. A thousand pardons. A 24 thousand pardons. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Want the County Attorney to 4-23-07 37 1 review this and come back a little bit later in the meeting 2 and advise us? 3 MR. EMERSON: Thank you. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's leave that one hanging on 5 the hook for a minute and go to Item 7; consider, discuss, and 6 take appropriate action to approve resolution of proclamation 7 designating July 1 through 4, 2007, as "The American Family 8 Reunion." I put this on the agenda at the request of one of 9 my colleagues up in Williamson County. This is patriotism at 10 its finest, it appears, and what it does, it allows us to 11 designate essentially our Independence Day period as American 12 Family Reunion in Kerr County, as other counties have done. 13 The resolution, I will read into the record. It's a 14 resolution of Kerr County Commissioners Court expressing 15 support for declaring July 1 through 4, 2007, as The American 16 Family Reunion in Kerr County, Texas. "Whereas, we, the 17 people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect 18 union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide 19 for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and 20 secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our 21 posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution of the 22 United States of America; and whereas, we, the people, pledge 23 allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to 24 the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, 25 indivisible, with liberty and justice for all; and whereas, 4-23-07 38 1 we, the people, request that the following theme be proclaimed 2 for our nation, The American Family Reunion for the 3 celebration of the 4th of July, 2007. The American Family 4 Reunion, July 1 through 4, 2007, a reunion of present 5 perspectives with past patriotism for future families, 6 celebrating our origins, our heritage, our liberty; and 7 whereas, we, the people, wish to thank the County for your 8 time and consideration of this request and for the 9 proclamation of the same, and for the contributions that you 10 and all of our state public servants make, both personally and 11 professionally, and request that it be further proclaimed that 12 God bless America and all nations who pursue liberty and 13 justice for all; Now, therefore, be it resolved that Kerr 14 County Commissioners Court proclaims July 1 through 4, 2007, 15 as The American Family Reunion; and, therefore, let it be 16 further resolved and proclaimed that all citizens be 17 encouraged to participate in honoring our nation in the spirit 18 of this celebration in perpetuity." Designated to be adopted 19 this 23rd day of April, 2007, and signed by all members of 20 this Court. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I'd move approval of 22 it, with two corrections. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, sir? 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The second "whereas," on the 25 first sentence, United States of America instead of 4-23-07 39 1 "American." 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The same correction in the 4 fourth "whereas," fourth line. God bless "American" instead 5 of "America." 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Thank you, sir. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With those two corrections, 8 I move approval. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 11 of the resolution as indicated. Any question or discussion? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You want to change the 13 spelling, but you definitely want to leave the word "God" in 14 there? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Absolutely. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you. Just wanted 17 to make sure. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All 19 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good deal. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll make those corrections and get 4-23-07 40 1 that circulated. Let's move to Item 8; consider, discuss, and 2 take appropriate action to approve resolution of proclamation 3 designating May 3, 2007, as National Day of Prayer. I put 4 this on the agenda at the request of Fern Lancaster, who, as 5 most of you know, has been the person in charge of the 6 National Day of Prayer ceremony that has occurred here at the 7 courthouse for -- I can't tell you how many years, but several 8 years. There's a ceremony out in front at which various 9 proclamations are read, all the way from the national level 10 down to the local level, with various persons participating. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 14 approval. I did not read this resolution into the record. 15 The request by Reverend Lancaster was that this actually be 16 executed and proclaimed at the ceremony to occur on May the 17 3rd of this year. Any other questions or comments? All in 18 favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 19 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 20 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll move 23 to Item 9; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 24 approve bill of sale and assignment of those certain 25 wastewater improvements constructed in Phases II and III of 4-23-07 41 1 the Kerrville South Wastewater Project, as provided in 2 intergovernmental agreement dated July the 12th, 2004, between 3 Kerr County and the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, and 4 authorize the County Judge to sign the same. Commissioner 5 Williams? 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. This is 7 in keeping with our interlocal agreement, where the County, as 8 you may recall, is the lead agency in getting the funding and 9 doing the contracting and constructing the wastewater 10 collection system. This is for Phases II and III. As we did 11 at the conclusion of Phase I, we executed the bill of sale and 12 assignment, and assigned the pipes and laterals, et cetera, in 13 these two -- in these areas, as designated by the metes and 14 bounds and descriptions, to the Upper Guadalupe River 15 Authority. They, in turn, will be the keeper of it from this 16 point forward, maintain, operate it, and so forth and so on. 17 So, I would move approval of the bill of sale and assignment 18 as proposed. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 21 of the agenda item as indicated. Is there any discussion or 22 questions? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just one other comment, 24 Judge. I'll -- I will convey this to them -- if you'll sign 25 it, I'll convey it to them Wednesday when I meet with their 4-23-07 42 1 board to talk about other sewer projects we have in the 2 pipeline. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other questions or 4 comments? All in favor of that motion, signify by raising 5 your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move 10 to -- let's move back to Item 6, if we might. Consider, 11 discuss, and take appropriate action to approve the contract 12 with the Hunt Volunteer Fire Department, and allow the County 13 Judge to sign same. Where are we, Mr. County Attorney? 14 MR. EMERSON: After reviewing the contract, I think 15 you're correct. They indicated an intent to change Item 16 Number 5, but they did not on the actual contract. Based on 17 their accounting procedures that they -- that they have 18 submitted in Item Number 2 in their letter, I don't see a 19 problem changing Item 5 to their requested language, if that's 20 what the Court desires, but either way it's okay. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. The -- 22 MR. EMERSON: It's a system based on reimbursement 23 of expenses with proof of documentation. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: The existing language is actually 25 less restrictive than what they were proposing, in my mind. 4-23-07 43 1 MR. EMERSON: Correct. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll move we approve the 4 contract -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- with Hunt Volunteer Fire 7 Department and authorize the Judge to sign. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: That was a second, Commissioner 9 Baldwin? 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second. All 12 in favor -- any question or comment -- further question or 13 comments on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify 14 by raising your right hand. 15 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move 19 to Item 10; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 20 approve an interlocal agreement with Bexar County to 21 participate in the Bexar County Regional Public Defender's 22 Office and authorize the County Judge to sign same. I was 23 presented with some information concerning what -- what is 24 essentially a pilot program. By way of background, 25 occasionally when indigent defendants are tried in our local 4-23-07 44 1 criminal courts, they have the right to have those cases 2 appealed, and in doing so, appeal counsel must be provided for 3 them, as well as the record to go up on appeal and so forth. 4 The normal course of events is that, occasionally, trial 5 counsel is appointed. More often than not, there is a 6 separate counsel appointed by the Court in which the defendant 7 was convicted to handle the appeal, and those appeals are at 8 the cost of Kerr County, just as the cost of the trial 9 representation of the defendant. 10 The project that's being developed in the Bexar 11 County Appellate Public Defender's Office, it's an initial 12 18-month period that they're going to try and ramp this thing 13 up. If we will participate in the program, the appeals are 14 absorbed -- the cost of those appeals are absorbed, and -- and 15 other than providing the record, which we have to do anyway, 16 and the cost of transmitting that record down to Bexar County 17 for the appeal in the Fourth Court of Appeals, we have no 18 further cost in it, so it would save us some money for 19 attorney's fees that would otherwise have to be paid to 20 attorneys handling appeals for indigent cases. I think 21 there's some other up sides to it also. You've got a -- it's 22 probably a more efficient manner for handling appeals, because 23 you've got experienced appellate attorneys that that's all 24 that they're doing, is handling appeals. Some of the research 25 that must be done sometimes by attorneys who do not regularly 4-23-07 45 1 and routinely handle appellate work, sometimes there's more 2 research has to be done by those folks, rather than the 3 experienced appellate people, so that's a cost savings, as I 4 see it. Plus they've got considerable experience in handling 5 appeals. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: I think it's a great program. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. When I read the, I 9 guess, pack that I was sent on this, only question I had is 10 who -- what county is responsible for maintaining the records? 11 It's still going to be Kerr County, I would think, maintaining 12 all of the court records up through the District Clerk's 13 Office, and how -- I didn't see anything in the documentation 14 that was sent to me about how you -- how that's done. Does it 15 just happen? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: When an appeal is perfected, there's 17 a designation of what needs to be included in the appellate 18 record. You got two different -- two different records. One 19 is a statement of facts, which is a verbatim transcript of 20 the -- of the testimony proceedings, much as we have here in 21 this -- in this court. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: And then you have what they call the 24 transcript, which is the -- the various file documents; the 25 indictment, the various motions that are filed, the charge to 4-23-07 46 1 the jury, all of those various written documents. And 2 sometimes the entire record of documents is necessary. 3 Sometimes the entire record is not necessary. It depends on 4 what the issues are on appeal. But the -- the transcript and 5 the statement of facts for an indigent defendant would 6 continue to be the cost of Kerr County, as it is now. Once 7 that record is transmitted, under this interlocal agreement, 8 after the appeal is considered, that record would come back to 9 Kerr County at the cost of the Appellate Public Defender's 10 office. But the permanent records are maintained here, yes. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- but -- so, it's no 12 additional work for this District Clerk, based on -- they're 13 going to put the same file together they currently put 14 together, and then Bexar County will maintain that file until 15 it's through the appellate process, and then send the whole 16 file back and it goes back into our system? 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just didn't understand how 19 that part of it worked. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the pilot program just 21 simply is trying to get -- to see if a regional type public 22 defender's office would work. But, better than what's going 23 on now. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: It would be a better system, and more 25 efficient. 4-23-07 47 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: And -- 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: At the cost of the state. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I'm not sure where their 5 funding is coming from. I suspect initially it's a grant 6 funding program. But I think there are some efficiencies to 7 be gained, primarily because of the proficiency of -- of 8 attorneys who handle only appellate matters. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: And -- and sometimes, frankly, issues 11 are appealed that maybe shouldn't be appealed. Where you have 12 maybe two decent issues, they take up 10 points of error, and 13 it's more of a shotgun approach. That's just a personal 14 opinion, though. Mr. Emerson, did you have some comments? 15 MR. EMERSON: Couple of quick comments, Judge. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 17 MR. EMERSON: I went upstairs and talked to the two 18 District Judges, and Judge Prohl said that in his district, 19 they have done exactly the same thing, except they have jumped 20 on a pool out of Midland/Odessa. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 22 MR. EMERSON: For west Texas. And he said they 23 don't have that many appeals, but they were excited about it. 24 And Judge Ables was not available, but he did say Judge Ables 25 was aware of this program, was behind this program and thought 4-23-07 48 1 it would be very cost-efficient. Now, there's a couple of 2 minor issues. I would point out, under Paragraph 1.04, that 3 if their funding under the existing program expires, the 4 County is obligated to fund for an additional period of at 5 least one year beyond on a prorated basis, based on Kerr 6 County's cost. And under Paragraph 1.07, currently, the way 7 the system is set up, is your judges act as kind of a check 8 and balance on approval of additional expenses. If an 9 attorney gets appointed to do an appeal, and they want to 10 spend $10,000 on an investigator, they have to get preapproval 11 to do that. 1.07 pretty well implies just an open checkbook, 12 and then the County will reimburse the investigating agency, 13 so I don't think it would hurt on that particular paragraph to 14 put some kind of qualifying language limiting the County's 15 obligation. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: As a practical matter, on an 17 appeal -- in appeal situations, generally, the time for 18 investigators has long since gone. I mean, that -- you do 19 that prior to trying the case at the trial level, normally. 20 MR. EMERSON: Unless Mr. Jones pops up and says, you 21 know, "I had all this evidence, and my attorney just wouldn't 22 look into it." 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm, yeah. Newly discovered 24 evidence doctrine. 25 MR. EMERSON: Correct. 4-23-07 49 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you're saying that -- 2 that when the program reaches its -- not its end, but is it -- 3 is it, like, a three-year program? Is that what you just 4 said? 5 MR. EMERSON: I think 18 months. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 18 months. 18 months. And 7 then the counties will continue at least one year? 8 MR. EMERSON: That's -- under 1.04, it says the 9 participant shall make a good-faith effort to continue 10 spending existing funds budgeted for indigent defense through 11 the program on a prorated basis for a period of at least one 12 year beyond the task force funding in order to give the full 13 effect to the program. So, if their funding expires, we're 14 still in for another year afterwards to finish up the appeals 15 that they have in process, and that's -- I mean, that's not 16 unusual. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that -- 18 MR. EMERSON: 'Cause if you had a private attorney, 19 you're still going to follow it all the way through. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We still have the cost 21 regardless. 22 MR. EMERSON: Yes. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those expenses wouldn't -- it 24 wouldn't anticipate there would be any more than we'd have to 25 pay anyway? 4-23-07 50 1 MR. EMERSON: I wouldn't think so. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Be the same basic dollars. On 3 1.07, is that a -- I guess, what is the likelihood -- the 4 chance of charges of additional investigations and things of 5 that nature? I mean -- 6 MR. EMERSON: I don't -- this program is being put 7 together out of Bexar County. I don't have a clue what Bexar 8 County's local rules are. Kerr County's local rules are, the 9 judges basically preapprove expenses within a limit. If an 10 attorney approaches them and says, "I need additional 11 investigating expense," the judge will say, "Okay, I'll 12 authorize you on this particular case up to some -- 'X' amount 13 of dollars." I don't know that there's any check and balance 14 in Bexar County. I don't have that knowledge. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's the last sentence, I 16 think, that kind of gets my attention, along with Commissioner 17 Letz. "Costs of investigators, translators, or any other 18 collateral cost must be absorbed by PARTICIPANT." And that's 19 highlighted in capital letters, meaning that if we -- if we're 20 the participant, and that case goes from Kerr County to Bexar 21 County, those costs go with it and they're ours to bear. Is 22 that how you would read that? 23 MR. EMERSON: Well, what that situation would be, 24 this firm is out of Bexar County, and the Kerr County 25 appellate case ends up in Bexar County in this firm's lap, and 4-23-07 51 1 they decide that they need translators or investigators or 2 whatever additional expense they need. What they're saying 3 is, we will do our job to the best of our ability, but you're 4 going to pay the bill. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I said. 6 MR. EMERSON: Yeah, it's our cost to bear. But 7 there's -- you know, like I said, my concern is there's no 8 check and balance like there is here. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: That would be our cost anyway, but 11 our -- our procedure here locally on appeals of that nature 12 is, it's looked at in advance, and ceilings are put on it by 13 the local judges. 14 MR. EMERSON: Correct. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: My question is, if Judge Prohl 16 is participating in the West Texas for this very same purpose, 17 why would we need to do it in Bexar County as well? 18 MR. EMERSON: Judge Prohl's participating on the 19 other four counties in his district with the west. My 20 understanding is Kerr -- Kerr County's under the Fourth 21 Judicial Administration Region, and that whole group of 22 counties is trying to put together this appeal. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, but three of Judge 24 Prohl's counties are involved in this list of counties. 25 MR. EMERSON: Correct. 4-23-07 52 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Medina -- Mason, Menard, and 2 Kimble. 3 MR. EMERSON: Right. But those -- those counties 4 have -- historically, have always hooked up with San Angelo 5 and counties west on their agreements. That's all I can tell 6 you. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, we probably wouldn't be 8 allowed to participate in the West Texas, being as that we're 9 involved with the region of Bexar County. 10 MR. EMERSON: It probably would not be as efficient 11 to hook up with West Texas. It's much easier for somebody 12 from Bexar to drive up here and do something if they need to 13 take care of it than to drive here from Midland. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: And to process and argue an appeal at 16 the Fourth Court in San Antonio. 17 MR. EMERSON: Correct. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How would you -- on 1.07, what 19 language would you recommend inserting or requesting be 20 inserted -- we can't unilaterally do it -- to give a little 21 bit more protection to Kerr County taxpayers? 22 MR. EMERSON: I couldn't give you exact language at 23 this point. I think somebody needs to talk to Judge Ables, 24 which is one reason I was trying to get to him and find out 25 what the Bexar County procedures are. 4-23-07 53 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Best thing to do at this point is 2 just kind of pass it and bring it back, and let Rex work those 3 issues, I would think. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Looks like it's a good 5 program. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I like the idea. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A lot. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else on that one, 11 gentlemen? Let's move forward. Consider, discuss, and take 12 appropriate action to authorize independent or outside audit, 13 in whole or in part, of the affairs, activities, and/or 14 transactions by or with the Kerr County Treasurer's office 15 and/or other offices as applicable or necessary. Commissioner 16 Oehler? 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I put this on the agenda 18 mainly because it seems that a lot of the investigation has -- 19 the investigation has gone about as far as it's going to go 20 without an audit. Evidently, the Comptroller has chosen not 21 to get involved in it up to this point, other than doing what 22 investigation they did, from my understanding. And if they're 23 going to do the whole thing, they're going to have to find 24 some state funds missing. That's my understanding. I could 25 be wrong about it, but that's what I've been told. And so I 4-23-07 54 1 feel like that, in order for Kerr County to get -- get back to 2 a zero starting place in the Treasurer's office, we need to 3 have an audit done, to investigate that and see whether 4 anything is missing or not. And I really don't care how it 5 comes out. I just think it's time that -- I get asked this 6 question all the time, almost every day, everywhere I go. 7 They say, "What's happened to doing an audit to investigate 8 the Treasurer's office?" And I think any other offices that 9 may be needed to be looked at to determine where we are with 10 our finances in Kerr County. And Tommy Tomlinson talked to me 11 a while ago and said that -- he now says that the 12 Comptroller's going to come in and do some kind of an audit in 13 the next month or two, but I was just told that prior to this 14 meeting, and that information had not come before. So, that's 15 kind of where I am with it. I don't know what your -- what 16 the rest of y'all's feelings is on it, but I do think it's 17 important that we -- that we go forward and go out and get 18 some proposals from qualified people, whether they be local 19 and qualified and experienced, or whether they be in large 20 firms that would make a proposal of what it would cost to do 21 this, and at that time make a decision on who we would like to 22 have do it. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, I -- I think 24 we are at the point we need to move forward, and in my mind -- 25 I mean, I didn't know the Comptroller was going to do 4-23-07 55 1 anything. But I think, you know, what we need to get first 2 is -- I'm not sure how we do this, but we need to generate 3 exactly what we want. We can't afford, I don't think, to go 4 to Peat Marwick and say, "We want you to audit this." I mean, 5 we would -- it's like giving a blank check to somebody. We 6 need to give them some specific things that we're looking at, 7 certain accounts we're looking at, or -- you know, and I 8 don't -- I'm not real sure how we develop the list of what we 9 want and then go to the next step as to, what's this going to 10 cost to get this? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We do it through a scope of 12 engagement, and that's a very good point. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We have to identify. 15 Otherwise, we're giving a blank check to somebody. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And if we want to give a 18 blank check to it, then be prepared to put some zeros after 19 that first number, 'cause that's what it's going to take. You 20 have to have a scope of engagement that identifies the 21 department, what you want them to look for, how far back you 22 want them to go and so forth. And are we talking about an 23 ordinary type audit? Are we talking about a forensic audit? 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: For -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I don't -- I don't have the 4-23-07 56 1 knowledge to know what questions to even ask in the scope of 2 engagement. I think -- I mean, I think it's complicated. I 3 don't know -- you know, I think we probably need to -- you 4 know, my preference would be not to go with a local firm, but 5 I wouldn't mind a local firm helping us design the scope of 6 engagement, 'cause I think you almost need an accountant to -- 7 to write something like that. I don't know if y'all are, or 8 the Auditor is, you know, knowledgeable to do that or not. 9 But I think it would be better from a -- a perception 10 standpoint and other standpoint to have a non-local firm do 11 it. But I certainly think we need some expertise figuring out 12 what -- how do we specifically say what we're looking for? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you remember, last meeting 14 the Kerr County Sheriff brought us a report on the issue, and 15 he said that soon he would be back with some recommendations 16 as -- toward the -- toward an audit, and in my mind, I would 17 personally hike to hear that report. That would be step one 18 for me, in order -- and then to start putting together this 19 list of issues and items that we want to take a look at. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, clearly, the Sheriff's 21 probably -- or Sheriff's Office is probably in the best shape 22 to start looking at where to look. They've done a lot of 23 research. I don't know if they're at that point or not. I 24 understand it was presented to the Grand Jury, and I don't 25 know if any action was taken or not. So, Rusty, where are we 4-23-07 57 1 on your investigation? 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. As you know, our 3 investigation was presented to the Grand Jury. It was passed 4 by the Grand Jury; they're wanting a little bit more 5 information on other matters. Whether this County goes 6 through the expense of an audit or not, I think what you're -- 7 number one, from what we've seen -- and we've gone through 8 thousands of records, okay? I cannot release what that is, 9 one, because it is still before a Grand Jury, and two, because 10 it's an ongoing investigation till after the Grand Jury 11 decides. Our investigation was totally turned over to the 12 A.G.'s office. They've been running with it, presenting it. 13 I do not see -- from what we've been able to uncover through 14 all of our investigation, at this point, I do not see any 15 additional criminal type charges that would be, because there 16 are some things under the law, and they're under 17 misapplication of funds by fiduciary or under theft or 18 anything like that, that would go to whether or not it was 19 reckless, negligent, or just mistakes. So, it would depend on 20 what the goal is of the County -- of y'all. 21 Now -- one. Now, to recover some late fees, things 22 like that, that are not criminal in nature, that could be done 23 either by civil suit or whatever procedure y'all want. There 24 are some deficiencies that I think we uncovered. I think 25 Tommy would agree with this, 'cause we've had some -- some 4-23-07 58 1 conversations about it. Where -- the main part that I see, or 2 where the County was deficient in some areas, is if one 3 department turns in funds, we collect fees, like I do over 4 civil process or I do over -- you know, whatever fees I 5 collect. We had got to the point where we had, like, a civil 6 account, checking account, and we actually wrote a check to 7 the Treasurer's office to cover that, so we'd have a permanent 8 record of that check and everything. Other departments have 9 collected cash in the past, and then you take that cash, and 10 they would take it down to the Treasurer's office and get the 11 Treasurer to sign a receipt for it, perhaps. Perhaps not. 12 When they were required. And that's Kerr County local 13 requirements, okay? And turn that money over to the 14 Treasurer. 15 Well, then you have turned -- a lot of them turned 16 the receipt and the money in to the Treasurer. They may have 17 kept a copy of the receipt for themselves, but who's ever to 18 ask, you know, "What did you do?" The copy of that receipt 19 never went directly to the Auditor of the county, unless the 20 Treasurer gave the Auditor a copy, so you could have 21 situations there where you had cash; the receipt was kept by 22 the Auditor. You -- I mean by the Treasurer, cash kept by the 23 Treasurer. And I'm not naming this Treasurer. I think we've 24 uncovered everything -- or -- or any former treasurer. I just 25 see a weakness, and I explained it to the County's audit firm 4-23-07 59 1 that comes in and does a yearly audit to where, if you had an 2 unscrupulous person down there, they could destroy the 3 receipt, keep the cash, and who would ever know whether that 4 money was ever deposited with the Treasurer's office? That's 5 where you have the checks and balance. Okay? 6 Now, I think the new computer system has ways of 7 keeping up with it. I think the County needs to enact 8 policies that, like, if my department turns money over to the 9 Treasurer, also return a receipt of that to them, but also to 10 the County Auditor, so that they know what to look for. They 11 know to look for a deposit of this amount going in somewhere. 12 And that's where we didn't have a good checks and balance. 13 Other than that, I think you're dealing with a lot of late 14 fees and that, and I'm not going to get into whether or not 15 there should be an audit. Now, Tommy explained to me this 16 morning, too, that the Comptroller has notified the County 17 that they're going to be coming in and doing just one of their 18 normal audits that they audit each agency around. It's just a 19 -- you know, every so many years, they come in and audit and 20 make sure everything is taken care of. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff, the point you make 22 with respect to the check and balance of the routine 23 acceptance and receipt of moneys, regardless of the source, 24 is -- is typically something that our normal outside auditor 25 should have focused on and corrected by reason of his letter 4-23-07 60 1 back to the Court at the conclusion of his engagement. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That is true. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's not new stuff. 4 That's not new territory. 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It isn't necessarily new, but 6 my problem is, without that double-check and balance, how 7 would our outside auditor even know to look? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It needs to be corrected; I 9 agree with you. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's why it needs to be 11 corrected. Nobody would even know to look at that, okay? 12 That's where the policy needs to be corrected, is -- is my 13 opinion. You know, will an outside audit actually even show 14 all of that, of any kind? I don't know. Because if the -- if 15 the department head -- and the County does collect money from 16 Probation, from my office, D.A., you know, everywhere, all 17 right? If they didn't keep a copy and they don't remember, 18 two years ago, how much money they gave that Treasurer, how 19 are you ever going to find it? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're making a point, and 21 I'm going to follow up on it. You're making a really good 22 point, and it is something that this Court needs to do. When 23 we engage the external auditor, we need to examine one more 24 time -- I don't think we've examined -- we haven't examined it 25 in the eight years I've sat on this Court. We need to examine 4-23-07 61 1 the scope of that -- of that engagement. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's -- 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And I think we're going to 4 probably do that this time, because we are going to change 5 auditors. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right, I agree. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At least we're going to put 8 out RFQ's for an audit, and that's the appropriate time to 9 examine the scope of that engagement. If we want to expand 10 it, that's the time to expand it. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I agree; you're probably 12 right there. Now, like I said, our investigation, I saw, does 13 not show where we may have had hundreds of thousands of 14 dollars missing in this county by embezzlement or anything. I 15 can't show any of that. I can't show anything like that, 16 okay? And I think my investigators and number of subpoenas 17 and all that we did was a very thorough investigation. I 18 can't open that investigation up to the public and let them 19 see what all we went through just because of Open Records, but 20 there are a lot of little things in there that I think it 21 would be wise for the County to look at, either through the 22 normal auditing procedure -- if you hire, you know, somebody 23 to come in, I think they can give you points. I'm not going 24 to recommend one way or another what y'all do, 'cause I have 25 no idea what it would cost either. 4-23-07 62 1 And I don't know if filing on the bond for late 2 fees -- you know, I know that there was one thing that Judge 3 Tinley got involved in and we got involved in where we're 4 trying to change some stuff through state Legislature and 5 other counties deal, such as there is now a law that says if 6 my department collects fees, I'm required to turn those fees 7 over to the County Treasurer within the same business day. 8 Failing that, within seven business days, okay? And failing 9 that, at least once a month, if the Court has given 10 permission. But there is nothing in that law that ever 11 required a time limit on, from when the Treasurer got the 12 money, for them to actually put it in the deposit. And when 13 you're talking millions of dollars, you're talking a lot of 14 lost money in interest if they waited six months to deposit 15 that money. So, yes, I think there's a lot of those type of 16 things that need to be looked at. I know the Legislature is 17 looking at changing that, putting the same statutory 18 requirements on treasurers across the state for doing that in 19 smaller counties. And there's just -- there's a whole gamut 20 of different things that -- that should be looked at. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, after some point, 22 presumably the Grand Jury will be finished with their -- and 23 do what they're going to do or not do. At that point, will 24 you be able to come to us and give us some more specific areas 25 that we may want to look at? You mentioned late fees several 4-23-07 63 1 times. An area that we can look at, as I think we also looked 2 at -- there's some issues that probably need to be looked at 3 that we have a concern about. 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I will mention -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Things of that nature, so we can 6 narrow the scope to certain areas where we believe that there 7 may be some problems, as opposed to just a shotgun approach. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I will be more than happy at 9 any time to sit down and point out some areas that my 10 investigators or us have found that I think are some weak 11 points, and in procedural and in how things are done. I don't 12 have a problem doing that anytime with anybody. I already, 13 you know, got a call from our current audit firm, and we've 14 talked for over an hour on the phone about some of those. 15 That I can do at any time. I cannot get into anything in the 16 criminal investigation. One, at this point, because it's not 17 concluded, 'cause the Grand Jury hasn't concluded it. Two is, 18 if that investigation is no-billed, I believe Rex will say 19 that in a criminal investigation that does not go anywhere, 20 it's also not public record by law. I cannot release it -- 21 it's not whether I want to or not -- on the criminal 22 allegations or the criminal investigation part. But as far as 23 policy and where we see weak points and where we see things 24 that may be able -- I think that should happen, and I would -- 25 I would definitely avail myself and our investigators at any 4-23-07 64 1 time to point that out. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This all sounds real good, 3 and -- I mean, it sounds like, you know, that it's going to be 4 good for the future, but what about what's past? What about 5 what's gone on in the past? If we don't examine it now and 6 find out what has happened or not happened, it's not ever 7 going to happen, the way we're talking now. Yes, we can 8 change policy in the future. We're talking about an 9 investigation that is still ongoing, and -- and time and time 10 again, the general public is saying they want to know where we 11 stand on past issues. We can fix the problems for the future 12 with future auditors, but there's nobody that's going to come 13 in and find out, without us asking and approving something to 14 be done for an audit, of what's past. And that's what I want 15 to know, and I think that's what a lot of the citizenry wants 16 to know, is what's past? Where are we? 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And, Bruce, I have no -- I do 18 not disagree with you one bit, okay? I totally agree with 19 what you're saying. I'm just saying that we've looked at 20 almost two years, okay? And I don't find where we're going 21 to -- if the goal is to find more criminal charges, I don't -- 22 I'm just letting you know up front, from what we've looked at, 23 and we've looked at about two years, I don't see any of that 24 coming up. Now, maybe something could come up that -- that we 25 haven't -- I'm not an auditor, and I'm, you know, not an 4-23-07 65 1 attorney, but I've done as thorough of an investigation as I 2 think can be done on the criminal side. It's not my place to 3 do a civil investigation. I won't get into that. That's 4 something an auditor, an outside law firm, whatever, would 5 want to do. And if that's the stance that this Court takes, 6 then, you know, I'm just letting you know where we are and 7 what I've seen in this investigation and where it could go. 8 It could end up being public. It could -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, I don't -- in my mind, 10 the goal is not to see if there's additional criminal charges. 11 The goal is to see what -- what -- I guess what the status is 12 of that department at a snapshot in time, which is -- 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And that's exactly where you 14 take my agency out of this -- this whole deal. My agency is, 15 you know, to investigate criminal charges, to investigate any 16 criminal acts, all right? And that's what we've done. Now, I 17 cannot go into, and wouldn't know how to go into a lot of the 18 civil stuff, and that's not my place. And that's where the 19 Commissioners Court needs to make their decision on what y'all 20 want to do. I can only speak to -- to us doing criminal 21 investigations. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: See, 'cause I don't -- I don't 23 see how we can find what needs to be fixed unless you look at 24 what happened. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I think you have a very 4-23-07 66 1 good point there. And that is -- okay, all I can tell you is 2 what I've seen, what happened, and the recommendations I would 3 make. But I haven't gone into a lot of the other civil 4 accounting stuff. That's not my job. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you can -- at this point, 6 you can give us at least a -- directionally, these are areas 7 that you said -- 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That we can -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- to look at. And that's what 10 I think we need to probably get with an accounting firm to 11 look at. You know, what other areas should we look at -- 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I can give you a lot of those 13 areas. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- from a policy standpoint? 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And a lot of things have come 16 up, you know, that could be a cost to this county, all right? 17 Such as, you know, when is it that a former employee gets 18 dropped from the insurance program; County's not paying 19 insurance, okay, any more? Is that a criminal violation, that 20 that employee stayed on there a month? A year? Not 21 necessarily. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's neglect. It's neglect. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's neglect, okay. And in the 24 criminal law, there's a big difference between reckless and 25 neglect, and that's where I'm out of it. And that's why I 4-23-07 67 1 said a lot of those, yes, there could be a lot of things that 2 this county needs to do, and I think should do, and I'm not 3 the one to recommend those type of changes. I'll be happy to 4 sit down, point out what we've seen to anybody, but I can't 5 recommend changing -- that would go to accountability and 6 civil stuff. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Two questions, Sheriff. In your 8 investigation or any investigation the Attorney General's 9 office may have done, to your knowledge, was any assistance 10 requested or obtained from the Public Integrity Unit of the 11 Department of Public Safety? 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I can't answer that question, 13 okay? I know when it was first brought up, the Rangers were 14 asked to assist in the investigation, and there was a -- they 15 declined. And that's where it ended, okay. And so, you know, 16 once the Rangers -- and that, to me, is D.P.S. on this type of 17 investigation. Once they declined on that, and then when the 18 Attorney General's office got it, as far as doing an audit and 19 that, we had to be able to show that there were missing state 20 funds. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: So, you don't know whether the Public 22 Integrity Unit was ever even consulted about it? 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It was not consulted by my 24 office. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 4-23-07 68 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The Rangers were. I do not 2 know, when we gave a lot of it over to the District Attorney, 3 who all at Austin that he consulted with. I know he did with 4 the A.G., and then the investigation was turned over to the 5 Attorney General's office, and they came down and met with us 6 and went over everything before it ever went to Grand Jury. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Second question. You had 8 indicated that you had, as a result of your investigation, 9 come up with a number of concerns about procedures and 10 methodology that had been used heretofore, and had a lengthy 11 conversation with the outside auditor about that? 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Did you also have those same 14 conversations with the County Auditor, the inside auditor? 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, I did. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It seems to me that one way 18 that we could maybe get some advice, this county has a wealth 19 of retired people that have a lot of credentials; they have a 20 lot of experience, and if maybe we could ask for those -- 21 somebody like that to come in and kind of visit with us and 22 visit with the Sheriff about some areas that he feels like 23 need to be looked at, would that not be information enough 24 to -- to go and get somebody to do those and do an audit on 25 those suspect areas? 4-23-07 69 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, I agree with you. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't believe that we need 3 to do possibly a total county-wide forensic audit. I think 4 that the -- the intent of this is kind of what I have stated 5 on this agenda item. It's the Treasurer's office and other 6 offices that could be linked as being necessary or applicable. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only difference I have 8 there is -- is, yes, it's Treasurer's office, and when you 9 talk other, it's every other office in this county -- 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- that sends money to that 12 Treasurer's office, one form or another. Some use checks, 13 some use cash, some use whatever. But you are looking at 14 every department, which needs to be -- and a lot of people -- 15 you know, I found -- we discovered where one agency or one 16 department did not realize that you had one day, seven days, 17 and at the very most, 30 days to get money down to the 18 Treasurer. They weren't -- they didn't know about that 19 section of the Government Code, so that's been corrected. 20 They were advised about it. But when one department holds 21 money for, you know, 60, 90, 120 days, that's in violation of 22 the Government Code. So -- but it wasn't because they were 23 intending to deprive our civil money. It may have just been a 24 very small amount; they just let it build up until it got to 25 the point they ought to deposit it. 4-23-07 70 1 So, there's an educational stream, and there needs 2 to be some internal stuff that needs to be done, okay, to do 3 that. And the only thing I would ask is, at this point, 4 before I become very involved, I would like to get to a 5 point -- and we were hoping it wouldn't have got passed, but 6 they did -- to let us get our case done. Let us get it 7 through the Grand Jury. I'm not doing, you know, a lot more 8 investigation. Those weren't the questions they asked. But 9 I'd like to get some kind of ruling from the Grand Jury one 10 way or another before I get real involved in doing other 11 things, and which could be in a month. I mean, they could 12 very well take it back -- 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, the thing -- I guess my 14 biggest concern is that -- that the meeting -- I think it was 15 either -- I think it was two meetings ago, whenever this came 16 up the first time, was that, you know, I think I asked you a 17 direct question of whether or not you would give us ample time 18 prior to concluding your investigation to authorize an audit, 19 if one was deemed necessary, and at that time you indicated 20 that that was the case, that you would. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, then next thing we know, 23 it goes to the Grand Jury. And if the Grand Jury is going to 24 -- you know, they could possibly be meeting on this issue in 25 another three weeks again. And, you know, I just -- I just 4-23-07 71 1 want to be sure that they have as much information as they 2 could possibly have before this investigation is closed. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It would have to be reopened 5 again, and there are things that can happen. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There are. And let me -- 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But that I don't think are 8 right. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Let me explain the way this 10 works. We had some points that we had to look at, that we 11 started our investigation. We went through; we found some 12 even other points that -- you know, some of this stuff going 13 to Grand Jury is not what the original investigation even 14 showed, okay? And we -- and we've done that. And the last 15 time I was before the Court, I gave you that, you know, the 16 District Attorney had called the A.G.; A.G. had called and 17 said what Grand Jury they wanted to go to, and we advised you 18 of that. I can't release, I can't do anything else until 19 after that Grand Jury is over. That Grand Jury decided to 20 pass it, wanted a little bit more information. We're in the 21 process of doing that. It will go back to them probably the 22 next Grand Jury. I don't know. I don't -- I don't control 23 which Grand Jury it goes to. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I tried to keep y'all 4-23-07 72 1 informed. Now, what I'm saying is, I don't personally see 2 more criminal stuff coming, okay? If this county were to do a 3 -- a forensic type -- or an audit, and you end up showing 4 things, and I think what the law actually says is, as far as 5 negligence, reckless, that plays a big role in this 6 misapplication, theft, you have to really look at a lot of 7 that and understand, and that's what attorneys do better, 8 okay? And defenses to prosecution, you have to look at. If, 9 in the future, okay, you have, you know, a long statute of 10 limitations, and if this County -- if y'all decided to do an 11 audit besides the different outside entity, and they were to 12 show something else that could possibly be criminal, I mean, 13 all you're talking about, Bruce, is not an investigation that 14 stopped and started and reopened. You're talking about a 15 different issue totally at that point, okay? Which is a new 16 investigation, and should be a new investigation. And it 17 would go -- we'd work with that auditor. It's not whether we 18 would reopen something that's already been looked at. If 19 there's a new point, it's a new investigation. 20 You know, if Mini-Mart gets broken into, that's one 21 investigation. If they get broken into tomorrow, that's 22 another investigation. It's a different deal, whole different 23 set of scenarios and evidence, and that's what we would look 24 at. But as far as criminal, I think we've done as -- I'm very 25 proud of what my investigators have done and the extent, the 4-23-07 73 1 time and the subpoenas and the records and the interviews, 2 that there are some issues that I think the County needs to 3 look at. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bruce, are you -- are you 5 suggesting that we tap into the retired community, an Exxon 6 person that's retired here that is an auditor-type person, and 7 tap into them to take a look at this thing? 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what I'm suggesting we 9 do in the beginning. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Get somebody like that to take 12 a look at, you know, some of the -- you know, just kind of a 13 quick overview of where some problems are. And -- 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And maybe see if they're -- 16 you know, what their little short investigation would tell us, 17 and give us some advice on whether we need -- how far we need 18 to go with this, or if we even need to do it. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I think it would be 20 almost foolish for us to spend possibly $100,000, or hundreds 21 of thousands of dollars to correct things like Rusty was 22 talking about, this receipt issue that moves around. That 23 would -- that would be almost foolish to do that. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't disagree with that at 25 all. I don't intend on anything like that, but I do think 4-23-07 74 1 that there are some expert people that live here that have 2 credentials, that have experience. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And we could ask that -- 5 somebody like that to come forward and work with us in the 6 very near future to do a little preliminary investigation of 7 some kind, to give us some ideas of how deep this thing needs 8 to go, or if it even needs to go. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, there's a couple 10 points here. Investigation is one thing. Tapping into that 11 brain trust to help us -- help us device a scope of engagement 12 is something else again. If we're talking about having 13 somebody who has great expertise in audits, certified public 14 accounting and governmental auditing and et cetera, et cetera, 15 et cetera, then come sit with us, take a look at the picture, 16 and help us devise a scope of engagement for an external 17 audit, I would support that. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And that's -- 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we're talking about an 20 outsider, undefined, whoever that might be, with his or her 21 credentials to do an investigation, that's a different ball 22 game. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I agree. I don't think we 24 want them to do any investigation; I think we just want to 25 figure out -- 'cause if we do the investigation, and if it's a 4-23-07 75 1 local person that volunteering, every side's going to think if 2 it's -- it's a -- you know, that person has an agenda, and 3 it's not going to be worth anything. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: "Investigation" was probably a 5 bad choice of words. But -- but, -- 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's -- 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- you know, I do agree with 8 what Commissioner Williams said about the scope of -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- of -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Engagement. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- what needs to be looked at. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I agree with you, because 14 the one thing that I think has to also come out of this, and I 15 think the County has the authority to do this, there has to be 16 a written set -- just like I've been redoing all my policies 17 and procedures for the Sheriff's Office. There has got to be 18 some of set policy and procedures on how every elected 19 official or department head or individual employee in this 20 county handles and deals with and keeps track of county 21 moneys. There needs to be some set policies in that. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're absolutely right, 23 Sheriff. But that doesn't warrant an expenditure outside the 24 scope of the -- of the external audit we already commissioned. 25 That needs to be a part of that external audit, with specific 4-23-07 76 1 instructions to that audit company what we want. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The expenditure part is totally 3 up to y'all. I'm just saying that there -- that -- and I'm 4 looking at four, okay? It's up to y'all, 'cause I've already 5 finished our criminal part of it, but I'm looking at four, and 6 I think there has to be some good policies, and strong ones, 7 set. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler, I think your 9 term "investigation" may have been misunderstood. What I 10 perceived investigation to be would -- whoever this individual 11 or individuals are with appropriate expertise in trying to 12 give us some guidance as to the extent to which we need to go 13 forward and what we need to look at, obviously, they're going 14 to have to know what the existing procedures are that have 15 been followed to see where strength areas are, weakness areas 16 are, things of that nature, in order to be able to give us 17 that guidance. That's what I perceived it to be. But insofar 18 as actually doing an audit of the records, at this point in 19 time, no. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's internal control, is what 21 we're talking about. And I think they really need to meet 22 with -- probably the Sheriff can give him some ideas in 23 general terms. I think the H.R. -- Eva, I think, has looked 24 at a lot of these areas; she can give them an area, and I 25 think the Auditor. I think those three individuals can give 4-23-07 77 1 someone a lot of information as to -- well, those three kind 2 of know what our system is right now. And then that can be 3 given to somebody, and they can say, "Okay, based on that, you 4 probably need to look here, 'cause you have a real problem in 5 this area." That's what I would hope we'd be able to find. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That would work for me. I 7 just want to get to the bottom of this. I don't care how we 8 get there. You know, I would like to see it put to bed. And 9 whatever comes out, I could care less; whether it's in the 10 favor of that office or whether it is detrimental, it does not 11 matter. The thing is, I believe the public has the right to 12 know where we are. 13 MR. EMERSON: Just -- I don't think I'm restating 14 anything that y'all haven't already stated, but just to make 15 sure that we all understand each other, there's a fine line 16 between developing your scope for further investigation and 17 going in and investigating, and maybe accidentally messing up 18 the A.G.'s investigation and/or potential prosecution, if 19 that's what happens. So, the County needs to be real careful 20 not to cross through and completely contaminate the process 21 that's already ongoing. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think the first step is 23 to get the word out that we hope some of these, you know, 24 retired people would be willing to work with us, and get them 25 back before the Court and discuss a little bit further. I 4-23-07 78 1 mean, they're the ones with the expertise. But I agree, I 2 think we have -- and they have to be aware there's an 3 investigation, and that's why I think it's imperative that 4 these people talk with probably you, Rex, and Rusty, and maybe 5 the District Attorney's office, and Eva and the Auditor to 6 know kind of where they are. And they may say, okay -- 'cause 7 I think most of them are really looking at what our procedures 8 are for internal control. And then, once they know that, they 9 will then be able to know, okay, based on that, this is where 10 you need to look, because you didn't have a good check system 11 here, didn't have any good controls in place. And then we can 12 make a decision whether or not we're going to go and look at 13 those specific areas or not. But I don't see them looking -- 14 doing any actual investigation. It's more a control issue. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Pearson, you had a question or 16 comment? Wait a minute. Wait a minute, I'm not sure I like 17 you packing about a 2-inch thick item up there. 18 MR. PEARSON: No. When this issue came up many 19 months ago, and when the Sheriff started his investigation, I 20 had some friends in the Comptroller's office that I talked to, 21 and one of their first comments was, number one, if there's 22 state money involved. Number two was that there needed to be 23 some type of an audit to determine if state money was 24 involved. They expected that to be done on a local level. 25 And -- and I understand what Bruce is saying; we have some 4-23-07 79 1 very competent people in this community, but then you go back 2 to the same thing that Commissioner Williams came up with, you 3 know. There's going to be a perception in the community, 4 "Well, is this guy a buddy of Bruce's or is he a buddy of 5 Oehler's -- I mean of Buster's or somebody?" I think you're 6 getting in a can of worms. And I hate to rain on your parade, 7 but I just -- I'm afraid that we've had that problem before in 8 this county. 9 And -- and in getting back to this -- what the 10 Sheriff said about when moneys are supposed to be turned in, 11 Rex caught me in the Law Library one day; we both looked at 12 the Local Government Code. The Local Government Code says 13 funds should be turned in immediately. Immediately. That 14 don't mean tomorrow or yesterday; that means the same day that 15 you receive them. And as far as the accountability by 16 departments, it's a simple daily report by each department 17 head of moneys. Funds in, funds out, a copy given to the 18 County Auditor. And each department could compile their daily 19 report into a weekly report, turn it over to the Auditor, and 20 he would immediately know what funds have been funneled into 21 the Treasurer's office. Doesn't take rocket science to do 22 this. But I don't think that people in the county -- people 23 that I've talked to are not going to be satisfied until 24 there's some type of an outside audit, not a local audit. 25 It's been proven, in my opinion -- and I've read a copy of 4-23-07 80 1 the -- of the county audit. And I'm not an accountant; I have 2 trouble with two and two, but there was no -- if you look at 3 their critique in this thing, there's nothing in there, like 4 you say, to -- to give the County any guidelines. There was 5 no critique, as could I see it. And I think your -- your 6 mention of changing auditors is a good one. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think, just a comment -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's going to happen, sir. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- comment on that, is I agree 10 with Mr. Pearson as far as probably an outside. As y'all all 11 know, when the Rangers, you know, denied assisting in this, 12 that left our agency to do the investigation. And I think 13 y'all all saw my temper one time before when I was getting 14 letters and hit from both sides, one saying, well, I'm a 15 friend of Barbara's, or one saying I'm going to -- you know, 16 out to hang Barbara. And I think an outside agency does bring 17 in -- even though I can promise you, we did as upright and 18 honest investigation, looking at everything that we could. 19 But I think an outside agency may keep that down some within 20 the county itself, 'cause then nobody has anything -- and I 21 don't disagree if this county goes that way. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we're all saying the 23 same thing; all saying that we need someone to give us some 24 expertise on what to look for, and then you hire an outside 25 person to look in those areas. 4-23-07 81 1 JUDGE TINLEY: I see some members of the media here 2 today, and hopefully the word will go forth, and maybe we'll 3 get some response in from these retired or semi-retired 4 experts that we have among our population to give us a little 5 bit of guidance. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just one footnote, Judge, 7 following up on what Mr. Pearson said. There's an old saying 8 we're all very familiar with that, "Familiarity breeds 9 contempt." And it goes -- that washes wide and fast, and all 10 sorts of directions. More than likely, there's not a local 11 law firm that would want to do this -- or a local accounting 12 firm that would want to do this. If we can -- if we can agree 13 on a scope of engagement, we're probably going to see an 14 accounting firm from another city come in and do that. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I would think so. Mr. Bittner, did 16 you have something you wanted to -- 17 MR. BITTNER: I'd like to make just one quick 18 comment. Now, without a complete audit, how can there be any 19 closure on this? Without the facts. You know, you got to 20 have the facts. And a Grand Jury wasn't satisfied with what 21 was presented to them, and I'm appalled that our Treasurer, 22 our County Attorney, our District Attorneys, our District 23 Judges, Commissioners Court is not demanding clarification, 24 accountability. And the citizens from -- the taxpayers of 25 Kerr County are due accountability of their money. Y'all are 4-23-07 82 1 handling $20 million a year of our money, and we need to 2 follow the money. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jimmy? I can guarantee you 5 that if we was to spend $150,000 of taxpayers' money and we 6 didn't find anything, you would be in here raising hell about 7 that, too. 8 MR. BITTNER: Mr. Baldwin, -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that -- am I wrong? 10 MR. BITTNER: -- $100,000 to a $20 million budget is 11 a cup of coffee. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that. Doesn't 13 have anything to do with it. 14 MR. BITTNER: No, sir, I would not be in here. But 15 if you push it under the table, -- 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nothing's being pushed under 17 the table. 18 MR. BITTNER: -- then I will be here. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I welcome you. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: I think we've beat that one about as 21 much as we can beat it for right now. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: For right now. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: It will be back. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It will be back. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's take about a 15-minute recess. 4-23-07 83 1 (Recess taken from 10:47 a.m. to 11:08 a.m.) 2 - - - - - - - - - - 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if we 4 might. We were in recess. Why don't we go to Section 4 of 5 the agenda. Mr. Auditor? We're here about the bills. 6 MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Are you here? 7 MS. BOLIN: I'm here. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: First item is to pay the bills. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we pay them, so we can 10 discuss them. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right, Jon. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Second? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that motion. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We have a motion and 15 second to pay the bills. Any question or discussion? 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Any discussion. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Page 28. We don't have Maintenance 18 here, do we? I see where we have a -- now that all the air 19 conditioning equipment at the jail has been replaced, 20 piecemeal -- though it hasn't been replaced, has it? 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And it still breaks down. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Keep going out here. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're all about the same age. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All 4-23-07 84 1 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to 6 budget amendments. Budge Amendment Request Number 1. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Number 1 is for 8 Nondepartmental, to transfer $7,984 from Workers Comp to 9 Unemployment line item for -- this is to pay TAC for 10 unemployment audit. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For an audit? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, for last year's actual. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 16 approval. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the 17 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment 22 Request Number 2. 23 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 2 is -- is from the Sheriff, 24 to transfer $330 from Dispatchers line item to Employee 25 Medical Exams. 4-23-07 85 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 4 approval. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the 5 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Budget 10 Amendment Request Number 3. 11 MR. TOMLINSON: Three is for the 216th District 12 Court, request to transfer $724.64 from Court-Appointed 13 Attorney line item, $32.85 to Court Transcripts, and $691.79 14 to Court-Appointed Services. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 18 approval. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the 19 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment 24 Request 4. 25 MR. TOMLINSON: Four is for the 198th District 4-23-07 86 1 Court, and this request is to transfer $2,025.43 from 2 Court-appointed attorney service -- Court-Appointed Services, 3 $814.33 to Court-Appointed Attorney line item, and $1,211.10 4 to Civil Court-Appointed Attorney line item. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 8 approval. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the 9 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment 14 Request 5. 15 MR. TOMLINSON: Five is for the County Judge, to 16 transfer $56.87 from Conferences, Dues, and Subscriptions to 17 Out-of-County Mileage line item. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any 21 question or discussion? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, quit going out of county. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: They keep dragging me over to the 24 Legislature, places of that nature. Any other questions or 25 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 4-23-07 87 1 your right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment 6 Request Number 6. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: Six is from the Tax Collector, to 8 transfer $3,142 from Capital Outlay into Software Maintenance. 9 This is for payment of the voter registration maintenance 10 for -- for voter -- to Software Group. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 14 approval. Any question or discussion? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is the one that we didn't 16 approve last time? 17 MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we've been browbeat by the 19 Tax Assessor; we need to pay this one. 20 MR. TOMLINSON: I was too. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: She just sent us about 30 23 newspaper articles about all the -- 24 MS. BOLIN: That kind of explained it. Thank you. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Educational process, right? 4-23-07 88 1 MS. BOLIN: Absolutely. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One more quick -- is the State 4 going to get their system in line at some point? Is it going 5 to be abandoned? 6 MS. BOLIN: We don't know what's going to happen. 7 All we know is this May 12th election is going to fall flat on 8 its face. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 10 MS. BOLIN: But we're not. Kerr County is not. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: After the Tax Assessor talked to me 12 after we passed on it last time, and she explained the problem 13 to me, I -- I suggested to her that when she contacts the 14 State, to let them know that we would be seeking reimbursement 15 for this because their system wasn't capable of handling what 16 it needed to do. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can try. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Worst that would happen is we get a 19 no. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I would -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All 22 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 4-23-07 89 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Any other budget 2 amendments? 3 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Number 7? 5 MR. TOMLINSON: Number 7 is between Nondepartmental 6 and Crime Victims Rights Coordinator, Rosa Lavender. There 7 was a request from her to transfer $285 from -- into her Local 8 Mileage line item to reimburse her for mileage that this grant 9 will not pay. So, I recommend that we take the $285 from the 10 Property Insurance line item from Nondepartmental. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does the grant pay for any 12 mileage? 13 MR. TOMLINSON: I think it pays $100, and she had 14 already used that. But she thought originally that the 15 mileage could come out of another line item, and they 16 disapproved it. I believe that's correct. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 18 MR. TOMLINSON: She's visited with the Judge about 19 it. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 approval. Any question or discussion? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we need to -- we need to 24 actually budget this round for that. 25 MR. TOMLINSON: I think she's taken care of that in 4-23-07 90 1 the next grant application. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Probably as part of -- if it's not 4 permitted under the new one, as part of our in-kind -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: -- contribution. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She can pay for it out of her 8 pocket. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or discussion? 10 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 11 hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we have 16 any late bills? 17 MR. TOMLINSON: No. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with the 19 following reports: Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Justice 20 of the Peace, Precinct 4, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3, 21 and County Clerk, Trust and General Fund. Do I hear a motion 22 that these reports be approved as presented? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval 4-23-07 91 1 as indicated. Any question or discussion? All in favor of 2 the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 3 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 4 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 5 (No response.) 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Okay, we are back 7 to Item 12. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 8 review applications for open position in Environmental Health 9 for an inspector. Does any member of the Court have anything 10 to offer in open or public session before that matter might be 11 considered in executive or closed session? 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I believe we should discuss it 13 in closed session. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It concerns personnel and also 16 salary. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me go ahead, then, and call Item 18 13 also. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action 19 regarding transferring employee from Road and Bridge to 20 Maintenance. Does any member of the Court have anything to 21 offer in open or public session before this matter might be 22 considered in executive or closed session? Apparently not, so 23 at this time, at -- at 11:17, we will go out of public or open 24 session to go into executive session and consider those two 25 items that I just called. 4-23-07 92 1 (The open session was closed at 11:17 a.m., and an executive session was held, the transcript of which 2 is contained in a separate document.) 3 - - - - - - - - - - 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we are back in open or public 5 session. It is 11:42. Does any member of the Court have 6 anything to offer in connection with matters discussed in 7 closed or executive session? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. I'll make a motion that 9 we offer the opening in the Environmental Health inspector to 10 Mr. Roy Shaver at a 17-5, which is $28,807 salary. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I second the motion. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 13 indicated. Any question or discussion on that motion? All in 14 favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 15 (Motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have some -- I have a 20 question, though. He's going to Dallas in June? Or that's 21 when the next school is? 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: He is able to be -- he will 23 come to work as soon as his obligation is over at Schreiner 24 College at the end of the month. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: End of the month. So, do we 4-23-07 93 1 pay all expenses to Dallas, and is there a fee -- 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There is a fee. It's not -- 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hotel room? 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's not a big thing. It' a 5 three-day course. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Meals and travel and -- 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm. And I don't know how 8 much is available in that -- that's something else that 9 I've -- I'll bring that probably on the next agenda just for 10 discussion. 11 MS. HYDE: Mr. Rex said I needed to -- we've got a 12 letter that we need to put on the agenda to address that the 13 next time. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Next meeting, there are some 16 things. 17 MS. HYDE: To answer Mr. Baldwin's question. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't think they have money 19 in their budget. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. I just wanted 22 to make sure. If there wasn't, we need to fix that before he 23 gets going. And then I really like the idea of us rewarding 24 people for education -- obtaining education, a higher level of 25 education. I think that's neat. 4-23-07 94 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we've got it in the -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sheriff's Office. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: -- Sheriff's Office, and to a lesser 4 degree in Road and Bridge. But if there's any special skills 5 that can be achieved through education in any of our 6 courthouse staff functions, we need to recognize those. I 7 agree with that. Any other -- any other action to be offered 8 in connection with any items discussed in open -- or closed or 9 executive session? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, under Item 1.13, I'll make 11 a motion that we transfer Sonny from -- back from Road and 12 Bridge to our Maintenance Department, effective immediately. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 15 indicated. Any question or discussion on that motion? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's a question out 17 there. 18 MS. HYDE: Where do I -- where would I put him back 19 into the -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maintenance. 21 MS. HYDE: -- production? With Tim? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maintenance, yes. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Maintenance, yes. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- well, at our next 25 meeting, we'll also realign the responsibilities for that, and 4-23-07 95 1 let them take over park maintenance. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not sure that's even been taken 3 out. May not have been. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Might not. We need to make sure 5 that Maintenance person is aware that he's responsible for 6 that item. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just so they understand, 8 they got the work that goes with the guy. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or comments on 10 that motion? All in favor of that motion, signify by raising 11 your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Okay. Let's 16 go to Section 5 of the agenda. Do we have any reports from 17 any Commissioners in connection with their liaison or other 18 assignments? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nothing, other than I, once 20 again, would like to say that we need to get our joint 21 dispatch committee together pretty soon. So, Commissioner 22 Letz, if you would be kind enough to just think through that 23 process. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Am I on that committee? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. We're in trouble. 4-23-07 96 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me clarify that for you, if I 2 might. I contacted -- after we amended the committee 3 composition, I contacted the City. Number one, we could not 4 find initially where they had made their appointments. In 5 truth and in fact, they had. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They did? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, in truth and in fact, they had. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Early January. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: And so we have those. And also, they 12 have no objection to Mr. Zachary being added to the committee. 13 The -- the response was, they didn't feel it was even 14 necessary to carry it back before Council; fine with them. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Let her rip. So -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that, too. 18 Well, good. So, we're off and running on the thing. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And their -- their 21 committee's in place? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Their -- their -- they designated 23 Chief Young, -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Chief Holloway. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: -- City Manager, I believe, and I 4-23-07 97 1 believe Chief Holloway. We've got them designated there. 2 They did, in fact, respond to that. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well -- so, I really think 4 that our committee needs to get together one time, just us 5 chickens, and kind of get -- make sure we're all riding the 6 same horse, and then invite them somewhere for an initial 7 meeting pretty quick. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We want to be proactive on 10 this thing. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I agree. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'll set it up. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, that's just been on 16 my mind. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: You got anything for us, Commissioner 18 Williams? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a word, Judge, about 20 the air -- the 25th Anniversary Air Conference sponsored by 21 TexDOT Aviation. In addition to greeting your son in the 22 driveway -- 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Was his conduct good, by all 24 appearances? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Conduct was really good. He 4-23-07 98 1 was there for oil and gas; that means he was going to make 2 money. I was there to see if we could figure out a way so we 3 didn't have to spend so much, so we weren't talking about the 4 same things. But, yes, we did have some interesting topics. 5 And I'll just mention to Commissioner Letz, it's kind of a 6 learning curve we got to get on real quick, because they talk 7 in aviation-speak most of the time, and they take for granted 8 that everybody in the audience knows all the acronyms and what 9 they mean and how they apply, and whatever, whatever, 10 whatever. But we talked about the future and the air taxi 11 market, very light jets and how they serve the market, et 12 cetera, such as ours. And we talked about -- the one that 13 really got my attention was new instrument approaches coming 14 to an airport near you, and we've talked about that at the 15 Airport Board, having to do with the Wide Area Augmentation 16 System versus the existing instrument landing system; the one 17 that's global positioning-driven and the other is 18 whatever-driven, and had an interesting discussion about that. 19 We talked about airport leases and how we can perhaps maximize 20 that, and some considerations in that regard. And, just 21 generally speaking, it was informative, and I was glad to have 22 that opportunity to attend. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: What do you got for us? 4-23-07 99 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- only thing I have is 2 probably going to be dovetailed with what Commissioner 3 Oehler's going to talk about related to the Ag Barn and his, 4 you know, spending part of an afternoon walking around, trying 5 to come up with some plans. I'll turn it over to him. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's good. Leave to it me, 7 huh? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will say, we were going to put 9 it on this agenda today; then we decided we really need to 10 get -- have a little bit more of our ducks in a row as to 11 exactly what the drawing -- because I suspect that it might 12 get a fair amount of -- 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I want you to know, these are 14 some professional drawings. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's a preliminary drawing. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is a brown bag special. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Brown bag special? 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Except it's on a white piece 19 of paper. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rex, do you want a copy of 21 this? 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I didn't see -- I don't see 23 an engineer's seal on this. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Let me tell you something, 25 there's not one. We talked about lots of things when we were 4-23-07 100 1 out there, one of them being building a new, basically, hog 2 barn out there, I think is what we want to call it. But it -- 3 but it would be a multi-use barn, and that's what's this is. 4 This is -- these are estimated prices on buildings that are 5 150 feet wide, 300 feet long, three different plans. And 6 there's quite a difference in money, because some of them have 7 internal columns like our existing indoor arena, and for 8 spectator things, those are not good. For a lot of reasons, 9 they're not good, but it makes it cheaper, 'cause your beam 10 for your truss isn't going to have to be as heavy if you have 11 columns under them, and that's why there's a difference in 12 price. We also -- I mean, this just gives us an idea of what 13 this -- this is -- this is only the metal structure. There's 14 no labor. There's no concrete, and I believe that any new 15 facility that's built out there needs to have a concrete slab. 16 This has many, many more uses if you have concrete, and you 17 can tailor it to do just about anything if you have -- or -- 18 or hard surface in there. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And kind of just a little 20 direction, what we're -- Bruce and I are thinking, we're going 21 to be coming back at the next court to propose building this 22 building. It will be on the -- probably on the east side of 23 the big arena. Leave the existing exhibit hall as-is, but 24 tear off all of the barn portion where the hog pens currently 25 are and all that area back there, tear that off and turn that 4-23-07 101 1 into parking. Rehab the -- where the horse barns are 2 currently housed, rehab -- well, first, take the horse stalls 3 that we feel are needed, that number of them -- we're not sure 4 what that number is yet -- probably move them up to one of 5 those storage areas next to the arena, where they would 6 actually be used a lot more; we could keep more control on 7 them, and then rehab that barn that's never been used for both 8 a combination of storage and 4-H projects, and probably 9 concrete floor there and put sides on it. I mean, make that 10 into a usable barn too. And -- but because of the way that 11 was built, it's not suitable for a big barn. It's got too 12 many supports in it and things, but it certainly is good for a 13 lot of storage. 14 One of the storage uses would be the -- the fair, 15 and others. There's a lot of little storage things out there, 16 and maybe try to clean up that lot a little bit, put about a 17 third of it to half of it in storage, and the other third and 18 half for an area that Roy has been looking for, to use for 19 youth exhibits under the 4-H, for -- basically, so people 20 can -- in the city of Kerrville can have a spot to keep their 21 animals. And he's -- he has -- so that's kind of what we're 22 looking at. And -- you know, and hopefully starting that this 23 year. We have some money budgeted for the rodeo arena this 24 year in the budget; we're probably going to look at bringing 25 that -- transferring those funds to start the rehab this 4-23-07 102 1 summer of the barn where the horse stalls are. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And get rid of the excess 3 horse stalls. Those things are nothing but a liability. 4 We're not getting any rent off of them. One reason we're not 5 is because they're out of sight, out of mind. You can't tell 6 if there's a horse in the thing until you walk down there, go 7 through it, and look and see if there's any horses. People 8 are bringing them in, so they'll get one key, you know, and 9 one key fits all the locks. Their buddies come along behind 10 them with more horse trailers, and they pay for one horse, and 11 they may put five of them in stalls, and we don't catch them, 12 so we get no revenue off of it anyway. If we move some of 13 those up into that outside area on the east side that's closed 14 to the indoor arena, then they can be policed, and they also 15 can be locked down by pulling doors down. If somebody puts a 16 horse in there, you can lock that thing up, and they'll come 17 get their horse. They'll be -- and they'll be willing to pay 18 to get their horse back that way. You can have a secure, 19 policed area that way. The way it is now, that -- that thing 20 is just totally out of sight, basically out of mind. We don't 21 have that much staff out there any more, and that's -- 18,000 22 square feet is how big that building is. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one? 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The outdoor pavilion. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pole barn. 4-23-07 103 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 18,000? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pretty much. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Dirt floor in it? 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. It's 19 by 200. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we're looking at -- at 6 concreting part of that floor, if not all of it, over time. I 7 mean -- I mean, just -- it's a good building; it's just never 8 been used. And it's absolutely just ridiculous not to use the 9 building for something. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What would it cost to 11 concrete the floor? 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, you're looking at 13 probably -- 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: $6 a foot. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- about $105,000, $110,000. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was the Fair 17 Association willing to spend for a new building? 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think $30,000 or $40,000, I 19 think. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why couldn't they 21 participate? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the idea. That's the 23 thought. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's the idea. I mean, 25 that's what we talked about. Both of us have talked about it. 4-23-07 104 1 And the Fair Association needs a permanent storage for all 2 their floats, their -- all the -- whatever they have that they 3 utilize in the fair. They need a 30-by-40 enclosed, but a 4 permanent building. And I hate to see us take up any more 5 space for something like that when we have that kind of space 6 available. We could utilize that 30-by-40, which is not a 7 very big area, a 1,200-foot building, and then put maybe 8 community service stuff in another part of that next to it, 9 and then maybe make more county storage if needed. And all 10 that would be enclosed, and we could get rid of all the 11 containers, the out buildings and all that stuff that is not 12 being -- I mean, the more we do of that, the more disjointed 13 it gets. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I mean, a lot of -- right 15 now, a lot -- all of the pens for the stock show are housed in 16 the arena, some of the side parts of the arena. If we can put 17 those out in this barn, make it a storage building where we 18 need it, that stuff's all usually moved around by equipment, 19 anyway. What's the difference if we move it from the side of 20 the arena with a forklift or move it from the outside storage 21 area with a forklift? 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Most of it's only moved once 23 or twice a year. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would this facility -- this 25 facility would eliminate the pens behind the existing exhibit 4-23-07 105 1 hall? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. Yes. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it would -- and, 5 therefore, it, in effect, replaces them for the stock show 6 people. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, my question really is, 9 is this building going to be sufficient -- large enough -- to 10 meet the needs of that growing stock show? 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I believe so. It's going to 12 actually be larger. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's larger in that area. And 14 also, the idea would be to put the auction rings in this 15 building. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So you keep animals out of the 18 exhibit hall. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that what remains, then, 20 as an exhibit hall would be for people use, limited though it 21 is? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What improvements are we 24 talking about to make to that building; i.e., restrooms, 25 concessions and all that other stuff? 4-23-07 106 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We haven't gone that far. We're 2 -- we're really at the point right now of trying to figure up 3 a footprint, so to speak, and get some preliminary costs on 4 some of these newer structures, new things. And I think it's 5 going to be kind of -- Bruce and I both are kind of pay as you 6 go, maybe with a little -- hopefully get some grants or some 7 other outside funding. And maybe if we need to do a little 8 bit of a short-term tax anticipation note or something like 9 that, but to try to get this thing -- you know, it's not a -- 10 this is not a huge plan. It's not an intent to really do a 11 major overhaul of the exhibit hall, Phase I. Maybe part of 12 it. And I think, really, before I'd want to spend much money 13 on that portion of the building, I really want to see what the 14 Fair Association's plans are and where they're going with some 15 of their plans. Because if -- I mean, and it may be that it's 16 better to use, you know, some county money to get -- to 17 encourage that getting done, as opposed to, you know, going 18 into those old buildings. You got to figure it out. I just 19 think we're not to that point to know really what improvements 20 need to be made. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I participated with that 22 long enough with you for you to know that I -- I believe that 23 we have to improve the agricultural part. I know we need to 24 do that. That's an obligation we need to have. But at the 25 risk of sounding like a broken record, we also need to talk 4-23-07 107 1 about improving and working toward improving the people side 2 of the equation, and take a look at everything that's being 3 missed in this county by virtue of the fact that we don't have 4 adequate facilities to do it. Two things come to mind 5 immediately. The recent one that Commissioner Baldwin shared, 6 the West Texas County Judges and Commissioners Association 7 meeting, he did a yeoman's job in getting that into the Y.O., 8 but we absolutely overran and ran over that, used up that 9 hotel ten times over, more than it -- than it was built and 10 probably can handle. I also had the opportunity to visit with 11 the Master Gardeners at their meeting at the Inn of the Hills. 12 650 Master Gardeners were in Kerr County for that meeting, and 13 they, too, overran the Inn of the Hills. It was great; we 14 managed to accommodate them. We got them in there, took the 15 money, and sent them all home in both cases, but we need to 16 examine very carefully, hopefully with another governing body 17 in this city, how we take care of people and people needs 18 going forward. 19 Sudie Burditt prepares and keeps a running list of 20 lost business. Not business -- she keeps a list of business 21 attracted and business accommodated, but she also keeps a 22 running list of lost business. It would blow your mind if you 23 could see how much and the size of some of the meetings that 24 we have lost. We have the rooms to do it. We've got almost 25 1,800 hotel rooms in this town. If we're not careful, 4-23-07 108 1 somebody else is going to get it, and we're going to be set -- 2 we're going to be wishing that we'd done something about it. 3 Fredericksburg is currently engaging in building hotel rooms 4 just as fast as they can build them over there, which tells 5 you that they're thinking this same thing we should be 6 thinking. I think we need to examine very carefully with the 7 City how we get this done with a public/private consortium, 8 and get it done. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't disagree with anything 10 you're saying, but I think that that -- Bruce and I are 11 looking at trying to fix this facility for this purpose. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I commend you for that. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think -- and I think it's 14 simpler to separate the pieces, rather than trying to do it 15 all at once. And the reason is, the City has no interest in 16 this ag facility. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. You're right. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I mean, the ag facility is 19 going to be a county facility, and that's great. Then, once 20 we get this taken care of, I think then we focus on something 21 else that we can figure out, a joint governmental or private 22 joint, you know, effort. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't disagree with what 24 you're saying, Commissioner, except I think you can do both at 25 the same time. You can put them on two separate tracks. 4-23-07 109 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have a problem with that 2 at all. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I agree with the two separate 4 tracks issue, because there's not really room for both. But, 5 anyway, that's kind of where that is. I think we'll present 6 something more next meeting. And I also mentioned it to Rosa 7 Lavender, that's going to find me a half million dollars right 8 quick to do some of this work, and so she's out doing whatever 9 she does, trying to find some, I hope. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's money out there. 11 U.S.D.A. has money out there for things like this. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's probably enough on that 14 for the time being. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably come back at our next 16 agenda or the one after that with more of a -- of a plan that 17 we can present. And -- 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. I'll draw it off 19 similar to the way I drew this one. (Laughter.) 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Professional style, of course? 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Little bit larger paper, 22 little bit larger plan for those of us -- 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe some color? 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- that don't see as well as 25 we once did. Only other thing, I guess, is Animal Control is 4-23-07 110 1 doing very well. They've -- they're continuing to get animals 2 adopted. And I appreciate your support on the Environmental 3 Health, and I'm so glad we had a really good applicant come in 4 to that job. Be disappointing to me if it doesn't work out, 5 but I think it -- that's a good one. I'll leave it alone at 6 that. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it, gentlemen? We stand 8 adjourned. 9 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:03 p.m.) 10 - - - - - - - - - - 11 12 STATE OF TEXAS | 13 COUNTY OF KERR | 14 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 15 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my 16 capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court 17 of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place 18 heretofore set forth. 19 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 27th day of 20 April, 2007. 21 22 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 23 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 24 Certified Shorthand Reporter 25 4-23-07