1 2 3 4 5 6 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 7 Workshop 8 Monday, March 10, 2008 9 1:30 p.m. 10 Commissioners' Courtroom 11 Kerr County Courthouse 12 Kerrville, Texas 13 14 15 16 17 OSSF and Platting Issues 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 On Monday, March 10, 2008, at 1:30 p.m., a workshop of 2 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: I will convene a workshop which was 7 posted and scheduled for this date and time, Monday, March 8 10th, 2008, at 1:30 p.m., the purpose of the workshop being 9 to participate in a workshop regarding O.S.S.F. and platting 10 issues. Are you going to launch this thing? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll launch it first, and -- 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have -- just kind of an 14 opening statement, that the new rules which were adopted the 15 end of November are available now. They're on our web site 16 -- well, they're supposed to be on the web site. Anyway, 17 there are copies available; Jody has them. There are no 18 changes, just typos and all that stuff worked out, and page 19 alignment and all that type of stuff. With those new rules, 20 5.07 -- you might want to look at that -- fire suppression. 21 5.09 is a lengthy new addition related to lots under -- 22 5 acres and under. A lot of that is related to secondary 23 type issues, but it's not what we're talking about, really, 24 today. 6.035, alternate plat approval process, that was 25 modified, as was -- we also added 6.7, a new provision 3-10-08 wk 3 1 regarding amending plat. An amending plat is only if there 2 is an error. It's not just a minor change; it's an error. 3 But going back to 6.035 and O.S.S.F., the issue 4 that I think has been a problem is 6.035. The Court's intent 5 in the alternate plat process has been to make it as easy as 6 possible for people to make minor changes to a subdivision 7 plat, mostly either real small plats or combining lots. And 8 the idea was to get this -- make this as simple, as painless 9 as possible to try to encourage people to do it, especially 10 on the combining lots, because in every situation, that is a 11 better situation for the County, in our feeling. The problem 12 has come in as to O.S.S.F. -- O.S.S.F. rules, which I believe 13 it's under Chapter 285, Ray? Is that right? 14 MR. GARCIA: Yes. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And their rules require that 16 all plats, as I understand it, need to be reviewed by 17 Environmental Health Department. Well, for Environmental 18 Health Department to review a plat, then the surveying group 19 has to put information on the plat for them to make it 20 worthwhile, such as structures, wells, septic fields and all 21 that. Once they do that, they're basically doing the same 22 work as a preliminary plat, because they're preparing a plat 23 for O.S.S.F. -- O.S.S.F. Department, and then they're having 24 to do a final plat, because we don't want that detailed 25 information on the final plat. So, we pretty much have gone 3-10-08 wk 4 1 full-circle, and what we were trying to make simpler for the 2 public, we've made more -- well, we've eliminated; it's not 3 working. And the real question is if we could, you know, fix 4 that, is kind of the problem in a nutshell. 5 MR. DON VOELKEL: Well, we went over this when I 6 had a -- was combining lots in Falling Water within the last 7 year, I don't know. 8 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Six or seven months ago. 9 MR. DON VOELKEL: And at that time, Miguel was the 10 -- the head of that O.S.S.F., and he gave me a feedback 11 saying he didn't -- wouldn't approve the plat because I 12 didn't have a contour map, drainage map and all these things. 13 And I asked him, I said, "Well, you show me in the law where 14 it is." And he referenced TAC 30, and that's the law. I 15 looked at the law, and I did a little research, and I think I 16 gave all my findings to Rex at that meeting. That's what 17 y'all requested, Rex to look at it. And it specifically said 18 a person who is subdividing property and developing property. 19 Well, the property I was working on, Falling Water, had 20 already been developed and already been subdivided, and we 21 were not subdividing. I looked in Black's law dictionary. 22 We weren't subdividing a piece of property. We were taking a 23 lot line out, and the same guy owned both lots. Combining 24 them did not fit under that guideline. 25 And I have a letter that Rex wrote to the 3-10-08 wk 5 1 Commission saying that when you're combining lots, you're not 2 subdividing. You're not -- that's when those laws did not 3 kick in. And I -- that's what I found, and at the meeting I 4 explained that to y'all, and y'all said, "Rex, would you -- 5 would you investigate it?" That's what we found at that 6 time. And have I that letter at my office. I know you 7 probably remember going at that time, looking through that. 8 And that's what we found at that time. So, that -- it put 9 that specific lot combination in a different category than 10 replatting or cutting a lot in half or taking three and 11 making four or anything like that. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What about the issue that comes 13 in -- like, we did one today, Infamous 1869. 14 MR. LEE VOELKEL: 1169. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Access road was changed. 16 MR. DON VOELKEL: Point of entry? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Point of entry was changed. 18 Nothing that affected any lot, but it was new. It went 19 through -- and I think that one, O.S.S.F. felt they needed to 20 review it, I believe. Isn't that true? 21 MS. HULETT: Well, they brought it to us for 22 review. All we did was basically sign off on our statement. 23 Basically, that was the only check. It didn't affect 24 anything else. 25 MR. GARCIA: Right. 3-10-08 wk 6 1 MR. DON VOELKEL: Right. And that's kind of 2 similar to combining lots. It was nothing being changed. I 3 don't read specifically -- I don't personally think that 4 should have been a replat, but that's what everybody else 5 felt, so we did it. I mean, I took his money and we did it. 6 But I didn't really think that -- but that's a little 7 different animal than combining lots. But specifically on 8 combining lots, that's what I researched, got all the 9 information and gave it to Rex. He came up, I think, with 10 the same conclusion that I did, that that specific combining 11 lots didn't kick in the review and all the contour map -- 12 there has been several thousands worth of dollars to spend on 13 something that I don't think -- and I think at the time, 14 Miguel said he's just wanting to make sure that they get a 15 system out there, and I said, "It doesn't really matter. 16 Right now, you could put two systems." And we talked about 17 that, Jonathan. And by taking that middle line out and 18 making it one system, it was better for the County, and these 19 were larger lots. These were 4-, 5-acre tracts; they weren't 20 little half-acre lots that were substandard anyway. But I 21 can see even that. Even if it was half-acre tracts that were 22 platted in the '70's, taking two half acres and making them 23 1 acre is still a better situation. And that's what we all 24 -- but y'all wanted Rex to -- to legally say that was the 25 same. 3-10-08 wk 7 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- okay. The question 2 is -- I guess it comes down to, does our current language 3 work? 4 MR. DON VOELKEL: For combining lots? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, for the alternate plat 6 process. 7 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Not for combining lots. I'd say 8 it works, but what you're doing is requiring -- for combining 9 lots, you're requiring a lot of extra expense, and not only 10 what Don said. I think if you just look at it as common 11 sense, how can you explain to somebody that wants to combine 12 lots that it's going to cost them $1,000, and what are they 13 getting for that? They're absolutely getting nothing. There 14 is -- in my mind, there is no review. There's no sense in 15 saying, "Okay, you can have septics on two lots, maybe. Now 16 that you're going to combine them, you're not going to be 17 able to put a septic on it." That just doesn't make sense to 18 me. So, I think if there was a way that you could word it to 19 -- to exempt combining lots, that would help. 20 MR. DON VOELKEL: I think it exempts it in the 21 state law. I don't think the state law requires that, that 22 specific plat, or amending plat. Not amending, revision. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's not just combining 24 lots, 'cause it's -- this thing we did this morning is one. 25 I mean, you know, if we don't need to run them through the 3-10-08 wk 8 1 O.S. -- Environmental Health Department, we shouldn't run 2 them through Environmental Health. Changing road names. We 3 did one not too long ago where we changed a road from public 4 to private. 5 MR. DON VOELKEL: How would that kick in needing to 6 be reviewed? Just like the one for Infamous 11 -- I mean 16 7 -- 1169, and also combining lots, I don't need -- I don't see 8 what the need for review is, if you're not -- if you're 9 dividing a piece of property. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the -- 11 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Maybe we could hear from O.S.S.F. 12 and see what their reading is. 13 MS. HULETT: If it has an O.S.S.F. statement on 14 there, you know, then I feel that has to be reviewed, 'cause 15 I've seen some that have gone through that weren't reviewed, 16 and the language wasn't correct. And I don't know that 17 anybody else would be looking at that. 18 MR. DON VOELKEL: I don't think anybody -- I won't 19 speak for everybody, other surveyors. Having the note on 20 there is not necessarily doing a contour map and all the 21 other things. I think that's -- I don't have a problem with 22 her looking at it and saying, "This note needs to be on 23 there." 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have -- once we -- till we 25 standardize things, once we have a note on a plat, someone's 3-10-08 wk 9 1 going to have to sign the note or say why it's not being 2 signed. 3 MR. DON VOELKEL: She means the note saying no -- I 4 mean, I don't mind them signing it either, as long as we 5 don't have to do all of the couple thousand dollars worth of 6 work, when we're not really doing a subdivision. 7 MR. GARCIA: Well, and that is the question. I 8 mean, it -- you know, like we talked before, too, is I need 9 to find out -- define exactly when we do become involved, 10 when O.S.S.F. is in question and when it's not. Because some 11 of these, I don't see where we come into -- to have anything 12 to do with the change of point of entrance. 13 MR. DON VOELKEL: Right. And that's my point, too. 14 I mean -- 15 MS. HULETT: And all we did was look at the 16 O.S.S.F. statement on there and sign it. Didn't require 17 anything else on that. 18 MR. DON VOELKEL: 'Cause we didn't want to change 19 anything that had just been done previously, and there's one 20 I'm doing right now that was out -- the one we had to set the 21 public hearing for, where there's -- Oehler. It was Bruce's 22 deal. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: His family. 24 MR. DON VOELKEL: That one is, like, a 60-something 25 acre tract, cutting it into two tracts. There's already 3-10-08 wk 10 1 homes there; there's two homes there, and she's been letting 2 this other person live there, evidently, or something. And 3 the guy said, "I want to buy this tract," and she said okay. 4 Or maybe he just now can afford to or something. So, we've 5 carved off, made a 200-foot access and created the plat. 6 Well, the review I get back says I think the only deficiency 7 is I haven't shown septic tanks and drain fields -- I mean 8 the sewer. 9 MS. HULETT: Well, I looked, and the original plat 10 had none of that information with it. 11 MR. LEE VOELKEL: No, I understand. When you have 12 existing lots that already have wells and septics on them, 13 why are you going through soil examination when the septic is 14 already in place? 15 MS. HULETT: Well -- 16 MR. LEE VOELKEL: That's the review that I can't -- 17 MR. GARCIA: Again, that's what's in question, is 18 that we are going by 285. And it requires something totally 19 different from what you're used to, or what the norm is. 20 MR. LEE VOELKEL: But let me just ask you on a 21 common sense -- let's say 285 says that. When you're 22 combining lots, what can you see, as far as your experience, 23 why would you need topography and soil delineation when we've 24 already got two lots that are -- that have already been 25 accepted for approval for septic? I'm going to combine 3-10-08 wk 11 1 those, you know, and you're saying, "I want all this 2 information to review." Are you going to refuse them a 3 septic after you get that all that information? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex has a question. 5 MR. EMERSON: Let me throw something out real quick 6 on combining lots. We reached the conclusion last year that 7 combining lots was not a subdivision pursuant to T.C.E.Q. 8 rules. T.C.E.Q. disagrees with us, and we said, "Too bad, 9 that's our interpretation of the law." Bell County has just 10 hit the exact same wall. I don't know what's going on over 11 there politically, but Bell County has now submitted it to 12 the Attorney General's office for an opinion, so sometime in 13 the next six months, we'll get an A.G. opinion that will 14 clarify that. Now, the good news is -- is we'll have an 15 opinion. The bad news is, if the A.G. disagrees with us, 16 we're back to square one. 17 MR. DON VOELKEL: Where do we stand about the -- 18 and I'm just talking about practical. I mean, if I own a lot 19 and I'm having to spend the money out of my pocket, I'd be 20 concerned. I'm on the other end of that; I'm taking these 21 people's money, but I don't think it's right. Can we 22 still -- 23 MR. EMERSON: Let me add something on that, Don. 24 They're bound to follow 285. They -- we're representatives 25 of T.C.E.Q. through that department. If we don't follow 285, 3-10-08 wk 12 1 T.C.E.Q. can step in and take that authority away from us, 2 and then we're stuck with somebody from San Antonio coming up 3 here every time somebody wants to do an O.S.S.F. 4 MR. DON VOELKEL: So -- 5 MR. EMERSON: They have to follow 285. 6 MR. DON VOELKEL: So, if the A.G. says combining 7 lots, you still have to do topographic and all these things, 8 we still have to do it? 9 MR. EMERSON: If the A.G. comes back and says that. 10 As of right now, you know, as far as I'm concerned, you 11 don't, 'cause it doesn't fit under the subdivision rules. 12 MR. DON VOELKEL: Until this comes in. 13 MR. EMERSON: Right. 14 MR. ODOM: Not a subdivision. 15 MR. DON VOELKEL: Right now it's not, but it may 16 be. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- so, the only things that 18 need to go through Environmental Health Department for review 19 with documentation of stuff is if it is subdividing property. 20 If we're changing roads from public to private, changing 21 access points, if we're not dividing property, they don't 22 need to look at it. 23 MR. EMERSON: I think that's -- the wording that's 24 in 285 specifically refers to subdivisions. 25 MS. HULETT: Right. But could some of those 3-10-08 wk 13 1 changes affect possibly a setback requirement? That would be 2 a question that I would have. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I wouldn't think so. 4 MS. HULETT: The road changes, possibly. I don't 5 know, you know. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not a boundary -- a road 7 boundary change would. But a road classification change, 8 such as from a public to private -- 9 MS. HULETT: Boundary change might. 10 MR. DON VOELKEL: Or a point of entry. 11 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Combining lots won't affect 12 setbacks. I don't see how it would. 13 MR. DON VOELKEL: Well, but that -- that being 14 said, I think we're -- until the Attorney General comes up 15 with some ruling, we may check it. But as far as what I'm 16 talking about on the Oehler Estate -- 17 MS. HULETT: That's considered a subdivision, 18 though. 19 MR. DON VOELKEL: I understand that. I understand. 20 What I'm saying right now is, what I want to find out, she's 21 telling me she wants me to locate the drain field. Well, 22 it's buried. It's been buried for 20 years. No way for 23 me -- unless they go out there and dig it up. Is that what 24 we -- the public is -- are being told by the Commissioners 25 and -- and the O.S.S.F. Department, is that you want them to 3-10-08 wk 14 1 go out -- 'cause I'm not going to certify it and sign and 2 seal something that locates something if the owner just said, 3 "Oh, it's over there." I -- I'm not going to do that. And 4 if -- and if they demand that it's either shown on the plat 5 or they're not going to sign it, what do we do? And, you 6 know, Bruce, if you were -- you've lived in your house for as 7 long as you have, you have an idea where it is, but I'm not 8 going to -- I would put a note on the plat saying, well, the 9 owner told me this is where it is, but I don't know if that's 10 good enough for what they want. They want me to certify and 11 my sign -- put my signature and seal that it's located there. 12 How do we do that? I'm talking about practically, not -- I 13 know it's in the law. I know -- 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Practically, I would say you 15 do it -- if it were required, I would say you do the tank 16 with GPS. 17 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Yeah, it's the drain field. 18 MR. EMERSON: Unfortunately, I have an answer to 19 that, too. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The tank is what I'm saying; 21 locate it with GPS. 22 MR. LEE VOELKEL: But it's all buried. We don't 23 know where that is. 24 MR. DON VOELKEL: The drain field is what's 25 concerned. 3-10-08 wk 15 1 MR. LEE VOELKEL: How does O.S.S.F. recommend 2 people locate their septics? 3 MR. EMERSON: We just acquired a piece of property 4 in Brown County, and it cost $75 for me to have a gentleman 5 go out there and flush some kind of isotope down the toilet, 6 and he has a tracking device and he can tell me exactly where 7 the drain field was. 8 MR. DON VOELKEL: He was with the O.S.S.F.? 9 MR. EMERSON: Private individual. 10 MR. GROGAN: Tells you if it's functioning 11 properly, too. 12 MR. EMERSON: Right. 13 MR. DON VOELKEL: That's true, but I would still -- 14 if I sign and seal it, I'd say as per this man telling me 15 where it was. I mean -- 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think what we get to, if you 17 go to -- those that have copies of the rules -- 6.02.C.7 on 18 Page 37 of the new rules, we require, for the preliminary 19 plat, structures, wells, oil, water, and monitor wells, and 20 septic systems to be located on that preliminary plat. 21 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Preliminary plat's not certified 22 to. Nobody's signing and sealing it. That's the difference. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, you're just saying it's 24 there. 25 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Just showing it on the plat. 3-10-08 wk 16 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You have no problem with 2 that -- this provision? 3 MR. LEE VOELKEL: On the preliminary plat. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 5 MR. LEE VOELKEL: But when you go in under the 6 alternate plat thing, I think, you know, you want it 7 certified by a surveyor that that's where the septic system 8 is. And that's difficult for surveyors when you don't know 9 where it is. And how -- the question is, how do you locate 10 them? 11 (Several people speaking at once. The court reporter asked everyone to speak one at a time.) 12 13 MR. DON VOELKEL: What we're talking about is -- 14 and I don't -- I'm not saying you're wrong for asking for it. 15 What I'm saying is, how do we get from Point A to Point B? 16 You tell me I got to locate it, and I go to Rex and say, 17 "Rex, it's your property; I don't know where your septic is." 18 And I don't think there's anybody in Kerr County -- do y'all 19 know anybody that does that isotope thing? 20 MR. GARCIA: That's the first I've heard of it. 21 MR. DON VOELKEL: Unless we have somebody that's 22 around that doesn't have to come from Brown County down here, 23 I don't think we're going to do it. And, I mean, I think 24 that's a good plan, but -- 25 JUDGE TINLEY: May be a good sideline business for 3-10-08 wk 17 1 you to investigate. 2 MR. DON VOELKEL: I'm going to charge more than 3 $75. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, if you're the only one around, 5 you can probably get away with it. 6 MR. DON VOELKEL: Maybe. But that's -- that's 7 where -- 8 MR. GARCIA: Well, it -- again, that's why we're 9 here, because -- 10 MR. DON VOELKEL: That's -- 11 MR. GARCIA: No, no, you're right. That's the 12 question. How do we get there? And, you know, can we come 13 up with something to locate that? Because if we have no 14 record of it, you know, in our O.S.S.F. permitting system, 15 then, right, how do we find it? 16 MR. DON VOELKEL: And that's the problem we have 17 with our clients about -- if they're telling us they want to 18 file the plat, and then -- and Ray's saying, "Well, you're 19 not going to do it unless we can locate that," we're kind of 20 -- rock in a hard place. 21 MS. HULETT: Would the homeowner have any idea of 22 who they used to install their septic? 23 MR. DON VOELKEL: Well, even so, if they go out and 24 say, "Well, yeah, it's over there," you're not going to 25 accept that. I'm not going to sign and seal that. 3-10-08 wk 18 1 MS. HULETT: Did they obtain a drawing or something 2 from the person who installed it? 3 MR. DON VOELKEL: Specifically the one, I don't 4 know. But that -- I haven't even broached this with her yet, 5 'cause I just got that from y'all last week, and we had that 6 meeting set up for today, so between now and April the 13th, 7 whenever, I'll have to figure that out. But that's what we 8 have a problem with, is making -- making them happy so that 9 they sign it, but figuring out how we can do it without 10 costing thousands of dollars. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- well, I'm reading again, 12 our current rule, and it says -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page are you on? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 44. 15 MR. DON VOELKEL: You keep jumping around. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you make -- you said under 17 preliminary plat, you don't mind locating stuff. 'Cause you 18 don't certify where the stuff is; you're just kind of 19 locating it. And our rule says Section 6.01, Concept Plans 20 shall not be applicable in the alternate plat approval 21 process. Section 6.02, Preliminary Plat shall not be 22 applicable in the alternate plat approval process; however, a 23 plat containing the data required in Section 6.02.C.7.b shall 24 be required, or a statement shall be added to the Appendix B, 25 which is a certification statement. We're not saying that 3-10-08 wk 19 1 that information has to be on the final plat and certified. 2 We say you have to give a drawing of where -- the same as you 3 would be required to under the preliminary plat if there is a 4 septic system on that property. 5 MR. DON VOELKEL: But still, he's expecting it to 6 be a correct drawing. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, same as you have on 8 preliminary plat. 9 MR. DON VOELKEL: I know. Well, I differ from -- 10 MR. LEE VOELKEL: If I'm giving a preliminary plat 11 that has a Voelkel Engineering survey on the plat, I need it 12 to be right. I mean, I'm liable, I think, if -- what happens 13 if -- if that guy just tells me, "Oh, it's over here," and I 14 locate it, and then when they get the plat and they sign 15 it -- y'all sign it, and then two months later they find out 16 that the drain field was actually over there, and it's on the 17 other guy's lot. Then they say, "Well, Voelkel gave us the 18 plat showing it over here." Even though I didn't sign and 19 seal it, I think I'm still liable. I mean, wouldn't you 20 think so, if I've given Ray a plat saying here's where it is, 21 and then -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I always blame the surveyors. 23 MR. DON VOELKEL: I know. 24 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Everybody does. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I'm just trying to make 3-10-08 wk 20 1 sure that our rules are doable. And, you know, I guess I'm 2 looking at it -- why do we need -- why, from a -- I guess 3 from a division standpoint, we don't want someone to divide 4 property where it's going right through the middle of a 5 septic field. 6 MR. DON VOELKEL: You don't want the drain field on 7 the wrong lot. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we need the requirement, you 9 know. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In reverse. 11 MR. DON VOELKEL: Why can't we get Ray certified to 12 do this isotope thing? (Laughter.) 13 MR. GARCIA: Have to start a business up. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: And the County can make the dough, 15 right? 16 MR. DON VOELKEL: There you go. Well, he's the one 17 that has to sign off, so he has to be comfortable. He wants 18 me to tell him where it is, and I'm uncomfortable unless I 19 know where it is, and we don't want to make them dig it up. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right now, how does the 21 surveying comment handle a property that has a couple houses 22 on it, and they decide to do a subdivision? 23 MR. DON VOELKEL: Doing one right now. I mean, 24 that one for the Oehler Estate has two houses on it. See, 25 that's the reason for that revision of plat. That's -- 3-10-08 wk 21 1 'cause she's going to convey to him what he's been living in. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you went out there and -- 3 MR. DON VOELKEL: We located the house and the 4 wells and put the hundred -- 100-foot septic -- I mean, 5 sanitary control easement, but I didn't -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just left septic off, even 7 though our rules say to put it on? 8 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Don't know where it is. Again, I 9 don't know how anybody knows where it is. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What if -- 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Wherever the green grass is 12 growing. 13 MR. HARVEY: Why do you need it? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If someone draws a lot line 15 right across that drain field, all of a sudden, that's 16 against state law. You can't have two owners -- a drain 17 field crossing some property lines. 18 MR. HARVEY: I mean, is this something trickle-down 19 from 285? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's -- well, that's in 285. 21 That's the state law, too. I mean, and it makes a lot of 22 good sense. You've got to have -- you have a drain field; 23 you've got to have it on that property. And it can't -- 24 MR. HARVEY: Are there specific provisions in 285 25 for existing systems? I thought 285 was all set up by 3-10-08 wk 22 1 T.C.E.Q. having to do with brand-new systems. 2 MS. HULETT: Well, in the case of a property 3 division, that septic system -- we need to know where it is 4 so it's not crossing into that other person's property once 5 it's subdivided. That's the reason why we need to know where 6 it's located, 'cause it's not supposed to cross property 7 boundaries. It wasn't a problem at the time it was installed 8 because it was on that particular property, but now they're 9 dividing the property. That's the reason why they need to 10 tell us where it's located. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there are situations -- 12 MR. HARVEY: I guess I need to catch up here, 13 'cause we keep jumping back and forth between taking a piece 14 of land and removing a common boundary line or subdividing. 15 MS. HULETT: Talking about subdivision in this 16 case. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we're taking a line out, it 18 doesn't have to go through Environmental Health Department, 19 period. 20 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Wait, wait. Is that a decision 21 that's been made? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex said -- 23 MR. DON VOELKEL: Until the Attorney General -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Until the Attorney General 25 opinion rules differently, they don't sign it. 3-10-08 wk 23 1 MR. HARVEY: That's why I asked, why do you need 2 it? I mean, if you're taking a line out -- 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I agree with you 100 percent, 4 if you're talking one out. You already have one existing on 5 the property. It was platted and approved before that was 6 done in most cases, so if you're removing a lot line, what's 7 the point? 8 MR. DON VOELKEL: Yeah. For now. 9 MR. HARVEY: Or changing access, like somebody said 10 a while ago. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Doesn't make sense. Why do 12 you have to? And if the Attorney General is -- is not smart 13 enough to figure that out, then somebody needs to help him 14 with it. 15 MR. DON VOELKEL: We'll find that out. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 17 MR. DON VOELKEL: But I think, like, the one 18 specifically today for -- the one for -- for the Oehler 19 Estate, I can see where O.S.S.F. needs to know where the 20 drain field and the -- for that, or each lot, that they're 21 not, you know, cutting them off. I don't know the need for 22 any of the other information, like a contour map and drainage 23 plans and all that. 24 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Soil study. 25 MR. DON VOELKEL: Soil study. I think we need to 3-10-08 wk 24 1 get practical and say, hey, we're just replatting an existing 2 subdivision. Make sure the septic's on there. We don't need 3 all these thousands of other dollars. I don't see the need 4 for all that. Me, personally. 5 MR. HARVEY: That's what 285 is. That -- that's 6 what kicks in provisions of 285, the new systems that 7 requires in-situ soil sampling, topography maps, all of that. 8 I don't remember any provisions of 285 that specifically 9 address existing old systems. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How far is this house -- 11 MR. DIGGES: Just for the repair or alteration. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How far is this house from 13 the new proposed property line? 14 MR. DON VOELKEL: We pretty much divided -- there's 15 two homes there and two wells, and -- and I imagine two drain 16 fields, I assume, and we kind of split the difference. It's 17 probably several hundred feet. 18 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Might be one. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Several hundred feet from 20 each property where the house is now to the new property line 21 from either side? 22 MR. DON VOELKEL: I think so, from both sides. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Wouldn't make a whole lot of 24 common sense that those tanks and drain fields are anywhere 25 near that property line. Why would somebody go in that 3-10-08 wk 25 1 particular terrain, which I know well, several hundred feet 2 away to put in a tank and a drain field? 3 MR. DON VOELKEL: In this specific case, I think 4 we're probably okay, ultimately. But -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think you can't look at 6 that, 'cause I know of a situation -- and, granted, it's in 7 Kendall County -- where, for some reason, they -- they ran a 8 line -- sewer line probably 800 feet to keep -- to go into an 9 old tank that was working fine to add one bathroom over in a 10 storage building. So, I mean, you know -- 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: In this situation up there, 12 though, this is all -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can't write rules for -- 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- flat country and good 15 soil. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can't write rules for one 17 situation. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, I understand that. 19 MR. DON VOELKEL: But other situations are going to 20 come up where we're going to have the same concerns and the 21 same problems. 22 MR. DIGGES: Now, there's some local pumpers that 23 they don't have the isotopes, but they do have a transmitter. 24 They go fishing, but in a different type of way. They put it 25 down the toilet, and they -- they flush this transmitter down 3-10-08 wk 26 1 and they keep flushing and flushing until it won't move any 2 more. That means it's reached the tank. And -- 'cause it 3 won't leave the tank. So, you can find the tank that way, 4 'cause you go out there with a receiver and, you know, you 5 can pick up that signal from the transmitter; you can locate 6 the tank. And then, from kind of common sense -- because 7 from the tank, usually the drain field will be slightly 8 downhill, and you can kind of figure out where the -- the 9 drain field's going to be, with -- within a reasonable, you 10 know, amount of confidence. And, of course, then if there's 11 green areas or there's indentations, like trenches -- there's 12 all kinds of clues. But, you know, unless you just had a 13 really critical case, well, then you may have to go to the 14 n'th degree to find out where it is. But in a lot of 15 instances, you can kind of get a common sense feel for it. 16 It's hard to put that all in writing, but that's the way it 17 is. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Maybe it can encompass a 19 certain area that may not be the exact location, that it 20 would be the exact location within a larger area than what it 21 would possibly be necessary for a system. 22 MR. DIGGES: Yeah. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Say it's in a space of 24 200 feet by 200 feet. We would have -- "Here, that's where 25 it is." 3-10-08 wk 27 1 MR. DIGGES: Yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If you do that, that's going 3 to pretty well eliminate your encroachment onto any kind of 4 easements or other property line. 5 MR. DIGGES: Yeah, it is. And, you know, back 6 before we had profiles and all that, where there would be 7 records, I mean, what you did is, when you left the tank, you 8 went as quickly as you could to the drain field area. You 9 didn't run a couple hundred feet to get out of bad soil into 10 good; you just put it right there, and that's how they 11 operate. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think that's all good. I 13 think Bruce has a good point on setting the boundaries, but 14 I'm going back a little bit to one of the people -- maybe it 15 was Les -- talking about 285. I'm confused what 285 16 requires. I mean, if someone goes out and, you know, takes a 17 30-acre tract, makes 10 -- three 10-acre tracts, what does 18 that mean? What do y'all do right now? What -- I mean, what 19 do you require for that plat to go through? 20 MS. HULETT: Well, we have a list of everything 21 that we use, that we look at. 22 MR. HARVEY: 285 is essentially T.C.E.Q.'s design 23 rules -- 24 MS. HULETT: That's our checklist. 25 MR. HARVEY: -- for on-site sanitary sewer 3-10-08 wk 28 1 facilities, and the modification and expansion of existing 2 systems. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's true. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it's an overall site plan. 5 Easements, topographic map, floodplain, U.S.D.A. soil 6 analysis, that kind of stuff. The rest of it's more related 7 to -- 8 MS. HULETT: That's -- and the explanation is 9 provided -- I think he also provided you this. 10 MR. GARCIA: Yeah. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you do require that. I'm 12 not saying you -- I mean, I'm just asking, is that required, 13 whether it's a 100-acre lot or a 5-acre lot or 1-acre lot? 14 MS. HULETT: My understanding, that's what we go 15 through for everything. 16 MR. HARVEY: Any -- the design of any system. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not -- all we're talking about 18 is dividing a lot line -- you know dividing a lot. 19 MR. DON VOELKEL: How -- what do you do -- 20 MR. HARVEY: 285 is designed -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they're required to look at 22 it under 285. 285 says that they have to review -- 23 MR. HARVEY: -- for new systems. 24 MS. HULETT: These guidelines are what we received 25 from T.C.E.Q. on subdivision reviews. 3-10-08 wk 29 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 2 MS. HULETT: And that is -- there's a section for 3 subdivision rules also. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For a plat, a subdivision of 5 property, they have to get this information. And I -- I 6 guess I'm clarifying, that's what 285 says. Because, to me, 7 it doesn't make any sense, even though -- even though -- 8 common sense is not a good judge here, necessarily. But if 9 you have a 100-acre tract, I don't see why you need anything. 10 But, you know, that's not the law. That's not the law. 11 MR. DON VOELKEL: I'm the same with floodplain. If 12 there's just a little tiny little stretch of floodplain -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do not go there. 14 MR. ODOM: There's no compromise on that. 15 (Laughter.) To be putting your seal and name on it. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Now, there is a -- maybe an 17 exception to some of this, because if you have over 10 acres, 18 you can actually put in a system that will meet or exceed 19 state standards, and you don't even have to go to O.S.S.F. at 20 that point. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, that's not -- but it 22 doesn't say they don't have to look at the stuff for platting 23 when you do the additional plat. But -- and I'm not -- I 24 haven't read this. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If -- if it is a piece of 3-10-08 wk 30 1 land and has been divided. But if it is -- if it's an 2 already existing, say, 10 or 15 acres -- 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're talking about on -- we're 4 trying to figure out what they're going to need on a division 5 of property on a current subdivision, what they have to get. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there -- and no matter the 8 size, you need to do the topographic, soil analysis and all 9 that, if you're doing 20 lots, one lot or two lots. Size 10 makes no difference. If you're dividing -- if you are 11 subdividing properties, that's what's required. Do you agree 12 with that, Ray? 13 MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir. I mean, I -- that's what I 14 said; I'm going right from what 285 says. 15 MR. LEE VOELKEL: And we don't waver from that? In 16 other words, Commissioners Court can't say we're going to 17 either -- those are guidelines; we're not going to go by 18 these guidelines? Or if you got 100 acres, or if you're -- 19 you've got existing structures, that you still need all that 20 information? The reason I ask, too, is because -- I know 21 this is terrible to say, but, like, surrounding counties are 22 not requiring all that. If it's state law, which is what 23 everybody says, shouldn't every county be doing that? And I 24 don't think -- every county's not doing that. And I'm 25 wondering if the reason they're not doing it is that their 3-10-08 wk 31 1 Commissioners Courts have opted to say that's unreasonable, 2 that's not good practice for our county. I don't know. 3 That's just a question I have. But I know that we don't have 4 those things going on in surrounding counties. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Are they -- are they not requiring 6 all this contouring and soil sampling in those situations 7 where there are existing septic systems on the lots? 8 MR. DON VOELKEL: I just did one, Pat, in Kendall 9 County, in Champee Springs, where there was, like, a 900-acre 10 tract, 180-acre tract, and the man owned both of them. And 11 they had a buyer for the 180, but he wanted to sell 110. The 12 guy -- maybe -- maybe that's all the money he had; I don't 13 know, but he wanted to sell 110. They let me do an amending 14 plat. As a matter of fact, I delivered the stuff this week, 15 an amending plat. Even though it wasn't an error, they 16 allowed me to do an amending plat. There's a house -- on the 17 180 piece, there's nothing. There's floodplain, but there's 18 no -- and I showed the floodplain. But there's -- on the 19 900-acre tract, there's a house and a well and a septic. I 20 didn't have to show any of that. And they know it's there, 21 but they didn't require it. I didn't show the well, the 22 septic, the house, the structures, the driveways, nothing. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it occurs to me, if -- if the 24 state rules apply to a design of new systems or modification 25 of existing systems, and we're requiring the soil sampling, 3-10-08 wk 32 1 the contouring and so forth, in order to establish some 2 threshold that a new system can be placed there, that there 3 may be a way that you can exempt from the contouring, soil 4 sampling, all these other nonrelevant requirements, in those 5 cases in which you have existing operating systems. Or am I 6 missing the boat here? 7 MR. DON VOELKEL: No, I -- that's what I think 8 would be practical. 9 MR. LEE VOELKEL: That's what would be practical. 10 MR. DON VOELKEL: Other than they're saying locate 11 the system so we're not over the line. I can see a need for 12 that. I just don't know how to get that done without digging 13 them up. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's -- the stuff from 15 T.C.E.Q. is pretty -- it's all proposed subdivisions and 16 development plans. 17 MR. DON VOELKEL: But talking -- but, like, 18 revisions of plats -- 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, this is the first time. 20 You go down to a raw piece of land, you need to do all this 21 stuff. 22 MR. DON VOELKEL: So, on a revision of plat, we 23 don't have to? The revision of plat doesn't come under that 24 guise? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it would too. 3-10-08 wk 33 1 MR. DON VOELKEL: It would? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I mean, revision of plat 3 is the same as -- 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm with the Judge. It 5 doesn't make sense to do all that when you have an existing 6 system. Why would you prove up the soil types and contours 7 and all that -- 8 MR. DON VOELKEL: Like on the one for the Oehlers. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- when you already have an 10 existing system? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, it doesn't make any 12 sense to do it on a 100-acre or a 1,000-acre subdivision. 13 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Amen. Another reason for an 14 exemption. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can do something. 16 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Does your copy, at the top, have 17 "Guidelines," or does it -- because mine says "Subdivision 18 Review Guidelines." 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It says "Guidelines." 21 MR. LEE VOELKEL: To me, that's not law -- state 22 law. If you're going to do -- if you want to do a review, 23 these are some guidelines on how you do it. 24 MR. DON VOELKEL: He's not an attorney, by the way. 25 (Laughter.) 3-10-08 wk 34 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We know. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: They can't take his law license away 3 from him. 4 MR. LEE VOELKEL: That's the way I interpret it. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nice try. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Guidelines. You don't 7 necessarily have to buy into them. They're suggested. 8 MR. LEE VOELKEL: If you like to do it or not. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean -- 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Optional. 11 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Yes. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: These guidelines are pretty 13 clear. Whether we have to follow them seems to be the 14 question. 15 MR. LEE VOELKEL: There we go. Bottom line is, it 16 just adds a lot of cost. And I think, on combining lots, 17 having to do that, we would be discouraging people from 18 combining lots, and I think that the Court has decided years 19 ago that they wanted to encourage that, and I think it's a 20 great idea. These other ones where it's just going to add a 21 bunch of cost to it, I think it just eliminates affordable 22 type housing for Kerr County, because the price of these lots 23 gets so expensive. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Combining lots is taken care 25 of. That's -- until the Attorney General rules otherwise, 3-10-08 wk 35 1 they no longer need to go through Environmental Health. And 2 anything that doesn't -- if you're not subdividing, it 3 doesn't need to go through Environmental Health. It's 4 whenever you're subdividing, whether you're changing a lot 5 line or creating a new subdivision, that's subdivision. 6 MS. BAILEY: But you still haven't answered the 7 question, if you've got rural property that has not yet ever 8 been subdivided, you're going to try to do a plat, and 9 there's already an existing home on it, it sounds to me like 10 you're saying you're still going to have to have topography 11 and drainage and all that; is that right? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what the guidelines say. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, unless -- unless you read it 14 by saying, "All proposed subdivisions or development plans 15 wherein the wastewater is to be disposed of." That connotes 16 a future tense, rather than, "wherein the wastewater is 17 presently disposed of by means of an on-site sewage 18 facility." 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Lawyer. 20 MR. LEE VOELKEL: That's the way I would read it. 21 MS. BAILEY: If I owned four pieces of property 22 that are all defined by metes and bounds, and I want to put 23 them together so I just have one piece, but I'm not going to 24 sell it off, but I have a house already on it -- thank you -- 25 are you saying that according to what you just read, I 3-10-08 wk 36 1 wouldn't have to have all of that? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, if you interpret it the way 3 that I just proposed -- which, if that goes to the A.G., I 4 don't think it will get much support, but we'll see. Unless 5 and until we have definitive law that says otherwise -- 6 MS. BAILEY: They haven't opined otherwise. If you 7 opine that way, I guess that's the rule until they say 8 otherwise. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Again, these are guidelines. 10 MR. ODOM: Metes and bounds, we don't see it 11 anyway. 12 MS. BAILEY: Well, except if you're going to plat 13 it -- oh, well -- 14 JUDGE TINLEY: You're going to plat it if it's 15 metes and bounds. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Did he read that from the 17 bottom, or was that -- is that something he read into it? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To be future -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: No, we're not going -- we're not 20 going to mess with the floodplain. Leonard's -- 21 MR. ODOM: There is -- in conjunction with this 22 here, we're having a problem. Of course, part of this is 23 going to be resolved in a little bit when we get an A.G.'s 24 opinion. But the routing slip and all and the timing, I've 25 had O.S.S.F. -- maybe they bring it to us and we sign it, and 3-10-08 wk 37 1 then they wait right prior to the agenda item before they 2 look at it. Sometimes O.S.S.F. does not know about it until 3 they get the agenda. So, I see a problem, and I would like 4 the direction of the Court. I don't think that we should 5 sign for anything until -- if O.S.S.F. needs to look at it, 6 they need as much time as they can, just like we do at 21 7 days. And I think the way to solve this problem -- because 8 it's not done. And I'm pointing toward Don, but just in -- 9 in general, surveyors, you know, sometimes we have to call 10 and say we've got a problem. I may know on Friday, before 11 the Monday, that O.S.S.F. has a problem. And part of that 12 reasoning is because of the timing of when surveyors get it 13 to them, or not get it to them. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Here again, it's the surveyors' 15 fault. 16 MR. DON VOELKEL: Always the surveyor. 17 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Always. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Just accept it, and that's a given. 19 Okay, guys? 20 MR. GROGAN: Charlie may be able to answer this. 21 Is there any property around here that can't be served? It's 22 just a matter of the cost to serve it, what kind of system 23 goes in, whether it completely treats it. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. That's been one of my 25 arguments, Mike, before, is that you can -- there is -- you 3-10-08 wk 38 1 can put some kind of system on any piece of land almost, no 2 matter how small. It may be a really expensive system, may 3 be a big tank that has to get pumped somewhere. You know, 4 there may be -- but you can do something within our rules. 5 You know, 1-acre minimum lot size, you can put in a system on 6 an acre. 7 MR. GROGAN: So, taking it from there, isn't all 8 the stuff just held off till after someone goes to put in a 9 septic on a property? They have a note that says they need 10 to get a permit; they go to get a permit that tells them the 11 type of system that could go -- are we doing this twice? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would say probably yes. I 13 mean, it doesn't -- the property owners, when they go to get 14 their system, have to, but the reason is, right now, the -- 15 MR. DON VOELKEL: Guidelines. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the guidelines are -- I 17 mean, T.C.E.Q. guidelines are law, basically. I mean, 18 frequently. It depends on -- laws are passed by the 19 Legislature; the regulations are written by T.C.E.Q. in this 20 case. 21 MR. DIGGES: You need -- in order to put in a 22 system with the tanks and, like, a spray area for -- if we're 23 doing aerobic for spray, and considering the setbacks -- 24 typical setbacks, either from a property line or from a water 25 line, something of that sort, even -- even a house, I need 3-10-08 wk 39 1 about 5,000 square feet in rough numbers. And when you get 2 out on these 50-acre tracts, there's just -- unless there's 3 just totally terrain like this, or all floodplain, you can't 4 prevent us from putting in a system. But there -- I went out 5 to one three weeks ago that was platted back in -- I think it 6 was '84. And it backs up to Camp Meeting Creek, and it's 50 7 foot wide by 140 foot deep, 75 foot setback from the water's 8 edge, and then the house and the two-car garage. I don't 9 know what to do for these people. It got platted in the 10 mid-'80's, and they don't have enough room to put in a 11 system. Even the current system that they have that was 12 permitted, it was with a variance to allow part of the drain 13 field in the road right-of-way. So, that's what they're 14 trying to get -- I mean, they're trying to keep away from 15 situations like that happening. But when you get on these 16 big pieces of property, it's hard to prevent us from putting 17 in a system. 18 MR. DON VOELKEL: Well, when that was probably 19 being -- we started business in 1972. You could put a house 20 and a well and a septic on a 15,000 square foot lot, 100 by 21 150. I mean, and so we're light-years away from that. So, 22 whatever was created in 1980, I don't think -- we're not 23 going to be platting lots like that any more. 24 MR. DIGGES: No. 25 MR. DON VOELKEL: When you're talking about 3- to 3-10-08 wk 40 1 5-acre minimums, I think we're -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 3 MR. DON VOELKEL: -- away from that problem. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 1 acre -- we're at 1 or 5, and 5 there are times you can have a 1-acre that is pretty darned 6 hard to put a system on. But I guess -- Rex, is there a way 7 that you can look and see if these guidelines are guidelines, 8 or if they're absolute? Because, I mean, I'd be much more in 9 favor of something -- if your lot size is over 5 acres, it 10 doesn't even need to go through Environmental Health. I 11 mean, I just -- I think it's a waste of our resources in the 12 county having -- tying up your time reviewing these things. 13 'Cause if you have 5 acres, you can put in a system. It may 14 be pretty expensive, something like that. If you get less 15 than 5 acre -- 5 acres or less, we got a whole bunch of new 16 rules with what we adopted under 5.09. I think there, we're 17 not -- I wouldn't be willing to -- 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Set that -- if you would set 19 that at 10 acres, then you sure wouldn't have to worry about 20 it. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, 10 acres. I mean, you 22 know, I think that there's a -- if we have the ability to do 23 that, I would sure be in favor of setting it at 5, 10, 24 wherever. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. But I do think the 3-10-08 wk 41 1 Judge has a point on reading this, though. Because it -- it 2 doesn't say of an existing or proposed. It just says, you 3 know, wherein wastewater is to be disposed. And "is to be" 4 is a future term. That is not something that is in past 5 tense. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Isn't the power of suggestion 7 wonderful? 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's just great, and it makes 9 sense. I mean, they would have said otherwise if they'd have 10 meant both ways. 11 MR. HARVEY: Well, the comment was made earlier 12 that you can't write a rule that is universally applicable to 13 everything. That is exactly what 285 is. That's exactly 14 what the State tried to do, is write guidelines or a rule 15 that could be used throughout the entire state. To 16 piggy-back on what Mike Grogan said, there is a way to where 17 you can treat wastewater in any on-site sewage disposal in 18 any soil condition. Technology is available nowadays. But 19 285 is a guideline to be universally applied across the 20 entire state of Texas. Now, they -- they have put in some 21 procedural things in there about platting, but it is 22 primarily a universal guideline for design, installation, 23 like Charlie said, for modification and expansion. But 24 that's exactly what 285 is. It's a rule to be applied 25 throughout the state. I think that's why -- I think that's 3-10-08 wk 42 1 why everybody has to handle it in a way to massage it the 2 best way that it works for you in this county. And there's 3 other counties -- sounds like to me, from what Lee says, 4 there's other counties not even paying attention to it, 5 'cause it doesn't work for them. Or maybe they're just 6 avoiding trying to work with it. Who knows? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, really, until Rex 8 gives us a -- I mean, it's hard for me to vote. I might 9 agree with that, but until I find out if it's a suggested 10 guidelines or something that we are supposed to follow, you 11 know, it's hard for me to vote. I would -- hopefully, it's 12 what you're saying. 13 MR. HARVEY: You can also take the opposite 14 position, in that state rules are the absolute minimum, and 15 every county has the right to enforce even stricter rules. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't want stricter -- 17 MR. HARVEY: I've seen that done before, too. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Used to be here. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 20 MR. HARVEY: So there's two ways -- there's a lot 21 of different ways to turn the mirror on this thing, if you 22 ask me. That's probably why we're having this meeting. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: At least we've resolved things 24 that if it's not a subdivision, it doesn't need to go through 25 Environmental Health. 3-10-08 wk 43 1 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Before we leave that, does that 2 require the note on there too, or no note? Just a question. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have no strong opinion. I 4 think if it's a note, a note or -- what's the note say? 5 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Says it has to be -- whenever you 6 go for -- it's a site-specific evaluation, whenever you take 7 that. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, you want the note on 9 there. 10 MR. LEE VOELKEL: And that's fine. I think the 11 note's good. But as long as the note doesn't mean that they 12 need to review it, doesn't kick it back to them. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that -- what do y'all -- is 14 that all right with y'all? 15 MS. HULETT: I still wish we could at least have a 16 chance to look at it, make sure that it's correctly -- 17 MR. GROGAN: Is there a fee if a note's on there? 18 MS. HULETT: I don't believe there are. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's only a fee if they're 20 signing. 21 MR. GARCIA: If we're signing. 22 MS. HARDIN: Could we make a policy on the route -- 23 or the routing slip that it goes to them before we get it? 24 So that we know they have it in-hand, and it's not two weeks 25 from the time it comes to our office until they get a copy? 3-10-08 wk 44 1 MR. GARCIA: We do often find out when the agenda 2 comes up that this -- as Leonard stated that, "Oh, by the 3 way..." You know, last minute. So, it would help. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: If it's just going to be submitted 5 for review, I don't -- I don't see anything wrong with, on 6 the routing slip, that by the time it hits Road and Bridge, 7 there be a statement on there that it has been submitted for 8 your review. I don't see a problem with that. I mean, the 9 sooner everybody is in the loop, or the -- even that has to 10 take a look at it is given knowledge of it, I think it's 11 better in any circumstance. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I still don't see the need 13 for review at all. If it's a -- you know, removing lot 14 lines. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Removal of lot lines. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's not -- 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They don't even need to see 18 it. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, they don't. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Waste of their time, and 21 everybody, if it's only subdivisions that they see. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's -- by definition, 23 that's the absolute opposite of subdivision. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Exactly. Exactly. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or anything else, if it's only 3-10-08 wk 45 1 subdivision. 2 MS. HARDIN: But that does not include moving a lot 3 line. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. 5 MS. HARDIN: Removing. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Moving is a different story. Then 7 they need to see where that is in relationship to any 8 existing systems on either side of that line. 9 MR. DON VOELKEL: Yeah. The way the routing slip 10 says now, you got to submit 11 copies and so on, 28 days 11 before the Commissioners Court, and then it says you have to 12 complete the routing slip and submit it back 15 days before. 13 MR. ODOM: It should get -- when you bring it to 14 our office, the ladies sign it that we received it, right? 15 MR. DON VOELKEL: Right. 16 MR. ODOM: There's a date and there's an agenda. 17 What we're saying is that at the same time, O.S.S.F. ought to 18 receive a copy of that, that they know about it. Because 19 that routing slip is totally different -- we're talking about 20 acceptance of the plans, so we want them to have it ahead. 21 So I don't get a call on Friday afternoon around 3 o'clock, 22 that says, "I got a problem. I don't know about this." And 23 I've already got it on the agenda for Monday. 24 MR. DON VOELKEL: I know, but your routing slip 25 says it has to be submitted and signed by everybody and back 3-10-08 wk 46 1 to your office 15 days before the meeting. 2 MR. ODOM: How many times have you done that? 3 MR. DON VOELKEL: Oh, every time. (Laughter.) 4 That's what I'm saying. 5 MS. HARDIN: What day -- 6 MR. ODOM: If everyone followed this, Don, then, 7 you know, it would be a happy world. 8 MR. DON VOELKEL: I know. I don't have a problem 9 with doing it 28 days ahead, so my clients -- 10 MR. ODOM: All we ask you to do is get it to 11 them -- if you get it to them when we receive it, we would 12 like to see O.S.S.F. sign that we know that they have it. 13 Then if I get a call on Friday afternoon, I'm going to be 14 quite upset, that there's more than enough time to review the 15 thing. And if I've already put it on the agenda, then I have 16 to make calls to try to cancel or try to find out what's 17 going on. That's not appropriate. 18 MR. DON VOELKEL: No, I understand. But that's 19 what I'm saying; you need to change this to say that this 20 needs to be there sooner, because the way this is set up 21 right now, it says 15 days before the meeting. 22 MR. ODOM: What we're saying is, get it on there so 23 O.S.S.F. -- we don't want to take it -- I don't want to take 24 it unless they have it in the same deal. We're not talking 25 about the routing slip, per se, 15 days before. Everybody 3-10-08 wk 47 1 ought to sign this; everybody's signature on the paper. 2 MR. DON VOELKEL: I know everybody in this room 3 understands what you're saying right now, but unless we make 4 some kind of -- that everybody else knows, I mean, what the 5 routing slip says is 15 days. So, what we have to do is get 6 them to sign the routing slip that they've seen it 15 days 7 before the meeting. 8 MR. ODOM: We're saying 28 days. 9 MS. HARDIN: We're saying we're not going to sign 10 it unless you've taken it to them. 11 MR. ODOM: We're not going to take it. 12 MR. DON VOELKEL: I know, but the routing slip 13 doesn't say that. You need to make the routing slip say 14 that. That's what I'm saying; you need to change it. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All I'm suggesting is when you turn 16 it in to Road and Bridge, as part of that process, you -- 17 when you submit it, you sign off that you have furnished a 18 copy of that to O.S.S.F./Environmental Health. 19 MR. ODOM: That just says they have time to review 20 it. 21 MR. DON VOELKEL: No, I understand. What I'm 22 saying, Pat, is that the routing slip says 15 days. And the 23 front -- we have to get it to Road and Bridge 28 days. So, 24 theoretically, if you go by what your rules say, I submit the 25 plans to the Road and Bridge 28 days before the meeting, but 3-10-08 wk 48 1 I've got another week to get it to O.S.S.F. and everybody 2 else. If -- we need to revise this, if that's what y'all 3 want, so that everybody knows, not just everybody in this 4 room knows. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not sure we're playing by 28 6 days or the 15 days, either one, are we? 7 MR. DON VOELKEL: Well, right now you're playing 28 8 days. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We say 28, but we don't do 10 that. 11 MR. DON VOELKEL: I think you ought to have a 12 guideline. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Suggested guidelines? 14 MR. ODOM: We will have the minutes on this one, 15 you know. The less you say, the less you have to take back. 16 MR. DON VOELKEL: I understand. That's what I'm 17 saying. What I'm doing is -- 18 MR. ODOM: I can live by it. 19 MR. DON VOELKEL: -- revise this to match what 20 Len's saying, and Truby. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're both given at the same 22 time. 23 MR. ODOM: The same time, give their signature, 24 bring it to us. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Both do it -- 3-10-08 wk 49 1 MR. DON VOELKEL: But right now, this says 15, so 2 we need to change this, if that's what -- 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So both say 28 days, and we 4 won't follow that either. 5 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Right, just a guideline. It's 6 just a guideline. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Suggested guideline. 8 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, for the time being, we're 10 going to leave the language as written in here, but with the 11 understanding if it's not a subdivision, it doesn't go 12 through Environmental Health. And Rex can look into it a 13 little bit to see what leeway we have. 14 MR. DON VOELKEL: Well, they want to see it, but 15 they don't have to sign it. We have to deliver it to them -- 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For the time being. 17 MR. DON VOELKEL: Right. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only ones they don't see now 19 are if it's not a subdivision, for streets, roads -- I mean, 20 not changing where they are, but public to private or 21 combining lots or stuff like that. That does not go there, 22 but everything else still does, and until we hear something 23 from Rex. 24 MR. LEE VOELKEL: All the requirements, topography, 25 soil, whether there's an existing house, existing septic, 3-10-08 wk 50 1 everything will stay in place. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Until Rex tells us we have 3 authority to remove that without jeopardizing our -- whatever 4 we have. 5 MR. DON VOELKEL: I don't want to kick the ant bed, 6 but what happens if there's three lots, and I own Number 3 7 and Mike owns Number 5, and Number 4 is between us, and we 8 buy it and want to split it. We're not subdividing; we're 9 taking three lots and just making -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's a subdivision. 11 MR. DON VOELKEL: So, that has to go -- even though 12 we're taking three and making two? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're changing -- as soon as 14 you change the lot line, there's a valid reason for them to 15 have to look at what you're doing. 16 MR. DON VOELKEL: And to make sure the septics that 17 Mike has -- 'cause he built it. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know that they need to 19 look at it. Y'all need to be -- I think I'd be real 20 concerned about signing something if you have existing 21 septics out there. 22 MR. DON VOELKEL: Yeah, and that would be that 23 situation. 24 MR. LEE VOELKEL: And on the certification or the 25 plat that's going to require this information, you're saying 3-10-08 wk 51 1 it doesn't have to be certified, or it does? I was confused 2 when you started looking in the order. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It says here that the plat 4 containing the data, meaning the house, well location, septic 5 location, that's just a drawing. It's not the plat. It's 6 not the final plat. 7 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Right. 8 MR. DON VOELKEL: Those don't have to be on the 9 final plat? The house and the -- 10 MR. ODOM: That's right. 11 MR. DON VOELKEL: -- the well? Well does. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the well -- whatever, 13 yeah. 14 MR. GROGAN: There's a rule on the final plat that 15 it supposedly conforms substantially to the preliminary plat. 16 That's something -- everything on the preliminary is supposed 17 to be on the final. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Substantially, except these 19 things are taken off. These things are not included. 20 MR. GROGAN: Then I need to talk to Bandera County. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Appears to me there needs to 22 be some language about existing systems on lots that are 23 going to be divided. I mean, if you have an existing system, 24 why would you do a profile and why would you do a topography 25 survey and all of that? I can understand locating the 3-10-08 wk 52 1 systems to some degree, but not a total full-blown deal, as 2 if you were going to put in a new system. That makes no 3 sense. 4 MR. DON VOELKEL: For the Oehler Estate. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Makes no sense. 6 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Doesn't make sense to the public 7 that's doing it. They don't understand it. They don't 8 understand why we have to spend all that money without 9 getting anything out of it. The answer is, you're not 10 getting anything. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: That's where the issue comes up when 12 you say, "Well, what's it going to cost me to do that?" And 13 you tell them, and they say, "Well, what good is that?" 14 I.e., "What am I paying for, and why am I paying it?" That's 15 where it jumps up and bites you. 16 MR. GROGAN: What are y'all getting on the plat? 17 Because if I have to show a septic according to somebody else 18 determining the location, I'm not going to say that I'm 19 certain that that's where it's at. That's according to him. 20 Unless they expose it, I'm not going to show it certified 21 that that's where I'm saying the location is. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think our rules say you 23 have to certify. You just have to have a drawing to them 24 and, you know -- 25 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Put a note on there where that 3-10-08 wk 53 1 information came from. 2 MR. DON VOELKEL: Unless we find somebody, like Rex 3 was saying, to come down here and do that, other than, "The 4 owner said..." 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think it'll cost $75. 6 MR. DON VOELKEL: No, I don't either. 7 MR. ODOM: I would -- yeah, make the note and do 8 that, and it's your best guess. 9 MR. DON VOELKEL: Yeah. 10 MR. ODOM: Just like floodplain. Best information. 11 MR. DON VOELKEL: Now, if it's real close to the 12 property line, I can see -- you know, I'm going to be 13 hustling, "Wait, wait a minute, how close is this?" 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So much of it depends on the 15 size, if you're dividing. 16 MR. DON VOELKEL: That's true. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Say it's an older subdivision 18 and you're adjusting a lot line, and it's a 2-acre lot. It 19 could have an impact, I mean, if it's an existing system 20 there, because a lot of these properties are being bought 21 with the full intention of modifying, changing, tearing down, 22 rebuilding houses. And, you know, you kind of need to know. 23 It's really tied to acreage more than anything else. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is this subdivision on the 25 Oehler Estate up there, is that between family? 3-10-08 wk 54 1 MR. DON VOELKEL: No -- well, it's real good 2 friends, family friends. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. Well, not family, 4 then. 5 MR. LEE VOELKEL: I like the way you're going, 6 though, Don. She could adopt that guy. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If it had been family, you 8 wouldn't have to go through all this -- any of this, correct? 9 MS. HARDIN: In that case you wouldn't, 'cause it 10 was over so many acres. But on 1.03 on the new rules, when 11 you -- when you had the draft, you suggested -- and I wrote 12 on my draft that exemptions in 1.03 would not come into play 13 unless the lots were over 5 acres, but it's not stated as 14 such in the new rules. So, is it or is it not? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it is under -- if you go 16 to 5.09, it will say that. But -- 17 MS. HARDIN: So, if somebody comes in and asks if 18 they are exempt from a family division of property, what do 19 we tell them? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Less than 5 acres, they're not 21 exempt. 22 MR. ODOM: But how do we do that? 23 MS. HARDIN: How do we know that if it's not in 24 1.03, where we have all the exemptions listed? 25 MR. ODOM: I mean, it doesn't say -- 3-10-08 wk 55 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's in 5.09. "These rules 2 in this section supersede any conflicting regulations." 3 MR. ODOM: That's true, but if they subdivide there 4 without -- off metes and bounds, and we catch something 5 later -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just like we do them now. I 7 mean, we note it and say, hey, it was an illegal subdivision. 8 MR. DIGGES: Are these rules in effect that you're 9 talking about now? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 11 MR. DIGGES: They're in effect now? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They have been for about a 13 month, two months. 14 MR. DIGGES: How long? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two months -- since 16 November 26th. 17 MR. DIGGES: Okay. Then -- 18 MS. HARDIN: There were not copies available until 19 last week. So, you're saying that the 5.0 -- the new one is 20 going to override the state rule on exemptions? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the reason we did it this 22 way is that there's quite a few -- it would have been a total 23 rewrite of them and been very cumbersome to go back and 24 forth. We would have had to state a rule, then say except if 25 you're here and in this situation. Because the -- 5.09 3-10-08 wk 56 1 really changes the lots. If you're less than -- 5 acres or 2 less, you really have to read that. 3 MR. DON VOELKEL: Are you talking about exemptions 4 for family divisions? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They are not exempt under 5.09. 6 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Because they're less than 5 7 acres. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because they're less than 5 9 acres. Anything less than 5 acres has -- 5.09 is real 10 critical. You have to read it carefully. 11 MR. ODOM: What about something already platted, 12 saying -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If it's already platted, there 14 is no new subdivision. It's grandfathered. But it would 15 cover a revision in an existing subdivision. 16 MR. DON VOELKEL: They're exempt from filing a 17 revision if it's more than 5 acres in a family -- 18 MR. ODOM: Less than 5 acres. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Less than 5 acres. 20 MR. ODOM: 5 acres or less. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All of the exceptions to 22 platting do not apply if you're less than 5 acres. 23 MR. DON VOELKEL: Right. So if you're more than 24 5 acres and you're family, and if it's an existing plat, then 25 you can -- you're exempt from filing a revision. 3-10-08 wk 57 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Well -- 2 MR. DON VOELKEL: Even though it's platted. 3 MR. LEE VOELKEL: No, it's already platted. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If it's already platted, you're 5 not -- 6 MR. DON VOELKEL: You're talking about -- 7 MR. LEE VOELKEL: It would be unplatted land. 8 Unplatted land. 9 MR. DON VOELKEL: What if they're building a road 10 to get back into that? 11 MR. LEE VOELKEL: No, it's not exempted. 12 MR. ODOM: It's a driveway, Don. That's not a 13 road. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is Aggie interrogation. 15 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Law school 101. Let's go back 16 and do some drawings. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Are you through, Buster? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am through. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm through. 23 MR. LEE VOELKEL: We'll explain it later. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Till we hear back from Rex, 25 we'll know where we're going, right? Right. 3-10-08 wk 58 1 MR. LEE VOELKEL: We're not going to talk 2 floodplain today? Okay. 3 MR. ODOM: Let's talk. Let's do it. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can go talk with -- 5 MR. LEE VOELKEL: The Floodplain Administrator. 6 Yeah, you bet. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: I recommend that you do that right 8 away. Like, now. 9 MR. LEE VOELKEL: Yes. 10 MR. ODOM: Got him fired up. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is that it? Okay, this 12 workshop will be adjourned. 13 (Commissioners Court workshop adjourned at 2:40 p.m.) 14 - - - - - - - - - - 15 STATE OF TEXAS | 16 COUNTY OF KERR | 17 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 18 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 19 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 20 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 21 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 19th day of March, 2008. 22 23 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 24 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 25 Certified Shorthand Reporter 3-10-08 wk