1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Special Session 10 Monday, August 25, 2008 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 August 25, 2008 2 PAGE 3 --- Commissioners' Comments 6 4 1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on request from Hill Country District Junior 5 Livestock Show Association to use Kerr County Courthouse grounds on January 16, 2009, for 6 Cowboy Breakfast 9 7 1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for ordering the general election 10 8 1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 9 set public hearing for the purpose of continuing the Records Archive Fee and written plan for the 10 adoption of such for budget year 2008/09 11 11 1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for final plat of Sanderosa Estate 13 12 1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 13 authorize Kerr County Maintenance Supervisor to go out for bid for electrical, plumbing, HVAC, 14 and pest control services 14 15 1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action concerning two jail analysis proposals 16 16 1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 17 storm water issues regarding property located on Highway 173 25 18 1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 19 appoint Elizabeth Hughes for ESD #1 Commissioner 44 20 1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to designate the 2007 loan transaction with Banc 21 of America Public Capital Corp., a bank qualified transaction for purposes of Internal Revenue Code, 22 and authorize County Judge to submit amended form to Internal Revenue Service 45 23 1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 24 imposition of optional local fees in addition to registration fee as provided by Chapter 502 of 25 Texas Transportation Code 48 3 1 I N D E X (Continued) August 25, 2008 2 PAGE 3 1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on proposed joint funding agreement or resolution 4 with City of Kerrville on joint City-County operations/projects 50 5 1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 6 clarifying a budget item on the "Interlocal Agreement for the Continued Existence of a 7 Joint Airport Board to Provide Management of Kerrville/Kerr County Airport" 59 8 1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 9 appoint Commissioners Baldwin and Letz to renegotiate the "Interlocal Cooperation Agreement 10 between Kerr County and the City of Kerrville for Regulation of Subdivisions Within the City of 11 Kerrville's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction" with City of Kerrville 66 12 1.18 Open bids and award contract for 3 interior walls 13 for maintenance shop at Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, one 12' x 10' rollup door, one 10' x 10' 14 rollup door, and one 3' x 7' walk-thru door with hardware 68 15 1.19 Open bids and award contract for reworking 16 electrical conduits and wiring in the front area of Kerr County Courthouse square 72, 17 150 1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action 18 regarding FY 2008-09 budgets, budget and salary policies and fiscal, capital expenditure, and 19 personnel matters related thereto for various county departments 74 20 1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to set 21 date, time, and place of public hearings on Kerr County FY 2008-09 budget 120 22 1.16 Consider/discuss, approve by record vote the 23 proposed Kerr County 2008 tax rate and set date, time, and place of first and second public 24 hearings on such tax rate 129 25 4 1 I N D E X (Continued) August 25, 2008 2 PAGE 3 1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to authorize publication of notice(s) of proposed 4 salary, expenses and other allowances of Kerr County elected county or precinct officers for 5 FY 2008-09 and set date, time and place of public hearing on same 134 6 1.20 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 7 change salary grade for Assistant Auditor (Executive Session) --- 8 4.1 Pay Bills 135 9 4.2 Budget Amendments --- 4.3 Late Bills --- 10 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 150 11 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee Assignments 152 12 --- Adjourned 164 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 1 On Monday, August 25, 2008, at 9:00 a.m., a special 2 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in 3 the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, 4 Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in 5 open court: 6 P R O C E E D I N G S 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. 8 Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the 9 Kerr County Commissioners Court, posted and scheduled for 10 this time and date, Monday, August the 25th, 2008, at 9 a.m. 11 It is that time now. Commissioner Williams? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you'll please rise and 13 join with me in a word of prayer followed by the pledge of 14 allegiance to our flag. 15 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Be seated, please. At 17 this time, if there's any member of the public or the 18 audience that wishes to be heard on any matter that is not a 19 listed agenda item today, this is your opportunity to come 20 forward and tell us what's on your mind. If you wish to 21 speak on an agenda item, we have participation forms at the 22 back of the room. We'd ask that you fill one of those out. 23 It's not absolutely essential, but it is helpful for me to 24 know that there is someone that wants to speak on a given 25 issue. And, however, if -- if we get to an issue, you've not 8-25-08 6 1 filled out a participation form and you wish to be heard on 2 that issue, just get my attention some way and I'll see that 3 you have the opportunity to be heard on that issue. But 4 right now, if there's any member of the audience or the 5 public that wishes to be heard on any matter that is not a 6 listed agenda item, please feel free to come forward at this 7 time. Seeing no one coming forward, Commissioner Williams, 8 what do you have for us? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing, Judge, except the 10 rains were good. We just didn't get enough of them, and the 11 burn ban is on in Precinct 2. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it? 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's it. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Short and concise. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not much. Good week last week. 17 Had some good rains. Burn ban's on in Precinct 3, too. I 18 almost lifted it, but decided to leave it on. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I left mine off. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yours is off? 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: See, you got all the rain 22 out there. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Bull, we didn't get as much 24 as you got. (Laughter.) But it's green. Well, the areas 25 that got more, you know, Ranchlands, out in that area, got 3 8-25-08 7 1 or 4 inches, and Hunt got a lot, and the largest part of the 2 area got 3 to 4 inches. We only got an inch and 3 three-quarters. But -- 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's bragging, is what that 5 is. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- everything is green, and 7 we haven't had a lot of high wind, so I decided to leave it 8 off for a few more days. That's it. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else for us? 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Nope. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have a couple of 12 things. I was visiting with my dear friend Rosa Lavender, 13 and she was telling me that she was notified by the 14 governor's office Friday regarding the VOCA grants. There 15 were three grants granted for Kerr County -- or in Kerr 16 County; the Hill Country Crisis Council, Kids Advocacy Place, 17 and the Crime Victims Coordinator of Kerr County. Those 18 three grants were totaling $322,919. Entire AACOG region, 19 which includes San Antonio and Bexar County, they only got 20 1.4 million in grants, with a total of 12 grants, three in 21 Kerr County, and that's about 20 percent of all those grants 22 is coming into Kerr County, so we are very proud of that. 23 Rosa's hard work and -- is she here? Yeah, she's in the 24 back. Thank you for your hard work and what you do for us. 25 And what precinct do you live in? 8-25-08 8 1 MS. LAVENDER: Precinct 1. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Number one, attagirl. 3 (Laughter.) And she's smart. Also, in regards to our 4 visiting judges emptying the jail issue, we need to -- we 5 want to get that thing cranked up as quickly as possible and 6 get it going. The meeting that we had been talking about, 7 what I would like to do -- and y'all can talk with me 8 privately later on if -- if we have some problems with it, 9 but our first meeting in September is the 8th. The 10 Commissioners Court's in session on September the 8th at 11 9 a.m., generally. I'd like to bring us in early that 12 morning with the D.A.'s and judges, and all those people that 13 are involved in this thing, and -- and sit here and have a -- 14 a powwow and a workshop type setting, and see if we can't 15 nail this thing down and get -- get her going. So, about 16 7 a.m. on the 8th, if we can. That's all, Judge. Thank you. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: To follow up on yours, Commissioner 18 Baldwin, there were -- there was a sizable award to CASA, but 19 it's for the entire Alamo area region, and, of course, our 20 local organization which serves, I know, Kerr and Bandera 21 Counties, and maybe one or two others, of course, will 22 obviously share in that in some manner. But I noted those, 23 and noted that particularly the Crisis Council got a -- got a 24 healthy amount of funding. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They did. 8-25-08 9 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's exciting. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: So, let's get on with the business 3 at hand. First item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, 4 and take appropriate action on request from Hill Country 5 District Junior Livestock Show Association, along with the 6 Chamber of Commerce and Kerrville Main Street, to use the 7 Kerr County Courthouse grounds on January the 16th, 2009, for 8 their Cowboy Breakfast, which would be the -- I don't know 9 which annual Cowboy Breakfast, but it would be the second 10 annual on the courthouse grounds, I think. Mr. Talarico? 11 MR. TALARICO: Thank you, Judge, Commissioners. I 12 have Johnna Wade with me representing the Main Street and 13 City of Kerrville. Brian Bondy gives his regrets for not 14 being able to attend today as a representative of the 15 Chamber. We'd sure like the Commissioners and the Judge to 16 approve the use of the courthouse again for our Cowboy 17 Breakfast this year. It will be the fifth annual; second 18 annual if we do it here, which we hope you approve. We have 19 found that last year, the grounds were perfect for it. We 20 had a much greater attendance, and it just -- it just went 21 off without a hitch, and we appreciate that and would like to 22 continue with this as a tradition. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 8-25-08 10 1 approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good parties. Good parties. 3 MR. TALARICO: Thank you. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: You indicated that with a little bit 5 more lead time here, you think you can make it bigger and 6 better, and by a pretty good margin? 7 MR. TALARICO: We believe so. We believe so. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Further discussion? All in 9 favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank you 14 for being here. 15 MR. TALARICO: Thank you, gentlemen. We appreciate 16 it. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: The next item on the agenda is to 18 consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for ordering 19 the general election. Ms. Alford? 20 MS. ALFORD: Yes, sir. Good morning. This is the 21 order and I need you to sign to order the November 4th 22 general election to elect the Sheriff; Tax Assessor; County 23 Attorney; Commissioners, Precinct 1 and 3; Constables 1, 2, 24 3, and 4; District Judge, 216th; District Attorney, 198th; 25 Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, for an unexpired term; and 8-25-08 11 1 County Treasurer for an unexpired term. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 5 approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in 6 favor of that motion, signify by raising your right hand. 7 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 8 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 9 (No response.) 10 MS. ALFORD: Thank you. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have the original order? 12 MS. ALFORD: You have the original one. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon? 14 MS. ALFORD: You should have the original one. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Unless she's got it there, I don't 16 have it here with my materials. 17 MS. ALFORD: You can have mine. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 3; consider, 19 discuss, take appropriate action to set a public hearing for 20 the purpose of continuing the Records Archive Fee and written 21 plan for the adoption of such for the budget year 2008-09 in 22 accordance with the Local Government Code, Section 118.025. 23 Ms. Pieper? 24 MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, the records archival fee, 25 there is a law that states that I have to do a written plan. 8-25-08 12 1 We set a public hearing and go through that, then y'all 2 approve it, and then we can continue to collect the $5 3 records archival fee. And so at this point, we just need to 4 set a public hearing. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What day? 6 MS. PIEPER: I don't have a calendar with me. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What day would you like? 8 MS. PIEPER: Whatever the next Commissioners Court 9 meeting is. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 8th. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: What does it need, 10 days? 12 MS. PIEPER: Yes, I believe so. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Isn't it, Bill? 7th or 8th? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe so. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's the 8th. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: September 8th, first one. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What time? 10:00? 19 MS. PIEPER: 10 a.m. is fine. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval that we set the 21 public hearing September 8th, 10 a.m., for the records 22 archival fee. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for setting 25 of the public hearing as indicated. Question or discussion 8-25-08 13 1 on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by 2 raising your right hand. 3 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 4 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 5 (No response.) 6 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. 7 MS. PIEPER: Thank you. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 4; consider, 9 discuss, and take appropriate action for the final plat of 10 Sanderosa Estate located in Precinct 1. 11 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. This property on Calcote Road 12 came before the Court back in June, and you granted a 13 variance from the grandfather date on the subdivision rules 14 in Court Order Number 30887, and I instructed Mr. Garcia to 15 plat it as a one-lot subdivision. At this time, all the 16 requirements have been met; therefore, we ask that you accept 17 the final plat of Sanderosa Estate in Precinct 1 as presented 18 today. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll move for approval. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on that 23 motion? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I just wanted to say 25 that this gentleman has worked very hard to do the right 8-25-08 14 1 thing with the guidance of our Road and Bridge office, and 2 it's a neat thing to see when people work together. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion? All 4 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your 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 9 to Item 5; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to 10 authorize Kerr County Maintenance Supervisor to go out for 11 bid for electrical, plumbing, HVAC, and pest control 12 services. I assume this is the annual bid process that you 13 go through? 14 MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 19 approval. Question or discussion on the motion? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: When do you want the -- when 21 are the bids due back? 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I believe the 19th of 23 September is what I saw. 24 MR. BOLLIER: 19th of September. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, 19th. Okay. 8-25-08 15 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would also encourage you to 2 visit with the County Attorney on some of the requirements 3 that, say, for instance, pest control may have in order for 4 people to be able to bid. It seems that there may be some 5 elements in that that are a little bit farfetched, in my 6 opinion, one of those requirements being that I think you 7 have to have a million or $2 million policy for an uninsured 8 operator or something of a vehicle on county property or 9 something. There's a little bit of -- 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Overkill? 11 MR. OVERBY: -- overkill, it seems, that would 12 allow -- that would not allow some of the people that do have 13 proper insurance and licenses to do this service to be cost 14 prohibitive to -- and unheard of, in some of the cases, to be 15 able to bid. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To state that another way, I 17 think we need to, on a lot of these, use the minimum -- the 18 state law minimums -- 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There you go. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- for the insurance 21 requirements. Because most of this is not the type of work 22 where they're going to be endangering buildings or anything 23 like that. They just need to carry what's required by law. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: State law minimum seems appropriate. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Sounds good to me. 8-25-08 16 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's going to work. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Further question or 3 discussion on that motion? All in favor of the motion, 4 signify by raising your 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. Let's move 9 to Item 6, if we might; consider, discuss, take appropriate 10 action concerning two jail analysis proposals. Mr. 11 Hierholzer. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I think all of us agree 13 that those proposals are, in my opinion, extremely high as 14 far as cost. It does show some of the details that can be 15 done, and I don't really recommend at this time that we go 16 with either one of those proposals. I'm more in line with 17 what Commissioner Baldwin said a while ago and what we talked 18 about last week. I don't know if we can set a firm date, or 19 who you want to notify on a Monday -- is that what September 20 the 8th is? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Normally that is a Grand Jury 23 and court date, one of the courts in one of their counties, 24 so I don't know who you want to -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's just a starting date. 8-25-08 17 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, we just -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Something to start with. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But I think we should also 4 include the -- the Judge-elect if we can get him in on the 5 meeting, 'cause it's going to affect his docket more than 6 anybody's. From what I see, the 216th is the major docket 7 problem we have, and he'll be the Judge of that court. But 8 just the material we were provided by those analysts, those 9 companies, I think is fabulous material for us to all look 10 at. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Like you, I found that the proposals 12 do incorporate some information that was pretty enlightening, 13 and things that -- that maybe we want to discuss in a -- in 14 an open discussion format, and probably wait to do anything 15 here until after we've had the meeting with all the parties 16 concerned. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But I also think we need to 18 have the municipal court judge as part of that meeting. 19 Unfortunately, you know, I -- going through jail stuff, we've 20 had a person in jail for six days for sitting out a fine for 21 having -- what was it? Too much garbage clutter, some city 22 offense. And it's a young person that evidently didn't haul 23 off all their garbage or something, so they sit in jail for 24 two weeks while we pay them, sitting out a fine that they 25 couldn't pay. I think alternative sentencing guidelines can 8-25-08 18 1 help with some of that type of stuff. I just think -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Community service type work. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think we need to look at 4 some different options. To me, jails -- the way things are 5 going now, jails should be meant for violent and constant 6 criminals, not -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not garbage people? 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not just a way to get a point 9 across. I think that's the wrong issue. So -- 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, Rusty, too, there -- 11 there is a lot of folks in the courtroom today that don't 12 normally come here and don't -- probably don't keep up with 13 us and what we're doing, and some of them don't care, and 14 that's fine. I understand that clearly. But bottom line, 15 what we're talking about here, we're trying to figure out a 16 way to get people out of jail that don't need to be in jail, 17 as opposed to spending 10, 12, 15 million of the taxpayers' 18 dollars building a new jail. And that's what we're talking 19 about, and that's what we're working at, just for their 20 information. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And it -- and it's exactly 22 right, and it's not just to get people out of jail that don't 23 belong. It's to speed up the system. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There isn't -- for people that 8-25-08 19 1 don't know, I have people in our jail right now, and there 2 isn't any reason for it, that you have somebody in jail 500, 3 600, 700 days that are waiting to go to trial. Or sitting 4 there 300 days, you know, and then get -- get dismissed or 5 not guilty, and we have paid medical, we have paid housing, 6 we have paid food, we have paid everything for these people 7 for hundreds of days to walk out and nothing ever happened, 8 and they didn't get their day in court. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with you. I agree 10 with you, Sheriff, with respect to the proposals. They're 11 both very interesting, and they're very pricey. But what was 12 interesting about it to me was that one of them -- at least 13 one of them provided you with a real blueprint for the 14 discussions that you're going to take -- that Commissioner 15 Baldwin and you are trying to put together for later in this 16 year. And I think that's good, because it outlined many, 17 many things you ought to examine that might not come to the 18 forefront that have been listed. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It outlined a lot of things in 20 there that I wouldn't even have thought of. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I think that's where those 23 proposals can be very advantageous for us to look at. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now knowing what they are, 25 we can examine them ourselves. 8-25-08 20 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I have a little bit 3 different opinion on that. I -- I think there very well may 4 be a value to some of those -- of an outside person to help 5 facilitate those discussions. I think you -- they are 6 experts in that field. I certainly don't want to pay what 7 they're paying, but I would encourage the Sheriff to talk to 8 both of them and just see what they'd charge just to come and 9 facilitate a meeting, and not get that involved. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's going to be this. I've 11 talked to them about that, and it's -- the difference is, 12 these -- these companies and these corporations that are 13 doing this can't afford to do it -- we're a little bit ahead 14 of the curve from where most counties start looking at this. 15 The one that -- the one did it in Midland County, okay, they 16 were already housing inmates out of county. They were 17 already spending right at a million dollars a year somewhere 18 else just to house inmates, so at that point, a $70,000 bill 19 to -- to do a total analytical study -- which did help them, 20 because it enabled them to no longer house out of county. 21 They're still going to have to add onto their jail, is what 22 the study came up with, but they were able to speed up and 23 fast-track everything enough that they weren't having to 24 spend a million dollars a year any more in housing out of 25 county. At that point, that $70,000 bill is not bad at all. 8-25-08 21 1 We're at that -- you know, if we don't do something pretty 2 quick, then yes, we're going to be at that point where we're 3 going to be housing out of county again, as we did in years 4 past, a long time ago. We're already losing -- from when I 5 first took office eight years ago, we were able to house 6 other counties' inmates in our jail, and we brought in, you 7 know, probably, profit-wise, 300,000 a year doing that. So 8 we're losing that, because I can't house other counties'. 9 But we are -- we're just at the point where we're going to 10 have to start spending. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just -- you know, I think we 12 understand where we need to look and where we're probably 13 trying to go, but you're talking about a lot of different 14 independent elected officials and trying to keep them focused 15 and have an accountable plan that we can go back with some 16 accountability. It's going to be a real challenge, and I 17 think sometimes it's better to have an outside person kind of 18 coordinating some of it. So, you know, maybe there's other 19 options out there. I just think -- I don't want this thing 20 to get lost in the details, because we know what -- we kind 21 of do have a good idea, I think, what needs to be done, but 22 implementation is going to be pretty difficult when you get 23 on an independent elected official's turf. And that is why I 24 think there's a possible -- there's some value to you having 25 a third party involved, at least from a facilitation 8-25-08 22 1 standpoint. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, from these proposals and 3 the prices on both of them, I -- I truly believe that those 4 companies, with their personnel and the way they do it, they 5 earn that -- that bill. I mean, it's not wasted money that 6 the County would waste. It's just a hard pill for me to 7 swallow, at least, in saying, "Yes, spend this money just to 8 do a study," 'cause that's the way most people look at it, 9 without looking at the details. I think you're exactly 10 right. We're going to have some -- some issues between 11 elected officials and departments and how they want to 12 schedule their dockets, or they want, you know, me to be able 13 to bring inmates over and have court hearings, or whether 14 it's -- yeah, there are going to be some issues that we're 15 going to all have to sit down and agree that this has got to 16 be solved. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it's going to take 18 commitment by each elected official to truly analyze their 19 own operations, because what's going to come out of this, 20 probably, in multiple offices is that they're part of the 21 problem. And it's real hard to get some of these people to 22 admit that they're the problem. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: May be easier to hire a 24 mediator. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I'm saying. 8-25-08 23 1 Something, a facilitator -- that's why I used the word 2 "facilitator" -- may be of benefit. I just think it's a -- 3 you know, -- 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- I think we're going down the 6 right road, but we just need to make sure we don't get 7 derailed along the way because of egos. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Do you want Jody, then, to try 9 and set up a meeting to begin with? Do you want my office 10 or -- or -- you know, I mean, to get this thing off center 11 and actually start moving? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm setting this meeting up. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You want to set it? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you want to set up 15 something separate to go do a study, go do it. We're doing 16 this thing, and we're going to get her done. If you -- if 17 you're going to study it, we're going to be through by the 18 time you get to where your study's going. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Commissioner, I hate to say 20 this, but this is exactly what Jonathan and I are talking 21 about. There's a lot more to it than just, we're going to 22 sit and -- 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand exactly what 24 you're talking about, and we're not going to throw up any 25 more roadblocks. We're going to move forward. 8-25-08 24 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what I'm -- 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Conversation's over. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So, you're going to set up the 4 meeting? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely am. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, you know, if this 8 works, it'll be wonderful. We don't have to spend the money. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Exactly. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But later in the year, if 11 this doesn't work, what y'all are proposing to do -- and we 12 sure hope it does; it will be a lot cheaper, but maybe by the 13 end of the budget year, Rusty might have some money left over 14 in his jailer line item where we can fund that study. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. I like it. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: And even before the end of the 18 budget year, we might be able to see that, and do it midyear. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's true. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's just do it now. 21 (Laughter.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: We already know where the money's 23 coming from, right? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on that particular 8-25-08 25 1 agenda item? Why don't we move on, then, to Item 7; 2 consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on storm water 3 issues regarding property located on Highway 173. 4 Commissioner Williams? 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I placed this on the 6 agenda -- Judge, thank you -- because I've had correspondence 7 from Mr. Trevor Hyde, president of Comanche Trace. I've had 8 innumerable telephone calls from people who live out in the 9 vicinity -- in The Homestead or in the vicinity with respect 10 to some developments taking place on some adjacent property. 11 I'm not certain what, if any, authority the Court has, but I 12 thought it would be important to bring it to our attention, 13 because it not only affects what's taking place on this 14 property that's being developed, or its use is being changed, 15 but it does have a lot of effect on adjacent pieces of 16 property. I passed Mr. Hyde's letter on to the County 17 Attorney and asked him to take a look at what, if any, 18 authority the County has in this matter. It's my 19 understanding that this probably is a T.C.E.Q. matter, but I 20 wanted to be certain that that was the case. There are also 21 people here who have an interest in it, and I think the Court 22 needs to listen to some of their concerns, even though we may 23 not have authority to do something. But nonetheless, 24 Mr. County Attorney, based on the letter that we received 25 from Mr. Hyde in which he outlines the nature of the problem 8-25-08 26 1 and the -- the particular permitting that is required, I 2 think it's Storm Water Pollution Permit Number 3 or whatever, 3 what is your opinion with respect to the County order to 4 compel? 5 MR. EMERSON: Commissioner, as you know, the -- the 6 Commissioners Court only has the authority delegated to it by 7 the state, because you're a subdivision of the state. And 8 when you get into private property in unincorporated areas of 9 the county like this, if it's not being subdivided, our 10 authority is very, very limited. You can -- we can go in and 11 we can clean out drainage ditches, we can regulate sexually 12 oriented businesses, wild animals, that type of thing, but as 13 far as the construction of a particular type of business and 14 its effects on drainage, we don't have any authority. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The agency that can compel 16 is the T.C.E.Q.; is that correct? 17 MR. EMERSON: That's my understanding. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And because the 19 development's taking place on property -- or the disturbance 20 of the existing property is on 5 acres or more, I think 21 that's a parameter; is that your understanding? 22 MR. EMERSON: That's my understanding, for T.C.E.Q. 23 to get involved. Now, there's a lot of civil issues between 24 adjacent property owners on changing and runoff and drainage 25 and natural water flow, but that's not something for this 8-25-08 27 1 Court to be involved in. And the few statutes that are out 2 there as far as the County's ability to control that type of 3 issue seem to be related to counties with populations of 4 100,000 or better. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's certainly no 6 prohibition to the County being in touch with T.C.E.Q. and 7 following up to see whether or not an SWP-3 plan has been 8 filed? Would that be your -- 9 MR. EMERSON: That's a fair statement. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- thought? Okay. There 11 are folks in the audience who may want to speak to the issue, 12 Judge, if you'll ask about that. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Those of you that might be -- 14 there's a gentleman right here. If you'll come forward to 15 the podium and give us your name and address, please? 16 MR. MEYERS: Sure. My name is Jim Meyers. My 17 address is 360, that's 3-6-0, Saddleclub Drive in Kerrville. 18 Thank you for the opportunity to present to the Commission, 19 and it's -- I'm a few years retired, so I've kind of put 20 myself back into gear here this morning to do a presentation 21 to you, or at least to kind of give a position of The 22 Homestead. I'm the president of the homeowners' association, 23 and we have probably about 55 homes now at The Homestead. By 24 estimate, we would say that if the rainwater runoff and storm 25 water runoff from this proposed development is not adequately 8-25-08 28 1 controlled, it's going to adversely affect Homestead's 2 property, in addition to probably between 12 and 15 other lot 3 owners who are members of the association within The 4 Homestead. Historically, we've had runoff when very heavy 5 rains occur, and, of course, it will dissipate eventually, 6 but we just don't want to exacerbate that situation. 7 I have here a letter that I prepared. As you are 8 already aware, there are many issues associated with the 9 proposed building of a 300-unit mini storage facility on the 10 18-acre Louis Howard property on Texas Route 173 in Kerr 11 County. These issues were brought to your attention in a 12 letter from Comanche Trace Realty Company dated August the 13 8th, 2008. The Homestead at Turtle Creek -- which we'll call 14 "The Homestead" from now on -- homeowners' association board 15 of directors has reviewed the letter, and concurs in its 16 findings. Several issues raised in the Comanche Trace letter 17 are of great concern to the board and to the members of the 18 association. Although the ground has been significantly 19 disturbed and trees removed from the mini storage site 20 property, there are no plans for controlling, containing, 21 preventing storm water runoff from the proposed development 22 into the association's property or private property within 23 The Homestead. Although The Homestead has engineered water 24 diversions to appropriately divert runoff from occasionally 25 heavy rains, they are not intended to divert large amounts of 8-25-08 29 1 storm water runoff that may be generated by several acres of 2 impervious structure, such as roofing and roadways. 3 Storm water runoff from the elevated ground 4 comprising the Howard property already passes through The 5 Homestead. Long-lasting heavy rains like we experienced in 6 2007 already cause significant water flow through some lots 7 in the community when the ground is fully saturated. This 8 situation will only get worse unless a storm water runoff 9 plan is developed, approved, documented, implemented, and 10 supervised. This issue has been raised with the Texas 11 Commission on Environmental Quality. The proposed 12 construction site lies within the city of Kerrville's 13 extended territorial jurisdiction. Being within the ETJ, we 14 believe that the special development regulations apply to 15 this project. The project should also comply with all other 16 city, county, and state regulations applicable to the 17 proposed use and development. At some time in the future, it 18 is likely that the Howard property and whatever improvement 19 is placed upon it will be assimilated into the Kerrville city 20 limits. To protect the health, welfare, safety, and property 21 values of The Homestead, The Woods community nearby, and 22 nearby Comanche Trace, we believe that a stronger and well 23 coordinated effort should be made by the City to assure 24 compliance with every aspect of the endeavor. 25 The Howard property is surrounded by present and 8-25-08 30 1 proposed residential development. The development of a large 2 mini storage complex immediately adjacent to expensive homes 3 in well managed associations such as The Homestead, The 4 Woods, and Comanche Trace raises questions of whether or not 5 the proposed use has been reviewed under the provisions of 6 the Kerrville Comprehensive Plan, and did that review 7 determine that the proposed use is consistent with the 8 property's best and highest use within a residential area? 9 Is the proposed commercial use consistent with the property's 10 current zoning within the ETJ? And I think those are some 11 questions that need to be addressed and answered. There are 12 several governmental agencies that have become involved in 13 this project, but the City of Kerrville has the primary 14 responsibility, as we see it, for the oversight and 15 regulation of development within the ETJ in compliance with 16 applicable regulations. We would request that all parties -- 17 and that includes the County, the City, the State, everybody 18 who's got a piece of this thing, handle on it -- should work 19 together so that we can develop a good project there that 20 does not create a bad relationship between the other 21 neighbors. And -- and that's pretty much the end of the 22 statement. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is another 24 illustration of -- I already made this point to my two 25 colleagues who are about to engage the City in discussions 8-25-08 31 1 with respect to what takes place in the ETJ. And, to me, 2 it's just another illustration of -- of how the ETJ, under 3 the current situation, becomes never-never land or no-man's 4 land, if you will, by reason of the interlocal agreement that 5 exists between the County and the City. I realize the 6 property is not being subdivided, and that ties our hands to 7 some extent, but by the same token, here we have a situation 8 where the City disclaims any responsibility for doing 9 anything. The County, by reason of the County Attorney's 10 opinion, its hands are tied, because we're not -- the 11 property is not being subdivided. And so who gets injured? 12 No one but the property owners adjacent to it have the 13 potential for injury. I think that's a problem, and I hope 14 that when you two gentlemen engage the City again, some of 15 these issues may be taken up as to who properly has some 16 reason to engage and be involved in situations in the ETJ. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- the answer to 18 that is probably going be the Legislature. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Could be. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think the -- I agree 21 totally with what the County Attorney said related to our 22 authority in the ETJ on these types of matters. If they're 23 not -- if there's not a subdivision plat, we're pretty much 24 taken out of the loop, and I think the City's the same. I 25 don't think they have any zoning authority or anything like 8-25-08 32 1 that. They need some planning in the ETJ, but I don't -- I'm 2 not sure they have much authority there, from my 3 conversations with City Council and the City Manager. But, 4 you know, I think it possibly goes a lot, you know, back 5 to -- I know Commissioner Williams and Baldwin myself were at 6 a meeting on Friday where this was talked about. That is a 7 legislative problem. And, you know, it's something that some 8 of us -- or I'm working on with other counties in the Hill 9 Country, is to at least look into this, at least giving 10 counties the option to get some of this authority at a local 11 election basis. It cuts both ways, though. We have to be 12 real careful, in my mind, when you start going down this -- 13 this is a situation where there are a lot of civil remedies, 14 but that's costly to the people that are involved, and that's 15 the problem there. I think -- by looking at the photographs, 16 I think there's ag violations, probably the Agricultural 17 Code, drainage. I mean, there's a lot of state law on that, 18 but it's between you and the neighbor, unfortunately, not 19 between any governmental entity and the property owners. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Hyde, do you wish to be heard? 21 If you'll come forward and give us your name and address, 22 please, tell us your position on this. 23 MR. HYDE: Trevor Hyde, 2801 Comanche Trace Drive. 24 Good morning, Judge, Commissioners. I echo everything 25 Mr. Meyers said. My -- some of the questions I have -- I 8-25-08 33 1 mean, does the -- does the County have any jurisdiction over 2 fire safety? Health? Any language within there that y'all 3 can make sure that the citizens that are in this area are 4 protected? There's -- you know, if there's no water to the 5 site, how are they going to do any type of fire protection? 6 I know Comanche Trace is not allowing water over there. I 7 know The Homestead is not, and I know The Woods is not. So, 8 are they going to be drilling a well in the ETJ? I think 9 there's a septic system from the neighboring property that 10 goes across and into part of this 18 acres, and I think from 11 fire safety, health and welfare, you know, you probably do 12 have some jurisdiction. When you have a developer that's out 13 there -- or maybe he's not a developer. He's clearing land 14 without the necessary inspections, environmental reports, and 15 drainage studies. And y'all look at us, okay, it's y'all's 16 -- you know, your problem. We understand and sympathize with 17 you. But on my end, I look at it, y'all do have some 18 responsibility. And I know y'all have language that allows 19 you to have some responsibility, and how far do y'all want to 20 take that? I'm not saying, hey -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, that -- tell me what 22 that is. 23 MR. HYDE: Well, as far as in your language like 24 the City has -- I haven't read your documents, but -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You just said you knew. 8-25-08 34 1 MR. HYDE: Excuse me. I would think you would. 2 Excuse me, let me reword that. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 4 MR. HYDE: And I think for, you know, the 5 protection of the public in this area -- I mean, if you lived 6 right behind it, you'd feel just like these people do. I 7 mean, a 300-unit storage facility that people can store 8 whatever, it could cause fire and damage, and these people 9 have homes that butt right up to it. What are any type of 10 setbacks? I think y'all have seen the pictures. The 11 gentleman's actually put material on neighboring property. 12 He's actually destroyed the fence and everything, and so 13 it -- it's serious to us, and we're looking for y'all's help, 14 if you can help. And, you know, he doesn't have a permit 15 from TexDOT. He hasn't done the traffic study. I've asked 16 Mike Coward that. Again, this gets into traffic and safety 17 and health, the citizens in the county that drive up and down 18 there. Everybody in this room and all these people over here 19 pay significant tax dollars to the county as well. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Hyde, the -- I'm sorry. 21 MR. HYDE: No, go ahead. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: On the issue of health, we, of 23 course, would have jurisdiction if there is a desire to put 24 in an on-site sewer facility, a septic system, and that, of 25 course, would come through our Environmental Health 8-25-08 35 1 Department. Insofar as water, if -- if utilities are not 2 extended to it by some private organization that has it 3 within its area of responsibility or service area, and 4 there's a desire to have a well, that, of course, as you 5 know, would go to Headwaters. 6 MR. HYDE: Mm-hmm. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: And they would determine whether on 8 not a permit should be granted for a well, which, of course, 9 would relate directly to a fire. But, unfortunately, we -- 10 we only have what the Legislature says we can have. The 11 City, on the other hand, is a -- you talk about health, 12 safety, and welfare. The City has a general grant of 13 authority within the area subject to its regulation to do 14 anything related to health, safety, and welfare, excluding 15 only that which they're specifically prohibited from doing. 16 We're just the flip side of that. 17 MR. HYDE: Right. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: We've only got what they 19 specifically give us, and unfortunately, the only -- the only 20 tool they've given us to this point, other than the septic, 21 for example -- and, of course, we've got police powers there. 22 As you mentioned, it borders Highway 173. The traffic issue 23 is a state issue. Certainly, we have police powers there, 24 law enforcement, insofar as traffic violations occurring in 25 the area. If they see those, they're certainly going to 8-25-08 36 1 enforce the law. But, unfortunately, we don't have any 2 specific land use or land regulatory control authority. I 3 think, as Commissioner Letz said, if we're going to go to 4 that next level, we have to get that from the Legislature. 5 That would be a significant step, I assure you. I'm not sure 6 what the scope of county government would have to -- we would 7 have to become in order to handle the enforcement aspect of 8 this enhanced scope, but certainly to the degree we have 9 enforcement and regulatory authority, we're going to exercise 10 that. The -- the civil issues that you point out, I think, 11 are -- they're right there right now. 12 MR. HYDE: Right. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: And it occurs to me that if there 14 were, by virtue of existing trespasses, I'll call it for lack 15 of a better term -- that's a term in the civil law -- that 16 have occurred, if litigation were initiated there, things -- 17 things might get aired out in a little more thorough manner. 18 But it appears that T.C.E.Q. dealing with your drainage 19 issues and whatever permits they require are your most 20 prospective enforcement at this point in time. 21 MR. HYDE: Well, I appreciate that. And -- and I 22 understand that, and I understand, you know, doing the right 23 thing and working together with neighbors. And, obviously, 24 we don't have that situation here. And, you know, being an 25 active developer here in the city, and also from part of our 8-25-08 37 1 properties that we annex from the county in the city, I hope 2 that you're working with the Council and Todd -- and the 3 mayor and everything in the ETJ, because when someone 4 significantly changes the use of their property from 5 agricultural and putting in a commercial 300-unit, inviting 6 the public to come and put personal belongings there, and it 7 butts up to the ETJ -- and the setbacks are clear from the 8 City's end of it; from 25 feet, if it's a storage facility, 9 off the property line. You can see what he's already 10 building. His pad is right on the line. R.V. storage has to 11 be 50 feet off. Those are the type of things I think -- I 12 hope that you can work in concert together to make it a 13 continuing growing and better place for all the citizens. 14 Thank y'all. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that 100 16 percent. Thank you. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. We appreciate your -- 18 what your input is today. Yes, ma'am? Please come forward 19 and give us your name and address, and tell us your position 20 on this matter. 21 MS. STACY: My name is Debbie Stacy. I'm here on 22 behalf of Jim and Debbie Stacy, who live at 435 Saddle Club 23 Drive here in The Homestead. Good morning, Your Honor and 24 Commissioners. First of all, let me go on record to say that 25 we have filed a complaint with T.C.E.Q. regarding this 8-25-08 38 1 project. Let me also say that we've only lived in The 2 Homestead for about a year and a half. And, gentlemen, we 3 bought that property because there was no commercial zoning 4 in that area. This -- this project is of grave concern to 5 us, as it should be to y'all, because we're facing the very 6 real possibility of home devaluation. And if that happens, 7 you also fail -- you also -- you also will experience a 8 reduced tax base. We are in agreement with Mr. Meyers and 9 Mr. Hyde for all of the things that they have spoken about. 10 There is no provision for storm water runoff, and as one of 11 those properties that could be affected by this, I can tell 12 you that last year, when we had those heavy rains, the 13 culvert underneath the street sent a river onto our property. 14 With -- with what this -- what has happened on this property, 15 the ground has changed. The trees have been removed. We're 16 facing -- we're facing the distinct possibility that that 17 water is going to come up to our home now. So, that's just 18 our property. 19 Let me also make a couple of other points that I 20 don't believe have been made to this point, which should 21 concern the health and safety all the residents of Kerr 22 County. If this project is allowed to proceed and we end up 23 with standing water, gentlemen, we already have confirmed 24 cases in San Antonio of West Nile Virus. It's not hard to 25 believe, with standing water, that that could end up here in 8-25-08 39 1 Kerr County. That not only affects those of us who live over 2 there; those mosquitoes will travel throughout Kerr County, 3 and they will continue to -- to breed. The other thing is, 4 when you have a storage facility like this, you also 5 experience increased crime, criminal activity. You have 6 stolen property being housed in those units. You have 7 increased drug activity. Again, when we purchased our 8 property, none of that -- none of that happened. But these 9 last two points affect everyone in this room, the increased 10 criminal activity and the very real possibility of West Nile 11 Virus. So, those last two points I wanted to -- I want to 12 make, because they will affect everyone here in Kerr County. 13 Thank y'all so much. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Stacy. We appreciate 15 your comments. Is there anyone else that wishes to be heard 16 with regard to this particular agenda item? Anybody else? 17 Mr. Meyers, an additional point you wish to make? 18 MR. MEYERS: Yes, thank you very much. I 19 appreciate the opportunity to make a second little comment 20 here. Trevor kind of brought up the safety issue. I'm a 21 safety guy; that was my career. I'm kind of a 22 belt-and-suspenders kind of man, you know; can't be too safe. 23 But one of the things that struck me the other day as I was 24 driving by there, we're turning -- we're talking about fire 25 safety. Right now on that property is a line of uprooted 8-25-08 40 1 trees and brush. It's probably 200 feet long, and it's 2 probably maybe 30 feet wide, 40 feet wide. It's just like 3 a -- a row of debris sitting there. As it sits right now, 4 and as dry as it is in the county, if that catches fire, 5 we're going to have a hell of a bonfire out there. That 6 thing's going to really go, and if it's windy and it gets 7 started, it's going to go across 173, or it could actually 8 blow over onto The Homestead. So, I mean, that sort of stuff 9 presents a concern to us, and it's a little disturbing to 10 say, well -- or hear that, you know, well, yes, the County -- 11 we could do this, but the City can do that. And yet I think 12 that we should look a little closer, and maybe work a little 13 closer with the City to -- to make sure that they take health 14 and safety issues into -- into consideration, and do it soon 15 so that we don't have something go on, as Debbie said, you 16 know, that could be a -- standing water, or it could be a 17 fire hazard, or any other type of hazard that's up there. 18 And I think these things can be addressed. I mean, most 19 government agencies have some type of emergency provisions 20 for safety and health, and I would exhort the Commission here 21 to talk to the City and get them to do what they have to do 22 to make that happen, to make it safe and keep it safe. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just one final comment. 24 I'll continue to monitor -- for the information of the people 25 who've come out for this issue, I'll continue to monitor with 8-25-08 41 1 T.C.E.Q. as to whether or not they filed for their SWP-3, 2 storm water pollution permit, and what the status of that is. 3 And I'd also like to ask the County Attorney one more 4 question. And if you don't have the answer today, Rex, 5 that's fine; you and I will talk about it later. Is there 6 anything in the Health and Safety Code that provides the 7 County with some authority in this particular instance? You 8 don't have to answer now. I'll talk to you about it later. 9 MR. EMERSON: Well, the only particular issue that 10 would arise would be possibly under the nuisance statute, but 11 right now, there's nothing there. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 13 MR. EMERSON: And if you would allow me to address 14 the fire issue, 'cause that's been raised several times. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure. 16 MR. EMERSON: Other than the county fire marshal 17 enforcing the International Fire Code in commercial 18 structures out in the county, or the burn ban, we don't have 19 any authority, guys. I'm sorry, we're just -- we're not 20 located adjacent to a major metropolitan area, and our 21 population isn't high enough. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And a final comment. I've 24 heard from several people that, you know, we don't want to do 25 it. It's not that we don't want to do something. We don't 8-25-08 42 1 have the ability to do something. It's -- we have no more 2 rights related to all these issues than you all do. What we 3 could do, possibly, and I'd be supportive of either 4 Commissioner Williams or the Judge writing a letter to 5 T.C.E.Q. asking them formally to monitor the situation, but 6 beyond that, I mean, they're the state agency that has the 7 ability to do it. And we just -- I mean, we just don't have 8 the authority, and I'm afraid the City doesn't have much 9 authority here either. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I think Commissioner Williams 11 has already indicated that he's going to indicate his and 12 this Court's interest in -- in particular issues that relate 13 to this matter as it relates to T.C.E.Q.'s regulatory 14 authority. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct, Judge. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm just -- 17 MR. MEYERS: So that's going to happen? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can do an official -- you 19 know, authorizing him to write the letter if we want. I 20 don't know that if that makes any difference, but from the 21 sake of involvement, -- 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will do. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- that's all we can do. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have one final question. 25 MR. MEYERS: Yes, sir? 8-25-08 43 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You suggested that we 2 contact the City and encourage them to do the right thing. 3 Are you going to do that as well? 4 MR. MEYERS: Yes, sir. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you -- are you going to 6 City Council like you did here today? 7 MR. MEYERS: If we know when the meeting is to be, 8 sure, we'll be there. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tomorrow night. 10 MR. MEYERS: I've got a letter -- a similar letter 11 to what I've presented here that's going to be sent to them. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tomorrow night. 13 MR. MEYERS: Tomorrow night? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May I suggest that there's 15 wisdom in going over there? 16 MR. MEYERS: I understand. And -- and I do 17 understand your comment, Commissioner Letz, that you have 18 certain regulatory constraints on what you can do or can't 19 do, depending on how you're authorized. But I think what 20 we're really saying here is that we would request that the -- 21 the County -- the County use the bully pulpit, if you will, 22 to borrow the phrase. I mean, if you talk to the City at any 23 time, if you write them a letter, write letters to T.C.E.Q. 24 and anybody else that you think is appropriate to support 25 this position. And I'm hearing, too, that we need some 8-25-08 44 1 enabling legislation to give the counties more clout. I 2 mean, it's kind of hard to accept, in my mind, as to how you 3 can say, well, if you're close to a big city, then you would 4 have these things, but we have the same issues as big cities, 5 even if we're small. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've spent probably more time 7 in the past year than the rest of the Court has on this 8 particular issue. I have been meeting with a lot of other 9 counties, primarily in the Hill Country, and we're looking at 10 how you get there. 11 MR. MEYERS: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's not that we're going to 13 try to get there, necessarily, for Kerr County. We may or 14 may not. That's another hurdle. We're just trying to figure 15 out where you go into state law and try to make the changes 16 to give someone this authority. I mean, it's -- this is a 17 monumental task to first figure out where you make the 18 changes. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a sticky wicket at 20 best. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Meyers. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Anyone else? Okay, let's move on, 24 then, to Item Number 8; consider, discuss, take appropriate 25 action to appoint Elizabeth Hughes for the Emergency Services 8-25-08 45 1 District Number 1 commissioner. Commissioner Oehler? 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Move approval. We had a 3 vacancy by resignation from a previous commissioner, and 4 Ms. Hughes has agreed to serve. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 7 approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on the 8 motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your 9 right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Here, 14 again, it appears like we have a wedding with very poor 15 representation on the -- what is this, the groom side? This 16 is the bride side, isn't it? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Must be the groom's side. 18 Must be the groom's side. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: No, I think this is the bride side, 20 because that's where the bride's parents are seated, is on 21 this side. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we're backwards 23 today. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. Let's move on to Item 25 9; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 8-25-08 46 1 designate the $1,030,000 2007 loan transaction with Banc of 2 America Public Capital Corporation, a bank qualified 3 transaction for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal 4 Revenue Code, and authorize the County Judge to submit an 5 amended Form 8038-G to the Internal Revenue Service. There's 6 a whole lot of bureaucracy in that statement, isn't there? 7 MS. HARGIS: Probably. This is really a very 8 simple transaction. It looks very difficult, but what it -- 9 what it basically is saying is that Banc of America has a 10 commercial branch that sells paper for large notes, and they 11 would like to move this over to their smaller commercial 12 division, which does loans like you and I would do for cars 13 and things of that nature, because the tax break to them 14 would be better. An 8038-G is the form you send to I.R.S. 15 that says that you're able to give a nonprofit status or tax 16 breaks on an issue, and in order to change from one type of 17 an agency to another, even though it's in the bank. We'll 18 have to reissue that. I think I gave y'all an attachment 19 that our attorney said that he would prepare that form and 20 then forward it to us, 'cause he wants us to be the one that 21 signs it. So -- 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think he's absolutely 23 right; we need to be in control of this, and not the bank, 24 and I have no objection to our doing it. I prefer the route 25 that is outlined by bond counsel. 8-25-08 47 1 MS. HARGIS: And, again, this is the -- the leasing 2 that you did in 2006, but you actually received the funds in 3 2007. So, I would request that the Court approve this. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Motion that we authorize County 5 Judge to submit the amended Form 8038-G to the Internal 6 Revenue Service, and all the paperwork will be approved and 7 prepared by our bond counsel, Mr. Tom Spurgeon. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 10 indicated. Question or discussion on that motion? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. At -- she's right; at 12 first glance, it is a little bit confusing, but as I took a 13 look at it and got to understand it some, and then see that 14 Mr. Henderson says it's an okay thing, and then Mr. Spurgeon, 15 and I've got -- I've grown to respect those two guys quite a 16 bit more. Mr. Spurgeon, obviously, had went out of his way 17 just a little bit to make sure that Kerr County is protected 18 in this issue, and -- and I appreciate that very much. So, 19 it's a done deal, far as I'm concerned. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion 21 on the motion? Did you have any additional comments, 22 Ms. Hargis? 23 MS. HARGIS: No. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, signify 25 by raising your right hand. 8-25-08 48 1 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 3 (No response.) 4 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll move 5 to Item 10; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on 6 imposition of optional local fees in addition to the 7 transportation fee as provided by Chapter 502 of the Texas 8 Transportation Code. This was before the Court previously. 9 We now charge the $10 add-on for every vehicle that's 10 licensed. We have the opportunity to charge up to a dollar 11 and a half per registration for a child safety fund fee, but 12 we are required by law to expend those funds for a school 13 crossing guard program, if we have one. If we don't have 14 one, to deposit that money in an interest-bearing account and 15 expend it for programs that are designed to enhance child 16 safety, health, or nutrition, including child abuse 17 prevention and intervention and drug and alcohol abuse 18 prevention. I read that where it says "and" to 19 parenthetically include child drug and alcohol abuse 20 prevention. Do you do likewise, Mr. County Attorney? 21 MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Because it's related 23 specifically to children. But as the County Attorney's 24 information indicated to you, it doesn't give you much 25 guidance beyond that. But then there's a provision where 8-25-08 49 1 we've got to split those funds up with the incorporated 2 cities within the county. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Based upon population. I see 5 Commissioner Baldwin with a little grin on his face. I -- 6 let me predict his thinking. His thinking is, "Why are we 7 going through this drill? We'll just do what we've done for 8 eons and keep the $10 and go on down the road." 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 100 percent, exactly. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is that your motion? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I thought it was. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I appreciate your 15 explanation, though. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to have our 17 imposition of fees under Chapter 502 of the Texas 18 Transportation Code be as they have been previously, with the 19 $10 per vehicle add-on. Question or discussion? All in 20 favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 21 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 23 (No response.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Ms. Grinstead, we 25 will do the certification to our folks at the state and get 8-25-08 50 1 that in. I think it has to be in fairly quickly. 2 MS. GRINSTEAD: Friday. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 11; consider, 4 discuss, and take appropriate action on proposed joint 5 funding agreement or resolution with the City of Kerrville on 6 joint City/County operations and projects. I put this on the 7 agenda at the request of -- of the City. They acted upon 8 this, apparently, at their last meeting and have approved it. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would it be your 10 understanding, Judge, that the -- the approval of the funding 11 plan for the funding agreement, whatever you want to call it, 12 this is all still subject to the budgeting process and the 13 allocation of funds in subsequent budget years? 14 JUDGE TINLEY: No question about that, 'cause we 15 can't legally -- we can't legally commit beyond the coming 16 budget year. The other thing that I have some concern about 17 is -- 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have another concern, 19 too. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: -- the Exhibit A, where it states 21 airport -- 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Doesn't have a CIP in it. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it does not indicate that that 24 change in percentage relates to maintenance and operation 25 only. There are some other asterisks, but there's not any on 8-25-08 51 1 the airport, but that could be construed to include capital 2 projects. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: The other thing that -- other 5 questions I have, I recall there being, on the fire, a $5,000 6 incremental increase. That was a suggestion. I don't know 7 where we -- I know where the 3 percent came from. When 8 Commissioner Letz came in with his late-night spreadsheet 9 that literally saved the day, and it did, -- 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: -- there was a 3 percent annual 12 increase mentioned there that we worked off of. So, I don't 13 have any -- I don't have any particular problem with that. 14 Same thing with the library. But I don't recall there being 15 any considerable discussion about those escalators during our 16 joint meeting. And I'll leave it at that. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought the 5,000 went by 18 the board, did it not? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the City came back with 20 one of their proposals with a 5 percent increase, and I 21 looked back at the dollars that we were talking about, which 22 was 5,000, and I believe 3 percent is very close to -- it's, 23 like, 5,200, something like that. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Fifty-four. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 5,400. So, that's where I came 8-25-08 52 1 up with the 3 percent. And I -- you know, I don't have a 2 problem with those being included. I think, you know, it 3 makes sense to have some kind of escalator in there, at least 4 for -- you know, cost-of-living type of items. But I'm just 5 happy they put in 3 percent instead of 5. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: The library -- I don't recall there 7 being any discussion during the meeting about once that got 8 reduced to 200 -- now, it's shown here on your sheet what we 9 adopted; however, that came from the joint efforts of the 10 financial officer of the City of Kerrville and our Auditor. 11 It doesn't show the -- the 3 percent escalator on the fire, 12 and it doesn't show it on the library, showing it all the way 13 out. On the fire, it just shows an "N/A" all the way across 14 at 180, and on the library it just shows it dropping to 200 15 in the third year and then remaining there. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I recall a comment by 17 Ms. Hargis and -- what's Josh's -- 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Josh Selleck. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Selleck. That the -- there 20 were some details they didn't elaborate on because of the 21 time factor they were under. I don't know if that was 22 necessarily the point. I mean, I don't think -- I agree that 23 there was not much discussion on those points on this. You 24 know, and those items are -- while they -- you know, they 25 kind of cut both ways, and I think the -- you know, I don't 8-25-08 53 1 have a real problem with those being included in the deal, 2 though I agree, they weren't really discussed. I do have a 3 problem with the airport capital funding not being included, 4 'cause that is a significant dollar figure that varies from 5 year to year. The whole intent was to have the City 6 involved. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Should be really 8 significant in the next couple of years because of the 9 taxiway project, so I think that needs to be clarified, 10 Judge. And it's M and O only. Percentage split does not 11 include CIP; there's a fifty-fifty split forever. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Long as there are two 14 undivided interests. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: And what I'm hearing in the way of 16 census is that this -- we're in favor of the joint funding 17 agreement, subject to, number one, there being an asterisk by 18 the airport that the arrangement -- the reduction in funding 19 by the City includes maintenance and operation expenditures 20 in excess of revenues only, and capital expenditures would 21 continue to be shared equally between the City and the 22 County, and the additional caveat that the approval of this 23 plan does not constitute a commitment of funds beyond the 24 next budget year. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 8-25-08 54 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Current appropriated funds. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I believe that was all made 4 clear at the time. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But that's not reflected in 6 their resolution. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand. That needs to 8 be reflected in their resolution. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true. Are we going 10 to do a resolution? Or -- you know, I feel like everybody in 11 this room understands that we cannot commit a future court to 12 any funding. We all understand that, but I'm not sure people 13 outside this room understand that clearly, so I think it has 14 to be in there -- that verbiage has to be in there somewhere. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree, it ought to be in the 16 part of the -- 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It should be. You're 18 absolutely right, Commissioner, and it should be in their -- 19 their third "whereas," when they talk about it's in the 20 public interest to adopt a three-year funding plan with the 21 County, subject to -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Annual appropriations. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- annual appropriations. 24 It doesn't say that, and it ought to say that, or some such, 25 Judge. 8-25-08 55 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Stated something that's not 2 right. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we fix the resolution 4 and send it back? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why don't we do our own 6 resolution? I don't know if you can fix theirs. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't mean fix it. 8 Keep it mostly as-is, redo it, and send it back. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Amend it with the language that 10 Commissioner Williams -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There you go. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: -- just inserted, and then put the 13 asterisk there on the airport on Exhibit A. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 17 indicated. Question or discussion? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask -- let me ask one 19 more question. I think I went to sleep there just for a 20 moment, so I missed this. On the three-year funding plan, 21 Exhibit A, the library has two cute little stars, and then 22 down below the two little stars, it says the amount is fixed 23 as shown, and FY 12 and on is subject to a 3 percent 24 escalation. Does the word "escalation" mean go up? 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 8-25-08 56 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the library we're 2 bringing down, and then we're using language here talking 3 about it going up. Is that lawyer talk? You're coming down, 4 but you use language about going up? Or -- and I'm telling 5 you, I'm reading this; I'm not making this up. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it refers to the -- to the 7 chart up there, which goes through -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: It says "F 11 11." That should read 10 "FY 11." But it refers to that chart, which would be for 11 those three years. And for fiscal year 12, which would mean 12 the next one, -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: -- and beyond would be subject to a 15 3 percent escalation. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we come down to the 17 200,000 and then we start going back up after that, 18 3 percent? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all are going to have a 22 fight out of me over that. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is the 3 percent based on 24 our $200,000 contribution, or is the 3 percent based on the 25 total budget alignment? 8-25-08 57 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Based on 200,000, the way 3 I -- 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just thought I'd raise the 5 question. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's the way I view it. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. That's -- 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's my opinion and only 9 mine. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What would be -- what would 11 be wrong in saying, "City, you own the library; pay for it"? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your constituent, 13 Mr. Benham, might write another column about that. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that -- him writing a 15 column is better than coming in here and spending a half a 16 day. How's that? I enjoy his column. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- the answer, to 18 try to answer your question, is that the -- we pretty much 19 are saying the library is yours, and based on their million 20 dollar budget, 200,000 and we're not a partner in the library 21 with them. What we're saying is that we think it is a 22 worthwhile thing for the County to have a public library, and 23 we're willing to fund it at a fixed level, at 200,000, and 24 then put in an escalator or no escalator on it, 3 percent a 25 year, just to kind of keep up with inflation. 8-25-08 58 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: At the same time, we're 2 taking on more funding of the airport to offset the cost of 3 the library. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, fiscal year '12, we'll 6 have a real conversation about this. Or next -- next year. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Have another conversation. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would say if we agree to 10 this, and if we don't have big arguments next year, and the 11 agreement continues on through fiscal year '12, then the 12 fight should be pretty well over. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- and, you know, I 14 think the -- depending on how the airport shakes out, which 15 is a little bit of an unknown on the financial side -- 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Very much unknown. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the intent there very much 18 is that the airport should start costing less. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That is our hope. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And desire. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it's the airport board's 22 hope. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And desire. So -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you for allowing me to 8-25-08 59 1 ask that question. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion that's before us. 3 Further discussion or question on the motion? All in favor 4 of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 5 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 6 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries. Let's move to 7 Item Number 12; consider, discuss, and take appropriate 8 action on clarifying a budget item on the Interlocal 9 Agreement for the Continued Existence of a Joint Airport 10 Board to Provide Management of Kerrville/Kerr County Airport. 11 Commissioner Letz? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can't find it on my thing up 13 here. But, anyway, the -- there's two points in the 14 agreement that I had a concern with, and the most important 15 one is that we talked about requiring a budget -- a detailed 16 budget be presented to both the City and the County, and that 17 the format of that budget presentation is attached as Exhibit 18 -- A? 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or B? And I think on that, I 21 agree with everything to that point. The question I have is 22 that if you look at that, and that's what they're presenting, 23 the implication is that that's the budget; it can't be moved 24 without going back to the City and the County, and I don't 25 think that is the intent. I mean, I -- I don't want the 8-25-08 60 1 Airport Board to have to come back to the City or County if 2 they want to move $100 from maintenance of lawns to light 3 bulbs. I mean, I want them to -- I want to approve a total 4 dollar amount. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What section are you 6 speaking to? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't have it -- 8 (Low-voice discussion off the record.) 9 MR. EMERSON: 4(b). 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 4(b). 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 4(b), Content and Format. The 12 budget shall be substantially conformed to the format and 13 line item content as specified and depicted in Exhibit B. It 14 says -- and I just think that we need to have clarification. 15 I don't think we need to change the agreement. I think we 16 just need to, maybe, between us and the City, go to the 17 Airport Board and say, the intent is you submit it in that 18 form, but you can -- once that is approved, they have the 19 latitude to move items from line item to line item. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: I think it's implied in Subsection 21 C, where it talks about excess spending prohibited. Without 22 prior written approval of each party, the Board shall not 23 expend or incur obligations which at any time will exceed the 24 total amount of the board budget. So, I think it's -- I 25 think it's somewhat implied there. They just can't go over, 8-25-08 61 1 but they can move things around if they need to. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't disagree with that, but 3 I think it's gray. I just thought if we just sent a letter 4 over to the City and have them sign it that it's a 5 clarification point, that that would be a way to clarify it. 6 Or we can be silent on it. The other item that I have on 7 there, which is just a -- was just a general comment, on the 8 next page, under 5(a), a dollar amount of 187,000 was put in 9 there for this year. That is -- we have not approved and 10 they have not submitted a final airport budget yet, so that 11 number that was put in there, that number's in the agreement. 12 There may need to be a budget amendment with that once we get 13 the actual number, and maybe that will work. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we ought to just 15 delete the dollar figure and just leave the percentage, 16 'cause that's all we agreed to. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then we'd change the agreement, 18 and I don't want to change the agreement. That's what I'm 19 saying. That's why I talked to Rex about both of these 20 items. We decided let's go ahead and sign it, get it done. 21 We can handle that through a budget amendment after the fact 22 whenever they come up with their final number, which would 23 change that, and then we can also do the other when we do the 24 clarification. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we're doing a 8-25-08 62 1 clarification letter, over the Judge's signature on the other 2 point, you can make the point here the same way. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's what this -- you 4 know, because those are two points, and they sort of don't go 5 to the substance of the agreement, and I didn't want to 6 recommend the Judge not sign it because of those two items. 7 But I think we do have to pay our -- 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Either that, or they can just 9 operate with that amount of money for this year. That will 10 give them time to make a budget for next year. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If that's enough money for this 12 year. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, they might have to do 14 it on that amount of money. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's a possibility the 16 budget could come in less. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: True. If it does, that's 18 fine. We're covered. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm just saying that, you know, 20 there's a -- I mean, I don't think it's particularly right to 21 go in and say, "Here's your number," before we have a -- and 22 we're not listening to what you -- 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That number wasn't pulled out 24 of the sky. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pretty much, it was based on 8-25-08 63 1 operations last year. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's right. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But there's been a change on 4 how they operate this year. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It was based on some history; 6 it wasn't just pulled out of the air. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, that's true. But the 8 scope of work on the -- on the contract with the City is -- 9 the contract has changed. Hopefully that'll draw that down a 10 little bit. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That number shouldn't have been 12 put in there, in my mind, but it's there, so it's there. But 13 that was -- maybe we need to do a budget amendment at some 14 point to get the right number in there, and it's not. I 15 don't -- 16 JUDGE TINLEY: It's signed with the understanding 17 that, number one, the percentages are correct. The actual 18 amount expended was to be determined based upon the actual 19 budget that's approved and the appropriation of funds. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sounds good. I like that. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think -- and the 22 reason -- 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And only if it's less than 24 the amount that's been put in there. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the -- 8-25-08 64 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not to exceed. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Well, we're capped. All 3 you have to do is not approve it, and last year we funded 4 more than this amount. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what their maximum is. 7 The reason -- the clarification is really for the Airport 8 Board more than the City, you know, so that they -- you know, 9 they understand that they don't have to come back to us if 10 they need to change money around a little bit. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I agree with you 100 12 percent. Is this new -- this new work going on out there on 13 the runways -- 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Taxiway. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does that affect this budget 16 in any way? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it's our -- our match 18 is already appropriated. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was primarily matched by 20 E.I.C. Almost entirely, I think, matched by E.I.C. It was a 21 big match. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, it was. I think 80-some 23 thousand dollars. Wasn't it 800 this year? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, maybe this year it is, 25 but, I mean, in next year's -- 8-25-08 65 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Four each. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Four million, so it's 3 10 percent of 4 million, so 400,000. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: 400. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The E.I.C. is funding that. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So we've already approved 8 that, so all we're doing is clarification today. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Your -- if I understand what your 10 intent here is, that we approve the agreement and I'm 11 authorized to sign it, and that I return it to the City with 12 the clarification that it is done so with our understanding 13 that -- that the Airport Board not be required to -- so long 14 as they stay within the total amount of the budget, not be 15 required to obtain approval from either the City or the 16 County if they need to move items around in their budget. 17 And secondly, that the -- all the percentages are correct on 18 maintenance/operation for the airport; the actual number 19 that's inserted in there is, number one, not necessarily 20 correct, but would be based upon the actual budget that's 21 approved, and subject to approval in each of our respective 22 budgets. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was my motion. 8-25-08 66 1 JUDGE TINLEY: All right, I see. And I don't 2 recall if you had a second or not. 3 THE CLERK: No, sir. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, now we have a second. Okay. 6 Now that we've discussed it, do we want to discuss it 7 further? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, signify 10 by raising your right hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go to 15 Item 13; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 16 appoint Commissioners Baldwin and -- or Commissioner Baldwin 17 and Commissioner Letz to renegotiate the Interlocal 18 Cooperation Agreement between Kerr County and the City of 19 Kerrville for Regulation of Subdivisions Within the City of 20 Kerrville's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction with the City of 21 Kerrville. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Move approval. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 8-25-08 67 1 approval of the agenda item. Further question or discussion? 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Good luck. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was just wondering, do you 4 think that we should add in there that we need to take Rusty 5 with us? 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I refuse. It's in the 7 city; get the Chief of Police. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I did have a conversation with 9 Mr. Hofmann, and we're further apart than I thought. I'll 10 just leave it at that. Just -- we'll go from there. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But this has to be done. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Has to be done one way or the 13 other. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It has to be done. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think that when we go, I 16 think -- well, it's up to Commissioner Baldwin. I'd probably 17 like to have Rex attend that meeting with us, at least the 18 first one. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If you take Rex with you -- 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They disagree on the enabling 21 legislation. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, they do, and members 23 of the Council are saying the same thing. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Anyway -- 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion and a 8-25-08 68 1 second. Further question or discussion on the motion? All 2 in favor of 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: That motion does carry. 7 (Discussion off the record.) 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 18, open bids and 9 award contract for three interior walls for the maintenance 10 shop at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, one 12-by-10 11 rollup door, one 10-by-10 rollup door, and one 3-by-7 12 walk-through door with hardware. You got any bids? 13 THE CLERK: Only the one that I put on there for -- 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's electrical. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: That's electrical on the courthouse 16 grounds, I think. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What do you do when no bids 18 come in? 19 MR. EMERSON: Sorry? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What do you do if we don't 21 receive any bids for a project? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Start over. 23 MR. EMERSON: Go back to square one. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bid it again? 25 MR. EMERSON: See what happens. 8-25-08 69 1 JUDGE TINLEY: What's the anticipated cost of these 2 particular improvements, Mr. Bollier? 3 MR. BOLLIER: It was, like -- 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have a ballpark? 5 MR. BOLLIER: I think it was 9,000. Wasn't it, 6 Commissioner Oehler? Something like that. 9,000, somewhere 7 in there. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Depends on if you do it -- do 9 it in-house, it will be something like that. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was just going to ask the 11 question, why can't we do it ourselves? 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We can. 13 MR. BOLLIER: We can. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why are we going out for 15 bid? 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, we probably have to go 17 out for bid for materials, because it's part of the project. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, certainly, I 19 understand. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: We're talking about under 25,000 21 here. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well -- 23 JUDGE TINLEY: And that's probably why it was 24 difficult to obtain bids, because of the low value of the -- 25 of the project. 8-25-08 70 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I believe so. Let's see if 2 we have community service; there may be some metal building 3 people on there. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And this gets into that 5 problem, just everything that we do out there is subject to 6 bidding because of the -- the way the statute reads. That's 7 one project. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Cumulative -- cumulative 9 cost. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But if we have the ability 11 to do the labor, the actual construction, why can't we do 12 that? We did the whole annex basement, basically, with our 13 people and jail release people, right? 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have no problem using 15 inmates to help build that stuff out there. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex, can we not violate the 17 bidding rules if we do it in-house and buy the materials off 18 of a state site that's already preapproved? 19 (Mr. Emerson nodded.) 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's go that route. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Let's do it. If I have to 22 drag my welder down here to do that, let's do it. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, boy. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Get 'er done. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Bruce with his magic hot stick. 8-25-08 71 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, get the stick down 2 here. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bruce and I were working a 4 couple weekends on a fence down there. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to item -- do we need any 6 formal court action? Obviously, we can't take it under this 7 agenda item, so it wouldn't make any difference, would it? 8 Mr. Emerson? Insofar as saying, "Let's do it ourselves," we 9 can't take any formal action on -- 10 MR. EMERSON: Correct. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: -- that basis under this agenda 12 item, can we? 13 MR. EMERSON: Correct. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Let's wait till next meeting. 15 I'll put something on to authorize Tim to go out and get 16 prices on materials, something like that. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Isn't this in the budget 19 somewhere? Can't we -- we have talked about it. If it's 20 budgeted, why can't we just do it? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought -- 22 MR. BOLLIER: I thought we had talked about it, but 23 it fell in there where we had to go out for bids. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Under the state contract, 25 then, this takes care of that issue. 8-25-08 72 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's coming out of your budget. 2 Doesn't matter how you do it. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You could do it however you 4 want to do it. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go do it. Are we okay? Can we 6 just go do it? 7 MR. EMERSON: Sir? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we go do it? 9 MR. EMERSON: I don't know that you have to take 10 any formal action if you're just doing it in-house. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Get 'er done. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just go do it. Get 'er done. 13 MR. BOLLIER: So, it's get 'er done, right? Okay. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Item 19, open bids and award 15 contract for reworking electrical conduits and wiring in the 16 front area of the Kerr County Courthouse square. We have 17 here -- 18 MR. BOLLIER: One. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: -- one bid. 20 MR. BOLLIER: I don't know. Probably -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: D.W. 22 MR. BOLLIER: If there's one in there, that's 23 probably who it is. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We have excited the 8-25-08 73 1 community, haven't we? 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Heavy-duty stuff. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Nobody wants to work for us. 5 (Discussion off the record.) 6 JUDGE TINLEY: We have one bid from D.W. Electric, 7 and it specifies what they will do, furnishing labor and 8 materials to various things. The amount is 24,4. 24,400. 9 Obviously, the Maintenance Supervisor has not reviewed the 10 specification of what the proposal is issued to accomplish. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll move we accept the bid and 12 give it to the Maintenance Supervisor for recommendation. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 15 indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor of the 16 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 17 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 19 (No response.) 20 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Why don't 21 we take us about a 15-minute recess or so, and we'll come 22 back. 23 (Recess taken from 10:30 a.m. to 10:50 a.m.) 24 - - - - - - - - - - 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order and 8-25-08 74 1 get back on our agenda. Item 14 is to consider, discuss, and 2 take appropriate action regarding the FY 2008-09 budgets, 3 budget and salary policies, and fiscal capital expenditure 4 and personnel matters related thereto for various county 5 departments. We've got some fine-tuning to do with regard to 6 these items. One of them that comes off the top of my head, 7 the Court, I think, had indicated that -- that it was 8 inclined to allow the Extension Office to acquire a vehicle, 9 the -- the exact make, model, style and so forth to be 10 determined. And in that regard, the -- the capital outlay 11 item is there, but the item just above it titled "Operating 12 Equipment" previously had some -- had some funds requested in 13 there for fuel, based on 30,000 miles a year, and that got 14 deleted. It had 7,500. I made a quick calculation that said 15 7,300; I just did a slightly different calculation than 16 Mr. Walston did. But if there's going to be a vehicle, there 17 has to be an allowance for fuel and minor maintenance, and 18 the figure that he had in there of 7,500 is probably 19 appropriate. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question, Judge. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are all these other travel 23 reimbursements and so forth going to remain as proposed? Are 24 they going to get -- are they going to disappear? Are they 25 going to get lumped up into one transportation allowance or 8-25-08 75 1 what? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: No, they're going to remain as-is, 3 but there is a significant reduction in each of those 4 accounts from last year to this year based on the acquisition 5 of a vehicle. The remaining amount in there is to provide 6 for per diem and lodging and so forth, -- 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: -- primarily. Out-of-county only. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I see it now. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, where are we? Do you 11 want me to ask him a tough question? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are we on the vehicle thing? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that's kind of where we are. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why are you so hung up on 18 buying a Suburban? 19 MR. WALSTON: Basically, we can get a 20 nine-passenger vehicle. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can't do that in a 22 bigger van that's safe as everything else? 23 MR. WALSTON: As far as -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all kind of help me. I've 25 already completed my questions. 8-25-08 76 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You only had two questions? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 3 MR. WALSTON: You know, to get into ten-passenger, 4 we have to get into the vans. And -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't want ten-passenger. 6 MR. WALSTON: Do what? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't want ten-passenger. 8 We can get that off the table. 9 MR. WALSTON: We got to go back, so I was trying to 10 get as many passengers as I could. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can get nine in a 12 Suburban? 13 MR. WALSTON: We can get nine in a Suburban, a 14 three-bench-seat Suburban. You -- and the other -- the other 15 vehicles that I've looked at, I think there's a Ford 16 Expedition, XL or EL, that I think we can get nine in. You 17 know, and that's -- that's kind of the two. If we want to 18 get fewer than that... But I think, cost-wise, it's -- you 19 know, they're all pretty comparable. So -- 20 JUDGE TINLEY: There are smaller vans available, 21 too. 22 MR. WALSTON: We can get -- I mean, if we want to 23 get down into some smaller vans, you know, we get down into a 24 seven-passenger, and I was -- I was trying to keep the 25 passengers, primarily, because most of our judging teams that 8-25-08 77 1 we haul, you can put two teams in a nine-passenger van. When 2 you get to the seven passengers, you're cutting one team out. 3 So -- but that's where I was getting the nine passengers 4 from, was the number of kids that we put in there. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the cost difference 6 between the seven-passenger van and a Suburban? 7 MR. WALSTON: Well, I can pull those up, and I'm 8 going to have to get more detail for you to do that. But 9 I've looked at several of them, and it depends on where you 10 look at to the difference. You can look at one comparison -- 11 if you're looking at Chevrolet, you know, they're going to -- 12 they're pricing the Ford vans higher than what they show on 13 their comparisons. So, you know, actually, I'm going to have 14 to go to a dealer and see what they're going to price it at. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can go to the state website 16 and look at all of them. 17 MR. WALSTON: Buy Board? Or -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Buy Board, and pick -- give you 19 a comparison, not that you necessarily want to buy it right 20 there. 21 MR. WALSTON: Yeah. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Get a comparison. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Was the $10,000 capital 24 item, was that what a lease would cost per year? 25 MR. WALSTON: That's from the same -- the same one 8-25-08 78 1 the Sheriff's office uses to purchase their vehicles. I 2 called them, and he said, basically, a -- you know, for a 3 2008 Suburban is 36,000. Over a four-year period, it comes 4 out to 9,000 a year. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 6 MR. WALSTON: So, that's where that came from. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I think there's some smaller 8 vans, too, that have nine-passenger capability, up to nine. 9 Of course, then when you get to ten or better, that's when 10 they get in trouble with the longer -- longer van. 11 MR. WALSTON: Yeah. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: With a higher center of gravity and 13 so forth. 14 MR. WALSTON: Haven't been able to find a smaller 15 one that will hold that many, other than the Expedition. 16 Everything I've seen is -- it gets into seven. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And moving forward, because we 18 need to move forward, I think it makes sense for you to have 19 a vehicle, much more than what you have been doing. Let's 20 put in 9,000, but don't authorize any expenditure until we 21 come back and decide what we're going to do. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: I've got no problem, really, with 23 just leaving the funds in there, in the budget, so that we 24 can plan on acquiring a vehicle. But he's also going to need 25 the fuel -- 8-25-08 79 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: -- there in that upper line item of 3 7,500, which he had in there. That -- and, like I say, I 4 calculated it just roughly on 30,000, came out with 7,300. 5 And, of course, you're going to have some minor -- minor 6 maintenance, routine service. 7 MR. WALSTON: And that's my main question, I guess. 8 I wasn't real clear as to whether we want to go on into the 9 bigger vans, or if -- what our -- what our -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. 11 MR. WALSTON: -- parameters -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't want to go into a big 13 van. 14 MR. WALSTON: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We want to either go Suburban 16 or small van. 17 MR. WALSTON: When you get into the big vans, it 18 gets cheaper per vehicle. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't want to go -- 20 MR. WALSTON: Okay. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't like the liability 22 that goes with it. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Safety factor, yeah. If we can 24 restore that 7,500, and you want to reduce the 10 to 9? Is 25 that what you're talking about? 8-25-08 80 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what he says, that's the 2 maximum you're going to need is nine for a Suburban. 3 MR. WALSTON: Yeah. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, when you put in 36,000, your 5 nine is just going to cover your principal; there's going to 6 be a factor in there for leasing, so let's leave ten. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ten, I think, is better. 8 MR. RUARK: He's got 9,000 for the Suburban and 9 1,000 in there for an office computer, so that's your 10,000. 10 MR. WALSTON: And we can probably get that computer 11 done this year. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Nine probably includes the 13 financing. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: The nine does include -- 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would think so. You're 16 doing it over six -- four years. 17 MR. WALSTON: He said over four years. He said 18 it's -- it's 36,000, and I didn't ask him about interest. Or 19 I figured he had that -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What did you say, Bruce? 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I said the 9,000 includes the 22 financing, I believe. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. And did y'all hear what 24 he said about the computer? 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. 8-25-08 81 1 MR. WALSTON: We can get the computer this year, or 2 we should be able to. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: That's for the laptop; that's not a 4 desktop. 5 MR. WALSTON: Yeah. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And we don't have any 7 additional desktops. 8 MR. TROLINGER: We don't have any additional 9 laptops. We have desktops. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Excuse me, laptops. 11 MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, we're restoring the 13 10,000 and restoring the 7,500. Okay. 14 MR. WALSTON: Anything else? Thank you, sirs. 15 Appreciate it. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: What else do we have, gentlemen? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think on the budget, I don't 18 recall any other really unfinished items. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did we put -- take me to the 20 visiting judges. The numbers that you put in the 216th -- 21 you put some in 216th and some in 198th. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: 12,5 in each. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember now. Very good. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: There's a -- a salary policy that 25 could very well come into play, depending upon what happens 8-25-08 82 1 with the personnel increases. As I'm sure all of you 2 remember, we -- I think it was while I was on the Court; it 3 may have been previous. There was a policy put in place that 4 the Sheriff's salary would be not less than $5,000 more than 5 the chief deputy. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Which I think he's probably bumping 8 right at that now. And if one of the proposals that has been 9 vetted here is incorporated with that policy in place, it 10 would require the budget to be automatically increased to a 11 higher figure for the Sheriff's salary only in order to 12 comply with that. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we need to stay with 14 the policy. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We can't -- can't allow the 17 second-in-command to make more than the elected official. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, wouldn't make more. Just -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, even -- 20 JUDGE TINLEY: -- within the 5,000. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- within that range. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll give you a for-instance. 23 I have some thoughts on some things that could affect the 24 bottom line of the budget. But say, for instance, if -- if 25 there was a 5 percent proposed for all elected officials and 8-25-08 83 1 department heads, and a 10 percent for all the other hourly 2 employees, and in that case and scenario, you would have the 3 Sheriff being able to get an extra bump because of the rise 4 in his chief deputy, which he'd be the only one that would 5 get more, say, than 5 percent, and I don't agree with that. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you -- well, and what 7 would you do, remove the 5 percent? 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would remove -- I would 9 remove that court order that ties it to an exact $5,000 above 10 whatever. Because in that case, just my -- what I just told 11 you, it's going to allow -- even if none of the other elected 12 officials got anything -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure, I understand exactly 14 what you're saying. I'm in agreement with you. That's fine. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think we need to rescind 16 that court order. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The -- the -- so it doesn't 18 matter, as long as the Sheriff makes at least a dollar more 19 than the chief deputy? 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, I'm not saying that. I'm 21 just saying that you don't have -- it doesn't have to be 22 5,000. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. You know, I 24 agree with you. I don't know why we put 5,000, but we did. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think that was my 8-25-08 84 1 predecessor's suggestion. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. Can't 3 remember. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But, anyway -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I'm fine with that. I 6 see what you're saying. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Because it's unfair for the 8 other elected officials in some case -- some point in time. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Could be. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: And the Sheriff has risen to speak. 13 Or observe; I'm not sure which. Did you just -- you just -- 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I would like -- 15 JUDGE TINLEY: -- arise to observe? 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think the only thing you 17 have to look at -- I'm not complaining about my salary; don't 18 get me wrong. But in the equity of it, Bruce, what you have 19 to look at, the normal standard around this county, even, 20 between the department head or the elected official and their 21 next in line is normally 15,000, 20,000 difference, or 10,000 22 in there already. There is a large enough gap that you don't 23 have to worry about the second-in-command making more than 24 the department head or the elected official. Because of 25 going way back, the Nash study, and then what the Court did, 8-25-08 85 1 straightening out a lot of things with employees, that gap 2 closed. And the first three or four years I was Sheriff, the 3 chief deputy made more than the Sheriff, okay? The -- your 4 predecessor in your seat actually made a recommendation at 5 one time to bump the Sheriff's salary to 20,000 more so that 6 you'd get that gap back between there. I believe 7 Commissioner Williams and them settled on the 5,000 8 difference, okay? 9 My issue is, I -- if you look at -- and you just 10 bear -- and I don't know how to say this without creating a 11 lot of stuff, but when you look at the head of the detention 12 center -- Juvenile Detention Center, he's paid as much as 13 your Sheriff, okay? When you look at a police chief that's 14 paid 20,000 more than the Sheriff, you look at a Road and 15 Bridge that's paid 30,000 more than your Sheriff, then I 16 think you need to look at where that gap is. If you -- one, 17 I agree with you, the order may ought to be rescinded, and I 18 -- 'cause it is kind of hard, 'cause it always keeps your 19 Sheriff or that position going up every time your chief -- 20 and I don't think your chief deputy should be frozen unless 21 he's at that end in the step and grade scale, like was agreed 22 upon at the 20 years. But I think at that 20 years, end of 23 the step and grade scale, your Sheriff should be at a 24 position where you never have to worry about his 25 second-in-command making more. Because the second-in-command 8-25-08 86 1 does a lot. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But every federal lawsuit, 4 every, you know, thing else you have does fall on the 5 Sheriff. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not really arguing that 7 fact with you. I'm trying to figure out a way -- and if we 8 do need to make that gap bigger, then maybe we should make 9 the gap bigger, but don't tie it to a court order that 10 mandates that whenever -- that could create something that 11 you would be the only one that would get, and none of the 12 other elected officials or department heads would get. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I totally agree with that 14 philosophy of it, but I think it's due to how narrow the gap 15 is. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I have no problem with there 17 being a gap. It's -- it's just how you get the gap. We may 18 differ in the way we go about it. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, if a court order is 21 required just to set a margin between an elected official and 22 chief deputy, then make it a blanket court order that sets 23 the margin for all, not just the Sheriff. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. I just want to get -- 25 I want everybody to be treated fairly and equally as much as 8-25-08 87 1 possible. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have -- 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: However we get there is 4 immaterial to me. It's just the fact that it needs to be 5 that way. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have a new summary sheet? 7 That one-page sheet that I like to look at that gives the 8 numbers? The Auditor's nodding. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hyde, you had some comments? 10 MS. HYDE: Just that, you know, during the last 12 11 to 18 months, we've been revamping on the worker's side. 12 This next year, we're going to have to revamp on the 13 department head side, but that's going to take some 14 discussions, probably workshops, to discuss it. I have 15 requested Kevlar from head to toe. But we do need to look at 16 those, and look at the salaries and look at the grades where 17 you have top-level officials and then second-in-commands. 18 What -- what are our expectations, and where are those people 19 going to go? Because, as y'all have taught me well, if 20 something happens to the elected official or department head, 21 the second -- if it's an elected position, then that chief 22 deputy steps in. So, I think that we need to look at those. 23 But I think the first -- the first item that we had to work 24 on was worker bees, and that's what we've been focusing on. 25 So, 2008-2009 -- or, like I said, I just need the -- I've got 8-25-08 88 1 it in the budget so I can have Kevlar from head to toe on 2 those. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I didn't mean to jump -- Judge, 4 are we -- seems like we were kind of done with the rest of 5 the stuff, other than -- 6 JUDGE TINLEY: I -- 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not done with it. What 8 do you mean? 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We've got to talk about the 10 total numbers now. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, yeah. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's where -- 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what I'm talking 14 about. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We got to look at where the 16 dollars say what we can and can't do. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's exactly right. 18 (Ms. Hargis handed documents to the Court.) 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. These -- these 20 three scenarios that we've just been handed out here, will 21 they all three require a tax increase? 22 MS. HARGIS: Yes. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. 24 (Discussion off the record.) 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What -- 8-25-08 89 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait a minute, Jon. Let me 2 stay on my thinking here just for a second, please. Now, all 3 three require a tax increase. Can you tell me what each one 4 of them -- what kind of tax increase would be required for 5 each one of them? 6 MS. HARGIS: Yes. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, good. 8 MS. HARGIS: I mean, I wasn't -- I was letting 9 y'all debate the others. Are you ready for all the rest of 10 the paper? 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I want you to tell me. 12 I don't want any more paper. 13 MS. HARGIS: Don't want any more paper? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not -- 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Some of us may. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They might. I don't want 17 any more. I've got to get a damn wheelbarrow to get all this 18 stuff out of here. I just want to know. 19 MS. HARGIS: Well, I'd rather -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 21 MS. HARGIS: I'd rather pass them around. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Inquiring minds want to 23 know. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that Shakespeare? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I believe so. No, 8-25-08 90 1 it's the guy underneath the bridge. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: First off -- 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's good, Bill. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hargis, before you get started, 5 let me -- 6 MS. HARGIS: I thought you weren't quite ready for 7 me yet. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask if maybe the headings on 9 two of these may be reversed. The one that says 10 percent 10 plus step increase for the department heads and employees has 11 a smaller number than the one that has the 10 percent plus 12 step increase for employees only. Seems to me that -- 13 MS. HARGIS: Okay. The one with department heads 14 is nine -- 946 -- you're right. We did these in a hurry. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: But -- 16 MS. HARGIS: There's only $13,000 difference 17 between the two. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Right. Right. But -- 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, they're switched? 20 MS. HARGIS: Well -- 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one are we looking 22 at? 23 MS. HARGIS: Okay. If you -- 24 JUDGE TINLEY: The one that says "10 percent plus 25 step increase for employees only" should read "for department 8-25-08 91 1 heads and employees." 2 MS. HARGIS: Haste makes waste. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: And the one that reads, "Step 4 increase for department heads and employees" should have 5 "department heads" deleted from it. Correct? Okay. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. So, it's backwards. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. There's a small number 8 difference, but, I mean, you can -- 9 MS. HARGIS: Okay. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. One of the questions 11 that I believe the Judge asked this morning, do you have the 12 paperwork on that? 13 MS. HARGIS: Yes, sir, I do. That's not it, but I 14 was waiting for you to ask for that. Now, I've done this in 15 two scenarios. Okay, can everybody hear me? 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. 17 MS. HARGIS: One is the revenue side and one is the 18 expense side, is what I think you wanted. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What I want, and it should be 20 very simple, -- 21 MS. HARGIS: It's the revenue side. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- and that is to get the 23 difference in the amount that was budgeted last year and the 24 proposed recommended amount that was asked for this year. 25 MS. HARGIS: Yes, sir, that's what you have. 8-25-08 92 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That number is what I'm 2 looking for. That number will tell a lot of stories. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the number you're 4 looking for again? 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm looking for the number of 6 difference -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Between the proposed and final? 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, between what we expended 9 last year -- last year's budget, and what the increase of 10 that amount is for this year. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, the total. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The total. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Budget increase. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Budgeted increase for this 15 coming year. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: We got the percentage -- the -- 17 MS. HARGIS: The expenditure one is titled 18 "Expenses." You got three -- the three scenarios as well 19 there. You have the first column, which was the approved 20 budget for last year, the expenditure side, general fund. 21 Then you have the expenditures proposed for this year, and 22 the difference, and I believe that's what you asked for, 23 Commissioner Oehler. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Are you telling me that 25 there's a difference of two -- there's $2,188,000 difference 8-25-08 93 1 in the proposed requested -- or recommended budget for this 2 coming year over last year? 3 MS. HARGIS: Yes, sir. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Then why did you give us the 5 figure of 821,000 last time? 6 MS. HARGIS: The 821 was only the difference that 7 the revenue at the old rate would bring -- would bring in. 8 When I did the proposed budget that you have in front of you, 9 I took the new certified tax value, multiplied it by the old 10 tax rate, which was .3592 for the general fund -- 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't know why this is so 12 confusing. 13 MS. HARGIS: That's exactly -- 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Really, I don't know how such 15 a simple thing can be so confusing. 16 MS. HARGIS: Okay. You asked for us to give you 17 the approved expenses for last year, which were 14 million -- 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I asked for the difference in 19 the amount of budget that was requested here over last year. 20 MS. HARGIS: That's what you have. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what you're saying 22 that this $2,199,000 is? 23 MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Or the $2,188,000. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Total budget. Total budget 8-25-08 94 1 increase. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 3 MS. HARGIS: That's the total. That's not -- 4 that's not raises; that's budget. Budget to budget, 5 everything. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Everything to everything. 7 MS. HARGIS: Everything to everything. There were 8 increases -- 9 JUDGE TINLEY: General fund only? 10 MS. HARGIS: General fund only. There were 11 increases in the budget other than the raises that were 12 proposed. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand that. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Here, again, the two headings are 15 reversed on your budget expense comparison. The bigger 16 figures should include department heads and employees. 17 MS. HARGIS: Well, because I used the same sample. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So -- okay. So, department 20 head goes up on top and department head comes out of the 21 second one? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Right, exactly. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But based on this, what I'm 24 seeing right here -- of course, I haven't read the whole 25 thing, but to fund a $2,199,000 increase would take 8-25-08 95 1 approximately 9 cents on the tax rate. 2 MS. HARGIS: Your value increased. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand the value 4 increased. 5 MS. HARGIS: And if you'll look at the revenue 6 side, I think that would help you some. If you look at the 7 first line that says, "Option 1, no raises," if you took the 8 value for 2008-2009, -- 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm. 10 MS. HARGIS: -- that will -- at the same tax rate 11 that you had last year, it will produce $1,132,566 more. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm. 13 MS. HARGIS: You subtract that revenue from your 14 2 million; that is the difference that you need to raise over 15 what the tax rate would have been if you'd left it alone. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm. Okay. Well, see, to 17 me, that's confusing too. I think it's confusing to the 18 public. What -- if our effective tax rate is correct at 19 .3712, if it's not been misfigured and, you know, everything 20 is like it's supposed to be, .3712 applied to this year's new 21 tax values -- taxable values would generate the exact amount 22 of money that we spent last year in last year's budget; is 23 that correct? 24 MS. HARGIS: It would expend the same amount of tax 25 revenue, not -- not expenditures. 8-25-08 96 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, tax revenue to fund 2 last year's budget. 3 MS. HARGIS: Right. It would -- 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is that correct? 5 MS. HARGIS: The 37 includes Road and Bridge. Yes, 6 it would. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. If that be the case, 8 then why would we not add to that the total difference in the 9 budget request for this year and apply a tax rate that would 10 generate enough money to fund that additional -- the 11 additional expenses over last year? 12 MS. HARGIS: If you'll look at the spreadsheet that 13 I gave you that has the red on it -- 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We have red on there? 15 MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The one that was in our 17 packet? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: She handed it out just now. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay, this one. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Tax rate estimates? 21 MS. HARGIS: Right. As you recall, there -- the 22 856 is the new number because of some of the changes that you 23 made at the last budget workshop, which was last Thursday. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. 25 MS. HARGIS: Okay. Then we add the additional 8-25-08 97 1 steps that the -- the additional amount of money that it 2 would take to fund the additional step. This one is with 3 department heads. That, then, would give me a negative of -- 4 of the million 42. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 6 MS. HARGIS: In order to fund that million and 42, 7 I would need the tax rate that is attached, and I've showed 8 you on the side in black. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And that would be on top of 10 the effective rate, or on top of the old tax rate? 11 MS. HARGIS: Be on top of the old tax rate. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Why, is my question. 13 MS. HARGIS: The effective rate produces the same 14 amount of revenue as you produce the following year -- the -- 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The previous year. 16 MS. HARGIS: The previous year. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The effective rate. 19 MS. HARGIS: Effective rate basically is your -- 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Based on the new values. 21 MS. HARGIS: As your value goes up, your rate goes 22 down. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand that. That's 24 why it's .3712 and not .3896. 25 MS. HARGIS: If I used the effective rate, I would 8-25-08 98 1 have to actually raise more revenue than if I used the tax 2 rate that I used last year. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct, 'cause the 4 rate went down. 5 MS. HARGIS: It's very difficult to understand that 6 if -- let me take maybe a simple scenario. If I had a 7 million dollars at a tax rate that was 10 cents, and then the 8 following year my value became, let's say, a million, two, 9 then my tax rate -- effective rate went down to 8 cents. But 10 my expenses went up from the 10 cents to 12 cents, so now 11 I've got a 4-cent gap that I have to cover. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's -- I mean, that's 13 exactly what I'm saying. But what I'm saying is, why would 14 you add -- why would you go to all the trouble to make it 15 confusing to use the old rate to do one figure, instead of 16 taking the effective rate and then taking the amount of money 17 that you need to cover this year's budget and apply a tax 18 rate to the effective rate to get that amount of money that 19 you need because of the increased values? 20 MS. HARGIS: When I did the budget, I did not have 21 the availability of the effective rate. I had an estimate, 22 and that's what I -- 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand. We're talking 24 about now. We have an effective rate figure now. 25 MS. HARGIS: I used -- normally in the budgeting 8-25-08 99 1 process, you assume that the -- that the elected officials 2 are going to either remain at the tax rate that they have, so 3 that they can have a level that's consistent with what 4 they've had in the past and raise enough revenue based on 5 using the same rate that would cover their expenses. So, my 6 assumption was that, because you've used that same tax rate 7 for four years, that you would use it for the fifth year, and 8 that's the reason that I plugged it in. To use the effective 9 rate -- I mean, I can go back and use the effective rate, but 10 it was just simpler to say off of the .3592 which I already 11 have in the -- because the -- the rate is divided between -- 12 'cause you can see on your summary sheet ten different items, 13 so -- and then I would have to go back and change it. It was 14 just simpler. That's -- 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. So, what you're saying 16 in this first line here, you have the red numbers of 856 and 17 186,714. That equals $1,042,940. And you apply this 3-cent 18 -- .0367 tax rate is what's needed to generate that money. 19 On the old tax rate, not on the effective rate. 20 MS. HARGIS: That is correct, yes, sir. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The rate today. That's what 22 you're saying? 23 MS. HARGIS: Yes, sir. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Seems to me like it could 8-25-08 100 1 have been a lot simpler the other way around, but -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seems -- 3 JUDGE TINLEY: The Legislature has, by very 4 confusing statutory language, dictated what all these things 5 are, and given the terminology of "effective tax rate" and 6 all this other stuff. But -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- personally, I think 8 effective rate is what's confusing. I think we should 9 eliminate the whole term "effective rate." It's a tax rate. 10 That's what it is. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The effective rate is 12 generated so that you -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're absolutely right, it 14 does confuse things. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But the effective rate also 16 is the basis for what you have to go by so that you can 17 establish rollback. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but that's legislative. 19 That's a gimmick. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Been there for a long time. 21 This is not something that went through -- 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a legislative gimmick. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- while I've been missing in 24 action for eight years. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Gimmick? 8-25-08 101 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Gimmick. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What you're saying, Bill, is 3 that you think there's lawyers involved in this thing? 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Lots of them. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Lots of them. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're really sharp today. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll telling you what, 8 buddy, I'm ready. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: You're starting off the week great. 10 You've got one thought already for this week. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See? 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Anyway, I think we finally 13 got that one understood, even if I don't totally understand 14 why, but -- 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we'd be adding 3.67 to 16 the existing -- 17 MS. HARGIS: .3592, which is your -- 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- .3592. 19 MS. HARGIS: -- general and debt service, right. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And that is the -- that is 21 the -- 22 MS. HARGIS: That is if you -- 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 100 percent, across-the-board 24 raises for everybody, cost-of-living, whatever you want to 25 call it; is that correct? 8-25-08 102 1 MS. HARGIS: No, sir. The first scenario says 2 that -- 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Except -- 4 MS. HARGIS: -- the 10 percent you requested at the 5 workshop meeting, that we add an additional step. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm. 7 MS. HARGIS: The first one says that it's an 8 additional step for all employees and department heads. The 9 second scenario says that it's 10 percent, employees' step 10 rate increase only, and the third scenario is 10 percent 11 raises for everybody, period. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I think we got a little 13 confused on all the other stuff. But -- so, if we have -- 14 it's a 3.74-cent increase is what we need to do under the 15 second scenario on here? 16 MS. HARGIS: That's correct. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: That includes Road and Bridge. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That includes everything. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm, yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Three -- three and 21 three-quarters cents, basically, increase. 22 MS. HARGIS: Road and Bridge, which I didn't do 23 here -- Road and Bridge is at .0304, and we propose to bring 24 them to .0322, which is -- which is their M & O maximum. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But this -- this sheet includes 8-25-08 103 1 everything, or just those three items? 2 MS. HARGIS: This is just the general fund. And 3 the -- everything that would fall in the debt service, and 4 the debt service is included in here. Keep in mind, we did 5 have -- in this negative of 856, we have -- we lost an issue, 6 but we picked up an issue this year as our first payment on 7 the one we got last year. And also, one of our principal 8 payments on one of the other issues is higher this year, so 9 there's a little bit of a debt service increase here as well. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is a zero-based budget 11 and does not include any deficit spending? 12 MS. HARGIS: No deficit spending. In fact, if 13 you'll see in the first and second scenario, in order to 14 hold -- I was asked to hold the fund balance at 20 percent or 15 higher, and in order to do that, I needed to add 25,000. And 16 that's in the first and second scenarios that you see there. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 18 MS. HARGIS: So, that -- I mean, those are all -- 19 all variables for you to consider. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 21 MS. HARGIS: These are the separate questions I've 22 been asked from several of you. So -- 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. Well, it's time for me 24 to continue being myself, I guess. I've been thinking quite 25 a bit about this budget thing over the -- over the weekend, 8-25-08 104 1 and not only do we have a responsibility to our constituents, 2 but we also have a responsibility to provide our employees 3 with a decent wage. And I believe we're -- we're all in 4 agreement with trying to do the best we can with what we have 5 to work with. What I'm -- last year, the employees -- hourly 6 employees got -- hourly employees, whatever you want to call 7 it, they got 3 and a half percent. All the department heads 8 and elected officials got 3 and a half and 3 and a half, 9 which is 7. I propose we reverse the percentages this year, 10 and that we give elected officials and department heads 11 5 percent, and all -- everyone else 10 percent. If you take 12 that over the last two years, this year and last year, and 13 you total up what -- what everybody has received, the elected 14 officials and department heads have received or will receive 15 12 percent increases based on that number, which is an 16 average of 6, which is probably more than a lot of other 17 companies and corporations are giving. And employees would 18 be up to 13 and a half percent total if we do what I'm 19 suggesting. 20 I do believe -- and I realize that we're behind 21 some of the major employers in Kerr County in what we pay our 22 employees, but I think we need to take our time and make some 23 steady increases over the next several years, rather than 24 trying to give such a huge influx all at one time to 25 everybody. I believe that we are -- our biggest problems are 8-25-08 105 1 in the areas of our hourly people, where we have the largest 2 turnover, and I believe they're the ones that are furthest 3 behind and need to be brought up so we can compete for those 4 people in the job place -- in the job market. But this plan 5 will necessitate a rate increase. We have no doubt about 6 having to increase the rate. There hasn't been an increase 7 for a long time on taxes, and there's a lot of reasons we can 8 do this. One of them is the fact that we've lost $776,000 in 9 65-and-older tax freeze. And that's not something we need to 10 complain about, but it's something we have to deal with. And 11 had we had that 776,000, we'd be talking about almost no tax 12 increase whatsoever, but we don't, so we have to face 13 reality, and it's up to the people who are left to pay. 14 So, we're going to have to -- we are -- we're going 15 to have to raise the rate. It's just a matter of how much 16 and what we agree to. And I do not have the numbers of what 17 I'm proposing would save as far as the tax rate, but I 18 believe it would save probably a half cent, maybe. Not much, 19 but I think it's something, and I think we do have an 20 obligation to the taxpayers to -- to give them our best 21 service that we can give them, and not hit them as hard all 22 at one time. And I believe that if we -- we give ourselves 23 10 percent after getting 7 last year, I think it's wrong. 24 It's fundamentally wrong, and I just totally disagree with 25 it. A small COLA for us is fine, but not -- not as much -- 8-25-08 106 1 not 10 percent. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, you're -- see, you just 3 brought up my question. Are we talking about a salary 4 increase, or are we talking about a COLA? 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You can call it anything you 6 want to; it's still an increase. I don't care how -- any 7 terminology you use, I don't care what you call it, it's 8 still an increase in salary. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct. So -- so, 10 what you're saying, then, is give the elected officials a 11 5 percent salary increase, and then a 7 and a half percent 12 COLA? 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, that's what I'm 15 asking. What -- 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, that's not what I'm 17 proposing. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm talking about 5 percent. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want the COLA instead. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I'm not going to -- I'm 22 not going to say -- you know, we if we go with a pure COLA, 23 we all know that that could be 11, 12 percent. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And I don't believe that we 8-25-08 107 1 can afford to do that for everybody this year. I think with 2 what's been had in the last few years, and with our benefits 3 package and everything that we have that others don't have, I 4 believe that we'll still be competitive and will get the 5 people's salaries up or give them a COLA that would allow 6 them to make enough money to where they could be off food 7 stamps. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bruce, I'm with you almost 9 100 percent, but not quite. And my hangup is -- is a COLA is 10 what it is. The cost-of-living, the cost it takes us -- and 11 that's all of us -- to go to H.E.B. and get our milk and 12 bread and go over to the gas station and get our gas. The 13 cost to do that is what it is. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's true. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Whether it's 3 percent or 16 85 percent. I don't have any idea where it is, but it's a 17 lot. But it -- but it's there, and that is also a reality. 18 So, that's where you and I differ a little bit. I think -- I 19 think the COLA is the important part, to me. And then -- and 20 that's giving everybody the ability to go down and stay up 21 with the cost of eggs a little bit, so we don't -- to me, 22 that's where the reality is. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, a salary increase, this 25 10 percent language and this 5 percent language, I'm with you 8-25-08 108 1 100 percent. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, that's just -- it's a 3 matter of terminology, whatever you want to call it, but it's 4 still an increased cost to the County, and it's an increase 5 in our tax rate. And -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And I don't know that -- that 8 I could walk down the street and face my constituents that -- 9 on a 10 percent COLA, salary increase or whatever. It's just 10 a plain old check, is what it amounts to. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One -- just a brief comment. 12 You know, and everyone can look at things the way you want 13 to. You chose to look at the last two years. If you went 14 back three years and four years, all of a sudden you realize 15 that the employees were taking -- were adjusted the third and 16 fourth year past, and the reason we adjusted the elected 17 officials and department heads last year is 'cause they were 18 skipped for years. So I think, you know, you can't -- you 19 know, it's kind of like any number or any statistic; 20 depending upon what you want to show, you can make the 21 numbers do it, depending where you draw the line. So, I look 22 at more of a philosophy; look at it more like Buster. A 23 COLA's a COLA, and I think that everyone should be entitled 24 to a cost-of-living adjustment. 25 We started out this year trying to give the 8-25-08 109 1 employees a boost, because we felt that they were losing 2 ground. I think everyone is agreeing on that. And, you 3 know, one of the proposals I hear shows a -- a step increase 4 for the lowest of the hourly workers, and then basically a 5 COLA for everybody else. You know, Commissioners Court 6 always -- you know, we get -- we're the ones going to get 7 dinged on because we make the decision, but that's just part 8 of the job. I mean, you got to do what you got to do. 9 People both ways can gripe, but I just think that it is the 10 right thing to do for people to get COLA's. I don't think 11 you should make less this year than you did the previous 12 year. And I think that's why Social Security does COLA's. 13 That's why a lot of retirement funds do COLA's. I mean, and 14 I don't think the County is any different than that. When it 15 comes to the salary increases, I think the priority, in my 16 mind, is employee -- hourly workers. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's why I said what I did. 18 Because this narrows the gap a little bit for those 19 lesser-paid employees, way less-paid employees, to get -- to 20 do some good, to get them up to where they're where they 21 should be and able to afford to go, like, to H.E.B. a little 22 bit more, like Buster says. And, yes, it's -- you know, 23 elected officials are probably going to shoot me for saying 24 it, but I just believe that this year, the people that are 25 hurt the worst are the ones that have the least. 8-25-08 110 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we tried to address 2 that, Commissioner, by proposing an extra step and grade for 3 our people in certain -- certain categories. I agree with 4 Commissioner Letz; the erosion of an individual's buying 5 power in today's -- in today's economy is the same whether 6 you're an elected official or whether you're appointed or 7 whether you're hired on an hourly rate. There is no 8 distinction when you go out to purchase whatever you go out 9 to purchase. And Commissioner Letz is right in reflecting 10 back more than just two years ago in terms of how we've dealt 11 with these things. And every time you skip, then at some 12 point in time, you're going to make up, and so that's the 13 penalty for skipping, for whatever reasons you did the 14 skipping. And I'm not inclined to do that. I think a 15 COLA -- I agree with Commissioner Baldwin, and a COLA in the 16 amount that we've been talking about is top to bottom; there 17 is no distinction. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Well -- 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's why there are five of 20 us on the court. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Unfortunately, we're put in a 23 position where we have not done what we should have done in 24 prior years. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right. 8-25-08 111 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Government bodies traditionally are 2 prone to react rather than be proactive, even to the point of 3 waiting for a crisis. And because of our failure to do what 4 we should have done -- there was a policy put in place to 5 give longevity and educational increases to our employees 6 that I think was a good policy. It gives them kind of an 7 insurance policy that periodically they will get an increase. 8 Beyond that, we've tried to do COLA's. But, unfortunately, 9 the marketplace has outpaced us. And I think we all approach 10 this knowing that because of our inaction in prior years, 11 what we've done is, we've got our employees who are lagging 12 behind others that are in the marketplace, similarly 13 situated. And as a result, when we lose employees, our exit 14 interviews are showing that 95 percent, I believe was the 15 number, are exiting and leaving us because of pure 16 compensation issues, not related to benefits. The responses 17 have been, "I can get the same or similar benefits plus more 18 money somewhere else for a like position." 19 So, what we're trying to do is, number one, play 20 catch-up. Well, unfortunately, when you play catch-up from 21 last year, you're getting yourself to last year, and then you 22 look around and see what the marketplace is doing this year, 23 so you're not really catching up. You're catching up to be 24 behind again. And when Commissioner Letz mentioned people 25 really going to try and get into the marketplace, and get our 8-25-08 112 1 people where they need to be currently in the marketplace, we 2 needed to consider, in addition to the COLA, an additional 3 step increase to try and bring them to maybe the lower end of 4 the current level, as opposed to last year's level. I think 5 it's a good concept. Unfortunately, yes, it will require a 6 tax rate increase. There's going to be a tax rate increase 7 irrespective, because we've not done what we should have done 8 in prior years. That's plain, pure, and simple. Our 9 financial adviser urged us to increase our tax rate. His 10 rationale was primarily based upon the impact of the over-65 11 tax freeze and the loss of tax base this past year, and 12 the -- all the various indexes, the Consumer Price Index, the 13 wholesale price index. 14 All of those indexes indicate significantly higher 15 pressures this year on all of the economic needs of 16 everybody. Grocery -- they talk about core, they talk about 17 non-core, all of that mishmash. But the bottom line is, 18 every single employee of this county, be they -- be they 19 elected, be they a supervisor, a department head, or the 20 lowest man or woman on the totem pole, when they go to the 21 grocery store, when they go to the hardware store, when they 22 go anyplace to purchase goods or services, they notice right 23 away, "Gee, that's really gone up," because it has. Fuel 24 costs are out of range. Utilities are going up. We're 25 having to plan for that. Yeah, COLA's appropriate for 8-25-08 113 1 everybody, but I think if we're going to get all of the main 2 cogs of our machine up to where they need to go, we need to 3 start adding the additional step to those people. I think 4 the real issue today is whether or not that additional step 5 includes department heads or does not include department 6 heads. And there's probably -- they can make a case 7 department by department; this one should be, this one 8 shouldn't be. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're not going to do that. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you know, that's -- that's a 11 hard row to hoe. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I wouldn't suggest that 13 either. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: And I -- I think that's the real 15 decision that we got to make today. That's what I see as 16 being the Court decision. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, one other comment. I 18 want to go back to the very beginning of the budget process, 19 is that our first meeting, I think we had every elected 20 official in the audience, and they went in and all of them 21 worked very hard and cut -- $1.4 million? 22 MS. HARGIS: Six. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: $1.6 million from their own 24 budgets, cutting wherever they could, whether it be delaying 25 a year on new cars or delaying a little bit on a computer and 8-25-08 114 1 all that. And I think that -- you know, and that was the 2 first time since I've been in office that we had all of the 3 elected officials really come to us with a -- wanting to help 4 the hourly employees, and they did that. And I think, you 5 know, if it's -- yes, it means we have to have a tax 6 increase. I don't -- I don't like it, but I think they have 7 done their part, and now we need to do our part. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're right. I hope we 9 would all vote on that issue. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: One addition to that, 11 Jonathan, is that they didn't say just help the hourly 12 employees, because of what y'all have been talking about, the 13 cost-of-living. They said all of them; department heads, 14 elected officials, including yourselves and everybody. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand that. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, where are we? 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, really, it's set up as an 18 action item, and I think in order to be able to discuss Item 19 16, we probably need to know where we're going to go here, 20 folks. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, we do. Ms. Hargis, 22 want to come back to the podium so we can make certain that 23 we know where we're going with these 15 sheets of paper we 24 got here? 25 MS. HARGIS: Yes, sir. 8-25-08 115 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 10 percent raise for all, 2 step increase for employees and department heads, is -- 3 MS. HARGIS: And a reserve. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And a reserve. 5 MS. HARGIS: Is .379. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've got to find it. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: We're not at the tax rate issue. 8 We're at the -- what the employee compensation is going to 9 be. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I'm looking at. 11 Am I correct? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Adjustment -- no, you probably need 13 to be looking at -- 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Depending on which one of the 15 plans you want to follow. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: There you go. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: If you're talking about the top one 19 there -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, am I hearing y'all say 21 that the 10 percent salary increase, included in that is the 22 COLA? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm with you. I would rather 25 -- I don't like that word on here. You know, for future 8-25-08 116 1 years. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Say that again? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: A COLA's a COLA. Then you have 4 increases on top of it. I understand what Bruce is saying, 5 that it's all an increase, but -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The 10 percent is -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is the COLA. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- is the COLA. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right, okay. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's not a salary 11 increase. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct. 13 MS. HARGIS: I used the word "adjustment." 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Here we are. COLA equal to the 15 adjusted 10 percent as shown. 16 MS. HARGIS: And step increase. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Now, is it actually 10 percent, 18 or is it actually 10.38 percent? 19 MS. HYDE: 10.381. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 381. And that's to keep us in 21 the step and grade? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: That's what we've been calling the 23 adjusted 10 percent. 24 MS. HYDE: Right. Ms. Hargis used "adjusted" 25 because it's confusing. But you're doing -- you're doing the 8-25-08 117 1 grades so that we don't blow the step and grade out of the 2 water. 3 (Multiple low-voice discussions off the record.) 4 THE REPORTER: I need to know what's on the record 5 and what's not. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, you have a complaint 7 here. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sorry? 9 THE REPORTER: I need to know what's on the record 10 and what's not. There are several conversations going on 11 here. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: I think Commissioner Williams is 13 going to put something on the record here. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Assuming he gets his mind 15 wrapped around it. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: I see. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. What's confusing me 18 is tax rate. With additional step increases, except -- okay. 19 That's -- that's the increase for department heads and 20 elected -- and hourly-rated with a step, and the rate is 21 10.381 for the COLA. And this gives us this tax rate right 22 here; is that correct? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. My motion would be 25 -- let's see if I can get it out here. That -- you haven't 8-25-08 118 1 called this, Judge, Item Number 16, have you? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: No. No, it's 14. And we got -- 3 everything's open under 14, I assure you. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Including the Sheriff's policy. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That we go with the tax 7 rate estimates for '08-'09, with an additional step increase. 8 Additional step increase would include hourly-rated and 9 department heads, but not elected officials, and the COLA is 10 equal to 10.381, and the amount of the tax rate to cover that 11 is .0379 increase. Is that correct, Ms. Hargis? 12 MS. HARGIS: 036. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon me? 14 MS. HARGIS: .0379, that is correct. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my motion. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You excluded the elected 17 officials and department heads? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Excluded elected officials, not 19 department heads. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For the step. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: For the step increase. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No step for elected 24 officials. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How are you going to get a 8-25-08 119 1 step for us? 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good point. But 3 they're out of it, anyway. They're out of it. And if you 4 figure out how they get it, they're still out of it. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: So, your motion is for the Court to 6 approve a COLA equal to the adjusted 10 percent, which is 7 effectively 10.381, as per the step and grade, be four steps, 8 plus a one-step increase for all county employees except 9 elected officials? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's my motion. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you're putting -- you're 14 putting this number here, whatever it is, the tax rate, in 15 that court order, and are you real comfortable that we -- 16 you're putting an accurate number in there? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Take out the tax rate. We 18 don't need it. The tax rate comes in another agenda item. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think so. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Number 16. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think so too. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: When I restated, I did mention 23 the -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: -- I did mention the tax rate. 8-25-08 120 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion on the floor. Do I 3 hear a second? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second the motion. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion is made and seconded. 6 Questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify 7 by raising your right hand. 8 (Commissioners Baldwin and Williams voted in favor of the motion.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10 (Commissioners Letz and Oehler voted against the 11 motion.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Chair votes in the affirmative. 13 Motion carried. Anything else to discuss under Item 14? 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Probably going to get plenty 15 of discussion on that. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on 14, gentlemen? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not that I can see. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: A few more like that and I'll 19 be ready to go eat lunch. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we'll go to Item 16; consider, 21 discuss -- excuse me, Item 15. Consider, discuss, take 22 appropriate action to set date, time, and place of public 23 hearings on Kerr County FY 2008-09 budget. That public 24 hearing is a date after the 15th day of the month next 25 following the month in which the budget was prepared, the way 8-25-08 121 1 I read the Local Government Code. Is that what you've got? 2 MR. EMERSON: To be honest with you, Judge, I 3 didn't read it before this meeting. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 5 MR. EMERSON: Haven't read it since last year, so 6 I'll have to rely on your expertise. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: I cheated yesterday. So we're 8 looking at -- we're going to do it -- 9 MS. HARGIS: We also have to have 10 days to give 10 it to the County Clerk, remember. But I think we'll be okay 11 on your schedule, probably. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what's the date? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the date? 14 JUDGE TINLEY: It can be the 16th. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It can be the 16th? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: And -- well, and I think -- I think 17 the Tax Assessor has proposed that we meet on the 16th for 18 the second public hearing on the tax rate. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: September the 16th? 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The second meeting or the 22 first? 23 MS. BOLIN: If we do the first on September 2nd, 24 then we'll do the second one on September 16th. 25 MS. HARGIS: September the 16th, I believe, is your 8-25-08 122 1 regular scheduled meeting, is it not? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: No. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The 8th and the 22nd. 4 MS. HARGIS: Okay, yes. It's the way that the 5 calendar reads. That way, we'd have the two public hearings 6 on the second -- second -- first public hearing on the budget 7 and the second public hearing on the tax rate, and then you 8 would approve the budget just like you did last year. We 9 have to -- this time of the year, you have to have some 10 special meetings. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we're having -- on the 12 16th, we're having a meeting? 13 MS. HARGIS: Yes. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, no, that's not been determined 15 yet. I'm -- 16 MS. HARGIS: You can back that up. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: What would be wrong with holding the 18 first public hearing on the 8th, the second one on the -- 19 MS. HARGIS: It's not sooner than three days, not 20 greater than 14. She has to get this publication in today. 21 Diane, is that publication -- I think if she puts both days 22 in -- 23 MS. BOLIN: I have to put both dates in. 24 MS. HARGIS: If she puts both dates in, then you 25 can't meet for the first public hearing not sooner than 8-25-08 123 1 three, not greater than 14. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: What would be the problem of having 3 our -- our first public hearing on the 8th, and having our 4 second public hearing on -- what's the second meeting date? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 22nd. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: The 22nd. That's within the 3- to 7 14-day window. 8 MS. BOLIN: Well, it's actually seven days. It has 9 to be in the paper seven days before the public hearings. 10 MS. HARGIS: So, if you put it in tomorrow, which 11 is on the 26th -- 12 JUDGE TINLEY: The notification must be at least 13 seven days before the public hearing. So, we're not 14 violating either way there. What's wrong with the 8th and -- 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 22nd. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: -- and 22nd for those two hearings? 17 MS. BOLIN: Nothing's wrong, as far as I'm 18 concerned. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 20 MS. BOLIN: You have to adopt within three to 14 21 days after the second public hearing. 22 MS. HARGIS: See, that's the problem. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, set a special date. 24 MS. BOLIN: To adopt. 25 MS. HARGIS: To adopt the rate, you'd still have to 8-25-08 124 1 have one special meeting after the 22nd. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 3 MS. HARGIS: Would you rather do that? 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we're going to go to 5 regular Commissioners Court days that we're doing? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Why not? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know why not. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then we can do -- 9 MS. HARGIS: What is the following Monday after the 10 22nd, Judge? 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 29th. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The 29th. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We could actually adopt on 14 the 22nd too, couldn't we? 15 MS. BOLIN: No. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: After you put it on, you have 17 another deal to adopt? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: No, there's -- there's a 72-hour 19 notice, apparently, after the two hearings -- 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. Then we -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: -- in which we can adopt the tax 22 rate, but we got nine days in order to do that. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It says must adopt tax rate 24 by September 29. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we can do it the 24th -- 8-25-08 125 1 or we can't make it -- the 27th -- 72 hours. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Takes three days, yeah. 3 MS. HARGIS: After the advertisement -- there's an 4 advertisement -- I believe another advertisement, so I have 5 to get that -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just give us a date. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Really. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well -- 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Takes forever just to get a 10 date, doesn't it? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just give us the dates. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 26th, then probably have our -- 13 a date to adopt then? 14 JUDGE TINLEY: We have to -- in this initial 15 notice, we have to notify the date that we propose to 16 actually adopt the tax rate? 17 MS. BOLIN: No, sir. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: I didn't think so. So, we can set 19 the two hearings now for 9/8 and 9/22 at 10 a.m. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Who made that motion? 22 MS. BOLIN: Are we doing the budget, or are we 23 doing the tax rate? We're on the tax -- we're on the budget 24 part. 25 MS. HARGIS: The budget, you can do. You can -- 8-25-08 126 1 the first public hearing -- 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sorry, we're on the tax rate. 3 Thank you for getting me on track. I appreciate that. No, I 4 was seriously off. 5 MS. HARGIS: The first -- we can have the first 6 budget hearing on the 8th and the second one on the 22nd. 7 But we can't -- 8 JUDGE TINLEY: You don't have to have but one 9 hearing on the budget, do you? 10 MS. HARGIS: I thought it was two. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought all we had to 12 have is one. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just post it, have a hearing, 14 and then you -- 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then you set the rate. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Then you adopt it, then set 17 the rate. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: It's got to be after the 15th -- 19 public hearing for a date after the 15th day of the month 20 next following the month in which the budget was prepared. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Be September, wouldn't it? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it would be September. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Has to be September. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Every year we do this. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We can't wait till October to 8-25-08 127 1 do this. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: That would be -- 3 MS. HARGIS: So, we can't -- 4 JUDGE TINLEY: You're going to have to speak up so 5 I can understand what you're saying. 6 MS. HARGIS: Go for it. 7 MS. HYDE: Four-day work week? Can that be put 8 somewhere? There's been lots of questions. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Far as I'm concerned, it's 10 dead. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't hear any answers. 12 MS. HYDE: I don't either. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's dead? 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You don't think it's dead? 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't want it to be dead. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For this budget year? 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't want it to be dead. 18 I want it to go for one year and then try it out. If we 19 don't like it, we don't do it any more. 20 MS. HARGIS: Can we get the date on the budget -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: We're working on the budget now. It 22 has to be after the -- after the 15th, which, if we're going 23 to do it on a regular day, it needs to be on the 22nd. 24 MS. HARGIS: Okay. That will be our hearing for 25 the budget. 8-25-08 128 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 2 MS. HARGIS: First and only hearing. That's the 3 only thing you can do is have the public hearing that day. 4 You cannot adopt the budget till after you adopt the tax 5 rate, so you'll have to wait till the 29th. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what he just said. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. You can't adopt it on that 8 same day? 9 MS. HARGIS: No, you have to adopt your tax rate 10 first. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, we'll do that on the 12 29th, okay. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. So, we're going 14 to have a budget hearing on the 8th. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fill in all the blanks and then 17 we'll go to lunch, and after we're done, everyone can sort it 18 out. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Hold 20 on just a moment here. So, the suggestion is that we have 21 the public hearing on the budget 9/22/08 at 10 a.m., correct? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe we already have a 23 10 a.m. 24 MS. GRINSTEAD: No, on the 8th. On the 8th, we 25 have -- 8-25-08 129 1 JUDGE TINLEY: No, we don't, because that wasn't 2 included within this agenda item. That's the next agenda 3 item. 4 MS. GRINSTEAD: No, Jannett already has a public 5 hearing set at 10 a.m. on the 8th, so we can't use that same 6 time, is all I'm saying. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I'm awaiting a motion for a 8 public hearing on the budget on 9/22/08 at 10 a.m. I 9 continue to wait. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we do that. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Public hearing on the 13 budget on 9/22. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Do we need a motion for that? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to hold a 17 public hearing on the budget for 9/22/08 at 10 a.m. Further 18 question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify 19 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 carries. Now we go to Item 24 16; consider, discuss, and approve by record vote the 25 proposed Kerr County 2008 tax rate and set date, time, and 8-25-08 130 1 place of first and second public hearings or such tax rate. 2 MS. BOLIN: I think we already set the 8th and the 3 22nd as our days. I just need a time. 10 o'clock is taken 4 on the 8th. What time do you want to have that? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, 10:15? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What time do you want to 7 have it? 8 MS. BOLIN: 9 o'clock. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fine with me. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. 11 MS. BOLIN: 9:15? 9:30? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 9:30. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 9:30. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On the 8th? 15 MS. BOLIN: On the 8th, yes, sir. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: And that'll be here in Commissioners 17 Court courtroom? 18 MS. BOLIN: Yes, sir. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 20 MS. BOLIN: And then on the -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: What time? 22 MS. BOLIN: -- 22nd -- what time did we do -- 23 10 o'clock for -- 24 MS. HARGIS: 10:00 on the 22nd? Or we can do 9:30 25 again. Or do we need to do it after the budget hearing? 8-25-08 131 1 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think it makes any 2 difference. We can't adopt a budget until after we set the 3 tax rate on the 29th, anyway. 4 MS. BOLIN: Right, okay. Then we'll do it at 9:30. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 6 MS. BOLIN: And then, just for thought process, you 7 can adopt three days to 14 days after the second public 8 hearing, so if you decide you want to do it at the end of 9 that week, then y'all can decide that later. 'Cause I don't 10 need it for this, but I do need a record vote. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For which one do you need a 12 record vote? 13 JUDGE TINLEY: 16, the proposed tax rate. 14 MS. BOLIN: The tax rate. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Which is? 16 MS. BOLIN: Good question. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, if you want me to vote 18 on it, we're going to have to find out what it is. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ms. Hargis? We're adding 20 what to 3.92? 3592? 21 MS. HARGIS: The total tax rate, including Road and 22 Bridge, needs to be .4288. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: .4288. That's everything? 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Current rate is .3896. 25 MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm. The current rate, the total 8-25-08 132 1 rate of .3896. 2 MS. BOLIN: Mm-hmm. 3 MS. HARGIS: Unless she and I added something wrong 4 a while ago. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: I come up with 4275. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I come up with. 7 MS. HARGIS: I got .3592. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 3.5 what? 9 MS. HARGIS: .3592. Then add .0379, and then you 10 need to add .0322 for Road and Bridge. .4293. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 42 what? 12 MS. HARGIS: 93. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We got three numbers out 14 there now. 15 MS. HARGIS: One more time. .3592 plus -- 16 JUDGE TINLEY: I have a splendid idea. We're going 17 to be in recess until 1:30. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That makes sense. Let's 19 go. 20 (Recess taken from 12:04 p.m. to 1:35 p.m.) 21 - - - - - - - - - - 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if 23 we might. We are back on Item 16. As I recall, we were 24 discussing what the new proposed tax rate would be, and there 25 was some number-crunching going on. And where did -- where 8-25-08 133 1 did everyone agree to light? 2 MS. BOLIN: We came up with .4293. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Say it again? 4 MS. BOLIN: .4293. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we have our dates and 7 times? 8 MS. BOLIN: Yes. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 10 MS. BOLIN: That increases the total revenues by 11 15.65 percent. So, what I need is a record vote for the 12 .4293, and we set our dates for September 8th at 9:30 in 13 Commissioners Court, and September 22nd at 9:30 in 14 Commissioners Court. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we set 16 the tax rate for 2008-2009, total tax rate at .4293, and we 17 set public hearings for September 8th at 9:30 and 18 September 22nd at 9:30. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Here in Commissioners Courtroom? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Here in Commissioners 21 Courtroom. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: There was a second, Mr. Baldwin? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion's been made and seconded as 8-25-08 134 1 indicated. Question or discussion on the motion? Okay. You 2 need a record vote on this? 3 MS. BOLIN: Yes, sir, I do. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: I'll start down here. Commissioner 5 4? 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Commissioner 4 votes yes. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner 3? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner 2? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner 1? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I vote aye. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: And the chair votes aye also. 14 MS. BOLIN: Okay, that's all I needed. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 16 MS. BOLIN: Thank you. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Next item, Number 17; consider, 18 discuss, and take appropriate action to authorize publication 19 of notices of proposed salary, expenses, and other allowances 20 of Kerr County elected county or precinct officers for fiscal 21 year 2008-09 and set date, time, and place of public hearing 22 on the same. 23 MS. HARGIS: This is the sheet that I gave you. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a public hearing already set 25 on the budget for 9/22. 8-25-08 135 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion that we set the 2 public hearing for 9/22 at 9:45. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and second to 5 authorize publication of notices of proposed salary, 6 expenses, and other allowances of Kerr County elected county 7 or precinct officers for FY 2008-09 for September the 22nd, 8 2008, at 9:45 a.m., here in the Commissioners Courtroom. 9 Question or discussion on that motion? All in favor of that 10 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We've got 15 one agenda -- I mean one executive session item on the 16 agenda. Rather than doing an in-and-out, why don't we go to 17 Section 4, payment of bills. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got a couple of 19 questions. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: All right, sir. 21 MR. BOLLIER: Judge? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Wait a minute. That's right. We'll 23 get to you in just a second. We'll come back to it. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 12. I think we'll 25 probably have a -- 'cause I'm going to be the only one that's 8-25-08 136 1 concerned about this issue, but -- so we'll probably have a 2 private conversation about this, but as an example, County 3 Court at Law, general fund, the first set of -- actually, 4 second set, Ms. Rode, reimbursed steno machine repair, 5 something, something, $359. And if I knew -- back in the 6 olden days once, there was -- it gave the -- what line item 7 that that was coming out of, and I could go there and I could 8 go to that line and I could see that there's plenty of money 9 to do that kind of thing, and my fears and bad dreams would 10 go away. But I can't do that any longer. 11 MS. HARGIS: Okay. We'll see if we can't modify 12 this report and ask them to add that. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just stop and think about 14 that, you know, 'cause probably half -- I would think if 15 we're going through these bills, that's kind of what -- 16 that's what I look for. 17 MS. HARGIS: If -- if I read you okay, and the 18 position that you had, the County Court at Law is -- I can't 19 quote off the top of my head; it's four-something. 403, I 20 think. If you go to 403, and you would go to the repair line 21 item, then you would see -- so it gives you the department. 22 And let's go to it so you can see. 23 MR. RUARK: What's the account? 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me ask a question. 25 Commissioner, are you concerned about -- 8-25-08 137 1 MS. HARGIS: 10. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: -- which budget department, or the 3 specific line item? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Specific line item. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, I can see County 7 Court at Law here, and I can figure out where that is in the 8 budget. I know it's earlier on and that kind of thing. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, for each separate 10 expenditure, as opposed to just knowing the sequence -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are they charging this out 12 to Kleenex, or are they charging it out to Ms. Rode's steno 13 machine, or what? 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What are they charging it 16 out to? 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I agree with you; that would 18 be things that have happened in the past. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah, absolutely. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That didn't say where the 21 money was coming from. It just all of a sudden got plugged 22 in. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Or what it was for, in some 25 instances. 8-25-08 138 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think our job is just to, 2 you know, dot the I's and cross the T's, and I'm doing my 3 best to do that. So, we'll think about that. 4 MS. HARGIS: I can -- we can call and ask to have 5 that report modified. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Here's a good one. Page 4, 7 Human Resources. 8 MS. HYDE: Oh, lord. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What I'm seeing here is 10 Office Depot, bought a headset for $719.98. 11 MS. HARGIS: Two headsets. 12 MS. HYDE: Two headsets. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What the hell do those 14 headsets do? 15 MS. HYDE: They allow the people not to sit there 16 with a phone against their ear. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what line do they come 18 out of? 19 MS. HYDE: Office supplies. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What do they do? 21 MS. HYDE: Allows them to be mobile so we're not 22 running back and forth trying to answer phones. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Those things cost that much? 25 MS. HYDE: Yes, sir. 8-25-08 139 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Whew. 2 MS. HYDE: Those were the cheap ones. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't get any of the 4 expensive ones. 5 MS. HYDE: I won't. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 5, County Jail, halfway 7 down. Cleaning Ideas, floor pads. 8 MS. HARGIS: It's for a buffer. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry? 10 MR. BOLLIER: For a buffer. 11 MS. HARGIS: For a buffer. It goes in a buffer. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Does that go in the 13 jail, or maintenance? 14 MS. HARGIS: No, it goes into the jail, 'cause it 15 came from the jail. They have their own buffer. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: To be honest, Buster, half the 17 time it comes out of mine, half the time it comes out of his. 18 It's maintenance. I couldn't -- I couldn't tell you. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, it's just public money. 20 Hell, let's don't worry about this. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It all goes to maintenance, 22 but those machines stay out at the jail, and we use them on 23 the buffers. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sounds like a maintenance 25 issue to me, but if you see it differently, you're the 8-25-08 140 1 Auditor. 2 MS. HARGIS: The bill came from the Sheriff's 3 Department and it was coded accordingly, so that's where we 4 put it. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, ma'am. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Wait a minute. Before you leave 7 that page, while we're there on the jail, I've got one. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Richard Montgomery. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. He's a dentist. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: $2,000. I thought we were paying 12 for extractions, not major oral surgery. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That inmate had -- that's one 14 of my complaints about inmates staying in our jail too 15 long -- impacted wisdom teeth that were ordered to be taken 16 out. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, did he get there just 18 in time to have that done, or had he been there for a little 19 while? 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. Unfortunately, on that 21 inmate, he had those six months ago. He ended up getting 22 prison time. We sent him to the prison. He got brought back 23 a couple weeks ago. Dr. Montgomery had said it was an 24 emergency. Then we sent a note with him to T.D.C. that it 25 was an emergency situation, had to be done. The inmate got 8-25-08 141 1 brought back on a bench warrant. He still had the same 2 problem, and he complained immediately. We took him back to 3 the dentist. He said, "That's it." This was an emergency 4 and had to be done. We're stuck. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Why don't we send that bill to 6 T.D.C.? They failed to do what -- 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I want to see T.D.C. pay it, 8 Judge. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: We can sure ask them, can't we? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Send it for reimbursement. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Why was that particular inmate 12 brought back on a bench warrant? 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: At a witness in another trial, 14 I think. Could have been another case pending, too. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Did that other case go to trial? 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't remember. I don't 17 know if it has yet or not. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: While we're there, while 19 you're standing and have the floor and are comfortable and -- 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, yeah, here it comes. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tell me about one of my 22 favorite constituents and why EMS was out there for $634. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Because they charge us for 24 every call they make to the jail, just like they charge you 25 if they go to your house. I've disagreed with that. I've 8-25-08 142 1 asked them why, since we supplement them, but we get bills 2 too. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Are you ready to go to the next 4 page, Buster? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to Page 6. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm pretty excited. Page 6, 8 down at the bottom, the Sheriff's Department. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now you see why I think my 10 salary ought to be better than Juvenile Detention. But go 11 ahead. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, this is just -- 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Juvenile Detention doesn't have 14 these kind of problems. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Isn't that the truth? 17 JUDGE TINLEY: I explained this to him when we 18 broke for lunch, that Juvenile Detention is ahead of budget. 19 That's saving us money. He's just costing us money. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If you have 4 to 6 inmates to 21 150, you're right. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And this is just for 23 educational purposes, nothing else. Peterson Regional 24 Medical Center, about $2,400, investigation expense. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. A lot of that will be 8-25-08 143 1 sexual assault exams, okay? In a sexual assault case. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Those, we will normally get 4 reimbursed, and it goes into the general fund. But we do 5 file with the Attorney General's office and that, or Crime 6 Victims gets reimbursed if they go anywhere. So, you -- we 7 have to pay it up front, but then you get reimbursed for it. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just so you're not over 9 there investigating the hospital. 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Are you through with Page 6? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am, sir. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me come back to one on Page 6. 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You're having fun, aren't you, 15 Judge? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: This also is under the jail. This 17 is good news, folks. Towards the top of the page, Air Evac 18 EMS, $6,250. Ms. Lavender negotiated that down from over 19 $16,000. 20 (Applause.) 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 60,000? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: 16,000. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, 16. I was going to 24 say, what did they do, take them to Beijing for the Olympics? 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, that was the bill that 8-25-08 144 1 came in. It was 16,000-something dollars. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, I misunderstood the 3 Judge. I thought he said 60. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Can we join the deal and pay 5 an annual fee? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Family rate? 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, I will be honest; that 8 does bring up a very good and valid point. I think if the 9 County had somebody that had the time to check a lot of these 10 type bills and do just what Rosa did on that, that this 11 county could save on that. I don't have the time to call on, 12 you know, thousands and thousands of medical bills and try to 13 negotiate, and that's not my duty, but I think it would be 14 advantageous for the County to look at that. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we're going to go over to a 16 contract primarily, if I'm understanding where you'd like to 17 go. So, that's -- 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this the first time we've 21 had Air Evac go to the -- 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No? How often does it happen? 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: About twice a year. This one 25 was different in that normally about twice a year, they 8-25-08 145 1 actually get air-evac'd out of the jail. This one got 2 transferred to the hospital from the jail by ambulance. 3 That's your ambulance bill. And then the hospital decided to 4 air-evac to San Antonio, which we had no say-so in, of 5 course. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just wonder if it wouldn't be 7 worthwhile to work with Air Evac and see if we can get a 8 different rate negotiated for us if we use them that much. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: You may continue. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. Page 8. Again, 11 the line item issue, the County-sponsored general fund there, 12 a third of the way down. Both of these folks are from the -- 13 let me say it right -- historical group, and that's one of my 14 little jobs. And I'm wondering, reimbursement of supplies, 15 $337. It just seems like an awful lot of money when their 16 budget's not much bigger than that. 17 MS. HARGIS: They submitted the bill, so -- I mean, 18 I can pull them for you. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I don't want -- what I'm 20 asking you, though, is can I see -- 21 MS. HARGIS: That all goes to Historical 22 Commission. We just have one line item for them. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 24 MS. HARGIS: We don't break them down. That's why 25 they're under County-sponsored. 8-25-08 146 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Could be, Buster, that 2 they're -- they're kind of like the fire department; they 3 have to submit bills for their total amount, and then they 4 just bundle together a bunch of bills at one time. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly what happens, 6 yeah. Page 9, and here's the big one. Three-quarters of the 7 way down, Road and Bridge, Guadalupe Wastewater, dam repair, 8 windmill. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Repair damn windmill. It's 10 obvious. (Laughter.) 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- 12 JUDGE TINLEY: What is it you want to know? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we got "repair" and 14 "dam" backwards? Is that all there is to it? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. Yeah. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Repaired the damn windmill, 17 okay. Must be in Precinct 3. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Must be in 3. Must be by the 19 cattle guard. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Probably on Wilson Creek 21 Road. (Laughter.) 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Pulled the cattle guard out 23 and ran into the windmill. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that Richard Bohnert's 25 windmill? 8-25-08 147 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or is it Jon Letz' windmill? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't have any left. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I hope we're not filling 4 water tanks up from windmills. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know. They couldn't pull -- 6 probably, seriously, what it is, 'cause they cannot pull out 7 of the river. They need to water -- 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Hope you got a big storage 9 tank. Windmills sure take a while to fill a water tank. 10 Takes a while. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two gallons a minute? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just tell me that's a bad 13 choice of words. 14 MS. HARGIS: I'm sure it is. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: That's what you wanted to hear. 17 That's what you got. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, okay. And I think I 19 know what this is. Page 10 up at the top, Y.O. Ranch Hotel. 20 And I think I've seen the word "juveniles" there, maybe. Is 21 that a meal? 22 MS. HARGIS: That's IV-E funds. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry? 24 MS. HARGIS: Those are IV-E funds. Those are grant 25 moneys. 8-25-08 148 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Of course, IV-E funds. 2 That's -- tell me what that is. 3 MS. HARGIS: Okay. We get a grant from -- well, 4 from the Juvenile Probation Department right now, that's the 5 money that we may or may not get in the future, for holding 6 -- paying residential and for transportation, transporting 7 juveniles. And, you know, to be honest with you right now, I 8 can't answer the exact question on that one. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Y.O. Ranch Hotel. 10 Has to be a meal or something, but 35 bucks is a pretty heavy 11 meal. 12 MS. HARGIS: It could have been there was an 13 officer that brought a child here and it was late; they had 14 to put him up for the night or something. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $35? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Pretty good rate, isn't it? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Pretty good rate. I can't 18 get that. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sleeping in a stable behind 20 the inn. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Judge, that's all -- 22 that's all the questions I have. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: All you got? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all I have, sorry. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anybody else want to take a 8-25-08 149 1 shot? 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He answered all my 3 questions. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have a motion yet? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the bills. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to pay the 9 bills. Question or discussion? 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does that include the cell 11 phone? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that's included in each of the 13 items. They allocate that as per -- this list is for 14 informational purposes to show you what it would have been 15 without the contract and what it is with the contract. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I like this, too. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Further question or 18 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 19 your right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. I didn't 24 see any budget amendments. 25 MS. HARGIS: No, none. Not until the first -- 8-25-08 150 1 remember, we do them once a month, the first of the month. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay. Any late bills? 3 MS. HARGIS: No late bills. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I've been presented with a 5 monthly report from Constable, Precinct 3. Do I hear a 6 motion that that report be approved as submitted? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 10 approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the 11 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go 16 back to, while we are still in open session, Item 19. Open 17 bids and award contract for reworking electrical conduits and 18 wiring in the front area of the Kerr County courthouse 19 square. This matter was -- the bids were received and 20 accepted and referred to the Maintenance Supervisor for 21 recommendation. And do you have something that you wish to 22 go forward on, Mr. Bollier? 23 MR. BOLLIER: I would just say I would like to 24 recommend this bid here by D.W. Electric. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: For 24,6? 8-25-08 151 1 MR. BOLLIER: For -- I can't see it, Judge. For 2 24,4. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: $24,400? 4 MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And you're recommending the 6 acceptance of that bid? 7 MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 12 approval of the bid as indicated. Question or discussion on 13 the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 14 your right hand. 15 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. 19 MR. BOLLIER: Thank you, sir. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Do we need to go back into any other 21 items at this point in time before we go into executive 22 session? Okay. We will go out of open or public session at 23 1:47 -- excuse me, 1:57. 24 (The open session was closed at 1:57 p.m., and an executive session was held, the transcript of which 25 is contained in a separate document.) - - - - - - - - - - 8-25-08 152 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We're now back in open or 2 public session, and it is 2:18 p.m. Does any member of the 3 Court have anything to offer with regard to any matter 4 considered in closed or executive session? I failed to 5 inquire a while ago for reports from Commissioners in their 6 committee or liaison assignments. Do you have any wonderful 7 news for us, Commissioner Baldwin? 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I don't. No, I don't. 9 If I do, I'll call you tonight. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All right, that'd be wonderful. 11 Commissioner Williams? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing, Judge. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've just been working with the 15 airport folks trying to get that moving, and we're moving 16 slow -- or they're moving slow. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you a question 20 about that. When will they put on the new board members? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They are working on that. 22 They're putting -- they're going to advertise for it, put a 23 notice, get a little bit of press about it. I think they're 24 looking at towards mid-September. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. Within -- within a 8-25-08 153 1 month? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They want to get a couple weeks 3 out, give notice. They've got quite a few applications -- I 4 say quite a few. Several applications already, and they're 5 trying to -- they want to make sure that everyone -- you 6 know, the public that may want a position out there is aware 7 of what they're doing. And they've got some process set up; 8 I can't remember. I think -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, in my mind, my pea 10 brain, just watching y'all and listening to you for a year 11 and a half now, once you get that board -- the new board 12 members on board, and -- and they should -- the minute 13 they're sworn in, they should have some kind of understanding 14 of what's going on there, aren't these other issues that 15 y'all deal with -- still dealing with every day, shouldn't 16 those issues go away at that time? 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the goal. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: As soon as -- as soon as the 19 Airport Manager is hired and the budget is resolved. And the 20 budget, that comes, really, back to you for this next year. 21 The manage -- what is going to be left is the management 22 contract with the City. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Talking with the board members, 25 they're going to -- and talking with the City, the City's 8-25-08 154 1 still going to provide the bulk of the services under the 2 management contract, and I think they're currently discussing 3 exactly what that means. And I think it's on the City's 4 agenda for tomorrow night. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The new full board should 6 address the permanent Airport Manager? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, the current board is. The 8 short -- the three-person board is doing that right now. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And then budget. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And budget. They're 12 working on that now. And they're also -- well, Commissioner 13 Letz and I had lunch with one of the members of the board 14 today, and we talked about the budget process. They're 15 trying to get their arms around a budget process, and which 16 the largest piece of which is the contract with the City for 17 services, and they're trying to figure out what stays, what 18 doesn't stay within the framework of that contract. So, 19 they're working on it. They're gaining on it. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One of the -- I think the 21 difficult things that the board -- while they're very 22 knowledgeable about budget issues, they're not necessarily 23 knowledgeable about governmental agencies and how governments 24 work. As an example, I gave them -- I said, you know, for -- 25 in the management contract, there's a big area for fixing the 8-25-08 155 1 roads and fixing potholes and all that kind of thing, and I 2 just gave them, as an option, they may want to look at -- 3 look at either the FEMA contract rate or the state rate or 4 federal rate for reimbursement for big equipment. Adopt one 5 of those schedules, and then go to the City and the County 6 for an interlocal agreement; that if we need a pothole fixed, 7 this is what you're going to charge us, and have it under a 8 governmental schedule, rather than have it as just a big 9 contingency sitting out there, as it has been. And that way, 10 they have a lot more control -- the Airport Board will have 11 control over what their expenditures are. And I just tossed 12 that out to them as the type of thing that they might want to 13 look at, and they're very appreciative, 'cause they don't 14 know that those types of schedules even exist. So, you know, 15 that's the type of, I think, input I'm giving them. I'm 16 giving this to Bruce, the interim Airport Manager, as well, 17 saying, "Here's an option," rather than -- because I know 18 that the City is having difficulty figuring out what's going 19 to be included and not included, and they're having that same 20 difficulty. The only thing that's known is the Airport 21 Manager will not be a City employee any more. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's wonderful. Couple of 23 questions to do with the airport. Are those hangars -- some 24 of the hangars going to have to be relocated because of the 25 taxiway? 8-25-08 156 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They don't have to be 3 relocated? 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. There was some 5 property over there that was acquired -- that was acquired 6 outside the airport, within the -- within the loop. Within 7 the airport property, but outside the aviation part, because 8 of some relocation of -- of the taxiways. Airport Loop Road 9 will have to be, but not the hangars. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only thing that may -- 11 Dugosh has a hangar outside their main building. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That is my question. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A patio hangar, yeah. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That one, I think, may have to 15 be relocated. I'm not sure. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, that will be relocated at 17 somebody's expense. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not sure. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Won't be ours. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand it won't be 21 ours, but it's not going to just be taken down and not put -- 22 not relocated somewhere. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think he's wrassling with 24 whether or not to continue that piece of his operation, those 25 patio hangars. 8-25-08 157 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. What's the Airport 2 Manager's name out there? 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bruce McKenzie. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bruce McKenzie. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Bruce McKenzie. Do you know 6 what his phone number is? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have it in my office. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: In my office, I have it. I 9 know it's 896. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll get it from you after 11 the meeting, 'cause I have a constituent that wants to ask a 12 bunch of questions. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the other one? 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Let him ask them. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, okay. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No point in wasting our time, 17 me asking you his question. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: He needs to talk to the 20 Airport Manager. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? Anything else? 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Library, it would seem to me 24 that, being that we're going to not be arguing about funding 25 for the library any more, there really is not much use of 8-25-08 158 1 having a -- a member on the Library Board. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: I thought you were having big fun 3 over there. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bruce? 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, you're going to get 6 cookies and Coca Cola every month. What's the matter? 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We do not. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The gold watch and the dead 9 turkey at the end of retirement -- I mean at retirement. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No. I just thought I'd throw 11 that out there, just to say, well, you know, what's the point 12 of me being over there for these meetings whenever we're not 13 discussing anything to do with funding any more? The funding 14 stuff is already set by agreement, from now on. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd have been gone a long 16 time ago. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: I thought you and Antonio were 18 pretty tight. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Not necessarily, but we're 20 not real far apart either. Just staying at arm's length; 21 that's the way it's best for us to be. His arm's length. 22 Mine's longer. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you a -- I'm like Buster; 24 I'd have been gone a long time ago. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand. 8-25-08 159 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you a member of that board 2 based on -- 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It was a -- it's a liaison, 4 but it's also a voting member of that board. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But -- 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That board has no authority 7 to do anything. You can stand there and vote all you want 8 to, but you're not changing anything. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who created the board? I 10 guess, what's the board -- is it a city board? 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's an advisory board. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was created a couple 13 years ago. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, a couple years ago. It 15 used to be a, you know, nonvoting member. But, you know, I 16 asked them when I went over, "Am I a voting member of this 17 thing?" They said yes. I said, "Why?" 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess what I'm looking at is, 19 if it's -- I presume there's some ordinance or court order or 20 something that makes it that the County has a slot on that. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Cheryl needs to look for 22 that. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You might want to say that and 24 tell them we don't need it any more. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't know what the purpose 8-25-08 160 1 of me going to that meeting any more. I haven't really 2 understood the purpose for a long time. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I have one quickie. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I could spend my time doing 6 other things that would be more productive. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: You may want to make -- if there's 8 not a court order that says you're on, you might just gently 9 pull back and be done. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There is a court order that 11 we adopt in January of every year when we make assignments. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: That doesn't put him on the library 13 board; that just makes him a liaison to the library. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I bet there's something that 17 says a commissioner is on that board, and I bet it's 18 something in the city. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Otherwise, I'd be a nonvoting 20 member. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. So, I bet it's a city 22 thing that needs to be changed. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If it's a city thing, if you 24 miss three in a row, you're automatically gone. They've 25 tried that on me before. 8-25-08 161 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I haven't missed any, but I 2 can sure do it. Not a problem. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I'll confirm this, 4 but I understand that our application with T.W.D.B. for 5 facilities planning -- 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah? 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- could go to the board in 8 September, the T.W.D.B. board. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Good. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll confirm it in the next 11 couple days. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Speaking of progress, we're trying 13 to set up a meeting with representatives from the Texas Youth 14 Commission for a comprehensive site evaluation on the larger 15 portion of our detention facility. They claim they want to 16 bring all sorts of people over here, their administrative 17 people, their educational people, their treatment people, 18 their construction people. I don't know. They're probably 19 going to need one of those more than 10-passenger buses, and 20 they could be at risk coming over here. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do I need to bring a 22 sandwich that day or a sleeping bag? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, they're talking -- I talked to 24 them about whether it's going to take half a day, and the 25 response I got was that, no, with that many people that were 8-25-08 162 1 planning on being here, there's probably going to be more 2 than a half a day's talking, so we ought to plan on a half a 3 day up to a full day. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And out of the meeting, I trust 5 that you will find out what portion of the 6 million we get? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: I've already asked, but I'm going to 7 ask again, 'cause I didn't get the answer the first time. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On how to get there. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. If they'll tell me what the 10 renovation costs are, I'll figure it out. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Attaboy. That's what I'd 12 do. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not that I'm a liaison to it, 14 necessarily, but on Friday morning at 9 o'clock, GMA-9 is 15 holding a board meeting, I believe, over at U.G.R.A. Very 16 important meeting. They are -- are setting the desired 17 future conditions for the aquifers, and they're moving and 18 trying to get some done, and there's some disagreement on 19 this, I think on Headwaters as well right now. But 20 they're -- the direction that is being pushed by Blanco 21 County, who I think chairs this thing, is to go ahead and 22 start picking some of these aquifers and doing the desired 23 future conditions. One of them is Edwards-Trinity for Kerr 24 County. Another one is the -- is the Glen Rose, which is a 25 shallow aquifer, a lot of ranching. Trinity is not to be 8-25-08 163 1 included. But my recommendation is strongly that they not do 2 this, because I can see them picking off these -- satisfying 3 Blanco County, getting all these other counties, and at the 4 end, Kerr County's going to be left holding the bag without 5 any negotiating position. I think they need to do them all 6 at one time till the end of the process, and definitely don't 7 need to decide or future conditions on the Trinity or the 8 Edwards in Kerr County at this time, 'cause they don't have 9 the science to back it up. So, I'll be at that meeting 10 making a statement, but -- pretty important. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Tell them I said I agree with 12 what you say. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: And you can tell them that that's my 15 position also. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, that does mean -- I take it 17 that some of y'all may not be there? 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We shouldn't be taking a 19 vote, though, should we? 20 JUDGE TINLEY: No, I'm just talking about 21 individually. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll just give my input. 23 Anyway, interesting. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: You can tell them there is 25 considerable agreement with the position you're taking. 8-25-08 164 1 How's that? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm sure that will carry a lot 3 of weight. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll get the Sheriff to go with 5 you. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That and $2, you can get a 7 cup of coffee. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Get Rusty involved with you 9 and you got it going. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Take Ray. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else, gentlemen? We are 14 adjourned. 15 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 2:33 p.m.) 16 - - - - - - - - - - 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8-25-08 165 1 STATE OF TEXAS | 2 COUNTY OF KERR | 3 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 4 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 5 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 6 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 7 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 29th day of August, 8 2008. 9 10 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 11 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 12 Certified Shorthand Reporter 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8-25-08