1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Regular Session 10 Monday, October 11, 2010 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 October 11, 2010 2 PAGE 3 --- Commissioners' Comments 5 4 1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on resolution for Dietert Center's Meals on Wheels 5 grant application to Texas Dept. of Agriculture 8 6 1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to vacate, abandon, and discontinue a portion of 7 Jones Road pursuant to Section 251.052 of Texas Transportation Code 11 8 1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 9 discuss preliminary revision of plat for Lot 1 of Howard's Hill, and Lots 124 and 125 of Country 10 Manor, Section 2, and set public hearing 13 11 1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to form a citizens' committee to evaluate ambulance 12 companies that are requesting to provide ambulance service in Kerr County 15 13 1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 14 confirm and ratify easements for Sheriff's Annex 24 15 1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action regarding approval of contract with IKON for two 16 certified copiers, one for the jail and one for the Criminal Investigation Division in the annex 27 17 1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 18 receive audit report for Kerr County Jail Commissary for fiscal year ended Sept. 30, 2010 29 19 1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 20 appropriate additional funds to continue co-representation of Kerr County by Lloyd 21 Gosselink, Rochelle & Townsend, P.C. in pending LCRA CREZ litigation 30 22 1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 23 confer with County Attorney regarding assistant county attorney position vacancy, hiring of 24 replacement to fill position, or other actions to fulfill necessary functions of County 25 Attorney's office 45 3 1 I N D E X (Continued) October 11, 2010 2 PAGE 1.10 Presentation by Scott Evans from Courtesy EMS, 3 a private ambulance service, regarding possibility of providing services to Kerr County 51 4 1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 5 forfeiture report for Constable, Precinct 2 -- 6 1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to accept and approve requests from elected officials 7 and department heads for appropriate office staff pursuant to LGC 151 57 8 1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 9 audit 216th District Attorney Asset Forfeiture report as required by Code of Criminal Procedure 57 10 1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 11 proposal to join Regional Capital Public Defender Office 58 12 1.16 Confer with County Attorney to receive information 13 and update on pending LCRA CREZ litigation 63 14 1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on pending/possible litigation -- 15 4.1 Pay Bills 64 16 4.2 Budget Amendments -- 4.3 Late Bills -- 17 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 68 18 1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to modify Court Order #31811 to adjust the Forcible 19 Detainer Citation fee that was adopted as part of the Sheriff's and Constable Fees 72 20 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee 21 Assignments 79 5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department Heads 84 22 --- Adjourned 91 23 24 25 4 1 On Monday, October 11, 2010, at 9:00 a.m., a regular 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 this 10 date and time, Monday, October 11th, 2010, at 9 a.m. It's 11 just a bit past that time now. Commissioner Letz? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Please stand, join me in a word 13 of prayer. 14 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. At this time, 16 if there's a member of the audience or the public that wishes 17 to be heard on a matter which is not a listed agenda item, 18 this is your opportunity to come forward and be heard. If 19 you wish to be heard on an agenda item, there's some 20 participation forms at the back of the room. We'd ask that 21 you fill one of those out so that I'm aware that there is 22 someone that wishes to be heard on that item and don't skip 23 over it. However, if we get to an item and you haven't 24 filled out a participation form and still want to be heard, 25 get my attention in some manner and I'll see that you do have 10-11-10 5 1 that opportunity. But right now, if there's any member of 2 the public that wishes to be heard on any matter that's not a 3 listed agenda item, come forward, give us your name and 4 address and tell us what's on your mind. Seeing no one 5 coming forward, we will move on. Commissioner Letz, what do 6 you have for us this morning? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just, I think, a report. I 8 think most everyone on the Court knows that I've been 9 spending a lot of time for the past year in Austin on a task 10 force on subdivision rules and regulations. Most of the time 11 it was a contentious group, but we were -- and I think at one 12 point I was described as being the most hated person in the 13 room, because of my stubbornness. But the good news is, when 14 the votes finally happened last week at our final meeting -- 15 the -- the purpose of this was primarily reviewing model 16 subdivision rules in counties that are Subchapter B and 17 Subchapter C counties. We're a Subchapter C county. Y'all 18 probably don't want to get bored with all the details of 19 that. But I kind of find myself in alliance with the 20 homebuilders' association, and on that task force, and we 21 were able to finally successfully get through the committee 22 and report back to the Legislature some changes that will be 23 very beneficial to Kerr County and the rest of the state when 24 it comes to being able to adopt the model subdivision rules 25 and have them more workable than they currently are. The 10-11-10 6 1 vote on that particular issue came to -- or was a 9-to-8 vote 2 that we won. We won, to be honest about it, because two 3 people didn't show up that would have voted against it. So, 4 it was a very -- (Laughter.) 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That'll teach them. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's right. But -- and the 7 overall report passed -- I think it was on an 11-to-7 vote. 8 Still rather split. It shows the nature of that committee. 9 But interesting. It'll -- the report's going to Legislature. 10 I doubt anything will come of it this session, but down the 11 road it might. But, anyway, so I just wanted to report back 12 on that. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You didn't stand up and 14 cheer at the end, did you? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. No. I felt like it, but I 16 didn't. I was just actually in shock, that it -- 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Winning a very slight victory with a 18 couple folks being absent kind of reminds me of the state 19 Board of Education fiasco that's been going on. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's right. It's important 21 to attend when you're going to get involved in something like 22 that. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler? 10-11-10 7 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Remind everybody that we 2 have -- annual Mountain Home Volunteer Fire Department fish 3 fry is going to be on Saturday. It starts at 4 o'clock, and 4 we got a pretty big crew put together and a lot of people 5 that are participating in that. And I think this year, 6 somewhere around 500 pounds of catfish. So, hopefully we'll 7 have a good turnout and raise a little money to help further 8 their efforts and get some equipment -- new equipment and 9 things that they need. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's it. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Baldwin? 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: On the very same day that 14 Bruce is having his catfish for Mountain Home, there will be 15 a chili -- or meat cook-off type thing out on Turtle Creek 16 for the Turtle Creek Fire Department. And a good time will 17 be had by all there, I'm sure. So, just anybody that's out 18 in that neighborhood Saturday afternoon, stop in, eat some 19 chili and make a small donation to the fire department. Or a 20 large donation, either one. Friday night, I witnessed 21 something that was just kind of really dadgum neat in 22 Kerrville, Texas. The Hall of Fame night at Antler Stadium, 23 there was -- Judge Brown was installed and several other 24 people, and it was -- all that was really good. But Doyle 25 High School, the old black high school here in Kerrville back 10-11-10 8 1 in the segregation day, were there, and they sang their -- 2 the old coach was there, and some of their players were 3 there, and they were, like, state champions over and over 4 again. Little old bitty school, and it was just a neat thing 5 to see. And when they got through with their school song, 6 everybody in the stadium stood up and honored them, and it 7 was just a -- it was just a neat, neat thing to experience. 8 It was a healing in there. So, it was -- I'm really thrilled 9 that I got to participate in all that. That's all, Judge. I 10 think -- I think we got a pretty good agenda here today. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing, Judge. I'm good. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You are good. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Today is Columbus Day, or Columbus 16 Day is being celebrated, as it were, today as a holiday in 17 most quarters. I think banks, maybe federal offices, 18 possibly state offices too; I'm not sure. So, I'd hoped that 19 we'd have all these people that didn't have to go to work 20 show up here at our court today and participate in our 21 proceedings, but didn't happen. Didn't happen. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Didn't happen. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's get on with the agenda. 24 The first item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and 25 take appropriate action on resolution for the Dietert 10-11-10 9 1 Center's Meals on Wheels grant application through the Texas 2 Department of Agriculture. Ms. Woods? 3 MS. WOODS: Good morning. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Good to have you here again. 5 MS. WOODS: Good to be here, sir. Thank you. I 6 want to first thank you all for being able to make a grant 7 towards our center this year. You've worked really hard with 8 the budget. It was very interesting to sit in on some of 9 those meetings, and I do appreciate how hard it is to figure 10 out where you parcel out funds, and I'm very grateful that 11 you were able to give us some so that we can apply for this 12 Department of Agriculture grant. This will be the third year 13 that we've applied. Part of the requirement for that 14 application is that a home-delivered meal provider has to get 15 a grant from their county that's equivalent to at least 25 16 cents for every eligible person 60 years or older according 17 to the census to be able to access the grant funds. And then 18 we also need a resolution from the Court stating that you did 19 give us a grant and that do you approve our accounting system 20 or fiscal agent. 21 The deadline for the grant application is November 22 1st, so I'm here this morning to respectfully ask you to give 23 us that resolution so that we can complete the grant 24 application. This grant funds unfunded -- it's based on the 25 meals that were unfunded in the previous year. We had close 10-11-10 10 1 to 2,000 unfunded meals last year. We're calculating this 2 year's -- we just -- October 1st is our fiscal year as well, 3 so we'll probably have about 2,500 unfunded meals this time 4 around. So, the grant is very -- very helpful towards our 5 program. We received $44,000 last year. We're hopeful that 6 we'll get somewhere in that neighborhood again. It just 7 depends upon how many other providers have applied for the 8 grant, and they parcel it out accordingly. So, hope you can 9 help us again. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: You furnished your financials to our 11 Auditor, and she's indicated to me she's found them in quite 12 good order. 13 MS. HARGIS: Yes. I reviewed the financial and 14 their policies, and I was very impressed with their 15 organization. Good fund balance, strong financial aid. 16 Looks like they're being managed very well. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of Dietert's 18 request for a resolution so that they can access the funds to 19 continue the home-delivered meals program. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 approval of the agenda item and the resolution. Question or 23 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 24 your right hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10-11-10 11 1 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank you 4 very much, Ms. Woods. We appreciate you being here. 5 MS. WOODS: Thank y'all. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 2; consider, 7 discuss, take appropriate action to vacate, abandon, and 8 discontinue a portion of Jones Road pursuant to Section 9 251.052 of the Texas Transportation Code. Commissioner Letz? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is on the agenda -- this 11 road, Jones Road, they want to close the very end of it. 12 They've already previously posted the notice out in the area. 13 I think we just need to set a public hearing today for this, 14 and then followed by -- I guess 30 days, I believe, is the 15 time. What's 30 days? 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner, are we setting 17 a public hearing, or are we vacating the road? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're setting the public 19 hearing. I probably didn't put the agenda item exactly 20 correctly, but I've talked with the County Attorney, and the 21 appropriate -- the action that we're going to take today is 22 to set a public hearing. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you going -- 24 JUDGE TINLEY: And that's one of the items 25 specified in Section 251.052 of the code. 10-11-10 12 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 2 THE CLERK: The 8th is the first meeting in 3 November. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So second meeting in November. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Vacating the first part or 6 the last part? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Last part of the road. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The part that goes in or 9 the part that comes out? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we set 11 a public hearing on our second meeting in November, which is 12 November -- 13 THE CLERK: 22nd. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- 22nd at 10 a.m. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to set a 17 public hearing on the vacating, abandoning, and 18 discontinuance of a portion of Jones Road pursuant to 19 Section 251.052 of the Texas Transportation Code for November 20 the 22nd, 2010, at 10 a.m. Question or discussion on that 21 motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your 22 right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 10-11-10 13 1 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll go to 2 Item 3; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 3 discuss the preliminary revision of plat for Lot 1 of 4 Howard's Hill, as set forth in Volume 6, Page 203, Plat 5 Records, and Lots 124 and 125 of Country Manor, Section 2, as 6 set forth in Volume 4, Page 222 of the Plat Records, and set 7 a public hearing, the same being located in Precinct 1. 8 Mr. Odom? 9 MR. ODOM: Yes, Judge. Y'all excuse me; my voice 10 goes out. We were approached by the Gore family to -- to do 11 a revision of plat. They have two small lots. The lots are 12 -- there's three lots altogether. Two of them are in another 13 subdivision, and Mr. and Mrs. Gore got permission from the 14 lady that -- Mrs. -- Ms. Pratt, to vacate out of that 15 subdivision. As you can see in the backup data, Mrs. Pratt 16 does not have any issues with the Gores' Lot 1 becoming part 17 of the Country Manor, Section 2. We had turned this in, this 18 data, and I got a letter in your backup material from 19 O.S.S.F. They were having an issue either with how it was -- 20 as-builts, and -- but at this time, we want the Court to 21 understand that we're going to go forward with the public 22 hearing. This issue, if it's not resolved, won't come to a 23 final anyway, so we don't see this as an issue, but at this 24 time, we ask the Court to set a public hearing for the 25 revision of plat of Lot 125R in Country Manor, Section 2, 10-11-10 14 1 Precinct 1, for November the 22nd, 2010, at 9:15 a.m. And 2 also, if this is not resolved, they have a year after this 3 time to resolve this issue. So -- 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Len, are there any existing 5 structures on this property? 6 MR. ODOM: There's one home. The two lots that are 7 being combined are empty. So, this one is shown -- I have 8 this note from Tish that shows that there's -- the drawing 9 and the as-builts, versus what Lee Voelkel has given, shows 10 three full sprinklers, and they overlap, and so that needs to 11 be resolved, where that's really more of a -- of an error on 12 his part, not having enough information and all. And I think 13 that'll be resolved. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's just an existing system 15 for a larger lot, which has nothing to do, in my opinion, 16 with combining. 17 MR. ODOM: That's right. That's right. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 approval to set a public hearing on the revision of plat for 23 Lot 1 of Howard's Hill and Lots 124, 125 of Country Manor, 24 Section 2, located in Precinct 1, the public hearing being 25 set for November the 22nd, 2010, at 9:15 a.m. Is there 10-11-10 15 1 question or discussion on the motion? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is in the ETJ? 3 MR. ODOM: This is in the ETJ of the city of 4 Kerrville, right. But O.S.S.F. is still involved. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I was just wondering -- 6 this is one of those they kind of do both. 7 MR. ODOM: I think there's a note there that says 8 it's in the ETJ. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So it's got to go through -- 10 okay, that's fine. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion? All 12 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank you, 17 Mr. Odom. 18 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Thank you. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 4; to consider, 20 discuss, and take appropriate action to form a citizens' 21 committee to evaluate ambulance companies that are requesting 22 to provide ambulance service in Kerr County. Commissioner 23 Baldwin? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, sir. I've been 25 contacted by a couple of companies -- San Antonio, Bandera -- 10-11-10 16 1 that are interested in providing ambulance services to our 2 citizens. And instead of just saying no, that we -- we love 3 everything that's going on with the City and our agreements 4 that we have there, I thought that maybe we better take a 5 look at them and, you know, explore the options and just see 6 what's out there. And, you know, there may be an alternative 7 to services provided by the City. So, what I'd like to do 8 is -- and I've provided a suggested list, and I didn't make 9 it in here with it, a suggested list of folks that could 10 possibly serve on this committee. And it's -- you know, 11 certainly, whatever you guys want to do and how you want to 12 do that is fine with me, but just a -- just to get the thing 13 started, I put together a small list of people that are 14 professional, been involved in it, in that kind of business, 15 and move on down the road. 16 And if you -- if you want to adopt that particular 17 list, that's fine. If you want to change things up, you want 18 to add -- I think the volunteer fire departments need to be 19 involved in this thing. And so, you know, however you want 20 to do it, and I'll bring it back next meeting for approval as 21 far as the actual committee's concerned. But I just wanted 22 to get on the table today that there's some interest out 23 there, and I think there will be more once -- once the word 24 gets out that we are listening. And so I'd like to have this 25 committee in place to take a look at and visit with and see 10-11-10 17 1 how they function and what they offer and all those kinds of 2 things. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I appreciate you putting it on 4 the agenda, 'cause I think this is an effort, I think, 5 that -- you know, we don't -- we should not forget what just 6 happened through our last budget where this was a very hot 7 issue. And I think we need to evaluate our options from the 8 county standpoint, and I think this is -- I like the 9 standpoint -- idea of having a relatively small committee of 10 professionals at this phase, and then maybe a second 11 committee after we -- to get more public input, or meetings, 12 somehow to get more public input, 'cause I have two groups of 13 citizens that have been very active in contacting me with a 14 lot of, you know, petitions and signatures and all that 15 stuff. And so I want to make sure we have another period 16 down the road to get the citizens' input involved, but I 17 think that we do need to look at this issue and see what 18 options are out there, because I think one of the things we 19 need to be doing in the coming months also is visiting with 20 City of Kerrville on this issue and see where we're going, 21 but we need to know what our options are. And there -- I 22 don't know. I'm glad to see that there are options, because 23 we've kind of felt like we were being -- didn't have an 24 option. I'll just leave it at that. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think there's something 10-11-10 18 1 that was brought to my attention that could be a thing to 2 consider with this EMS issue, and that being that it could be 3 possible to have a county-wide ESD, and get it out of the 4 political realm. Take it away -- you know, get it out of our 5 hands, get it out of the City's hands. Let an independent 6 elected board run it, and they can contract with whoever they 7 want to, and it would no longer be a political issue. The 8 funds for it would be raised through an ESD, and that could 9 also go into fire protection and other things. But I think 10 that's something that needs to be looked at by your -- by the 11 committee that you're proposing to see what benefit that 12 might be, rather than the way we have it now, just kind of 13 being told what we're going to pay, and without any real -- 14 what I call proof that the increase that was proposed to us 15 and mandated was necessary. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think we need to have 17 input in the process. We've been told by City of Kerrville 18 repeatedly we're not going to have input; we can either take 19 it or leave it, whatever they want to charge us. They give 20 us background, but -- 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's been the attitude 22 all along. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you add on -- if you add 25 on the element of an ESD, county-wide ESD, you also need to 10-11-10 19 1 examine how much time it takes to put that together and call 2 an election. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right, and it will take some 4 time. You know, if it were to be started fairly quickly, I 5 think that by the -- the next general election, that might be 6 possible in 2012. If -- and I really -- you know, that -- 7 that idea was proposed to me, and I think it sounds like a 8 reasonable idea. That way everybody in the county 9 participates in the funding of that, and it's also an 10 independent board where you take the politics out. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, I think the -- the ESD 12 ultimately is going to be the answer, because of -- because 13 of the way things are fractured right now, city/county. 14 You've got a couple of outstanding ESD's, you've got 15 ambulance service, you've got fire service. You need to 16 bring the whole thing together with as many of those 17 emergency services as you can and have an independent 18 organization, as required by the statutes, to oversee those 19 functions only, and let them -- let them administer it and 20 provide for its operation. I think that's the ultimate 21 answer to resolve all those issues that are outstanding. I 22 totally agree with you. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What we have now is -- you 24 know, we do have a good service. We have to give Kerrville 25 credit for good service. 10-11-10 20 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Never been a question. 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That never was up for debate. 3 But the funding of that and our cost share is -- is always 4 controversial. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Always at issue. And the 6 manner which they get there is always at issue. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's right. So, anyway, 8 that's just a thought. And I think that's something that 9 that committee, or -- or whoever does this, should consider. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, let me -- let me ask 11 you about your agenda item that you have today. I got from 12 your presentation that your initial question is, do we want 13 to go forward to examine options, -- 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: -- really? 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct, yes, sir. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: You've got it limited to ambulance 18 service. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: What I'm thinking is, based upon the 21 discussion, it appears that, yeah, we want to look at 22 options, but we want to look at broader options. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm just wondering about, inasmuch 25 as there was a probability we were going to have to come back 10-11-10 21 1 at a later meeting to put a committee in place, or at least 2 an initial committee in place, if we might bring this back at 3 a subsequent meeting, since that's going to have to happen 4 anyway, to broaden the scope of it, just dealing with 5 emergency services, and maybe put it in one big ball of wax. 6 What are your thoughts on that? 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, my thought is we 8 certainly can do that. We can come back and get 9 authorization, or I can just do it. How's that? I think I 10 can go out there and -- and actually broaden -- I'm looking 11 for y'all just to -- I see your heads nodding and you're 12 agreeing with the thing, and that's kind of what I'm looking 13 for, is that do you want to pursue this kind of thing at all? 14 JUDGE TINLEY: I think that answer is obvious. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The answer is obvious. And 16 so I think I'm just going to take the ball and take off 17 running, and then I'll come back in a couple weeks and we'll 18 take a look at where I'm at with it. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Going to bring the names 20 back too? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, mm-hmm, bring some 22 names back. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Well, I commend you 24 for putting it on. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I think -- I think my 10-11-10 22 1 original thinking -- and the list that I provided is really 2 built around ambulance service. You're correct about that. 3 So, I wanted -- I'll need to change that up a little bit and 4 put a financial mind or something like that on there as well. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, you may look at, 6 when you bring it back, at this stage it may not be a bad 7 idea to have multiple committees, because I think the 8 ambulance issue is -- that's a very specific issue. That 9 really may or may not be related to an ESD issue. I think 10 that's an issue that we need to look at ambulances. I think 11 we need to look at ESD's. And the ESD is kind of a broader, 12 longer-term thing, possibly, too. So, I think the -- really, 13 the ambulance issue is pretty specific. I think we need to 14 get an answer to that one piece, and I don't want that to get 15 bogged down in a -- a year-long study. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Good point. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is a good point. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And would you also separate 19 out fire as a separate thing? 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think fire, you know, would 21 probably go in with the ESD, 'cause our fire -- other than 22 the immediate area around Kerrville where they have the 23 Kerrville fire contract, I mean, our fire's pretty much set. 24 The funding of it may change long-term, and we need to get 25 input from them, but that kind of -- they kind of go, really, 10-11-10 23 1 to me, in my mind, hand-in-hand with the ESD issue. Is there 2 support for an ESD county-wide? And then the other -- then 3 there's a legal component also, and that may be a first step, 4 really, to refer to the County Attorney to get a -- legally, 5 you know, what has to be done to do a county-wide ESD? 6 Timing, procedural, and also what do we do with the three 7 that we have -- 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Two. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two that we have right now? 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think you -- once 11 you do -- we talked about this before. My memory says if you 12 really and truly do a county-wide ESD, you would dissolve the 13 two out there, and they just roll into county -- county-wide. 14 And, you know, I don't see it as that -- as a difficult 15 issue. You simply take the county map, and you got to carve 16 out the city of Kerrville, because they're not interested. I 17 have asked that question, and the answer is no. They're not 18 interested in becoming a part of the ESD, so you carve them 19 out and take the rest of it, and everybody gets to vote. 20 They get to approve it themselves. And then someone has to 21 sit down and figure out how much of the pie does Turtle Creek 22 get and how much does Comfort get and Center Point, et 23 cetera, et cetera. And I know it's a little more complicated 24 than that, but not a lot. I can't imagine it being -- I 25 mean, that's the basic part of it right there. So, it's not 10-11-10 24 1 a difficult thing. And I agree with y'all 100 percent; ESD 2 is the answer. It truly is. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's really the answer for 4 the city, too, if they open their -- open their minds. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: True. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And take the fire thing away, 9 you know, put it under one central authority to operate it, 10 rather than it being a city -- totally a city venture. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Anyway, okay. I'll be back 12 in a couple weeks. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: What -- are you asking any specific 14 action from the Court? 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Or do you have your guidance for 17 going forward? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm heading that way. I may 19 disappear before this day's over. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. All right. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's move on to Item 5; 23 consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to confirm and 24 ratify easements for the Sheriff's annex. There are some 25 easements attached to your presentation -- to the matters in 10-11-10 25 1 your materials, and they're two different easements. One is 2 the drainage channel that -- that comes from that detention 3 pond. The other is the water line which serves the fire 4 hydrant that was required to be placed back -- I believe it's 5 in the back parking lot, if I'm not mistaken, or adjacent to 6 that. It was necessary that -- that those easements be 7 executed and in place prior to our being able to get a 8 certificate of occupancy here a couple of weeks ago. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Are we ever going to get one? 10 JUDGE TINLEY: We got it. We got it. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We got it? Okay. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: And I must say that -- that the 13 requirements for these easements, that was known sometime 14 back. Our County Surveyor was very timely in responding to 15 our request to get these things in hand. The City was -- was 16 very responsive because of the time constraints we had with 17 our lease expiring for our probation people, reviewing these 18 things and putting everything together the way they should. 19 County Attorney had an opportunity to review them. They're 20 pretty standard easements of the type indicated. And so my 21 -- my purpose today is to merely ask that the Court ratify 22 the -- the execution and delivery of those easements. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who granted the easements, 24 Judge? 25 JUDGE TINLEY: We granted them to the City of 10-11-10 26 1 Kerrville. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Because of the drainage and the 4 water hydrant -- the fire hydrant issue. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only one I have a question on, 6 to me -- I just don't deal with City of Kerrville that much, 7 but the detention pond. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why -- so that becomes -- the 10 City is responsible for the detention pond? Or we're 11 responsible? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: No, we're responsible for it, but -- 13 but they have an easement that that remains a drainage 14 facility, a drainage component. We're -- but the actual 15 requirement that -- that it be maintained and keep -- keep 16 vegetation cover on it, that was another issue that -- that 17 was addressed that we had to put into place rather quickly; 18 had it hyper-mulched, and I might say that that has turned 19 out quite, quite good. It really took hold. But those 20 requirements were in place way back yonder. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They were in place when the 22 jail was built. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Well, I'm talking about when 25 the project got started on the concept plan that was 10-11-10 27 1 approved. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: That was part of the requirements of 4 -- and conditions of the concept plan. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just curious. Move approval. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: I've got a motion and a second for 9 approval of the agenda item, to ratify and confirm the 10 execution and delivery of the easements. Question or 11 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 12 your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go to 17 Item 6; to consider, discuss, take appropriate action 18 regarding approval of a contract with IKON for two certified 19 copiers, one for the jail and one for the Criminal 20 Investigation Division in the annex. What's the difference 21 between a certified copy or a noncertified copy? 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, new and rebuilt. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Rebuilt certified, is what the 25 difference is. What -- 10-11-10 28 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Certified to be as good as 2 new. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What the difference -- 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Refurbished the same with a new 5 warranty. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. What happened was, 7 when I was preparing the budget way back in June, I got a 8 price for small copiers for the annex, for C.I.D. over there, 9 and that -- after the budget was approved, that price had 10 changed some, which was a little bit more than I budgeted, so 11 one of the copiers we also had back in the jail is -- is an 12 older one that's out of contract, and we're having more and 13 more problems. So, I tried to get IKON to look at replacing 14 both of those, and the best we could come up with is 15 replacing them both with certified rebuilt ones. And doing 16 that, it saves us about $102 a month in replacing them that 17 way. The contract has been forward and looked at by the 18 County Attorney. No problems with it. So, all I'm doing is 19 asking to -- to be able to go ahead and sign that contract 20 and get that -- get the two copiers replaced. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 24 approval. Question or discussion? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the budget money doesn't 10-11-10 29 1 change? 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. In fact, it goes down. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: And these -- they're on a proper 4 form that -- subject to appropriation by the governing body? 5 MR. HENNEKE: It's the standard addendum to the 6 global master agreement that we have in place, so it just 7 fits in with all the other copiers that the county has. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Other question or discussion? 9 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 10 hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Let's go to Item 15 7, to consider, discuss, take appropriate action to receive 16 the audit report for the Kerr County Jail Commissary for 17 fiscal year ending September 30, 2010. Ms. Hargis? 18 MS. HARGIS: I think y'all have a copy of this 19 audit. This is required annually, that we -- that you review 20 it and approve it, and then we send it to the -- the Jail 21 Commission. We need to have it when they come for their 22 annual inspection. The only difference to point out this 23 year, of course, is that we changed over last year to a 24 service that is now providing the commissary services for us, 25 so we don't have inventory any more. We just kind of receive 10-11-10 30 1 a commission on the items that are sold in the commissary. 2 It seems to be working quite well. We still have one person 3 in the jail who is dedicated to overseeing our part of it and 4 handing it out. We found that we actually had a little bit 5 of a profit increase by doing it this way, and it seems to be 6 working well. Didn't find any problems, and would request 7 that you approve it. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 12 approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in 13 favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 14 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 16 (No response.) 17 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move 18 to Item 8; to, consider, discuss, take appropriate action to 19 appropriate additional funds to continue co-representation of 20 Kerr County by Lloyd, Gosselink, Rochelle, and Townsend, 21 P.C., in the pending L.C.R.A. CREZ litigation. Mr. Henneke? 22 MR. HENNEKE: Morning, Judge, Commissioners. It 23 was months ago that we had a discussion with regard to 24 retaining co-counsel to represent Kerr County along with the 25 coalition that's been formed with the City of Kerrville and 10-11-10 31 1 Kerrville Public Utility Board in representing our interests 2 before the administrative judge in the pending L.C.R.A. CREZ 3 litigation. At the time, this Court set a budget of $5,000 4 to assist Kerr County in properly filing a procedure, and 5 then filing the -- the direct testimony establishing Kerr 6 County's position. That's been done and those funds have 7 been expended. The trial starts October 25th. It's expected 8 to be a two-week trial up in Austin. Given the scope of the 9 case, they're having the trial in the Austin Convention 10 Center, because there's over 1,000 intervening parties. It's 11 spread out over seven counties. There is a massive and 12 monumental litigation piece. 13 We've been very well represented. I'm very pleased 14 with the work that Ms. Crump and Lloyd Gosselink have 15 provided, and they estimate that to continue with their 16 representation through the trial and through some of the 17 post-trial proceedings will require up to an additional 18 $15,000. And I would point out for the Court that I would 19 compare that to the CREZ litigation fight that private 20 property owners had over on Goat Creek where they themselves 21 expended, I think, about $225,000 in legal fees, and I think 22 we're getting better representation, and if the Court so 23 chooses to do this, the total, after the five we've spent and 24 this 15, would be about $20,000, so I think that's a very 25 good bargain. And I think that our collaborative efforts 10-11-10 32 1 with the City of Kerrville and KPUB has paid off in spades 2 and has helped us to work together, and also to leverage our 3 purchasing power with -- with this counsel. So, it's -- 4 that's the issue, and just need to know what the Court's 5 direction is on it. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's just another estimate? 7 Or are you pretty sure that this would carry us through to 8 the end? 9 MR. HENNEKE: This is -- I've asked for an 10 estimate, and this is the high end of what they estimate our 11 share would be to carry us through the administrative law 12 hearing portion of this process, through trial, through the 13 two-week trial and through the post-trial paperwork that will 14 be filed. Now, it's -- as I think we've discussed, the way 15 this process works is you go have the trial with the 16 administrative judge, which we're about to do, and then the 17 -- and then his decision gets sent to the Public Utility 18 Commission, which they then evaluate and they make a decision 19 on what they want to do, and then that can go on to district 20 court and, you know, further on. So, into the process, this 21 is through the end of the administrative law trial process, 22 which is the first major step, and certainly, I think, the -- 23 the biggest effort that's involved because of the evidence 24 and the testimony and the trial portion. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The additional 15 will also 10-11-10 33 1 apply to the City of Kerrville and KPUB and whomever else -- 2 MR. HENNEKE: Yes, sir. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- as a part of it? 4 MR. HENNEKE: We've apportioned it. That's our 5 share, and each side has their own share, and it's being 6 allocated equally between us and the City of Kerrville and 7 KPUB, and then we have a private partner as well. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hargis, we've got funds 9 allocated for this? 10 MS. HARGIS: No. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, where are we going to 12 find them? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What do we have in 14 professional? 15 MS. HARGIS: You didn't put very much in 16 professional. We're probably going to have to take it out of 17 contingency. That's really the only place. I don't want to 18 take it out of professional fees this early on. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Most of those are already allocated 20 in professional? 21 MS. HARGIS: Yeah. You pretty much use those by 22 the end of the year, so -- 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rob -- and I understand the 24 process, but -- sort of. But what -- the result of the 25 administrative law judge -- 10-11-10 34 1 MR. HENNEKE: Mm-hmm. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- is going to be that he's 3 going to recommend a line? 4 MR. HENNEKE: He -- under the way the law is 5 written, yes. From the date of the filing of L.C.R.A.'s 6 application, he has 180 days to render an order, which is his 7 decision, which basically establishes -- his decision is a 8 line, a route, and that is based on his receipt of the 9 evidence and testimony that's presented from the L.C.R.A. 10 advocating for a route. And right now, their preferred route 11 is one that Kerr County is favorable towards. And then 12 everybody else who's involved, either testifying in favor or 13 against, or variations of either way, he takes all of that 14 evidence and testimony and then he comes out with a decision 15 on a route. And then that decision, along with all of the 16 evidence and testimony and everything that's in the record, 17 goes up to the P.U.C. for them to ratify, modify, reject, or, 18 you know, a combination of all the above. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What kind of history is there 20 to -- after this process happens, that the P.U.C. followed 21 the Judge's recommendation? 22 MR. HENNEKE: My understanding is the statistic is 23 about 50/50 -- well, 50 percent of the time, the preferred 24 route I think is what's recommended, but I don't think that 25 the P.U.C. has ever left it alone without meddling some. I 10-11-10 35 1 mean, I think that there's going to be some -- usually some 2 changes, some modifications. We had the -- the other CREZ 3 litigation recently involving that line through Gillespie 4 County when they went through the entire litigation process, 5 and the administrative judge chose a route and it went up to 6 the P.U.C., and the P.U.C. said, "We don't like it; start 7 over." And now, in fact, that route is questionable whether 8 it's going to be put into place. So, what the P.U.C. is 9 going to do on this after the ALJ's order, I mean, I think 10 that's anybody's bet. I don't think there's any way to 11 predict that. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we -- if we don't fund this 13 and just tell the law firm that we're happy with what you've 14 done, we got our testimony in, and then it goes to P.U.C. and 15 they change it and we don't like what P.U.C. does, have we 16 lost anything? 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: $15,000. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm saying if we don't spend 20 15,000. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, 20 total. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm saying if we don't spend 24 15,000. We've submitted our testimony, as I understand it. 25 I mean, the judge -- you know, it was sent. Work with that. 10-11-10 36 1 If we don't do -- I guess I'm trying to figure out why 2 we're -- we obviously have some criteria that we're 3 submitting as well. We've submitted this testimony. We 4 somewhat are pleased -- or willing to go along with -- 5 L.C.R.A. is going to spend a whole lot more than 15,000 6 trying to get this line approved. If we don't do anything at 7 this point -- if we don't spend any more money anyway at this 8 point, how do we lose? 9 MR. HENNEKE: Well, I think we lose if the 10 administrative judge is persuaded that the I-10 route is a 11 better route than the preferred route. And -- and I think of 12 the 1,000-plus intervening parties in this suit, more than 13 half, maybe more than three-quarters, though they're not 14 openly saying it, are at least privately pointing at I-10, 15 pointing at Kerr County as the way to go. We've got seven 16 counties that are affected in this region, and only three 17 counties that I-10 goes through. So, you know, the bad -- 18 bad thing to come out of this hearing will be the 19 administrative judge's recommendation, based upon all the 20 hearing testimony, which I think will carry some weight 21 with -- with the P.U.C., because that's how this process 22 works, that his order is for a route we don't like. And 23 right now, that route would be taking it from it I-10 all the 24 way from the Kerr -- Kerr-Kimble border to the Kerr-Kendall 25 border, or some variation thereof. Right now, with the 10-11-10 37 1 preferred route -- right now, with the northern route, which 2 we advocated in our resolution, it doesn't touch Kerr County. 3 And right now with the preferred route, which we are 4 favorable towards as a viable alternative, it only cuts the 5 corner of -- the northeast corner of Kerr County, and I think 6 that's a minimal amount of harm. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, there's a -- there is 8 a lot of pressure to keep pushing this thing south, which, of 9 course, is to our detriment, the I-10, based on a couple of 10 things. Number one, the commission appears to be removing 11 the link between Kendall and Gillespie, which will require 12 coming only from McCamey to Kendall. The northern route -- 13 of course, that would pretty well wipe that out, because 14 there's no need to come all the way through Gillespie if, in 15 fact, there's to be a leg with Gillespie. So -- but there's 16 more and more pressure to push this thing south. I think the 17 other issue that we have to be concerned with is we've got 18 partners in this deal, and I think it behooves us not to do 19 anything that is going to bail out, as it were, on our 20 partners. Certainly, our further participation is to be 21 conditioned upon their desire to further participate. I 22 don't see that as a problem, because we're all in this thing 23 together. But we entered into this partnership to try and 24 get a stronger single voice, number one, and number two, to 25 minimize each of our individual costs. And I think -- 10-11-10 38 1 actually, I think the number that we're dealing with on a 2 two-week hearing is pretty doggone reasonable when you 3 consider what those things normally run and the rates that 4 those folks charge for those specialized types of hearing. 5 But I think another issue is, we've got to consider our 6 partners in this thing, and we don't want to do anything to 7 jeopardize them. We don't want them to do anything to 8 jeopardize us. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand that to a degree, 10 but that's not as compelling an argument to me as -- as 11 protecting, you know, the citizens of Kerr County, you know. 12 And I guess -- and that's my overriding concern, more than 13 the partners. And this is a way that does that. I guess 14 my -- my caution is that we're spending, you know, $20,000 -- 15 or 15,000 additional dollars, and the P.U.C., which is a -- 16 has -- you know, likely will not follow the administrative 17 judge's recommendation exactly, and because of some other 18 individuals that live -- that are very well politically 19 connected that live in this area can put a lot of pressure on 20 the P.U.C., I almost wonder -- and it seems like -- I'm 21 wondering if this is money well spent. You know, there 22 are -- for example, the lieutenant governor has property 23 here. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Say it again? 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doesn't he have property up -- 10-11-10 39 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Sold it, I think. Snaffle Bit -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: -- changed hands. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: At least he's not right up 5 here. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: My understanding is that the Snaffle 7 Bit has sold. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Well, that's neither 9 here nor there. But there are -- I'm just -- this process is 10 so abstract, to me, in that we have, you know, an 11 administrative judge; then it gets referred on up, and they 12 can totally disregard what he says. I guess the action then 13 is you go into district court to challenge P.U.C.? 14 MR. HENNEKE: Mm-hmm. The appellate remedy from 15 district -- from a P.U.C. ruling is to file a suit in 16 district court and then take it through the court system. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Welcome to litigation. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. County Attorney, at 19 this point, what's the down side if we decline to proceed? 20 MR. HENNEKE: Well, the down side -- Judge Tinley 21 is right. We'd be not part of the coalition any more, and I 22 think part of what we've been able to accomplish in doing 23 so -- not that anybody is really looking at selling the other 24 side down the river, but we have presented a unified single 25 front along with the city of Kerrville and KPUB. But -- and 10-11-10 40 1 if we're not collectively -- I don't know what they're going 2 to do, but that's kept us together. That's kept us unified, 3 and that's kept us as one Kerr County voice in this process. 4 You know, the down side is that we have very skilled and 5 trained counsel that -- that is working with me and assisting 6 me in their specialty. You know, when you think about it, 7 it's the difference between a brain surgeon and a general 8 practitioner, and they're doing a very good job. But if this 9 Court's direction is to not keep them on board, then I'll do 10 my best. I'm planning on being up there for the -- the 11 hearing and working with the counsel on representing Kerr 12 County's interests. But I think that there is considerable 13 value and that we are receiving considerable value by their 14 assistance and expertise. And I think the -- you know, so I 15 can tell you afterwards what the -- 16 JUDGE TINLEY: What the value is? 17 MR. HENNEKE: -- the positive or negative aspects 18 of having them involved or not having them involved would be. 19 And -- but I -- that would be too late at that point. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Would not another option be approval 21 of this next funding cycle conditioned upon the like approval 22 by our partners in this project? 23 MR. HENNEKE: Absolutely. That's why it makes 24 sense. We don't get this bang for the buck if we go by 25 ourselves, and we wouldn't be able to afford this firm and 10-11-10 41 1 this level of representation were we not in this partnership 2 with the City of Kerrville and Kerrville -- KPUB. So, it 3 only makes sense if we are all three continuing to partner in 4 this -- or all four. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you remember, I voted 6 against the original 5,000. 7 MR. HENNEKE: Yes, sir. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As well as a vote against 9 the coalition, because -- and that may seem small-minded or 10 backwards, whatever. It doesn't matter; that's the way I 11 think. But the good part of it, I think that you are a very 12 bright man and very extremely capable of handling all of 13 these issues without us hiring some law firm from somewhere 14 else. And I'm sorry about the coalition with our little 15 friends, but I just -- I don't see it. I think that you're 16 very capable of handling it as a representative of Kerr 17 County, and get on down the road, in my opinion. 18 MR. HENNEKE: Thank you for your confidence, 19 Commissioner. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, I have the same 21 confidence. But, you know, I also -- just by listening to 22 all the arguments, kind of both sides of this thing, you 23 know, we may be out -- outmanned from the people forcing it 24 south. We may be throwing money into the fire that's not 25 going to really be that beneficial. 10-11-10 42 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other side of it is, I sure 2 would hate for it to come south and us not doing what we 3 could to stop it. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I know, 'cause then we're 5 going to be in deep hot water with our constituents for not 6 trying to fight something they want to us fight. 7 MR. HENNEKE: And from -- well, there's a lot of -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Should not be lost. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I thought we might mention 10 that. 11 MR. HENNEKE: I will say, there are a lot of 12 individual landowners who look at I-10 and Kerr County as a 13 very nice place to put a massive utility transmission line. 14 I think we balance that well by virtue of the fact that Kerr 15 County is a governmental entity, and so is the City of 16 Kerrville, and I think that our voice in representing the 17 citizens of Kerr County as an elected body does carry weight, 18 and so far has been shown deference in this process and 19 the -- the discussions, the private meetings and the 20 attention that we've had from the L.C.R.A., for better or 21 worse. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm going to make a motion in a 23 minute to fund it, but the -- reluctantly. But the other 24 thing I think it does, it gives Representative Hilderbran and 25 Senator Fraser something to go forward to on the commitment 10-11-10 43 1 of our -- of Kerr County. I'm sure they have pressure from 2 their other constituents as well, but it does show clearly 3 that we're willing to, you know, put our money where our 4 mouth is on this one, and gives a direction as to what our 5 desire is representing the county. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, the next agenda item 7 might help us to come up with the money to help fund it. 8 (Laughter.) 9 MS. HYDE: There you go. 10 MR. HENNEKE: I need to talk to Jody about the 11 placement of that one. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Did you notice that? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I did. I'll make a motion that 14 we authorize the expenditure of up to $15,000 to help fund 15 the pending L.C.R.A. CREZ litigation, contingent upon City of 16 Kerrville and KPUB funding their like share. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 19 indicated. Question or discussion on the motion? 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My vote -- my "no" vote is 21 because these are $15,000 that are unbudgeted money. We're 22 11 days into the budget, and we are popping it for 15 grand. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- and funds would come out 24 of our contingency funds. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Come from where? 10-11-10 44 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Contingency. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Contingency. Is that acceptable? 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But Commissioner Baldwin is 5 correct that they are not budgeted. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They were not budgeted 7 because we didn't know at this point where this was going to 8 go. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And I -- this is one of those 11 two-edged sword things. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right, damned if you do and 13 damned if you don't. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You said it very well, 15 Commissioner. I was just trying to keep from saying it that 16 way. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, 'cause we don't cuss 18 in here. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Any more. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Any more. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was an expression. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion 24 on that motion? All in favor of that motion, signify by 25 raising your right hand. 10-11-10 45 1 (Commissioners Williams, Letz, and Oehler voted in favor of the motion.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. 4 (Commissioner Baldwin voted against the motion.) 5 6 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries. Okay, let's go 7 to Item 9; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to 8 confer with County Attorney regarding assistant county 9 attorney position vacancy, hiring of replacement to fill this 10 position, or in lieu of filling position, other actions to 11 fulfill necessary functions of County Attorney's office. I 12 suspect this has something to do with the hiring freeze? 13 MR. HENNEKE: It does. It does. And first of all, 14 it's with regret that I have to announce that Assistant 15 County Attorney Chris Eaton has tendered his resignation 16 effective Friday. Chris and his wife were blessed about 17 three and a half weeks ago with the birth of their son, and 18 Chris lives and has always lived in New Braunfels. His wife 19 had worked in Austin, and so they split the difference, and 20 he's commuted this distance since he was hired by Judge 21 Emerson in 2008. And not surprising that an hour and a half 22 distance is too far for him to be away from his wife and baby 23 boy, so he's found employment closer to New Braunfels and 24 will be leaving us. But I commend him for the work that he's 25 done. He's a good lawyer, and he's been of good service to 10-11-10 46 1 Kerr County for the two years that he's been here. 2 But that brings us to the issue that there was 3 quite a bit of discussion with the Commissioners during the 4 budget workshops and with the elected officials about what 5 we're going to be doing with our personnel work force over 6 this next budget cycle. And my recollection was that this 7 Court had asked for cooperation and help from the local 8 elected officials, in working with their staff and offices, 9 to work towards that goal of the budget issues that were 10 raised, and I've always been cooperative in that effort. I 11 didn't expect that Mr. Eaton would leave, but I put this on 12 the agenda, I guess, to have the opportunity to have the 13 first discussion of this budget cycle about how this is going 14 to move forward. 15 I will tell you that -- that myself and the two 16 attorneys in the County Attorney's office are busy. Three 17 attorneys are -- are needed, partly because of how many 18 attorney hours are required per week to be in court. Someone 19 with a bar card has to physically be in front of a judge, 20 whether it's juvenile court, misdemeanor court, J.P. court, 21 State Hospital, protective orders, guardianships, and of 22 course I'm here with you gentlemen during Commissioners 23 Court. It's just a lot of hours per week that someone has to 24 be someplace, and quite often you have two courts going on at 25 the same time. And I experienced it when it was just 10-11-10 47 1 Mr. Eaton and myself, before Ms. Stallings was hired and came 2 on board, how -- the kind of jumping around it required to 3 cover all the different courts. 4 Now, what I'm prepared -- what I need to do and 5 prepared to do in the -- in the interim is to use contract 6 attorney labor to help cover some of the different courts 7 that we just won't be able to reach with two attorneys. And 8 we did that during the interim before Ms. Stallings was on 9 board, and that was the standard practice by Mr. Emerson when 10 he was County Attorney, before this Court committed a third 11 attorney position in 2008; he had attorneys who contracted 12 for different positions. And -- and what I would propose -- 13 I want to work with this Court. I want to do the best that I 14 can, and I want to have an opportunity to evaluate how that 15 would work with the contract labor. I know that, you know, 16 this Court wants to -- to kind of reduce the work force by 17 attrition, and I want to do my best to work with y'all. I 18 don't know if I can really continue to perform the necessary 19 functions of the County Attorney's office without filling 20 that position, but I'm willing to give it a try. 21 And I'm willing to try, for at least the immediate 22 interim, using contract labor, using part of Mr. Eaton's 23 budgeted salary to pay for contract labor and to see how that 24 works, with Ms. Stallings and myself being the full-time 25 counsel in the office, and then using attorneys where we have 10-11-10 48 1 to; for example, the State Hospital, with some of the J.P. 2 courts, and seeing how that works. And if I can make that 3 work, then maybe I can delay having to fill that position, or 4 maybe it'll show that I won't have to fill that position. 5 But if it doesn't work well, then I feel it would be 6 necessary -- that's an attorney position. That's a skilled 7 position, and, you know, one that's -- you know, can't -- 8 those duties can't be fulfilled by anybody else in my office 9 that doesn't have a bar card. So, I just wanted to present 10 that, and to -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: At the present salary of Mr. 12 Eaton, is that adequate to -- if you were going -- let's say 13 you want to replace him. Is that adequate funds to hire an 14 attorney? 15 MR. HENNEKE: Well, I think it remains to be seen, 16 Commissioner. Mr. Eaton is now four years out of law school, 17 and was only two years out of law school when he came here 18 and started. I think it's a mixed blessing that the economy 19 is what it is, in that I think it helps to attract qualified 20 individuals who, you know, might not be willing to -- to work 21 for, you know, positions or certain salaries if there were 22 more jobs that were out there. Part of -- it remains to be 23 seen, the November bar results, or the -- the next round of 24 bar results come out beginning of November, and there's going 25 to be quite a few young, bright and talented individuals who 10-11-10 49 1 will be looking for work, and I think it's likely that we 2 could attract some good candidates of some, you know, bright 3 attorneys who are looking for training and experience that we 4 can work with and get value from their intelligence and from 5 their enthusiasm, and in turn, they can get some experience 6 that'll serve them later in life. So -- 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What's presently budgeted for 8 that salary? 9 MR. HENNEKE: I believe Mr. Eaton makes -- 10 MS. HYDE: $49,938. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 49,000? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: 50. 13 MS. HYDE: But keep in mind that he's been here 14 several years, so he's received longevity. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand. 16 MS. HYDE: So when we look at start-out, it should 17 be about 46,000, which is about a Grade 25, to answer your 18 question. If we hire someone that has five years experience 19 as a county attorney, they also get a state supplement, so 20 that's something else. 21 MR. HENNEKE: I think realistically, it's probably 22 a -- a zero to three-year entry level attorney position. But 23 I've been very pleased and very blessed with the quality of 24 the applications that I've received on the two positions that 25 I've filled this year, and hope to have the same kind of luck 10-11-10 50 1 and good fortune with that. If I don't, then I can come back 2 and have a discussion with the Court. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So at this point, your request 4 would be to -- you'll come back to us with a budget amendment 5 to shift some of the salary to contract? 6 MR. HENNEKE: That'll be necessary. And I guess 7 what the point -- my point in putting this on the agenda was 8 to have a discussion with this Court about how it's my desire 9 to try to work with y'all and see how -- if that position can 10 be delayed to be filled full-time, or maybe after I work with 11 some contract attorney positions, I discover that we can get 12 by for a while without filling it. But if I try it and it 13 doesn't work, and it's my determination that I need to fill 14 that position, then I'm going to have to fill that position. 15 My message to you is I'm just doing my best to understand 16 where y'all are coming from and to work with y'all, but in 17 the same sense, I have to, you know, keep the office 18 functioning and performing its necessary duties. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Do you foresee that the money 21 that you have available in that salary could be -- could 22 actually save money with the contract until maybe the first 23 of January? 24 MR. HENNEKE: I think that's what I'm looking at. 25 I mean, with the holiday season, it's unlikely that -- I 10-11-10 51 1 can't have the position filled tomorrow, so there is time to 2 post and interview and what not. And so my goal for the 3 short term is to save -- save some of that money through 4 contract -- 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And for sure not to exceed, 6 by contract, what the -- what the salary would have been. 7 MR. HENNEKE: No, there will be savings. When you 8 take into account not only his salary, but the retirement and 9 benefits and taxes and everything, it will be a savings in 10 that budget. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 13 MR. HENNEKE: Thank you, gentlemen. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate it. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Rob. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a 10 o'clock timed item; 17 it's a bit past time now, that we're going to go to a 18 presentation by Scott Evans from Courtesy EMS, a private 19 ambulance service, regarding their services, and possibility 20 of providing services to Kerr County. Mr. Evans? 21 MR. EVANS: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: And where are you from, sir? 23 MR. EVANS: Bandera. From Bandera. You can tell 24 by the cowboy hats. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Okay. 10-11-10 52 1 MR. EVANS: So, basically, how y'all doing today, 2 the Commissioners? Judge? 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pretty good. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Super. 5 MR. EVANS: Basically, what we're talking about 6 doing is we would like to come and operate in the city of 7 Kerrville and Kerr County out there. We're not looking to 8 run the 911 contracts out here. Mostly what we're going to 9 do is we're looking at doing the non-emergency transfers, the 10 calls from the nursing homes, the calls from the hospitals 11 and such over there. We -- but what we'd like to do -- the 12 reason that we're approaching y'all at this early stage over 13 here now, we're approaching the state for licensure and 14 everything. The reason we're approaching y'all over here is 15 we want to have active participation by the county and the 16 city in getting us started and getting us up to y'all's 17 standards up here. So -- yes? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Your initial -- your initial 19 proposal for service, then, would be only for transfer 20 patients? 21 MR. EVANS: Yes. Yes, for transfer patients over 22 here, but we will be operating -- we're going to be what's 23 called B.L.S. with M.I.C.U. capability over here, so we will 24 have paramedics available. We also want to be here for 25 backup just in case, say, the city gets real busy over there, 10-11-10 53 1 and we will be able to provide the same services. That's 2 what I mean as far as participation with the county and the 3 city over here. So -- 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But as I understand it right 5 now, you're -- you're starting this entity? 6 MR. EVANS: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So it's a new business? 8 MR. EVANS: Yes, sir, brand new business over here. 9 And, like I said, you know, we want -- we want to come in -- 10 we want to, you know, have good relationships with everybody 11 and work with everybody. We want to work with the hospital. 12 We've already been speaking to the hospital over there, and 13 they would -- they expressed an interest in having an 14 alternative. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you in -- are you operating 16 in Bandera County? 17 MR. EVANS: No. No. No. Like I said, we're a 18 start-up. We're a start-up. As a matter of fact, our -- our 19 investor is over in Houston getting the money right now, 20 so -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 22 MR. EVANS: Yeah. So that's where we're at right 23 now here, and we wanted to meet with y'all beforehand and 24 make sure that, you know, like I said, we're operating up to 25 your standards. 10-11-10 54 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Where do you propose to have your 2 main office, or initial office? 3 MR. EVANS: The office is on -- what was the -- 550 4 Earl Garrett. It's where the Salvation Army is right now. 5 We've already been talking to Mr. Brinkman, so we're looking 6 at right across the street from the police department right 7 there. So -- 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 9 MR. EVANS: And initially running two ambulances 10 out of there, and then we will have a third backup in Bandera 11 over there. That's to start out with, and then we're going 12 to run a wheelchair van too. We've got a 12-passenger 13 wheelchair van with lifts. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You would propose to cover 15 the entire county; is that correct? 16 MR. EVANS: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. With our service, 17 yes, sir. We -- you know, like I said, we'd like to be there 18 for backup. We would like to be there, you know, just in 19 case something happens, you know, God forbid, a mass casualty 20 or something like that. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. He's proposing a 22 basic life support system, and we're going -- as far as our 23 ambulance is concerned, we're going to require advanced life 24 support system. 25 MR. EVANS: Right. Right. 10-11-10 55 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Like the City provides us 2 today. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 4 MR. EVANS: And we will have that capability. 5 That's what I'm saying. You know, we will be B.L.S., basic 6 life support, with M.I.C.U., which is mobile intensive care 7 unit, capability over there. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is the City of Kerrville 9 going to allow you to operate in the city? 10 MR. EVANS: We're talking to the City. As a matter 11 of fact, there's a provision in there, the city ordinance -- 12 it's under violations, 24-79 over there -- that says a person 13 in favor with the City Council that can get a certificate of 14 convenience and necessity for the public interest over there. 15 So, we're speaking with them to see if we can't try to kind 16 of smooth the way over here and try to -- try to grab that 17 certificate up. So, that's key. That's key to our business 18 operations here. So -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How long do you think it'll 21 take you to get started up? 22 MR. EVANS: By January. We'll be able to get 23 started by January. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: By January? 25 MR. EVANS: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. We're getting 10-11-10 56 1 ready to -- the ambulances are there. We got a heck of a 2 deal out of this thing, two 2006 Type II ambulances and the 3 wheelchair van over there for $30,000, so we've got a really 4 good deal. They're going to come fully stocked and ready to 5 go. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: What are Type II, as opposed -- 7 MR. EVANS: Type II is the van-type ambulance. As 8 you see -- 9 JUDGE TINLEY: The box? 10 MR. EVANS: No, not the box, the actual van-type. 11 Yeah. It's not -- it doesn't have the big box on it. It's 12 got the integral unit itself over there. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Same as the wheelchair 14 unit? 15 MR. EVANS: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you sir. 20 MR. EVANS: Sure appreciate it. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you for coming by. 22 MR. EVANS: All right. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 11; consider, 24 discuss, take appropriate action on forfeiture report for 25 Constable, Precinct 2. I'm going to -- I'm going to pull 10-11-10 57 1 that. That needs some attention, and we'll bring that back. 2 Let's go to Item 12; consider, discuss, take appropriate 3 action to accept and approve a request from elected officials 4 and department heads for appropriate office staff pursuant to 5 Local Government Code Chapter 151. We had some more requests 6 come in. Let me get to them here. Had requests from 7 Juvenile Detention; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2; Road 8 and Bridge; and Human Resources. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 12 approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the 13 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 14 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 16 (No response.) 17 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll go to 18 Item 13; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 19 audit 216th District Attorney asset forfeiture report as 20 required by Article 59.06, Code of Criminal Procedure. This 21 was placed on the agenda by myself to present to the Court 22 the asset forfeiture report. That report appears to be 23 complete. I believe it has been reviewed by the Auditor. 24 And the report indicates in summary form that during this 25 past year, $3,295 of forfeiture assets were expended, leaving 10-11-10 58 1 a balance of $66,031 in the forfeiture account. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept the report. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 5 approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the 6 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 7 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 8 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 9 (No response.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to 11 Item 15; to consider, discuss, take appropriate action on 12 proposal to join the Regional Capital Public Defender Office. 13 Ms. Hargis? 14 MS. HARGIS: I'm not an expert on this, but as you 15 recall, about -- when I first came here in '07, we were part 16 of a public defender program out of San Antonio. And that 17 lapsed, I think, in 2008, and we haven't been a part of any 18 type of a public defender program, so to speak. The Lubbock 19 area has come up with a public defender program where the 20 first year you don't pay anything, and then the next year you 21 pay based on your population. I think our -- Judge, you took 22 my little form, so was it 5,000 or something? Or 12? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: 12,000. 24 MS. HARGIS: 12,000. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: This is capital cases only. 10-11-10 59 1 MS. HARGIS: Yeah, these are large capital cases. 2 Basically, what this is is insurance, but it's not a bad 3 thing to have, because if we have a big capital case, that 4 could save us, you know, a million-plus, so it's something to 5 think about. And Gillespie County is -- they have already 6 signed up for the program. It was presented when the 7 auditors were appointed and our salaries reviewed. The Judge 8 went over the program, and Gillespie County forwarded us a 9 copy of that. I think it's something for us to think about. 10 You know, $12,000 versus a million, to me, is a no-brainer. 11 We may not have one, but if we do have one -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What capital cases does it 13 cover? I mean, all? 'Cause, I mean, we -- 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Will it cover any that go 15 backwards, that have already occurred, but no arrest been 16 made? 17 MS. HARGIS: I don't know. I don't know. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to find out the 19 -- I mean, find out the details of exactly what is covered by 20 this program. 21 MS. HARGIS: Okay. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause, I mean, capital -- that 23 can be a broad term, what a capital case is. And with the -- 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember us doing that, 25 and I remember it being attractive, but what exactly -- how 10-11-10 60 1 does it benefit the taxpayers of Kerr County? I can't 2 remember. 3 MS. HARGIS: Well, we join in this program, and so 4 we -- we are provided a public defender instead of us having 5 to pay for a Court-appointed attorney for, for instance, a 6 capital murder trial that -- you know, so we don't have to 7 pay for the attorney. We basically pay into this insurance 8 program and they provide us with a public defender. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the cost? 10 MS. HARGIS: At no cost to us at this point. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: The first year. 12 MR. HENNEKE: It's an insurance policy. 13 MS. HARGIS: It's an insurance policy. 14 MR. HENNEKE: We pay premiums. If we get hit with 15 a big, you know, capital case, then that's what's the policy 16 covers, is how I understand it. 17 MS. HARGIS: Right. 18 MR. HENNEKE: I haven't reviewed the specifics. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What is -- go ahead. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, go ahead. What's the 21 cost of the second year? 22 MS. HARGIS: The Judge took my -- 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Almost $13,000. 12,000 -- 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And each subsequent year 25 after that? Do we have an idea of what the -- 10-11-10 61 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it's grant-funded, and it's a 2 declining grant. It declines by 20 percent each year. The 3 first year, it's -- it's totally funded. The second year it 4 comes in at almost 13. The next year it comes in at 17. The 5 next year it's 25, almost 26. It just continues to graduate 6 up as the funding of the grant is depleted that the -- that 7 the public defender office has. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: One thing that ought to be 9 noted on most capital cases -- Rob may be able to verify 10 this. My understanding is most of the time it's two 11 attorneys on capital, so you have two. Now, in this county 12 right now, we have one capital case that is already going 13 with attorneys and everything, but a lot of that's kind of on 14 hold, because the subject's in Boerne. The other capital 15 case that we have, the suspect in that is in Mexico, so we 16 have not been able to make an arrest on that. That's been 17 going on for a number of years now. So, those are the two 18 current ones, at least that the Sheriff's Office has 19 outstanding. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What about the Seard case? 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's the one in Boerne. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, Boerne. I thought you said 23 Burnet. Boerne. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So -- and that one's already 25 got attorneys appointed to him. 10-11-10 62 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does the -- and this isn't a 2 question -- you know, y'all may not know at this point, on 3 what it covers. It seems like a lot of these capital cases, 4 there's a whole lot of other, you know, mental health 5 experts, all these other experts. Are they covered, or are 6 we only talking about the attorney only? 7 MR. HENNEKE: I haven't seen the policy. 8 MS. HARGIS: I'm going to have to -- I mean, what 9 we got is not a whole lot of information. And basically, let 10 me contact them and get them to give us more detail. I mean, 11 what I've gotten is just basically the brief outline, and I 12 would assume it's mostly attorneys, but I'm not going to -- I 13 don't know. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd be interested to look at it 15 further, but I think if you can just get them to send 16 whatever you have to sign up with, whatever documentation 17 they have. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We don't want to sign up for 19 something long-term until we get some long-term answers. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you a question, 21 now. This agenda item, Regional Capital Public Defender's 22 office, is that -- is that the one in the panhandle you're 23 talking about? Or -- 24 MS. HARGIS: Supposed to be out of the Lubbock 25 area. 10-11-10 63 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Lubbock. 2 MR. HENNEKE: My understanding is they're opening a 3 hill country office, and the location's to be determined. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To be determined. 6 MR. HENNEKE: It needs to be determined. Don't 7 know. I don't know which county. I mean, I've heard Uvalde, 8 but I've also heard that that's not definitive. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Maybe we can be the host 10 county and they can just kind of forego any charges for us. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Might find some office 12 space. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, we could find them an 14 office, maybe. 15 MS. HARGIS: I will inquire. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Need to gather more information and 17 bring that back. 18 MS. HARGIS: I will. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to Item 16; to 20 confer with the County Attorney, receive information on and 21 update on pending L.C.R.A. CREZ litigation. Is that 22 something that we need do in executive session, or is that 23 something you can do in the clear? 24 MR. HENNEKE: Judge, I think most of the 25 information we discussed in connection with the counsel, but 10-11-10 64 1 if there's any questions, I thought this was just a good 2 time, since the case does commence on the 25th. So, I think 3 we've discussed most of the current status. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions with regard to 5 that item? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Why don't we -- 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Judge, I can -- if you would 9 call 17, I will respond to that, without having to go into -- 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I'm sorry. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Won't take but a second. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Good enough. Let me call Item 17; 13 to consider, discuss, take appropriate action on 14 pending/possible litigation. Commissioner Oehler? 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I will pull that one. I did 16 get a response from the person I was trying to get a response 17 from, and I will visit with you about a possible date of a 18 meeting. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, good enough. Okay. Let's go 20 to Section 4 of the agenda, payment of the bills. It 21 appeared that our roster was -- 22 MS. HARGIS: Well, this is the end of the year, and 23 so you have two sets. And, unfortunately, our software 24 doesn't allow us -- and I know Mr. -- Commissioner Baldwin is 25 not happy. We tried to condense it as much as possible, but 10-11-10 65 1 this time of the year, we have bills that are current for 2 October. We have current -- we have bills that go back to 3 September, so it's kind of hard to pull a little report. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: That's why there's a lot of double 5 reporting? For each -- 6 MS. HARGIS: Double recording. And the due-to's 7 are because that's -- because it's an end-of-the-year. Makes 8 it a little different than just expensing it. So, that's why 9 you're seeing a little bit -- you're seeing all of the stuff 10 that we do, rather than just the bills. Okay? 'Cause we do 11 the insurance in between. That's your due-to's and 12 due-from's. And just a little accounting 101. When a person 13 gets a paycheck, we take that money and put it into a -- kind 14 of like a deposit account; it's called the due-to account. 15 And then you pay the bill and it zeros out. It's kind of 16 like a control account. So, that's the reason why it's 17 called a due-to, 'cause it's really not our money, because 18 it's money that we place there from someone else. So, you 19 normally don't get all of those. This is a combination. 20 I've gotten everybody pretty much to give me all their bills. 21 The only thing we should have left in the current fiscal 22 year, I'm hoping, is we need -- we did not get some of our 23 credit card bills and some of our utility bills. But other 24 than that, we should be pretty much done with last year. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: And you can encumber until you get 10-11-10 66 1 those utility and credit card bills? 2 MS. HARGIS: We will till the end of the month. We 3 can keep it up until the end of the month. The reason why 4 I'm closing it early, number one, is to get a better handle 5 on our cash flow, but because of the requirements of getting 6 our audit done by March 31st, we've got to close our books. 7 I've already talked to the auditors; I hope to have them here 8 by the middle of November so that we can get started. Our 9 financial advisers were very adamant, because of our new bond 10 issue, that we be done by March 31st, because the S.E.C. 11 requirements now are that you have the audit report -- not a 12 draft, but the report -- to them on the day of the submittal 13 of the S.E.C. report, so we've got to have it done. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 15 MS. HARGIS: Are there any questions about any of 16 the bills, even though they're -- a lot of them in here you 17 don't see? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the bills. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for payment 21 of the bills. Question or discussion? On Page 16, -- 22 MS. HARGIS: Yes? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: -- the last entry there on that. 24 Icemaker, I believe it is. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm. 10-11-10 67 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Or, excuse me, walk-in -- that 2 walk-in cooler. My understanding was that that expenditure 3 was going to be handled as a capital to preserve fund 4 balance. 5 MS. HARGIS: I've got an air-conditioner, Judge. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's the big walk-in 7 freezer and the cooler at the Ag Barn. The icemaker, I 8 think, too. All three of them. 9 MS. HARGIS: Yeah. I believe we did take this out 10 of -- out of -- actually, out of the old bond issue. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: The old capital -- 12 MS. HARGIS: Yeah. And that's -- 13 JUDGE TINLEY: The Ag Barn line that we had in 14 there, when I talked to Mr. Bollier about it, I asked him to 15 discuss that with you, and I believe that's what he 16 indicated, that you were able to plug it back in in that 17 '07-'08 capital item. 18 MS. HARGIS: Yes. Unfortunately, I didn't convey 19 that to Joy, so I will fix that. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other questions or -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, let me ask a question 22 about it. That line comes out of this group of bills? 23 MS. HARGIS: We still have to pay it, but we'll 24 just take it out of the capital projects. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. It won't be coming out of 10-11-10 68 1 budget operational funds. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Comes out of capital? 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. So the -- the fund balance in 4 major repairs in Youth Exhibition will be -- will be restored 5 by that amount of money, since it's coming out of capital. 6 Helps us with cash flow. 7 MS. HARGIS: Helps us in the general fund to keep 8 our cash flow up. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? 10 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 11 hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. I didn't 16 see any budget amendments. We don't have any of those, do 17 we? 18 MS. HARGIS: No, we're done. We're done. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Late bills? None? 20 MS. HARGIS: We don't have any late bills. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I've been presented with 22 monthly reports as to the Kerr County payroll for September 23 2010; Constable, Precinct 1; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 24 3; County Clerk; and Environmental Health. Do I hear a 25 motion to approve those -- 10-11-10 69 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: -- indicated reports as presented? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve 5 the indicated reports as presented. Question or discussion? 6 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 7 hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Okay. We 12 have an 11 o'clock item that we need to come back for. 13 MS. HARGIS: Judge, can we go back on mine just a 14 second, about late bills? Or late -- or amendments -- budget 15 amendments? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm, sure. 17 MS. HARGIS: I just want to make a comment so 18 that -- not all the elected officials are here, but we had a 19 few people that had some payroll issues that they wanted to 20 carry into the new year, and I just wanted to make the Court 21 aware that we can't take payroll issues backwards, because, 22 number one, we have I.R.S. issues with it, and number two, 23 when we're checking our payroll against our forms, our 941's, 24 our I.R.S. forms, as well as the audit, it doesn't agree, so 25 there's a problem. So, I just wanted everybody to be aware 10-11-10 70 1 that if you have overtime or anything like that that you 2 don't want to come out of your current budget at year end 3 next year, you need to do it in September. You can't do it 4 after that. So -- 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. I appreciate that. 6 Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's another hand up. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Hmm? 9 MS. HYDE: Can I piggy-back on that? Because she 10 and I have talked about it, along with Mindy. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 12 MS. HYDE: I know that most people aren't here, but 13 perhaps if it gets on the record, people will read it; to 14 remind folks that overtime was pretty much taken out of our 15 budget, and part-time was pretty much taken out of our 16 budget. So, if they turn in payroll with overtime or 17 part-time that is not within the budget, we can't pay it. I 18 can't pay what I don't have money to pull from. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: That makes sense. 20 MS. HYDE: So I tried to make it real simple for 21 people to look at. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: The Sheriff wants to be excepted 23 from that rule. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I believe we have a 25 separate line item for overtime that has been approved. Is 10-11-10 71 1 that not correct, Eva? 2 MS. HYDE: I didn't say everyone. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank you. Just wanted to 4 make sure. I hadn't seen a final printout version of the 5 budget. 6 MS. HYDE: We just had very limited overtime, and 7 the only part-time that I'm aware of is the two part-time 8 regular positions that were approved, and then some very 9 small amounts in a couple of budgets. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, I'd strongly recommend that 11 you look at that final budget, because we did some amazing, 12 amazing things. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We're waiting for a copy. I 14 think there's still being some adjustments to it or 15 something. I haven't had a copy yet. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If we forgot something, we 17 could still make adjustments in the new time. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Never too late. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would like to make our 20 little report, if you're going to do that part before you do 21 anything else. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll get to those, but first we're 23 going to take a recess. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: We'll be in recess for -- gosh, 10-11-10 72 1 probably 20 25 minutes or more. 2 (Recess taken from 10:30 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.) 3 - - - - - - - - - - 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if 5 we might. We have an 11 o'clock timed item, to consider, 6 discuss, and take appropriate action to modify Court Order 7 Number 31811 to adjust the forcible detainer citation fee 8 that was adopted as part of the Sheriff's and Constables' 9 fees. Judge Ragsdale asked that this be placed on the 10 agenda. I think the issue is the -- the difference between 11 the actual citation for forcible entry -- or forcible 12 detainer lawsuit and what we commonly refer to as a writ of 13 possession, which commands the Sheriff or constable to 14 literally go move the person being evicted out, where we 15 increased that to $200 plus some cost, or standby and 16 expenses and so forth, a few years ago. The actual forcible 17 detainer filing is a regular citation, and I think there's a 18 separate entry on your schedule, was there not, for writ of 19 possession, Sheriff? 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, forcible detainer can be 21 several things. You have to remember, number one, these fees 22 are set for the entire state to know what we're charging, 23 okay? Force -- at one time, if you look up in the civil 24 process book that's normally used by officers across the 25 state, you look up forcible detainer, it goes back that it's 10-11-10 73 1 a removal of property, and it goes back to a writ of 2 restitution, which then in the late '80's was changed by the 3 Legislature to a writ of possession. So, different courts 4 are using different phrases. On Page 2 of our current fees 5 that we adopted, I have specifically in there citations, any 6 type, all courts. That's $85. That's the citation. Next 7 year, if you want me to, I can leave the -- we've had this 8 forcible detainer at 200, 'cause that's actual removal of 9 property, in my opinion. I can expand it out next year to 10 just say actual removal; put that in parentheses behind it. 11 But because these come from different courts and 12 everything, this is for everybody to know, it's already been 13 sent in to the Comptroller's office this year. I have no 14 intention of changing it. I don't think we should change it, 15 because different courts still refer to it. Could it be a 16 little bit more specific? Granted, it probably could, but I 17 have no problem with the way it's written in there as of now, 18 and I have no problem with Page 2; it's saying all citations, 19 any type, any court, is $85. So, if you're talking about the 20 citation itself, that's the $85. It's covered in those 21 deals. And that's my -- my position on this whole deal. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Judge Ragsdale? 23 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Thank you. I appreciate what 24 Rusty said. He was correct in that it used to be called a 25 writ of restitution, which restored a person's real property 10-11-10 74 1 back to the person with the greater right of possession. It 2 is -- and it's right here on whatever page that is. It says 3 writ of possession at $200, and that's correct, and we've 4 been charging that for a number of years. However, forcible 5 detainer -- I don't know how it's defined in our people's 6 books, but I go to the Property Code, which is the 7 legislative definition of forcible detainer, and it's Section 8 24.002. It's clearly defined as -- as a lawsuit that 9 initiates an eviction action. It's not -- it is not the writ 10 of possession. Never has been the writ of possession, and 11 never will be the writ of possession. It is the initiation. 12 It is the act that causes a possible writ of possession to 13 take place, should the plaintiff prevail. 14 My problem with it is this. If the Court wants us 15 to charge $200 for service of a forcible detainer citation, 16 which is what this says, then we have to charge it. That's a 17 legal fee, and I'm required by law to collect all legal fees. 18 If the Court wants to instruct me that what is said here is 19 not what they want, then I'm relieved of collecting the fee. 20 It just should be done correctly. And if -- if the Court 21 relieves me from collecting $200 to serve a forcible detainer 22 suit, then I'm relieved of that liability; I don't have to 23 collect it. Otherwise, in January, I have to collect $200 24 for every eviction suit that comes along, plus the filing 25 fees. 10-11-10 75 1 JUDGE TINLEY: The language used -- excuse me -- in 2 the Sheriff's schedule there does not say citation of 3 forcible detainer. It merely says forcible detainer. 4 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Yes, sir. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Without any further elaboration. 6 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Yes. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: So if the understanding of the Court 8 is that a forcible detainer is something that is another 9 terminology for placing into possession -- 10 JUDGE RAGSDALE: You would be wrong, but you can do 11 it. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not debating the fact, right or 13 wrong. But if it was the understanding of the Court, in 14 establishing the fee in that manner, -- 15 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Then I would be relieved. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: -- then, of course, other citations, 17 any other citation being -- 18 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Yes. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: -- for the initiation of any kind of 20 a lawsuit, be it forcible detainer or any other kind not 21 specifically enumerated. 22 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Correct. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 24 JUDGE RAGSDALE: The problem, of course, like I 25 said, was in this particular case, they chose to specifically 10-11-10 76 1 state forcible detainer, and it's very clearly defined what a 2 forcible detainer is. So, it doesn't matter really what 3 other people's interpretations are; it's what the law says it 4 is, is what counts. But like we were saying, is if the Court 5 says, "Judge Ragsdale and all other J.P.'s, we didn't mean 6 for you to collect $200; we meant for you to collect $85," 7 then -- then maybe I won't get indicted. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, obviously, the Sheriff -- the 9 Sheriff's intention in presenting it in that manner, -- 10 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Yes. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: -- stating that a forcible detainer 12 was at the same cost for a writ of possession, -- 13 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Right. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: -- the Sheriff's intention was to be 15 inclusive of what a writ of possession may have -- in some 16 other areas, may have come to be known as a -- be it right or 17 wrong. 18 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Correct. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: That was the terminology that was 20 used from time to time, and maybe still used in other 21 jurisdictions, and that was the equivalent of a writ of 22 possession. He presented it that way. Far as I know, the 23 Court understood it that way. They've forwarded it to the 24 Comptroller that way, and seems like we're done, right? 25 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Well, and -- yes, but let's just 10-11-10 77 1 put a finger here for next year, and try to get it done -- I 2 guess I'm being a little difficult. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hmm-mm. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: What an admission. 5 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Far be it from me. But I just 6 believe that -- that we should do this -- also, several of 7 the constables -- or a couple of the constables told me that 8 they've tried for a while on this writ of possession to get 9 the same thing done for writ of possession that was done for 10 writ of execution. There is only one writ of possession that 11 I know of, and that's when you restore a person's property 12 back to the person with the greater right of possession. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you move an evicted person 14 out. 15 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Well, you don't -- yeah. You 16 don't actually remove the stuff, but you cause it to be 17 removed. And they wanted the same stuff as -- that y'all put 18 in with the writ of execution, because these things are often 19 very time-consuming. And I notice in the writ of execution, 20 which constables serve also, that there's some additional 21 fees that are charged after a certain amount of base time, 22 and they were hoping that that could get added to the writ of 23 possession too. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: That would be another issue for next 25 year, wouldn't it? 10-11-10 78 1 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Again, kind of put your finger 2 there a little bit, and either, perhaps next year, eliminate 3 the distinctive of forcible detainer, or put it in there the 4 same as others. Just a recommendation. I think it's strong, 5 because this business about maybe being confused with a writ 6 of restitution, there is absolutely no writ of restitution 7 that exists, and so for some court to send a writ of 8 restitution to a sheriff or constable to be served would be, 9 one, absurd; two, extremely improper, and should be returned 10 back to the court that issued it, 'cause it doesn't exist, 11 and you would have liability to serve a -- a document that 12 doesn't exist. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: That would be between the issuing 14 court and the person -- 15 JUDGE RAGSDALE: And the person asked to serve it. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: -- attempting to execute it, then. 17 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Exactly. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 19 JUDGE RAGSDALE: So, anyway, I just await your 20 instruction. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I think the Sheriff's 22 intention in presenting it was forcible detainer was in the 23 same nature as a writ of possession; therefore, the same 24 charge. That's how it was presented by him. That's how he's 25 presenting it to the Comptroller. Best I can tell, that's 10-11-10 79 1 how the Court understood it. 2 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Okay. So I don't have to collect 3 $200? 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Collect other citations. 5 JUDGE RAGSDALE: Okay, good. Thank you. 6 Appreciate it. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Okay, do we have any 8 reports from any commissioners in connection with their 9 liaison or other assignments? Commissioner Letz? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see Mr. Lipscomb in the back. 11 I will bring up, I believe there's an opening coming up on 12 the Library Board, so anyone that's -- anyone who's 13 interested, let me know or let Mr. Lipscomb know, and we can 14 -- there is a vacancy coming up; Mrs. Hayes is not eligible 15 to serve any longer. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: This is one of the appointments 17 that -- that the county has to the board? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know. Who -- whose 19 appointment is that? 20 MR. LIPSCOMB: It's Kay Hayes for the county and 21 myself for the city. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just that. 10-11-10 80 1 JUDGE TINLEY: And we have one other on the board 2 presently, if I'm not mistaken. 3 MR. LIPSCOMB: Correct. You have two, yeah. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. All right. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, anyone, just let me know 6 and we'll proceed with that. And -- 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I thought you were supposed 9 to come up with somebody. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I can. I will. I'm just 11 giving y'all the opportunity -- 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, you're giving us the 13 opportunity. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The opportunity, but I'll be 15 glad to come up with someone. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Inclusiveness here. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm glad to hear that. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Other than that, I think that's 19 about it. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: New outdoor arena is really 21 looking good. They've done a fine, fine job on it and, you 22 know, it's basically pretty much state of the art and very 23 well-built, and they've done really neat work. It should be 24 just about finished. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Relative to the existing outdoor 10-11-10 81 1 arena, what is the size of this new one? 2 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It is 160, including the 3 10-foot return out -- it's really 150 by 250. It is the 4 standard size. The old arena was very -- very short and very 5 narrow. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And, too, where we added -- 8 we added that return alley, which is 10 feet wide. And go by 9 and look at it. I mean, the holding pens and the chute that 10 feeds into the roping chute is all steel-sided and -- and, 11 you know, nothing can really get hurt, nor can they turn 12 around, and they -- and the roping boxes have -- instead of 13 having a solid wall behind them where a horse backs up before 14 they take off out with the roper, they have a 6-inch pipe 15 that comes up out of the ground that is what the horse backs 16 up against so that you can actually maintain, pull dirt and 17 stuff back in where they kick it out when they take off. And 18 it's going to be very, very easy to maintain, and I think 19 we're going to start seeing more events because of what it 20 is, and I think that the big grass field around it makes it 21 more attractive to ropers, to where theirs horses will be on 22 grass rather than on -- going across pavement. There's some 23 things we can do to that hopefully we'll be able to figure 24 out a way to someday cover that thing, because if we do, we 25 can bring more things into town than were imagined, plus we 10-11-10 82 1 can expand the use of that maybe into the shock show, and 2 eliminate some of the other footage that were talked about 3 doing in the future to the existing building. You're talking 4 about a cover that's 68,000 square feet under roof, at a very 5 low cost, and very low maintenance. So, something to think 6 about for the future. But -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not necessarily enclosed, 8 but -- 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- just covered. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Covered, and maybe -- maybe 12 enclose part of it, but have it where you can put, you know, 13 garage doors and stuff when you open it up to get 14 ventilation. No, it does not need to be enclosed; it does 15 not need to be heated and air-conditioned. But I believe -- 16 I'm going to go to Gonzales; I understand they have a 17 facility like that in Gonzales, and it's been a big, big hit 18 for their economic development. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They're bringing in lots of 21 folks and lots of events that they never had before. So I'm 22 going to go check that out and report back on what kind of 23 impact that has to the -- to that city. That's it. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Baldwin? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just want to remind you guys 10-11-10 83 1 that with the Historical Commission, we're going to have 2 lunch with them on November the 8th, and next meeting I will 3 bring more of a -- or Jody is wanting to send y'all a 4 reminder through the mail. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you going to have a menu? 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's on a regular meeting 7 day. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, good, they're going to 10 buy lunch. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's what they're 12 trying to do. That -- the answer to that question has not 13 come back yet. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is the -- 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But they did last time; they 16 provided a sack lunch for us. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But that's November the 8th, 19 Monday, at 12 o'clock out at Schreiner University. 20 Historical Commission. And that will not be the annual 21 report. They will come in this room to do the annual report. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this the luncheon? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just a reminder. 10-11-10 84 1 JUDGE TINLEY: In the library? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Excuse me? 3 JUDGE TINLEY: In the library? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. Thank you. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Meeting Thursday morning at 9 9 o'clock of the bridge committee. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And there's a lot of rumors 12 floating around about what came out of Representative 13 Hilderbran's office; there was a meeting that you and I had, 14 and this and that and the other, and so we'll see where that 15 takes us. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We deal in rumors. We 18 feast on them. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Feast on the rumors. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Elected officials? Department 23 heads? Ms. Hyde? The Sheriff is getting in his starting 24 blocks, it looks like here. 25 MS. HYDE: Update on insurance. Thursday we're 10-11-10 85 1 supposed to have the bids. Are we going to have an opening? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: We've already posted a meeting for 3 1 o'clock that day. 4 MS. HYDE: Okay. 5 MS. GRINSTEAD: We haven't posted it yet, but it's 6 ready to be posted. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: We've done the agenda. We will post 8 it before 1 o'clock. 9 MS. HYDE: And then for the Commissioners Court 10 order regarding T.C.P.N., they were notified. They've been 11 talked to. They gave an intent to bid, and that is T.C.G. 12 and Entrust. I got a response from TAC Friday. As of Friday 13 afternoon, they -- they were still -- "Yes, we're going to 14 bid on you guys," so there's three that would be kind of 15 outside the norm. TAC did bid on us last year, but they were 16 fully insured, and they still are fully insured. So, that 17 would be -- be a -- becoming part of the risk pool. So, it's 18 at 1 o'clock Thursday? 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 20 MS. HYDE: Okay. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other department heads or 22 elected officials? Stand up, Sheriff, and come on up. 23 (Laughter.) 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Couple of things. Jail 25 population is 150 this morning. It's 128 males and 22 10-11-10 86 1 females. My issue that I think we're going to have to 2 seriously start looking at pretty soon is -- or at least for 3 long-range, what are we going to do with our females? 4 Maximum I can house, total beds, is 32. 22 is really over 5 your percentage, and we don't have any other place for 6 females. And I really don't want to start housing them out 7 of county, but it's something that we probably all should 8 look at. We've made it several years now. I know that it's 9 gotten high. We looked at the old juvenile facility before, 10 and that didn't work because of the way it's built and 11 everything. But it's just something we may get on the radar 12 to start looking at. The other thing is, I did have a jail 13 position come open last week. One of the females that has 14 elderly parents that live up out of Wichita Falls, and 15 they're not doing very good, so she left and went to work for 16 Wichita Falls -- Wichita County, I guess, Sheriff's Office 17 for their jail. She was a good employee. I told the jail 18 administrator to look at a way that we can do around that 19 position. She was able to find one, so we've given up 20 another position through attrition, which is the way I'd like 21 to see that work. So, that would be two and a half come 22 January. Other than that -- 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Are you still in compliance? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you in compliance? 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We will be in compliance. 10-11-10 87 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's an echo in here. 2 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. We will be in 3 compliance, okay? You know, it will be very difficult. 4 There are certain numbers that we will have to always attain, 5 but it's for jailers to be in compliance. Now, where I can 6 always pull from when it gets close, you have to have 1-to-48 7 on the floor watching inmates all the time, and you have to 8 have one in your control room. Those are designated that you 9 can't switch out of. Now, where we have a little bit of 10 extra -- like, I have two that work in the kitchen, because 11 that is contract, you know, and then I've got jail 12 administrator and assistant jail administrator, so we can 13 always pull and shuffle a little bit. I just have to be 14 careful that, you know, when you got contract employees in 15 there, we still need to be serving the meals and having the 16 actual contact with the inmates, not contract employees. So, 17 we're able to do this. I couldn't tell you if we will be 18 able to do it again if we have another opening. Definitely 19 if I have a female opening, I won't; they're always less, but 20 if I had another male opening, it's a possibility. We just 21 have to look at it at that time. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Fully moved into the annex? 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, fully moved in. Just 24 waiting on a few things like the copier and that. And they 25 had a few issues at first, but most of those have all been 10-11-10 88 1 worked out. The training room we probably will not move 2 until after January, just because you got open enrollment 3 coming up. You've got -- huh? 4 (Low-voice discussion off the record.) 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I was told January. January 6 and February is what they told me last week. Just because of 7 the -- the amount, we may need some different type furniture 8 in there that we're going to put all those on. Current 9 training room is real small, so I'm kind of looking at that. 10 But other than that, everything is in that facility and is 11 working fine at this point. We did measure off the fence, 12 Clay and I did, last week. I mentioned that to you. We're 13 drawing up that packet to go out for those bids on that. 14 We're hoping it may even come in below 50,000, because of 15 where we finally decided it really needs to run. It's about 16 2,100 feet of 10-foot, 9-gauge fence with razor wire and 17 barbed wire on top. Currently, what we have -- have acquired 18 out there is 1,200 feet, so you're only talking about 1,000 19 feet of that fence instead of 2,700, which was what we had 20 first gotten when we had another company just give us a 21 price. It would have been about 2,700, about 87,000, and 22 them providing everything. So, I'm hoping with us providing 23 some of this, cutting out one electric gate and that, we may 24 be able to cover pretty good. We'll see. Other than that, 25 that's it. 10-11-10 89 1 JUDGE TINLEY: And I've got a feeler out for some 2 more 10-foot, 9-gauge. And nothing -- nothing on-hand right 3 now, but they're running traps to see if we can buy us some 4 more at the reduced price. 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We'll probably try and bid it, 6 as you suggested, by the foot, with maybe them furnishing the 7 fence, or, you know, furnishing 1,000 feet of fence and then 8 us furnishing all the fence or something, see if we can get 9 two different prices, depending on how much you can come -- 10 other fence you can come up with. That's it. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other elected officials? 12 Department heads? 13 MR. HENNEKE: Judge, Commissioners, I will not be 14 at the Commissioners Court -- the next meeting due to the 15 beginning of the CREZ litigation. But, of course, if I can 16 have contracts or questions about any agenda items the week 17 before, I'll take care of it and respond in due course. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 19 MR. GARCIA: A couple months ago, I had informed 20 the Court about Kerr County Environmental Health going out to 21 AACOG to request AACOG to hold a couple of classes here in 22 Kerr County that they usually hold in San Antonio. Well, we 23 were informed last week that we had been approved through 24 AACOG, through a grant from T.C.E.Q., to hold two classes 25 here in Kerr County on the 28th and 29th of October. The -- 10-11-10 90 1 the topics that are going to be covered are going to be 2 outdoor burning, one for enforcement, and then they're going 3 to have a three-hour on that same day for the public. These 4 are all free classes to all the agencies, again, through a 5 grant from T.C.E.Q. And I'm -- Kerr County will be hosting 6 with AACOG and U.G.R.A. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who's going to set it up? 8 MR. GARCIA: Sir? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where's it going to be 10 held? 11 MR. GARCIA: U.G.R.A. Lecture Hall. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. That was my question. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, good. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good work. Fantastic. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: You got them both, Ray? 16 MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Both of them, both -- 18 MR. GARCIA: Both classes. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: I know one of them. 20 MR. GARCIA: I'm sorry. The other one was for 21 illegal dumping enforcement, and obviously, it's for all of 22 our -- everybody in our COG, and then they also put it out 23 statewide for all the other enforcement agencies. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: That's a mandatory training for 25 people in your field, right? 10-11-10 91 1 MR. GARCIA: Yes, it is. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Ms. Hargis? 3 MS. HARGIS: I won't be here on Thursday. I'll be 4 attending a seminar, part of the hours that I have to have. 5 I'm supposed to be gone all week, but I'm only going to be 6 gone those two days, Wednesday and Thursday. So -- 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else? 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll probably put on the next 9 agenda to talk about some space -- office space that we're 10 now paying rent for that we probably -- if we can find money 11 in the capital funds to do it. And related to that -- it's 12 in Ingram. Be my proposal -- and I've talked with Ingram 13 Volunteer Fire Department about a piece of land, and they got 14 it approved to allow us to have that and pay for it by 15 whenever, so we would have access to city sewer as well. So, 16 that's something I'd like to bring up, talk about, and see if 17 we can figure out a way to do it in the near future. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else? Got a special 19 meeting at 1 o'clock this Thursday to receive and open the 20 health benefits plan bids and to refer for evaluation and 21 recommendation. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This Thursday, 1 o'clock. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: This coming Thursday, the 14th. 24 Anything else, gentlemen? We'll be adjourned. 25 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:30 a.m.) - - - - - - - - - - 10-11-10 92 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 official reporter for the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 6 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 7 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 13th day of October, 8 2010. 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 10-11-10