1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Special Session 10 Monday, October 10, 2011 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 GUY R. OVERBY, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X October 10, 2011 2 PAGE --- Commissioners' Comments 6 3 1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 4 accept preliminary revision of plat for Lots 13 & 14B of Japonica Hills; set public hearing 10 5 1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 6 accept preliminary revision of plat for Lots 50 & 51 of Lake Ingram Estates, Section Two; set 7 public hearing 19 8 1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to select and approve employee health benefits and 9 employer-funded life insurance options of Kerr County Employee Health Benefits Plan 20 10 1.5 Open bids for electrical, plumbing, HVAC, and 11 pest control; give to Maintenance Supervisor for review and recommendation 49 12 1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 13 approve official bond and oath of Faye E. (Beth) Taylor for the office of Chief Deputy Treasurer 50, 14 96 1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 15 request from Kerrville Main Street to use court- house grounds for Holiday Roundup on Nov. 19, 2011 51 16 1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on the 17 “Reducing Adult Potentially Preventable Hospitalizations” grant offered by Texas 18 Department of State Health Services 55 19 1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to authorize County Attorney to accept payment by 20 credit card of a fee, fine, court cost, or other charge pursuant to Texas LGC §132.002 62 21 1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 22 authorizing survey for all properties associated with Lions Park in Center Point, Texas 63 23 1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 24 request from Hill Country District Junior Livestock Association to close Riverside Drive 25 and put port-a-potties at Flat Rock Lake Park during 2012 stock show 68 3 1 I N D E X (Continued) October 10, 2011 2 PAGE 1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 3 award bids on electrical, plumbing, HVAC, and pest control services 72 4 1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 5 requests from appointed and elected officials to appoint clerks and assistants for their 6 offices pursuant to LGC Chapter 151 73 7 1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to nominate one or more candidates for election 8 as board members for Kerr Central Appraisal District 75 9 1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 10 appoint three county representatives to Airport Planning Committee 80 11 1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 12 requesting County Attorney to research county stock laws in preparation for calling election 13 on same 82 14 1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on letter acknowledging request by Kerr County to 15 be removed from inclusion in the Southern Edwards Plateau Conservation Plan 83 16 1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 17 interlocal agreement with Regional Public Defender for capital cases 87 18 1.18 Consider/discuss take appropriate action to 19 approve Drug Offender Education Program agreement contract between Kerr County and Kerr County 20 Adult Probation; authorize County Judge to execute same 93 21 1.19 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to 22 approve DOEP Instructor Agreement contract between Kerr County and David Havis; authorize County 23 Judge to execute same 93 24 1.20 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to consider appointment of Kerr County Treasurer 25 to serve until next general election (Executive Session, as needed) 97 4 1 I N D E X (Continued) October 10, 2011 2 PAGE 3 4.1 Pay Bills 103 4.2 Budget Amendments --- 4 4.3 Late Bills 104 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 105 5 1.21 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action 6 regarding State of Texas vs. Estate of L. DeJuan Abel, Individually and d/b/a Trustee 7 for Hexagon Honeycomb Corporation (Executive Session) --- 8 3.1 Action as may be required on matters discussed 9 in Executive Session 106 10 --- Adjourned 107 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 1 On Monday, October 10, 2011, at 9:00 a.m., a special 2 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in 3 the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, 4 Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in 5 open court: 6 P R O C E E D I N G S 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. 8 Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the 9 Kerr County Commissioners Court posted and scheduled for this 10 date and time, Monday, October 10, 2011, at 9 a.m. It is 11 that time now. Commissioner Letz? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would everyone please stand for 13 a moment of prayer followed by the pledge? 14 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if there's 16 any member of the audience or the public that wishes to be 17 heard on any matter which is not a listed agenda item, this 18 is your opportunity to come forward and tell us what's on 19 your mind. If you wish to be heard on an agenda item, we'd 20 ask that you fill out a participation form. Should be some 21 located at the rear of the room. That helps me to know that 22 there are folks wanting to be heard when we get to that item. 23 It's not absolutely essential. If you haven't filled out one 24 of those and we get to an item you want to be heard on, get 25 my attention in some manner and I'll give you that 10-10-11 6 1 opportunity. But right now, if there's any member of the 2 public that wishes to be heard on any matter which is not a 3 listed agenda item, this is your opportunity to come forward 4 and tell us what's on your mind. Seeing no one coming 5 forward, Commissioner Letz? 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just two things. We ended up, 7 out at our place, about an inch, 70, which is more than some, 8 but less than others, but we were very happy with that. I 9 think it was certainly a general rain across the county. And 10 the other thing is, the -- I spent, I guess, Saturday 11 afternoon over at the -- the 4-H building we worked on over 12 at the Ag Barn. And I really haven't been -- spent time over 13 there when it was being utilized. That was some of the best 14 spent money that the Court's done. It really got it working. 15 There was a goat clinic, teaching young kids how to work with 16 the goats. I think there was, like, 12 kids that have -- 17 parents had never shown before. It was good, and it provides 18 a -- a facility where kids that don't have their own property 19 can keep their animals. It really is -- it's money well 20 spent. It's the first time -- and it's a use that benefits 21 the kids, and it's so much better than the old horse barn 22 that was empty 99 percent of the time. Anyway, I thought I'd 23 bring that up. 24 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Good. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's about it. 10-10-11 7 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, we had the Mountain 2 Home fundraiser over the weekend. That was fairly well 3 attended, I think. We did have less rain than you got, but 4 anyway, I did pull the burn ban yesterday morning, and I'm 5 going to leave it off until noon tomorrow and put it back on 6 in effect. It's going to dry out. There'll be sunshine the 7 rest of the week, and people that have been collecting a lot 8 of piles of stuff for a long time got a chance to burn them 9 up, so reducing the fire hazard in other ways maybe for 10 later. Overby will probably mention -- will talk more about 11 it than I will, but we did go to San Angelo and look at 12 facilities up there, and that's a real eye-opener. And those 13 facilities didn't cost all that much either, not near what 14 we're proposing, and they're a lot larger than what we're 15 proposing. And guess what, how they were paid for? 4B sales 16 tax. 17 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: 100 percent. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: You're joshing. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 100 percent paid for by 4B. 20 And so that's how that works, and that's how it can work if 21 there's cooperation between the county and the city. It is 22 owned by the city, and part of it's operated by the county, 23 part of it by the city. But, anyway, Guy will probably tell 24 you more about it, but it's -- it was a really worthwhile 25 trip, and saw some different ways to do things. That's it. 10-10-11 8 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner Baldwin? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Burn ban is lifted in 3 Precinct 1 through noon tomorrow, and happy to see that, but 4 I haven't seen a lot of smoke for some reason. You know, 5 people whine and moan and groan and need to go burn, but I 6 just didn't see a lot of it yesterday for some reason. 7 But -- so if we get out of here in time, I'll show you how to 8 create some smoke. But -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'll be doing that in the 10 eastern part of the county. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is it time to burn off 12 something down there? Back to this goat show thing, or this 13 -- you said there's new families raising goats? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: New families showing goats. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: New families showing goats. 16 That's good. You know, I wonder if we're going to be able to 17 compete with Gillespie County. You know, Commissioner Roeder 18 comes over here and makes fun of us every year because they 19 still have more goats than we do and that kind of thing. 20 Does it look like that program's growing a little bit? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's growing a little 22 bit. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good deal. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks like. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all, thank you. 10-10-11 9 1 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Just very thankful for the 2 rain that we had over the weekend. I've heard anywhere from 3 9/10 of an inch at my house to -- I think some folks out in 4 Center Point said they got a couple of inches out there. So, 5 you know, it just depends where you were. Couple of things. 6 I know this next Saturday coming up, we've got a historical 7 dedication of a marker out in Camp Verde, and I know that 8 Commissioner Baldwin with the Historical Commission committee 9 will be out there, but we're glad to have that dedication 10 ceremony. And I -- just to follow up again with what 11 Commissioner Oehler said, we had a real good visit. 12 Appreciate Commissioner Oehler's help leading that trip that 13 we went to San Angelo last week to look at the ag facilities. 14 Just to follow up, again, on what he said, we got 15 to see a new -- a few new things that we really didn't think 16 about that what we can do. I think one thing that I found 17 out there, there's a lot that you can do and how pretty a 18 building will look with a metal building and some 19 cinderblocks and with some type of paint that can be done, 20 and probably about half the cost of what we were looking at 21 originally. So, I know that as we move on, I think there's 22 opportunities for us down the road to help those ag facility 23 projects move forward. And it was a very good trip, and I 24 appreciate those that went, and I appreciate Commissioner 25 Oehler leading that effort. 10-10-11 10 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it? 2 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: That's it. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, can I make one more -- 4 the burn ban is lifted till noon tomorrow for Precinct 3. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Where are you on burn ban? 6 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Probably, since we're going 7 off at -- noon tomorrow? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 9 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Okay. We'll go ahead -- I 10 did not open it up over the weekend, 'cause I was at 9/10 of 11 an inch, but if we're all going to go to noon tomorrow, then 12 we'll just go ahead and go till noon tomorrow in Precinct 2. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Got a narrow window, but we have an 14 opportunity. 15 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: They got a day. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. All right, let's get on with 17 our agenda. The first item is a 9 o'clock timed item; it's 18 to consider, discuss, take appropriate action to accept the 19 preliminary revision of plat for Lots 13 and 14B of Japonica 20 Hills, set forth in Volume 5, Page 199, and Volume 6, Page 21 349, Plat Records, and set a public hearing, same being 22 located in Precinct 4. Mr. Odom? 23 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, thank you. And I hope those 24 young kids will be inspired enough that they go to A & M for 25 their agriculture degree. 10-10-11 11 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think A & M has 2 anything to do with a goat clinic. 3 MR. ODOM: You'd be amazed how we grow things down 4 there. Isn't that right? 5 MR. VOELKEL: That's right. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you recommend that 7 they play football? 8 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Oh. 9 MR. ODOM: Please. After this weekend, you 10 shouldn't say anything. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: True. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just lucky to get this week 13 with the clock not running out like it did. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Tech thought it was a 75-minute game 15 and not a 60-minute game. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 17 MR. ODOM: I tell you, it's a wonder what you can 18 do with that watch when you really want to. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, for sure. 20 MR. ODOM: John and Linda Pipkin own Lot 13, which 21 is 5.76 acres, and Stephen and Denise Pipkin own Lot 14B, 22 which is 7.58 acres. John and Linda would like some more 23 acreage, so with this proposed preliminary revision of plat, 24 Lot 13 will become Lot 13R comprising of 6.676 acres, and lot 25 14B will become lot 14BR comprising of 6.676 acres. At this 10-10-11 12 1 time, there are no improvements on either lot, so we ask the 2 Court to accept the preliminary revision of plat for Lots 13 3 and 14B of Japonica Hills, Volume 5, Page 199, and Volume 6, 4 Page 349, and set a public hearing for Monday, November the 5 14th, 2011, at 9 a.m., Precinct 4. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So moved. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second, -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- with a question. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for the 11 matter to be set for public hearing November 14, 2011, at 12 9 a.m. Question or discussion? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The question I have is on 14 O.S.S.F. on this one. This is probably to the County 15 Attorney. If this was not in a platted subdivision, this 16 wouldn't even require platting. It's basically just moving a 17 lot line between two property owners. Nothing new; no new 18 lot is being created, but since it is in a subdivision, it 19 requires a revision of the plat. I don't see why this should 20 have to go through O.S.S.F. at all, from a -- I mean, both 21 lots -- nothing's been changed. And it costs -- I mean, it 22 is an additional cost to the property owners. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There's nothing on there. 24 Raw land. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I know there's also -- 10-10-11 13 1 under the rules, O.S.S.F. is supposed to review all plats. 2 MR. HENNEKE: I mean, that's -- you know, you're 3 looking at the T.W.D.B. model subdivision rules that we've 4 adopted that sets forth the wastewater requirements, and also 5 there's the provision within our subdivision rules that says 6 that, you know, wastewater requirements can't be waived. So, 7 you know, there's -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is over -- the model 9 subdivision rules don't apply in this, 'cause these are over 10 5 acres. Model rules only apply to tracts that are less than 11 5 acres. But, I mean, we still have the other -- the 12 question is really as to whether it's -- what Chapter 285 13 requires is the issue. And I just have a hard time requiring 14 people to spend money for no reason, when they've already 15 spent money on these two lots. 16 MR. HENNEKE: Public policy -- public policy 17 purpose. You can also look at this as a way of making sure 18 that we're updating, you know, and checking the -- you know, 19 the status of systems, you know, when you have a change like 20 this. You may have lots that have been in existence for 21 100-something years, and nobody really knows what's -- what's 22 in operation, but if you're going to change the lot lines, 23 then that's a chance under our rules to make sure that we 24 know that the O.S.S.F. system is proper, even exists, or -- 25 or conforms to our standards. 10-10-11 14 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The thing is, there are no -- 2 I mean they've already gone over them. There are no existing 3 systems; there's no structures, no improvements. And so it 4 looks and seems to me that Environmental Health can look at 5 it and say, "There are no structures; there's no systems," 6 and sign off on it, send on it down the road. 7 MR. ODOM: The fee's going to be paid when somebody 8 builds on it. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 10 MR. ODOM: That's when you're going to change 11 something. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On lots of them, I understand. 13 I don't know how you -- it just seems this is the clearest 14 example we've come through of a waste of property owners' 15 money, to me. I mean, there's absolutely no reason to do it. 16 The only reason, if it was -- like I say, if it was just 17 adjusting lots lines between property owners, if it wasn't in 18 a subdivision, it wouldn't even require platting. 19 MR. HENNEKE: Well, I've looked at -- I think it's 20 285, and -- and the way that it's -- you know, this -- our 21 subdivision rules, you know, require that this be done, you 22 know, at this point in the process. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does it require it as -- and 24 I'm -- you know, really what I'm probably asking you is 25 asking you to maybe look at it again. This is not a plat; 10-10-11 15 1 this is a revision of plat, and I don't know that there's a 2 distinction. You know, I mean, revision of plat is a 3 different entity or different issue or concept, whatever you 4 want to call it, under 232 than a -- a subdivision. And 5 that's -- you know, this is just -- certainly, we need to 6 comply with state law, but at the same time, it just doesn't 7 make sense to me to waste money. 8 MR. HENNEKE: I can say that Environmental Health 9 is not requiring anything more stringent than what is set 10 forth in our rules, and -- you know, and what tracks the 11 statute. So, I mean -- you know, but they're doing what 12 they're -- they're told to do. And if we need to change or 13 relook at, you know, the parameters, we've got to be careful 14 about violating state law, and also in complying with our, 15 you know, overall obligations with T.W.D.B. and being a 16 Subchapter C or whatever. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I guess the question that 18 I'd look at, then, is could we -- in this particular 19 instance, the -- whatever he's called -- surveyor is an 20 engineer. In other instances, they may not be, and surveyors 21 are not -- it requires, under 285, either a sanitarian or an 22 engineer, as I recall. And, you know, so if -- and in that 23 situation, I mean, the person would have to go spend -- I 24 don't know what. I mean, I can't imagine an engineer's going 25 to start doing it for anything less than $500 or $600, even 10-10-11 16 1 if it's just to put their seal on it, seems to me. It's such 2 a waste of money. If we could either clarify with the -- 3 MR. HENNEKE: I'd be -- Commissioner, I'd be glad 4 to sit down with you and work with you on this. It's come up 5 before. I can't -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know you can't do anything 7 right now. We can't, you know, maybe change it, but I think 8 we need to maybe -- pretty quickly, maybe sit down, and in a 9 week or so, within a week, and discuss it. 10 MR. HENNEKE: I don't think, by policy, we can just 11 tell Environmental Health, you know, to stop enforcing the 12 rules, but if we want to look at the underlying requirement 13 that we have in our, you know, subdivision rules, and that 14 also track the statute, then, you know, let's work on that 15 together. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. All right. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We could grant a variance or 18 an exception to the rules in this case if we wanted to, 19 couldn't we? 20 MR. HENNEKE: Our rules prohibit that. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They prohibit that now? 22 MR. HENNEKE: Uh-huh. I mean -- 23 MR. VOELKEL: One thing I'd like to just add to 24 this; I've been talking to the County Surveyor about this 25 issue, and the way we read it, we look at the definition of 10-10-11 17 1 "subdivision" in the state law and in our subdivision 2 regulations, and this does not fit. It's not a subdivision; 3 it's a revision of a plat. And we're not trying to 4 circumvent any of the issues, and we feel exactly like 5 Jonathan explained, is that both of these are vacant lots. I 6 have another one on next that's one vacant lot and one with 7 some -- with some -- it's got a cabin and a septic, but we're 8 moving away from that area, so it's really making that a 9 better situation. And both of these brothers on this one are 10 planning on building, so here whenever they start in a few 11 months or a few -- six months or a year, whenever, they're 12 going to have to go through the same process to get their 13 permit, and spend -- and we've gotten an estimate of $450 to 14 $500 and up to do what Environmental Health requires. So, we 15 feel that we're not having to ask for any variances, having 16 to change any rules, not bypassing anything. We're not 17 breaking the law. I just don't think it applies. If you 18 look at it, 285 talks about developments and subdivisions. 19 Well, this is not a development; it's already been developed. 20 It's not a subdivision under the direct -- I mean, under the 21 definition of "subdivision" in the state law and our rules. 22 So -- 23 MR. HENNEKE: Why don't we do this; why don't we 24 just push it till next Commissioners Court meeting? This 25 issue hasn't been brought to me before this, and if y'all 10-10-11 18 1 want me to look at whether or not this constitutes a 2 subdivision, then certainly we can bring it back in two weeks 3 or a month or something like that. 4 MR. VOELKEL: That's fine. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That will work, not to take 6 action today? 7 MR. VOELKEL: Well, I want to go ahead and set the 8 public hearing so they can proceed, because we got two 9 meetings coming up -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. 11 MR. VOELKEL: We won't do this till next meeting. 12 and if we get together and everybody decides they got to 13 spend the money, throw it away, I'm sure there are guys out 14 there who would love to take it. 15 MR. ODOM: If worse comes to worst, you could hold 16 the final. You can still have the public hearing and we can 17 hold the final. 18 MR. VOELKEL: We've done that. Well, we even -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, these two items are only for a 20 public hearing. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion on 23 the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 24 your right hand. 25 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10-10-11 19 1 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 2 (No response.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to 4 Item 2, which is a 9:05 timed item; to consider, discuss, 5 take appropriate action to accept the preliminary revision of 6 plat for Lots 50 and 51 of Lake Ingram Estates, Section 2, as 7 set forth in Volume 4, Page 242, Plat Records, and set a 8 public hearing. Mr. Odom? 9 MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Steve and Nancy Juneau own 10 Lot 50, which is 6.36 acres, and Robert and Carolyn Bossert 11 own Lot 51, which is 7.29 acres. The Juneaus would like to 12 increase their proposed Lot 50R to 8.36 acres, which would 13 leave the Bossert's proposed Lot 51R at 5.29 acres. Lot 51 14 does not have any improvements. Lot 50 does have a septic 15 and a cabin on it. That's on your map on the revision. So, 16 at this time, we ask the Court to accept the preliminary 17 revision of plat for Lots 50 and 51 of Lake Ingram Estates, 18 Volume 4, Page 242, and to set a public hearing for Monday, 19 November 14th, 2011, at 9:10 a.m., Precinct 4. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Move approval. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 23 approval of the matter, to set a public hearing on this 24 matter for November 14th, 2011, at 9:10 a.m. Question or 25 discussion on the motion? All in favor, signify by raising 10-10-11 20 1 your right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Item 3 is a 6 9:10 timed item; to consider, discuss, and take appropriate 7 action to select and approve employee health benefits and 8 employer-funded life insurance options of Kerr County 9 employee health benefits plan. As the Court will recall, 10 we've got a -- we've got a budgetary amount plugged in, but 11 insofar as the final tweaking and fine-tuning and selection 12 of exactly what options we're going to offer, that's open. 13 As long as we do it within the budgetary constraints, we're 14 okay. Ms. Lantz? Mr. Looney? Y'all got your act together. 15 Do it the way you want to here. 16 MS. LANTZ: Morning, Commissioners, Judge. Here's 17 some documentation that we put together. 18 MR. LOONEY: No, you go ahead. I'm not -- tell 19 them what you did. 20 MS. LANTZ: Basically, what we've done is we've 21 contacted TAC to see if we would go with one option as far as 22 our plan goes. We have two different options that were 23 presented to us from TAC. The first one was the $3,000 24 deductible, the high deductible, and the second one was a 25 P.P.O. co-pay with a $2,000 deductible. Last Commissioners 10-10-11 21 1 Court it was suggested to possibly do a survey with the 2 employees, which I completed. I received about 175 of the 3 forms back, and according to the employees, 112 I received 4 back for the P.P.O., 80/60 deductible, and 60 for the high 5 deductible co-pay with the HCA card. My major concern was, 6 talking with the employees, a lot of the employees are not 7 going to the doctor, the reason being they cannot afford it 8 on our current plan. 9 They're not even seeking preventive, because a lot 10 of people have issues going on, and once you go to the doctor 11 and you have a diagnostic problem, it won't cover under that 12 preventive care any more, so they're not only going to be 13 charged for that office visit; it won't be covered under that 14 preventive service any more. It will then go towards 15 diagnostic, and then you have to go back again. So, they're 16 not able to pay that $250 visit when they go. The other 17 thing is, they're not getting their prescriptions filled, 18 so -- and they just do without. They're not seeing the 19 doctor, not getting their prescriptions. So, according to -- 20 speaking with the employees, I don't feel like the $3,000 21 would benefit them this year. And in this plan option that 22 we were given, our premiums would go down, and also our costs 23 as far as what it would cost the dependents to be covered if 24 we do choose the P.P.O. end of it. So, basically, that's 25 what I've come up with. 10-10-11 22 1 MR. LOONEY: What we put in front of you now, the 2 spreadsheet shows that the contributions that are currently 3 being requested for the county participation in the plan on 4 the high-deductible plan, the contribution for employees is 5 zero. The contribution for an employee and spouse is 250 a 6 month. Employee and children, 250 a month, and the family is 7 450. We moved that contribution into each plan to see what 8 the impact would be. That means that you would not change 9 any of the premiums for employees that are currently on the 10 high-deductible plan, and we give a credit to the employees 11 that are currently on the P.P.O. plan. The P.P.O. plan 12 current contribution is $50 per employee per month, and then 13 400 for employee and spouse, 350 for children, and 800 for 14 the family. So, by moving the contribution level down, that 15 family rate goes from 800 to 450. The spousal rate goes from 16 four -- 400, actually goes down to 250. So, there is a 17 premium credit being generated for each one of the 18 categories. 19 And we now have enrolled 25 employee and spouses, 20 we have 12 employee and children, and we have 16 families, 21 and out of 260 employees, that's not a high participation. 22 So, apparently there is some cost restrictions as far as 23 premium is concerned. The plan design itself is a P.P.O. 24 plan with 2,000. You've got a comparison in the two plans 25 attached on the next page, where it shows the Blue Cross/Blue 10-10-11 23 1 Shield plan at the 1400 NG plan. That is the P.P.O. plan. 2 It shows that they have a deductible on an annual basis of 3 $2,000, and a $4,000 maximum out of pocket. You build up 4 into that 4,000 out of pocket by having expenses that are not 5 covered by anything but the deductible or coinsurance. So, 6 deductible and coinsurances go toward satisfaction of that 7 4,000. Eventually, though, in a high-cost claim, the 8 employee would have $4,000 out-of-pocket expense. The 9 expense on the -- on the high-deductible plan, if you have a 10 large claim, the deductible goes to $3,000, and once you've 11 expended that 3,000, then everything is paid at 100 percent. 12 The two differentiating benefit factors in those 13 two plans is that under the P.P.O. plan, you have co-payments 14 for doctor office visits, you have co-payments for 15 prescription drugs, you have co-payments for other areas in 16 the plan, and those co-payments are paid 100 percent by the 17 employee, and then the balance of the bill is paid by the 18 insurance company. So, you have a $35 -- I think it is a $35 19 co-pay to go to the doctor's office. Under the $3,000 20 deductible plan, whatever that expense is goes against the 21 deductible. Once they go over 3,000, then 100 percent of the 22 doctor office visits were paid. Under the P.P.O. plan, once 23 you exceed the maximum out-of-pocket expense, your co-pays 24 continue. So, you would continue to have co-payments for 25 doctor office visits, prescription drugs, and other areas 10-10-11 24 1 that had co-payment requirements. 2 The differential, obviously, is that the employee 3 is going to have a lot of out-of-pocket expense under the 4 $3,000 deductible plan. We have tried to offset some of that 5 by incorporating the HCA piece of it, which is the $500 debit 6 card that is provided. Now, that debit card is utilized in 7 doctor office visits, but they pay the full portion of the 8 bill; it's not the co-pay. They pay the full portion of the 9 doctor office visit, so if the doctor office visit is $100 as 10 negotiated by Blue Cross, then the employee is charged $100 11 against that debit card. Once that card is used up, then 12 they are subject to the deductible, which makes their annual 13 deductible approximately $2,500. That HCA card is only 14 applicable to the employee, and it's only subject to 15 deductions in that area. So, you do not have people that are 16 involved in the -- in the dependent coverage; they are at 17 full bore on the $3,000 deductible. And at least two family 18 members have to complete that $3,000 deductible before all 19 family members are covered 100 percent. 20 So, there is out-of-pocket expense involved in a 21 $3,000 deductible plan. Subsequently, the rates that we 22 received from TAC reflect that. They reflect that fact that 23 there is less cost for them to have the $3,000 deductible 24 plan, so our premiums are obligated in that manner. But if 25 we choose to have two plans with a buy-up, then we have to go 10-10-11 25 1 back to the rates that were provided for us by TAC 2 originally. If you choose one plan, then we use the rates 3 that are currently given to us and then go from there. Now, 4 we have a calculation on the discounts -- I'm sorry, we have 5 the calculations on the actual budget impact. It's a little 6 bit different methodology than before, because we've used the 7 total -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. 9 MR. LOONEY: Sure. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- if we pick just one of 11 the plans and there's not an option -- not a choice for the 12 employees, then it's going to save money? 13 MR. LOONEY: Correct. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, to me, I'd almost like to 15 make that decision now, and then figure out which one of the 16 two we want -- is better to use. Because I think it's -- I 17 mean, I don't know if we want to vote on it. I mean, it 18 seems to me that that will take one whole discussion off the 19 table, and I think that makes sense, to me. 20 MR. LOONEY: Well, from the employee -- you know, 21 from the employees' point of view, obviously, based on the 22 summary that was completed, they prefer the P.P.O. network 23 plan. 24 MS. LANTZ: And by picking one plan, the County 25 will save approximately $77,000. If we go to two plans, 10-10-11 26 1 then -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think one is the way to go. 3 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Right. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think one. And, you know, 5 it seems to me like that the -- the HCAB or whatever you want 6 to call it, the card -- the benefit card would really come 7 into play. The deductibles would be the same, but they're 8 going to be 100 percent pay after that. 9 MR. LOONEY: As I understand the question, it's one 10 plan. So -- 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 12 MR. LOONEY: -- then we'd go into a further 13 discussion about the plans. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 15 MR. LOONEY: Does the Court need to vote on one 16 plan, or is that -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 18 MR. LOONEY: Is that a motion? 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion that we -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: At some point. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- that we only offer one plan, 22 and we'll decide which plan it is later today. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second to 10-10-11 27 1 offer one plan under the health benefits program. Question 2 or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right 3 hand. 4 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 6 (No response.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Okay, step two. 8 Which one? 9 MR. LOONEY: So, let's try and get as clear a 10 picture of how the two plans work as we can. I'll try to 11 make that as clear as I can. One of three things potentially 12 is going to happen to an employee during the year when they 13 have the health plan. You're either going to have minimal 14 claims, you're going to have moderate claims, or you're going 15 to have high claims. There's -- there's nothing in between, 16 other than zero claims. So if you have low claims, and the 17 total exposure for that employee for payment of those 18 expenses is under $500, which is the credit level for the 19 debit card, then the employee essentially would have no 20 out-of-pocket costs for their health care plan that year, 21 because they'd be reimbursed at 100 percent. Under the 22 P.P.O. plan, they would have the co-payments that would 23 generate, but that would be all family members that are 24 included in the plan, not just the employee. So, that would 25 be children going to pediatricians, spouses going to doctors; 10-10-11 28 1 they'd all fall under that $35 office visit, all fall under 2 the prescription drug plan. 3 So, one is more beneficial to the employees, 4 because potentially you're going to have employees that don't 5 have $500 of expense, and they will able to accumulate that 6 going forward toward expenses that may occur in future years, 7 because that $500 would increase in relationship to the 8 dollars not spent in that debit card. So, for a real 9 low-cost plan, you may have benefits from employees that have 10 minimal use under the high-deductible plan. It's that 11 moderate area that you're going to get into the greater 12 expense on. You're going to have co-payments, coinsurance, 13 and other physician co-pays under the P.P.O. plan. So, if 14 you have claims that are $10,000 or less, then what's going 15 to happen is the individual is going to be responsible -- 16 under the HRA -- under the HCA debit card plan, they'll be 17 responsible for up to $2,500, the net balance of the debit 18 card plus 100 percent of the expenses up to that $2,500 19 level, 'cause the $500 debit card does apply against the 20 $3,000 max. 'Cause that's a reimbursement function, so it 21 applies against that. 22 So, they end up with a $2,500 out of pocket max on 23 the employee. Now, for any dependents, they would still 24 include no co-payments for the doctor's office or anything 25 else; they would be responsible for those, so their 10-10-11 29 1 out-of-pocket expense could be much higher if they have 2 dependents covered. So, employee only, they're in pretty 3 good shape, because they've got a $2,500 deductible, 100 4 percent after that. If they're on the P.P.O. plan, they have 5 the co-pays that they've paid or out-of-pocket expense, the 6 co-pay. That doesn't apply against the maximum out-of-pocket 7 expense, only deductible items. And coinsurance items apply 8 against that, so they potentially then could accumulate 9 losses up to that $4,000 maximum out of pocket. And that, 10 again, though, would be for the individual employee, family 11 members, on that side of it. So, 4,000 max, but going along 12 to reach that, they've got co-payments, doctor office visits, 13 things that they don't have expenses for, that they would 14 under the P.P.O. plan. Does that... Okay, high claims. If 15 you get up over, you know, whatever number you get up over -- 16 JUDGE TINLEY: 25,000. 17 MR. LOONEY: Yeah, 25,000. You're going to have 18 4,000 out of pocket on one plan; you're going to have 2,500 19 out of pocket on the other plan. The big difference moving 20 forward is that on the HRA plan, it's 100 percent coverage 21 for all areas. If you have the P.P.O. plan, you're still 22 subject to co-payments, coinsurance -- not coinsurance, but 23 co-payments that would be subject to the plan. The biggest 24 differential in all of this is that the dependents currently 25 would not be covered under that HRA -- HCA reimbursement 10-10-11 30 1 debit card process. Now, the cost to put $500 into an 2 account for every employee is a pretty simple calculation; 3 260 employees, $500, is $130,000. And that -- that estimate 4 is on the -- on the sheet that you've seen. So -- 5 JUDGE TINLEY: What about the cost to go to the 6 P.P.O.? I realize you can't give us a total calculation 7 until you know what the exact enrollment is -- 8 MR. LOONEY: Well, the exact -- 9 JUDGE TINLEY: -- netted out of the premium, but -- 10 MR. LOONEY: If we're on one plan, the debit card 11 is not part of the P.P.O. plan at this point. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: I understand that. No, I'm talking 13 about the increased premium cost for the P.P.O. plan relative 14 to the -- to the debit card. 15 MR. LOONEY: Well, in relationship -- the $130,000 16 would be spent on premium, as opposed to being spent on the 17 accumulation side of it. So, taking that calculation into 18 consideration, not having that debit against the plan, then 19 you still have a premium savings under the P.P.O. network 20 plan based on what the total TAC premium is for selection of 21 one plan. And that number, I believe, is in the -- in the 22 sheet that we just handed out. 23 MS. LANTZ: It's in the first portion of it. 24 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: The 77,000? 25 MR. LOONEY: Well, that 77,000 was a differential 10-10-11 31 1 between the premium that was originally presented and what 2 the selection of one plan does. I think that our total net 3 budget savings at that point is -- it's -- 4 MS. HARGIS: 513. 5 MR. LOONEY: -- 513,000. 6 MS. LANTZ: On the P.P.O. 7 MR. LOONEY: On the P.P.O. network plan, assuming 8 no debit card is included. And that also makes the 9 assumption that we change the -- the premium requirement by 10 employees to include their dependents to the lower number. 11 So, there will be a significant savings to a number of 12 employees, particularly those that are covering families. 13 There'll be a $350 a month savings on premium for them to 14 move that premium to the current premium cost. 15 MR. HENNEKE: Would you say that again, Gary? 16 Would you say that again? 17 MR. LOONEY: For people that cover families -- for 18 people that have family coverage right now, under the base 19 plan, the premium is $450. It's $800 for those that are on 20 the P.P.O. network. So, if we move the $800 number to the 21 current 450, there will be a savings of $350 a month in 22 premium, 350 plus -- you know. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Say that one more time? 24 MR. LOONEY: If you get the $800 -- 25 MS. LANTZ: Basically, our premiums will stay the 10-10-11 32 1 same as they are right now with the basic plan. We will see 2 a significant difference if we go to the P.P.O. plan for 3 dependents. And what he's saying is a family coverage, 4 they're paying $800 right now for that family coverage. 5 Under the P.P.O., it will drop to 450, so 350 savings. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, deduct 450 under the HSA? 7 MR. LOONEY: No, under the P.P.O. plan. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, under the P.P.O. It's -- 9 MS. LANTZ: We're able to get that lower, but we 10 can't get it lower for the -- the $3,000. 11 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: We had 112, again, employees 12 in the county that liked the P.P.O. plan, surveyed? 13 MS. LANTZ: Yes. 176 total I got surveys. 14 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: So, 70 percent. 15 MS. LANTZ: And, basically, their concern was -- 16 most of those that -- and there's notes on there; I'd be 17 willing to give you that, but they're not going to the doctor 18 unless they have major issues and they've met their 19 deductible on the high cost. They're -- they're not going. 20 So -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's -- I wonder, did 22 they -- I mean, if you're not going to the doctor because of 23 the cost, it would seem that the -- I mean, the plan with the 24 HSA is beneficial, because it's 100 percent paid for, a 25 couple times a year. I mean, I wonder if -- I mean, I 10-10-11 33 1 presume they know what they're doing. You and I know; we're 2 back and forth a whole lot of times trying to make it clear. 3 MR. LOONEY: Yeah. I think the biggest fear is the 4 $3,000 number. That's the big -- that's the major fear, and 5 also the fact that the dependents -- you know, to put 6 dependents under the plan, since the HCA does not apply to 7 that dependent -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 9 MR. LOONEY: -- calculation, the concern is that we 10 have a lot of pediatric visits that we're paying 100 percent 11 of out of pocket. 12 MR. HENNEKE: Tough to hit that 3,000 -- that 13 number. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the family's even higher. 15 MR. HENNEKE: Yeah. 16 MR. LOONEY: For families -- 17 MR. HENNEKE: It's six. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 6,000. So that's a number that 19 they're going for. 20 MS. LANTZ: And that's what they're saying. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: If we go to the P.P.O. plan and we 22 lower the cost -- the premium cost to the employee for 23 children and family, I assume we're anticipating that the 24 enrollment for those dependents is going to increase? 25 MR. LOONEY: You know, if the selection is going to 10-10-11 34 1 weigh between spouse's coverage and employer coverage, then 2 the differentiator is going to be the amount of premium for 3 the plan design. The $2,000 deductible plan with $35 4 co-payment is a very beneficial plan, so you may have a 5 greater selection for participation in the plan. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Would you not expect that? 7 MR. LOONEY: Typically would expect some increase, 8 yes. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Now, that is going to 10 increase the cost to the county, because that's a subsidized 11 plan, obviously, for -- for dependents, is it not? 12 MR. LOONEY: It is subsidized for the dependents' 13 coverage. You're not increasing the employee population; 14 you're not hiring new employees, but those employees that are 15 currently not covering dependents may select to cover 16 dependents. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: I guess what I'm trying to arrive at 18 is what is a realistic figure of the additional costs to the 19 county over and above those that are participating for 20 coverage for dependents now? 21 MR. LOONEY: I'm going to -- you're testing memory 22 a little bit, Judge, but if I remember correctly, three, four 23 years ago, when we were the most beneficial plan in the area, 24 we were covering about 60 dependent units, and that would 25 have been distributed among the whole thing. And right now, 10-10-11 35 1 we're about -- let's see, 25 -- 2 MS. LANTZ: 53. 3 MR. LOONEY: 53. We're at 60, 65 dependents, so we 4 would increase maybe 10, 12 dependent units, not knowing 5 whether that was spouse -- a lot of the employees that are 6 single coverage now are going to cover their children. So, 7 that children rate, we don't expect a great deal of increase 8 in that. We may have some increase in that. The employee 9 and spouse will be a decision as to whether or not the 10 spouse's employer is better than the other employer. The 11 family rate, again, will be based on premium rate, and I 12 suspect that we will increase, but I would not -- my 13 projection would not be more than 10 or 12 units, not knowing 14 where they're going. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: So, not -- not a great increase in 16 cost, then. 17 MR. LOONEY: Well, if you're talking about the 18 subsidy piece of it, not the full employee contribution, it 19 would not -- I don't think it would be disastrous as far as 20 the plan is concerned. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, your recommendation is the 22 P.P.O. plan? You think -- 23 MR. LOONEY: That's the overall employee 24 recommendation. 25 MS. LANTZ: What I've heard from the employees. 10-10-11 36 1 You know, if it doesn't work, next year is a whole new ball 2 game; you go back to the 3,000. I mean, I just -- 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Bottom line is, if you've got a -- 4 if you don't have a lot of medical issues, particularly as to 5 the employee, the P.P.O. plan is much better. But if you got 6 a major claim -- 7 MR. LOONEY: If you're a single employee and you 8 have one or two visits a year that are less than that $500 9 debit card, then your plan's 100 percent paid for. If you 10 have no visits -- if you're like this gentleman right here 11 and you never go to the doctor -- right? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: He hates needles. 13 MR. LOONEY: If you never go to the doctor, until 14 he's forced to, which may be two or three years down the 15 road, then that $500 accumulates for him and goes forward -- 16 moves forward, so that eventually that will be able to reduce 17 that $3,000 deductible by up to 50 percent, to make it 1,500. 18 That's the max that it's allowed to go. So, if you don't use 19 it at all, then the potential for building up in that HCA is 20 substantial. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: But if you have a major health issue 22 and you accumulate bills of 25,000 or more, which is not -- 23 not too hard to do nowadays, -- 24 MR. LOONEY: You're going to be -- 25 JUDGE TINLEY: -- you've got a cost share going up 10-10-11 37 1 with you. 2 MR. LOONEY: You got a $2,500 -- you know, 2,500 3 max on one, 4,000 on the other, and you've got the 4 co-payments that go forward. I think the biggest 5 differentiating process in this whole process is going to be 6 in the dependent area. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 8 MR. LOONEY: Where you've got a substantial cost 9 for dependents, because you have no offsetting debit card. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: So, essentially what you're saying 11 is if the Court, as a matter of policy, wants to emphasize 12 dependent coverage, we can do that by the P.P.O. If we -- 13 MR. LOONEY: You're already subsidizing -- 14 JUDGE TINLEY: -- want not to, but rather focus on 15 the employee, we go the other direction. Essentially, that's 16 where we are. You had a question? 17 MR. BARTON: Well, I think this last year, with the 18 current plan that we have, what was deceiving to a lot of 19 employees was the preventive part, like where they encourage 20 you to go get a colonoscopy done, but when you went and did 21 that, if they found anything they were curious about, which, 22 at least in my experience, they generally do, it now became 23 diagnostic and not preventive, and you got stuck with the 24 whole bill, as opposed to being preventive. And I think it 25 discouraged -- at least from the people I talked to, they 10-10-11 38 1 were afraid to go get preventive stuff done, because they 2 were afraid it would, you know, get termed as diagnostic and 3 they would get stuck with the whole bill. I will tell you, 4 personally, after the major surgery I had, I was delighted we 5 had the $3,000 deductible, because I'd still be paying on it. 6 Methodist is charging over $4,000 a night for a room, so one 7 night in a hospital can offset that deductible tremendously. 8 But I understand there's a lot of employees who never have to 9 go to the doctor. But I do know that the preventive part 10 that we had under this current plan was deceiving to those 11 people who ran out to get these preventive maintenance checks 12 done, and they got screwed, for lack of a better term, in the 13 process. 14 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Mr. Barton, I was one of 15 those gentlemen along with you. Same thing happened to me. 16 MR. BARTON: They all said they got stuck with 17 these bills. 18 MS. LANTZ: That's what's happening. That's why 19 they're not even going to get preventive. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. I think a lot of that can be 21 resolved by proper communication -- 22 MR. BARTON: I hope this year -- 23 JUDGE TINLEY: -- with physicians that -- 24 MR. BARTON: -- they let us know what's preventive 25 and -- 10-10-11 39 1 MS. LANTZ: Exactly. 2 MR. BARTON: -- what's not. It all sounds good to 3 go get a check-up. "We're going to pay for you to go get a 4 check-up to make sure you're healthy, in good shape, but if 5 they find anything wrong, we're not going to pay for it." 6 And people just aren't going to go. That's just -- 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all are not going to get 8 into your colonoscopies here, are you? (Laughter.) 9 MR. BARTON: I'm through with mine. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: We're going to talk about yours, 11 though. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well -- 13 MS. LANTZ: I think -- 14 MR. LOONEY: You're not supposed to enjoy those. 15 MS. LANTZ: -- the more -- I think that P.P.O. will 16 guide as they go in for their initial -- or if you're sick 17 and you're already in, it's not going to -- 18 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Right. 19 MS. LANTZ: -- do anything to that preventive you 20 still need to have done. 21 MR. LOONEY: The problem with that is that we have 22 to try to reeducate our community of physicians. Because in 23 the past, for them to get paid for certain tasks of that 24 sort, it had to be medically necessary. So, by using a 25 "medically necessary" definition for reimbursement, they had 10-10-11 40 1 to find something or it wasn't paid for. So, now we've 2 changed the rules and all the coding and everything and said, 3 "Okay, now it's preventive, and it will be paid for." So you 4 have to code it in this methodology to be able to be 5 reimbursed by the -- by the insurance companies. So, it all 6 -- it's all in this little seven-digit code that they submit 7 on that master bill. And if they say, "Okay, we found 8 something," with the assumption we're going to get paid for 9 it, then that's what they do. So, it's almost retraining 10 these people in the office and saying, hey... You know, the 11 other thing is, we really don't want them to start finding 12 things that are unnecessary, because that becomes part of the 13 medical record, and all of a sudden you've got a history of 14 some sort of problem that they put in there to be paid, and 15 it doesn't exist, because you're fine. So, you know, those 16 -- trying to get that mentality turned around and changed to 17 where they understand that billing process, we have to go 18 back quite often and say, "Look, did you get your coding 19 straight?" 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then, on the other hand, 21 we have one employee that I know of with a spouse that meets 22 that $3,000 within a couple of months, first couple of months 23 of the year, and they're set. I can't imagine what their 24 bills would be without that. You can't imagine it. 25 MR. LOONEY: You know, that -- there would be four 10-10-11 41 1 under the P.P.O. You know, if they've got that -- 2 MR. BARTON: They still have the 20 percent. On 3 the 80/20 plan, you'd still be paying 20 percent. 4 MR. LOONEY: Well, you pay 20 percent until such 5 time as you accumulate excess losses up to 4,000. 6 MR. BARTON: Okay. 7 MR. LOONEY: It's not $4,000 in billings; it's 8 $4,000 -- 9 MR. BARTON: Out of pocket. 10 MR. LOONEY: -- in out-of-pocket expenses. 11 MR. HENNEKE: Well, Dawn, did you get a sense of 12 why the survey results came out the way they did? 13 MS. LANTZ: Higher? 14 MR. HENNEKE: Well, the preference, whatever. 15 MS. LANTZ: My feeling is, is they're not going to 16 the doctor, and they see that co-pay as they can go to the 17 doctor. It's not preventive, you know. Several have issues, 18 and they won't go to the doctor because they -- they can't 19 use it as preventive. Once they get in there, then they have 20 to pay full cost and have to go back and get more tests run, 21 and I think they see that co-pay as they can go, be 22 diagnosed, and then work it out from there, where they're not 23 having to cover up that -- 24 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: You go to a doctor; the 25 doctor has a $190 bill. They can't afford $190, and so they 10-10-11 42 1 pay 35. That's basically -- they're not going to go until 2 they can afford it. 3 MR. HENNEKE: It's more than a dependent issue on 4 the preference of the employees? 5 MS. LANTZ: Yes. It's not just -- 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The thing is, if you use the 7 $500 HRA card, you hope if they had that, as -- as opposed to 8 a co-pay, they'd be able to use that for those visits. 9 MR. LOONEY: Up until such time -- 10 MS. LANTZ: Until they meet their -- 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, you know, they use up the 12 $500, and then they have to start paying out of pocket. 13 MR. LOONEY: Doesn't take a whole lot to reach 14 $500. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I know. 16 MS. LANTZ: You may go twice and you've met it, 17 that's it. And then they go, "Oh, by the way, you need to 18 have all this MRI..." -- you know, whatever else it is, and 19 then you're still -- 20 MS. PIEPER: We were told you couldn't use that 21 card with the doctor's visit, though. 22 MS. LANTZ: That was -- 23 MR. LOONEY: Not on co-payment -- for reimbursement 24 of co-payments. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But you can use it against 10-10-11 43 1 the doctor's bill when there's no co-payment. 2 MR. LOONEY: Right. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Use that $500 to pay that to 4 start with. 5 MS. LANTZ: So, if your bill's 250 or 300 and you 6 go in there towards your deductible, it will come off of 7 that, but the co-pay -- if the doctor wants a co-pay, you 8 can't apply it towards the co-pay. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Jones? 10 MR. JONES: One thing I think you're leaving out 11 here is pharmacy, which is a frequently used situation by 12 both dependents and by employees. And you can use that $500 13 in pharmacy real quick, whereas if you have a co-pay in 14 pharmacy, you're more likely to have people get on that and 15 take what they need in order to get better. 16 MS. LANTZ: Correct. And that's -- that's what 17 their prescription card is on the P.P.O. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, I think -- I 20 mean, it seems like it makes sense, you know, to go to the 21 P.P.O. plan this year. We can always add -- next year you 22 could add an H -- you said HRA; I think it's HSA? 23 MR. LOONEY: HCA or HSA. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whatever. We could add one of 25 those next year, if we can afford it, to the P.P.O. plan. 10-10-11 44 1 So, it seems -- I mean, the first step seems to be to go with 2 the P.P.O. plan this year, so I'll make a motion that we go 3 with the P.P.O. plan. 4 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: I'll second. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not sure I understand 6 this. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to -- for 8 the one plan, to approve the P.P.O. plan as presented. Do we 9 have any further question or discussion? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you go over the P.P.O. plan 11 one more time? 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, so I can be sure 13 I understand it well enough to talk about it. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think I understand it. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think I do, but I want to 16 be sure. 17 MS. LANTZ: On that second sheet that's provided -- 18 the first one is actually the co-pay P.P.O., and the second 19 one is the high deductible. That kind of gives you a little 20 bit of what the costs would cost you -- or what out of 21 pocket -- 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is the one that's $4,000 23 total out of pocket? 24 MR. LOONEY: Right. 25 MS. LANTZ: Yes. 10-10-11 45 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: As opposed to 3,000 on the 2 deductible -- 3 MR. LOONEY: Right. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: On the other plan. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: That's for the individual, now. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, I understand that. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm -- I'm with you on that 9 one. 10 MS. HARGIS: Dawn, didn't you say there was more 11 wellness products in this as well? 12 MS. LANTZ: There's also -- and that was the other 13 thing TAC had mentioned. They do have a wellness program 14 that they can include in this P.P.O. plan at no charge, and 15 it's just getting someone here to get us signed up. And 16 that's also going to be presented when they do come in. And, 17 you know, especially with people with diabetes, there's 18 several different ways of getting those costs down and to 19 keep those costs down as far as using the plans. So, their 20 goal is to promote wellness within. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 22 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Okay. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If I were going to purchase 25 this just on my own, I would go to the high deductible 10-10-11 46 1 because of the long-term look at it. But the employees have 2 chosen P.P.O. I'll go along with that. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it also gives some emphasis to 4 family. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Spouse, children. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what it's all about. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. Any other questions or 9 comments? All in favor of the motion to adopt a single plan 10 as a P.P.O. plan, signify by raising your right hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. And the $20,000 -- 15 MR. LOONEY: Right. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: -- employer-funded insurance cost 17 with the AD&D rider? 18 MR. LOONEY: We were able to get that reduced down 19 to 14 cents -- it would save about $2,000, I think, per 20 year -- or -- yeah, I think our projection was $12,000 a 21 year. Now it's projected actually 9,000 and something 22 dollars, with ING. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Two or three thousand dollars a 24 year, that's pretty good. 25 MR. LOONEY: Trying to pay Commissioner Baldwin's 10-10-11 47 1 deductible for him, if I can. (Laughter.) 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. Thank you very 3 much. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other -- any other items 5 that we need to hear from you folks about on our health 6 benefits? 7 MR. LOONEY: Well, I -- we are planning at this 8 point for the enrollment time frame for the first week in 9 November. 10 MS. LANTZ: Yes, November. 11 MR. LOONEY: In November at this point. Which 12 we'll have documents, Judge, that we'll have to have signed, 13 the application providers and processes that we go through 14 with insurance companies. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: I assume the adoption of the plan 16 included my ability to sign the appropriate documents with 17 TAC and with ING to commit the County to the selection the 18 Court made today? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If I'd have made that 20 motion, all that would have been said. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I said it, I thought. 22 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: I thought that was included 23 in it. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I heard that. Now, what 25 about the -- the issues that she just brought up, the 10-10-11 48 1 preventive side of it? When do they come and tell us about 2 that? 3 MS. LANTZ: November, -- 4 MR. LOONEY: Enrollment. 5 MS. LANTZ: -- we're actually going to have Blue 6 Cross and Blue Shield here. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that an individual -- an 8 individual decision? 9 MR. LOONEY: It's not mandatory. 10 MS. LANTZ: It's not mandatory. 11 MR. LOONEY: It's not mandatory. 12 MS. LANTZ: It's something that's within -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You hang in there with that, 14 pal. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Question. Is Ms. Lantz absorbing 16 everything you're throwing at her? 17 MR. LOONEY: Yeah. I hope -- yes, ma'am -- sir. 18 (Laughter.) Yes, ma'am. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She's turning red; look at 20 that. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We ought to get a shot of 22 that. 23 MR. LOONEY: Thank you very much. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. We appreciate it. 25 Okay, got that one out of the way. Let's go to our 9:30 10-10-11 49 1 timed item, Item 5; open bids for electrical, plumbing, HVAC, 2 and pest control to give to Maintenance Supervisor for review 3 and recommendation. 4 (Low-voice discussion off the record.) 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's afraid I'm going to have a 6 safety accident up here. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: First bid we have is from Foss Pest 8 Control, on pest control services only, it appears. Next one 9 is from Goss Pest Control for pest control services. Next 10 one is from Airtech A/C and Heating. I assume it's on HVAC 11 -- mm-hmm. And the last one is from D.W. Electric, on 12 electrical. That's it, Commissioner? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Do I hear a motion that 15 these bids be referred to the Maintenance Supervisor for 16 review and recommendation? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Question 20 or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right 21 hand. 22 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 24 (No response.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Do I need to file 10-10-11 50 1 these through you? Probably do. Okay. Let's go to Item 4; 2 to consider, discuss, take appropriate action to approve the 3 official bond and oath of Faye E. (Beth) Taylor for the 4 office of Chief Deputy Treasurer. 5 MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, I believe y'all have the -- 6 Judge, you have the bond up there? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, I do. In reviewing the bond, 8 however, I note that the obligee on the bond is incorrect, 9 and also the condition of the bond is not exactly stated as 10 required by statute. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What was the first one? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: The obligee. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is an obligee? 14 JUDGE TINLEY: The person to whom the -- to whose 15 benefit the bond runs. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And where is that on here? 17 JUDGE TINLEY: The -- it says, "bound unto County 18 of Kerr." The obligee should be the County Judge, by 19 statute. 20 MS. PIEPER: I believe all of that is being 21 corrected. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Second one on there, the 23 condition of the bond, it states, "faithfully perform the 24 duties of the office." The statute says "execute" the duties 25 of office. 10-10-11 51 1 MS. PIEPER: Judge, can we just table this until we 2 make sure that this is being corrected? 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, we can come back to it if it's 4 being reworked. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It should say "faithfully 6 execute the office" or just -- or just say "execute"? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Local Government Code 83.002 gives 8 the language needed for the conditions of the bond and the 9 obligee on the bond. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought there was 11 something about that that didn't look quite right. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Well, you mentioned it to me 13 and told me to take a close look at it. 14 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Sharp-eyes Baldwin. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to Item 8, which is 16 a 10 o'clock timed item; consider, discuss, take appropriate 17 action on a request from Kerrville Main Street to use the 18 courthouse grounds for the Holiday Roundup on November 19th, 19 2011. 20 MR. RAIN: Good morning. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. 22 MR. RAIN: I'm Scott Rain. I'm a board member of 23 the Kerrville Main Street Advisory Board, and I'm here today 24 to ask permission to use the courthouse grounds. I believe 25 this would be our fourth annual Holiday Roundup. I think the 10-10-11 52 1 first two years we had it on Earl Garrett, and I think last 2 year we moved it over to the courthouse, where the Trade 3 Days -- kind of set up like the Trade Days. This year it 4 will be on the 19th, which is a Saturday, before the 5 courthouse lighting ceremony, before the parade before the 6 courthouse lighting ceremony. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Which occurs immediately after 8 Thanksgiving. 9 MR. RAIN: Yeah, which -- actually, before 10 Thanksgiving this year. So I think our -- our event will 11 start setting up around 9 a.m., and we'll have it broken down 12 by about 6:00, at which time the parade comes through, and 13 then immediately after the parade, the holiday lighting. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You want to do this pretty 15 bad, don't you? 16 MR. RAIN: Yes, sir. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to negotiate my cow 18 chip championship -- 19 MR. RAIN: We're working -- 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- trophy; I'd like to keep 21 that trophy. You don't know what that means to me and my 22 family. 23 MR. RAIN: Okay. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: That's not until January. 25 MR. RAIN: I'll put it on the list. 10-10-11 53 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Isn't this the same one? 2 MR. RAIN: Actually, we actually had -- last year, 3 we did have a cow chip -- but it's not the big one that is in 4 January. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Not the world -- 6 MR. RAIN: Not the world. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Not the world championship. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought this was the same 9 one. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: You'll have some more training time. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's a daily deal, not like 12 something you just pick up, a seasonal sport or something. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, I understand. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not for sissies. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: What all do you guys plan on doing? 16 MR. RAIN: Similar to last year. We have some food 17 booths; we have some games. It's basically a family event 18 for -- for children. We have a lot of booths that have 19 Christmas card decorations and various games and that kind of 20 thing. Kind of draws people downtown for the whole day. 21 Come down for that event, and then the parade and then the 22 holiday lighting. 23 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: How was it attended last 24 year? 25 MR. RAIN: It was well attended last year. 10-10-11 54 1 Actually, moving it over to the courthouse seemed to work a 2 lot better. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: We want the citizens to use their 4 courthouse. 5 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: That's right. 6 MR. RAIN: We would love for that to happen. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only thing I'd request is that 8 you work with Maintenance because of all the -- and the 9 Christmas lighting folks, just to make sure we're not 10 interfering, with people tripping over -- 11 MR. RAIN: Okay. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- all that stuff. 13 MR. RAIN: I know last year, there were some 14 concerns about the sound. We're working on that, which may 15 help with some of the cords and -- 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 17 MR. RAIN: -- and some of the tripping issues. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Make sure that everyone's -- 19 MR. RAIN: I think last year it was pretty well 20 attended. We're hoping to do the same this year. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: And you've got arrangements for 22 clean-up? 23 MR. RAIN: We will. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 25 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: That's lastly organized. 10-10-11 55 1 MR. RAIN: I didn't have that one on the list, but 2 I'm sure -- 3 JUDGE TINLEY: If you were in the army, you 4 remember the old -- remember the old adage, leave the place 5 better than you found it. 6 MR. RAIN: Yes, sir. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Joel can identify with that, can't 8 you? 9 MR. GONZALES: Yes, sir. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 13 approval. Question or discussion? All in favor, signify by 14 raising your right hand. 15 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Thank you, Scott. 19 Appreciate you being here. 20 MR. RAIN: Thank you very much. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 7; to consider, 22 discuss, take appropriate action on the Reducing Adult 23 Potentially Preventable Hospitalizations grant offered by the 24 Texas Department of State Health Services. I put this on the 25 agenda to let Ms. Lavender give you guys a short update on 10-10-11 56 1 where we are on that particular grant program. Ms. Lavender? 2 MS. LAVENDER: Good morning. In last year -- last 3 spring's legislative session, the Legislature appropriated 4 about $2 million to implement an initiative to reduce these 5 potentially preventable hospitalizations, and it's actually 6 about a year and nine month period of time that the grant 7 works for, and they identified 92 counties in the state of 8 Texas. And there's a list of these different diseases that 9 they're going to fund programs for, but Kerr County only 10 qualified for one of them, and that's the bacterial pneumonia 11 deal. And to qualify, it's where you have more than 50 12 percent of the state's average of people who are hospitalized 13 for that particular disease. And some counties qualified for 14 diabetes, and some for C.O.P.D., and some for heart and so 15 forth, so it's kind of a wide range of them. Kerr County's 16 only above 50 percent on bacterial pneumonia. 17 And so we got a letter back in September, the Judge 18 did. He passed it on to Dawn and I, and Dawn worked on it 19 while I was otherwise occupied, and then when I got back, she 20 passed it on to me. We've kind of formed a little consortium 21 of people with Peterson Regional Medical Center, Dietert 22 Center, the Texas AgriLife Extension, and Kerr County and the 23 Department of Health office here. And through e-mail and 24 discussion, we've talked about several ways to do it, but we 25 went ahead and filled out the paperwork, and the Judge signed 10-10-11 57 1 it. It had to be in by the 3rd of October, and so we assumed 2 that you all would -- 3 JUDGE TINLEY: That was the actual intent. 4 MS. LAVENDER: Yeah, our intent to apply for the 5 funds. And then I haven't heard back yet from the Department 6 of State Health Services, but I assume that we will at least 7 get into the mix of it. But they'll provide $50,000 -- 8 $25,000 each year -- for us to use. There's two real goals 9 in it that I see, and that we as the group had talked about. 10 One is education. You need to educate the population about 11 the disease itself, and the -- the problems that are created 12 through that, that end up -- people end up in the hospital. 13 And, of course, in Kerr County, because of our large 14 retirement population, the -- the incidence among those 15 people above the age of 65 is -- is the highest number, but 16 the American Medical Association has issued a bulletin 17 recommending that anyone over the age of 50 have the 18 bacterial pneumonia vaccination. And we have a large 19 population of people that are between the age of 50 and 65 20 who are not yet qualified for Medicare. Medicare actually 21 pays for the vaccine, but the 50 to 65 people that may be 22 either uninsured or not have benefits that would cover it 23 would be our target population. And then anyone over the age 24 of 18 that would be an at-risk type person would be our -- 25 our target group. 10-10-11 58 1 We talked about different ways of being able to do 2 it. Part of the program is to provide vaccinations, and the 3 bigger part of the program and the more important is the 4 education part of it, not only to the general population, but 5 also to the target population, so that we can convince them 6 how important it is to get the vaccination. You can only be 7 vaccinated every five years, is the minimum. You can't do it 8 within a five-year period, but they recommend, actually, that 9 you wait longer than five years. So, we're not sure -- we 10 don't have any statistics to show how many in that target 11 area there are, but that's our plan. I talked to the local 12 vendor who does provide vaccinations already, and it looks 13 like our best bet is for us to apply. Nobody can apply 14 except the county. But it looks good. It looks like it 15 would be better for us to apply for the funds and let them do 16 the actual vaccinations, and then we would pay out of those 17 funds for anyone who did not have medical insurance to cover 18 them. And -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is your target population 20 required to take the -- 21 MS. LAVENDER: No. No. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. For some reason, I 23 thought I heard you say that. 24 MS. LAVENDER: Governor Perry got into that. I 25 don't think -- 10-10-11 59 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Excuse me? 2 MS. LAVENDER: I said Governor Perry learned that 3 lesson, -- 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not Governor Perry. 5 MS. LAVENDER: -- so I don't think we're going to 6 require anyone to take a vaccination. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I misunderstood you; I 8 thought I heard you say that. 9 MS. LAVENDER: No, we would offer it to them. 10 Actually, the vaccination is about $60 if you go in and buy 11 it out of your own pocket. And -- 12 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Do you see a lot of our older 13 population -- I know everybody takes our flu shots annually, 14 but that -- that sector, that age, do they follow up and go 15 ahead -- if they can afford it, they go ahead and get the 16 pneumonia shot? 17 MS. LAVENDER: If they have the funds, they 18 probably do, but I don't know about the 50 to 65 group -- 19 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Yeah. 20 MS. LAVENDER: -- at all. But I've talked to 21 several local physicians, and they think that this is 22 probably a pretty good idea for us to do, if we can cut down 23 on hospital stays for people. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Heck, yeah. 25 MS. LAVENDER: I think it would be good for us, and 10-10-11 60 1 good for the community to do this. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Since it's bacterial, it reduces the 3 risk to the rest of the community. 4 MS. LAVENDER: Right. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: And no co-pay. 6 MS. LAVENDER: No co-pay. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: I mean, no -- no matching funds are 8 required. 9 MS. LAVENDER: Right. All of it's a reimbursable 10 deal. We'd have to initially pay for it and then file for 11 reimbursement, just like we do with a lot of our other stuff. 12 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Okay. 13 MS. LAVENDER: So I would ask that you, I guess, 14 approve the fact that we submitted this -- the beginning of 15 the paperwork, and that we continue with the process of 16 getting this. 17 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: I'll make a motion to accept 18 the process for this preventable health benefit grant for the 19 county. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion made and seconded 22 for approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the -- when will we hear 24 back? 25 MS. LAVENDER: I don't have any idea. The program 10-10-11 61 1 actually starts January 1st, so it will be within, you know, 2 the next few weeks. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'll look at the actual 4 details and -- 5 MS. LAVENDER: Right. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- accept or not accept? 7 MS. LAVENDER: Right, we'd always have the option 8 not to accept. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: I assume the motion includes my 10 ability to sign any documents that may be required -- 11 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Yes. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: -- to go forward? 13 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: That would be in that motion. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. All right. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To go forward, but not -- but 16 the grant comes back to the Court. 17 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: We'll come back and review 18 it. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. All in favor, signify by 20 raising your right hand. 21 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 22 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 23 (No response.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 25 MS. LAVENDER: Thank you. 10-10-11 62 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 9; to consider, 2 discuss, take appropriate action to authorize County Attorney 3 to accept payment by credit card for a fee, fine, court cost, 4 or other charge pursuant to Texas Local Government Code 5 Section 132.002. 6 MR. HENNEKE: Gentlemen, good morning. This is the 7 same authority that the clerk's offices have in accepting 8 credit card payments. The County Attorney's office receives 9 payments as hot check restitution for individuals that have 10 committed those crimes, and this is another tool that I feel 11 would be useful in being able to collect more restitution. 12 The statute allows for us to charge a fee on top of that. 13 I'm not going to charge any fee; I think just being able to 14 accept credit cards is sufficient enough, although there'll 15 be a merchant fee that's generated. It's going to be the 16 same setup, as I understand, Jannett and Linda have, but the 17 Local Government Code requires that I have approval from the 18 Court before doing so. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 approval. Question or discussion? All in favor, signify by 23 raising your right hand. 24 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10-10-11 63 1 (No response.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to 3 Item 10; to consider, discuss, take appropriate action on 4 authorizing a survey for all properties associated with Lions 5 Park in Center Point, Texas. Approval of that survey work 6 will assist in identifying the metes and bounds of property 7 in order to assist future improvements in the park. 8 Completed survey would assist Kerr County in working with 9 organizations and citizens in the Center Point community for 10 future park improvements. Commissioner Overby? 11 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Judge, Commissioners, I have 12 this as an agenda item on our docket this morning just to 13 look at. As you know, we talked about doing a survey earlier 14 in the year at Center Point Lions Park. You know, over the 15 last several months we've had several organizations who are 16 wanting to do some things to enhance the park. I'm glad to 17 hear that the Friends of the Center Point organization has 18 been organized. There have been some other folks who -- 19 there's been a lot of interest in the park and having a 20 survey done. The reason why we need to have a survey done 21 is, as we look at potentially looking at doing some other 22 things in the park like signage, restrooms, potentially, sand 23 volleyball court, something like that down the road, we need 24 to have a survey to identify the metes and bounds of the park 25 so we can have that. 10-10-11 64 1 Through the last couple of months, also, we have 2 found out that the property owner who owns the property next 3 to the park is wanting to get his part identified as well. 4 So, there may be an opportunity through the survey process, 5 if we can have approval for that, that we might be able to 6 work with him, and maybe we can get a -- a better rate as far 7 as our part getting done. So, I know that we have some folks 8 here today that are -- some of the members of the Friends 9 that might want to speak on that, but we really need to get a 10 survey so that we can move forward next year and working with 11 those organizations to see what we can do to help the park. 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is that a motion? 13 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: It is a motion. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I second. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 16 approval. Question or discussion? Mr. Gonzales, you filed a 17 participation form. 18 MR. GONZALES: Yes, sir. May I let Mr. Brian speak 19 before me? 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. Brian Wright also filed one. 21 Are you going to defer to him, Mr. Gonzales? 22 MR. GONZALES: Well, I want to see what he's going 23 to say, and then I'll take it after that. 24 MR. WRIGHT: Didn't sound like much of a deferral, 25 did it? Good morning, gentlemen. Appreciate your time this 10-10-11 65 1 morning. Brian Wright, Center Point. I had a little bit 2 more sleep this time than I had last time so -- which I 3 certainly enjoy. Basically, we'd like to thank the 4 Commissioners for considering this. I think it is a very 5 good step forward, and not only mending fences in the 6 community over Lions Park, but also to make it to where we 7 can go forward in the future to try and do some improvements 8 in working with the County Commissioners, and we're looking 9 forward to it. So, as a friend -- as a member of the Friends 10 of Center Point, Texas, I appreciate you guys doing this, and 11 I hope that it will certainly go forward. As a member of the 12 community, I think it's really important also. So, you know, 13 I would certainly appreciate that. And, Buster, I hope you 14 get out of here soon, 'cause as soon as I get finished with 15 this, I'm going to go make some smoke. So, thank you, 16 gentlemen. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, okay. Good. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Gonzales? 19 MR. GONZALES: Again, thank you, Commissioners, for 20 looking at this. It's very important for all the people, as 21 Brian mentioned, of Center Point. I'd like to just read 22 something, an article that we dug out. This comes -- goes 23 back to on this date on the 29th day of May, 1959, came on to 24 consider the acceptance of $300 from the Lion's Club for the 25 Commissioner of Precinct Number 2 as part payment of the 10-10-11 66 1 construction of restrooms/bathing facilities on county 2 property at Center Point. The -- the Court unanimously 3 approved this donation upon motion duly made by Commissioner 4 Bartel, seconded by Commissioner Stone, and the Commissioner 5 of Precinct 2 proceeded with the construction on these 6 buildings. We've had -- that's what we wanted to do, is -- 7 we've had buildings on that property before, and that's just 8 proof that we've had them. 9 And I thank y'all for this survey. We need it bad. 10 You know, there's always people crossing to the next person's 11 property. We don't know where the boundaries are at or 12 anything like that. This is going to help us as to where we 13 start building something. You always wanted the property 14 lines, and we want to get them, and that is great. It's -- 15 it's just big. You know, to clear out that property where 16 our bathrooms are at, we need the -- you know, right now our 17 bathrooms are back to where they were at, at the tree line. 18 You know, people using the bathrooms in the tree line. You 19 know, we want to let them know, don't use the bathroom on 20 that side of the tree line; we want you to use the bathroom 21 on this side of the tree line. 22 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Yes. 23 MR. GONZALES: Because our bathrooms -- and that's 24 the honest God's truth, but we want them to know, over there 25 you're trespassing. Don't use the bathroom over there; use 10-10-11 67 1 the bathroom over here, okay? 2 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: That's right. 3 MR. GONZALES: So, I want to thank y'all for that, 4 and that's just the beginning of that. And hopefully we can 5 get our port-a-potties back, 'cause people do miss them very 6 bad. It's not a busy summer season any more, but we still 7 have the snowbirds that come down and visit. I've talked to 8 people from Michigan that are already down here; they're 9 wanting the pecans. They're not ready yet, so -- 'cause we 10 got a pecan tree down there that's -- you know, they just 11 love, and these people have been coming down here for years. 12 I think it's 15 years that they've come down here, and they 13 camp out over here, but they love our river over here. And, 14 you know, the bathrooms is the main thing that they talk 15 about. "Hey, where's the bathrooms at?" We love the 16 property; we don't have bathrooms. So -- but anyway, we 17 thank you, you know, for getting this survey done, and as 18 soon as possible. And we'll get back with y'all, 'cause we 19 want to have the best little park in Texas. Not number two, 20 number one. Thank y'all. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Gonzales. Anybody 22 else wish to be heard on this item? We have a motion. 23 Further question or discussion on the motion? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, do we know -- do we 25 know how much it's going to cost? 10-10-11 68 1 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Our estimated cost that we 2 had earlier in the year was 1,500 that would need to come out 3 of our Parks line item that we have. But I'm hoping through 4 our discussion with the gentleman that's next door, maybe 5 that we can get that reduced 20 percent. I'm not sure; I'm 6 going to see -- 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Get his participation to handle 8 that? 9 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Get his participation, yeah. 10 I'm going to see what we can do. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mrs. Auditor, Parks is the 12 place where that money comes from? Okay, das gut. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? 14 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 15 hand. 16 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 17 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 18 (No response.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to 20 Item 11; to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on 21 request from the Hill Country District Junior Livestock 22 Association to close Riverside Drive and put 23 port-a-potties -- there you go, Mr. Gonzales -- at Flat Rock 24 Lake Park during the 2012 stock show. Commissioner Oehler? 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I put this on at the request 10-10-11 69 1 of the Stock Show Association. And the way it worked last 2 year on the port-a-potties, we got them authorized to be 3 placed there. They reimbursed us for the cost for those two 4 days. But it's much easier for us to do it because of the -- 5 the floodplain permit that has to be issued, at a cost -- if 6 they had it done, it would have cost them $400. And so we 7 can circumvent that expense by us getting the floodplain 8 permit and getting the fee waived, and then placing the 9 potties there, and they pay us back. And they've also 10 requested that we close Riverside Drive during the stock 11 show. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Which we have -- 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We did last year. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It worked out real well for 16 them. Y'all have any comments you want to make? 17 MR. BAUER: Commissioner, we'd also like to ask 18 that they include the park. You have the drive there, but 19 the park also be included in that. That's where we stage the 20 trailers during the show. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We'll have to do that in a 22 separate meeting, because I didn't realize, but that's no 23 problem. 24 MR. BAUER: Okay, thank you. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We won't close the park; we'll 10-10-11 70 1 just give you ability to store all the trailers in it. If 2 people want to use it, they still can. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: You've never encountered a problem 4 of having adequate space to put those trailers, based on my 5 recollection. There's -- you got a bunch of them down there; 6 seems like there's plenty of room left. 7 MR. REEVES: It's not only parking the trailers 8 after they're unloaded, but the staging of them for an area 9 to get up to the show grounds so we don't clog up 27 or the 10 part of Riverside Drive that's not closed. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 12 MR. REEVES: That is -- that's how we did it last 13 year, was the trucks and trailers initially come down to the 14 park, and then we release so many to the show grounds at a 15 time. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: So, the agenda item would need to 17 include an addition to the parking of the -- of the trailers, 18 and also utilize Flat Rock Park as a staging area for -- for 19 delivery of animals? 20 MR. REEVES: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 22 MR. REEVES: Last year all of that was available to 23 us from basically 12:01 of the Thursday of our stock show 24 week, through -- I think it said something like 8 o'clock 25 Saturday morning. That gives time for -- 'cause we don't 10-10-11 71 1 know when everything gets out, and that was -- we didn't 2 figure anybody would be down there after midnight, anyway. 3 But -- 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 5 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Anyway, I think we'll have to 6 do that at the next meeting to authorize that. The agenda 7 item doesn't allow for that. That's my fault, I guess. I 8 move for approval. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 11 approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in 12 favor, 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: That motion does carry. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What was the time on the -- 18 you said 12:01 Thursday? 19 MR. REEVES: Which would be the 19th. And if we 20 could have it until 8 a.m. Saturday, the 21st. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: All right. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: You're not going to need it for any 23 of the sale? 24 MR. REEVES: We have adequate parking during the 25 sale, Your Honor. It's just the day of the district arrival, 10-10-11 72 1 and then the day of the district show. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. He'll bring that back 3 as a separate item, then. Okay. Why don't we take about a 4 15-minute recess. 5 (Recess taken from 10:30 a.m. to 10:50 a.m.) 6 - - - - - - - - - - 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if 8 we might. Let's go to Item 6; to consider, discuss, take 9 appropriate action to award bids on electrical, plumbing, 10 HVAC, and pest control services. 11 MR. BOLLIER: You ready? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Bollier? Yeah. 13 MR. BOLLIER: My recommendation, since I only have 14 one for air-conditioners, is Airtech. And my other 15 recommendation is D.W. -- for electric is D.W. Electric, 16 since I only had one. And then my recommendation for pest 17 control is going to be Goss. They were -- there was $500 18 difference there between -- I said Goss? -- yeah, Goss should 19 receive the bid, because there's $500 difference between him 20 and Foss. And since we didn't get a plumbing bid, I'm just 21 going to go back to using Bosworth, if that's okay with the 22 Court. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you've had satisfactory 24 service with Bosworth, have you not? 25 MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir, I have. 10-10-11 73 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 2 MR. BOLLIER: If there's a problem there, I'll go 3 to Whelan's or Hal Poorman. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whatever you want. I move we 5 accept the recommendations of the Maintenance Director. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to accept 8 the recommendations of the Maintenance Supervisor and award 9 bids for electrical, HVAC, plumbing, and electrical -- I 10 already said that once, didn't I? Electrical, plumbing, 11 HVAC, and pest control as indicated. Question or discussion? 12 All in favor, 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: Motion carries. Thank you. 17 MR. BOLLIER: Thank you. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 12; to consider, 19 discuss, take appropriate action on request from appointed 20 and elected officials to appoint clerks and assistants for 21 their offices pursuant to Local Government Code Chapter 151. 22 We have a whole passel of those folks. For the record, 23 Animal Control; 216th District Attorney; Kerr County 24 Attorney; County Clerk; Kerr County Road and Bridge; Justice 25 of the Peace, Precinct 2; AgriLife extension, which is the 10-10-11 74 1 Extension Service; County Auditor; Maintenance; I.T.; Victims 2 Services; Constable, Precinct 1; County Court at Law; 3 Treasurer; Environmental Health; Justice of the Peace, 4 Precinct 1; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3; Kerr County 5 Juvenile Facility; District Clerk; Human Resources 6 Department; Court Compliance Department; Tax 7 Assessor/Collector; and Sheriff's Office. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 9 MR. HENNEKE: Judge, did you say County Attorney? 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. There may be several 12 that did not get their -- 13 JUDGE TINLEY: It would appear so. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just need to jack those up 15 and tell them to get them in there if they want to appoint 16 their clerks. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I see one solution. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No clerks. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Payroll. Okay. Do I hear a motion 20 to approve the appointment of those clerks and assistants as 21 indicated by the request from those department heads and 22 elected officials? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 24 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Second. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 10-10-11 75 1 indicated. Further question or discussion? All in favor, 2 signify by raising your right hand. 3 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 4 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 5 (No response.) 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. Let's go to Item 7 13; to consider, discuss, take appropriate action to nominate 8 one or more candidates for election as board members for the 9 Kerr County Appraisal District. I put this on the agenda 10 after getting information from the Appraisal District. We 11 have a total of 1,260 votes out of a total of 5,000 that we 12 can allocate or cast for one or more directors. If I'm not 13 mistaken, our current director is Charles Lewis. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: And we previously cast all votes -- 17 no, I think we cast a few for someone else. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, we did. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think a part of ours go in, 20 I think, with Ingram and Hunt, and who else? I mean, 21 there's, like, several different entities that take those 22 extra ones and that -- 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We help them get a 24 representative. 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- help them get 10-10-11 76 1 representation. That's a five-member board; is that correct? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Five members. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So we can cast 1,000 and we 4 can give -- 5 JUDGE TINLEY: 1,001. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 1,001, and leave the other 7 votes for some other entities to use? 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, let's name them. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- somewhere, I 10 thought that I read that there was only -- that the openings 11 were only K.I.S.D. or something, and this is -- you know, 12 looking at this, it's like they're all -- we have to -- the 13 whole board's being reelected. Is it the whole board or just 14 some -- one board member? 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't know. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just saw something earlier in 17 an e-mail. I thought it was -- we were just worrying 18 about -- I thought it was the K.I.S.D. representative, but 19 the way this looks like, it's the whole board needs to be 20 reelected. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, it does. 22 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: How long has Mr. Lewis been 23 representing the county? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quite a -- probably eight 25 years, I'd say. I haven't talked to him. I was looking at 10-10-11 77 1 the dates. We have until -- I would recommend, Judge, we 2 hold off on this and bring it back at our next meeting. I 3 think we have until the 31st to get these in. He has to have 4 the ballot prepared by the 31st, so that'll give us -- 'cause 5 I certainly, you know, want to -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Talk to Charles. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- talk to Charles, see if he 8 has an interest. And, you know, I don't know if he's 9 probably willing to serve again, or we have some other 10 person. He's been on there quite a while. It doesn't make 11 that much difference, in my mind, as long as we have someone 12 that -- 13 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Right. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- speaks up for the County. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He is an excellent board 16 member -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's been good. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- for these kind of things. 19 Oh, I remember him being on the 911 board way back when. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, sorted that out when we 21 had problems. 22 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Doesn't K.I.S.D. have 23 additional votes, too? Above and beyond -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: More than we do. 10-10-11 78 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They have the most. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So they share some of theirs 4 with Center Point and -- 5 JUDGE TINLEY: They've got just under 2,000, so -- 6 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: We got the second. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: -- they can't control two directors. 8 They can control one and have a big chunk for another one. 9 We could control one and have some excess votes; actually, 10 259 excess. 11 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How many -- do you have the 12 list of who has what? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How much does Ingram and Hunt 15 have together? Ingram ISD and Hunt ISD? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 239 and 369. 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And the city of Ingram? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: That's 608. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 21. 20 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Ingram's got 21. 21 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 21? 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Comfort has 135. And, I mean, 23 they're represented really on the other -- primarily on the 24 Kendall County -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They're in another county. 10-10-11 79 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, they're in another 2 county. 3 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Yeah. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: That's right. Comfort is in Kendall 5 County, isn't it, Buster? 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they have votes in Kerr 7 County. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought it was. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Says so right here. 10 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Divide's got 34 here. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: You want -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pass that one? Let's pass on 13 it and kind of visit. Generally, Kerrville has one -- City 14 of Kerrville has one, Kerr County has one, and then the 15 other -- 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Others come from -- 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other school districts or 18 cities from the smaller groups. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. We could -- we could join up 20 with our excess with the City of Kerrville. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We could. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: To assist them. That will get them 23 almost where they need to be. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, get almost one vote. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, mm-hmm. Well, we can think 10-10-11 80 1 about that, sure. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've thought about it. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: I see. 4 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Are you already through 5 thinking about it? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm through. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to Item 14; 9 consider, discuss, take appropriate action to appoint three 10 county representatives to the Airport Planning Committee. 11 I'm going to defer to Commissioner Letz on that one. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under the interlocal agreement, 13 a new entity -- or a committee was formed, or to be formed, 14 which has three members from the county, three members from 15 the city, of which in those respective groups only two can be 16 elected officials, and then there's two from the Airport 17 Board, and they can be whoever they appoint, the Airport 18 Manager or board members. The idea is for -- this is really 19 just to facilitate communication, largely with the city of 20 Kerrville, to insure that they are participating at the 21 airport, which is a lot of the issue this past year. This is 22 not a decision-making group in any way. It's just a matter 23 of communicating, and if they have something they think needs 24 to be done, it can either be referred back to the owners or 25 referred to the Airport Board. It's just kind of a 10-10-11 81 1 communication/recommendation type group. Not really -- it 2 doesn't -- you know, as loose as it is, I've heard some 3 members from the city say they don't think it will last a 4 real long time. You know, that came from the councilman -- 5 or councilwoman. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's see, who could that 7 possibly be? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: She didn't know, you know, how 9 long it would be in place. And it's going to largely depend 10 on how it works. But it is in the interlocal agreement. I 11 think we do need to appoint two -- 12 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So who's the third member 13 that you're wanting to appoint? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My recommendation would be Guy 15 and myself as the liaisons, and the Auditor, because she's 16 the head of the financial side of it -- the financial side of 17 all that, or handles the financial work for the airport. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I second it. 20 (Laughter.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that the 22 Kerr County representatives be Commissioner Letz, 23 Commissioner Overby, and the Auditor, Jeannie Hargis. 24 Question or discussion? 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Buster, we got out of that 10-10-11 82 1 one, didn't we? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor, signify by raising 3 your right hand. 4 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 6 (No response.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carried. Let's go to 8 Item 15; to consider, discuss, take appropriate action on 9 requesting the County Attorney to research county stock laws 10 in preparation for calling election on same. Commissioner 11 Letz? 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is just a follow-up from 13 our last meeting. We had an agenda item about a specific 14 situation with Ms. Marett, and I just wanted to put on it the 15 agenda and just formally request the County Attorney to look 16 into this again. I think he's done some work on it. And 17 then we need to, in my mind, start moving till we have one -- 18 you know, one livestock law for the county. 19 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I agree. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we need to have an 21 election, I believe, to do that and how we get that done. 22 And, you know, I'd probably say that November 2012 makes a 23 good time to do that. I don't see that we need to have any 24 kind of special election, and I'm sure it's too late to do it 25 in a couple weeks, so that would be the best time. 10-10-11 83 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second for 4 approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in 5 favor, signify by raising your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. 10 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Long overdue. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Item 16; consider, discuss, take 12 appropriate action on letter acknowledging request by Kerr 13 County to be removed from inclusion in the Southern Edwards 14 Plateau Conservation Plan. The short version of this, Kerr 15 County originally, by resolution, opted out of inclusion in 16 that plan. Notification was made to City of San Antonio and 17 Bexar County, I believe, with copies to Fish and Wildlife and 18 various and sundry others. We've not heard, to my knowledge, 19 anything back from them as to their acknowledging that we've 20 made that request of them or have received our opt-out. And 21 the folks that are really running hot and heavy about this 22 issue are urging us to write to them again and say, "We sent 23 you this before, folks, and you haven't responded. We want 24 you to respond, and we're reaffirming our opt-out, and this 25 time please do us the courtesy of responding and letting us 10-10-11 84 1 know that you've received it." Essentially, that's where we 2 are. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a good idea. I 4 have visited with Commissioner Wolff in Bexar County on this 5 issue. I mean, they received it, and they're aware of the 6 whole -- of our position. But I think they do need to 7 form -- you know, at least as a courtesy, formally respond 8 that they received it. And I -- and I would add to that that 9 I would like -- I think they should respond and tell us what 10 their timetable is going forward. Commissioner Wolff gave me 11 some of that information, but there's some things that were 12 still up in the air, and I think it would be useful to know 13 that. I would say that my preference would be, Judge, that 14 you draft your own letter, as opposed to the model letter 15 that was in here. I think that you could probably word it a 16 little bit better, and -- but request -- 17 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Especially whenever it says 18 Judge Nelson instead of Judge Wolff. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, a few things. And a few 20 things that were just -- but write a letter in your eloquent 21 manner and just request that they keep Kerr County out, and 22 give us a schedule of how they, you know, plan to go forward, 23 and acknowledge receipt of our prior resolutions and 24 documents. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. They -- you know, not 10-10-11 85 1 only that they acknowledge that they received it, but we want 2 -- we want them to say, "You are removed." 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- I mean, I don't know 4 when they can do that. I don't know how that -- 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to hear them say 6 that. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That'll take, I believe, a 8 Commissioners Court action down there, and I don't -- but in 9 talking with Commissioner Wolff, they've got a draft; they're 10 still working on the paperwork. I'm not sure we can ask for 11 that. 12 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: But they haven't 13 acknowledged -- 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what we want. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We want to be removed from 17 that thing. That's what we've requested. We want to be 18 removed from it, and that's what we want to hear. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, you can't force us in, 21 but tell us that we're out. 22 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Currently, they haven't even 23 acknowledged it. We want an acknowledgment that they 24 received -- 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They've received it. And I 10-10-11 86 1 think -- I mean, who -- I've talked to one commissioner; he 2 obviously can't speak for the Court, but they understand and 3 say that we're going to be out. But that's based on one 4 commissioner. So, they're still looking at a draft of where 5 they're even going. From what he told me, they won't know 6 till later this year. But -- but I think we could ask as to 7 when we're going to be out. And I think you have the rest of 8 what we're -- 9 JUDGE TINLEY: On the flip side, if their Court 10 will not take action to actually remove us from their plan, 11 should I advise them that we're going to initiate annexation 12 to portions of Bexar County so that we can do that for 13 ourselves? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're definitely going to 17 take Comfort in. We'll start with Comfort. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: I thought we had. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true. But we're 20 going to do the easy one first, you know. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll move that we authorize the 22 County Judge to send a letter to Judge Wolff in Bexar County, 23 again stating that Kerr County wants to be excluded from the 24 SEP-HCP, and request a timetable as to when they plan to make 25 their decision whether they will formally remove Kerr County, 10-10-11 87 1 and -- what was the other thing? And acknowledge receipt? 2 JUDGE TINLEY: And request that Commissioners Court 3 of Bexar County take appropriate action to exclude us from 4 their plan. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: I'll second that. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second as 9 indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor, signify by 10 raising your right hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. Item 17 is 15 consider, discuss, take appropriate action on interlocal 16 agreement with the Regional Public Defender for capital 17 cases. This thing resurfaced. Now, what I can tell you, 18 gentlemen, is that -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought we joined this 20 thing. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Well -- well, we did for the first 22 year, when there was no cost. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: However, when you look at the -- at 25 the table on this thing, you will see -- it's kind of hard to 10-10-11 88 1 read. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No kidding. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, what they did was they blacked 4 out the -- the zero, and for FY 2012, we would be on the hook 5 for $12,905. Now, having said that, there are how many 6 capital cases pending? 7 MS. HARGIS: Five. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Well that's for the entire district, 9 is it not? 10 MS. HARGIS: Right, but you have two -- two. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Two in Kerr County. Is that 12 correct, Ms. Lavender? 13 MS. LAVENDER: That's correct. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is a no-brainer. We've 16 been down the road where we didn't have this. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And it -- you know, it will 19 eat your reserves. It will -- it can -- 20 MS. HARGIS: This is a little lower than what -- 21 remember, it was about 14,000 they presented to us last year, 22 so it's a little bit more than 1 percent. It's good 23 insurance right now. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. It's basically a $12,000, 25 $13,000 insurance policy, -- 10-10-11 89 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: -- is what it is. 3 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: And are these other 4 numbers -- that's just projection for the following years? I 5 mean, we can't tell -- 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, it goes up each year. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Yeah. It's due to crank on 8 up there. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it goes up to 10 something like 40 or so. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, 43. 12 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: 43. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And that's the max that you 14 are supposed to pay, if I'm not mistaken. That comes in 15 what, the third, fourth year? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: One, two, three, four, five -- looks 17 like sixth year. 18 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Sixth year? 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. But I think what they're 20 doing is, depending upon the level of participation and the 21 cost of running that office, they are recalculating and 22 re-amortizing those costs. Now, ours is based upon number of 23 capital cases of 0.6, so a little more than one-half capital 24 case. So, if we got more than -- more than that, why, 25 somebody else is helping to carry part of our load. 10-10-11 90 1 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't see how we can not do 2 this. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which two capital cases are 5 pending? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: We don't want to talk about it. 7 MS. LAVENDER: They haven't been indicted yet. We 8 don't want to discuss them. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Don't want to talk about it. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, these are -- 11 MR. HENNEKE: We're under the existing agreement 12 currently, and this is the renewal, right? 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. 14 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's correct. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: It would be a renewal for 2012. 16 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 'Cause you can get out any 17 time you want to. 18 MR. HENNEKE: Right. And we're already in it, so 19 the cases that have already happened are currently covered. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does -- does it run from when 21 you have the trial or when they're indicted? 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what's he's talking 23 about. 24 MS. LAVENDER: Fiscal year. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But is it when they're 10-10-11 91 1 indicted? 2 MS. HARGIS: I think it's just the fiscal year. 3 It's a grant that they have. 4 MR. BARTON: I would think it's about the time they 5 have to hire a lawyer. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because -- I mean, either way, 7 I think it's a good thing to do, but it's -- I mean, we have 8 other capital -- there are some -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we have something running 10 right now? Is the meter running on some -- so it's worth the 11 money, then. And they provide what -- what is the major 12 service that they provide? 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Representation of the defendant in 14 capital cases. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A hundred percent of it? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. They -- 17 MR. HENNEKE: Well, they don't provide -- they 18 provide -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: There's some out of pocket. 20 MR. HENNEKE: -- mediation specialists and the 21 attorney. Other experts potentially have to be borne by us. 22 But, you know, just the attorney's fees and mitigation 23 specialists alone is a six-figure sum. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess what I'm thinking of -- 25 and I think it's in the Seard -- Vincent Seard, who's, you 10-10-11 92 1 know, in the mental hospital. He still has ongoing, and has 2 had ongoing legal services every so often. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, but those are appeals, 4 aren't they? 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Hmm-hmm. 6 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They're not, that's correct. 7 That's -- 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He hasn't ever been tried. 9 Never been tried. So, I mean, those types of things would be 10 covered under this as well, I would guess. 11 MS. LAVENDER: Because it didn't exist at the time 12 that his -- this consortium or this deal didn't exist at the 13 time. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So it goes based on the date -- 15 the date they're indicted. 16 MS. LAVENDER: I don't know whether it's the date 17 they're indicted or the day the crime happened, but he would 18 be out of the line -- 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Either way. 20 MS. LAVENDER: -- either way with that. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So one of those two, okay. 22 That's what I was trying get to. What is the trigger date? 23 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: And last year there was no 24 expense to the county; is that correct? The grant, we had a 25 -- we didn't have to pay anything last year, correct? 10-10-11 93 1 MS. LAVENDER: Correct. 2 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: All right. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll move we continue the 4 representation, or continue being a member of the interlocal 5 agreement on Regional Public Defender for capital cases, and 6 our amount is $12,905. Is that right, for this year? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 8 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 10 indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor, signify by 11 raising your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Let's go to Item 16 18; to consider, discuss, take appropriate action to approve 17 the Drug Offender Education Program Agreement contract 18 between Kerr County and Kerr County Adult Probation and 19 authorize the County Judge to execute same. Mr. Henneke? 20 MR. HENNEKE: Thank you, Judge. Would you also 21 mind calling 19 as well? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, it's the second step. Item 19 23 is to consider, discuss, take appropriate action to approve 24 D.O.E.P., which stands for Drug Offender Education Program, 25 instructor agreement contract between Kerr County and David 10-10-11 94 1 Havis, and authorize County Judge to execute same. 2 MR. HENNEKE: Gentlemen, for some years we've had 3 an informal agreement with Adult Probation where they 4 contract with us to provide the drug education class that is 5 part of the probation conditions, and we in turn contract 6 with Mr. Havis, who is an Adult Probation officer, but does 7 this after hours on his own time. Doing it this way means 8 that he doesn't get overtime or have to work less as an Adult 9 Probation officer in order to teach the class. This has been 10 done for a number of years, but it's never actually been 11 formalized or reduced to writing, and so this is a 12 three-party agreement where Adult Probation contracts with us 13 to provide the class. They have the grant money; they gave 14 it to us. We, in turn, contract with Mr. Havis, who is 15 already teaching the class and is very well qualified to 16 teach the class at the amount that we get from Adult 17 Probation. The contract says that if Adult Probation ever 18 loses the money to do this, then the contract terminates, and 19 that terminates our obligation to pay Mr. Havis. But I've 20 drafted this simply to reduce it to writing and formalize the 21 agreement. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: This is nothing more than a 23 memorialization of what's been going on for a number of 24 years? 25 MR. HENNEKE: Yes, sir. There's just never been 10-10-11 95 1 any contract or any formal writing approved by the Court. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. But 3 are we approving both agenda items -- 4 JUDGE TINLEY: You can. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- or just one? Both of 6 them require approval? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 9 MR. HENNEKE: Yes, sir, there's two different 10 agreements. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I move that we approve 12 Item 18 and 19. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 14 approval of both agenda items. 15 THE REPORTER: I'm sorry, I didn't hear who 16 seconded. 17 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: I'll second it. I just -- 18 first time I've said it. I'll second it. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: You shouldn't have whispered in my 20 ear. Did you hear something? 21 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: I second. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Other discussion? All in favor, 23 signify by raising your right hand. 24 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10-10-11 96 1 (No response.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Ms. Pieper, do we 3 have -- do we have confirmation that the bond is -- 4 MS. PIEPER: It is being corrected, yes, sir. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 6 MS. PIEPER: There's a rider that shows it's 7 payable to the County Judge, and then we have the e-mail that 8 states that it is -- they're changing the word "perform" to 9 "execute" on the face of the document, to coincide with the 10 statute. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Item 4, we'll recall. 12 Consider, discuss, take appropriate action to approve the 13 official bond and oath of Faye E. (Beth) Taylor for the 14 office of Chief Deputy Treasurer. Ms. Pieper has indicated 15 that the -- there's already one amendment or rider to the 16 bond which states obligee to be County Judge, and 17 communication indicating that the condition of the bond will 18 be that the obligor on the bond would faithfully execute the 19 duties of office. Do I hear a motion to approve Item 4 upon 20 the conditions as indicated, and upon Ms. Taylor executing 21 the bond, that we approve same on that basis? 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 23 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 25 indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor, signify by 10-10-11 97 1 raising your right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go to 6 Item 20; to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 7 consider appointment of Kerr County Treasurer to serve until 8 the next general election. The Auditor captured me this 9 morning, and before we get too far into this, wants to be 10 heard, so I'm going to give her first shot at it here. 11 MS. HARGIS: It's come to my attention that -- that 12 two of my employees have filed for this position, and as you 13 know, we're currently in the process of doing four external 14 audits. One of them is the county audit, and with all the 15 new changes and everything that we've done, I personally, by 16 myself, cannot complete all these and get them done on time. 17 We have a March 31 deadline on -- on the main audit, and then 18 we have the airport audit, which is separate, which I have to 19 do this year, as well as the Juvenile Detention -- not 20 detention, but Juvenile Probation and Adult Probation. And 21 there are problems with both of those. I'm working on those 22 as we speak, because there is some mistakes in their 23 budgeting process in Adult Probation, so I've got to fix 24 those before they can even go to audit. 25 So, I am only one human being. I can't -- so we 10-10-11 98 1 need until about the middle of November, because we can't 2 close the books until we get all the reports from all the 3 different elected officials and so forth. And it's also very 4 important that we get this so that if you want to go to the 5 bond market on the addition to the jail, we have this 6 information. So, we've got a real time crunch, and 7 there's -- there's only three of us over there, and the -- 8 mainly the three of us are the ones that are up. So, I think 9 the concentration needs to be on doing that. As you recall, 10 Beth did do that job for three and a half months for Mindy in 11 2008, and I have talked with her. We will help her as much 12 as we can with anything that she needs to have done that 13 requires a lot of spreadsheets and that kind of stuff. So -- 14 but we just need that time before y'all make a decision to 15 pull somebody out of my office, 'cause I can't get somebody 16 hired or trained fast enough to get it done. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: So, essentially, your request is you 18 need both of these ladies to work with you on those audits? 19 MS. HARGIS: Yes. It's a team effort. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: You'd be in a position to turn one 21 of them loose, if the Court decided to select one of those 22 individuals, approximately the middle of November? 23 MS. HARGIS: Approximately. Hopefully we can get 24 done. We have a lot of work to do before the auditor ever 25 gets here. I mean, it's going to put everything on me once 10-10-11 99 1 that's done, but that I'll try to handle. But we -- you 2 know, with the addition of the airport, that's another 3 document that we have to get ready. There's a lot of 4 spreadsheets. And, again, you got to remember that GASB 54 5 kicking in is making me change a lot of stuff. And, you 6 know, I -- I don't mind working every weekend, but, you know, 7 even working every weekend, it's going to take all three of 8 us to get it done. And -- and we've been working on some of 9 it, but we couldn't -- we can't do it till the book -- till 10 everybody's done. The bills you have today are for last 11 year, and we can't close out; we don't have all the reports. 12 We can't do official cash. There's just a lot of things we 13 have to wait till October to get done, so it's going to take 14 us a good four weeks to get it all done. 15 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Our November meetings are the 16 7th and 21st. 17 MS. HARGIS: The 21st would be better. 18 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Are you saying the 21st is 19 what you recommend? 20 MS. HARGIS: Yes. 21 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: All right. 22 MS. HARGIS: And hopefully -- I've already -- I 23 feel -- I spent this weekend filling out the internal control 24 documents that were about that thick, so -- and I took those 25 home and I worked Saturday, so -- by myself. But I can only 10-10-11 100 1 do so much by myself, and I need -- I need their experience, 2 their expertise. They've already got these spreadsheets. We 3 also have some audits out there that we haven't completed; we 4 need to get those done. It's just, you know, a cleanup 5 effort. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you a question. 7 And I know you're going to take this as being a rude 8 question, and it is. Did you just wake up this morning and 9 realize that you had all these functions to do? Why didn't 10 you tell us this two weeks ago? Or tell all these people 11 that are expecting to get this job two weeks ago? I mean, 12 did you just get up this morning and realize that you had 13 these projects to do? 14 MS. HARGIS: No, sir, I did not. But I also did 15 not know until the 30th that it would only have four 16 applicants, and two of those main applicants would come from 17 my office. Until that time, I didn't -- you know, I didn't 18 know if you would get someone else that would be applying for 19 that job. And to be honest with you, I thought we'd be 20 further along with our paperwork for our audits, and we're 21 not, and that's what I found when I was working over the 22 weekend. And, again, there's a lot of new things that have 23 to be done, and I'm not even familiar with all of them, but 24 I'm -- I got bombarded with a whole bunch of them on 25 Saturday, and I'm doing the best I can. 10-10-11 101 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you for your 2 explanation. To me, I think that we need to evaluate how 3 important it is to have a full-time treasurer in that office. 4 That's -- I mean, I understand what she's saying, and I 5 respect that. But it is -- you know, it's a constitutional 6 office. Are we -- are we required to fill that thing at a 7 certain time or what? You know. How important is it to have 8 a -- the real treasurer in that slot to be doing real 9 treasurer-type work? That's my question. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: From a legal standpoint, are we 11 obligated to do it at the earliest possible time? 12 MR. HENNEKE: No, sir. The office can remain 13 vacant until filled at the next election, which it will be 14 regardless of any appointment. But just as the Court has 15 acted in the past, the Court can name an acting person and 16 defer, you know, appointment until next month or until the 17 results of the March primary election are known, or, you 18 know, until after the filing deadline for -- it's at the 19 Court's discretion on if and when it would choose to appoint 20 somebody who would then be the appointed officeholder until 21 the next general election. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hargis, you said there was a 23 period of time in which Ms. Taylor was doing -- handling the 24 duties of that office for a period of time here? 25 MS. HARGIS: Yeah. In 2008, she was -- as you 10-10-11 102 1 recall, Ms. Williams was ill for three and a half months, and 2 she performed those duties. And she had really not been in 3 the job very long, and she did a good job. And I have spoken 4 with her, and she said, you know, there will be things she'll 5 need help with, and we will help her, as a team. We work as 6 a team on a daily basis anyway. But if I put someone in that 7 office, they're not going to -- they're going to be wanting 8 to be dedicated to that office, and not to the Auditor. And 9 it's kind of hard for me to ask that person to work with me; 10 if they don't want to, they don't have to. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 12 MS. HARGIS: So, you know, right now, to me, I 13 mean, the Treasurer's job is a very important job, but we 14 assist them on a daily basis. We coordinate the efforts with 15 each other. I think we can make it for -- until the 21st of 16 November. That way, our focus is on what we need to get done 17 for the county, and that's -- we've got to get this audit -- 18 all these audits out of here. And it's always difficult for 19 us to get them out anyway. And to be honest with you, Mindy 20 had a big piece of that, and we're picking that piece up. 21 And so, you know, there's -- there's a lot of elements here 22 that go into play. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: What's the Court's pleasure? 24 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: My preference is to leave it 25 open till the primary. 10-10-11 103 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that may be, but we need 2 to talk to Ms. Taylor. 3 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We need to bring her in here 5 today, and appear before Commissioners Court in executive 6 session and have that conversation with her. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We can do that shortly, when 8 we're doing our executive session. 9 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's a good idea. That's 10 my preference, if Beth will agree to -- to do that till the 11 primary. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Or whenever. 13 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Whenever. November or -- 15 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: -- January 1 or March the 5th or 17 whatever. Okay. 18 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: That's a good idea. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's do that, then. Let's go ahead 20 and go to Section 4 of the agenda, take care of those items. 21 Payment of the bills. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we pay the bills. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to pay the 25 bills. Any question or discussion? We've got two different 10-10-11 104 1 batches of bills. One is 2010-11, which is those that have 2 accrued for last fiscal year, and then there are a few for 3 this fiscal year, 2011-12. Any question or discussion? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And all of those are 5 included in this motion? 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. Yes. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Both sets. All in favor of the 9 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries. I assume we 14 have no budget amendments? 15 MS. HARGIS: No, we're done. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: We do have one late bill. Looks 17 like it was for -- 18 MS. HARGIS: It's for -- 19 JUDGE TINLEY: -- maintenance contract fees. 20 MS. HARGIS: And our indigent health, we weren't 21 able to -- we got kicked off of the software program, so we 22 had a little problem with that on Thursday and Friday. So -- 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And all the various bills in 24 connection with indigent health? 25 MS. HARGIS: Right. 10-10-11 105 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Aggregating 10,326.69 for indigent 2 health, and maintenance contract, $1,210. Do I hear a motion 3 that those bills be approved as submitted? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 5 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Second. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 7 indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor of the 8 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 9 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. I've been presented 13 with monthly reports from Kerr County Payroll for September 14 2011; Constable, Precinct 1; Constable, Precinct 4; and 15 County Clerk. Do I hear a motion that those indicated 16 reports be approved as presented? 17 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: Motion made. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 20 indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor, signify by 21 raising your right hand. 22 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 24 (No response.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Okay. At 11:30, we 10-10-11 106 1 will go out of public or open session for the purpose of 2 going into executive or closed session. Ms. Hargis? There 3 she is; okay. Why don't you stay? 4 (The open session was closed at 11:30 a.m., and an executive session was held, the transcript of which 5 is contained in a separate document.) 6 - - - - - - - - - - 7 JUDGE TINLEY: It is 12:24, and we are in open or 8 public session. Any member of the Court have anything to 9 offer with respect to matters considered in executive 10 session? 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Hearing nothing, anything else to 13 come before the Court under this agenda? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, do we want to give the 15 County Attorney some kind of guidance on that last issue we 16 just discussed? 17 JUDGE TINLEY: My understanding was he understood 18 the direction. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you not want us to say 20 something? 21 MR. HENNEKE: I mean, we -- you know, we recorded 22 the discussion in executive session. 23 COMMISSIONER OVERBY: That's all we need to do. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. 25 MR. HENNEKE: I understand the direction of the 10-10-11 107 1 Court from our conversation. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else to be offered 3 in connection with this agenda? We're adjourned. 4 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:25 p.m.) 5 - - - - - - - - - - 6 7 STATE OF TEXAS | 8 COUNTY OF KERR | 9 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 10 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 11 official reporter for the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 12 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 13 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 12th day of October, 14 2011. 15 16 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 17 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 18 Certified Shorthand Reporter 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 10-10-11