1 1 2 3 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT 4 Regular Session 5 Monday, January 23, 2017 6 9:00 a.m. 7 Commissioners' Courtroom 8 Kerr County Courthouse 9 Kerrville, Texas 78028 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: TOM POLLARD, Kerr County Judge HARLEY BELEW, Commissioner Pct. 1 24 TOM MOSER, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 BOB REEVES, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I-N-D-E-X 2 NO. PAGE 3 *** Commissioners' Comments. 5 4 1.11 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 9 action on request to pay for car repairs 5 and the installation of a digital-in-car- video for Constable 3 vehicle; funds to 6 come from contingency line item. 7 1.1 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 11 action to express Kerr County's 8 appreciation to the City of Kerrville's Fire Department and Police Department 9 for their "instant" reaction to the county jail fire. Their help and cooperation was 10 outstanding and we greatly appreciate them. 11 1.2 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 25 action on request to use the courthouse 12 grounds on the 4th weekend of every month. 13 1.3 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 34 14 action for the Court's Final Approval to change existing road name "Pat" as found 15 in plat record Westwood Oaks Section 3, Volume 5, Page 266 to private road 16 "Plumeria Canyon Dr. W., Pct. 4. 17 1.4 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 35 action on a concept plan for Laurel 18 Canyon Estates, Pct. 4. 19 1.5 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 41 action for the Court to accept the Alternate 20 Plat for World Amazing Grace, Pct. 1. 21 1.6 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 42 action for the Court's Final Approval 22 naming private road "Siesta Circle S.", Pct. 4. 23 1.7 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 43 24 action to approve the Amending Plat for Guadalupe Heights No. 2, Lot 1, Blk 5, 25 Vol. 2, Pages 34-36, Pct. 2. 3 1 I-N-D-E-X 2 NO. PAGE 3 1.8 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 43 action to convey 0.34 acres platted as 4 Cherry Way right of way in Guadalupe Heights No. 2, Vol. 2, Pages 34-36 to 5 the Glen Eldon Fifield & Elsie Viola Fifield Living Trust, Pct. 2. 6 1.9 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 48 7 action regarding the Hill Country Master Gardener Greenhouse project. 8 1.12 Annual report from Kerr County Historical 53 9 Commission. 10 1.10 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 59 action on proposal from Comfort Seal 11 Insulation for work at the maintenance Department Facility on Hays Street, 12 (total $3,646.00) 13 1.13 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 66 action to approve contract with Kerr 14 County Soil & Water Conservation District and allow the County Judge to sign same. 15 1.14 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 67 16 action to no longer require the Court Reporter to be present in Executive 17 Session matters. 18 1.15 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 68 action regarding update of the proposed 19 floodplain revisions along Third Creek. 20 4.1 Pay bills. 100 21 4.2 Budget Amendments. 100 22 4.3 Late Bills. 101 23 4.4 Approve and accept Monthly Reports. 101 24 4.5 Auditor Reports. 101 25 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison 101 Committee Assignments as per attachment. 4 1 I-N-D-E-X 2 NO. PAGE 3 5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department 102 Heads. 4 5.3 Reports from Boards, Commissions and 102 5 Committees. a). City/County Joint Projects or Operations 6 Reports. b). Other. 7 1.15 Consider, discuss and take appropriate 102 8 action regarding update of the proposed floodplain revisions along Third Creek. 9 4.4 Approve and accept Monthly Reports. 104 10 *** Adjourned. 105 11 *** Reporter's Certificate. 106 12 * * * * * * 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 1 JUDGE POLLARD: All right, attention in the 2 courtroom. It's January 23rd, 2017, it's 9 a.m. and the 3 Kerr County Commissioners' Court is in session. We'll 4 be led this morning by Commissioner Letz in the prayer 5 and the Pledge. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bow your head, please. 7 (Prayer and Pledge of Allegiance.) 8 JUDGE POLLARD: This is the part of the 9 agenda where it allows any member of the audience to 10 come up and talk about a subject that is not on the 11 agenda. If you wish to do that come forward to the 12 podium, identify yourself, state your address, and limit 13 your talk to three minutes. 14 Now, I have one request to speak from 15 Mr. George Baroody, but it indicated it was item 1.15 of 16 the agenda, so that will not apply here. He'll talk 17 when that's up. 18 Anybody wishing to speak at this time? All 19 right. There being none we'll go to Commissioners and 20 the County Judge to recognize achievements of persons in 21 each of their precincts or to make comments not listed 22 on the agenda. We'll start with Precinct Number 1. Do 23 you have my comments? 24 MR. BELEW: No, Sir. 25 JUDGE POLLARD: Okay. 6 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I do, Judge on 2 something that's not on the agenda, and that's the Kerr 3 County Flood Warning System. Our application had to be 4 in last Friday, we got it in before then. We got a 5 notification Friday that it was going to be extended for 6 six months. So we jumped through a lot of hoops and we 7 got it there. The good news that could mean that 8 they're waiting for additional -- more money than what 9 they have. And also it could be grants be issued in 10 tiers, and we'd be in the first tier, so that's good. 11 So we'll wait and see what that is. But so far it's the 12 County and UGRA who've agreed to participate in that. 13 That's all I have. 14 JUDGE POLLARD: All I have to say is I sure 15 had to hunker down to keep from getting blown away this 16 past weekend. All right, Mr. Letz. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nothing. I'll defer to 18 Bob to have a few words about the stock show. 19 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Well, I guess first, 20 another record sale. Money's still coming in, and so 21 when they hit the print button on the computer late 22 Saturday night it was a record sale. So that shows the 23 support for the kids from this entire County, as well as 24 the surrounding counties. I want to compliment Jake and 25 his staff, and maintenance and their staff, for the 7 1 hours they put out there, Sheriff's Department, that 2 coordinating security with off-duty officers and coming 3 in that it was second to none. 4 Thursday, I guess was suddenly going pretty 5 good and somebody said Bob we need to see you. I walked 6 out and there was two people from the State to in -- 7 inspect the mass gathering. When we were through they 8 said it was the best mass gathering event they've ever 9 inspected. So they complimented the facilities, they 10 complimented everything. So a long week, and -- 11 JUDGE POLLARD: Successful. 12 COMMISSIONER REEVES: -- a successful week. 13 We're already planning for next year. We were doing 14 that yesterday. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What do they expect at 16 that mass gathering? I think it's pretty interesting 17 how broad it was. 18 COMMISSIONER REEVES: It's true, it's broad. 19 It started out they gave me a list of items, and I said 20 well, let's start with the security. And we headed out 21 there, the Sheriff had put up his mobile command 22 station, and Captain Twist was in there, and Dub from 23 emergency management was in there at the time. And they 24 were impressed with that. They asked the Captain a few 25 questions, and very surprised that it was law 8 1 enforcement out there. Ray Garcia was on the grounds at 2 that time, and he was able to go over all the 3 environmental health department concerns that they might 4 have, and turned out none of their concerns were even 5 needed. Fire protection was above approach as far as 6 what is built into the facility. They went to each 7 room, checked if there was adequate hot water, the 8 cleanliness of it, and that's where it goes to Jake's 9 and Tim's staff, that they were very clean. Completed 10 inspection of the concession area, how the 11 concessionaires were handling the event as far as health 12 and sanitation, food temperature. All of that passed 13 without a problem. And then we just went from each 14 building as they walked around, and they did have one 15 question about the uncovered wash areas until I showed 16 them that that was for pigs. And they said okay, never 17 mind. They thought it was -- I guess they were used to 18 events that have no permanent facilities, so they -- I 19 told them it was easier to show them than explain what 20 those areas were being used for, so -- but it was a 21 complete inspection of health, fire protection, safety, 22 security, the the entire event, and they were -- they 23 said they'd never inspected one that good. So I think 24 it's a compliment to everybody here in the County how we 25 all work together. 9 1 JUDGE POLLARD: That's true. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Stock Show 3 Association. 4 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Everybody. 5 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. Thank you very 6 much. 7 There's been a special request to call item 8 1.11 on the agenda first today, because the Constable 9 for Precinct 3 needs to talk to us in this one, and he 10 has to be testifying in Court pretty soon so we got to 11 get him out of the way to go testify, do a little 12 swearing. 13 All right, item 1.11 consider, discuss and 14 take appropriate action on request to pay for car 15 repairs and the installation of a digital in-car video 16 for Constable Precinct 3, and that's on the supplemental 17 agenda now, changed Precinct 1 to Precinct 3. And the 18 fund to come from the contingency line item. Brenda 19 Doss, and then if necessary the Constable. 20 MRS. DOSS: Yes, we had some unexpected un 21 budgeted car repairs, and also we need to buy a new 22 video camera for Constable 3 because the video camera 23 was not functioning. We've estimated that this would 24 probably be around 76 hundred dollars, so I am asking 25 for authorization to take it out of the contingency line 10 1 item. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move for approval -- 3 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Second. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- of the entire amount. 5 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 6 Letz, seconded by Commissioner Reeves for approval of 7 item 1.11 to pay for the car repairs and installation of 8 a digital in-car video for Constable Precinct 3. And 9 that figure was what, six hundred dollars? 10 MRS. DOSS: $7,600.00. 11 JUDGE POLLARD: Seven thousand. My hearing 12 aide skipped a little bit. $7,600.00. Is there any 13 further discussion? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. Brenda, on 15 the car repairs they're nothing significant. I know 16 there is some concern about the age of that vehicle and 17 repairs. 18 MRS. DOSS: It was brakes I believe, and 19 then they also did the transmission. I believe they 20 went over it very well, and the car repairs were 16 21 hundred dollars. 22 JUDGE POLLARD What's the year model? 23 MRS. DOSS: It's a 2011. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The mileage is pretty 25 low on it? 11 1 MRS. DOSS: I believe it has 78,000 -- 2 63,000. 3 JUDGE POLLARD: Okay. If there's no further 4 discussion, those in favor of the motion signify by 5 raising their right hands. It is four zero, unanimous. 6 Thank you. 7 MRS. DOSS: Thank you. 8 JUDGE POLLARD: Then let's go to item 1.1. 9 Consider, discuss and take appropriate action to express 10 Kerr County's appreciation for the City of Kerrville's 11 Fire Department and Police Department for their 12 "instant" reaction to the county jail fire. Their help 13 and cooperation was outstanding and we greatly 14 appreciate them. Sheriff Hierholzer. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, this hopefully is 16 something that I just put it on kind of a slide show 17 deal. Hopefully this is not something that we will ever 18 go through again. But it could have been extremely 19 serious. First, I want to say it did not make it into 20 any of the inmate housing area at all. We did, out of 21 precaution move about 32inmates to another portion of 22 the jail. Those all had to be shackled and handcuffed 23 as they were being moved, which we enacted our emergency 24 plan that the jailers have to practice and train on 25 every month. So it did work very well. But the fire 12 1 department responded instantly, you might say, it just 2 took them a few minutes to get there, it took probably 3 less than that to actually get the fire back under 4 control. The issues we did have -- where as you can 5 tell some of this through these pictures, it fried about 6 13 thousand dollars worth of my emergency radio antennas 7 and communication system. So during that we had to 8 evacuate our communications center, because there was 9 some smoke coming in through that area, so they were 10 evacuated, and I'll let John Trolinger explain how that 11 worked with the assistance of the Kerrville Police 12 Department and how all that pans in. 13 But what the main thing that happened when 14 you have something like this at a jail, at any given 15 time I normally have over two hundred people under that 16 roof between inmates and employees. And with this being 17 a jail it's not something that the fire department can 18 just run in and say everybody get out, the roof is on 19 fire, it doesn't work that way. So it takes -- 20 JUDGE POLLARD: Judges wouldn't like that. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sometimes I wouldn't 22 like that, but it just doesn't quite work that way. And 23 there's a procedure, and my employees are trained, and 24 we have, you know, the oxygen masks and everything else 25 and the tanks to be able to do our job fully, and there 13 1 were, you know, a few mis guidances, the fire department 2 didn't really appreciate me getting up on the roof so 3 I'd have to make the call on whether or not we have to 4 evacuate. And we have set up some things or in the 5 process setting up some tours in the future, so they 6 actually know how this building is built. So when you 7 get up on this roof as you can tell -- let me go back a 8 couple of these pictures real quick. That where they're 9 standing in cement, it's a concrete roof, okay. What we 10 have to worry about is the sidewalls going down in 11 between, and that's what got us. It's not so much the 12 roof itself is going to cave in or anything else like 13 that. And then you got about a four foot gap in between 14 that roof and then it's steel on top of each cell roof. 15 JUDGE POLLARD: So a fire barriers. 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So there are fire 17 barriers everywhere, fire walls that divide that whole 18 thing in that little bitty section and exhaust fans that 19 come on and take care of those sections where it had 20 gone off. And in reality the smoke didn't even 21 penetrate down enough for the first 15 minutes to set 22 off our fire alarms, because they're in that in between 23 section, and it was of course up on the roof. But the 24 fire department did get there very quickly. They -- the 25 police department got there very quickly, because the 14 1 worse thing you have in a jail now what are you going to 2 do if you have to evacuate. You got over a hundred and 3 70 inmates in that same jail. The police department 4 didn't have to be asked or anything else. They sent 5 just about every single person they had on duty over 6 there, and every one of the detectives and investigators 7 in their office over there without even being asked, and 8 they called in their night shift. They closed down 9 pretty well Clearwater Paseo so we had that under 10 control. And then they were there when I got there just 11 to ask me where I wanted them and what they could do. 12 And I think that with the emergency plan and what John 13 can tell you about in a minute, just shows that when it 14 comes down to a situation that can be extremely serious 15 for our community and our citizens, nobody cares whether 16 you're City or County. It doesn't matter everybody 17 pitched in, nobody had anything about anything else. 18 Everybody just got the work done. And I think that's 19 extraordinary and that shows what Kerrville and Kerr 20 County is really about. Not a lot of this other little 21 stuff we see. 22 But the aftermath as you can tell by these 23 pictures, the J.P. courtroom is now inside one of my 24 conference rooms over in the annex, because there's is 25 right below where this took place. And so their office 15 1 area and that did sustain water and smoke damage. Total 2 damage due to this fire is between 80 and a hundred 3 thousand dollars. Okay. But mainly it's rebuilding 4 everything out of the J.P. office, they tear the whole 5 roof out, all the installation had to come out, 6 sheetrock on the outside walls had to come off. Some of 7 the rock outside the building is going to have to be 8 removed because it got so hot that it did kind of make 9 the mortar turned loose and some of that old rock, that 10 building's 22 years old now, so a lot of that is being 11 rebuilt. But the roofing company that accidentally set 12 it on fire has taken total responsibility for it. We've 13 been working with their insurance adjustor, and they 14 have not denied anything. And they said whatever it 15 takes. Get it fixed, so we're very pleased with that. 16 The new antennas are ordered and putting it all back 17 together should start probably today, because they have 18 already been clearing out and took all the smoke damage 19 and water damage and all that. So now the construction 20 will start back on that. 21 But I will go farther. You know think about 22 what you do when you evacuate the communication center, 23 what do you do for something that controls 911, all my 24 radio dispatch, all the volunteer fire departments. 25 Advantage Communications needs to be also receive a big 16 1 thank you because we lost ten of hour emergency antennas 2 up there immediately, and before the smoke had even 3 cleared, literally, they with Advantage Communications 4 already had those antennas rewired into some other ones 5 and we're back in operation, okay, so it was unreal. 6 But I'll let John -- John, you want to come up and say 7 how it worked when we have to back way to communication? 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Does Advantage 9 Communications have a contract with you or -- 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, there the ones 11 that take care of that, and the Motorola dealer takes 12 care of all our radio systems. And they were there 13 before the smoke ever got totally out of the way. 14 MR. TROLINGER: Good morning. So you can 15 see that the fire took out some antennas. In about 16 another few minutes it would have taken out our radio 17 and communications equipment and the computer network. 18 So very quickly the fire department really did save us, 19 because it was a matter of minutes and we would have 20 lost a substantial amount of computer and radio 21 equipment. But I'll tell ya, just recently Chief Knight 22 allowed us, Kerr County IT, to get on his roof and 23 connect our computer network together, the Sheriff's 24 Office and the P.D.'s, and that's what allowed us within 25 a very short period of time less than an hour we had a 17 1 fully functional work station over at the Police 2 Department and our dispatcher was taking calls, logged 3 in her computer, had all her tools. She was able to get 4 all the different lists and everything that they keep -- 5 they keep nearly everything on the computer nowadays, so 6 without that help and cooperation from the Police 7 Department we would have been able to answer phones 8 probably, but having the computer network and one of our 9 Kerr County phones is now over there, we basically got a 10 place to go in an emergency very quickly. 11 And without their cooperation even on that 12 day, instantly their IT Department just dropped what 13 they were doing and helped us get the wires patched over 14 and things like that. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And the thing about all 16 that is now not only, and they had it, is the first time 17 it's used, not only can we instantly change our 18 communication center from inside our office to the 19 police Department, now true we lose one station, but 20 you've got one open. They can do the same thing. They 21 can, after today once they get the furnishings in for 22 our remodel communication center that's happening today, 23 or this bond issue. But they will be able to do the 24 same type thing if they had something, disaster or 25 something to their communication center, they would be 18 1 able to come over, sit down, and actually it's kind of 2 remoting in type deal. It will be their actual station, 3 all their computer stuff will be seen from our's, and 4 they can do their dispatching from there. Just like all 5 of our actual computer files, everything could be seen 6 from over there and they could to it. So it's really it 7 takes a lot with today's technology to be able to do 8 that instantly, you know, and extremely proud of the 9 employees of the Sheriff's Department getting them out 10 and being able to put our emergency operation plan into 11 effect and getting that many inmates moved immediately. 12 And that's including -- it's not, you know, easy. 13 They've all got to be handcuffed, shackled, chained, and 14 if we have to evacuate you can get them out, and we did 15 32 within a matter of minutes. And it was just a 16 phenomenal, thank goodness, just a trial situation you 17 might say for all agencies involved. And I just really 18 want to thank the fire department, police department. 19 And I got calls from businesses that own buses, I got 20 calls from people all over saying hey is there anything 21 we can do, because once people started seeing the smoke, 22 you know, the phones started ringing, but I probably had 23 about ten different calls from businesses during that 24 offering their help and assistance with whatever we 25 needed, and I thought that's what Kerrville and Kerr 19 1 County stands for. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Question, Rusty, what 3 was it that burned so much, was that the new stuff, and 4 the second question is, as you describe it with the 5 concrete and then the barrier between, how did it get 6 down into the building so quickly? 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. What happens is 8 the front part of the jail, or the front part of the 9 office, that three foot wall there where the antennas 10 are mounted, that part which covers all the 11 administrative area. Those walls go all the way to the 12 ground. They've actually got your metal studs in them 13 and everything else, and then coming up they have the 14 rock exterior, and then they have sheetrock and they 15 have installation, sheetrock and they've also got 16 plywood. And underneath the metal cap on the very top 17 of that wall is about three quarter inch plywood. 18 That's only on the administrative area, okay. Once you 19 get farther back it's not burned back there, that's the 20 jail area, that's just tilt concrete walls that go all 21 the way up. There's no kind of, you know -- 22 JUDGE POLLARD: So the wood caught on fire. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What happened is when 24 the roof that they're putting on is a rubber roof. 25 They're doing away with all the gravel and the tar 20 1 that's on it, they're scraping that off. This project 2 on just removing has gone on about a month and a half, 3 two months now, and still has probably about another 4 month to go because it is a total new roof. But it's a 5 rubber-type roof, and the membrane when it goes up that 6 wall has to be heated, and then it lays in and it melts 7 into that where it works. Underneath one of these rain 8 parts -- let me show you. Where the first bit of black 9 smoke on the wall itself you can see in that picture 10 that's one of those rain gutter-type deals. When they 11 heated that underneath it was little bit of plywood, and 12 their heating it -- what I call pair burn(phonetic), and 13 it started smoldering under it. They have up there a 14 two hour fire watch guy. A guy that does nothing but 15 watch for fire. This entire fire is on video because 16 everything around that building is on video, they left, 17 the roofers left, and the fire watch guy left. The last 18 time they worked at that area of the building was two 19 o'clock in the afternoon; they left at four. The fire 20 watch guy was up there and has two hours watching it. 21 The fire erupted at 4:20, and then it just took off from 22 there. But every bit of the fire is in that wall. What 23 happened, there's no fire damage below that wall on the 24 roof, Commissioner, what you were talking about. What 25 happened is you got water going down in there, into the 21 1 J.P.'s office some, okay, but a lot of it once that got 2 that you had smoking going down in there. And a lot of 3 that smoke was from when they opened the doors to go in 4 and make sure of everything, because there are 5 firewalls, but once you open the doors when the firemen 6 went in it sucked in a whole lot of smoke. And that's 7 why some of this we're going to have some tours and do 8 things like that to show how it's separated and it 9 can't. Because in the jail you don't worry about the 10 flames. The flames are not what's going to get you in 11 the jail, there's too much concrete and steel. You 12 worry about the smoke. But they did excellent and I'm 13 just proud of the way it all worked out. 14 JUDGE POLLARD: Well, I appreciate the help 15 from Kerrville Fire Department -- 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I appreciate a lot -- 17 JUDGE POLLARD: -- and wanting to chip in, 18 and maybe some of it did. Especially IT also, and the 19 Police Department. I guess they heard it on the radio 20 and they weren't asked, they just -- 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They just dispatched 22 Kerrville Fire Department. You know, it's funny 23 watching the video because you got probationers coming 24 in and out of probation office. You got people going in 25 and out of my office and I'm sitting there watching the 22 1 video, of course we don't have the manpower to watch 2 those cameras 24 hours a day, everything's recorded, 3 okay. And you can see people driving up, driving out, 4 and leaving and that fire's just a going and nobody's 5 paying attention. And it the wasn't until it really got 6 to rolling that people started wondering and then you 7 could see them starting calling 911. But it was going 8 pretty good. You know we were blessed, we were 9 fortunate. Been another 35, 40 minutes later it could 10 have been bad, because then the people that are normally 11 eight to five people would have left, and without it 12 setting off our fire alarms, because it's up on the 13 roof, it could have been awhile before the jail actually 14 knew, and then we could have had some smoke migration in 15 the jail area, which would have caused some evacuations. 16 But I was very pleased with everybody's reaction to it 17 and getting it taken care of. 18 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Compliment everybody. 19 KPD, Kerrville Fire Department, your staff and all of 20 the County, just compliments, something you trained for 21 and you hope you never have to use, but good job. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: In 36 years this is the 23 second jail fire. We had one here and that one out 24 there. It's interesting because you start getting media 25 call and everybody else saying they heard that there 23 1 were inmates set it on fire and we had 10 or 15 escape 2 and we got manhunts going on. Some of that just really 3 gets -- it's almost funny if it wasn't so serious. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Fake news. 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Fake news. But I do 6 want to thank everybody for all their help. 7 MR. BELEW: I have one last question about 8 your antennas. Is there a need for or possibility to 9 upgrade in anyway, is there anything that -- 10 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Of court those, they're 11 all getting moved in this remodel. They're moving off 12 that wall and more to a place in the middle of the new 13 roof up there. We have to have them, okay. There's no 14 doubt we've lost some of our back channels right now, 15 which really isn't that major of a deal. They were -- 16 two of them were our main antennas, our main radio 17 frequency channel one and two, okay, but we were able to 18 redo those and new ones have been ordered and that 19 company's paying for them and as soon as they come in 20 and it's all going to get reinstalled in the permanent 21 location anyhow, but they're done with that area. We 22 were going to move them, and I think it's going to be 23 better than it's ever been. 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So bottom line is 25 jail's 22 years old, never had a fire. The change is a 24 1 new roof, and that's probably not going to happen again 2 for long time. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The roof's got a 30 4 year warranty and I hope it doesn't happen. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So the probability is 6 pretty low. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And jails are built 8 that way. You know nothing besides losing some 9 equipment on the roof you're really not going to have 10 much else. You know if it started that way. If it 11 started inside then you got smoke, but it really worked 12 real well. Of course we had to notify the jail 13 commission, we had to notify everybody else. But 14 everybody did their job extremely well without even 15 having to make phone calls. PD and everybody was there 16 and it just worked. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I think it would 18 be a nice thing to do approve a Resolution. I know we 19 don't have one drafted right now, but -- 20 JUDGE POLLARD: I agree. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- probably draft a 22 resolution and authorize you to sign it, and shoot it 23 over to the City Council. 24 JUDGE POLLARD: I think that's a great idea. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion that we 25 1 authorize the Sheriff and the IT Department to make a 2 Resolution of appreciation to the City of Kerrville and 3 authorize the County Judge to sign. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Second. 5 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 6 Letz, seconded by Commissioner Moser to draft a 7 Resolution to the City stating our appreciation to them 8 for their instant cooperation, and authorize the County 9 Judge to sign same. Is that a fair statement? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 11 JUDGE POLLARD: Is there any further 12 discussion? Those in favor of the motion signify by 13 raising their right hands. It's four zero, unanimous. 14 Thank you very much, that's a great idea. 15 All right. Let's go to item 1.2 consider, 16 discuss and take appropriate action on request to use 17 courthouse grounds on the fourth weekend of every month. 18 Anke Leitner. 19 MS. LEITNER: Hi, good morning. My name is 20 Anke Leitner. My husband and me, we were the organizers 21 of Kerrville Trader's Fest last year. Was canceled by 22 us due to various reasons. And we would like to bring a 23 similar event back to courthouse grounds, being in the 24 center of town, and would like to create another 25 community event with shopping, light music and food 26 1 vendors, and we would like to do it every fourth weekend 2 of the month. And the courthouse here used to have 3 Kerrville's Trader's Fest -- Kerrville Market Days and 4 it's going to be expanded from what they had. I don't 5 know if some of you are familiar what we did down there 6 last year, we had a great community response, we also 7 had quite some response after we did cancel to bring it 8 back and create another event for Kerrville, because the 9 community obviously enjoyed the event, so I'm here to 10 ask to use courthouse facilities once a month on the 11 fourth weekend of every month for our new event. 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Describe the event if 13 you would, please. 14 MS. LEITNER: It is basically what it is 15 it's merchandise, shopping, we're going to have a bunch 16 of different merchandise vendors, we're going to have 17 live music, we're going to have food trucks again, it's 18 a free event to the community, and it's going to be 19 Saturday and Sunday, and many other -- well, actually 20 most other towns have events like that what is usually a 21 great response from the community, because it gives 22 everybody something to do, and that's basically what it 23 is. I don't know if you have made it down to our event 24 last year. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think at this time -- 27 1 I mean we're working -- I don't know if you're aware, 2 there have been some issues about who is using 3 courthouse square, signs on the courthouse square. I 4 think until we get a policy in place I'm not in favor of 5 doing anything on the courthouse square for the time 6 being. I think we need to be able to -- and the reason 7 is we have found out that if we let one thing happen, 8 then something else comes up that we may not like down 9 the road we can't say no very easily, so we need to have 10 a policy the County Attorney can look at and make sure 11 we're on firm ground to be able to control the property. 12 And this is not because of your event; it's because of 13 some of the things that happened in the fall. Working 14 on a policy, and I think sometime around the first 15 quarter, we could have it done in the next couple 16 months. 17 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I tend to agree with 18 you, Commissioner. Just not -- until we get a policy 19 written, to how to guide us on events, it's putting the 20 cart before the horse, and I know I've sat down with the 21 County Attorney and we've made some preliminary notes a 22 couple of weeks ago about what procedures we need to 23 follow, and I really don't think we should allow 24 anything new until the procedures are drawn up. You 25 made the comment allow anything, I believe. You know, 28 1 if we have already approved something naturally we would 2 let it go, but I think until the policy, I don't think 3 we should do anything because it would be 4 counterproductive. 5 MS. LEITNER: Let me ask you a question. I 6 mean, why you said about two weeks you going to have 7 those regulations in place? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. No. A couple of 9 months. 10 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I met with the County 11 Attorney a couple weeks ago. 12 MS. LEITNER: For an event like that the 13 preparation for that is usually three to four months to 14 even have the first event even, you know, ready to go. 15 I mean you cannot have an event like this within a 16 month, it's impossible due to vendors, due to bands, due 17 to other things. Is there like anyway that we can work 18 together that we can kind of work simultaneously and do 19 my part and do some of the preparations while you guys 20 work on the policies, or -- 21 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I don't feel that 22 would be fair to other people if we're working with you 23 while we're drawing up the policy. I believe the policy 24 should be drawn up first, and then we could work with 25 you or the next individual who might want it. But to 29 1 work with one individual while we're making a policy 2 wouldn't be fair to the County as a whole. That's my 3 opinion. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And may be sooner than 5 two months. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I would hope we could 7 do it sooner than two months. We're trying to postpone 8 possible litigation or something like that by trying to 9 get a policy in place as soon as we could. 10 MRS. STEBBINS: I'm working on it. 11 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I can attest to that. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's working. It may be 13 less than two months. 14 COMMISSIONER REEVES: But once the policy is 15 developed then you or anybody else who might have a wish 16 for the use of the courthouse square could know what the 17 county's policy is as far as allowing -- 18 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And it'll be public 19 what the policy is before it's implemented. 20 MS. LEITNER: I mean of course I understand. 21 I mean you have to have insurance in place and all that. 22 I mean we had that then, we had it down at River Star 23 when we did it down there. So I mean I am quite aware 24 that there has to be some kind of sort of regulations 25 and stipulations there, what you can do and what you 30 1 cannot do. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: A question, you want to 3 move it from River Star up here, is that -- 4 MS. LEITNER: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Is it just because it 6 is a more central location? 7 MS. LEITNER: Well, it is a more central 8 location. We had some issues that was bad for our 9 vendors, and some of them that were impossible to even 10 work for our vendors, so at that time we decided that 11 those issues might not be resolvable, and so that was 12 the reason why we cancel it, so -- 13 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I would suggest no 14 action until the policy is drawn up. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. 16 MR. BELEW: Now, as the new kid the block, 17 everybody that does something with any of these County 18 spaces, they have individual contracts? 19 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unless it's a 21 County-sponsored thing, like a veteran's event that we 22 host, those don't, but -- 23 MR. BELEW: You have a policy and individual 24 contracts for each event. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. There's not a 31 1 huge number of events, but there are some. 2 MR. BELEW: And the policy -- what I'm 3 trying to figure out here is if I have a contract that 4 specifies what I may or may not do, we still need a 5 policy? 6 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes. The Court decided that 7 we need a policy so people have -- know what to expect 8 in the process and can be consistent across the board 9 for things that come on the courthouse grounds, whether 10 it be signs or events like this. We need to have 11 something that people can expect that we will follow 12 that is -- 13 MR. BELEW: The contract basically says that 14 you will follow a policy. It's a legal binding document 15 that says you will follow the policy. 16 MRS. STEBBINS: Usually we have contracts 17 with people -- like for example the stock show contracts 18 with that type of organization for something that big 19 that requires insurance and things are to be addressed, 20 but if it is -- it's not always that there's a contract 21 with folks doing something out here, they've asked for 22 permission. Like for example, a blood drive they have 23 to park there bus out here, and they haven't had to have 24 a contract that I remember. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Like the banners for 32 1 the children or CASA, or whatever. 2 JUDGE POLLARD: Abused children. 3 MRS. STEBBINS: Right. Just ask for 4 permission. 5 MS. LEITNER: I have one question, if you do 6 an individual contract, the contract does it override 7 policies, because a policy is a general policy for 8 certain regulations. Our event is going to be, of 9 course, an individual event. Some of the policies that 10 are in place can they be overwritten by a contract if we 11 come to an agreement? Like for example you might not 12 require port-a-potties from other events that are only a 13 few hours. Us, for example, we are completely aware of 14 it that we would for example have to bring in 15 port-a-potties so you know to make it comfortable for 16 people that are here, plus we encourage people to be 17 there for several hours. We would consider all that. 18 So how would it work with the contract? Is a contract 19 individual from a policy, or is it -- 20 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I think we should 21 defer and allow our legal team to develop, if based on 22 what they feel we need. Then once it's developed we can 23 let you review it and see if it meets your needs or 24 meets anybody else's needs. It will not be specific, 25 but it will address any health, safety and welfare of 33 1 the use of the grounds. 2 MS. LEITNER: Okay, one question that I 3 have, and I really couldn't get an answer to it. And 4 that has somewhat to do with the event or not. The 5 property off the courthouse itself is this considered 6 County, or is it County-owned property within the City 7 limits? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: County-owned property 9 within the City limits. 10 MS. LEITNER: That's what I mean, it wasn't 11 quite clear. I asked a couple people and they couldn't 12 give me a straight answer, so I am going to ask you 13 guys. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably should have 15 once we get a little bit of a draft have a workshop, so 16 we can over lots of the issues. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I think so. 18 MR. BELEW: I agree. I will say this about 19 the event, I did the attend their event out at the River 20 Star Arts Events Park, it was well run. It's a good 21 operation. A lot of fun family entertainment. 22 MR. WILLIAMSON: I agree. 23 JUDGE POLLARD: All right, thank you, Ma'am. 24 MS. LEITNER: All right, thank you. 25 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. Going to item 34 1 1.3 consider, discuss and take appropriate action to 2 change existing road name "Pat" as found in the plat 3 record Westwood Oaks Section 3, Volume 5, page 266 to 4 private road "Plumeria Canyon Dr. W.". Kelly Hoffer. 5 What is a plumeria? 6 MS. HOFFER: It's a plant, I think. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: A plant. 8 MS. HOFFER: Laura K. Stewart applied 9 through the 911 office on 10-26-2016. Miss Stewart 10 would like to rename road name "Pat" to private road 11 named Plumeria Canyon Drive West. Miss Stewart owns the 12 street right-of-way property I.D. R533621, it's .13 13 acres. It was purchased from Landon Jones under a 14 special warranty deed on 2-9-2012. The original plat 15 for Westwood Oaks Section 3, Volume 5, page 266, it 16 shows the road Pat as a stub in road with a note above 17 and to the left of it as Westwood Oaks future. Miss 18 Stewart's property never did get subdivided and 19 developed. So at this time I ask the Court for their 20 final approval to rename road named Pat to private road 21 name Plumeria Canyon Drive West in Precinct 4. 22 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I met with 23 Engineering, Road and Bridge, and 911. Based on their 24 recommendation I move for approval of the agenda item. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. Comment. 35 1 JUDGE POLLARD: It's been moved by 2 Commissioner Reeves. Seconded by Commissioner Letz to 3 approve item 1.3 on the agenda, changing the name of the 4 road from Pat to Plumeria Canyon Drive West in Precinct 5 4. Comment. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The comment is I visited 7 Kelly on a road name procedure. I think we really need 8 to have a workshop and figure that out. Our naming 9 guidelines are very old. And we did them probably like 10 in 2000. They may still be fine, but there's been a lot 11 of changes in 911, a lot of changes in Road and Bridge, 12 because some of it doesn't make a the lot of sense to me 13 right now. 14 JUDGE POLLARD: Who is Pat? Don't know? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just look at this whole 16 policy. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: May be it was a 18 grandchild. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it. 20 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. Further 21 discussion? Those in favor of the motion signify by 22 raising your right hands. Four zero, unanimous. Thank 23 you. 24 Let's go to item 1.4 consider, discuss and 25 take appropriate action on a concept plan for Laurel 36 1 Canyon Estates in Precinct 4. Mr. Hastings. 2 MR. HASTINGS: Thank you. Concept plan was 3 submitted by Dieter Werner, engineer on behalf of the 4 owners. And his comments on the concept plan say as 5 this subdivision is exempt from the concept plan 6 submittal requirement in accordance with section 6.01 of 7 the Kerr County Subdivision regulations, which is true. 8 This plan is submitted solely for the purpose of 9 consideration for approval of a variance to the paving 10 requirement for the proposed extension of Aspen Way. 11 I've gone out there and looked at this. 12 Aspen Way is unpaved, and it's very short. I don't even 13 think it's a hundred feet long. What they're looking to 14 do is extend Aspen Way and make a cul-de-sac sp that 15 they can subdivide their Property and have proper access 16 for each one of the proposed four lots that the -- that 17 they have in their concept plan, which you have before 18 you. And so the sole purpose of this concept plan, what 19 they've that submitted is they're requesting that they 20 don't -- that they could have an unpaved cul-de-sac at 21 the end of Aspen Way. In accordance with kind of the 22 surrounding area and with Aspen Way as it is right now 23 it's unpaved and it is not maintained by the County, but 24 this would still be a private road not maintained by the 25 County. 37 1 COMMISSIONER REEVES: And we've met several 2 times, all the other requirements per our subdivision 3 guidelines are being -- are fine. Is that correct, 4 Mr. Hastings? 5 MR. HASTINGS: With the exception that this 6 concept plan as submitted, and the road that just got 7 renamed to Plumeria Court now, or Plumeria Canyon, I 8 can't remember the name of it, but it used to be Pat 9 Street, there will need to be some access. There's a 10 back lot to all this property that's not in this concept 11 plan. It's not being proposed to be platted at this 12 time, but it's about 12 acres. It will need to have 13 access to a road. We'll work that out through the 14 platting procedure, but again for today their main 15 reason was to see if they could move forward on this 16 without having to pave a small extension of an unpaved 17 road. 18 COMMISSIONER REEVES: And the road leading 19 into it is already not County maintained and it is not 20 paved. 21 MR. HASTINGS: That's correct. 22 COMMISSIONER REEVES: And this would just be 23 an extension so -- 24 MR. HASTINGS: Yes, Sir. 25 COMMISSIONER REEVES: And so you don't drive 38 1 from pavement to unpaved back to a short section of 2 pavement? 3 MR. HASTINGS: That's correct. And some of 4 the discussions we've had with the developer they are 5 probably going to put a gate across it as well. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Charlie, just for 7 clarification. The idea of a concept is we agree with 8 the concept, and then that gives them the more freedom 9 or confidence in moving toward. 10 MR. HASTINGS: That's exactly right. 11 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Good. 12 MR. HASTINGS: They still have to come back 13 at a final time, they want to make sure before they jump 14 off into this they can move forward. 15 JUDGE POLLARD: What's the likelihood of, 16 Charlie, of these four lots getting sold, and 10, 15 17 years down the line and people calling in, we want some 18 help with the County and paving the roads, and they're 19 not taking care of them. What happens then? 20 MR. HASTINGS: Well, on the plat that will 21 get filed we have language that has been around for 22 probably ten years or so. I think the last time we did 23 our subdivision regulations about 2007 that will state 24 specifically that this road is a privately maintained 25 road, public access but privately maintained. And 39 1 therefore, if it's going to be maintained by the County 2 it will need to be brought up to our paving standards. 3 That note will be on the plat. It'll be covered. 4 JUDGE POLLARD: And we often get a request 5 like that, and we have to tell them that it's not a 6 County maintained road and we can't help them. 7 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And even if it is the 8 County standards we have approve it at that time. 9 MR. HASTINGS: Yes. 10 JUDGE POLLARD: That's right. Except 11 maintenance. 12 MR. HASTINGS: Yes. 13 JUDGE POLLARD: Okay, just trying to point 14 that out. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did you say it will be 16 platted? They are going to go through the whole 17 process, or does not -- or will not require platting? 18 MR. HASTINGS: They can use the alternate 19 plat process on this. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The alternate plat 21 process. 22 MR. HASTINGS: Yes. 23 JUDGE POLLARD: All right, is there any 24 further discussion or comments? 25 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I feel this is just 40 1 fine. I move for approval of the concept plan of Laurel 2 Canyon Estates. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 4 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. There's a motion 5 on the floor as I recall. 6 COMMISSIONER REEVES: That's what I just 7 did. 8 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. Charlie, so 10 the intent is that Pat Street will be the access into 11 the back part of this property? 12 MR. HASTINGS: I think that's the intent. 13 And so when they come in with their alternate plat 14 they'll need to dedicate some right of way to make 15 Laurel Canyon be able to go all the way -- or Plumeria. 16 I keep calling it -- I call it Pat. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it'll be I guess 18 like a 60 foot right-of-way. 19 MR. HASTINGS: They'll need to dedicate some 20 right-of-way. And it can be privately maintained and 21 the same note will have to go on the plat. 22 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. Any further 23 discussion? There being none, those in favor of the 24 motion signify by raising your right hands. It's four 25 zero, unanimous. 41 1 Item 1.5, consider, discuss and take 2 appropriate action for the Court to accept the alternate 3 plat for World Amazing Grace. Charlie Hastings. That's 4 in Precinct 1. 5 MR. HASTINGS: Yes. The alternate plat 6 process was approved by Commissioner Baldwin a few 7 months ago. This plat creates a 5.01-acre tract out of 8 99.7 acres owned by World Amazing Grace Corporation. 9 The proposed track meets minimum lot size and road 10 requirements. It is outside the special flood hazard 11 area and it will be served by a private well, water 12 well, and OSSF. The applicant indicated it will be sold 13 and utilized for commercial purposes; however, it may 14 also be used for residential property or purposes if 15 they so desire. 16 The County Engineer requests the Court 17 accept the alternate plat for World Amazing Grace, 18 Precinct 1. 19 MR. BELEW: I move that we accept the 20 proposal. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Second. 22 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 23 Belew and seconded by Commissioner Moser to approve the 24 plat pursuant to item 1.5 on the agenda, that is to 25 accept the alternate plat for World Amazing Grace as 42 1 presented. Any further comment or discussion? There 2 being none, those in favor signify by raising your right 3 hands. It's four zero, unanimous. 4 1.6 on the agenda, consider, discuss and 5 take appropriate action for the Court's final approval 6 naming private road Siesta Circle South. That's in 7 Precinct 4. Kelly Hoffer. 8 Mr. John David Grisebaum applied through the 9 911 office on January the 13th, 2017, to name a private 10 road on his property. The proposed private road name is 11 Siesta Circle South, which lies in Precinct 4. I don't 12 believe this has ever been named before. 13 At this time I ask the Court for their final 14 approval approving regarding private road named Siesta 15 Circle South in Precinct 4. 16 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I move for approval. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 18 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 19 Reeves, seconded by Commissioner Letz, for approval of 20 item 1.6 on the agenda and that is seeking the Court's 21 final approval naming the private road indicated 22 therein, naming it Siesta Circle South. Is there any 23 further discussion or comments? There being none, those 24 in favor of the motion signify by raising their right 25 hand. It's four zero, unanimous. 43 1 MS. HOFFER: Thank you. 2 JUDGE POLLARD: Item 1.7 consider, discuss 3 and take appropriate action to approve the amending plat 4 for Guadalupe Heights Number 2, lot Number 1, block 5 of 5 record in volume 2, pages 34 through 36. This is 6 situated in Precinct 2. Mr. Hastings. 7 MR. HASTINGS: Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Charlie, before we 9 begin does this agenda item and the following one, are 10 they related? 11 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Would it be better -- 12 and I'm asking the County Attorney, if we call them both 13 at the same time, so then -- 14 MRS. STEBBINS: If it would help y'all 15 understand what's what that would be a good idea. 16 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Could you call 1.8 at 17 the same time so we could discuss all of it? 18 JUDGE POLLARD: Item 1.8 consider, discuss 19 and take appropriate action to convey 0.34 acres platted 20 as Cherry Way right-of-way in Guadalupe Heights Number 21 2, volume 2, of record in pages 34 through 36 of the 22 Plat Records of Kerr County, Texas, to Glen Eldon 23 Fifield and Elsie Viola Fifield living trust. This is 24 situated in Precinct 2, Mr. Hastings. 25 MR. HASTINGS: Thank you. 44 1 JUDGE POLLARD: We'll consider both of them 2 at the same time. 3 MR. HASTINGS: Cherry Way was built outside 4 of the platted right of way on the opposite side of Lot 5 1, Block 5 of the Guadalupe Heights No. 2 Subdivision. 6 This amending plat that you have before you would place 7 the right-of-way in the correct location for Cherry Way 8 and redesignates Lot 1, Block 5 to Lot 21, Block 3. 9 The next agenda item, Cherry Way again, was 10 built outside that 0.34 acres. And Voelkel Surveying 11 has prepared the amending plat that you have in front of 12 you that places the right-of-way in the correct location 13 for Cherry Way and does the re designation of the lot. 14 And if the plat is approved, then it would be 15 recommended that the Court convey the said 0.34 acres of 16 platted right-of-way to the property owner, the original 17 0.34 back to the property owner. 18 So on one hand you have an amended plat, and 19 the other what we have is a conveyance. 20 JUDGE POLLARD: In short, a summary, they 21 platted it and it showed the road in a certain place, 22 and instead the road was placed outside of that lot. 23 MR. HASTINGS: That's correct. 24 JUDGE POLLARD: -- and now they're just 25 trying to correct that and recognize the existing road 45 1 and that abandons the right-of-way on the lot and going 2 to convey that to the land owner. 3 MR. HASTINGS: Yes, Sir. 4 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And Charlie, about 5 this, it's something that's never come before the Court 6 before because there was never any need to. So I think 7 its just cleaning up the paperwork, so I move for 8 approval. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 10 JUDGE POLLARD: Moved by Commissioner Moser, 11 seconded by Commissioner Letz to approve both items, 12 items 1.7 and 1.8 on the agenda. 1.7 is to amend the 13 plat for Guadalupe Heights No. 2, Lot 1, Block 5, Volume 14 2, pages 34 to 46. And item 1.8 is to convey 0.34 acres 15 separate platted as Cherry Way right-of-way platted in 16 Guadalupe Heights No. 2, Volume 2, pages 34 to 36 to the 17 Glen Eldon Fifield and the Elsie Viola Fifield living 18 trust. Did I pronounce those names right? 19 MR. HASTINGS: Yes, Sir. 20 JUDGE POLLARD: All located in Precinct 2. 21 Thank you. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, a comment on 23 this. The process is amending a plat, it's a term. 24 It's something that was put into State law and not all 25 that long ago really, to correct the error. And we've 46 1 looked at it, and the County Attorney and I looked at 2 it, and it meets the criteria as amended, but it makes 3 it an easier process than going through that original 4 procedure, so it's less expensive to the property 5 owners. And it is allowed for by state law in 6 correcting an error. 7 COMMISSIONER REEVES: And we can with 8 that -- I have not read up on that portion of it, but we 9 can convey the property with this type of an agenda 10 item? 11 MRS. STEBBINS: I believe so yes, Sir. 12 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Okay. Just as long as 13 we can do that. 14 JUDGE POLLARD: And I guess the County Judge 15 to sign the deed of conveyance, okay. Is that correct, 16 County Attorney? 17 MRS. STEBBINS: Yes, Sir. 18 MR. VOELKEL: Don Voelkel, Kerrville. A 19 little background. This had been conveyed with like an 20 owner finance, so it never had a lender involved for all 21 these years, and then when both Glen and his wife have 22 passed on, and so the estate is trying to sell it. The 23 title company couldn't warrant title because their 24 houses is actually in the right-of-way of the platted 25 strip of Cherry Way. And there was a utility electrical 47 1 line going over the house. So to give you a little bit 2 of background since ETJ has taken it to the P and Z last 3 Thursday, they approved it. And in their process they 4 have a DRC meeting, Development Review Committee 5 meeting. And KPUB is having me prepare -- it's like an 6 affidavit that the owners will sign knowing that the 7 electricity line is there and we don't want to have it 8 moved. They're allowing everything to stay the way it 9 is just to make this right. We're moving the 10 right-of-way to where the road is. And so, they've 11 already approved it. They also said it was amending a 12 plat to fix an error. So that's why this is happening. 13 It's not just -- not like we want to move around a road 14 and anything. They didn't find out about. It's been 60 15 years and nobody knew about it until now. 16 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I'll also amend the 17 motion to authorize the County Judge to sign the 18 appropriate documents. 19 MR. VOELKEL: Thank y'all. 20 JUDGE POLLARD: Both parties agree to that? 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yes. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 23 JUDGE POLLARD: Any further discussion? 24 There being none, those in favor of the motion signify 25 by raising your right hands. It's four zero, unanimous. 48 1 Thank you. That's on both item 1.7 and 1.8. 2 Item 1.9 consider, discuss and take 3 appropriate action regarding the Hill Country Master 4 Gardener Greenhouse project. Roy Walston. 5 MR. WALSTON: Thank you, Judge and 6 Commissioners. I invited a couple of your master 7 gardeners to join me this morning to answer some 8 questions by chance if there's something I can't. We 9 have our president Jackie Skinner, Sandy Lewis and Ann 10 Brown has joined us. And I visited with them along with 11 Jonathan Letz on a proposal that we'd like to ask, and I 12 I dropped off a letter to you the other day, and this is 13 another one that I've added an areal photo there that 14 might help get a better idea. There is a fence about 12 15 feet behind our office that runs directly behind our 16 office, and Jonathan -- Commissioner Letz has been out 17 and we've looked at it, and the privacy -- it's a 18 privacy fence attached to a two by four no climb wire 19 fence. And we would like to move that fence about 45 20 feet directly back that would -- it would still be -- 21 it's approximately a hundred and 60 feet long, and it 22 will be on the opposite side of the shed that is there 23 currently that was part of the park's storage lot that 24 was there. And we could then store -- the master 25 gardeners could then store their rain barrels for 49 1 construction in that storage shed, as well as add an 2 additional greenhouse over -- directly behind the 3 existing greenhouse, along the highway, for expansion 4 and growth in their -- for their plant sale that they 5 have in May. 6 JUDGE POLLARD: What's the cost to the 7 County? 8 MR. WALSTON: The cost to the County would 9 be the fence, the hundred and sixty feet of fence. We 10 can use probably replace and use that wire that's there, 11 the post if you know, if we can get those up we can 12 still use those. And that's depending on whether y'all 13 want to use the privacy fence, if you want to go back 14 with the privacy fence or not. 15 JUDGE POLLARD: So you don't know what it's 16 going to cost. 17 MR. WALSTON: I don't have a number for you 18 exactly. 19 JUDGE POLLARD: Is there a line item for 20 that? 21 MRS. DOSS: It wasn't in the budget. I mean 22 as soon as we find out how much the estimate is, we can 23 look and see where we can take it out of. 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I think we can see what 25 it's going to cost, and see what Tim may be able to do, 50 1 and figure out how we're going to pay for it. 2 MR. WALSTON: I just to don't know what the 3 cost of the privacy fence is, I wasn't able to get that. 4 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Pretty well squaring 5 up where the existing fence, where the RV hookups are. 6 You're just kind of proposing to square that up and 7 that's that little dog leg that backs up to your office, 8 is that what you're talking about? 9 MR. WALSTON: No. It would attached to the 10 chain link fence on the road and goes all the way across 11 to the -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where the gates are. 13 MR. WALSTON: -- where the gates are, yeah. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean it's a good 15 thing. It's a piece of the River Star that's really not 16 used, not usable. It's kind of an area that they use 17 for storage and a bunch of junk in there, that would 18 allow the master gardeners and Roy, for both, to have 19 some room right now. Right now it's so cluttered behind 20 the building you can't get anything accomplished. 21 JUDGE POLLARD: What about the metal 22 buildings, can they utilize those? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, they can use that, 24 but maintenance has use of that. So it could be 25 utilized as it's already there. And it's a matter of 51 1 the cost of the fence. And hopefully they can maybe 2 raise the money for the materials. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So use the existing 20 4 by 20 shed. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, Sir. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: That's what you're 7 saying. And then a proposed greenhouse, so you just 8 move the existing one there or an additional greenhouse? 9 MR. WALSTON: An additional greenhouse. 10 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So that will be another 11 item? 12 MR. WALSTON: No. The master gardeners have 13 already approved funding for that. 14 MR. WALSTON: The only cost would be the 15 fence and hopefully we could use the material and 16 maintenance could help in moving that fence. It's just 17 a matter of if we want to make it a privacy fence, and 18 and what that cost would be. 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Why don't you work with 20 Tim and come back and let us know. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The concept is fine. 22 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I think it's a 23 workable, a very good idea. Let's just figure out where 24 any funding, if needed, would come from, and work on it. 25 And we can't approve it today, but once we figure that 52 1 then we can get to work and get it taken care of. It's 2 a good use of land that's not getting utilized. 3 MR. WALSTON: Well, it makes it accessible 4 to where we could get behind the office a little easier 5 and clean up. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, cleaning up 7 would be a big part. Yeah. 8 JUDGE POLLARD: Y'all are going to be able 9 to do this? 10 MR. BOLLIER: It's not that big a job, 11 Judge. It's something we can knock out in a couple days 12 probably. Let's just say a week, we should be able to 13 knock it out in a week. I believe we can use that old 14 fencing that's there, and we have some old pipe over 15 there that Roy doesn't want me to steal, but I'll steal 16 it and use that over there. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So if it's of no cost 18 other than maintenance labor, should we go ahead and 19 approve it rather than bring it back? 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I think that's good, 21 yeah. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion to 23 approve the concept and authorize maintenance to install 24 and there's no authority to purchase any materials. 25 MR. BELEW: I'll second that. 53 1 MR. BOLLIER: No authority to purchase 2 materials, good job. 3 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 4 Letz, seconded by Commissioner Belew to approve the 5 action regarding Hill Country Master Gardeners 6 Greenhouse project, and put language in there about that 7 the only cost to the County would be furnishing labor. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I said. 9 Authorize maintenance to install, but no materials. 10 JUDGE POLLARD: And any materials that might 11 be necessary would have to be their cost, but we can use 12 the same posts and fencing materials in so far as 13 possible when you change them. All right, is that a 14 fair statement? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 16 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. Is there any 17 further discussion or comment about the motion? There 18 being none, those in favor signify by raising your right 19 hands. It's four zero, unanimous. Thank you. 20 MR. WALSTON: Thank you, Judge. 21 JUDGE POLLARD: Been called to my attention 22 there's a timed item at 9:30. We are somewhat passed 23 that at this time, so we'll call item 1.12. Annual 24 report from Kerr County Historical Commission. Julie 25 Leonard. 54 1 MRS. LEONARD: Good morning. The purpose of 2 the Kerr County Historical Commission is to protect and 3 preserve the county's historic and cultural resources 4 for the use, education, enjoyment and appreciation of 5 the present and future generations. We're a unit of the 6 Texas Historical Commission and work under the guidance 7 of the Kerr County Commissioners' Court. Members are 8 appointed by the Court. 9 The KCHC meets at noon who the third Monday 10 of each month at the Union Church building, Travis and 11 Broadway. Our public meetings begin with a program and 12 end with a formal meeting. Local newspapers inform the 13 public of our meetings. And in 2016 we had 59 members 14 that volunteers an astonishing 6808 hours in service to 15 Kerr County and the State of Texas. 16 Officers for 2016 is Julie Mosty Leonard, 17 Chair, Mike Bolin Vice Chair, Mary Lee Stewart, 18 Secretary, Wilma Teague, Treasurer. 19 The KCHC has been awarded the distinguished 20 service award for eight consecutive years during my 21 tenure, and I add there that there were several years 22 before that that they were awarded the same honor. In 23 2016 only 92 of 254 Texas counties achieved this honor. 24 Our program last year consisted of Eva Smith, she was a 25 founding member of the local Joshua D. Brown chapter of 55 1 the daughters of the Texas revolution, she talked about 2 past, present and future of the DRT. Jim Morris, the 3 jewelry designer, demonstrated his hobby of flint 4 flaking, which is making arrowheads, and he gave 5 information about the early inhabitants of our area and 6 how the different arrowheads were used for hunting game. 7 Another program was local archeologist Brian 8 Saner gave a program on the Indians of Kerr County, and 9 he brought some of his collection of artifacts and 10 demonstrated how they were used. 11 Cemetery archivist and KCHC member Linda 12 Nielsen Reynolds gave a talk about the Blank family. 13 They were the first black family that settled in Kerr 14 County, and several of their descendents were in 15 attendance for that presentation. 16 Rudi Rodriquez, he's a Texas Hispanic 17 researcher and author, told of his efforts to restore 18 his ancestor, Jose Policarpio Rodriquez, 1890 school 19 house in Bandera County. Policarpio, "Polly", was a 20 famed Texas surveyor and military guide for the Texas 21 Rangers and troops in Camp Verde. Many of his relatives 22 still live in Kerr County. Another program the members 23 participated in a discussion of Kerr County growing up 24 along the Guadalupe, so there were some interesting 25 stories there. 56 1 Our historical marker dedication ceremony 2 were held for Notre Dame School, HEB original store, 3 Famous Door Saloon, and the First Christian Church in 4 Center Point. And four applications for historical 5 markers were submitted last fall. 6 Our Oral history project, which was quite an 7 undertaking, Francelle Collins is Chair, Bonnie Pipes 8 Flory, and Louis Stephens are all members of that 9 committee. Louis archives all items in the history 10 center and the Logan Library Schreiner University. 11 Archived in 2016 was Judge Tom Pollard, 12 Gerald Witt, Joseph Luther, Kathleen "Katchy" McCall, 13 Sam Junkin, Sylvia Lewis, Joe Lewis and Cecil Wellborn. 14 And I didn't put this in this, but these are all 15 available at the Schreiner Library, and also the History 16 Center. 17 And the 2016 interviews that were done were 18 Bertha Real Priour, Spencer Brown, Pinky Brown, Robert 19 Bell, Authur Bell, Mary Elaine Adamack Jones, Frances 20 Schumacher Andrews, Billie Schumacher Zuber, Jeanie 21 Schumacher Sutton, Clark Klein, Karen Herzog Klein, 22 Louis Romero, Joann Lochte Redden, Clifton Fifer, and 23 Bob Blackburn. So these will all be transcribed and 24 available probably this year. 25 Our endangered properties, chairman Deborah 57 1 Gaudier Schofield School for girls, and the Seaborn 2 Eastland House at 1028 East Main, which is the last 3 known residence of Captain Joseph Tivy, are of concern. 4 So we're watching those. 5 The portals to Texas history, is the 6 University of North Texas website, and Mary Elaine Jones 7 is the Chair of that. We received a thousand dollars 8 partnership award for the third year in a row. And this 9 money assures that we have no expenditure for adding our 10 submissions. And in 2016, 14 oral histories were added 11 to make a 75 total that can be accessed on this website. 12 Also added will be Rosa Lavender's Kerr County Judges, 13 the 1856 to 2015 booklet, schools of Hunt, Texas, 1880's 14 to 1980. Jeanie Schumacher Sutton prepared that. She 15 also did the Hunt -- historic Hunt driving tour. And 16 the other two submissions were Hospital On The Hill, 17 Mark Mosty narrated the history of the Kerrville State 18 Hospital, and the last was the reminiscences of my youth 19 and other catastrophes by Merrill Doyle, Kerrville Life 20 1911 to 1914. 21 And then I've added on your printout how to 22 view this site. You google portals to Texas history, 23 and then you scroll to "a gathering of rare", you click 24 "explore by", you choose a partner, click K, and then 25 you scroll to Kerr County Historical Commission, and you 58 1 will see a lot of Kerr County history. And it's an 2 amazing site. And I encourage you to check it out. And 3 we obviously have a lot that we've planned to add to it. 4 The County website, Mike Bowlin's our Chair, 5 and we really thank Matt Comer and John Trolinger for 6 their help and advice on this site. Mike has helped 7 people from 11 different states about cemeteries and 8 families seeking information on ancestors, and assisted 9 San Antonio newspapers seeking information. And I also 10 want to thank you all for the additional audio visual 11 equipment for the Union Church building. We continue to 12 have 30 or 40 people at our meetings, and I hope that 13 other groups will learn of our enhancement because this 14 building could really be used more than it's being used 15 because it's a wonderful, historic county property. 16 And I really thank you for your support. 17 And Harley, we hope to be working with you, too. 18 MR. BELEW: Looking forward to it. 19 MRS. LEONARD: And also thank Jody, who's 20 very helpful always, and thank you again. Respectfully 21 submitted. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: We thank you. How long 23 have you served as the Chair? 24 MRS. LEONARD: I think all my life. I'm 25 going on eight years. 59 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, congratulations 2 on all the accomplishments, and 68 hundred hours of 3 volunteer? 4 MRS. LEONARD: Yeah. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Good gracious, last 6 year. 7 MRS. LEONARD: Yeah. All volunteer. 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Is there any place else 9 in the State that is this good historical -- 10 MRS. LEONARD: Oh, I'm sure there's not. 11 Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Thank you. 13 JUDGE POLLARD: Thank you. All right, back 14 on schedule. Item 1.10 consider, discuss and take 15 appropriate action on proposal from Comfort Seal 16 Insulation for work at the Maintenance Department 17 facility on Hayes Street. Total of $3,646.00. Mr. 18 Bollier. 19 MR. BOLLIER: Yes, Sir. We have found out 20 that we have to use this comfort seal insulation. I did 21 not know that, so that's the reason why I have this on 22 there. 23 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Let's back up, Tim. 24 You found out that in order to have the building 25 improved through who? Who? 60 1 JUDGE POLLARD: The City. 2 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I'm asking Tim to 3 answer it for us. 4 MR. BOLLIER: The City. 5 COMMISSIONER REEVES: And what did they 6 require? 7 MR. BOLLIER: They require comfort seal 8 insulation. 9 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Did they require this 10 company? 11 MR. BOLLIER: No, they did not. 12 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Did they require the 13 type of insulation? 14 MR. BOLLIER: Yes. 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: What's being insulated? 16 MR. BOLLIER: The walls, the outside walls. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: After talking to Tim on 18 this, they don't require this type of insulation. They 19 require a certain R value of insulation, and the only 20 way we can get the R value is to use foam insulation. 21 So the exterior wall that was previously insulated by 22 the City. 23 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And it requires 24 insulation because it's air conditioned? 25 MR. BOLLIER: Yes, Sir. 61 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Or inhabitated, or 2 what's the requirement for it to be insulated? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's an exterior wall of 4 the building. I guess there's offices inside. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: People are going to be 6 working in there -- 7 MRS. STEBBINS: Because they're making 8 modifications they now have to bring it up to code, the 9 city's code, so this is what's required. Because 10 they're modifying the building. In order to -- you have 11 to have that in the plans to get a permit to do the 12 modification. 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: They're modifying for 14 offices for people so there -- 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. There was offices 16 already. It's in my mind, it's not even changing the 17 use. We're just upgrading it. But they're requiring 18 a lot of -- 19 MR. BELEW: Is this the only company that 20 has the R -- what is the R value required? 21 MRS. STEBBINS: 19, I think. 22 MR. BOLLIER: 19.6, and since we're using 2 23 by four walls, two by four for walls, we can't use just 24 R19 because the squash the R19 which ruins the R factor. 25 I'm just telling you what they told me. 62 1 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Now to go back, this 2 company has done work for the County before. And they 3 are following a similar model to what they did at Animal 4 Services. But I wanted it clear that we were not 5 required to use them. 6 MR. BOLLIER: No, we're not required to use 7 them. We can use anybody we want. This is the only 8 people in town that I knew of, so this is where I went 9 to get a quote. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the City has a -- 11 they will approve -- I mean if we approve the foam, 12 everything else is okay according to the City? 13 MR. BOLLIER: No. 14 MR. BELEW: Of course not. 15 MR. BOLLIER: Of course not. I don't -- 16 Heather was out all week, I sent her an e-mail what the 17 City had sent me back, and I got this quote and tried to 18 go with what the City said. But they sent it back and 19 they said it did not pass. 20 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Well if that is the 21 case and I know it's going to delay you two weeks, but 22 it's been delayed. I'd like to wait two weeks and find 23 out everything we have to do, and we don't keep having 24 to piecemeal this project, so I'd like to pass on that 25 right now. 63 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would just for the 2 County Attorney -- I don't know. I'm certainly not an 3 expert on city's rules in this area, but there's no 4 change in use in that building. If it's a storage 5 building, it's a storage building. If there's office 6 space, it's office space. So I thought if it was no 7 change of use you didn't have to go through -- 8 MRS. STEBBINS: I think it's the extent of 9 the modifications to the building, but I can look. And 10 if you would like for me to participate in this process 11 with Tim and the city, I can be very helpful if you 12 would like me to do that. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would like that. 14 JUDGE POLLARD: Essentially what's the code 15 if we have to bring it up to code. I think what he's 16 saying maybe we don't -- 17 MRS. STEBBINS: I think what they'll say is 18 that the modifications to the current building, despite 19 the use, the modifications kick in and the need to 20 comply with the building code. That's what they'll say. 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: It's a really good 22 question, because we did something like that out at the 23 airport. We kept the same use maybe modification, but 24 since it was the same use of the facility we didn't have 25 to go back -- 64 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which was a City -- 2 owned by the City and us together. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 4 MRS. STEBBINS: I can talk to them with Tim 5 and be helpful. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 7 MRS. STEBBINS: You're welcome. 8 MR. BELEW: Out of curiosity, Tim, what's 9 the extent of the remodel? I mean what is being done to 10 the building to change it? 11 MR. BOLLIER: All we've done is we tore out 12 the old offices that were there, because they were not 13 in good shape at all, so we came in there and just made 14 us a couple offices in there, a male and female 15 bathroom, it's like 20 by 30 -- well -- it's actually 16 21 -- 6 wide, and right at 35 feet long. 17 MR. BELEW: New plumbing was installed. 18 MR. BOLLIER: The plumbing was there. All 19 we've done -- all we're going to do is add in some water 20 for our sink in the break room and sink in our shop area 21 and it just comes down the wall, which is a very short 22 distance, and we have a washer and dryer down there, and 23 we've built a little laundry room there. It's all into 24 that one area. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was still -- they had 65 1 an office space in there for the people that used that 2 building. They had bathrooms in there before. We added 3 doors to the building, roll-up doors. 4 MR. BELEW: I remember there was a 5 discussion about it. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean it may be a 7 change of use. If you add value to the building value, 8 we're making a 20 thousand dollar change to a million 9 dollar building, and you know, it's the same use. It's 10 still a warehouse, storage building as it was before. 11 That's my question. 12 MRS. STEBBINS: I'll find out and come with 13 Tim next time with a report connecting the dots. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 15 JUDGE POLLARD: Next question. Whatever it 16 costs, where is it going to come from? Is it in the 17 budget? 18 MRS. DOSS: No, it's not budgeted. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It was budgeted but not 20 this amount. 21 MRS. DOSS: This is not budgeted. This is 22 going over the amount budgeted. Well, the only line 23 item I can think of right now would be another 24 contingency. 25 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Ooh, we're sure hitting 66 1 the contingency -- 2 MRS. DOSS: Yes, we are. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: -- so early in the 4 year. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We'll see how much it 6 is. 7 MR. BOLLIER: Thank you. 8 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. Item 1.13 9 consider, discuss and take appropriate action to approve 10 contract with Kerr County Soil and Water Conservation 11 District and allow the County Judge to sign same. 12 Take a look at the contract and see that it 13 specifies. They're a private non-profit corporation, we 14 deal with them for the purpose of maybe educating the 15 public, and outlining all these purposes that are stated 16 in the contract that's in here. This is something we've 17 done as a renewal, isn't it? 18 MRS. STEBBINS: I believe so. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move for approval. 20 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Second. 21 JUDGE POLLARD: Is there a second? 22 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Me. 23 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 24 Letz, seconded by Commissioner Reeves to approve the 25 contract of Kerr County Soil and Water Conservation and 67 1 allow the County Judge to sign same. Any further 2 discussion or comment? Those in favor, signify by 3 raising their right hands. It's four zero, unanimous. 4 Item 1.14 -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's take a break, 6 Judge, 7 THE COURT: All right. It is now 10:23, 8 we'll take a ten-minute break. 9 ( Break.) 10 JUDGE POLLARD: All right, we're back in 11 session, the break is over. The next item is 1.14 12 consider, discuss and take appropriate action to no 13 longer require the Court reporter to be present in 14 executive session matters. 15 The reason I ask that to be put on the 16 agenda where we had discussions, just some brief 17 discussions about this before, as to whether or not -- I 18 don't think it's actually required that we do record it. 19 And I thought it would be a good idea to talk about it. 20 What do you think? 21 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I think she should 22 stay in there, the executive session are only for 23 certain items, and I would like there always to be a 24 record of this body that we are not discussing anything 25 but what is permitted by law. 68 1 MR. BEWEW: I agree. 2 COMMISSIONER REEVES: So I would like to see 3 the Court reporter remain in all of our executive 4 sessions. 5 MR. BELEW: I agree to that. 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I think that's a good 7 point. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. 9 JUDGE POLLARD: Okay, that's the way it'll 10 be. 11 JUDGE POLLARD: Item 1.15 consider, discuss 12 and take appropriate action regarding update on the 13 proposed floodplain revisions along Third Creek. 14 Now, do you want to do this in open session 15 mostly or closed? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Open. We may need to go 17 into closed, but may not. 18 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. Go ahead. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I'll start it, I'm 20 not sure if Tom will come in as well, or maybe even 21 Charlie. We had a meeting with the City that we 22 requested when Tom and I went to the City Council 23 meeting, and we met with City staff, and Freese and 24 Nichols, the engineers that prepared the floodplain 25 studies. 69 1 A couple things, one, I think the City and 2 Freese and Nichols were very upfront and told us what 3 their plans were. More so than they've been in the past 4 whenever I've been met with them at. Freese and 5 Nichols -- you know, I'm not going to say I agree with 6 their model totally, but I think have -- it's 7 justifiable from an engineering standpoint. When you do 8 a model of this type there are assumptions that you 9 make. They -- I think they used the term is a very 10 conservative model, which makes the footprint or any 11 other floodplain evaluation is larger, you know. Airs 12 on the larger size than keeping it small. So I mean and 13 there's a basis for it, they're not going to back off 14 their model. From the model standpoint that is the 15 model that the city's going to use. I'm pretty certain 16 of that. 17 The City has said they understand some of 18 our concerns, and they some of the specific questions we 19 had about how they did thing on the County property and 20 how they stopped some of the cross sections. Freese and 21 Nichols says they really didn't study that area a great 22 deal, they didn't go out and verify the elevations in 23 some of the areas and the contours, they felt up on the 24 City property were more important. 25 MR. BELEW: Now, where are you talking 70 1 about, Jon? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the County property. 3 MR. BELEW: Right at the line. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pretty much at City 5 limits or Spur 100. Almost right at the same point 6 right there. I guess Spur 100 is the City limits and 7 their property is slightly inside that area. But they 8 did not study the area below the reuse pond or outside 9 the city property to the extent they upstream and on the 10 City property. They understand that since we have gone 11 out and surveyed it, we have shown that -- their data is 12 not real accurate because we did construction at the Ag 13 Barn and the Youth Event Center, so their remedy is to 14 stop the area that they're going to turn in on the CLOMR 15 as area studied at either Spur 100 or the City limits. 16 And that will mean that the entire -- all the County 17 property, Road & Bridge and the Youth Event Center and 18 little league fields and all of that will then be listed 19 has an unstudied area, and will be in the AE Zone as it 20 currently exists. They'll be no change. 21 JUDGE POLLARD: It won't be put into the 22 hundred year floodplain. 23 COMMISSIONER MOSER: We'll use the existing 24 hundred year floodplain. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. To me, you know, 71 1 it's -- it meets the needs of the County from the 2 standpoint as our concern has been all along and we 3 questioned the floodplain study, but the reason was they 4 they put part of the Youth Event Center in the hundred 5 year floodplain and it put part of the County property 6 in the hundred year floodplain, this will not happen 7 then, it will looked at as an unstudied area. My 8 understanding is that it is a pretty common for flood 9 studies to be only a portion of a basin. And when you 10 start thinking about that; if not, any time you did any 11 kind of study you'd have to go to the Gulf of Mexico, so 12 you can limit it, so that's done. 13 I think the risk is that the model that you 14 know we're -- I'm not so sure that the best model used 15 would be, I guess, the model of record at FEMA right 16 now. If somebody wanted to study downstream from the 17 City property that would be the default model right now, 18 but I think there's a lot of things at that point 19 they're trying to figure out talking to Charlie about 20 this, who would study all that area, we own the 21 property. So we would be the only ones who would 22 logically right to study it. I guess there's some risk 23 that FEMA will say well we have a model, here's the data 24 and let's go and try to study this whole area now, but 25 it's pretty slim chance that that would happen. 72 1 And the other option we would have is to 2 hire another engineering firm and do a study, and the 3 City would submit their study, we'd submit our study. 4 We have no idea, maybe the same and maybe it would 5 different and FEMA would make a determination. But 6 there's a risk there that same as City model. I mean 7 our engineering firm may say it's the same thing, I 8 don't know. 9 But I think at this point from the county's 10 standpoint the best thing is to do is accept the 11 city's -- they've offered to do, and withdraw our -- 12 both of our requests that we have to the City right now 13 one to stop construction and the other thing is to 14 provide information, which they provided the information 15 at this point, and say they can go ahead and submit the 16 CLOMR as revised. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: The only thing that I'd 18 add is I think that the City came there, with us, I 19 think there were three of us from the county, Jonathan, 20 myself and Charlie, and they had about four of their 21 staff, four or five people from Freese and Nichols. 22 They were very professional, they went through every 23 single thing. Their logic of why they assume what they 24 assume, compared it with what other analyses had been 25 done. It was reasonable what they did. I think they 73 1 understood the question or the concern for the County 2 and were willing to say, look, we don't know, we don't 3 have your latest information, did not put that into our 4 analysis, don't need to do that, it satisfies us for 5 right now if we want to do it later, we can. So I think 6 it was -- I think we all walked away from there being 7 satisfied. With again City and County coming together 8 looking at the problem, finding out a solution. And I 9 am agree with Jonathan, I don't think we withdraw -- we 10 should withdraw our thing about, you know, cease and 11 desist on the pond until we get this resolved. I think 12 we've -- I'm satisfied with it. And I guess -- I hope 13 Charlie is, and I think Jonathan is. It was good, it 14 was a good discussion, and very professional. And I was 15 very impressed with Freese and Nichols and their 16 professional staff. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Freese and 18 Nichols, I think if we hired an engineering firm we'd 19 come up with a different answer, so they have a reason 20 then why they did it the way they did, it certainly met 21 the criteria and it's fine. You can't argue with it. 22 You can say maybe some of your assumptions could have 23 varied a little bit, but it may change or may not. 24 The the other thing I would like to say is, 25 I'm not -- I'm representing the county's interest here; 74 1 I'm not saying the model's right, wrong or indifferent 2 really. If someone he's wants to challenge it's up to 3 them. It's our biggest concern is to get the County 4 property out of the floodplain and this does it. 5 JUDGE POLLARD: And keep it out of it to the 6 extent that it is. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's possible. 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, it doesn't put it 9 in the floodplain based on their analysis, okay, that's 10 the key thing. So it says okay, we'll take your 11 concerns out of our analysis, but our analysis says what 12 we need to do with the City, and it does, so -- 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think the other 14 thing is, and I wish the City would have explained a lot 15 of this to the public as well earlier. I think it would 16 have avoided a lot of the questions. And as an example 17 they're modifying -- the pond construction they take 18 into account they've modifying the area, I guess, where 19 the water's going to flow slightly. And I didn't 20 understand that until Charlie showed me. If you look at 21 the cross section, if you know kind of what you're 22 looking for, they are enlarging the flood area, or the 23 stream bed I guess you'd call it. And the way that 24 whole area is where they're building the pond it's kind 25 of hard to explain, you have a little bluff on one side 75 1 and then you have a creek bed and then it goes up and 2 then it goes back down where they dug a bunch of dirt 3 out years ago. So it's kind of like an overflow area 4 where the water's going anyway. It's not like the water 5 was flowing through there all the time. So it's kind of 6 like a little detention area, and they're modifying a 7 little bit will probably improve the flow of water 8 through there. 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: They're deepening the 10 flow -- 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're deepening the 12 channel, widening the channel. So I think if they would 13 explained this a lot sooner it would have been a whole 14 lot easier to understand why from their standpoint is 15 that they're not having impact on flow downstream, 16 because they're -- it's a modification; it's not just 17 that they're putting a pond there, they're making 18 modifications to account for the pond. If they'd said 19 that early on it would have helped. But we got to where 20 we are. And I think -- 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: The end point where 22 both parties are happy. 23 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. Is there a 24 motion? 25 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I had a couple 76 1 questions, and I'm really curious what George has to 2 say. Did they did they cease and desist -- 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. 4 COMMISSIONER REEVES: So even if we withdraw 5 it, they haven't changed what they're doing? 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. 7 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I've heard comments, 8 and I was not at the Council meeting, so and I've not 9 read their minutes. I want to point out that I have 10 heard that one Council member said we should not have 11 built in the floodplain to begin with, and I wanted once 12 again to make that of the record that we did not build 13 in the floodplain; the fact of the matter, Mr. Hastings, 14 we have documentation through Mr. Hewitt, correct? 15 MR. HASTINGS: Correct. 16 COMMISSIONER REEVES: And I just want to 17 point out we did not build in the floodplain to begin 18 with. It wasn't like we weren't taking care of our 19 business on that. The two of you have worked very hard 20 on this and I compliment you, Precinct 2 looking out for 21 that, as well as Commissioner Letz looking out for the 22 interest of our buildings and our properties, little 23 league, the AG barn and everything else, so -- 24 COMMISSIONER MOSER: And the residents close 25 to it, right. 77 1 MR. BELEW: Well, I'd like to ask if you 2 have anything to add to this, Charlie? 3 MR. HASTINGS: No. I think everything was 4 well stated. The meeting was really a good source of 5 information from us, it was really good to hear directly 6 from their engineers. I think that was one of the 7 difficult things through the process, is that we were 8 respecting that this was their engineer was their 9 client, and we didn't make any direct contact with 10 Freese and Nichols, and so having that direct contact 11 with them, and being able to have our questions answered 12 was very, very helpful, and we appreciate the City for 13 setting that meeting up. 14 COMMISSIONER MOSER: So we require any 15 action? 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think we 17 probably should, but probably we of this one -- 18 JUDGE POLLARD: Mr. Baroody. 19 MR. BAROODY: George Baroody, 1616 Glen 20 Road, Kerrville. And I appreciate the laughter as my 21 name got called out there by the way. 22 But any ways, so just a little background. 23 Obviously, the very first thing that the City is 24 required to do to build this thing is to display proof 25 that the project is not going to negatively impact the 78 1 surrounding properties. And by ordinance and by 2 Floodplain Code Development Code, they're supposed to do 3 two things. They're supposed to determine the base 4 flood elevation and they're supposed to obtain a LOMR 5 essentially stating what the baseline -- they're 6 supposed to study the unstudied area and get a baseline 7 floodplain map set up. They haven't done that, that's 8 the first step. So and for whatever reason they're 9 reluctant to do so. Conjecture -- I mean it's purely 10 conjecture on my part. But I believe they have actually 11 worked backwards to try and prove that they have not 12 affected the floodplain negatively, because keep in mind 13 that they did have the other study done the year prior 14 to the same area, and drastically different numbers, but 15 actually kept the County buildings outside the 16 floodplain. That was a reasonable model as well. So 17 even though Freese and Nichols has a reasonable model, 18 they also have in their possession, an equally 19 reasonable model that shows a considerably different 20 setup. 21 And then we have empirical data that shows 22 loosely that these buildings are not in the floodplain. 23 So when they show -- when I say they're working backward 24 what it appears to me that they've done is create a 25 model that they knew to enlarge the floodplain enough to 79 1 where a reasonable model with the pond built would not 2 affect that. And knowing that you have that other study 3 done in the same area, I think it's kind of hard to 4 disprove that. So they actually -- it's on the city's 5 burden to prove that this thing doesn't modify anything. 6 And there's variance between the two studies, which you 7 know, I have a problem with that. 8 The other thing that if you accept this 9 proposal, as you guys are doing, technically the 10 buildings won't be in the floodplain. But all that 11 really does is you don't have to buy flood insurance. 12 If their floodplain -- if their model is accurate, then 13 what you know to occur is that your buildings are in 14 danger of having flood damage, because they've showed 15 you their model extended, even though they didn't fully 16 study it, they've showed you where this building is in 17 the floodplain, so you won't have flood insurance for it 18 when flood damage occurs, you're still up for the cost 19 of whatever damage is done. And to me that's -- it's 20 back to the same boat you had, they haven't proved that 21 there's no affect to your property, or your properties, 22 our properties, you know, everybody's property. 23 And so I find -- I find that stance to be 24 kind of like kicking the can down the road, you know, 25 the cost is going to hit you if their study is accurate 80 1 and we're accepting it as it is. And I think it would 2 be cheaper, I mean the, you know the upside -- well, 3 will the County be sitting back and allowing some other 4 developer to work a project this way. I don't think so. 5 If it wasn't the City, wouldn't we be saying, you know, 6 that's fine don't do the process the way it's supposed 7 to be done, don't create the baseline floodplain map the 8 way is should be done because that's what they're 9 required to do, so I don't think so. And then it's 10 almost like a game of chicken that the city's playing, 11 we dare you, we know you don't have the expenditures to 12 create a study of your own, a conflicting study. I 13 would argue that it's cheaper to go out and pay somebody 14 to do a study than to deal with the damage that that's 15 likely to occur in a hundred year flood according to 16 their model, or paying for insurance. I think it's 17 cheaper to do -- all you have to do -- I mean, I would 18 suggest call LNV because they're the ones that did the 19 study, they modelled it the year before. Kick in their 20 model and fire it up. And I think that's -- 21 JUDGE POLLARD: I agree. I agree. 22 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Let me make some 23 comments to what you said, George. First of all, I went 24 in there with my professional engineering hat on and 25 listened as a County Commissioner, and I was not looking 81 1 at them as the City as the City. We want to have a good 2 relationship with the City, but that didn't have 3 anything to do with it. I went in there personally, 4 okay, and I think Jonathan and Charlie did the same 5 thing, looking at what their engineers had done, and I 6 questioned every bit of it. I started off kind of 7 banging them on the head about something that I didn't 8 really like what they were doing. They on any analysis, 9 okay, you can call them a model, what it is is just 10 purely and simple an analysis, how much water's going to 11 shed from this area, how much vegetation is there, how 12 much of the hard surface is not going to shed. Those 13 are the things that come into play. A lot of how it 14 flows do you know the creek and all that kind of stuff. 15 A lot of variables, okay. There's a lot of variables. 16 They had both models that they presented, the Freese and 17 Nichols and what is it LVN -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: LNV. 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: LNV. They went through 20 point by point both analyses in the assumptions and why 21 one chose one, and why the other chose the other, and 22 Freese and Nichols says here's what we did. We assumed 23 this, we assumed this much vegetation, we assumed this 24 kind of flow, those kind of characteristics. They said, 25 Freese and Nichols thought they were trying to air to 82 1 the side of being conservative. Meaning it was worse 2 than they want to air on the side of it being worse than 3 you know, possible, okay; not to make it worse from 4 worse, they did that -- 5 MR. BAROODY: Can I pause you there? 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Let me finish. I was 7 convinced, not because they were the City; I was 8 convinced that had their engineering staff was 9 completely thorough, they were very compelling, they 10 didn't hide anything, and to me they had a straight 11 forward -- and could you say well, you need to change 12 this ten percent or twenty percent, yeah, you can always 13 say that on any analysis that has a lot of assumptions, 14 so that's it. 15 So number one is I was not looking at who it 16 was, I don't care if it was, you know, ABC Company 17 doing it. If it's the County propery going to be 18 affected, I was going to be pay attention to that. 19 Number two is that I don't think -- I think you made one 20 statement that I would take issue with. I wouldn't 21 accuse anybody of saying we're going to leave it like 22 this because we know you're not going to pay to have it 23 done. That's, you know, I respect your opinion, but 24 I -- I'm not sure I would agree with that. I'm 25 comfortable with that what they've done, and I think 83 1 they did it. They analyzed it up to the point of which 2 they were required to by their contract, and by what 3 FEMA regulations are, correct me if if I'm wrong, 4 Charlie, and going up to the property they have done and 5 showing no changes, so therefore they did it. 6 And as Commissioner Letz said they did some 7 modifications that I wasn't really clear about until we 8 had that meeting. They actually deepened the channel of 9 flow in the area of where the reservoir is to help 10 reduce the area, you know, it's a cross-sectional area. 11 There's a creek and there's the rest of the land if you 12 don't -- if you put more water in it and you cover more 13 area then you deepen the channel and that's what they 14 did, and their analysis is correct, I don't know. I 15 think it is, you know. So it the best that there is. 16 If we to want do more. Yes we can. 17 MR. BAROODY: Okay, a couple things, the 18 part I was going to pause you on. They say that they 19 wanted to do it the most conservative model, and that's 20 well and good, but -- 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Not the most 22 conservative. They said but they wanted to air on the 23 side of the conservative. 24 MR. BAROODY: And nobody's doubting the 25 background on resume, whatever you want to call it on 84 1 Freese and Nichols, but nobody was doubting LNV either. 2 And if they had been doing that mold, and they were 3 presumably paid to do so, paid to do a model. I would 4 assume their model was just as valid, airing on the side 5 of whatever it was is almost irrelevant. 6 The fact is that there is empirical data 7 showing that the AG barn property is not truly in the 8 current danger of floodplain, a hundred year flood. So 9 any model that puts them currently pre project, pre pond 10 in the floodplain, I would have to take issue with. 11 Now, it doesn't mean there assumptions are 12 outside the bounds of realistic, but I would air on the 13 side of ones that match closer to what historically we 14 have shown, which the LNV one apparently did. 15 Now, again that -- you said something else 16 in your explanation where the study that they showed, 17 the model that they showed was it pre or post the pond, 18 because you're talking about channeling the pond area 19 that's not there now that they're discussing, so were 20 they studying as if it was after the pond? 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Freese and Nichols did 22 it after pond is there. They analyzed with the pond 23 being there, yeah. 24 MR. BAROODY: And you understand that in 25 order to prove that they aren't negatively impacting the 85 1 area they first have to study that area pre pond. They 2 have to create the baseline map to claim that -- 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 4 MR. BAROODY: So if they're showing us 5 numbers that are post pond, or a modelling post pond, 6 they have yet to prove -- there's no data to say to 7 prove that they haven't negatively impacted it. 8 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, let me explain 9 it, they did it pre pond, and then they did it post 10 pone to see what they had to do. And that's the reason 11 they deepened the channel there, because adding the pond 12 there. So they had to increase the flow area by going 13 down rather than out. 14 MR. BAROODY: But keep in mind both their 15 models of the Ag barn in the floodplain, correct, the 16 hundred year floodplain, correct? They have to be 17 because they're saying the pre and post aren't being 18 changed. 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, there's also some 20 question, and I think Jonathan's brought it up that the 21 County has additional survey data which they didn't 22 have, which is probably more current and more accurate 23 than the LIDAR data that they used in the proximity of 24 the AG barn. 25 MR. BAROODY: In the AG barn, but I don't 86 1 think it affects the Road and Bridge property, did it? 2 I mean the extra data did, so they're including land in 3 it. So if there model is actually correct. Then what 4 we're doing is we're saying don't map it so we don't 5 have to buy insurance, but in the back of your mind you 6 have to know that you are, you know, you're not insuring 7 property that is now in the floodplain. And that's a 8 cost to the -- 9 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Your point's very valid 10 and that's the way I started the conversation with them, 11 and they said we didn't want to do that because we 12 didn't want to show that. And I said don't, stop. If 13 they show it's in the floodplain we want to know it, you 14 know, so that's the way we started the conversation with 15 them. Exactly what you're saying. 16 MR. BAROODY: And to me I would argue you 17 don't back off because they haven't done what they need 18 to do first, and that's they have to obtain from FEMA 19 the beginning map. They have to actually file that LOMR 20 and get it approved by FEMA. To what -- they have to 21 study that area pre project, that has to be studied 22 before they can do development. That's both City and 23 FEMA Flood Development Code, and they haven't done that 24 yet. And people may, you know, go all Machiavellian on 25 us and say we're going to have to get there anyway so 87 1 don't worry about it, that type of thing. But in this 2 particular case you have conflicting data, and I -- I 3 just think just from cost effectiveness from the 4 county's standpoint, 50 thousand dollars or so is what I 5 hear a study would cost if you had to go -- 6 COMMISSIONER MOSER: More than that. 7 MR. BAROODY: Well, whatever that is, weigh 8 that against whatever damage you can count on getting if 9 these properties because it'll be uninsured damage, so 10 that will be cost directed to the County. And that's -- 11 I mean as a City person, I'm still a County person, and 12 so we're basically trading one cost for the other, and 13 it doesn't seem to make sense, because the City can do 14 this, like you said before get the floodplain map done 15 right and let them engineer they're way around it, 16 instead of just giving them a pass because you're 17 opening up the County to some liability that we won't be 18 able to cover. 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I have one question of 20 Charlie. Mr. Baroody just said that the City has to, 21 and I wasn't aware of if this if this is true, the City 22 has to have a LOMR on the existing before they do any 23 modification before they can proceed with -- 24 MR. BAROODY: I can cite the City ordinance 25 for you that stays it. 88 1 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Let me ask Charlie. 2 MR. HASTINGS: I think he's correct, because 3 I think that's the section that talks about -- there's a 4 specific section in the city's rules that talks about if 5 you're in that Zone A that hasn't been studied that you 6 have to do X, Y and Z before you can get a permit to 7 develop. 8 MR. BAROODY: If you go to the building code 9 that reference floodplain development as well, it's in 10 there as well. They have to prove that no impact has 11 occurred, and the only way to do that is to first tell 12 us what the starting point was, and they haven't done 13 that yet. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: George, I agree with you 15 on almost everything you're saying. And what I tried to 16 say earlier is I'm not making my decision on -- I'm just 17 talking about the county's interest, I'm -- 18 MR. BAROODY: So am I. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- and I'm not going 20 to -- if the City may -- it appears that the City is not 21 following their own ordinance right now; whether or not 22 they're Following FEMA'S ordinance and rules I don't 23 know, but that's FEMA'S responsibility, and the City 24 Council, if they choose to not follow their own rules 25 that's their issue and maybe they should get 89 1 consequences for doing that. But I don't think it's a 2 wise use of county tax dollars, out of our budget to 3 argue that the city's not following their ordinances. 4 MR. BAROODY: Right, and I'm not actually 5 arguing that point, but I'm saying this goes back to my 6 claim about being a game of chicken. Which is it's not 7 the county's job to have to go do that, but I believe 8 that by their action to deal with the loss of damaged 9 buildings and liability and all that, the County is 10 being forced to do what you don't want to do which is 11 pay for a study your own self. To me, that's -- that's 12 a mistake by the City. They're playing that game 13 because they're saying you won't do that. And in my 14 view to do -- to not do that is to say we not only 15 accept what you're saying, but we're accepting what I 16 would argue is a floodplain map that is really a post 17 project map, which implies that the pond itself, the 18 development, whatever development's there, is the thing 19 that is driving this change of the floodplain map, and 20 it's the thing that's driving your concern, which is the 21 liability on those buildings. 22 I'm not suggesting you go to their -- tell 23 them you're not following your ordinances because that's 24 not at issue. I mean that's not an issue for you; 25 that's one that I've gone to them with. But I'm saying 90 1 that if you accept their stance as of right now, which 2 again isn't even a proven stance, because they haven't 3 filed this change with FEMA yet. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 5 MR. BAROODY: You're actually opening -- I 6 don't know what the amount, I don't know what insurance 7 cost, I don't know what flood insurance actually costs, 8 but if you tell them not to put you in the study, that's 9 the only thing you're saving. You're not saving the 10 real loss. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, two things on the 12 insurance issue -- two issues there. One, the fact that 13 your the flood insurance maps are not always identical 14 to the floodplain maps, so there's a, you know, so we 15 don't know what those flood insurance maps are going to 16 look like in the future when all this gets filed. 17 The other thing is that if FEMA'S going to 18 make the determination, if they like the Freese and 19 Nichols. And I have talked to -- we have yet to discuss 20 really as a Court whether we should send any information 21 to FEMA when they're starting that, and basically 22 saying, hey there's another model out that the City of 23 Kerrville's run, you may want to request it. Which 24 they've already seen it once, I believe. So I think 25 that's where we got it. 91 1 But anyway so just the fact that FEMA'S or 2 the City is sending in this study does not mean that 3 FEMA'S going to follow that map, because they already 4 have another analysis of the same basis done by the City 5 of Kerrville, and we may or may not want to have any 6 input into that process of the LOMR actually being done 7 by FEMA. 8 On the insurance side there's a couple of 9 issues there. One, we get capped so flood insurance 10 doesn't help us a whole lot out there because of the 11 value of that building. The other thing I think people 12 have to realize that these are studies and I think 13 Freese and Nichols, and myself, and others, you're 14 modelling rainfall, and I really wasn't aware of this, 15 but they're required to use NOAA, I guess it's NOAA 16 weather service information and every so often they do 17 it. And they're basically modelling thunder storms and 18 how you they moved through the area. They're using a 19 very old -- statewide they're using very old a 1998 20 data, all that's going to change when they update it 21 sometime in the near future. So there's lots of 22 variable. 23 The bottom line is if a true hundred year 24 floodplain hits North Fork, South Fork, Johnson Creek 25 and Third Creek, it's all irrelevant anyway. It's all 92 1 going to flood. Because the models say that doesn't 2 happen, it doesn't say that it shouldn't happen, but it 3 could happen, we don't know what's going to happen. I 4 mean thunderstorms are very, very variable. So we have 5 to do floodplain models. We have to follow them but at 6 the same time from the true flooding standpoint they're 7 not real real value in my mind. They give you an idea 8 under a certain criteria. 9 And just one last thing just back thing 10 going back to the LNV study and the Freese and Nichols 11 study. The differences that they did was vegetation 12 type, one assumed mostly brush, one said mostly grass. 13 In the rural areas LNV assumed a I think it was a 12 14 percent and -- not a permanent -- 15 MR. HASTINGS: Impervious. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Impervious. And Freese 17 and Nichols said 15 percent impervious cover. Whether 18 commercial area in the City Freese and Nichols assumed 19 75 percent impervious cover, and LNV did a different 20 number, so that's why they were different models. You 21 know, like I said, I don't I don't think -- I think 22 Freese and Nichols is a little bit over pushed. They 23 couldn't answer a question or they didn't really answer 24 a question about if things are built in the city limits 25 don't they have to do retention, doesn't that account 93 1 for it. I'm not sure I understood the answer I got on 2 that, but again I'm going back to -- I don't think it's 3 the county's responsibility to challenge and to look at 4 the model, how that model was created and how the City 5 had prepared in the city limits. It's, you know, at 6 some point we may have to spend the money. I don't know 7 that it's a -- and maybe that would be as soon as FEMA 8 comes with a LOMR that changes the floodplain one way or 9 the other that we disagree with. We may want to study 10 it. 11 MR. BAROODY: Right. And the problem with 12 that's going to be and this is where -- 13 JUDGE POLLARD: It'll be to late. 14 MR. BAROODY: Yeah, because the pond will 15 will already be built. The pond will be built before a 16 LOMR is complete. So this gets back to the thing where 17 okay, I don't consider this a conspiracy theory but 18 maybe I'm seeing darkness were you're not wanting to 19 look at it, but the real possibility exists that they 20 have been doing the modeling coincidentally post and pre 21 pond at the same time, okay, because the goal, keep in 22 mind, the goal is to to prove that the design of 23 wherever they're building will not affect the floodplain 24 negatively. So with that in mind if you're going to 25 build something that is going to impact the floodplain, 94 1 what do you want to do? Well, you want to make the 2 original floodplain be as big as it can be, all right. 3 So they haven't set out to do so. Now the LNV study 4 didn't serve that purpose because it didn't make it big 5 enough to fit the design. Now, that means to me not 6 that their assumptions are illegal or outside normal 7 bounds, but that there is a study that exists that 8 proves that there -- or it would show that the 9 development being done there will negatively impact the 10 floodplain. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It doesn't show that. 12 MR. BAROODY: No; it does. Because here's 13 why, no. If the LNV study was the flood map, the 14 baseline start point, the post project flood map is the 15 Freese and Nichols study. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. You would have to 17 do to make that statement you'd have to take the LNV 18 model and put the pond in and see what the result is. 19 MR. BAROODY: No, no. Because what we're 20 talking about is you have to create these pre project 21 flood map. The LNV studied that area pre pond, pre 22 development. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So did Freese and 24 Nichols. 25 MR. BAROODY: Yeah, but there is the LNV 95 1 study exists showing that this that is a reasonable 2 model of this land pre project. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 4 MR. BAROODY: So if the Freese and Nichols 5 model is then taken as both the post and the pre, which 6 is what the City is going to be doing, then that model 7 is different than the LNV showing that the post project 8 development is negatively impacting the LNV study -- 9 it's a worse scenario for the floodplain. It's 10 enlarging the floodplain. So there's a reasonable model 11 that exists pre project. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We gotta move on, 13 George. The LNV study doesn't address post. So no one 14 knows -- 15 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Right. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- if you put that pond 17 in there if it would change the floodplain or not. 18 Freese and Nichols does not think it would, and they 19 said that. And they're convinced the pond is not going 20 to have any impact on the -- 21 MR. BAROODY: You understand -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand what you're 23 saying, but again it's one of those things that we can't 24 -- the immediate certain was going out and doing another 25 model, which isn't going to stop anything from the 96 1 city's standpoint, they're going to still build the 2 thing, their pond, which they're building right now. 3 It's not going to change anything. The only thing it 4 may change -- I mean the worse it could be is have to go 5 after the fact and put in some sort of detention 6 structure upstream, that could still happen. FEMA may 7 say hey we disagree. You need to put in some detention. 8 And that's a process with FEMA and we have to turn it 9 over to them. 10 MR. BAROODY: I'll sit down after I say just 11 one quick thing, what we're basically doing is 12 this(hands over eyes) -- 13 COMMISSIONER MOSER: No, no. 14 MR. BAROODY: No, we are, because we 15 see what we're -- we know what impact the pond is 16 having. 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Well, you may say that, 18 but I'm not. 19 MR. BAROODY: Freese and Nichols is telling 20 us -- 21 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Okay, I'm not doing 22 that. 23 MR. BAROODY: By telling them to cut off at 24 the City knowing what is being affected by it, we are. 25 And that's good enough, I mean it's okay. I mean 97 1 I'll -- you're late. 2 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Don't get me wrong, 3 George, I mean I really like what you do. You 4 challenge, and it's fantastic, because I've seen you do 5 it and I agree with you all the time, you know. 6 I would say one other thing. If you had 7 hired another engineer to do the same thing they'd have 8 a different set of assumptions, and they'd probably have 9 different results, and then you'd have three. Guarantee 10 you there wouldn't be -- they wouldn't align with either 11 one of them, just wouldn't happen. So then you look for 12 how can we calibrate or verify the model, and Freese and 13 Nichols said they would have liked to have done that, 14 correct me if I'm wrong, Jonathan or Charlie, but they 15 didn't have the rainfall measurements for that area to 16 be able to do that proper analysis, is that correct 17 Charlie? 18 MR. HASTINGS: Right. 19 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, they didn't have 20 the rainfall for that. We thought they could, I'd 21 probably done it the best I could, but they didn't. So 22 that's all that -- that's the only point. 23 The other thing is I think the other 24 analyses had a lower flood flow rate than the Freese and 25 Nichols model did, did it not, Charlie? 98 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They did, they used a 2 different type of model. 3 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Yeah, but they had a 4 different flow rate. A different flow rate, I think 5 it'll probably -- if they put the reservoir in it 6 probably would have come out better than the Freese and 7 Nichols. 8 MR. BAROODY: But again, remember if you're 9 just looking at pre all you need is a reasonable model 10 which LNV was, showing that the project is actually 11 going to negatively impact the floodplain, and it does 12 that. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And George, you could be 14 right. You could be right the flow -- 15 MR. BAROODY: I mean I'm an arrogant guy, 16 but in this case, there's no way to say to you that the 17 city's Freese and Nichols study is comparing point A pre 18 project, to point B pre post. But I would agree, I am 19 right. 20 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Personally, thank you. 21 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Before I make any 22 decisions, I have some questions to the County Attorney, 23 but I feel like it should be in executive session. 24 JUDGE POLLARD: I've been kind of quiet in 25 open session, I want to say. But I agree with a lot 99 1 with what Mr. Baroody has said. If he's correct, and I 2 believe it is correct, that the City has the burden to 3 prove the negative impact on the adjacent properties 4 with FEMA. If that's the case, then it's a lot like a 5 court case if there's not anybody in there presenting 6 anything the other way. And it's only Freese and 7 Nichols telling FEMA that it's hunky dory, then it's 8 going to get approved by FEMA. And once it gets 9 approved by FEMA then we have just kicked it down the 10 road and made it more difficult to come back and change 11 because they've got an existing order. I don't like it. 12 I don't like putting it off. I think -- I don't know 13 how we do it, I don't know if it justifies another 14 study, although I know is that somebody's got to get in 15 there with FEMA and try to present something to make 16 sure that the City does assume that burden, to prove the 17 negative. And if they're isn't anybody doing that 18 talking then they're going to get it. And whether or 19 not we need to get a study to do that or not is -- the 20 jury's out on that, okay. I think we need to study it 21 some more. I like what he says, and I disagree with you 22 guys. Okay. 23 All right, now we're going to go into closed 24 session. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Want to pay the bills 100 1 and everything. 2 JUDGE POLLARD: Oh, yeah. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I move to pay the 4 bills. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Second. 6 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 7 Letz and seconded by Commissioner Moser to pay the bills 8 as presented. Any questions or comments? There being 9 none, I guess, then those in favor of the motion signify 10 by raising your right hands. Thank you, it's four zero, 11 unanimous. 12 4.2 budget amendments. 13 MRS. DOSS: Yes, Sir, we have four budget 14 amendments. 15 JUDGE POLLARD: Is there a motion to approve 16 them or any questions about it? 17 COMMISSIONER MOSER: Move that we approve 18 the budget amendments. 19 COMMISSIONER REEVES: I second. 20 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 21 Moser and seconded by Commissioner Reeves to approve the 22 budget amendments. Any further discussion or comments? 23 There being none, those in favor of the motion signify 24 by raising your right hand. Right hand. 25 MR. BELEW: Yeah. My other right. 101 1 JUDGE POLLARD: Your other right, okay. 2 It's unanimous. 3 All right, 4.3 late bills. 4 MRS. DOSS: No late bills, Sir. 5 JUDGE POLLARD: Okay, 4.4 approve and 6 accept monthly reports. Mr. Reeves. 7 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Yes, Sir. Monthly 8 reports all for the month of December, 2016. County 9 Clerk's office monthly report, District Clerk's office 10 monthly report, J.P. Precinct Number 4 monthly report, 11 J.P. Precinct Number 2 monthly report, Treasurer's 12 monthly report, Treasurer's quarterly report for October 13 to December, 2016. 14 Move for approval, and signatures as needed. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 16 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 17 Reeves, seconded by Commissioner Letz to approve the 18 monthly reports as submitted, and authorize approval as 19 needed. Is there any further discussion or any comment? 20 There being none, those in favor signify by raising your 21 right hands. It's four zero, unanimous, thank you. 22 4.5 Auditor's reports. 23 MRS. DOSS: None this time, Sir. 24 JUDGE POLLARD: Okay, 5.1 reports from 25 commissioners and liaison committee assignments. 102 1 Anyone? 2 5.2 reports from elected officials and 3 department heads. Anyone? 4 5.3 report from board commissions and 5 committees. City County joint projects or operations 6 reports, or other. Anyone? 7 All right, there being none. We'll close 8 now and not adjourn, but go into closed session, and 9 coming back out into open session after this. All 10 parties in the courtroom that are not required to be 11 here for the closed session please remove yourself. 12 (EXECUTIVE SESSION) 13 JUDGE POLLARD: All right, we're back into 14 open session. Are there any motions? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that 16 we withdraw our letters of November 15th and December 17 20 -- no, it's not. I believe it's November 15th and 18 January -- I mean December 21st, I believe. The two 19 letters previously wrote to the City regarding to the 20 floodplain in the area of the Hill Country Youth Event 21 Center and Third Creek. We withdraw those based on the 22 City has agreed to modify their submission of the area 23 studied in their CLOMR to not include any of the County 24 property, and to stop their analysis in the area of Spur 25 100, and to authorize the County Engineer and County 103 1 Attorney to determine what active role Kerr County can 2 take in the LOMR process for this area so that Kerr 3 County is aware as to where FEMA plans to modify or 4 create a new LOMR for this area. 5 COMMISSIONER MOSER: I second that. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that made sense. 7 JUDGE POLLARD: Been moved by Commissioner 8 Letz, seconded by Commissioner Moser to -- holy smokes, 9 to withdraw the two letters to the City. I guess 10 communicate that to them in the form of a letter, but to 11 participate actively in the LOMR or CLOMR, is it CLOMR 12 or LOMR? 13 MR. HASTINGS: Both. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The LOMR's the final 15 revision, the CLOMR's the conditional. 16 JUDGE POLLARD: All right, whatever it is, 17 process with FEMA, and the purpose being to help insure 18 that the City complies with what you claim is their 19 burden to prove the negative of the impact on that 20 adjacent property. Now, that's not part of the motion, 21 but it's an explanation. All right, does anybody want 22 to add or clarify that motion? Those in favor of the 23 motion signify by raising their right hands. It's four 24 zero, unanimous. 25 Okay, any further business? If not -- yes, 104 1 Ma'am. 2 MRS. SOLDAN: Can I get you to re read my 3 quarterly report into the minutes to include investment 4 reports in that title. 5 COMMISSIONER REEVES: We'll go back to the 6 monthly reports. Item six I read as Treasurer's 7 quarterly report for October to December, 2016. I 8 should have read that it was the quarterly investment 9 report for October to December, 2016, and I should have 10 known that since I was on the committee, so I would like 11 to amend the motion to include the quarterly investment 12 report for the period stated. 13 JUDGE POLLARD: Who was the second to the 14 original motion? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it was probably 16 myself. 17 MRS. MOUSER: It was. 18 JUDGE POLLARD: Both of you agree to that 19 amendment? 20 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Yes. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. 22 COMMISSIONER REEVES: Could we vote on it 23 because this needs to be voted on. 24 JUDGE POLLARD: All right. Those in favor 25 of that raise your right hands. It's four zero, 105 1 unanimous. 2 COMMISSIONER REEVES: And my apology, Madam 3 Treasurer. 4 JUDGE POLLARD: We're adjourned. 5 * * * * * * 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 106 1 STATE OF TEXAS * 2 COUNTY OF KERR * 3 I, DEBRA ELLEN GIFFORD, Certified Shorthand 4 Reporter in and for the State of Texas, and Official 5 Reporter in and for Kerr County Commissioners' Court, do 6 hereby certify that the above and foregoing pages 7 contain and comprise a true and correct transcription of 8 the proceedings had in the above-entitled Commissioners' 9 Court. 10 Dated this the 11th day of February, A.D. 11 2017. 12 13 /s/DEBRA ELLEN GIFFORD Certified Shorthand Reporter 14 No. 953 Expiration Date 12/31/2018 15 * * * * * * 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25