~-..
,. --,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Monday, April 26, 2004
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
~~~
~J
'~~
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I N D E X
April 26, 2004
--- Commissioners Comments
1.1 Discuss adverse financial implications to J.P.
courts resulting from termination of Citation
Disposition Receipt Program
1.2 Prohibit sale of goods/services at Youth Exhibit
Center and Flat Rock Lake Park without prior
approval of Commissioners Court
1.3 Grant permission to Texas Arts and Crafts
Educational Foundation to utilize County's well
at HCYEC to augment irrigation needs
1.4 Adopt Resolution authorizing designated signators
for T.C.D.P. Contract TBA 2004.P2
1.5 Approve Grantworks Administrative Contract for
2004 Community Development Project
1.6 Consider naming county representatives to a
committee to study/recommend local government
incentives for new or expanding businesses
1.7 Approve road names for privately-maintained roads
in accordance with 9-1-1 guidelines
1.8 Accept presentation of 2002-03 Audit Report by
Pressler Thompson & Co.
1.9 Approve proclamation for National Day of Prayer
1.10 approve Resolution to Senator Troy Fraser and
Representative Harvey Hilderbran opposing any
legislation that has a negative financial impact
1.11 Approve contract with Global Tel*Link Corporation
for inmate telephone system
4.1 Pay Bills
4.2 Budget Amendments
4.3 Late Bills
4.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports
5.1 Reports from Commissioners, Liaison/Committee
assignments
--- Adjourned
PAGE
4
7
25
36
39
42
44
54
55
81
82
84
96
96
99
100
102
117
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Monday, April 26, 2004, at 9:00 a.m., a special meeting
of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning. It's a bit past
9 o'clock. I'll call to order the regular Commissioners
Court meeting scheduled for this time and date.
Commissioner 4, I believe --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Join me in prayer,
please.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. At this
time, if there's any member of the public or the audience
that wishes to bring to the Court's attention anything
that's not listed on the agenda for today, you're privileged
to do so at this time. We'd ask that you come forward. If
it's in connection with an agenda item that you have some
comments or some -- something you want to offer, we'd ask
that you fill out a participation form. It's not absolutely
required, but it kind of keeps me straight so that I don't
miss you when that item comes along, and that helps me to
keep from skipping over you. So, if there's any member of
the public that wants to talk to us about any item not
listed on the agenda, please come forward at this time.
9-~6-09
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Nobody seems to be making a move, so we'll get right down to
business. Commissioner 4, have you got anything for us this
morning?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: One?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Two?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good rain. No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Three?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just welcome to Kathy
Mitchell.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
MS. MITCHELL: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Welcome, Kathy.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's that all you got?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's all I got.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's one of the things I
wanted to point out, that we have a new Administrative
Assistant/Coordinator for Commissioners Court. Kathy
Mitchell comes here with a good deal of government
experience, and hopefully she can keep me straight. I
realize that's a pretty tall order, but she's willing to
try. She'll probably give up in short order, but welcome
aboard, Kathy.
MS. MITCHELL: Thank you.
4-''6-G4
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here.
The other thing that I'd like to point out is I received a
letter -- or a copy of a letter, actually, from -- from the
people with the Hill Country Agility -- that's the dog
agility group that occasionally uses our Youth Exhibit
facility out there. And the original letter, of course, was
addressed to our Director of Maintenance and Facilities,
Mr. Glenn Holekamp. The substance of their letter was to
praise the efforts of cur maintenance people in the
operation and their efforts out at the Youth Exhibit
facility. And, in fact, on the occasion in question, when
they were using the facility, there was a plumbing
difficulty; a pipe burst or whatever, which at least
temporarily disabled some of the restrooms, and
Mr. Holekamp's people immediately stepped in, got the
problem resolved, made arrangements for alternate facilities
during the interim, got the problem resolved. And, in
short, they were most, most complimentary of our maintenance
people out there at that facility, and I thought it well to
pass that along, because they're deserving of these kudos.
But that's all I have at this point, and so we'll get on
down to business.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, if I may add
something, it kind of follows along the lines of your
comment. I received a note from -- I'm not sure of the
4-^6-04
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
organization; it's the youth polo group that -- in west Kerr
County. They had thanked the Court for allowing the -- on
short notice, the Ag Barn facility to be used as a backup
facility when they were in town not long ago. I'm not sure
if they used it; it doesn't look like they did. I think
they used Camp Waldemar as their primary location. They
wanted to do it because of the rains that weekend. They got
hold of me and, you know, I got hold of Maintenance; they
were able to work out a backup arrangement. They're very
appreciative to the Court for helping them out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Polo or polocrosse?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Polo.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Polocrosse.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Was it polocrosse?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Polo --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, it looks like
polo, but it's different. I didn't know about that, but
it's a good thing to support them. They bring a lot of
people into Kerr County for these meets, and we have -- this
competition that's jus= over with, they qualified to make
the national team, and last year we had three Kerr County
players on the national team that went to Australia.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The letter -- I guess the
organizers of the -- Audrey Schmidt; I think she's one of
9-~6-09

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the ones that organized it. Anyway, they wrote me a letter,
just thanked the Court, on short notice, for making the
facility available. They paid -- they were willing to pay
and had insurance and all the other things. We didn't do
any favors for them, other than just made it available for
them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They didn't use it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think they did.
Didn't look like it was torn up. I think they used Camp
Waldemar or Stewart.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Looked to me like
they were all out there; they were playing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Commissioner.
Let's move right into the agenda. First item on the agenda
was a timed item for 9:15, but I'm sure we're ready to go on
it, that being the consideration and discussion of the
adverse financial. implications to Kerr County J.P. courts
resulting from the Texas Department of Public Safety's
decision to terminate its Citation Disposition Receipt
Program. Does that translate to their warrants program?
JUDGE WRIGHT: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
JUDGE WRIGHT: I think they probably call it
Failure to Appear program. Let me preface anything I've got
to say by telling you I'm here for J.P. 2; I'm not
4-26-04
8
1
--- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-,. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~.
25
representing other J.P. courts. We don't all do this the
same way. I went back six months and just collected figures
from what I collected on failure-to-appears and warrant fees
in my court. It would have been a loss, I believe, of just
a little less than $.18,000 with the Omnibase program.
They're telling me we can go ahead and do the warrants and
do the failure-to-appears and just hold them in our office.
This program is going to simplify our job tremendously.
We -- we do a failure to appear letter, and then if they
don't come in within the 10 days on that, we have to send
out another notice for show cause hearing and then issue a
warrant and a failure to appear complaint. All of this is
time-consuming, but the time reaps funds for Kerr County,
and this will be gone. I just wanted to be sure that you
gentlemen understand that this is going to have an impact on
our budget -- the income on our budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I mean, as I
understand it, there's nothing that the -- we can do. The
D.P.S. eliminated the program, so it's gone, and there's
a -- the Omnibase -- whatever it's called, is a private
company that's going to pick up some of the slack.
JUDGE WRIGHT: Our association is meeting
this morning with the head of D.P.S. to try to get them to
rethink this program, because of the adverse effects on all
of the J.P. courts. We're hoping that there will be some --
4-26-04
9

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
something good comes out of this. I -- I can't offer any
alternative suggestions. I've -- I don't know what we can
do instead of this. Rusty might have some suggestions. But
it's going to -- it's going to impact our county.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's -- it's my understanding
that their basis for terminating their warrants program was
there was some legal reasoning, and in order for them to get
back into business, there would have to be legislation for
them to be able to reinstitute that. Am I correct in -- in
that understanding?
JUDGE WP.IGHT: They got out of it without
legislation. I'm not -- what they are trying to do is get
out of the money collection business, and that's why they
got out of the warrant business. But a warrant tells them
to take them to jail or bring them to me; it doesn't tell
them go collect the money. So, that's -- I don't know.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON; Judge, let me see if
I understand the fin~~ncial implications. If -- if this
would have a negative impact of $18,000 in six months in
your court alone --
JUDGE WRIGHT: Just in my court. Now, the
others, a lot of them don't file the failure to appears.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: On an annualized
basis, for four courts, it may not be that much, but it
9-~5-04
1
.--~ 2
3
4
~ 5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
would be $145,000 or so.
JUDGE WRIGHT: I don't -- I can't speak for
them. I don't know.
COMMI;;SIONER NICHOLSON: If it is, that's a
significant impact for a small r_ounty's budget.
JUDGE WRIGHT: And another thing that you
need to keep in mind, if you just renewed your license and
you get a ticket, we're going -- and you don't come in and
pay the ticket, we're going to send a notice to Omnibase.
Four years from now, when you go to renew that license,
you're going to have to pay that ticket, but they don't put
you in jail then; they give you 60 more days to go see the
judge. And then, if you don't do it, they're going to take
your license or hold your license.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are you prohibited, under this
Omnibase program, from issuing a failure to appear in a case
where the accused does not respond to the initial offense?
JUDGE WRIGHT: I can issue it and hold it
locally, hold it in my office. For what reason? They're
not going to bring them in. Joel works most of my warrants.
This money that's collected, it was D.P.S. tickets, but Joel
worked 90 percent of these and collected the funds that I'm
talking about, but they were still in their databank. If
they were stopped, then he could go pick them up, and they
didn't have -- they don't like to mess with the prisoners.
9-~6-04
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On most of them, he called or went and picked them up
himself, but it was a warrant that was issued, and he could
pick them up.
JUDGE TINLEY: If a failure to appear is
issued, could you not -- assuming you opted into the
Omnibase program, could you not also forward in the failure
to appear if that one wasn't responded to appropriately?
JUDGE WRIGHT: I've heard both ways.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We don't know?
JUDGE WRIGHT: I -- I don't know.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
JUDGE WRIGHT: And I don't know what good it
would do to do it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. My understanding is
that the -- the opting into the Omnibase program is --
JUDGE WRIGHT: It's not an option.
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
JUDGE WRIGHT: I don't think it's optional.
JUDGE TINLEY: My understanding was that each
J.P. -- assuming that the contract was entered into by the
County, then each J.P. or other jurisdiction that collects
within the county has the authority to opt into the program
or not opt in.
JUDGE WRIGHT: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
4-?6-04
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE WRIGHT: But what's our option?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This -- it's my
understanding you can still issue the failure to appear
warrant; it's just not going to be in the State's database,
so that if there's a traffic stop by D.P.S., no one's going
to know about it. But you can still issue --
JUDGE WRIGHT: I can issue it and hold it
there in my office, and then in three or four years I can
call it in and cance.L it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, and there's --
I'm looking at Rusty. Rusty, is there any way to get it so
that locally, if it's a -- I mean, I don't know what percent
of the --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What this -- I read the
-- the whole packet D.P.S. had put out when they decided to
cancel their warrant database. Their warrant database, what
it does, the -- the advantage of having it was that if any
person that had outstanding J.P. warrants, traffic warrants,
was stopped anywhere in the state of Texas and their
driver's license was run through the state computer, it
would show them having a warrant, and they would
consequently get arrested wherever they were, whether it be
Abilene, Texarcana, or anything else, even though it was a
local warrant. At that point, they actually had the --
D.P.S. always had the option, I think, of taking a cash bond
4-~E-04
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
r---
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and fines, and they're considering that as a fine. Officers
can't take fines, so that's where they're getting into the
question of whetYier it was legal or not to take that money.
Or D.P.S. had to send a trooper up there from here to go
pick that guy up and bring him back here, and they were
making trips; D.P.S. was all over the state all the time.
And, personally, I think that's why they got out of this.
It kept their officers on the road too much.
In reading the other part of this -- and I
spent a couple hours talking with Sergeant Stafford over it,
on the effects it would have locally. Dawn's right in a lot
of her aspects, but one thing is, you enter one warrant into
that Omnibase, okay, to do it. You can still issue all
other warrants; you can still charge all the other fees, but
as far as in the system, they issue one. If a guy -- they
immediately send the person a letter telling them you need
to contact this court and get this taken care of prior to
your renewing your license, or it won't be renewed. And
when they go to renew their license, then they also send
them another letter stating that now you have 60 days to get
this taken care of o.r we won't renew your license and you'll
be driving with an invalid license, which is a Class B
misdemeanor and you actually go to jail over. But you're
being allowed to charge a -- an additional $30
administrative fee on this, 6 of which goes to Omnibase for
4-26-04
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
their processing of the -- of the warrant; 20 goes to the
State Comptroller, and 4 stays in the county. So, you're --
you're adding a $4 fee that would actually come back into
the county; then you are taking it away.
Now, they do leave it optional whether the
J.P. wants to issue the F.T.A. and the -- and the other
warrants, you know, in with that offense. But they only
enter one in the Omnibase, and that's the one that notifies
the person. So, Dawn's right; if they decide to ignore the
letter, it could go four years before you have an
opportunity to collect that -- that money. But it doesn't
keep you from serving a warrant locally. What we would have
to do is -- it's going to add more -- more work on our
staff, to be honest, and a lot of agencies, 'cause you have
to add another warning on your citations now that gives them
a written warning. You have to change the way they are --
about their license not being renewed if they don't take
care of their warrants.
The other thing is, I would imagine it will
put all those warrants D.P.S. had in their database that
they now sent back to all of our J.P.'s -- eventually, after
their constables try and serve them, they will come to our
office and we will have to enter them onto our local
database, which we do on lots of other ones now, which means
any time an officer Locally in this county checks to see if
4-~6-G4
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
there's outstanding warrants for somebody, those will show
and that person will get arrested locally. He just won't
get arrested in Abilene or anything else on those Class C
warrants.
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
opportunity, for lack of another
agreement between us and at least
of the Hill Country, or maybe use
like that to get them to use this
it?
Is there any, you know,
cord, to do an interlocal
the neighboring counties
the C.O.G. or something
database or kind of expand
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I think -- as far
as showing that they have active warrants out of this
county?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: When an officer stops
them and those? I don't know how would you get a database,
other than D.P.S.'s they're doing away with, that would show
that in all the counties around. It's just more of a -- a
matter of, you know, either calling that agency and
wondering -- I know Stafford -- Sergeant Stafford did advise
me that if they had D.P.S. warrants here and the J.P. wanted
those warrants to try and get them served here, that they
could give them to D.P.S. individually, and they would go
out and try and find them here locally. But, that's what
that's going to amount to, is just -- it's all going to be
4-~6-09
16

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
done locally, and done only -- otherwise, only at time of
license renewal.
JUDGE TINLEY: This -- this Omni program,
it's my understanding it's been in operation for a year or
better?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think it's been in
operation a lot longer than a year. City of Kerrville,
Ingram, Kendall County, most of the counties are -- there's
a whole list -- are part of it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any feedback from
these jurisdictions that have been using this system?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have not talked to
them directly myself. Now, Sergeant Stafford told me to
talk to, like, Freida Pressler's office over in Comfort;
that they thoroughly don't have any problem with this, and
that they actually collect more out of it.
JUDGE WRIGHT: The ones I talked to love it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what I was told;
they love the program. And Dawn --
JUDGE WRIGHT: There's not as much work.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, there's not as
much if they don't want to issue those F.T.A.'s, but they
still can. But if Dawn doesn't want to send in a warrant to
that database, she doesn't have to. It's just that warrant
will only show up as an outstanding arrest warrant on a
9-26-09
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..-,
25
person here locally in this county; they won't show up in
any other statewide computer, except for when they go to
renew their license and that.
JUDGE WRIGHT: We do send copies of warrants
to adjacent counties, to the constable in that precinct, and
Lin will make a copy of the warrant and stamp it "copy" and
forward it to them.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that normally when -- when
the offender lives out of county, you've got an indication
he lives in Kendall or Bandera"?
JUDGE WRIGHT: If it's a local -- an adjacent
one.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, if it's a local
warrants officer, ours or hers would normally look at where
the address is and send that agency a letter saying, "We
show that we have outstanding warrants on this subject.
Would y'all please attempt to find him?" That's just a
phone call or a local warrant deal we do on all warrants, on
trying to get warrants served, no matter what they are.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It seems to me that
this would be -- this issue would be a good marriage for our
Collections Department to get involved in, as well as what
they're talking about right now, is sending the judge or the
constable sending a letter to the -- to the neighboring
county. But I think our Collections office does those kinds
4-~6-04
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of things already in other areas, and in a little more of a
threatening type way, actually.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only thing we don't --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we need to ask
them to get involved in it. Take a look at it, at least.
There's not a lot we can do about the D.P.S. issue.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's over.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, and the only
question I have in regards to this whole thing, as far as
how it works, any time a warrant is actually issued, it gets
directed to any peace officer in the state of Texas, and it
states, "You are hereby commanded to arrest..." That's
what's on the actual warrant. Now, how D.P.S. is going to
know when they come in to get their license renewed that
they have an actual warrant, and you got a D.P.S. officer
that tells them, "Well, you got 60 days to take care of it,"
when he's got a warrant there that says he's commanded to
arrest, that's some legal part D.P.S. has got to take care
of, ''cause, to me, the officer doesn't have a choice. But
you've got that -- you've got the deal that -- and they have
some legal issues I'm just concerned about.
Say the guy gets -- goes to get his license
renewed in Fredericksburg, and it shows that he's got
outstanding warrants out of J.P. 2 court here. They give
4-26-04
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
him 60 days to get that taken care of before his license
renewal. He drives back over to Kerrville, gets stopped
right when he enters Kerr County and gets arrested on them.
Did he have 60 days or did we arrest him -- you know, could
we arrest him? Then, when we arrest him, he gets out of
jail first thing the next morning on a P.R. bond that gives
him 10 days to take care of that warrant, but he already got
a notice of 60 days to take care of that warrant from
Fredericksburg. If he doesn't show up in the 10 days and he
says, "Well, they gave me 60 over there," are you going to
be able to issue another F.T.A. -- I think, you know,
there's going to be some confusion in that, but that's
D.P.S.'s problems and not --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's where the
legislation comes in, is to clean all that up.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what I think
they'll still have to work out. But I think it's going to
add more -- less work on the ,7.P.'s; it's going to add more
work on the Sheriff's Office on the -- on getting all these
warrants to put them in our database.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To the extent you
know, either Sheriff or Judge Wright, we fund a position at
D.P.S., --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- right?
4-~5-04
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does this alter the
workload of that individual by increasing workload or
diminishing the workload, and if so, how much?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I haven't seen what her
actual job description is. I would think it would have a
definite impact on her job, because she doesn't have to
handle warrants any more -- or their corporal doesn't, but I
don't know how much it would decrease or increase. I know
she does do other things for them, as far as typing up
accident reports, al:L that kind of stuff, and regular case
reports that they have. So I couldn't say how much it
increases or decreases.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think that's
something we want to know, particularly when we get to
budget time. I see Judge O'Dell sitting behind Judge
Wright. So, to what degree are you concerned with this,
Judge O'Dell?
JUDGE O'DELL: Same degree Judge Wright is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
JUDGE O'DELL: Same as Judge Wright. But,
now, going back to Tommie Damron, she didn't handle, I mean,
the -- the warrants. That was Corporal Olive that did all
the warrants. I do know that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't know how much
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
21
paperwork part of that she handles.
JUDGE
COMMI
a solution, right?
JUDGE
problem, because the
solve that one.
O'DELL: Right, yeah.
SSIONER WILLIAMS: No one seems to have
TINLEY: We can't solve the D.P.S.
Legislature's the only one that can
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
JUDGE TTNLEY: From what I'm hearing at this
point --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seems to me we sign up
with the Omnibase program and see how it works and hope for
the best. And if it doesn't, we, you know, go from there.
That's the only option we have right now.
JUDGE O'DELL: And maybe have Collections
help us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: They're available. Right,
Brad?
JUDGE WRIGHT: They've offered.
MR. ALFORD: I've already talked to some of
the J.P.'s, and what we're going to try to do is implement a
program that, whenever the constables are through and
they're fixing to push the magic button to go to Omni,
they're going to give us 30 days. We're going to kind of
9-~6-09

,._ .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
22
prolong this four-year deal by 30 days. By giving us time
to do more research, send out a little bit stiffer letter,
that type of deal, what we have learned is that, through our
program we've run, these people move and we're able to
locate them. And, after they've moved about three or four
times and all of a sudden they get a letter from Kerr
County, it kind of gets their attention that, oh, they can
still find us. So, that.'s what we're going -- Collection's
going to try to do.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We don't have a problem
with the fuse? That you got to send it in to Omni within a
specific time frame, or
MR. ALFORD: No, sir.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- or you're out?
MR. ALFORD: No, sir, there's not.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only other question that
we have, which is our problem, of course, we can't confirm a
warrant being existing on anybody unless we have the actual
hard copy of the warrant at the Sheriff's Office, and some
of this can get slowed down. Some of it can. We already
had a problem where D.P.S. sent them all back to one of the
J.P.'s, and then one of the guys got picked up, but the
warrant was at the J.P. after hours; we didn't have it at
the Sheriff's Office. We can't confirm the warrant type
deal, so you can't charge them with it.
4-26-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1U
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
23
JUDGE WRIGHT: It's my understanding that
there's not even a warrant; it's just a list that goes to
Omnibase of people that fail to appear. There's not a
warrant for their arrest issued.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You want to issue a
warrant, which is what D.P.S. database is, is warrants,
okay? It's still up to the J.P. to issue that warrant and
to make sure it goes where it needs to.
JUDGE WEIGHT: Anyway, there's going to be a
loss of revenue, and you're now aware of it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we ironed it
out, but we didn't solve it.
JUDGE WRIGHT: Just have to try to make it up
elsewhere. I'm -- I've got trials, excuse me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on this
particular agenda item?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Holekamp, would
you adjust that thermostat, please?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just wondering,
Judge --
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: You had something?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I'm wondering
if the Collections Department is just going to move forward
-- first, the first question is, are -- do we need to take
4-26-~4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
24
any more action on getting involved with Omni?
JUDGE TINLEY: No. We have -- we've signed
the master contract, the County, with D.P.S. Omni that
allows us to go into the program. Now, each particular
J.P., at that J.P.'s election, can --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- go or not go with the
program. And then our Collections Department is just going
-- they don't need us to order them to do it. They're just
going to automatically go on and work with the J.P.'s.
MR. ALFORD: Yeah. I think some of it is
part of Kerr County criminal collections. I mean, I
think -- let's just get it done.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just wanted you to say it
out loud.
MR. ALFORD: What? Oh, thanks, Commissioner
Letz. On the Omnibase, on the $30 deal, even if we collect
after the J.P.'s have gone on and sent it to Omni, Omni
still gets their money. So, once it goes to Omni, it's --
Omni gets their money.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah, sure. Once
they put it in their database --
MR. ALFORD: It's their money.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If they're acquitted,
4-~6-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
you don't have to pay that money.
JUDGE O'DELL: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we want you to
collect it all.
MR. ALFORD: That's right. I just -- we
won't -- we'll talk about it later. Nevermind.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on this agenda
item? Let's move to the next agenda item, consider and
discuss prohibiting sale of goods or services at the Youth
Exhibit Center and Flat Rock Lake Park without contracting
or booking the use of premises or prior approval of the
Commissioners Court. I put this on the agenda because a
concern was raised Saturday at a planning meeting in
connection with the Arts and Crafts Fair, that what is to
prohibit someone from rolling into Flat Rock Lake Park on
the Arts and Crafts Fair weekend and becoming an
entrepreneur and selling their own little arts-and-craftsy
items? I guess the first question is, do we currently have
an overall policy that prohibits that kind of activity?
Some of you with more experience on this Court than I could
hopefully answer that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought we did.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I thought that --
I thought that it was going to be in Parks Rules and Regs,
but we never did do Parks Rules and Regs.
4-~6-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I mean, I can't --
you know, I thought we had one, but I thought something came
up when Flat Rock first -- a while back. Now, it does not
-- anything we have does not cover Hill Country Youth
Exhibit Center. If we have anything, it covers the park.
And I thought we did something, because there was something
-- somebody wanted to -- actually, it might have been your
son -- wanted to sell canoe rentals or something. Or --
MR. MILLER: Yeah, very well may have been.
He was looking for a site to sell -- to rent canoes on the
river.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And so I thought
it came up, but I thought that -- I thought we did something
to limit that, you know. Best of my memory.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Including overnight
camping and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, you can't overnight
camp there, I thought. And I thought we have a basic set of
rules, but --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't remember.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I don't think they were ever
adopted.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't know of any.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I think Commissioner Williams
is right; I think they were proposed, but never adopted.
9-~6-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's do one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think that's
my recollection, Mr. Holekamp, that that was going to be
embodied in Parks Rules and Regs, which we got up to a
certain point and it foundered over fireworks or something.
MR. HOLEKAMP: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we didn't get it
done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why do the chili folks
have to come to us to use the park?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause they're using
the park.
MR. HOLEKAMP:	Using	the	park.
JUDGE TINLEY:	They	come	to get permission to
use the park.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: These people were using
the park. We had to have something originally. If we
didn't have something on the books, they'd just go use the
park.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, you know,
this -- there are those who, for example, follow parades,
and all of a sudden, there's a parade in town; you got
somebody on the street corner selling balloons and junk and
monkeys and everything else, right? You know, he didn't ask
the City to use those streets; he just showed up at the
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
corner of whatever and whatever to do that. That's what --
exactly what I think tr:e Judge is talking about, that kind
of thing, or somebody making Indian pottery from his
backyard. I don't know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, this --
MR. MILLER: Judge, from the point of view of
the Arts and Crafts Foundation, we're a nationally-rated
fine arts and crafts fair. To have people setting up with
trinkets and things that really would not qualify for our
fair will denigrate that fair and its reputation throughout
the state.
JUDGE TINLEY: I agree. That's one of the
bases that I put it on the agenda for consideration.
MR. MILLER: And we rent the entire Hill
Country Youth Exhibit Center during our event so that we can
have parking and the rest of those facilities there, and
under our lease agreement, we have the use of Flat Rock Lake
Park for parking, but it really -- we don't have any -- we
don't have any other authority that we know of at this point
to do anything else in that park, in Flat Rock Lake. I
don't -- we don't have the ability to limit anybody. Our
parking people who will be down there helping park cars I
don't think have any authority to stop anybody from doing
anything, 'cause one of the things we talked about at the
planning meeting was to still leave the back section open
4-^E-04
i r.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
29
for -- even during our event, to allow people to use the
park. So, it's not completely shut off to the public.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the -- the booking of
the facility includes the entire Youth Exhibit complex, but
it does not include Flat Rock Lake Park.
MR. MILLER: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: That, I see -- I'm not as
concerned about the Youth Exhibit facility now that I
understand that -- that you've got the entire thing booked.
MR. MILLER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Because
control, and you can control what doe
booked. What I'm concerned about now
because your booking does not include
have the right to use it for overflow
exclusive.
that gives you
s happen if you have it
is Flat Rock Lake,
Flat Rock Lake. You
parking, but it's not
MR. MILLER: Right. And we probably ought to
have some ability to book it in a more formal manner.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge?
MR. MILLER: And basis.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Rather than just take
up this issue separately, if the Court would prefer, we can
bring back Park Rules and Regs and see if we can put that in
place in plenty of time to take care of Mr. Miller's
problem. If I promise not to put fireworks back in, we can
9-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
~ 11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
take a look at it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, let me propose an
option, if I might, Commissioner. And I -- if we're going
to impose park rules, we're probably going to have to have a
public hearing. That's going to take what, 30 days? We're
past the Arts and Crafts Fair.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's true.
That's true.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now, a potential alternative
would be that we put on the next agenda -- or that the Arts
and Crafts people put on the next agenda a request that they
be permitted to use Flat Rock Lake Park so that they have
control over it for their event.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exclusive?
JUDGE TINLEY: If they choose to allow others
to use it concurrently with them, under certain guidelines,
they're certainly privileged to do so, but that won't
require a public hearing if we grant them the right to use
that. We've -- we've Gotten to the same result intended,
and then we've got time to work on rules if we want.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd much prefer that. My
thinking was that we -- it also does something else, because
another problem we got with the park rules is that --
enforcement. And this way, we're shoving enforcement over
to the Arts and Crafts group, as opposed to the Sheriff's
9-~6-09

31


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Department, who doesn't know what rules and what laws people
are actually breaking. So, I think it's much better to give
it to Arts and Crafts.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why don't you just do
that right now?
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not sure the agenda item
will cover it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it does.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, come on.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It says right here -- it
says "without contracting or booking the use of the
premises."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I do -- I think
it covers it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that
we -- we probably should have an agreement, though, as to
what we're giving to them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is a one-time
shot, and they -- we can do an agreement for years out later
on if we want to.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we don't have
on record the request from Arts and Crafts for the official
use of Flat Rock Lake Fark, exclusive or otherwise.
MR. MILLER: Can I make that request?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, you can.
4-26-09
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,.--.
25
MR. MILLER: I'd like to formally make a
request for the exclusive use of Flat Rock Lake Park from
May 27th through the 31st.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Now you're getting
closer.
MR. MILLER: 2004.
COMMISSIONER BAi,DWIN: I move that -- that
that request be adopted.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
grant the request of the Texas Arts and Crafts -- Texas
State Arts and Crafts Educational Foundation to use the Flat
Rock Lake Park premises for the period May 27th through
May 31st.
COMMISS=ONER BALDWIN:
"exclusive," I think, is the big word.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
that point. Exclusive. But, in doing
exclusive, is it our intention to keep
the fishing pier and so forth?
exclusive -- the word
Good word.
I was going to raise
so, when we say
fishermen out from
MR. MILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I didn't think
so. "Exclusive" ought to be in there, Judge.
9-26-04

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
33
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. You adopt that into
your motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, I do.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Second?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Any further
questions or discussion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was going to mention
something to Commissioner Williams, but I'll do it after the
meeting. It's really --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Miller.
MR. MILLER: Thank you, Judge.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, with
Mr. Miller and Mr. Holekamp both here, just let me pass on
to them some information I just received this morning in my
office at the Ingram Dam Cafe. (Laughter.) The F.F.A. has
expressed a concern about the new barbed wire fence that's
close to the -- to the rodeo arena.
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir?
9-~6-04
34
1
-^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And they're
concerned about the youthful riders getting tangled up in
that barbed wire fence, to the extent that they blocked off
that area last Friday night to keep riders out of there.
Will the two of you look into that and see if there's
anything that needs to be done?
MR. MILLER: Okay. Let me -- let me -- it's
not going to be an easy solution. Number one is, we pulled
our fence back from the rodeo arena; actually, our lease
agreement -- the boundary of our lease agreement is the side
of the rodeo arena. We pulled it back, because when we were
out there looking at wY~ere we were going to fence it, they
had an event out there and they had some bleachers in that
area, so I pulled the fence back so they could always put
bleachers back there. I wasn't aware that they used that
portion. It's outside of the arena proper, in truth.
Before our fence was there, it was open field from their
fence on out, so I didn't -- there was nobody -- no way for
us to be aware it was a problem. The barbed wire we need,
'cause that keeps nonpaying people out of the park, to have
a strand of barbed wire across the top.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't know what
the solution is. We just -- I'm just kind of tipping you
off that that -- that complaint may come forward.
MR. MILLER: Okay.
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
35
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Maybe we need to
block it off. I don't know.
MR. MILLER: Well, that's what they did for
the event; they put up panels at each end to block off the
use of it. And I wasn't there over the weekend. I'm not
sure how they used it, but -- or did they actually use that?
'Cause it was raining.
MR. HOLEKAMP: No, they used the arena Friday
night.
MR. MILLER: Did they?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah.
MR. MILLER: It all worked out for them, the
way it was blocked off.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah -- well, sort of. But --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's not on the
agenda, Glenn. I just --
MR. HOLEKAMP: No.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I found it
convenient, with both of you here, to go ahead and say it.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Commissioner Nicholson, you're
right, we had several parents that brought it to our
attention last week, the concerns of the barbed wire. And I
guess it -- it's really not an ideal place to use barbed
wire. Barbed wire is for livestock, primarily. With
children playing, it's rather dangerous. But if -- if we
9-^6-09
36
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~S
need to, we can do some barricading to keep them off of it,
possibly.
MR. MILLER: We can sure work on that. It's
just one strand of barbed wire across the top; it's not a
five-strand barbed wire fence or anything -- no, it is too.
It is a five-strand.
MR. HOLEKAMP: It is a five-strand.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: According to the
F.F.A., it is.
MR. MILLER: Part of it is and part of it
isn't.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We'll deal with
that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. MILLER: We'll work on that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it for that agenda
item, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I hope so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on to the next
agenda item, consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
to grant permission to the Texas Arts and Crafts Educational
Foundation to utilize Kerr County's well at the Youth
Exhibit Center grounds to augment irrigation for the River
Star Arts Park grounds, with all expenses associated
therewith to be borne by the Texas Arts and Crafts
9-26-09
~~,_ ~ ~.
37

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..-.
25
Educational Foundation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is what it says,
Judge. The Arts and Crafts people probably could use some
extra water to irrigate their grounds in this growing season
to get it up to where it needs to be. We all know that they
have city water, but we all know what rate they have to pay
to use it. And so, what all this would do would be having
the Court give permission for them, if they chose, to do
what is necessary to take water from our well and get it
over to their grounds. That's -- if they don't want to do
it, they don't have to do it.
JUDGE TLNLEY: Is there a pump in that well?
MR. HOLEKAMP: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a good idea.
It's a -- one, it helps Arts and Crafts Foundation, and two,
it puts a pump in that well that, several times in the past
in severe droughts, we've tried to find a way to have water
to allow public use. This would, all of a sudden, give the
County a pump in that well. Part of the deal is that, if
the County needs the water, we can use it too.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Holekamp?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Is anything going to have to
be addressed with the Headwaters or anything on this
particular well? Or --
4-26-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
38
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a permitted
well, isn't it?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Huh?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's a permitted
well, is it not?
MR. HOLEKAMP: I'm not aware of it. That was
many, many, many, many, many years ago.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then it's
grandfathered in.
MR. MILLER: I have met with the Headwaters
people and asked them specifically what the limitations were
to the use of that well. We would be under the pumping --
you know, their normal pumping limits on the well. They use
it as a monitoring well. I asked them, if we put a pump in
it, would that, you know, keep them from using it as a
monitoring well? And they said absolutely not. It would
not be a problem to them at all. Really, the only question
at this point is, what is the down-hole condition of the
well? I don't think anybody knows, 'cause I don't think
it's been used in a long time. We just have to get that
checked out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Motion to approve,
Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: And second?
4-_'E-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
~ 11
12
,..., 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
39
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries.
MR. MILLER: Thank you, gentlemen.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Miller. The
next item is consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
on a resolution authorizing designated signatory for the
Texas Community Development Program Contract TBA-2004.P2.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, this -- this
is another in our series of fundings for the Kerrville South
wastewater project. It'll be the latest funding that was
approved, and it is the required resolution that sets out
who handles the vouchers and who handles the dollars and who
signs and who is the chief executive officer, which will be
the County Judge, and other signatory, which will be the
Treasurer and so forth and so on. So, it's rather
perfunctory; it's a requirement of the grant. I would move
its adoption.
25 ~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
40
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. This is essentially what we've
done in each case?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: In each of the new Kerrville
South wastewater contracts?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. The only
other thing is, in the -- the others, in addition to you, I
have been designated as a signator as well.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question I have is --
it's the wording of it. It just says "Commissioners Court
designates County Judge, County Clerk, and County
Commissioner." I mean --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Because typically
Grantworks, when they prepare these, doesn't know who the
Commissioner is. In our case, it's been me. If you want,
we can change that to you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I don't want to sign.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we can modify
it to put a name in there, but -- but by court order, it has
been me in the past.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would be cleaner --
because of this being so specific, I would say "County
Commissioner, Precinct 2."
4-ter-o9
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can do that. We
can add that -- we can change it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or the Commissioner of
the precinct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, either way. It
seems odd having it sir_gular.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can amend it that
way and reprepare it. Kathy can do that, and we can add
either my name or my precinct, whichever you think is
appropriate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, precinct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay? Would that -- I assume
that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's acceptable.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- becomes part of your motion
and second?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Next
4-26-09
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
item is a companion item; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action on Grantworks Administrative Contract for
the 2004 Community Development Project, the last funding
phase for that Kerrville South wastewater project.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the follow-up
action, Judge, to the R.FP in which Grantworks was chosen as
the administrative group to handle the dollars and all the
paperwork that goes with the federal and state funding. I
move adoption --
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- of the contract.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any -- any question or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Has the County Attorney
reviewed this? I'm sure it's the same form as the last one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is exactly the
same form. It has been reviewed earlier, originally.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the numbers remain
the same? Do you think that the consultant fee has been
25,000?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The numbers haven't
24 changed, no.
25
4-?6-04
~.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The fee amounts are
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the same?
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
are paid out of the grant.
COMMISSIONER
the grant, yeah. They'll c
COMMISSIONER
did the RFP's, that was the
that's --
WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm, yes, sir.
BALDWIN: Very good.
LETZ: I think --
NICHOLSON: Those fee amounts
WILLIAMS: They'll come out of
Mme out of the grant.
LETZ: I think they -- when they
amount they bid, was 25,000, so
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It reflects their
RFP.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Reflects their RFP.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think we've got that
already.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Oh, we did?
MS. PIEPER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
4-20'-04
44
1
--, 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
,~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And with that, the
County Judge is authorized to sign; is that correct?
JUDGE TINLEY: That would be the same on the
previous one, I assume, also? Okay. Okay, next item on the
agenda is consider and discuss naming county representatives
to a committee to study and recommend local government
incentives to be made available to businesses expanding
operations or commencing new operations in Kerr County. I
placed this on the agenda. It's basically an economic
development initiative. Traditionally, when we have a -- an
existing business that wants to expand their operations
significantly, or new operation that's thinking about coming
into Kerr County, and they contact the various leadership in
the county, one of the first questions they ask is, what
incentives are available to me; i.e. tax abatements,
business development grants, tax increment financing, all of
these various economic development possibilities. At the
present time, unless there's something I've missed along the
way, the answer that they get is pretty standard. It's, "I
don't know."
I would like, in order to be able to
encourage the right kind of addition to our tax base -- and
I think we need to transition our tax base and redistribute
9-26-04
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it more towards the business end of it. I think it's
probably made more evident by the fact that we just got
through with the freeze on the residential homesteads of the
elderly and the disabled. We need to be in a position to
give these people a better response, if that's possible.
And, so, what I have done -- and have I talked informally
with K.I.S.D. and City representatives about the possibility
of forming a committee with representatives from each of
these entities, as well as economic development interest
stakeholders, to, number one, first see what incentives are
available. I don't think any of us, at this point, know
really what the full. list of incentives are that could be
offered. What we might be able to offer, if any, is going
to be different, in all_ probability, with what the City
might be able to offer, or the school. But I think we all
need to know collectively what is available.
Secondly, I think we need to know what our
competition has made available or is offering for -- to the
same or similar type prospective business operations, and
hopefully -- hopefully come up with a matrix or a schedule
in which a prospective business operation, when that inquiry
is made, is handed a fairly definitive itemization of what
incentives are available, depending upon the amount of
capital investments, depending upon the number of jobs
created and even the types of those jobs, wage scales,
4-26-04
46
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
possibly factor into it any additional infrastructure costs
that are required from the local governments. Even if we
don't get there, I thir_k we'll -- the educational process
will be good. We'll be that much further ahead just knowing
what's available, and secondly, what the competition is
doing. But the ultimate goal is to come up with a schedule;
when they make that inquiry, to hand it to them and say,
"Here it is." You don't have to wait around for months
while it's debated and it becomes a political football or
other difficulties. This is nothing -- nothing more than a
look at economic development opportunities.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, it's a good
thing to do, and I will- remind the Court that, oh, I guess
18 months or so ago, Bob Waller, who's now the current
chairman of the KEDF, attempted to do this sort of on an ad
hoc basis, and he brought together for a series of meetings
KEDF, the Chamber, City officials, County, those of us who
serve on that board and others, school and so forth, in an
attempt to develop that -- this very thing, and -- and
reduce to it some sort of a matrix and package so that when
somebody does come into town and seeks that information, we
can just hand them a package and say, "Here it is." That's
better than saying, "We don't know," which is what we say
now. So, I would support the idea. And I think,
probably -- I don't know if you're talking about forming a
4-2~-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
47
committee or just authorizing us to participate in that
discussion fostered by some other agency; I'm not sure which
way you're going with it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I don't think there's
any particular desire to be the -- the former of the
committee. I certainly think we need to participate in it,
and I think there needs to be a -- a group that -- that
organizes and forms for that purpose. And, as I said, I've
informally talked with -- with the City representatives and
school representatives, and they think it's a great idea.
We -- we think we'd like to get in, be part of it. I --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would -- I would
move that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait a minute.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just want to get
this on the table. We'll continue discussion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 'Cause I had an idea
I wanted to embody in it, that the Court approve the naming
of County representatives to a committee to recommend local
government incentives, and that we ask the KEDF to form that
committee.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine. Is that
a motion?
25 ~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be, yes.
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
48
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. The -- you want
to call it?
JUDGE TINLEY: Hmm?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's a motion and
second made. Is there any discussion? Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thought I'd just jump
in.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sorry, I was asleep over
here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I -- I agree; I think
that we need to do it. We have talked -- this body has
talked about tax abatements in years past under Judge
Denson, and had some great discussions, and I have some
great ideas, I think, and some thoughts about tax
abatements. My thinking has not gone beyond tax abatements
themselves. I've looked at and studied it. I have friends
around the state that do that, and they actually go out on a
stump and speak about it. But I don't -- I don't see the
benefit of us getting together with the City or the school
district, because we're going to find that the authorities
of the different government entities are going to be
different; that we're not going to have the same authority
9-~6-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
49
as the City, per se. So, I think that you probably need to
form a couple of members of this body to put together what
-- what our authority is, and that list, as far as the
County is concerned, and then we need to step out there and
put that, then, with the overall body or group.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be done.
That would be the idea, sure.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I really support any
efforts to -- to bring new commerce, new jobs, better jobs
to Kerr County, and I support this effort. It's -- it's
necessary to have a package ready when somebody inquires,
but on top of that, I'd like to see somebody take the lead
on it. I would think it would be KEDF, but I don't know.
And -- and be -- instead of just passively waiting for
somebody coming around asking, be proactive; go out there,
be aggressive in trying to bring the right kind of new
enterprise to Kerr County. I think some other counties and
cities have done a pretty good job of trying recruit
suppliers for -- for the new Toyota facility in San Antonio,
and I'm disappointed that we don't have the -- the
infrastructure, the capability to do those kinds of things.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me throw a
comment or two on top of that, Commissioner. I think there
has been a really renewed and redoubled effort on the part
of KEDF -- reconstituted maybe is a better descriptive
4-~0'-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
50
adjective. After splitting off from the Chamber and having
a -- and then setting up a whole separate board and separate
leadership and separate executive director, there have been
renewed efforts, and tris is one of the key components, as
you all know and I know, that the executive director needs
to get that done. They've made a lot of inquiries, but
they've also had a lot of -- a lot of opportunities to say,
you know, "We don't know. No, we haven't put that together
yet."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a -- I mean,
I -- I like the idea, but I have -- I'm trying to figure out
how to -- it's a big task. In my mind, I think KEDF is the
-- I like using them, 'cause that's what they're supposed to
be doing; we provide funding over there. And, so, there's a
couple of things that are going through my mind. I think it
was under -- when Bob Denson was Judge. I don't even
remember who it was -- Buster, you might remember -- that
came in; that we discussed this at length, and there was, by
some members of the Court at the time -- or some members
that aren't on the Court now were very much opposed to doing
anything. And what that brings to mind, to me, is that,
with the turnover that comes on this Court and City Council
and other entities, you know, I hate to spend a whole lot of
time, because I can almost assure you it isn't going to fly
in two years. You know, I'm thinking -- but my memory tells
9-26-04
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
me it was Commissioner Oehler at the time was very much
against doing it. And I can't -- I forgot who it was that
we were talking about doing something with. But any kind of
abatement, I think it's -- that we need to know what we can
do. I like knowing our authorities and things of that
nature, and what schools can do and what the cities can do.
I don't know why KEDF can't look at all three and come
report back to the entities, 'cause I just -- it's something
that I think that we're not doing our jobs if we don't
pursue it; at least know what we can do. And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- when it comes to
schools, I think that -- I don't know if the Judge talked to
more than one school district or not, but --
JUDGE TINLEY: I just talked to the one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because of the layout of
these districts, you clearly -- in my mind, KEDF needs to
talk to Comfort, Center Point, Ingram, and Kerrville. I
don't know that Hunt really has -- you know, I think they
certainly could be involved, but because of the way they
fall, right next to the airport you have Center Point, and
all of -- what's that place called out here?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Whiskey Canyon.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All of Whiskey Canyon is
Comfort. Anything going in big out there, you know, you
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
52
have to get that school on board on it as well. And I think
that if we don't, you know, get all those school districts
kind of at least, you know, in line, you kind of come up
with the same thing. "Well, if you're over here on this
side of the street, you can do this, but over here we don't
know." Which makes us look as bad as we are right now.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good point.
I'm not sure that KEDF, if they become the umbrella to make
this map, is fully aware of that. That's a good point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, to me, the first
step is you have to research. You go to the County, City --
I don't care how they come up with it; find out what schools
can do, what cities/municipalities can do, what counties can
do, and then go to the entities and say, "Here's what you
can do. Are you willing to participate?" That's the
approach that I would recommend.
JUDGE TINLEY: No question but what the
educational process is -- is step one. That's the only way
you're going to get there, is to first know what -- what's
available. And whatever it takes to initiate that process
to start this educational step, I -- I think we need to do
that. Whether it's done by -- by KEDF or some members of
county government working with KEDF, city government, school
district government, whatever, working with KEDF, we just
need to get the process going.
4-26-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
53
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Or it's not going to go along.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Well, with --
based on the motion that Commissioner Williams made, we --
he said utilizing KEDF. My recommendation would be to pass
that motion, or proceed with that motion, and then, at the
next KEDF meeting -- which I believe both of y'all are
members.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Next week.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Next week. Bring it up,
and if they're willing to take it on, let them do it. If
they're not, come back; we'll figure out another way for the
County to figure out what the County can do.
JUDGE TINLEY: As good a way as any to do it,
but we'll start.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That Letz is wise,
isn't he?
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wise.
JUDGE TINLEY: We had have a motion and
second on the table for -- let me get you to restate your
motion.
25 ~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, let's see if I
9-26-04
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
..-.
25
can remember how I stated it. That -- that we name county
representatives to a committee to study and recommend local
government incentives to be made available to businesses
expanding operations or commencing operations in Kerr
County, and urge the KEDF to be the sponsoring agency to get
that work underway.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further discussion
of the motion as stated?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We've got a wise man
and a wordsmith.
JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Next
item is consider approving road names for privately
maintained roads in accordance with 9-1-1 guidelines.
Ms. Hardin.
MS. HARDIN: We have nine private roads, and
I have one correction to make on the -- the next to the last
road, and that would be Flintlock instead of Flint Rock, all
one word.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: L-o-c-k?
4-26-04
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HARDIN: Yes. And your backup material
is all correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We've got a Six
Shooter, a Bronco, a Flintlock. It's the wild west out
there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Out in your area.
JUDGE TINLEY: Didn't you second?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion and
second for approval of the agenda item, with the correction.
Any further question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Next
item on the agenda, accept the presentation of the '02-'03
Audit Report by Pressler Thompson and Company.
MR. TOMLINSON: Good morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning.
MR. TOM~INSON: I've invited Doug Sundberg
from the firm to come present the '02-'03 audit, and for you
to have the opportunity to ask any questions about -- about
4-26-04

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.--,
25
56
his comments. We're slightly late with this presentation
this year as a result of -- of finalizing the -- the dreaded
conversion to GASB-34 statements. And the statements that's
in front of you conform to GASB-34, and all -- the statement
plus the -- the single audit report is -- is all-inclusive
in the statement. So, with the exception of -- of the
evaluation of -- of the infrastructure, we -- that's not
required for this year for anything that's -- that's with
the limitation of $500,000 or more. We didn't have
anything, so we are -- together with Truby and Leonard, we
are in the process of doing that. We're -- we've had a
meeting, and we're -- we're -- we have plans to -- to
complete that by the end of this fiscal year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you talking about
the actual county roads and things like that, actual
properties?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. The right-of-ways, the
roads themselves, any bridges, low-water crossings.
That's -- that's about it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's going to be
tough to do. What's the value of a -- of Letz' new bridge?
What's the value of a low-water crossing?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or the one that he
lost.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, we can tell you
4-26-04
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
what the value of his is. A lot.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, my approach is to -- to
have -- to have Leonard estimate the actual cost of
construction today of -- of a facility, whether it be a road
or bridge or low-water crossing. And then the next question
comes to -- as to when the original road was -- came to the
county. And if we -- I mean, I know that some of those
situations are going to be an estimate, but what my plans
are is to use the current price deflater table, which I got
from -- from the Comptroller's office, and we will deflate
the current price or the construction price today back using
that table to go back to the original cost.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To construct a road?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does that take into
account the cost of the right-of-way?
MR. TOMLINSON: No, the right-of-way is
separate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The value of the
right-of-way?
MR. TOMLINSON: The right-of-way's separate.
We do -- I'll get an appraisal -- a current appraisal of
property in a given area. We know how many acres are -- are
within one road, and I'll place a value-per-acre on current
prices; do the same thing, devalue that current price back
4-2E-04
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to the date of the original -- or when it became the
County's property. And, if any of those properties exceed
$500,000, then they will be included in the amount that we
record as infrastructure. They're -- the Comptroller's
office has -- has put a limitation of $500,000 -- a floor of
$500,000.00 any property or any structure, that anything
over that amount, then we -- we include as -- as an asset in
the financial statements.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if it's under 500,
you don't include it?
MR. TOMLINSON: Don't include it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you aggregate
everything under it?
MR. TOMLINSON: I think that's -- I think
they -- each road stands on its own, because they're all
different.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you -- you do the
roads individually?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, we'll do the roads
individually.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, right-of-way's not
right-of-way. I mean --
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, it is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right-of-way's
right-of-way?
4-2n-09
59

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: It is, but it's separate,
because it's not depreciable. The land is not depreciable.
So -- so, they become -- the land itself is separate from
the road.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, is that -- I mean,
I guess that -- you know, if
Comptroller. Makes no sense
less than 500,000, you don't
can see not keeping track of
don't -- I mean, you could c
and not have to count --
that's the edict from the
to me, though. Just if it's
aggregate it. I mean, to me, I
it as a line item, but I
hange road names every so often,
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I have -- I'm not
absolutely sure about that answer, but I -- I have not seen
in their -- in their directives that you -- that you
aggregate it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's nether here nor
there. I mean, I think it's -- I don't understand why they
would do it that way, but -- what about prescriptive
easements?
MR. TOMLINSON: Not included.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not included? Does Road
and Bridge have a -- I guess -- well, how do they know
what's prescriptive and what's not prescriptive?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I think -- I think we
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
60
know. I mean, according to the road list that -- that Truby
and Leonard have, we know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well -- and I'll just
take a road that I'm familiar with, which is Lane Valley.
Lane Valley has -- you know, a little piece here is deeded,
and this will be prescriptive for the next mile, then a
little piece here is deeded. And it's happened because,
over time, people -- usually when property changes hands,
people want to get rid of the -- paying taxes on this little
bit. But you have roads -- most roads in my precinct are
both. And, I mean, if they have a way to accurately tell --
I guess I probably need to go to Road and Bridge. I'd love
to see a map as to what's prescriptive and what's deeded.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, that's -- you know,
that's the issue that we're going to have, you know, to
face. And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, it hasn't been
that many years since Y.err County's required deeds. It's
only been, like, 13 or 14 years.
MR. TOMLINSON: Since '81.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: '81 since we started
requiring deeds, like subdivisions and that kind of thing.
So, you can separate all those.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I mean, those
will be easier, but I'm -- like, on the older roads,
4-2E-04
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
whenever we've done -- on Lazy Valley, when we did -- and
Stoneleigh, we did all that construction. Whenever we've
gone in and done any work, we've converted all those from
prescriptive to deed.
MR. TOMLINSON: Maybe I can get you to help
me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When does our audit
have to reflect the inclusion of the value of these roads?
What year? Beginning when?
MR. TOMLINSON: '81.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
MR. TCMLINSON: They -- well, the way we're
going approach it is to go back as far as we can.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I know, but it's not
included in here.
MR. TOMLINSON: It's not included.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what year will it
show up?
MR. TOMLINSON: Next year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Next year. And that
will mean that our asset -- our net assets will be increased
by an "X" factor, whatever that is; is that correct? All of
a sudden?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it'll be the net of --
of the original cost, less depreciation.
9-26-09
62
1
'" 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: Land -- the land itself or
the right-of-way will be at cost.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Definitely increase.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Doug?
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. SUNDBERG: Good morning, Your Honor,
Commissioners. We11, it's here. Let's start out on what's
labeled as Page 2, the Independent Auditor's Report. And
the third paragraph down starts out by saying, "In our
opinion, the financial statements referred to above present
fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial
position..." of all the entities of Kerr County. And then
the next paragraph points out that we are now -- we have now
implemented the new reporting model, GASB-34 required, and
the Management's Discussion and Analysis. In essence, a
clean opinion. From there through about Page 13 is the
Management Discussion and Analysis that, unless somebody
wants to go through it, I'll let you read that and go
through it at your own pace and -- and can ask Tommy
whatever questions you may have regarding that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question.
MR. SUNDBERG: Yes?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Was that the management
4-26-04
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
schedule written by your firm or by you or by Tommy?
MR. SUNDBERG: No, by Tommy.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It wasn't -- weren't we
told that we needed to write this at our conference?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought I heard
that.
MR. TOMLINSON: I gave you a copy of it about
three weeks ago to look over.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm glad you did this
year, but it's just something that, I mean, is --
MR. TOMLINSON: And Commissioner Williams
made -- made some comments.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: But I think it's about,
like -- actually, two weeks ago I sent everybody a copy,
along with a memo to review and either -- make any
recommendations that we want to make. So, it came time
for -- for us to have to send these audits out to different
places. I know, as far as Commissioner Williams, with the
-- with O.R.C.A., they were -- they were really adamant
about getting their -- their audit report by, actually,
March 31st. And, so, there -- there are state agencies that
have been requesting audit reports, and so I -- you know, I
made my own decision to go ahead and -- since I didn't hear
anything, to go ahead and finalize the report so I could
4-?6-04
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
give them that.
COMMISSIONER
just curious. I think next
anyone, we should spend a 1
COMMISSIONER
the memo Tommy circulated -
in print here.
LETZ: I'm glad you did. I was
year, just more for us than
ittle more time on it.
WILLIAMS: I didn't realize that
- my comments was going to end up
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Thank you.
MR. SUNDBERG: Okay? We'll jump over to Page
15, which is the Government-Wide Statement of Net Assets.
This is the first new statement under GASB-34. This puts
the County under full accrual accounting basis. The first
column, the Governmental Activities, represents all the
funds of the County. Whether they be the general operating
or whether they be debt service, those that used to be
classified as special revenue are all under this one column.
The only ones that aren't there are what's in the second
column, which is the Business-Type Activities, which is the
Juvenile Detention Facility, and what was labeled as trust
and agency over the fiduciary funds, those that you just
maintain for other entities, those are not included in this
column. What it does include also is the capital assets.
You notice down in the current -- current assets, all the
capital assets that used to be classified under the fixed
asset column are now included here. Also, in addition to
4-26-04
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that is the debt. The -- the bonds and notes payable, the
capital leases, et cetera, are included down in the
Liabilities section.
Under the Net Assets section, they're a
little different in that we are reporting things as
restricted or unrestricted, whereas in the past, it was --
we had fund balance or maybe you had designated a certain
item or something. Here they're restricted in -- in that an
outside party has -- has restricted those assets for a
particular person -- not person. Particular activity. The
first item there is "Invested in Capital Assets, Net of
Related Debt." That number represents the total assets less
depreciation up above, less the debt associated with that.
The Restricted section, for debt service and all other
purposes, is basically what was in the special revenue
section, which was for those particular funds, whichever
ones they were in. So, the general operating fund has an
unrestricted fund balance of -- of 4.4 million. The second
column, which is the business activities or the Juvenile
Detention Facility, really isn't much different than what
we've been reporting on in the past, because that has
already been on the full -- on full accrual basis. It's
just all the other County activities.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Doug, is the --
Column 2, Business-Type Activities, is the Juvenile
9-25-09
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Detention Center the only thing incorporated into that?
MR. SUNDBERG: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. SUNDBERG: Yes. The next page, on
Page --
JUDGE TINLEY:
MR. SUNDBERG:
JUDGE TINLEY:
show a receivable there, "Due
MR. SUNDBERG:
JUDGE TINLEY:
MR. SUNDBERG:
insurance claim that you have
got that from --
Before you get off this --
Sure.
-- statement of assets, you
from Insurance Company."
Yes.
Where did you get that figure?
That figure is that health
that has been unpaid. And we
MR. TOMLINSON: That's the net of -- of the
amount that we paid, less --
JUDGE TINLEY: The reported reimbursements?
MR. TOMLINSON: No, the actual
reimbursements. The -- I think the net is -- is, what, two
hundred and --
MR. SUNDBERG: 230,000.
MR. TOMLINSON: 230,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Did you give him that
figure, in essence?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
4-26-04
1
'~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
67
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay.
MR. SUNDBERG: One other thing I'll point --
glad you mentioned that. One other thing I'll point out
there just above that number is Receivables, is Court Fines
and Fees. This is -- Tommy went back and analyzed clear
back, from whenever to the current, what was still due on
various fines and fees the courts have assessed, less an
allowance that has been taken into account, and that's the
figure that we came up with, which has never been reported
before.
JUDGE TINLEY: You did age -- did an age
analysis to determine collectability, basically?
MR. SUNDBERG: Right.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, I did a 10-year running
average and I determined how much was collected in each
court for -- for a 10-year period, and I -- then I applied
that -- that ratio to the outstanding fines and fees that
were as of 9/30, and that's how I arrived at -- at the
reserve part that I did. There -- it's quite enlightening
to see the difference in the three -- in the county,
district, and J.P. courts as to what -- as to how much is
collected out of the fines and fees that are assessed in
Year 1, Year 2, Year 3, and Year 4. And, for instance, in
the J.P. courts, probably 80 -- probably 85 percent of the
fines and fees are collected in the first year and a half.
9-~6-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1Q
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
68
Then, when you get past four years, it's zero. And it's
essentially the same thing with the County Court at Law,
except it extends it somewhat. And then, when you get into
district court, there -- there's relatively zero by -- you
know, by the time you get to seven, eight years. After --
after that period of time, there's -- there's just not much
effort or ability to collect, you know, those fines and
fees.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. I think the problem is
we don't have the legislative authorization to do a lot of
things with the district court fines and fees that we have
available to us in the County Court at Law -- the
misdemeanors.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, that's correct. We --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe or maybe not.
Maybe not. Maybe. No one's decided whether you have the
authority or not. No one's ever tested it.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think there's a serious
concern about the degree of authority we have --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- in the district courts with
felony cases.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe a better way to put it,
yeah.
4-26-G9
1
'~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
20
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
69
MR. SUNDBERG: Anything else? Okay. One
thing I would have you note, notice at the bottom of Page 15
under the first column, the total net assets of 12 million,
261. I want you to keep that in mind, 'cause we'll have a
different number when we get to another report over here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's comforting.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Creative accounting
or what?
MR. SUNDBERG: Yes, we can make it read what
we want. (Laughter.) The next pages, 16 and 17, are the --
is the Statement of Activities. This is a little
considerably different format than what we've had in the
past. And the first section there, Governmental Activities,
and then you got your Business-Type Activities below that,
they're both treated the same way. The first column is your
total expenditures under the GASB-34 reporting model, full
accrual basis, the 15 million, 522 for the community --
excuse me, the governmental activities.
The next columns over -- well, back up. What
this report is supposed to do is show you where the revenue
comes to support -- comes from to support these
expenditures, what that revenue is, and then what has to be
made up by your governmental revenue taxes, sales tax, et
cetera. Okay? And this -- in the governmental activities,
you've got 15 million, 522 of total expenditures.
4-2~-oq
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
70
2.6 million came from charges for services, which included
in that line is the Court's fines and fees that we were
talking about. That's part of that. Then you've got
various other grants, operating grants, construction grants,
capital grants, et cetera, that are part of that. And you
come up to your governmental activities, net shows that we
still had 11,916,000 of expenditures that we still had to
have revenue to support. Down below, then, on Page 17,
you'll see General Revenues, listing there property taxes
levied, sales and other taxes, investment earnings, et
cetera, to a tune of 12 million, 9. That covered the
11 million deficit, so to speak, up above. So, we had an
increase in net assets for the year of $1,012,000 under the
full accrual basis of the County.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A million 12?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can't see that
number.
MR. SUNDBERG: Okay. On Page 17, it's about
the third line from the bottom.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, I do now, yeah.
Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: About a 5 percent -- little
over 5 percent gain in overall budgeted expenditures.
MR. SUNDBERG: Mm-hmm, right. This is under
4-26-04
71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the full accrual basis. Okay. Under the -- the Juvenile
Detention Facility, going across into the same basis on that
same line, they had a decrease in their net assets of
188,000 for the year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the reason for
that would be what?
JUDGE TINLEY: Incurred --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Incurred debt?
MR. TOMLINSON: Indebtedness.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Debt service on that?
MR. SUNDBERG: Well, the additional
indebtedness really didn't have anything to do with it,
'cause in this -- except for the interest paid on that debt,
okay, because the principal payments and -- and capital
outlay are not part of these expenditures like they have
been in the past. So, the main thing there would have
been -- as far as the debt is concerned, would have been the
interest paid on that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, just -- I mean, so
expenses went up or revenue went down?
MR. SUNDBERG: Right. Okay. Next page, on
Page 18, this -- there's where we come into that different
net asset figure I was talking about before. This -- this
statement is -- is a little different than what you've had
4-20'-04
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
before, but it's basically on the modified accrual basis of
accounting which has been reported on in the past. The
difference here is that we don't have it broken down by
general funds, special revenue funds, et cetera. We have it
broken down by what -- what the GASB there referred to as
"major funds." A major fund is one that their -- I got to
look at this to make sure -- where their total assets,
liabilities, revenues, or their expenditures are at least
10 percent of the total of all funds of that category type,
and the total assets, liabilities, revenues, and
expenditures of the individual governmental fund are at
least 5 percent of the corresponding total of all
governmental funds.
Under that scenario, the General Fund, which
is always a major fund, and the Road and Bridge were the
only two that qualified as major funds under this category.
All other funds are -- are listed under the Non-Major
Governmental Funds column. Like I said before, this is
under the modified accrual basis, so in this statement, you
don't see your capital assets or your bonds and related debt
associated with that. And so we come down to the final
column over there of fund balance of 6,082,000, as opposed
to the 12 million net assets we saw in the previous balance
sheet.
The page right next to that, Page 19,
4-26-0~
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lb
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
reconciles that out for us. We take the 6,082,000 that we
have included here, the total fund balance, and then we add
back -- excuse me -- we add to that the fixed assets, less
the accumulated depreciation, less the long-term debt
associated with that, and we also add to that -- which is
the 5,239,000, and then we also add to that various items
that were recognized as revenue that are not included in
receivables and so forth that were included on the other
report that are not included here because of going from full
accrual to modified accrual. Okay? And that gets us down
to our 12 million, 261 that we saw on the previous
statement.
Going to Page 20, here again, is this more in
line with what -- hoUT we reported the revenues and
expenditures in the past under the modified accrual basis,
but here again, under the major and non-major fund
categories. Under this, you'll notice that we have, under
the far right column, we had a million -- what, a 1,012,000
increase in net assets on that previous statement of
activities for the year, under the full accrual. Under the
modified accrual, you'll see that we have a $460,000
decrease. The reason for that, here again, is on Page 22,
where we reconcile that out, and mainly it's because of --
under the modified accrual approach, capital asset
additions, principal payments on long-term debt, those types
4-26-09
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of things are part of your expenditures. Under the full
accrual, they are not. They are used to decrease your debt
or increase your fixed assets, as the case may be. Any
questions?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What was your name
again? (Laughter.)
MR. SUNDBERG: I understand your confusion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, there is some,
'cause you spouted some numbers that are not on my page.
MR. SUNDBERG: Is there any questions? I'm
going through it kind of fast, I realize. And, you know --
okay. On Pages 23 through 25 is basically the balance
sheet, income statement, and statement of cash flows for the
Juvenile Detention facility, which are basically the same as
we saw on the previous pages. This type of reporting didn't
change, like I said, because this was already under the full
accrual basis, since it was an enter -- a business-type
activity. So, that's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Reserves at the
end -- or from Juvenile Detention Center, cash reserves at
the end of '03 was 260,746; is that correct?
MR. SUNDBERG: The cash reserve? Where are
you looking?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whatever -- whatever
reserves they have.
9-?6-09
~.r.,._ -- --
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. SUNDBERG: Oh, okay. Well, at the bottom
of Page 23, they have unrestricted net assets or reserves of
$727,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. SUNDBERG: There's 411 that's restricted
for the debt service.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. SUNDBERG: And a million, six, which is
restricted for the project -- the construction out there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MR. SUNDBERG: And then they -- then they
have a negative 2.1 million in investment and capital asset.
The reason for that is the debt that's -- that's now there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, again, my
question is, what's their operating reserve?
MR. SUNDBERG: 727,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: Commissioner, that would
be -- essentially, that would be the cash plus any current
receivables that are readily converted into cash.
Basically, that's what our current operating reserve is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's oversimplification,
but that's essentially it.
MR. SUNDBERG: Okay. On Page 26, as I stated
4-26-04
76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
before, there were several funds -- accounts that were not
included previously. That's this statement right here,
Statement of -- of Fiduciary Net Assets. This is all the
trust and agency accounts that the County is maintaining for
other entities, All we're doing is fiduciary capacity, not
really part of your net assets or liabilities. Okay.
Starting on Page 27, then, is the notes, which basically
there's some -- a little different information, but
basically the same type of information as you've had in the
past. I think you can probably go through and read that,
unless there's something that -- questions that someone has.
Page -- Pages 40, 41, and 42 is a little different analysis
of the debt that you -- that the County has; just kind of
gives us a slight analysis of each bond, note, capital lease
obligation, et cetera. And then Page 42 just kind of
summarizes that to show you the debt that's due as of
September 30, '03, and your requirements over the next five
years.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Going back -- looking on
Page 41 --
MR. SUNDBERG: Mm-hmm?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- why does the Road and
Bridge -- I mean, they -- obviously, they have a lot of
leases -- long-term leases as well. Are they somewhere
else?
9-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
77
MR. SUNDBERG: That's all -- that's all part
of this. Now, if they were a cap -- you know, if it's an
operating lease where they're just leasing the equipment on
an annual basis --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. SUNDBERG: -- that's not a capital lease.
That would be capitalized here, or a liability set up for
it. These are the capital leases that are, in essence,
purchases of that equipment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. They're over
there, too. I see Caterpillar there on the page -- some of
them. All right, thank you.
MR. SUNDBERG: Okay. I might touch on Pages
48 and 49, which is the budget comparison. This is a little
different this year also in that, in the past, we've --
we've reported on the final adopted -- or final amended
budget, the actual, and then the variance compared to that.
This year, we also reflect the original budget as originally
adopted, so that you can see the difference between what you
originally adopted and what the final amended one came in
at. And we present that for both -- for both of the -- what
we describe as major funds on the previous statement. So,
the General Fund and the Road and Bridge fund are presented
here, okay? The only other thing that I would like to
mention, unless there's some more questions, is on 67, which
4-26-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
78
relates to the federal -- the single audit part of this, the
federal grants that you had. The first line there indicates
that it was an unqualified opinion on the single audit
issues also, and that there were no findings and questioned
costs in relation to that. So, here again, that's a clean
opinion on that part of it also. The only other thing is
the -- is the management letter which you have before you.
If there's any other questions, I'd be glad to try to
answer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it's very well
done. I think that if we see this a couple of times and get
accustomed to it, it's going to be simpler for us.
MR. SUNDBERG: Right, I agree.
MR. TOMLINSON: Next year, in the -- in the
management discussion analysis, we will be able to have some
comparative summary statements, because we now have one year
behind us that we have the information for. So, next year,
when we do that same analysis -- when we do the M.D.& A., we
can put in '02-'03 and '03-'04, put them side-by-side to be
able to compare, you know, the activities of the County
between -- between years. So, that would -- that will be
helpful to some -- to some people, to be able to see that
as -- as a mental picture of what happened as a result of
operations.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Excellent.
4-?E-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
79
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doug, on Page 48 --
MR. SUNDBERG: 48, okay. Mm-hmm?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Excluding Road and
Bridge, which is on Page 49, we increased our fund balance
$1.13 million last year? Am I reading that right, that --
that final --
MR. SUNDBERG: No. You had budgeted for a
deficit of 495,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. SUNDBERG: Under this analysis, you had
an increase of 640,000, so there was a variance of 1.13.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, variance. Okay.
MR. SUNDBERG: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we increased it
640,000.
MR. SUNDBERG: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Our fund balance last
year. And then, in Road and Bridge, we increased the fund
balance there --
MR. SUNDBERG: Actually, there --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Decreased it there 83,000
-- 82,000.
MR. SUNDBERG: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are we in compliance
4-26-04
~.___.r- ~ ~.~.._ ,. a s
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
BO
with GASB-34?
MR. SUNDBERG: Yes, to the best of our
ability.
JUDGE TINLEY:
that we've got an unqualified
MR. SUNDBERG:
JUDGE TINLEY:
the compliance standards with
compliance requirements we ha
no deficiencies?
And what you're telling us is
and clean opinion?
Right.
And, secondly, with regard to
various grants or other
ve with state, federal, we have
MR. SUNDBERG: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I would move
the Court accept the presentation of the '02-'03 audit as
presented by Pressler Thompson and Company.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
accept the 2002-'03 audit report by Pressler Thompson and
Company. Any further question or discussion? All in favor
of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote,}
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. We're
about at break time. Why don't we stand in recess until,
4-26-04
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
oh, between five and ten to 11:00?
(Recess taken from 10:39 a.m. to 10:55 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to
order. We were in recess and we'll now resume. Next item
on the agenda is consider and discuss approving a
proclamation for the National Day of Prayer. Commissioner
Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't think that's
mine, Judge. That's Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe it was
Commissioner 3.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sorry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's all right.
JUDGE TINLEY: I misread it. I apologize,
Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is just the
proclamation that was forwarded to us by -- by Fern -- by
Ms. Lancaster, and it's here for approval. I move for
approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the resolution. All in favor, signify by saying
"aye."
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
4-26-04
82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. Next
item on the agenda is consideration and discussion of a
resolution to State Senator Troy Fraser and State
Representative Harvey Hilderbran opposing any legislation in
the current special session of the State Legislature that
has a negative financial impact on county government.
Precinct 3, Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This one, actually, you
can probably refer to Commissioner Williams, 'cause he
helped draft this. I did the first draft; he did the second
draft of this. I put this on the agenda and kind of drafted
this just because of some of the ideas floating around in
Austin these days. And I think we received a -- a
memorandum from -- or I received e-mail from Jannett as well
related to special session and things, and I just tried to
-- and I read some others from other counties that were more
specific. I decided that they're going to change whatever
they have up there from the original bills that -- that were
submitted, so we're trying to make a resolution to keep them
from negatively impacting the county. So, I have -- we can
make changes, modifications, approve, not approve, whatever.
I just put it on for discussion, and that's it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it's a good
blanket statement. I know that there are a dozen or so
issues floating around, unfunded mandates and other, other,
4-2E-04
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
other, other things, but this is a good blanket statement
and a good start. I wculd hope that -- there are a couple
that are important to me, I think that should be important
to all of us, that are just now coming out that -- that, I
mean, you see all these things, and we've already joined the
affray on the unfunded mandate, but there's a couple of them
poking their heads out now that we really are going to take
some interest in a little bit later. But this is a good --
this is good. I second his motion, if he'll make one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move -- I made a
motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Did you so move?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right, and seconded by
Commissioner Baldwin. Any further question or discussion?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. The
next --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thanks to Commissioner
Williams for getting the resolution in the proper format for
9-~6-09
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
,~---
25
resolution. Our wordsmith expert over there assisted in
the -- the original draft.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: He's got a lot of
expertise on this Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Next item on the agenda
is consider, discuss, and approve contract with Global
Tel*Link Corporation fcr the inmate telephone system.
Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: In our discussions about
changing inmate phone system vendors, I put out the word; we
decided to accept proposals, and then got proposals from
five different vendors. About a week ago, week and a half
ago, Judge Tinley and I sat down and went over them. I do
have a recommendation, which is this Global Tel*Link. It's
a little bit lower percentage of commission rates than what
some of the other ones offer, but the equipment and the
technology that this one offers is far greater, in my
opinion, than what the other ones offer. So, I think we
will actually do real well on the commission rates, because
of the type of collection stuff they do and type of billing
we have, and the equipment itself will allow us to enhance
the security in the -- in the jail facility greatly over
what we currently have.
JUDGE TINLEY: And some of the other
offerors, while the percentage commission may have been
9-~6-04
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
higher, it was on collected rather than actually billed.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Number one, some of them
were on collected revenues, not billed revenues, which is a
big difference. And, number two, some of them were a higher
percentage rate of commission, but also the calls were
costing the inmates' families a higher amount, and I didn't
really want~to get into that, too. This will actually lower
it just a little bit. It's a five-year contract. They had
in their overall look a sample of the five-year contract,
which I did let -- did send to County Attorney Motley. He
has also looked at, and I would recommend that we go with
this system.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Motley, I assume that the
contract with Global Tel*Link is considerably different than
the contract for our current provider?
MR. MOTLEY: Very much different. It's a
good contract for us. It provides far more options --
services than the other one can, apparently.
JUDGE TINLEY: Gives us rights and remedies
in the event --
MR. MOTLEY: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- there's no performance?
MR. MOTLEY: Thirty days notice. If there's
a failure of the consideration or the system doesn't work,
you got 30 days notice to terminate the contract, and we did
9-26-04
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not have that in the previous contract. The only one
question I had about it is, it does have us indemnifying
them in there against certain acts of -- of our employees.
Generally speaking, the County cannot indemnify another
group unless they provide a sinking fund or unless there's
certain other things dcne, one of which would be to boldly
set out the fact that County's indemnifying them for certain
specific acts, and clearly set out in the contract as
another way we could probably get past that. But it's not
much indemnification; it's just saying if our people screw
something up, we'll be responsible for it. So, I may talk
to their representative about that, see if there's some way
we can change that language. But, other than that, it's a
really good contract, I think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: David, the -- the out
provision for the County is, I guess, as beneficial to the
County as we could hope to have?
MR. MOTLEY: Well, I -- you know, I would say
it's very standard. It's -- it tells that they will -- you
know, there is a lot of literature that was provided Rusty
apart from the contract, and I don't think it's technically
within the letter of the contract, but they talk about the
maintenance and how they're wanting to maintain it, how
quickly they'll maintain it, to what standard they'll
maintain it, what happens in different events. If the, you
4-26-04
87
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
know, electricity goes off and all kind of different things,
and -- but, you know, it gives us -- it gives us 30 days --
it gives us 30 days notice if they are not performing up to
the -- I don't know. I've got it marked -- hold on a
second; I got it marked back here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the reason, I'm
just --
MR. MOTLEY: I think it's great, and it's
great compared to what we have; I can tell you that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, this is the third
phone service contract, since I've been a commissioner,
we've had out there. We have -- and each one was a
five-year term. So, obviously, we haven't made it yet to
our -- or maybe one of the three. We're not progressing too
far on these so far, so hopefully this company is a little
bit more -- I guess does a better job.
MR. MOTLEY: Well, this company certainly --
Rusty was telling you; he didn't share it with you too much,
but this company has just a tremendous increase in
technology and things that can be done, and the security and
additional services that are going to be provided to the
jail are just amazing, the way the technology is. It just
says if either party is in breach of or default of any terms
or conditions of the agreement, and shall continue for a
period of 30 days after written -- giving written notice
9-~6-04
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
thereof to the party, the other party can cancel the
contract without any charge or --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the contract's
explicit enough as to what they're -- service they're
providing?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. When you go back
to services, it -- Number 3 of the contract states, At no
cost to the premise provider, the company shall provide
all -- all management services necessary to implement this
agreement, and shall be responsible for the furnishing,
installing, repairing, and servicing the equipment. The
establishment, if and to the extent required by the company,
and compliance with all the tariffs, rules and things like
that. So, there -- and then they will set out a maintenance
schedule to where, if they consider it a catastrophic
failure of equipment, ~ike more than, you know -- well,
catastrophic, 100 percent of the jail system goes down, and
then they have minor and major, doing percentages of the
system that goes down and what their response time will be
to fix those problems.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty, do we address
in here the -- your problem with recording phone calls?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. These will all be
recorded, and a lot of other features also onto that. Along
with it also, it takes it into our visitation booths in the
4-26-C4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
89
jail. It over -- it has a lot better security system on
being able to issue inmates what's called pin numbers, which
is their S.O. number, so that they can use their number
to -- to code in when they want to make calls. But I always
was concerned about that in the past, 'cause you could have
one inmate claim that another inmate stole his number. This
also requires the inmate to put his fingerprint on the phone
itself, so you have a pin number and a fingerprint, and it
takes his picture every 30 seconds he's on the phone, so it
will solve all these problems that we have ever had in the
past. And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff, what are the
financial details of this contract, and is this a one-year
contract or with an evergreen or a rolling contract, or what
is it?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, this is a five-year
contract with one-year renewals at the end of that if
neither party, you know, wants to break the contract or
anything. They provide all the equipment, everything else,
and then the commission rates are -- the County will receive
35 percent the gross billable revenues and that, and the
company gets the remainder of it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How does that compare
with your current --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Our current one is a
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
90
fluctuating deal. Normally, it's probably about 38 to
40-something percent. I don't -- I may have that contract
with me. And some of these other ones offer better rates,
but one of my -- going up to -- the current one could go up
to 45 percent, where this is 35 percent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you're in need of
service, where does that service come from?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The headquarters for
this company is out of Alabama. They have a second office
in Houston, and most of the service would come directly out
of Houston. The main sales representative on this is out of
San Antonio; used to be with SBC, and they are hourly rates
for how long they have to -- to respond. Most of the
maintenance, unless it's an actual piece of equipment, the
phone itself broke or went down, most everything else is
done by computer, and they fix all their software problems
and run diagnostic checks daily on all the equipment,
computer-wise, from their corporate office. So, it just
keeps everything in fine tune.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If they detect
something, they can fix it remotely?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They can fix it remotely
without us ever knowing anything was wrong.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Considering the
changes in revenues and costs, what would be the net impact
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
91
to the County of this contract versus the current one?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think we will see a --
in my opinion, a large increase on the revenues that the
County's going to get, even though the percentage rate is a
little bit different. The other deal on this is, I can
actually look up at any time on the computer and see exactly
where our statement and how many -- who made what calls,
what percentage is the county's, what percentage is the
company's, so we can keep track of it, instead of once a
quarter just getting a check and not having any idea and any
way of verifying exactly what's on that. This allows us to
do that, plus it's a monthly billing rate that the County
would receive a check every month instead of every quarter,
and we can actually download statements.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: On the front end on
this cover sheet here, it says approve the contract with
Global Tel*Link.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But in the back here,
it says that we're terminating services with -- on the
agenda request, it says we're terminating with Advanced
Telecom. What are we doing?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that -- that's going to
come back as a separate item under the next -- next segment
of the agenda.
9-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
92
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Under the executive
session.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. So, we are now
-- we are now approving a new contract?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we -- if you'd be more
comfortable waiting until we consider the other item and
then come back to this one, that certainly would be --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wouldn't that --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- wouldn't be out of order.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wouldn't that make
more sense, Mr. Attorney?
MR. MOTLEY: Sounds good to me.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The last Commissioners
Court gave us the approval on the termination of the other
item and giving them days, which is why I'm bringing this
back in the executive session, is just to get the formal
letter sent out with the number of days.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You don't care
whether we approve this one first, or doesn't make any
difference?
MR. MOTLEY: I think -- I think -- I mean,
this is properly posted for this situation. I don't know
that this, per se, needs to go into executive session. I
don't see any exception to Open Meetings that would let this
come into executive session. It's not particularly
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
93
high-tech equipment, necessarily, so I think it's okay to do
it now. But if the Court wanted to wait and put off their
action on it until after they converse and talk about the
other matter in executive session, that would probably be
fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that's probably -- we
can come -- after considering the others, come back out into
open and then bring this one back up, as well as take
whatever official action may be required or we want to take
with regard to the other item. I think that would probably
be the best way to handle it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sounds good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Seems like that's where we are
at this point.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, at this time, we're
down to that portion of the agenda where we will close the
open portion of the Commissioners Court meeting at 11:10,
and we'll now go into executive or closed session. Why
don't we take that item out of order, and keep the Sheriff
and the -- and the County Attorney in here, but -- and
obviously the reporter, but everybody else probably we can
do without.
MR. TOMLINSON: Judge, do you think that
you're going to finish before lunch?
4-26-v4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
94
JUDGE TINLEY: I sure hope so.
MR. TOMLINSON: Probably? I'll be in my
office.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Don't go to lunch
early.
(The open session was closed at 11:10 a.m.,
and an Executive Session was held, the
transcript of which is contained in a
separate document.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We will come back into
open session. It's now 11:43. We'll come back to Item 11
on the regular agenda; consider, discuss, and approve
contract with Global Tel*Link Corporation for the inmate
telephone system.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of the
contract as presented and recommended by the County Attorney
and the Sheriff.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
9-26-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
95
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a word of
clarification, Judge, because -- because there is a tad bit
of confusion, not over the action we just took, but over --
over the wording on Number 11. Commissioner Baldwin and I
were just talking about that. What did we do with it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Consider and discuss
approval of contract.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We just did that, but
we also, in exec, talked about actual termination. Now, the
Court approved termination previously of the Advanced
Telecom thing, and the only thing to come out of that
discussion was on the length of time that would be required.
Does that need any confirmation? I guess that's my
question.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, that was just a matter of
logistics. The approval was given previously.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was.
JUDGE TINLEY: Previous court session, and in
open session by a motion and second, and it passed.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything -- anything proposed
to be offered in open session, formal action with regard to
matters discussed in executive or closed session?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We will move forward.
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
96
I guess now we're down to payment of bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we pay the
bills.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to
pay the bills. All in favor, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item,
budget amendments. Budget Amendment Request Number 1.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sheriff's Department.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. It's for the Sheriff's
Department for the -- the lease towers from -- one's for the
Mountain Home site; the other is for the Center Point site,
and they're actually for two years.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would explain
the 50 -- what appears to be a 50 percent increase in the
fee.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, they're for two years,
and they're actually for 2,000 each. We have -- we have
bills in hand for 8,000, but we know that we will have
another one for approximately $250 from L.C.R.A. that will
need to be paid this year, so that's the reason we're asking
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
97
for this amendment of $5,840, to be able to take care of
that invoice from the L.C.R.A.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, this tower --
this Mountain Home tower, is that the Black Bull Ranch --
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- deal? Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of Budget Amendment Request Number 1. Any question
or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 2.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 2 is a repeat from
last -- last meeting, and Miguel is with us right now to --
if you have any questions. He's -- his request is to
transfer $984.82 from Postage, with 931.74 into Operating
Expense and 53.08 into Capital Outlay for purchase of a -- a
computer for his new person, I guess. So, here's Miguel.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Here's Miguel.
9-26-09
1
"' 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
98
JUDGE TINLEY: The reason I had a question
about it, Mr. Arreola, is that when it was previously
presented, there was no current expense requirement.
MR. ARREOLA: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: And I had no -- no basis to
know -- you obviously see something coming down the pike on
Operating Expense that you're going to need some more money
on.
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir. We -- we need to
make that office space for Solid Waste. We can buy some
dividers for the office, and that's basically what it's for.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it's office space
and --
MR. ARREOLA: And a computer.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of Budget Amendment Request Number 2. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One more comment. You're
going to have enough money in Postage for the year?
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We aren't going to see
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
99
you --
MR. ARREOLA: No, it won't be a problem.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Do we have
any late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: I have one, to Hourglass
Construction.
JUDGE TINLEY: Instruction?
MR. TOMLINSON: Construction.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
MR. TOMLINSON: For $600 for work space
counter in O.S.S.F.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that part of the
original O.S.S.F. construction budget?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It was planned in
the original construction budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: My recollection was they came
in under --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
9-26-09
I
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
100
JUDGE TINLEY: -- what was budgeted earlier.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As long as there's --
there's money in the budget for this, right?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. No, we're not asking
for an amendment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's all I really
wanted to know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of late bill and hand check, I presume, to
Hourglass Construction in the sum of $600. Any further
question or discussion? All in favor, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's it for you?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Tommy.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Have a nice lunch.
MR. TOMLINSON: I'll try.
JUDGE TINLEY: We don't have any minutes. I
do have some monthly reports that have been presented from
9-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
101
Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, from Road and Bridge, and
from Constable, Precinct 3. Do I hear a motion to approve
as presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the reports as presented.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How many constables?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My constable.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Your constable. And
yours was last time, and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Last time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So we're -- we're
dropping off a little bit here, already.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, your constable.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We are dropping off --
we're not precinct commissioners; we're county
commissioners. You have to help me look out for my side,
too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If I see yours,
should I shoot him or what?
4-26-04
i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
102
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No comment.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
Reports from Commissioners, liaison/committee assignments.
Commissioner 1?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not at this time.
Next meeting, I will have a herd of things.
JUDGE TINLEY: A herd?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A covey.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Plethora.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Plethora.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner 2?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Couple items, Judge.
The -- the task force or working group, whichever --
whatever you want to call it, to nail out this -- nail down
the airport governance had its second meeting, and we are --
we are working our way through it. A third meeting will be
a week from today, and we should be, at that point, I think,
probably able to put a stamp of -- a final kind of stamp on
the draft of the document that will come back to
4-26-04
103
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commissioners Court and/or City Council. Yet to be
determined, however, are going to be the economics of a new
arrangement, because the economics of a new arrangement
would -- new arrangement would entail all things that are
related to airport operations, being accounted for through
the board and -- and to the respective governing body
owners. And the new arrangement would -- would envision two
members of this Court and two members of City Council
serving on that board. But everything then gets lumped up
into a budget which gets approved by that board, and all
that then gets passed back to the owners for stamp of
approval. And, so, all the items that go into that are
going to have to be discussed. And I know Commissioner Letz
and I have some concerns about how some of the numbers that
have been proffered to us as being reasonable for that
operation, how they came -- how they came into being, and so
that's going to be an interesting session. Whether we get
to it in this next meeting on Monday, I don't know. I think
we probably will.
The second item relating that to that has to
do with the -- the City's document -- UVC document, which is
garnering a lot of public comment. And there are two issues
there that involve us, but only one involving the airport,
and that is the airport overlay zone, which is a part of
this UVC document. I've asked Mr. Patterson to present to
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
104
this working group some assessment of what the overlay zone
means to the owners of that property, and to do it in this
working group so that we have a little sense of what that's
all about, and not be required to stand in line at the
public hearing to give our comments about an overlay zone
over property which both governing bodies own and operate.
So, we're moving. Bottom line is, we're moving. Secondly,
I had a -- oh, no, I'm sorry. One other item on that.
There's going to be a meeting tomorrow, I believe, first
meeting with the architects regarding zoning regarding the
airport --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hangar?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, the terminal
building. Design of the terminal building. And on that
working committee are Commissioners Letz and myself,
Councilmen Wampler and Smith, Roger Bobertz, the Airport
Board, and Dave Pearce, the Airport Manager, and I imagine
Mr. Patterson will sit in as well. That starts tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can I go?
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Design. Okay, one
other item. David Dozier, the K.I.S.D. Board, contacted me
with respect to the possibility of support from members of
the Court regarding the new synthetic turf project K.I.S.D.
has going. He originally thought maybe a resolution of
9-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
105
support from this body would be what he'd like to see, but I
told him it was too late for this agenda. Next meeting is
too late for their meeting, and so if any Commissioners
would like to write K.I.S.D. Board President or the
Superintendent voicing your support for the synthetic turf
proposal, feel free to do so. Here's some information that
was sent to me, if you want to see it. And, lastly, I had a
phone call on my voicemail today requesting a meeting from
Aqua Spot -- from AquaSource. It would appear they are
getting ready to regear for another rate increase. I know
that some of the folks in your territory have been just as
upset about previous rate increases as they have been in
mine. That's all I have, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Three?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One more thing on the
airport committee. I think it's -- I think the -- I guess
the view that Commissioner Williams and I are taking at
these meetings is this is likely to be truly a jointly run
airport from the standpoint of -- you know, they put in a
bunch of their numbers and what it costs to pave this and
cut this piece of grass and all that, and many of these
services -- some of these services, it appears to me and
Mr. Williams, I think, that the County could staff -- have
staff in place that does the same thing. And, as a -- to
make sure that they're using real, very accurate numbers,
~-~6-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
106
we've let that be known to them, that we'll -- at that
price, maybe the County will be glad to do that service.
And -- and, anyway, that's part of the thinking, but I
sincerely think that we may look at doing some of these
services as opposed to a cash contribution, or to offset the
cash contribution. So, anyway, that's kind of the
direction, so I'm bringing it up, just --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we're going way off
base, someone please pull us in and get us -- you know, let
us know.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you're on the
right track. I would never question y'all anyway, but if I
were going to, this would be my question. What -- what in
the hell is taking so long on this governance issue? What
is the holdup?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it seems like
it's taking a long time, and it has --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is taking a long
time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It took -- it took
Mr. Patterson a good length of time -- and this is really
the delay -- up front, before we ever sat down, Commissioner
Letz and I and this working group, to get the law
4-26-04
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
107
researched, run it through his Council, ask questions of --
of the State, TexDOT, and Aviation Division, all with
respect to the law as it is today, and then -- then look at
the differences, and then go back to TexDOT and -- Aviation
and find out how much of the old is not valid and what we
have to do to get out of what we are in and so forth. He
did a lot of work up front. Whether there were delays on
his part, I suggest there might have been. I don't know.
But that's -- he did a whole heck of a lot of work up front
before we ever sat down, and he gave us three basic working
documents. And once we got the three working documents,
we've moved pretty quickly.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, we're talking
about -- is this going to be a joint-run operation like the
present day, or are we going to turn it over to the Airport
Board? Are we going to create a real, live airport board?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The vision is --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not interested in
who's mowing what. I just want to know who's going to run
it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's subordinate to
the issue, but it is envisioned as a seven-person board; two
County Commissioners, two --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you sure you want to
say all that?
4-26-09
108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? I'll give
you the floor. Just go ahead.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, my question was,
until we have a -- the draft is presented by everyone, I
thought we weren't going to discuss the details of the
draft.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I'll shut up,
Bill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good point.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I told you I wasn't
going to ask the question.
JUDGE TINLEY: But if you were, you'd ask it
later, right?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't ask it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you for pulling
it back, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Can you say that --
that sometime in the future, it's going to be managed by the
Airport Board, and not the City and County jointly?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think you can say
that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You don't think we --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I think that you -- I
think that the -- you have to go back even further, and what
is taking so long -- first of all, I personally think that
9-?6-04
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the City didn't do anything for the first nine months,
whether Mr. Patterson or City Council doesn't make any
difference. I don't think anything was done until last
fall, when we again raised it to the front burner. At that
point, the City Manager decided to really tackle this, and
has done a great job, in my opinion. He has researched it
very thoroughly. And what is going to come out of it is not
a bandaid; it's going to be to fix the problem out there,
and I'm very happy with where we're going with it. I think
there are still -- and I think there's pretty much agreement
as to -- I think the City and County, the Airport Board are
all going to be very involved in running that airport. That
makeup, I don't think there's been a final recommendation by
the committee yet, but I think the County's going to be more
involved, City's going to be more involved -- City's
probably going to be less involved; we'll be more involved,
and the Airport Board's going to be more involved. So, I
think it's going to be a very good, workable resolution to a
longstanding problem out there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I concur in that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- but when we saw
something of the numbers, all of a sudden -- I'm trying to
avoid heart attacks on this table when we get the budget
implications of some of this thing. So, we're going at
those numbers real hard right now, and that's kind of where
4-26-09
110
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
__ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we are.
JUDGE TINLEY: In total context, a year or so
delay after 30 years of operating in the wrong -- I mean,
what's the difference?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not bad.
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm trying -- I thought
that I was going to add something else, but it was a
fleeting thought.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On the airport?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, not on the airport.
Oh, K.I.S.D. I've also talked with their -- Mr. Dozier, and
one of the things that I really should have had on this
agenda, and plan to get on the agenda very soon, is a -- a
concept for an interlocal agreement between K.I.S.D. and all
other school districts on purchasing products, just to let
them basically follow -- and more on construction-type
things. We got in a discussion on the parking lot at the
Antler Stadium, to allow the schools to use our purchasing
ability to buy materials for some of their projects.
Wouldn't cost the County anything; this would just be
enabling them to basically do some of the purchasing through
our -- since we buy so much more than they do, for specific
projects. They don't do much of that type work. And also
possibly using some of our Road and Bridge staff or
4-2E-04
111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
„_,_ 2 4
25
expertise and knowledge. But, anyway, that will be coming
up just as a concept, as to whether we want to pursue that
or not. I think Mr. Dozier will present it to the school
board as well, whether they want to pursue it. And if -- I
think if K.I.S.D. and we agree, then it needs to go to the
other school districts as well, but I think it's an
opportunity for -- basically, to save the taxpayers some
money hopefully by doing some joint purchasing arrangements.
JUDGE TINLEY: Couldn't that possibly work
both ways, too?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: They probably buy a lot more
food service products than we do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: We might be able to turn that
to our benefit also.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- anyway, so that's
in the works. I've talked to Mr. Dozier about that as well.
I think it's a -- it's -- I was happy to see that it appears
to be coming -- going forward on this. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: We've run you all the way up
to the noon hour.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Okay. Last Tuesday,
at the invitation of Miguel, some 12 or 13, something like
that, --
4-~6-04
112
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ARREOLA: 15.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- septic tank
contractors -- septic system contractors met with us. And
"us" was me and Miguel and Tish and Judy, and we spent an
hour and a half talking about ways that we can work better
together, and in a way that can be beneficial to both
parties, and agreed with the -- with the contractors that we
saw this as kind of a partnership where it was in -- we want
to administer the O.S.S.F. regulations in a way that we're
absolutely sure we protect the environment, but we also want
to do it in a way that helps them be profitable and continue
to be in the business. So, we first talked about -- and
I'll back up and say, twice in the last few months, two --
two contract -- a contractor has asked us to meet with
them -- two different contractors, to get their input.
First we thought we'd just invite a handful of them and --
and get sort of a -- a census of what they might be
thinking. Miguel said, "Heck, no, let's give all of them a
chance to come in and say what they have to say." So, we
first -- the first thing we talked about is what we're doing
right, and we got a good report. They said that they were
surprised that the transition went so well. Recognized that
there was a whole lot of tear-down and setup work to be
done, and that they acknowledged that they thought the --
the department and the staff were working hard and trying to
9-26-G4
113
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
make it work and trying to -- trying to do it in an
efficient, effective way.
So, we got -- got a report of a few
compliments, and then we got into the issues that were
bothering them, and what we did was record all of those.
Each one of them discussed what the issue is to make sure we
understood it. Not necessarily come to any resolution of
it, but to acknowledge that that was an issue. And the
issues were in two different areas. One was the
regulations. What are the regulations, and do you have any
flexibility in that, and can you do it in a different way,
or are you required to do it the way you're doing it? And
then the other one was not the regulations, but our
processes and procedures, how we're working and how they get
their appointments set up and how we handle that. And I
think all of you know that one of the major concerns is
that, if we're very bureaucratic, they've got a lot of
downtime; they got a piece of equipment sitting there, they
got a -- got their laborers standing by, and that can --
doesn't take a whole lot of that to turn a profitable
contract into an unprofitable one. That's the area they
probably need the most help in.
Where we left it with them was that we would
use that information they had provided to us, and we would
-- when we get it typed up, to -- in a way that acknowledges
4-26-09
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
their concerns, that Miguel and his staff would prepare a
response to each of those concerns, and then we would feed
that information back to them. What I think would be a good
idea is, before we do that, that Miguel provide a copy of --
draft copy of that report to each of the members of this
Court that -- and ask for our comments on it. We can't
comment on what the issue was, because the issue is what it
is, but we might want to give some consideration to Miguel's
response to each one of them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sounds good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Splendid.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It was a very good
meeting.
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir, I think it was very
productive. It was very -- very friendly. There's a few
concerns, a few comments that we got, and we're working on
them. We're almost through with all the responses. We have
the rules to go by, and basically we can -- we can't do a
whole lot in that area, but we're trying to improve our --
the process, how we work, and make it faster and make it
more productive for them, too. So, our response is going to
have both ends, and, you know, I think it's going to be
faster for everybody.
JUDGE TINLEY: Communication is key. That's
what it's all about.
4-26-04
115
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I would say that --
that all of those present, including Bennett Jordan, left
with a pretty good feeling about what Miguel had done,
holding the meeting, and an expectation that things were
going to be better for them, and that's not a bad outcome of
it.
JUDGE TINLEY: But, going into the meeting,
their feeling was generally positive overall anyway?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. They were
saying, "You've done a good job of moving this over here,
and that's working well, and you worked hard to get it up
and running, but we still got these concerns and we need
your help."
MR. AR.REOLA: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's always going to be
room for improvement ir. virtually anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I really -- I think it's
a great idea to meet with them. I think it would be
something good to do on a semiannual basis. Don't want to
do it too much, meet with them all the time, but to get them
in there -- I'm sure they give you comments out in the
field, but you're not the in the mind-set to receive
comments then, and they're not in the mind-set really to
think about what they're saying, necessarily. So, I think
4-^e-o~
116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
you gave them an opportunity; that's a real good forum.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: While we're on
Environmental Health, Miguel and I learned that the Solid
Waste Advisory Committee, which is a large committee and it
sits on top of a large pot of gold, rejected our request to
waive their longstanding rule that they would consider
funding a position, having once funded it and they went onto
the County payroll. We were asking, as you may recall, for
funding for three extra days or three new days in addition
to the two that we pay for with Mr. North now, which were
originally funded by those folks. They rejected that
request. They rejected it for us and one other county -- or
two counties, other entities. They didn't want to go back
on their longstanding rule. So, if we're going to go
full-time on the Solid Waste, we're going to have to think
about how to do that in the next budget, I guess.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Also, if you might just
be thinking as to what, possibly, in Solid Waste/O.S.S.F.
they -- you know, be thinking about what we could get
funding for. Maybe vehicles, computers, stuff like that.
If they're not going to try -- and then we can reshuttle --
or shuffle our money towards personnel. Let them buy
vehicles or something along that line.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I did do that,
Commissioner. I will get with the lady who runs the Solid
4-26-04
117
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,.,, 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Waste AACOG department, and we'll see how we can channel,
and see if we can figure out a way to move our dollars some
other direction so we can get a full-time person down there.
I think it's important. Miguel, thinks it's important. I
think Commissioners think it's important.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, indeed.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To have a person down
there. So, we'll keep working on it.
MR. ARREOLA: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further from
Commissioner 4?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we didn't quite make it
by noon, but anybody else have anything further? If not,
we'll stand adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:10 p.m.)
9-26-04
118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
STATE OF TEXAS I
COUNTY OF KERR I
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 29th day of April,
2004.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
B Y : _-J~ ~ ~~ _
Kathy Barr' k, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
4-26-04
.~ ORDER N0.28614
ARTS AND CRAFTS FOUNDATION TO
USE FLAT ROCK LAKE PARK
Came to be heard this the 26th day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Baldwin, Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to allow the use of Flat Rock Lake Park exclusively to the Arts and Crafts
Foundation from May 27 through May 31, 2004.
ORDER N0.28615
ARTS AND CRAFTS FOUNDATION TO
UTILIZE WELL AT HCYEC
Came to be heard this the 26th day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams , Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, grant permission to Texas Arts and Crafts Educational Foundation to
utilize Kerr County's well at the HCYEC to augment irrigation needs for River Star Arts
park grounds. All expenses associated to be borne by the Texas Arts and Crafts
Educational Foundation.
ORDER N0.28616
TEXAS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM CONTRACT
TBA
Came to be heard this the 26~ day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, to designate the signatures of the County Judge, Commissioner Precinct 2
and the County Clerk for the Texas Community Development Program Contract TBA
2004.
ORDER N0.28617
CONTRACT WITH GRANT WORKS
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACT FOR 2004
Came to be heard this the 26'~ day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams, Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, to approve the Grant Works Administrative Contract for 2004 Community
Development Project.
ORDER N0.28618
GOVERNMENT INCENTIVES TO BUSINESSES
Came to be heard this the 26~' day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams, Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by
a vote of 4-0-0, to name County representatives to a committee to study and recommend
local government incentives to be made available to businesses expanding operations or
commencing operations in Kerr County, and urge the KEDF to be the sponsoring agency
to get that work underway.
ORDER N0.28619
PRIVATELY MAINTAINED ROADS
Came to be heard this the 26th day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved 6y a vote
of 4-0-0, to approve the road names for the Privately Maintained Roads in accordance
with 911 guidelines as presented with corrections.
ORDER N0.28620
FINANCIAL AUDIT REPORT 2003
Came to be heard this the 26~' day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams, Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, to accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal year ended
September 30, 2003.
ORDER NO, 28621
PROCLAMATION
Came to be heard this the 26th day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to the Proclamation for National Day of Prayer May 6, 2004.
ORDER N0.28622
RESOLUTION
Came to be heard this the 26th day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to approve a resolution to State Senator Troy Frazier and State Representative
Harvey Hilderbran opposing any legislation in the current special session of the State
Legislature that has a negative financial impact on county government.
ORDER NO.28623
INMATE TELEPHONE
Came to be heard this the 26th day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
I Letz, Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by a
~ vote of 4-0-0, to approve the Contract with Global Tel*Link Corporation for inmate
~ telephones.
ORDER N0.28624
Claims and Accounts
On this the 26"'day of April 2004 came to be considered by the Court various
Commissioners precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
10 -General	$111,291.00
15- Road and Bridge	$46,645.01
18- County Law Library	$1,182.01
26- JP Technology	$240.45
,- 50- Indigent Health Care	$23,735.84
63-Lake Ingram Est. Rd Dist. $1,000.00
80- Historical Commission	$266.39
TOTAL CASH REQUIRED FOR ALL FUNDS: $ 184,360.70
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, Seconded by Commissioner Williams,
the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to pay said Claims and Accounts.
ORDER N0.2S625
BUDGET AMENDMENT
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 26's day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, to transfer 55840.00 from line item 10-560-480 vehicle insurance into 10-560-
463 Radio Tower Lease.
ORDER N0.28626
BUDGET AMENDMENT
ENVIItONMENTAL HEALTH
Came to be heard this the 26'" day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams, Seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court uuauimoualy approved by a vote
of 40-0, transfer $984.82 from line item 10-Cr40-309 and put $931.74 irno line item 10-
640-330 Operating Expense and put $53.08 into Line item 10-640-570 Capital Outlay.
ORDER N0.28627
LATE BILL
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 26`h day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
L,etz, Seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court uuauimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0, issue a hand check in the amount of $600.00 payable to Hourglass
Construction to be taken from line item 10-510-550.
ORDER NO. 28628
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 26th day of April 2004 with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, Seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0, approve the monthly reports from the following offices:
Justice of the Peace #1
Road & Bridge Department
Constable Precinct #3