1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Regular Session 10 Monday, December 13, 2004 11 9:00 a.m. 12 Commissioners' Courtroom 13 Kerr County Courthouse 14 Kerrville, Texas 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 24 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X December 13, 2004 2 PAGE --- Commissioners' Comments 4 3 1.1 Consider Regional Mitigation Action Plan and adoption of Resolution approving same 9 4 1.2 Consider variance for road right-of-way width for "Unpaved Country Lane" 11 5 1.3 Discuss request from landowner to accept Scenic Ridge Road for Kerr County Maintenance 25 6 1.4 Consider settlement agreement with bonding companies 44 7 1.8 PUBLIC HEARING for revision of plat for Tracts 15 & 16 of Bluff Creek Ranch 60 8 1.9 Consider final revision of plat for Tracts 15 & 16 of Bluff Creek Ranch 61 9 1.10 PUBLIC HEARING for cancellation of Spring Hollow Estates 65 10 1.11 Consider cancellation of Spring Hollow Estates 66 1.5 Adoption of Statement of Support for the Guard 11 and Reserve 67 1.6 Consider applications for stop loss and life 12 insurance, requesting payment for binder(s), authorizing County Judge to execute applications 69 13 1.7 Consider minor amendments to 2 recent agreements concerning EMS service to northwest Kerr County 81 14 1.12 Consider allowing Treasurer to hire a chief deputy at a 19.3 100 15 1.13 Nomination of Mr. Johnnie L. Hawkins to board of Kerr County Emergency Services District No. 1 104 16 1.14 Consider payment of 2005 dues to AACOG 106 1.15 Consider having first Commissioners Court meeting 17 of 2005 at Union Church building 107 1.16 Consider extension of temporary lease & operating 18 agreement at Juvenile Detention Facility 111 1.17 Consider acquisition of Kerr County Juvenile 19 Detention Facility 115 1.18 Approval of operational funding for Kerr County 20 Juvenile Detention Facility 131 21 4.1 Pay Bills 137 4.2 Budget Amendments 141 22 4.3 Late Bills 144 4.4 Read and Approve Minutes 145 23 4.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 146 24 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee Assignments 147 25 --- Adjourned 154 3 1 On Monday, December 13, 2004, at 9:00 a.m., a regular 2 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the 3 Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, 4 Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: 5 P R O C E E D I N G S 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and 7 gentlemen. Let me call to order the meeting of the 8 Commissioners Court posted for this time and date, Monday, 9 December 13th, 2004, at 9 a.m. It is just a smidgen, 10 Commissioner Baldwin, past that time now. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, it is. It's 12 a smidgen. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Just a smidgen. Yes, it is. 14 Commissioner 4, I believe you have the honors this morning. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Please join me in 16 prayer and the pledge of allegiance, please. 17 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if 19 there's any member of the public or the audience that 20 desires to address the Court on any item on the agenda -- or 21 excuse me, any item that is not listed on the agenda, you're 22 free to come forward at this time. If it is your desire to 23 address the Court or speak with respect to any matter that 24 is a listed item on the agenda, we ask that you fill out a 25 participation form. There's a form at the back of the room. 12-13-04 4 1 It's not absolutely required, but it helps me to keep up 2 with those that want to speak and hopefully not miss you. 3 But, at this point, if there's anyone who wants to speak 4 about any matter that's not listed on the agenda, feel free 5 to come forward at this time and tell us what's on your 6 mind. Seeing no one making that move, so we'll -- we'll 7 move forward. Commissioner Nicholson, do you have anything 8 for us this morning? 9 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, Judge. I think 10 all of you are probably aware of the tragic circumstances 11 surrounding the Julie Mogenis being injured in a hunting 12 accident -- actually, they weren't hunting; they were 13 putting a firearm in the back of a pickup trick. She was 14 shot through the pelvis. Ms. Mogenis is very well-known in 15 the sporting world, holds a number of records in hunting. 16 She's very active in civic life in west Kerr County and, in 17 fact, is a volunteer firefighter. She's going to survive 18 and going to be in the hospital a long time, and I was 19 hearing this morning on the radio that they're expecting her 20 medical expenses to be about a million dollars. There's a 21 -- we're not going to be able to cover a million dollars, 22 but there's an account at the Bank of the Hills if anybody 23 wants to make contributions there, and the Hunt Volunteer 24 Fire Department will be arranging a fundraiser sometime in 25 the near future. That's all I've got. 12-13-04 5 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner 1? 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, I don't have 3 anything, except it's good to see Mr. Emerson, our new 4 County Attorney -- well, County Attorney coming January 1. 5 Good to see you with us, sir. Thank you -- 6 MR. EMERSON: Thank you. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- for being here. 8 That's all. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner 2? 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I often hear 11 Commissioner Letz talk about the small-town Christmases, 12 particularly Comfort and its fun. Well, it was fun in 13 Center Point Sunday night when the community gets together, 14 and they have a little candlelight parade and the small band 15 plays Christmas carols, they gather in the park and Santa 16 Claus comes, and all the kids line up to -- to give Santa 17 Claus their wish list. So, it's always fun. Small towns do 18 it right, and I -- you know, I just -- just a note, that the 19 big city of Kerrville has absolutely zero Christmas 20 decorations anywhere that are put up by the City or 21 sponsored by the City's Parks Department. Little town of 22 Center Point is all lit up. Every little light post is lit 23 up and different things, and different shapes, candy canes 24 and bells and santas and so forth. I wonder why that has to 25 happen only in a little town; can't happen in a big town, 12-13-04 6 1 Judge. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I might make a 3 comment, that Center Point and Comfort are unincorporated. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good point. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it? 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's it. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner 3? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hermann Sons Bridge, the 9 preconstruction meeting is set for -- 10 MR. ODOM: 17th. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 17th? At -- so, Leonard 12 and I will be there and get the final go-ahead. Because of 13 a few delays they had, I think it should be after the first 14 of the year when they actually start construction. They 15 don't want to start it until right after the holidays, from 16 talking with them. Anyway, it's right around the corner; it 17 looks good. Also, they're trying to work on somewhere to 18 store some equipment. Some of the landowners require 19 right-of-way, things of that nature, working right now. 20 But, anyway, with that meeting coming on, that should happen 21 pretty quickly now. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which reminds me, 23 there's a fellow over in Center Point who's willing to take 24 those trees down for you. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: He needs to contact Dean 12-13-04 7 1 Word Construction. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, I'll pass that 3 on. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's now their domain. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, I'll pass that 6 on. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And on a personal note, 8 I'm very happy to announce that as of a week ago today was 9 the final adoption decree order passed by the court in San 10 Antonio, Bexar County, for -- Sam's officially Karen and I's 11 forever. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Great. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The attorney that was 14 representing us asked us the question before the judge; he 15 said, You understand when he comes in drunk, 18 years old, 16 and -- or 16 years old, drunk, and totals a car in your 17 front yard, he's still your son? And we said, Yeah, we 18 understand that. (Laughter.) But, anyway, it was a fun day 19 for us. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a -- 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Congratulations. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it is absolutely 23 astounding how hard they make it to adopt. It amazes me; 24 there's so many kids out there that need adoption. And I 25 guess there's -- I can understand a lot of the rationale in 12-13-04 8 1 trying to make sure it's a good match, but it is a long 2 process and lots of time, but worth it. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're to be 4 commended for doing it. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Amen. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. That is a rather 8 sobering question to be asked of a prospective new parent in 9 adoption. I can -- I'm not sure that's one I'd ask. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, yeah. I'll also 11 say that it certainly helps in your -- in Bexar County 12 courthouse to have an attorney that knows some judges, 13 because we were able to kind of get through that process, 14 which could be very lengthy, I think very quickly. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, as you say, there are 16 quite a few hoops to jump through, and there's a lot of 17 minefields in the Family Code relative to termination of 18 adoption. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd like it noted that I 20 had a positive comment about an attorney. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Good. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I heard that. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Baldwin may not 24 appreciate that. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's in the record 12-13-04 9 1 now, too. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, no, I appreciate 3 it. Just don't want to hear it again. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's get on with the 5 agenda. The first item under the agenda is to consider and 6 discuss Regional Mitigation Action Plan, adoption of a 7 resolution approving the same. We have -- we've got it here 8 somewhere. It's a small document; they actually sent it up 9 on a disk. That's it. If anybody's interested in taking a 10 look, why, be my guest. (Laughter.) 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just so the Sheriff 12 knows it by heart, that's all. 13 JUDGE TINLEY: He assured me already that 14 he's got it committed to memory and is ready for any changes 15 that might be incorporated to it. There was a question 16 whether or not it was essential that we specifically adopt 17 the plan as it finally became published, question about 18 whether or not, as a policy matter, we adopted the -- the 19 plan previously. My philosophy is, if there's a question, 20 let's resolve the question and get it before us, and then 21 handle the final adoption and resolution, which they 22 forwarded to us, and it's part of your materials there for 23 -- to adopt the plan. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you asking for 25 questions, or are you suggesting there might be questions? 12-13-04 10 1 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm suggesting that -- that 2 there was questions whether or not it was necessary that we 3 adopt this resolution, because there's a suggestion that 4 maybe we had already previously adopted this plan by prior 5 action of the court. Because there is an outstanding 6 question, I -- my philosophy is, let's take a look at it and 7 make a decision accordingly. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What did he say? 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I'm just going 10 to ask another question. Today or another day? 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I would suspect it would be 12 today. Because -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move the adoption 14 of the plan and the resolution that supports the plan -- 15 Regional Mitigation Action Plan, as presented. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're welcome. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 20 adoption of the agenda item and the resolution in support of 21 the plan. Any questions or discussion? All in favor of the 22 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 12-13-04 11 1 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank 2 you. The next item on the agenda is to consider a variance 3 for a road right-of-way width for unpaved country lane for 4 property to be divided off Wilson Creek Road in Precinct 3. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leonard, do you want to 6 start? You want to make some comments? 7 MR. ODOM: Well, I -- I'm open for questions, 8 but I think there's a letter there that y'all received from 9 Jeff Wentworth. I think that's what I saw this morning. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- I'll make a few 11 comments on this. Now, I don't know -- I was not privy to 12 the conversation between Mr. Hailey and Mr. Wentworth, so I 13 don't know exactly what he was told. The situation is, as I 14 understand it -- and I can be corrected if someone in the 15 audience knows more than I do about this -- that an easement 16 to get to the back piece of property that's going to be sold 17 was created under a -- a divorce decree by Judge Ables. Not 18 that that makes any difference, but it was created, a 19 12-foot easement. And it is a rather lengthy easement, and 20 in my opinion, that is not a sufficient easement to get to 21 that back property. I guess -- and I don't know if Jeff 22 looked at it and knows the whole thing. I've never seen the 23 actual decree, which I think is also a factor in this, to 24 see how it's worded, who has access, how it's -- you know, 25 how it was created. 12-13-04 12 1 There is an argument -- I would agree with 2 Jeff that, you know, if that is the access to that property, 3 it would not require platting. If that access is allowed 4 just as it is, and it's a 12-foot easement, it can never -- 5 it's not going to be brought -- you know, I think that if it 6 -- the title company and the realtor, real estate people, 7 all the people really need to be on notice if this goes 8 through that process without being platted, because there is 9 no way people that buy that property could ever really -- 10 well, they can never sell that property, never divide it. 11 They could sell it as a whole, as it was, but they could 12 never divide it -- one tract out of it, because that would 13 trigger platting, and they could not get enough property to 14 get access to that second piece. 15 So they're really, to me, putting an 16 encumbrance on the back piece of the property, and 17 considering it's done knowingly with the current rules -- if 18 this was done, you know, a hundred years ago, I think we'd 19 possibly consider a variance and things of that nature, but 20 being done under our current set of rules and knowingly, you 21 know, I would never grant a variance to that. So, I think 22 it's on notice. I have a question -- I looked at the state 23 law, and I'm quite familiar with it, that it's a -- you 24 know, I look at it as certainly reasonable if they're -- I 25 don't know how you maintain a 12-foot easement. If that's 12-13-04 13 1 all you have, there may be a way, you know, through -- 2 currently, of people getting along and, yeah, you can -- if 3 your maintainer gets, you know, a foot off here, a foot off 4 there, who cares? But, you know, you have to look down the 5 road. If someone puts a fence on that property, on that 6 easement line on both sides, I don't know how do you 7 anything on that 12 foot. 8 So, anyway, I think that, in my mind, it's 9 not a reasonable easement to get to that property, and 10 therefore you need get more, and then that requires 11 platting. I guess it can be referred to the County Attorney 12 if a 12-foot easement is sufficient and that's all you get, 13 and if they -- you know, 'cause that's clearly the issue, is 14 whether that easement is big enough or not. That's in Jeff 15 Wentworth's letter. The other issue which was on the agenda 16 originally, when the -- it was contemplated that platting 17 was required, that Mr. Hailey cannot get a 60-foot easement, 18 and it's very difficult to get to a 40-foot easement in 19 areas because of the corner where a barn's in the easement 20 in the right-of-way, or would be in the right-of-way. I 21 think they're going to move some structures to make that a 22 little bit -- you know, to help that situation. 23 But this is an area, clearly, where you 24 have -- we have to give a variance to get to a 40-foot -- go 25 down to a 40-foot. And that's why it was on the agenda, was 12-13-04 14 1 to get it before the Court, on the -- if we would grant a 2 variance for that 40-foot easement. Well, I would certainly 3 support that, because I think that's -- it's reasonable, and 4 I don't think it is reasonable to require someone to move a 5 building when they can get a 40-foot variance. Now, the 6 rest of the easement I think should probably be 60 foot 7 where it can be, which is what our minimum requirements are. 8 Anyway, that's just kind of where it is. So, I think the -- 9 you know, the item on the agenda is solely related to the 10 variance issue, and I'll make a motion to approve a 40-foot 11 variance where needed, but 60-foot the balance of the 12 easement where needed, and that would be if platting is -- 13 is done. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that. I 15 have a question. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 17 approval of a variance for a 40-foot easement -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where you cannot get -- 19 do a 60-foot easement. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: With the balance being 60 21 foot. Otherwise, the imposition of a requirement of 22 platting. Is that what I'm hearing? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I'm not -- that's 24 not the issue. I think that's an issue that the buyers and 25 sellers need to determine, you know, whether it needs to be 12-13-04 15 1 platted or not. I mean, I think there's an argument both 2 ways. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It can be referred to the 5 County Attorney's office for that resolution. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Questions or 7 comments? 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, I have two 9 questions. The court order from 216th District, that 10 doesn't bind us in any way, this decision today? That 11 doesn't bind us in any way, does it? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: I wouldn't think so. It just 13 specifies what the relative rights of the two -- of whoever 14 the parties were to that lawsuit. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: It certainly binds whoever -- 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: -- whoever was before the 19 Court and the Court had jurisdiction of in that case. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I really would like to 21 see a crystal ball and see how the judge arrived at 12 feet, 22 though. That would be something really interesting to know. 23 Number two, the letter from Senator Wentworth, which it 24 looks as though that he actually wrote some of the law 25 here -- I'm not familiar with 232.0015(c). Are you? 12-13-04 16 1 MR. ODOM: I'll read it for you, sir. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. 3 MR. ODOM: 232.001(a) and (3), "The owner of 4 a tract of land located outside the limits of a municipality 5 must have a plat of the subdivision prepared if the owner 6 divides a tract into two or more parts to lay out: Streets, 7 alleys, squares, parks, or other parts of the tract intended 8 to be dedicated to the public use or for the use of the 9 purchasers or owners of lots fronting on or adjacent to the 10 streets, alleys, squares, parks, or other part." So, 11 therefore, even if it's -- in my understanding, what was 12 presented to us, where this road goes in is through 14 acres 13 that his ex-spouse has, and that this other 50 acres is back 14 behind that, which does not have any frontage whatsoever. 15 So, if you give an easement, even if it's not built, just 16 that easement, metes and bounds, then you have to meet 17 subdivision requirements of 232.001(a)(3). That's laying 18 out a street. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. The exemption he's 20 -- as I understand it, you know, I think we're talking with 21 Mr. Motley at length, and others. There's an exemption for 22 agricultural use. If the property's going to be for 23 agricultural use and it's over 10 acres, it's exempt from 24 platting, as long as you don't have to lay out a road. I 25 mean, you can just sell it, basically. It means if you 12-13-04 17 1 go -- 2 MR. ODOM: It's -- 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- on 27 or any other 4 public or private, you know, road, then you don't have to. 5 The issue would be, then, is that 12-foot easement 6 sufficient access that's already in place to get to that 7 50 acres? 8 MR. ODOM: Get to that 50 acres. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, you know, Senator 10 Wentworth, by his letter -- and I have two calls in to him. 11 He's out of town today. He was out of town Friday, and he's 12 out of town today. I was going to visit with him to just 13 see, you know -- you know, basically just discuss with him 14 what his thought was when he -- 'cause he wrote the law. I 15 mean, one, he wrote the law, and two, he's obviously 16 reviewed the situation. Does anyone else -- do you want to 17 speak? 18 MR. HAILEY: I'd love to. You know, I've got 19 pictures. I've got pictures here, and I'll -- I gave 20 Mr. Odom that -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go ahead and give your 22 name, please. 23 MR. HAILEY: Tom Hailey. I gave him the copy 24 of the Senate Bill. If I may have that back? 25 MR. ODOM: Yes, you certainly may. 12-13-04 18 1 MR. HAILEY: This, I have pictures that -- 2 that we took. This is my road with two full-size 3 automobiles side-by-side. This is Wilson Creek Road, the 4 county road in front of my place. Wilson Creek Road is 5 15 feet wide. Between the fences, it's 28 feet wide. 6 MR. ODOM: 30 feet. 7 MR. HAILEY: 28. I'm sorry, but I measured 8 it. And the 12-foot easement was established in 1994, 9 October 1994. I have the -- the special warranty deed on 10 this granting this to my -- my spouse -- my ex-spouse, okay? 11 It was set up that way. Between my fences on my road here 12 is 37 feet between the fences. I have a drainage ditch 13 on -- on this side of the road, the east side of the road 14 where the water doesn't -- doesn't stand on my road. On 15 Wilson Creek Road, there is a curve down here that the water 16 stands 4 to 6 inches deep. There's no drainage on that one. 17 So, my road is actually -- the standards of my road, barring 18 the paving, my road is -- is just every bit as good. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: How wide is the easement? 20 MR. HAILEY: Mine? 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 22 MR. HAILEY: Well, it's a 12-foot-wide 23 easement. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the 27 to the -- 25 MR. HAILEY: I understand that, but I am -- I 12-13-04 19 1 am really okay with granting an easement on my property. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That -- 3 MR. HAILEY: I don't mind that going back. 4 But, yes, in the new property, the 50 acres does, but 5 against the end of that, that easement, it comes right up 6 against to the end of it. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What I'm saying, though, 8 if you grant an additional acre footage to that existing 9 easement, that triggers platting by law. 10 MR. HAILEY: But, Commissioner Letz, it's 11 going to be an agriculture -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Doesn't make any 13 difference. You have to read the law. 14 MR. HAILEY: And -- 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's an exception to 16 any one of the exceptions. I mean, if -- if it's 17 agricultural use, if it's -- a whole list, like eight 18 different exceptions. 19 MR. HAILEY: That's why I went to Senator 20 Wentworth, because a man at -- man named Rothermel that's a 21 counselor for Stewart Title Company got ahold of our title 22 company, and he suggested that we look at this, this law. 23 And which we did, and we visited with Senator Wentworth, and 24 Senator Wentworth told me -- he said, "That wasn't my 25 intention when I authored this bill." You know, to -- to 12-13-04 20 1 state -- you know, I read all through all this and 2 everything, but I failed to see the citizens' rights here. 3 I see everything that the -- that the County and the State 4 can do, but I don't see anything that I can do. You -- the 5 only thing I can do is just, you know, tuck my tail between 6 my legs and go. I can't afford to build a road. I'm 7 retired, on a fixed income. I can't afford to -- it would 8 cost me $30,000 to put a road in to the standards. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand that. First 10 of all, this isn't on the agenda. I really shouldn't -- I 11 mean, the agenda issue is the variance that you requested 12 originally, and we're -- and I'm willing to support that. 13 The issue of whether or not this requires platting, we'll 14 refer it to the County Attorney's office. Because 15 Mr. Wentworth -- you know, I cannot -- I don't understand 16 how he -- he did all the law, and I don't understand how he 17 would say if you're going to create an easement to get to 18 the property, how that doesn't trigger platting. It clearly 19 says it does. 20 MR. HAILEY: Yeah. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- you know, and 22 we're -- you know, I'm trying to accommodate you any way we 23 can. 24 MR. HAILEY: I understand that. And I'm not 25 here to circumvent the law, you know. I -- 12-13-04 21 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My concern is that if 2 this 12-foot easement is the access to that property, and 3 those people then decide they want to sell half of it -- 4 MR. HAILEY: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- they're not going to 6 be able to. 7 MR. HAILEY: Yes. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This Court will not allow 9 that. 10 MR. HAILEY: I understand. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That is a -- a problem. 12 Now, on the type of road, I mean, Mr. Odom is pretty 13 flexible usually on whether it meets the standards. 14 MR. HAILEY: I understand what you're saying. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we understand that 16 you can't get to a 60-foot easement. We know -- we're 17 flexible there. But, to me, 12 foot is just -- 'cause 18 that's all the legal rights those people are going to have 19 the right to use. 20 MR. HAILEY: I understand, and I'm -- I'm 21 happy with -- with going -- the thing about with a -- with a 22 40-foot easement, if -- if that's where we're going to 23 discuss, okay? My fence, I have 1,000 feet of fence on the 24 west side of this -- that 37 feet wide. The border fence is 25 the east fence, okay? Then the west fence covers a -- 12-13-04 22 1 fences off my front field. It's 37 feet between it. So, 2 for -- for 3 feet, I'd have to change -- move 1,000 feet of 3 fence out into the field. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't have to move 5 any of the fence. We're not saying -- as long as this 6 easement is -- 7 MR. HAILEY: Okay. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- designated, the 9 building can stay in the easement. The fences can stay in 10 the easement. That doesn't make any difference to me. 11 MR. HAILEY: I need -- I really need 12 clarification. I have a picture of my barn. There's a shed 13 roof right here. It's a feeder off the side of the barn. 14 That goes between the post and the -- and the fence. The 15 south fence is 33 feet. And, there again, I'd have to -- 16 I'd have to move my barn, you know. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's what I'm 18 saying; we don't want to you move the barn. 19 MR. HAILEY: Well, I appreciate that. I 20 appreciate that, really. And I don't want to move that 21 barn. It was suggested that I take that feed -- that shed 22 roof off and put it on the other side of the barn one time, 23 and I don't -- that's just out of the question, I think, to 24 me. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think maybe I -- so you 12-13-04 23 1 don't have 40 foot? You have 33 feet? 2 MR. HAILEY: I got 33 feet right there on 3 that one -- that part right there. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought you'd 5 already -- I thought that had been moved. 6 MR. HAILEY: The rest of it, when we -- we 7 get by the 1,000-foot fence on the front part there, when we 8 get to the corner of that, it's all open. It's open, you 9 know. But -- and, like I say, I'm not trying to circumvent 10 any laws here. I -- I try to -- try to deal as I should 11 with the laws. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other, I mean, 13 issue, we can do a -- a 60-foot easement and leave the -- I 14 mean, I don't care if you have fences and barns in the 15 easement. It's just that at some point, you know, the 16 owners of the easement may have an issue with it, 'cause 17 it's private. This is going to be a private easement; not 18 going to be a county road. So, you could leave the fences 19 there; you can leave everything there, as long as the -- you 20 know, the legal -- 21 MR. HAILEY: I understand. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- requirement is met for 23 the width. That's what's critical. 24 MR. HAILEY: I understand. The prospective 25 buyer is okay with everything. He -- he has no problem. 12-13-04 24 1 They -- this is a retirement place for them. They're 2 friends. It's a retirement place for them. They're both 3 dentists at the Health Science Center in San Antonio looking 4 for a place in four or five years to retire to. He has a 5 little farm -- 13 and a half acre farm in Boerne in the 6 middle -- right by the Cibolo Creek. His is a fence that 7 washes out every time it rains. Big iron fence, goats and 8 everything. He wants to move that up to Comfort. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Okay. 10 MR. HAILEY: Okay. He wants 50 acres. But I 11 would rather go back to the 40-foot easement issue you 12 suggested to begin with. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 14 MR. HAILEY: And I have no problem with that. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Well, then, we can 16 go forward on that motion. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Anyone else -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That variance. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: -- have a need to address this 20 issue? Any further question or comment from the Court? All 21 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 22 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 24 (No response.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank 12-13-04 25 1 you, Mr. Hailey. 2 MR. HAILEY: Thank you. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 4 MR. HAILEY: Sorry to be so long-winded 5 there. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: The next item on the agenda is 7 consider request from landowner to accept Scenic Ridge, 8 formerly known as Ridge Road, for Kerr County maintenance. 9 That's located in Precinct 4. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Let me introduce 11 this subject. I'm not sure we got this subject accurately 12 stated. It's -- it's not exactly a request from landowner 13 to accept Kerr County maintenance. It's the landowner 14 having done some research, and found that Kerr County should 15 have been doing maintenance on Scenic Ridge right along. 16 Also, the landowner's name is A-l-f-o-r-d, not O-l-f-o-r-d. 17 Mr. James Alford. Mr. Alford -- well, first let me say 18 Scenic Ridge is a bad road. And it's not the surface of it 19 so much that's bad. The surface is not very good either, 20 but it's been neglected, and there are rock and brush and 21 creek encroachments on it, and, in fact, at the end of 22 Scenic Ridge Road is a cul-de-sac. You almost can't tell 23 there's a cul-de-sac there. I don't think an emergency 24 service vehicle could get in there to service the residences 25 on that cul-de-sac, and there's some indication that 12-13-04 26 1 landowners there are claiming that cul-de-sac is private 2 property. In fact, there are signs there that says it's 3 private property. Mr. Alford's research revealed that on 4 June 2, 1970, the Commissioners Court approved the plat of 5 Hills and Dales Subdivision, and that Ridge Road was paved 6 by the developer sometime between 1973 and 1978. On October 7 24, 1979, the Commissioners Court assumed responsibility for 8 roads in Hills and Dales Subdivision, which had been paved. 9 And there's no -- no question that it has not been 10 maintained by the County. I think the landowners, as well 11 as the Road and Bridge Department, agree that it's not been 12 maintained. But Mr. Alford's findings suggest that it 13 should have been maintained, so I think I'll stop that 14 description right there and see if there's anybody -- either 15 the residents or anybody else that wants to talk about the 16 issue. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: We've had a number of 18 individuals submit participation forms, and I'd like to 19 recognize them now. Mr. Ray Furr. Yes, sir. Please come 20 forward, sir. 21 MR. FURR: Well, again, my name is Ray, last 22 name is Furr, F-u-r-r. And we've only been there two or 23 three years, and when we moved in, we were under the 24 impression that it was a private road and not a 25 County-maintained road. But then, after talking to Jim and 12-13-04 27 1 reading some of this other stuff, my -- I guess my only 2 comment would be, everything I read indicates that the 3 County should be maintaining it. And if that's the case, I 4 don't see why they're not. You know, I don't have any 5 arguments with anyone about it. It's just that, you know, 6 it should be maintained. I think they should be maintaining 7 it. That's -- that's it. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Ms. Judy 9 Kinsman? 10 MS. KINSMAN: Hi. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, ma'am. 12 MS. KINSMAN: I apologize; I've never done 13 anything like this, so I'm pretty shaky. So, I live on the 14 cul-de-sac. It's four lots that were later subdivided. 15 It's not a part of the county platted records. It was -- it 16 was a 10-acre tract in the subdivision on the county records 17 when it -- when that -- when the subdivision was platted, 18 and -- on the county records. The -- Mr. -- the Dole 19 brothers, Frank and William Dole, split the four -- the 10 20 acres into four tracts, Bill Dole and his wife keeping two 21 tracts, and Frank keeping two. I purchased Bill Dole's two 22 tracts, and then Frank sold his to the Gambrells, who just 23 recently sold their two -- the two tracts to George and 24 Carol Green. They have not moved in yet; they're in the 25 process of moving in right now. 12-13-04 28 1 When the Gambrells owned it, they put a road 2 from the house on the -- the 2-acre tract -- their 2-acre 3 tract, down to Roddy Tree, which they owned. So, there is a 4 road that cuts through those two tracts, making it basically 5 very difficult to ever subdivide. And the Greens are -- my 6 indications are that they do not want to sell off. And I've 7 set my house in the middle of my two tracts, so I can't sub 8 -- you know, sell off one. My side of the ridge -- we are 9 at the end of the ridge, and my side of the ridge, from the 10 little cul-de-sac, which is about 25, maybe 30 feet radius 11 from the center, goes -- starts down right from the road. I 12 had to put a berm -- an asphalt berm to keep the road from 13 washing away, 'cause it does go -- the property goes 14 completely down. If y'all come in and make it a full 15 50 feet, you're going to put that road about 4 to 5 feet 16 from my front door, and it's down about 6 feet from the 17 existing road, so you're going to have to do a lot of fill 18 on that whole side in order to do a -- a cul-de-sac like 19 you're talking about. 20 Now, regarding the emergency vehicles, KPUB's 21 huge trucks have come in there, because we do have big power 22 boxes at the back of -- you know, next to both of the homes. 23 The center of the cul-de-sac has no trees on it. That's -- 24 KPUB did that so that they could, you know, get through. 25 There's a huge construction truck in there now that came 12-13-04 29 1 across the center of the cul-de-sac rather than coming on 2 the road portion, which is narrow, and we've got trees on 3 it, you know, for aesthetics, which I again will lose 4 everything if y'all do this. Carol Green called me on 5 Saturday, having heard that this was coming up. And, as I 6 say, we are not a part of the county records as these -- 7 these four tracts. It's a single tract on y'all's records. 8 And she expressed the desire not to be maintained by the 9 County. So, we're the four -- four -- you know, four lots 10 at the end of -- you know, at the end of what the County -- 11 I have the -- I have the plats here if y'all would like to 12 look at -- if you don't know what I'm talking about. 13 I'm also here representing Hugh Palmer. He's 14 on the other part of Scenic Ridge, and he is very, very much 15 against this also. So that's, you know just one -- you 16 know, when I moved in -- or when I bought the lots and had a 17 water connection, when Frank had owned his two -- two lots 18 over there, Mr. Wiedenfeld, who has the water company, 19 brought the water all the way down. It's on the easement, 20 but it's on the cul-de-sac easement in front of Frank's 21 house, which was Frank's house -- Frank Dole's house, which 22 is now -- Mr. Wiedenfeld would not bring my water down to my 23 house, my water connection. I don't think he wanted to 24 blast through all that rock up there; he wanted me to have 25 to do it. So, he put my water -- he put my water meter at 12-13-04 30 1 the -- right at the beginning of my property. It is on this 2 easement. 3 So, I -- you know, I'm going to have to sell 4 out, you know, 'cause I can't -- I can't afford to replace 5 the -- the berm -- the rock berm I've put up to keep, you 6 know, that -- that road from coming down to my front door. 7 I'll lose all my trees. I've planted -- I mean, it's just 8 going to destroy my property, and I'm -- I'm going to have 9 to sell out. So, you know, I just want you to consider 10 those things. I have the county records where it shows that 11 those four -- those four lots are not a part of the county 12 record, and I have pictures of my property so you can see 13 what it's going to do if do you this on the cul-de-sac. And 14 if you -- if you -- I just at least would appreciate your 15 leaving the cul-de-sac alone, okay? 16 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mrs. Kinsman, you did 18 great. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, she did. 20 MS. KINSMAN: Thank you. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You did terrific. 22 Come back next week. 23 MS. KINSMAN: No thanks. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Marsha Mefford? Did I 25 pronounce that correctly? 12-13-04 31 1 MS. MEFFORD: Yes. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. 3 MS. MEFFORD: Jim Alford is my partner, and 4 we live at 104 Scenic Ridge Road. Basically, I guess now 5 I'm going to have to address some of the issues that Judy 6 brought up, because it's a very emotional issue for her. My 7 primary purpose was to show you photographs of what the 8 condition of the roadway is right now, and how it's 9 deteriorated over all these years. And I also have pictures 10 of the cul-de-sac showing how the center is really overgrown 11 with trees, and there is really very little passage, either 12 left or right. But the -- the main issue is that across the 13 street from us where the Palmers live, the road is so 14 blocked by the rock walls that they have built and the trees 15 that they have allowed to grow into the easement that even 16 when they had -- let me find the right picture. When they 17 had a party, all of the people that came to their party 18 parked in our front yard, basically, along the street. So, 19 it's really a problem with the width of the area that cars 20 can drive, and with being able to access, like when UPS 21 trucks or whatever -- whatever kind of large vehicles comes, 22 they end up turning around in our driveway because of the 23 large rock retaining wall and the "Private Property" sign 24 that Ms. Kinsman has put up on the public cul-de-sac. And I 25 guess that's basically the issue. The road is public, and 12-13-04 32 1 hasn't been maintained. The cul-de-sac is public, and needs 2 to be cleared so that vehicles can turn around, rather than 3 in our driveway, in the cul-de-sac. Jim's done a lot of 4 research and has all the facts, and I'm not good at facts, 5 and I'm nervous also right now. So, that, I guess, is 6 basically what I wanted to say, is that I feel like the road 7 really does need to be cleared off and -- and paved so that 8 our guests and other people's guests can come and have a 9 place to park and be able to have access to a cul-de-sac 10 where delivery vehicles or emergency vehicles have room to 11 turn around. Thank you. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. Is there 13 anyone else that wishes to be heard on this particular 14 issue? Mr. Odom, what are your thoughts? 15 MR. ODOM: I'll give this to the Court, if 16 you'll pass this. It's pictures. Hopefully you can tell. 17 If not, then, by all means, we can start here; it's in 18 color. My budget's so tight that I couldn't afford color. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: I knew we were going to get to 20 that. 21 MS. MEFFORD: Hey, I did mine in black and 22 white also. 23 MR. ODOM: I believe that -- and I appreciate 24 everybody's opinions. I believe that we sent that packet 25 that you can -- that outlines a lot of things that we've had 12-13-04 33 1 in that subdivision. Also in that packet that I gave you is 2 the existing plat for that subdivision, and in reference to 3 the cul-de-sac and all like that, you can see that 4 Mrs. Kinsman, I believe, was correct, in our opinion. But 5 there's some factors, I guess -- I won't beat this dog to 6 death, but let me go over the things that I think this Court 7 should consider and some of the information that was 8 presented to us, because I've talked to Mr. Palmer. We've 9 surveyed the people -- I had Truby talk to them, but I 10 talked to Mr. Palmer, who is the owner; he was living there, 11 came in around 1987 or later. But let me go through these 12 comments or thoughts that I have that the Court should 13 consider. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leonard, before you get 15 there, can you reference -- get me located from this drawing 16 to this plat, as to where -- this has R numbers, and this 17 has lot numbers, so I can make sure I'm -- 18 MR. ODOM: All right. This comes in -- this 19 is east -- East Hightop, I think, but this is the road right 20 here. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right here? 22 MR. ODOM: And there it ends into -- 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The cul-de-sac should -- 24 MR. ODOM: Wait, let's see. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is it here. 12-13-04 34 1 MR. ODOM: This is it here, I'm sorry. And 2 the cul-de-sac's on Lot 6. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. And Lot 6 is the 4 lot that was divided into four lots? 5 MR. ODOM: That was divided into four 6 different lots. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. 8 MR. ODOM: My thoughts are, is something said 9 35 years ago still binding on the present Court when that 10 road is not built or paved until 1987 or later? I talked to 11 Mr. Palmer. He was the oldest individual up there, and I 12 don't mean that in age, but as far as longevity on that 13 road. And he said in 1987, when he lived up there, that 14 road was dirt, and that he and Mr. Gold, and I don't know 15 who else was up there at the time, gave $300 apiece to 16 sealcoat that. So, it means it's later than when the 17 unitized road system was created. Mr. Baldwin was 18 Commissioner then, and that was dirt up there. And this 19 agreement that was talking about Looker in 1970 was the only 20 road. Apparently East Hi-Top, West Hi-Top, and East Hi-Line 21 were paved, and they were accepted into the unit road system 22 when that was created in 1986, I believe, and everybody 23 certified what they were -- what they were doing at that 24 time. But, by Mr. Palmer's explanation, that was all dirt. 25 He said it was so dusty that they all went in -- and they 12-13-04 35 1 wanted it private. They wanted to maintain the privacy up 2 there. It is narrow. It's a 30-foot right-of-way. 3 As Kerr County has never maintained this 4 road, it was not listed with the other roads in Hills and 5 Dales as part of the '87 list for the unit road system to 6 maintain 18 years ago. The roads that were on the list is 7 what I said; Looker, East Hi-Top, West Hi-Top, and East 8 Hi-Line. Not all homeowners on Scenic Ridge want the road 9 to be County-maintained at the present time. They want it 10 to remain private. In the past, we have required 100 11 percent approval of the landowners. Local Government Code 12 232.003.2 says no road shall be less than 40 foot wide and 13 no more than 70. A 30-foot road is a Class 3. There's no 14 such thing in state statutes as a Class 3 road now, so 15 that's 40 foot or less. So, we have already set precedents 16 up in there in Hills and Dales Subdivision by making West 17 Hi-Line do exactly what we're saying now. Existing was 30 18 foot, and it was to get 40 foot of right-of-way, and I 19 believe that you have that in your documentation that I gave 20 you, what we did in Hills and Dales. Bruce Oehler was 21 Commissioner of Precinct 4 then. 22 If additional right-of-way is given, the 23 people realize the area needs to be cleared, so you're going 24 to lose the vegetation up there. The existing cul-de-sac is 25 on Lot 6, and was built in 1987 or later -- we know that 12-13-04 36 1 Mr. Palmer was there and Mr. Gold was down there -- for the 2 use of two landowners. And what Mr. Palmer told me is that 3 Mr. Gold was going to subdivide that, because his brother 4 was going to live next door to him, and apparently that fell 5 through. I don't know if health or whatever reason that 6 that didn't come about, and then it changed hands. I 7 believe Mrs. Kinsman bought one part of it, and now some 8 other people own the other part there. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two landowners? 10 MR. ODOM: Two landowners on four lots. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What -- I mean -- well, 12 go ahead and finish. Then I'll get back to those four lots. 13 MR. ODOM: Okay. And those four lots were 14 sold by metes and bounds. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can tell. 16 MR. ODOM: Yes. Any problem with the 17 cul-de-sac is civil and at the discretion of those two 18 homeowners who can use it. That's my opinion. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question is, to you or 20 to whoever could answer it, no revision of plat was done on 21 Lot 6, ever? 22 MR. ODOM: No. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: First of all, that needs 24 to be done. But the fact that there are four lots, if it's 25 only two landowners and they don't intend to divide any 12-13-04 37 1 further, it ought to be -- I'd revise it to the way -- you 2 know, to the two -- to two lots. I mean, no reason to do 3 four and do it as a minor revision. But that -- you know, 4 the landowners of -- you know, you and your neighbors need 5 to really do a revision there. The cul-de-sac issue, as I 6 see it, is -- doesn't exist. The cul-de-sac's on private 7 property, you know. And there should have been a 8 cul-de-sac, in my opinion, and under our current rules there 9 would have been one put in there. But that cul-de-sac is on 10 Lot 6 and not part of the easement, not part of the 11 subdivision. And on the other issue on the paving, I mean, 12 to me, that is -- as you stated, I mean, it's a -- you know, 13 if it wasn't -- our policy has been if they weren't accepted 14 in '87, they're not County-maintained. 15 MR. ODOM: Not to -- 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: They may be public, but 17 they're not County-maintained. 18 MR. ODOM: Can be public. That's what it is, 19 because it doesn't have a gate up, but it's not 20 County-maintained. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, also -- perhaps 22 Hi-Line was the other one, similar situation. That was 23 accepted in the county fairly recently. Lot 6 really needs 24 to get -- that revision of plat needs to be done so it's 25 the -- it's important that the county records reflect 12-13-04 38 1 what -- 2 MR. ODOM: What's there. The other notes -- 3 if you'll bear with me, I'll just finish up my thoughts. 4 The platted road has no turn-around; it dead-ends into Lot 5 6. So, would the person who's requested maintenance need to 6 build a cul-de-sac on his property at the Court's request on 7 Dickey and Riojas? If so, is he willing to guild a 50-foot 8 radius and seal it? Drainage is a problem. You'll see -- 9 in these pictures, you'll see two berms up there. They go 10 back out at an angle, like a 30- or 35-degree angle there, 11 and that's to divert water from going into those homes right 12 there at that cul-de-sac. I talked to Mr. Palmer. He says 13 when he gets a real heavy rain, and 5 to 8 inches is not 14 unusual up there and in that area, he says the water almost 15 comes in his door, which is adjacent or right across the 16 street from the Alfords. So -- and that has nothing to do 17 with where the water goes down off that cliff. 18 Now that there are berms in the road to 19 divert water from the houses, we, the taxpayers, will pick 20 up the problems and costs to fix it there. That is always a 21 problem when you take in things, is the drainage. And it's 22 real hard to do anything up there, 'cause the point's been 23 brought out, it's solid rock up there. Where's the money to 24 come from to fix this road, the drainage problems? General 25 revenue? We did not allocate money our budget to do this 12-13-04 39 1 road. Should you decide to do this, should we drop special 2 projects on Beach Road? I've got some money in that, and 3 use it to work on the road that we do not maintain? Now, 4 you know, I don't mean to alienate anybody or this Court. 5 It's just my thoughts, and I feel like it never was ours. 6 That's the reason we did not maintain it. I don't know if 7 you can tell; we've got it marked up there by our standards 8 that that road's got a red strip on top of it. It tells our 9 people we do not maintain. Do not go down it. 10 MS. KINSMAN: And we paid for that. All the 11 landowners together chipped in and bought that -- that 12 street sign. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did I hear you 14 correctly? You said this road was never accepted 15 originally? 16 MR. ODOM: That's right, sir. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whenever we created 18 the unit road system? 19 MR. ODOM: That's right. 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What, then, caused 21 this 1998 court order? How did that come about? 22 MR. ODOM: I am lost on that. Let's see. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's in the backup. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hi-Line -- the Hi-Line 25 issue. 12-13-04 40 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Different road. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a different 3 road? 4 MR. ODOM: West Hi-Line? That's a different 5 road. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was one -- I think 7 Leonard put it in there as an example as to what has 8 recently happened. 9 MR. ODOM: What has recently happened. We've 10 set precedents in there. That's what I was -- and then, if 11 we're going to do it for one, should we not do it for the 12 others? That would give us 40 foot, which would be 5 foot 13 on each side, give or take. I don't know where this road's 14 laid out, as I've told the Commissioner. I don't know if 15 the road leans to one side. Mr. Palmer asked me that 16 question, and I said, you know, "That road could be over on 17 your side." If I cleared the right-of-way there, and I 18 don't clear it on the other side 'cause it's not necessary, 19 then we're the bad guys, because why are we clearing 20 everything there? When I clear in that cul-de-sac, I can't 21 say whether EMS or something can't get down. My old pickup 22 got down there, and I turned around when I took the pictures 23 down there. But I think that part of the problem is the 24 perception that that is public. And, you know, I'm not a 25 lawyer, so I don't have -- I just take it that that is Lot 6 12-13-04 41 1 and that's private property there. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me say this. I 3 came in as a Precinct 4 commissioner on January 1, 1987, and 4 the unit road system came in at exactly the same time. And 5 I distinctly remember putting together a master road list 6 that were County-maintained roads, and I distinctly remember 7 working with Mr. Palmer and Frank Dole both, that were 8 residents in there at that time, and the only road that we 9 put on the '87 approved County-maintained list was the main 10 road coming off of Highway 39 that goes back in there. 11 There wasn't any other roads at that time. The only thing 12 that's been added in my -- in my memory is the Hi-Line East 13 and Hi-Line West, maybe. The Hi-Line roads. That's the 14 only changes, is just -- the main road was the only thing on 15 the '87 list. This road is not -- was not on the approved 16 list. Now, I -- and going through here, I appreciate 17 everybody's research, but I don't see anywhere here any kind 18 of proof that it is, that it's a -- that it's a 19 County-maintained road in any way. Now, the statement that 20 Commissioners Court assumed responsibility for roads in that 21 subdivision, that doesn't mean that this road became a 22 County-maintained road. We have -- I personally have 23 subdivisions all over my precinct that, when they platted 24 them, it clearly says on there, "We dedicate these roads to 25 the county." Well, that -- that's one issue, but the County 12-13-04 42 1 accepting them is a whole different issue. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: For maintenance. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, for maintenance. 4 And so, you know, I'm not saying that this falls under that 5 -- that theory, but it's similar. It is not a 6 County-maintained road. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does fall under 8 that theory, I agree with you, because I have several 9 situations very similar to that where they have been platted 10 and the right-of-ways dedicated for public use, and the road 11 is atrocious and never was accepted in the county 12 maintenance program. So, there are a lot of them around the 13 county. I've got some in my precinct. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me see if I understand 15 your position, Mr. Odom. Because of the platting, the 16 30-foot-wide roadway for that road, up to -- 17 MR. ODOM: The cul-de-sac. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: -- up to Lot 6, as shown on 19 the plat -- 20 MR. ODOM: That's right. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: -- which does not include the 22 cul-de-sac as a public roadway. 23 MR. ODOM: Up to that point. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: That never was assumed, or 25 should have been assumed by Kerr County for maintenance. 12-13-04 43 1 With respect to maintaining the 30-foot width, certainly, 2 any member of the public or a person who's materially 3 affected by that has the ability to assert those rights to 4 maintain the integrity of that width is -- is assured. 5 MR. ODOM: Mm-hmm. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: One other comment, if I 8 might. This is, you know, kind of to everyone, all the 9 neighbors. The -- I mean, I think the County -- as I said, 10 they need to have a revision of plat to set out what's 11 happened on Lot 6, and I think that the County would like to 12 see a cul-de-sac there. I mean, it's a -- under our current 13 rules, we would not allow a road to be built without a 14 cul-de-sac. 15 MR. ODOM: Without a cul-de-sac. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, but -- and then 17 during these -- trying to fix problems like this is when we 18 tend to get into the variance mode. And I think it is a 19 safety issue; it is better to have one. But also, I don't 20 think it's right to destroy someone's home to get that 21 cul-de-sac there. I mean, that's unreasonable, as it was 22 unreasonable in the previous gentleman to tear down his barn 23 for the right-of-way. But it would be nice if the owners of 24 Lots 2A, 3B, and 6 could figure out a way together to put 25 enough property together to get at least something to turn 12-13-04 44 1 around at the end. As -- and I'm not sure if there's a 2 problem on the rest of Ridge Road going back to wherever the 3 road ties into, but I don't know what kind of a homeowners' 4 association, if any, there is in Hills and Dales, but the 5 homeowners' association, or certainly you can create one, 6 can help clear that road. I mean -- and, clearly, the 7 neighborly thing is for all the neighbors to get along and, 8 within that right-of-way, get it cleared. If there are -- 9 it looked like, in some of the pictures, there's trees 10 hanging over. And that, you know, certainly wouldn't solve 11 all the problems. It would help some of the problems. 12 MR. ODOM: Help some of them. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there is a mechanism 14 that I think, Leonard, if you want that road to become a 15 county road, there's certainly a mechanism to do that, and 16 how that's done is -- there's various different ways. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think you have 18 your answer, Mr. Alford. You're going to have to look to 19 your homeowners' association. The County's not responsible 20 for maintaining the road. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further to be offered 22 on that particular agenda item? Let's move to the next 23 item, consider and discuss settlement agreement with bonding 24 companies. Sheriff? 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think you have in your 12-13-04 45 1 packet what the agreements are. This has been brought to 2 the Court one time before. We're trying to get things 3 cleared up prior to the end of the year, and we have a 4 change of County Attorneys, and what could end up being 5 perceived as a possible conflict of interest at that time. 6 As y'all remember, there is no precedent for this. These -- 7 there's two bonding companies licensed to operate in Kerr 8 County to bond inmates out of the jail. Both of these 9 bonding companies have some old, old judgments against them. 10 Some of them date as far back as 1995, going all the way up 11 to 2004, when the law changed. When the law changed in 2004 12 or 2003, you know, they only have 30 days to pay those 13 judgments. If there's a judgment issued in them in a bond 14 forfeiture, they have 30 days to pay it, and that's the end 15 of the story, or else I have to -- the Bail Bond Board which 16 Kerr County has now would have to suspend their license or 17 collect it off collateral they have. 18 But, for many, many years, even prior to my 19 taking office, a lot of old judgments weren't collected. 20 One bonding company had been trying to make payments on it 21 at the time, and had worked some -- some sort of agreement 22 in making those payments, but when we really got to looking 23 at it, there was a lot of money owed to the County by 24 bonding companies, and another one wasn't making any 25 payments at all. So, through the Bail Bond Board and County 12-13-04 46 1 Attorney David Motley, we came up with a compromised 2 settlement agreement, which, as I said, there's no precedent 3 set for it anywhere that we can find. And I just spent a 4 week in Austin talking to Bail Bond Board instructors up 5 there, and people with the A.G.'s office and the Sheriff's 6 Association. There is no precedent. I don't know where we 7 go. 8 But, in due diligence, in trying to at least 9 collect some of this past-due money, the compromised 10 settlement agreement was everything that was added together 11 that the two bonding companies owed. It was taken at 90 12 percent, part of that, and then a 4 percent interest onto 13 that 90 percent for an agreed settlement agreement that they 14 would pay. The reason the board and everybody looked at the 15 90 percent, because there's other laws in there that if they 16 paid this judgment and then, within so long, a person comes 17 back or they get it taken care of, they could actually get 18 money back, and there's a lot of these old judgments. So, 19 to keep all that from -- from occurring, the two bonding 20 companies verbally agreed that they would just take the 90 21 percent, call it -- that's what they owe, with the 4 percent 22 interest on part of it, and start making those payments. 23 One bonding company has taken on it their 24 own -- as y'all know, what came up to the Court a while back 25 was one bonding company has taken on it their own to sign 12-13-04 47 1 the agreement already and started making payments, even 2 though it wasn't ever finalized. The other bonding company 3 has not done anything on it yet. In talking with the County 4 Court at Law Judge, Spencer Brown, his whole deal was these 5 were judgments that they entered, so they needed to be 6 collected. And he just -- if there was going to be an 7 agreement on how they got collected, he didn't feel the 8 County Attorney had the right to do that. But he felt that 9 if the Commissioners Court approved these settlements, he 10 had no problem with them. And I'm just trying to get some 11 past debt owed this county straightened up. It's in the 12 way -- in excess of $100,000 all totaled, and I think we 13 need to get some things taken care of. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: This -- this matter's been a 15 work in progress for -- what would you say, the better part 16 of two -- two years or more? 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: But more recently, probably, 19 for the past year or a little bit less, it's really been 20 pushed to get refined, to get nailed down to where it is 21 today, and everybody's pretty much on the same page at this 22 time? 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. Because a lot of 24 these are real old ones. You know, I'm -- a lot of them, 25 we're just trying to work out something that the bonding 12-13-04 48 1 companies would -- would agree with, and that -- that the 2 County could agree with to collect this past debt owed to 3 the County. It's owed; it needs to be paid. The problem I 4 face as Sheriff is, if I just shut them down because they 5 have not paid it, they're -- these are the only two licensed 6 bail bond companies that can write bonds at this time in 7 Kerr County, so if we close them down, no matter what, I 8 have nobody, unless it's the -- the inmate's attorney that 9 wants to bring his own bond for his client. But I have 10 nobody that is licensed to be able to write bonds in the 11 county, and the jail population would go up drastically in a 12 hurry on -- on cases that should be able to make bond, 13 'cause the bond's only meant to show their appearance. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: These agreements 15 would clean up, I guess, what's happened in the past. Is 16 there anything different going to happen to -- to prevent us 17 from being in the same place again two years from now? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The law changed. When 19 the law changed in June 2003 or 2004, now it's written in 20 the law that if there is a final judgment against a bonding 21 company, that bonding company only has 30 days to pay that 22 judgment in full, or else the bond -- Bail Bond Board can 23 suspend their license to operate and the Sheriff can collect 24 on the collateral that they have up to make the bonds. 25 Okay? Now, we -- Kerr County is not -- if your county's 12-13-04 49 1 over 100,000 in population, you're required to have a -- a 2 bail bond board. Kerr County is not that large, of course, 3 and it's optional for us. I started the Bail Bond Board, or 4 asked for one a couple years ago -- little over a year ago, 5 because of the number of just people wanting to all of a 6 sudden start writing bonds, and the problems that was 7 causing. So this way, at least, there was a set mechanism 8 to where they had to be licensed to be able to do it. But, 9 you know, it's also -- if I just close these two bonding 10 companies down, I have nobody that can write bonds. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: You feel it's in the best 12 interests of everybody concerned to go ahead and get this 13 thing resolved and get it behind us and move forward? 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I definitely do. And 15 there is one of the bonding companies here that may, you 16 know, want to make their own statements about it as to how 17 they feel. I just think we need to do something. We need 18 to move -- 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, I have a question. 20 And my issue has been all along that I don't mind trying to 21 work out an agreement, but I was always concerned about 22 basically the County financing a private business if we 23 weren't charging interest. 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, as I read this, 12-13-04 50 1 under -- on the first page, under Item 5 -- Roman numeral V, 2 b, the 4 percent interest is assessed, but the way -- it 3 looks like it's just assessed one time; it's not based on 4 future payments. I mean, so it's -- they're paying a 5 one-time -- is that based on the whole payout of the loan? 6 Is that 4 percent -- it's like a car loan? Or is it like 7 we're charging a one-time -- 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There's a certain amount 9 that is owed that interest can be charged, okay? Not every 10 bit of this interest can even legally be charged on it. 11 There's a certain amount that's owed that interest could be 12 charged on, and that lump sum, they put 4 percent on that. 13 And that's the -- 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's a one-time 15 charge, then, so we're financing -- they're not paying any 16 interest for the next -- this company, for the next 12 17 years? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only other thing that -- 19 you know, I want -- this needs to be resolved. Should have 20 been resolved eight years ago, but -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The biggest thing I 23 have -- it's either we do something like this, or we require 24 the bonding companies to go borrow the money, lump sum, and 25 pay the County 90 percent of everything that's owed all up 12-13-04 51 1 front, or I try and collect their collateral, which I may or 2 may not be able to do, 'cause a lot of that collateral was 3 put up that was owed, and it really wouldn't pertain to 4 this. I think there could be all kinds of -- 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have no problem in -- 6 clearly, I understand that there's certain parts of it -- 7 the court costs part, we can't charge interest on. And I 8 think 4 percent is acceptable, though low, compared to the 9 current market for businesses, considering the circumstances 10 and the benefit to us. But I do think that 4 percent should 11 continue to be charged on the ongoing balance, like any 12 other loan would. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think a lot of your 14 problem with that, Commissioner, and where you get into -- 15 actually, all these are individual cases, and it's -- as the 16 County Clerk can attest to, and what they have to do is 17 create a civil cause number that takes care of all these old 18 cases. As you can see on your spreadsheet, it's under one 19 cause number, okay? Otherwise -- and if you can't do that 20 with a set figure -- and Jannett, the County Clerk, can 21 correct me if I'm wrong. If you can't do that with a set 22 figure, you have to keep all these separated, and then you 23 have to figure out what payment and what amount of that 24 payment and what amount of that 4 percent you're going to 25 apply to each one. 12-13-04 52 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not -- all you do is 2 just look at that time code to -- like buying a truck; you 3 put the interest in, you figure out how long. 4 MS. PIEPER: Commissioner, I don't have a 5 bookkeeping system that would allow me to do that. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The Auditor can easily go 7 and put it in their computer and tell you, at 4 percent paid 8 out over 12 years, what the total amount you owe is, and 9 then you back it -- you know, do that it way. I mean, it's 10 not a hard process to do. And the Auditor can, I mean, 11 easily do that. I just don't think we should -- I don't 12 think it's -- I question whether we have the ability to 13 basically give interest-free loans. I don't think we can do 14 that. I mean, I question -- little bit of a question 15 whether we can do any kind of a loan, but -- you know, which 16 is what this is. We're lending them money. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My question is -- I 18 don't know if I agree with everything Commissioner Letz just 19 said, but most of it I do. My question is, what authority 20 do you have as a board that, two years down the road, you 21 know, we get back in this same -- same situation. What -- 22 then you're going to come along and say again, well, there's 23 only two bonding companies here; we better not do anything 24 to them? Is that -- 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. What you have, 12-13-04 53 1 number one, is the -- the Bail Bond Board actually does not 2 have any authority over any of these. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who does? 4 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Me, the Sheriff. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, god. We're in 6 trouble. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, you're right. The 8 Bail Bond Board had -- because these were all debts created 9 before the Bail Bond Board, and judgments created. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And so what do you do, 11 Rusty, two years down the road and we're back in the same 12 situation that we're in today? 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, you can't -- you 14 may -- you know, if they default on this, then, of course, 15 this explains out the procedure on that, that it can all be 16 collected at that time. Now, future bonds that they write, 17 bonds since 2003 -- June, I believe -- was it June 2003? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's covered under 19 new law? 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's all covered under 21 new law. If there's a judgment entered in court against 22 that bond, they have 30 days to pay it, period. No ifs, 23 ands, or buts. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What if they don't pay 25 that in 30 days? Who has the authority to do something? 12-13-04 54 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Number one, since we're 2 a bail bond board county now, the Bail Bond Board has the 3 authority to suspend their license at that time, or the 4 Sheriff has the authority to collect that out of their 5 collateral that they have put up, okay? So, you won't have 6 this problem again, thank goodness, 'cause the Legislature 7 finally changed some of the laws. I honestly don't see it. 8 It's just how do we get past all the -- 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: -- the prior, old stuff? I 11 don't know. And I don't know what the best way to do it. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think that -- you 13 know, I've been hearing about this for a long time too, and, 14 frankly, I'm tired of it. And I -- I see a vehicle here to 15 get us on down the road, so I -- I think I would approve -- 16 approve of this here, although Commissioner Letz is correct 17 about the interest and going on down the road. But, to get 18 us somewhere that we have never been before -- 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's true. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- I would approve 21 this document. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, and I can agree 23 with Commissioner Letz' deal, but then when you look at the 24 old law and you look at that they can go back and they're 25 waiving this part of it, they can go back and any of those 12-13-04 55 1 that the person did end up being caught years later or 2 whatever, they can actually go back, petition the court for 3 that money back. Okay? I think you're going to actually 4 be -- be collecting more money than you could, and not have 5 all the problems of them going back to the courts and 6 collecting back what they had already paid. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: This is a compromised 8 settlement. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is a compromised 10 settlement. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: It takes into account a lot of 12 the variables, the remittitur that the County would be 13 entitled to -- 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: -- when the principal was 16 subsequently surrendered or the case disposed of, and all 17 the other variables, whether or not there was collateral at 18 the time of the particular judgment. And this agreement 19 specifically, by contract, makes that collateral subject to 20 the payout under this agreement. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. It does not -- you 22 know, collateral -- and especially under Bail Bond Board, 23 you know, they have to have so much collateral up to 24 actually write so much in bonds. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 12-13-04 56 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This doesn't affect that 2 limit, okay? But it does affect that if they do not make 3 these payments, they default on this, the County then can 4 attach and have that collateral. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Irrespective -- 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Irrespective. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: -- of whether it was under the 8 prior circumstances. 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, with regard to 11 the ongoing interest, I -- it's a point very well-made. We 12 -- we frequently do interest-free financing over in our 13 Collections Department, where there are fines, costs, those 14 kinds of things. There -- those are paid out through our 15 Collections Department, and we don't collect any interest on 16 that. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're not collecting 18 interest on about half of this, either. 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You can't. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know, but we could 21 require payment -- 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But you can't collect 23 interest on the part you're not -- 'cause it's -- 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can require payment 25 anyway, in which case they'd have to go borrow the money at 12-13-04 57 1 about 8 percent. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, let me try to 3 make a motion. I sense that Commissioner Letz is about on 4 number two on his stroke level here. If we can avoid a 5 German stroke this morning, it would be great. So, I move 6 that we approve the settlement agreement with the bonding 7 companies. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think Jackie may have 9 also wanted to say something, if you -- 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I thought you gave her 11 an opportunity and she didn't. 12 MS. DAVIS: I can wait. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's -- y'all give her 14 the opportunity. 15 MS. DAVIS: It's just a comment, not 16 necessarily -- just that ever since I've been in business, 17 which has been over 10 years, every agreement I've ever had 18 with the County, I've done. At this point -- I think 19 Jannett can verify -- I've paid between 50,000 and 60,000, 20 although I owe a lot. You know, I'm real grateful for my 21 business, and I've tried to pay as best I can, and I 22 appreciate -- you know, I'll do this. And -- and he was 23 saying, two years down the road, what if this happens again? 24 If I follow the law, which we always have, it won't happen 25 again, because we're paying the debt timely as it comes in. 12-13-04 58 1 This has been as hard on us -- on me, my business, as it is 2 on y'all trying to figure out the right way and the legal 3 way to do it. That's really just a comment I had. But -- 4 but I have paid a lot to the County, over 50,000. I've paid 5 15,000 in three months this last -- within the last six 6 months. And everything I get, I put -- and the debt will be 7 paid as long as I'm in business, and it's done timely. 8 That's just a comment that I had. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Davis. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second the motion. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 12 approval of the compromised settlement agreement. Any 13 further questions or comments? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One more question to 15 the Sheriff. I'm very comfortable in Mrs. Davis doing what 16 she says she will do and signing this agreement. What about 17 that other company? 18 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Both companies had 19 agreed to this when it was first proposed, and it was -- the 20 compromised agreement was worked out. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What if the other 22 company does not sign this agreement? What do you do then? 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Then most likely what 24 will happen with the other company is, we will all end up in 25 litigation, because I'm going to have to collect on their 12-13-04 59 1 collateral. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. Thank you. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And you're -- you're 4 telling the Court that everything is current from '04 on, 5 for the year '04 to -- 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The other company has 7 about $1,000, $1,200 that they owe right now that's at the 8 30-day limit; it's just a little over, that I'm going to 9 have to collect. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In Mrs. Davis' case, 11 everything is current? 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Everything is current. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or 15 comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 16 your right hand. 17 (Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Nicholson voted in favor of the motion.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 19 (Commissioner Letz voted against the motion.) 20 21 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank 22 you. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Take a break, Judge? 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me go ahead and get this 25 public hearing out of the way, if I might. We have a public 12-13-04 60 1 hearing scheduled for 10:00, so I will recess the 2 Commissioners Court meeting and convene a public hearing for 3 a revision of a plat for Tracts 15 and 16 of Bluff Creek 4 Ranch in Precinct 3. 5 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:12 a.m., and a public hearing 6 was held in open court, as follows:) 7 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wrong. Precinct 2. 9 MR. ODOM: Two. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thought I got a new 11 subdivision. 12 MR. ODOM: I apologize, Commissioner. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You got the creek, I 14 got the subdivision. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Is there any 16 member of the public that wishes to be heard with regard to 17 the matter of the revision of the plat for Tracts 15 and 16 18 of Bluff Creek Ranch? Any member of the public wishing to 19 be heard on that? Seeing no one coming forward or hearing 20 no one speaking, I will close the public hearing for the 21 revision of a plat for Tracts 15 and 16 of Bluff Creek 22 Ranch. 23 (The public hearing was concluded at 10:13 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court 24 meeting was reopened.) 25 - - - - - - - - - - 12-13-04 61 1 JUDGE TINLEY: We're going to be back here on 2 the other item anyway, so, I will reconvene the 3 Commissioners Court meeting for this date, and let's go to 4 Item 9, consider final revision of plat for Tracts 15 and 16 5 of Bluff Creek Ranch. 6 MR. ODOM: I recommend to the Court that we 7 accept this final plat for Bluff Creek. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't you tell 9 the Court the sense of the discussions we had with respect 10 to this and so forth so that everybody ends up up-to-speed 11 on it. 12 MR. ODOM: Basically, what we had was removal 13 of a lot line to -- that was all. And that -- it was -- it 14 meets the criteria as far as the platting is concerned. And 15 I had a concern on Area A, which is unshaded, where there's 16 not a study there. But, basically, it was agreed that since 17 this is a -- my understanding, an alternate platting -- I 18 guess that's what we call it, just moving a lot line, that I 19 did have this comment put down here on this plat that before 20 any new construction on revised lots, a floodplain 21 determination must be made and a development permit issued 22 for these two lots which are in -- 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the reason we did 24 that is because there is no B.F.E. established? 25 MR. ODOM: There's no B.F.E., an unstudied 12-13-04 62 1 area. I'm sorry, Area A is an unstudied area. Nothing was 2 done when this was formally platted, and I put this in here 3 to make sure whoever buys this lot or these two lots would 4 be -- come to floodplain administration for -- 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Sherron, are 6 these two lots still in the hands of the developer? 7 MR. SHERRON: No, sir. 8 MR. ODOM: One individual is my 9 understanding. Am I correct on that? 10 MR. SHERRON: That's correct. Andrew and 11 Betty Moreland. 12 MR. ODOM: The same owner. It's already been 13 sold, and it's there and -- and this individual's wanted 14 that lot line moved for a well. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought you said 16 removal of lot line. I don't see a lot line being removed. 17 MR. ODOM: Well, it is if you look at -- 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see it being changed. 19 MR. ODOM: As platted, it was moved. Moved 20 down. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No -- yeah, okay. It was 22 -- it was moved. It wasn't removed. I thought you said 23 "removed." 24 MR. ODOM: No, just changed. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. The -- now, I 12-13-04 63 1 do have a -- this has nothing to do with a Voelkel 2 Engineering issue. I don't -- to me, "platted" is -- I 3 guess it looks like a verb. I don't think that's in the 4 dictionary as platted and replatted. I think that should be 5 "current plat" and "revised plat." 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're correct. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: "Plat" is not a term that 8 we accept in this court. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's not a 10 past-tense. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think it's a 12 verb. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Because it's always a 14 state of currency. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we should have 16 "current plat" and "revised plat." 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Get Rusty back in 18 here. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. I move the 20 final consideration of final revision of plat for Tracts 15 21 and 16, Bluff Creek Ranch in Precinct 2. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 23 MR. ODOM: Precinct 2. And are we saying 24 that you would accept this as the verbiage is right now? 25 I'm -- 12-13-04 64 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 2 MR. ODOM: I graduated from A & M, so English 3 was a foreign -- it was like a foreign language to speak. 4 Okay. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As presented. 6 MR. ODOM: As presented. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And in future, you 8 can correct the grammar. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or we can just draw a 10 line through it. I think they get the message. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Henceforth, with this -- with 12 this modicum of education in the English language, you can 13 put others on notice. And if you -- if you need some 14 clarification, a former schoolmarm, Ms. Harris, is here. 15 I'm sure she can help you out. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I didn't see her 17 raise her hand to say we were wrong. 18 MS. HARRIS: No, sir, I would never do that. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She rides for the 20 brand. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 approval of the final revision of plat for Tracts 15 and 16 23 of Bluff Creek Ranch in Precinct 2. Any further question or 24 comment? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 25 your right hand. 12-13-04 65 1 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 3 (No response.) 4 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Why 5 don't we take about a 15-minute recess? 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good idea. 7 (Recess taken from 10:18 a.m. to 10:33 a.m.) 8 - - - - - - - - - - 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come back to 10 order. The Commissioners Court meeting will reconvene. We 11 went into recess approximately 15 minutes ago. At this 12 time, we will recess the Commissioners Court meeting and I 13 will convene a public hearing for the cancellation of Spring 14 Hollow Estates in Volume 4, Page 174 of the Kerr County 15 Subdivision or Plat Records. 16 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:34 a.m., and a public hearing 17 was held in open court, as follows:) 18 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any members of the 20 public that wishes to be heard with respect to the 21 cancellation of the Spring Hollow Estates Subdivision as 22 evidenced in Volume 4, Page 174 of the Plat or Subdivision 23 Records? Seeing no one moving towards the podium or 24 otherwise speaking, I will close the public hearing for the 25 cancellation of Spring Hollow Estates, and I will reconvene 12-13-04 66 1 the Commissioners Court meeting. 2 (The public hearing was concluded at 10:34 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court 3 meeting was reopened.) 4 - - - - - - - - - - 5 JUDGE TINLEY: And I will call the next item 6 on the agenda, Number 11, to consider the cancellation of 7 Spring Hollow Estates Subdivision, as evidenced in Volume 4, 8 Page 174 of the Plat or Subdivision Records. 9 MR. ODOM: I move that -- the taxes have been 10 paid, they've followed Subdivision Rules, and it's in the 11 best interests of the County. I think the supporting 12 documents shows you how big on that -- how many small lots 13 there were, and I think just eliminating that will eliminate 14 a lot of problems up on Sheppard Rees. And, far as Road and 15 Bridge is concerned, I recommend that you accept -- that we 16 abandon and vacate and cancel the subdivision. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 20 the cancellation of Spring Hollow States Subdivision, as 21 evidenced in Volume 4, Page 174 of the Plat or Subdivision 22 Records. Any questions or discussion? All in favor of the 23 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 24 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12-13-04 67 1 (No response.) 2 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's 3 go back to Item 5, if we might, consider and discuss an 4 optional Statement of Support for the Guard and Reserve. 5 Several members of the Court participated in what is called 6 Operation Boss Lift, which was an exercise that was put on 7 jointly in San Antonio and Houston in support of employers 8 for the Guard and Reserve. And, at that particular meeting, 9 the -- the persons in charge of that program solicited the 10 support of all the employers there to support the other 11 employers who are signing the statement of support and 12 adopting it. 13 I think at the time that they were mentioning 14 what's required in order to include in that statement of 15 support that employment will not be denied because of 16 service in the Guard or Reserve, that employee job and 17 career opportunities will not be limited or reduced because 18 of service in the Guard or Reserve, that employees will be 19 granted leaves of absence for military service in the Guard 20 or Reserve consistent with existing laws, without sacrifice 21 of vacation, and that our adoption of any statement of 22 support in the policies will be made known throughout our 23 county employment organization. Those are merely what the 24 law presently requires now. All of those are required under 25 federal law for members of Guard and Reserve, and this would 12-13-04 68 1 be nothing more, as I see it, than adoption of agreeing to 2 follow federal law in this respect. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 6 adoption of the statement of support for the Guard and 7 Reserve. Any -- any questions? Comments? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I'd make was 9 that I thought it was a very good event. I learned a great 10 deal. I was not really that familiar with how the Guard 11 worked, and I have a -- probably a lot higher respect than I 12 did before, which was already high, for the people in the 13 Guard. They do a -- a lot more active -- I guess a lot more 14 true military work than I really realized they do. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I agree with 16 that 100 percent, and then I -- I'm taking another step and 17 focusing on the Iraq war and how many of these people are 18 actually on the front lines over there. It is incredible. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Even -- and, as an 20 example, those that are in the Airlift Wing, on their two 21 days, they may be in Iraq those two days. They may fly from 22 here to Iraq, take something, and come back. And, I mean, 23 just the fact that they're on that two days -- my thought 24 was always that, oh, they're just doing paperwork somewhere. 25 But, no, they're actually -- I mean, they're -- they're -- 12-13-04 69 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's true. That 2 air wing moves a lot of stuff from the stateside to the war 3 zone or to Europe. That particular wing flies all the time. 4 It was really interesting; I agree with you. It was really 5 interesting also to find out what all goes on down in the 6 different branches of service, what takes place in Ellington 7 Air Force Base -- or Ellington Field. I had no idea. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Very educational, to say the 9 least. And I -- I think it was helpful for those that have 10 employees who are members of the Reserve components to have 11 a better understanding of what the requirements are that are 12 placed upon their employees who are members of those units. 13 Any further question or comment? All in favor of the 14 motion, signify by raising your right hand. 15 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. The 19 next item on the agenda is to consider and discuss 20 applications for stop loss and life insurance for employee 21 health benefits program, requesting and authorizing payment 22 for binders on same, and authorizing Judge to execute those 23 applications. The new insurance program, the administrator 24 of that program has furnished us with the applications for 25 that coverage, and the -- the initial payment needed to bind 12-13-04 70 1 coverage under the program, according to the information 2 forwarded to me by the administrator, is just under $21,500. 3 It's in the materials that are before you. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This would be the -- 5 in effect, as the binder that this new program is underway; 6 is that correct, Judge? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: That's correct. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff has his hand 9 up. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sheriff has a question. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, sir? 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have a -- more of a 13 comment about the insurance, and it pertains to this, but 14 yet is not exactly on-point. As we all know, last week the 15 new insurance company came out and signed up all the 16 employees. We have some issues that I wish the Court would 17 address with the insurance company, see if we can get some 18 resolutions done. I've already received a resignation from 19 one employee due to the insurance change, and I have about 20 three other employees that very well may resign due to the 21 insurance change. And what the major issue is, is we have 22 an employee, for example -- I have three of them that have 23 been employed with the County for about a year. They have 24 coverage through the current policy, and about two months 25 ago, their wife or their spouse, or in a couple cases the 12-13-04 71 1 employee, became pregnant, and they were told by the new 2 insurance company that that is now a preexisting condition 3 and the new insurance will not cover that pregnancy starting 4 January 1st. That they're covered right now, but come 5 January 1st, they will not be covered, because it's a 6 preexisting condition. I don't know where we go, but 7 there's some loopholes and some problems in there that are 8 going to cause us all a great deal of problem. 9 The other issue that has come up is, I have 10 employees that are retired from another place and have their 11 primary insurance with that retirement, whether it be Blue 12 Cross/Blue Shield from the State, or whether it be -- school 13 districts is a good example. The school district, the 14 employee's retirement insurance is their primary insurance, 15 and has to be carried as such with the way their coverage is 16 and the way it's spelled out in that insurance plan. And 17 under the new plan that the County has, it is stated and 18 being told to them that this new insurance, whether they 19 take Option 1 or 2, it doesn't matter, will be their primary 20 insurance, period. And which a lot of them are very, very 21 concerned that it's going to cost them their other 22 insurance, which is what really covers them. And then what 23 some of those were doing was, on the amount that the County 24 allotted for insurance under the old insurance plan, 25 those -- especially the one with the school district did not 12-13-04 72 1 take any of the actual E.B.A. insurance that we had, but 2 they used that allotment, 'cause the County allowed them to 3 use it for supplemental like the AFLAC. And now they're -- 4 they're not given a choice; they have to take that. 5 And they were even told, and I was present, 6 that if they did not sign that application, that somebody 7 would sign it for them, period. That they were taking that 8 insurance no matter what, which ended their AFLAC or their 9 other supplements that they were using that allotment to buy 10 them, because now they're -- the County's paying for that 11 insurance. We're going to have some serious problems. I 12 already have them -- like I said, I've already lost one 13 employee, and I don't know what to tell these people, 'cause 14 I'm not an insurance person. And the insurance people that 15 were out at ours, including Mr. Wallace, could not answer 16 the questions, especially to their satisfaction, and flat 17 out just told them, "No, this is the way it is. This is 18 your primary insurance," period. We got some problems. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- you know, I 20 guess this is a little bit related because of the -- not 21 really quite on the agenda, but I think the insurance 22 issue's on the table. I think we probably need to get 23 Mr. Looney back here with Mr. Wallace, because I've had 24 several complaints about Mr. Wallace's group, and that -- I 25 mean, I don't think I can say it much clearer. The Court 12-13-04 73 1 told them that we awarded them that policy by customer 2 service, and they're already failing, in my mind, on that 3 note. The other issue -- and I'm -- the other reason I said 4 Mr. Looney is I'm confused on the primary care issue. I 5 thought that those AFLAC things were still there for them to 6 be able to put money into if they wanted it. 7 MS. PIEPER: Only if you take Option 2, I 8 believe. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, anyway, I think that 10 needs to be clarified, and so that that's understood by the 11 employees and myself. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: The -- the issue did come up 13 early on in the enrollment period -- and, in fact, I had 14 thought and, in fact, had indicated that -- that there was 15 the so-called third option. And the question was posed to 16 Mr. Looney in that regard, and he responded in writing that 17 -- that there was no third option. It's one or two, and 18 because that's the way the plan's designed. That if -- if 19 individuals are given the option to -- to opt out of the 20 plan, even though initially it may appear that there were 21 only possibly a half a dozen affected that had principal 22 coverage already in place through third -- third-party 23 sources, myself included -- I fall in that group -- that 24 that same option would have to be offered to every other 25 employee. And, given that same option and that being the 12-13-04 74 1 case, we may not have -- have a viable plan when we get to 2 the end of the road. What -- what it would amount to is the 3 possibility of -- of making an allocation of approximately 4 $6,000 a year available to employees to purchase voluntary 5 insurance products outside the plan. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what's different 7 about going forward than what we've done in the past in that 8 regard? 9 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What you did in the 10 past is, the employees that had the retirement and other 11 coverage -- 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I'm directing the 13 question -- I understand. I'm trying to -- I'm asking a 14 rhetorical question. So, what would be different about 15 continuing the practice in effect that has existed? I 16 can't -- I can't -- I can't imagine why there would be a 17 resistance on the part of the underwriter, the carrier, to 18 resist that. And, secondly, I can't imagine why the carrier 19 would not welcome an opportunity to be secondary to claims, 20 as opposed to primary. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know what the issue is 22 on primary and secondary; I -- I can't speak to that issue. 23 The -- the issue raised by the Sheriff with regard to the 24 continuity of coverage and preexisting, I got the very clear 25 understanding from -- from the orientation session that I 12-13-04 75 1 attended that discussed that issue, if you were under the 2 current plan with Kerr County for this current year, even 3 though the plan administrator had changed, and you went into 4 the county plan for the ensuing year, there was no 5 preexisting issue. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now -- 7 JUDGE TINLEY: That does not carry forward? 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What they explained to 9 me was that if they didn't have 18 months of service, okay? 10 And 18 months under that current plan. Even though our 11 current plan was covering it, that was a mistake on the 12 current plan, and they were not going to -- they would not 13 be -- 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That had to do with 15 new employees, or an employee adding a beneficiary that 16 hadn't been on there before, another member of the family? 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This came out directly 18 from an employee I have that's been an employee for a year 19 and is pregnant. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're not -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can't resolve it. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We need to get to 23 the bottom of all these issues, and we're not going to be 24 able to do that here. I really think we ought to do it as a 25 full court. 12-13-04 76 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Get the supervisor 4 in here and find out what all the issues are, and not let it 5 fester any longer. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hear, hear. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would suggest we 8 hold up the binder till we get them resolved. 9 MS. NEMEC: We're partially self-insured. 10 The plan document is a plan document that this Court can 11 change at any time. And this Court agreed, when we went 12 with the other insurance, to allow them to coordinate the 13 health benefits with the AFLAC, and that's exactly what I 14 was trying to come across the last time, that you have two 15 different providers now. This provider is not going to want 16 to coordinate those benefits and allow the employee to take 17 that deduction and buy products from another agent, and 18 that's exactly what's happening. And if that was going to 19 be the case, then it should have been disclosed to us, and 20 it wasn't. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why would that be the 22 insurance carrier's call? You know, I -- 23 MS. NEMEC: It's not. It's your call. 24 They're trying to make it seem like it's their call. It's 25 our plan document. You can change that at any time. Y'all 12-13-04 77 1 did not know that that had been put in place. Everybody was 2 surprised by it. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's true. 4 But if we allow a diversion of the basic amount of dollars 5 that everybody else receives to X, Y, and Z, employees could 6 purchase another plan. 7 MS. NEMEC: That we have been allowing for 8 the past three years. It should be no different. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're telling me, 10 then, that's not what -- the insurance carrier doesn't care 11 about that? 12 MS. NEMEC: He evidently doesn't want to do 13 it that way. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who doesn't? 15 MS. NEMEC: Mr. Looney is suggesting that it 16 not be done that way. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think there's a 18 couple of different issues here. The primary -- I think, 19 you know, at least I was aware that we were getting rid of 20 that Option 3, or C. 21 MS. NEMEC: This was -- that was Plan C. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Plan C. Because I think 23 there was a desire from the Court to simplify and better 24 position the County's insurance in a long -- going forward. 25 And Mr. Looney's comments were that we had an overly complex 12-13-04 78 1 plan for our employee group. Now, that doesn't mean -- but 2 I don't know that I understood at the time, and I agree with 3 that concept, but I'm un -- I wasn't sure or did not 4 understand exactly how it was going to work with a couple of 5 employees. It's not that many employees; about 3 percent -- 6 2 to 3 percent that that's really even an issue, because 7 what some employees have told me -- and I don't think -- you 8 know, I told an employee, and I'll say it publicly. I don't 9 think that we can design an insurance program for 2 to 10 3 percent of the employees. I mean, if we do that -- I 11 mean, but I also think there should be a way to accommodate 12 what they're trying to do, which is basically not have this 13 as their primary insurance, and be able to purchase 14 additional insurance or get additional insurance. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What I was told by them 16 is that, because it's a group plan -- and I don't know what 17 the difference would be in what we currently have and the 18 new one. But what the new ones are saying is, because it's 19 a group plan, every employee had to be part of it. Where, 20 before, if you didn't make them part of it, then the 21 allotment was given to them so they could purchase the 22 other, and now they're required to be part of it. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- time out. We 24 need to get a scheduled meeting. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When can we do it? 12-13-04 79 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm hearing one thing 2 I'm seeing a head nod the other way. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's why we need a 4 meeting. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When can we do it? 6 When can we get the San Antonio people up here? 7 MS. NEMEC: And I've got payroll that I'm 8 working on, and, you know, I'm at a loss as to what to 9 deduct, because I have a feeling some things are going to 10 change. And so I'm thinking I'm just not going to make any 11 deductions on the insurance this payroll, and try and catch 12 up at the end of the month, 'cause I'm looking at -- things 13 might change. I mean, I'm at a loss. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would think we wouldn't 15 change until the first of the year anyway, would we? 16 MS. NEMEC: No, we deduct a month in advance. 17 I have to -- all that has to go into effect. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: We got Friday, gentlemen. 20 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll be here. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the date? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: 17th. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've got a 9:30 meeting 24 that won't last but probably 30 minutes. 10 o'clock? 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Far as I know, I can 12-13-04 80 1 do it. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Baby-sitting? 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Got to baby-sit, too, but 4 I have -- might have Sam in here with us. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Got a ready surrogate handy, 6 it appears. 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Friday's good for 8 me. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Friday? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Friday at 10:00? 11 MS. NEMEC: And I can tell you what the 12 problem is with this preexisting illness. The County opted 13 several years ago to go under the HIPAA plan. What that is, 14 is that it allows the County -- that any new employee is -- 15 and if they -- a new employee or a new dependent for 18 16 months, they do have a -- if they have an illness, it is a 17 preexisting illness for the first 18 months. So, that has 18 been in place with the old insurance also. Now, from what I 19 understand, the Sheriff is saying that it was in place, but 20 they could have still been paying benefits. That's another 21 thing. But that, again, is a County policy. That is up to 22 you. We can change that any time we want. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's totally 24 unreasonable to have an employee who gets pregnant during 25 their first year of employment, and say we're not going to 12-13-04 81 1 cover. It is absurd to me. 2 MS. NEMEC: You can change that with a 3 signature. That can be changed with no problem. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: We're going to -- the proposal 5 is we're going to set a meeting for 10 o'clock Friday. 6 We'll need to try and get ahold of the plan administrator 7 and also Mr. Looney, and if there's a need to reshuffle 8 that -- I don't know what their commitments are. We may 9 have to roll it to the afternoon. We'll work around that. 10 But I'll check on it. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If it goes to the 12 afternoon, the earlier the better for me. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about Jeff 14 Wentworth? I'll -- 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 10 o'clock. 16 JUDGE TINLEY: We need to get him here. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What time? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 10:00, if it works. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: It's my sense of it that no 20 one's in a position to take any action on Item 6, then. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Very good. Let's 23 go to Item 7, then, ratification of minor amendments to two 24 recent agreements concerning EMS service to a designated 25 area of northwest Kerr County. 12-13-04 82 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we were 2 done with this issue. 3 MR. MOTLEY: Really not a lot to say about 4 this. It's almost just really a housekeeping item. The -- 5 the original agreement between the City of Kerrville -- 6 well, let me say the original amendment to the agreement -- 7 existing agreement between City of Kerrville, City of 8 Ingram, and Kerr County, there was a proposed amendment to 9 that, and originally it just described the area where this 10 ambulance coverage was going to be changed by, I guess you'd 11 say, a legal description, being the Y.O. Ranchlands 12 Subdivision. After that -- and at the same time, we had 13 done a separate agreement between Kerr County and Kimble 14 County EMS to -- for them to provide this ambulance service, 15 and it also made similar reference just to the Y.O. 16 Ranchlands Subdivision. Okay. And then subsequent to it -- 17 and I really don't know if it was the City Attorney's idea, 18 the City Manager, Ms. Bailey; I'm not really sure who came 19 up with it, but they had a really excellent suggestion, and 20 they also had the capability to produce maps, visuals to 21 attach to show -- originally, the original proposal was to 22 just outline on a map the area of Y.O. Ranchlands 23 Subdivision. Y'all have -- and, you know, there's a bunch 24 of documents, but y'all have a copy of that. 25 Well, at some point in time, the City had 12-13-04 83 1 thought about it and decided if they were going to -- make a 2 long story short, I guess, sort of be in the area, then 3 maybe that they -- you know, that Kimble County EMS was 4 going to cover the Ranchlands, that maybe they ought to just 5 kind of cover that whole block, and they basically made that 6 thing into a rectangle. They squared it off, and that was 7 another amendment to the area covered. And that was, I 8 believe, the document that was originally passed by our -- 9 by our court. And, if I'm not mistaken, that was a document 10 passed, and then afterwards, before the City of Kerrville 11 acted on that, they actually found a technical error that 12 resulted in this final map you have there, which was 13 basically a rectangle with sort of a notch in the southern 14 boundary of it, and that's the final version. 15 That was done after we had acted on it as a 16 Court -- y'all had acted on it as a Court, and I felt like 17 we were probably safe to even not come back and worry about 18 it, because it's such a minor change; you know, certainly 19 not a change intended to fool anybody or do anything. It 20 was just to be more accurate, provide more accurate 21 information for all the parties involved, and was a good 22 idea. So, that's why I'm seeking to have the Court today 23 ratify that minor change, that that final document, you 24 know, be put onto the -- the agreement the Court had 25 previously signed. And let me also mention that the 12-13-04 84 1 agreement -- we had sent an agreement over to Kimble County 2 for them to sign, and likewise, it needed to be changed from 3 the first version they had, which was Y.O. Ranchlands 4 Subdivision, to be described as attached property 5 description, which was that final version; again, the 6 rectangle with the notch at the bottom, so they're both the 7 same area described. 8 And, oh, let me also just mention, there were 9 a couple of -- actually, I think three changes in the text 10 of the agreement between Kerr County and Kimble County EMS, 11 so there was some changes actually to the agreement. 12 Specifically, in the original agreement, the -- the City of 13 -- or Kimble County EMS was designated as the primary 14 provider, and City of Kerrville was designated as secondary 15 provider. That has been changed, and Kimble County is just 16 called "the provider." There is no reference to City of 17 Kerrville relative to secondary, tertiary, or any other 18 provider. It specifically just says that they're out of the 19 providing of medical services -- emergency medical services 20 to that area in the attachment, you know, except for should 21 the need arise under interlocal agreements that Kimble 22 County might have with City of Kerrville, and they would 23 contact them through those interlocal agreements, and then 24 the City would respond under that. But there's no 25 responsibility under this contract, and, specifically, it 12-13-04 85 1 really takes them out of the -- the emergency medical 2 services business. 3 And there was also some -- some language in 4 the request for assistance -- and, actually, it may be kind 5 of a draft, but the language said that -- originally, that 6 upon request to a representative of Kimble County EMS from 7 Kerr County 9-1-1, that Kimble County would -- personnel and 8 equipment should be dispatched to the location within the 9 subdivision. That, again -- and it was really -- this was 10 at the suggestion of the City that it be changed, and what 11 it says now is, upon Kimble County EMS' receipt of a call 12 for emergency medical services which is in the area of Kerr 13 County depicted in Exhibit A, Kimble County EMS emergency 14 medical services personnel and equipment shall be dispatched 15 to the indicated location. It -- it changed around the 16 responsibility just a little bit and, you know, made it a 17 little bit clearer about how they would be dispatched. 18 There's also to be some agreements that 19 are -- some protocols that have been worked on, and some, I 20 guess, that are sort of in the final stages of getting 21 polished and entered that are going to be very specific as 22 to how these people -- the First Responders in this area are 23 going to be contacted when it's an emergency need in this -- 24 you know, this subdivision and this area. And these people 25 are also responsible for the area outside the subdivision, 12-13-04 86 1 so how they're going to be toned in for calls that they're 2 responsible to for Kimble County ambulance services, et 3 cetera. There's a -- there's a clear agreement, if 4 they're -- it's like if the Sheriff's Department should get 5 a call, our Sheriff's Department, what they would do -- in 6 other words, they won't be going through our 9-1-1; they're 7 going to call straight over to Kimble County, I believe is 8 the way it's worked out in the protocol, and skip that step. 9 So, there's a couple of things that cleared up, but the main 10 thing was the property description change, and clearing up 11 the role, really, of the City of Kerrville as being 12 responsible to provide services only in the area pursuant to 13 the interlocal agreements, and not under -- as a secondary 14 provider. 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: David, just a dumb -- 16 this is my dumb-boy question for the year. Don't -- I see 17 the protocol issue as just as important as this agreement 18 here. 19 MR. MOTLEY: Right. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How the thing actually 21 works. You know, who calls who and all that. That, to me, 22 is kind of important. Wouldn't that be -- go hand-in-hand 23 with the -- with adopting -- 24 MR. MOTLEY: Well -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we adopt the 12-13-04 87 1 protocol? Is that -- that's a 9-1-1 issue? 2 MR. MOTLEY: Well, the way I understand it 3 right now is that, actually -- and Ilse is here. I don't 4 mean to put her on the spot; I don't know if she knew this 5 was -- this item was up. She may have some more or 6 different information than I have on protocol. But Bill 7 Price, the Communications Director for the City, and 8 Mr. Amerine have been working, I believe with Mr. Budow from 9 the Ranchlands Subdivision, and additionally, I believe have 10 been talking with the Sheriff over in Kimble County, with 11 Marlene Jones, who is Emergency Medical District 12 Administrator and Ambulance Administrator. They've been 13 working on some very specific -- I think the thing about it 14 is -- I'll just tell you right now, I'm interested in it, 15 but when they start talking about some of this stuff, you 16 know, I kind of -- my eyes kind of glaze over a little bit. 17 Some of the technical aspects of it really may not belong in 18 a contract. But -- 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If the Court doesn't 20 have anything to do with the protocol, I don't even want to 21 bring it up, then. 22 MR. MOTLEY: Well -- 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No sense getting us 24 involved in something we don't have any business in. 25 MR. MOTLEY: I think we need to all -- 12-13-04 88 1 everybody -- and it may really more involve Rusty, per se, 2 than the Court, but I think we need to all be absolutely 3 sure that we're on the same page as to this -- any specific 4 scenario. And I think that's pretty much in the final 5 stages of being agreed to. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just think the 7 protocol issue is just as important as anything that we're 8 doing here. 9 MR. MOTLEY: I think so. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's got to be 11 perfectly clear. You know, the -- the thought of us 12 calling -- or whoever calls, calling Junction Volunteer Fire 13 Department and not calling the Divide Volunteer Fire 14 Department, that's just the craziest thing I've ever heard 15 of in my life. 16 MR. MOTLEY: You're talking about in the 17 event of a fire? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 19 MR. MOTLEY: Okay, I understand. No, we're 20 not doing anything to change any fire protection. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just saying 22 it's -- the protocol side of it is just really -- 23 MR. MOTLEY: Well, I hear you. And maybe 24 that needs to be clear, that we're not really -- we're not 25 working on -- the fire protection all stays the same. It's 12-13-04 89 1 strictly emergency medical services. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. My 3 point is that the protocol part of it is very, very 4 important. 5 MR. MOTLEY: Sure. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's -- I think 7 Commissioner Baldwin's point -- I mean, one, it's -- it's 8 not our responsibility from the standpoint of we've pretty 9 much gotten out of this. That area is not our -- not going 10 to be handled by us for EMS. But I think with the protocol, 11 it's very important, and we have created a situation where 12 there's a more likely -- greater likelihood of a problem out 13 there because of -- because, you know, you're going to have 14 EMS in some areas -- I guess this all goes through 9-1-1 -- 15 I mean Kerr 9-1-1 still. Or City's dispatch goes -- I mean, 16 through the hardware. 17 MR. MOTLEY: It's pretty seamless. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it isn't simple. 19 MR. MOTLEY: "Seamless," I said. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seamless. Well, except 21 that we have similar situations in eastern Kerr County, 22 because Comfort's in Kendall County. The fire department's 23 in Kendall County, and we have had times when they've -- 24 EMS-wise, they've always served Hermann Sons area when the 25 bridge has been out because of access issues. And there 12-13-04 90 1 have been a lot of times -- I'd say, easily, in the last -- 2 since I've been a Commissioner, 10 times when the wrong 3 ambulance out of the wrong city, or wrong emergency service 4 was dispatched out of the wrong city, and they -- it got 5 screwed up, and it was -- every time it has been a dispatch 6 problem. And the problem comes that it's confusing when 7 they're not doing the same thing every day, and they get one 8 call -- 9 MR. MOTLEY: I hear you. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- a year. Okay, fire 11 comes out of Divide. EMS comes out of Kimble County. I 12 mean, you're making them think under an emergency situation, 13 and that's when problems develop. 14 MR. MOTLEY: Yeah, I hear you. What -- what 15 -- as I understand the way it's supposed to work, I thought 16 actually that the phone calls from these specific 17 households, that they were going to be programmed to the 18 9-1-1 system. What I thought was going to happen was that 19 the calls going to 9-1-1 would just automatically bounce and 20 go over to Kimble County. That's not going to happen, 21 because they need to know what kind of emergency. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't want that to 23 happen. The Sheriff's calls and fire calls also would go to 24 Kimble. 25 MR. MOTLEY: What's supposed to happen is, 12-13-04 91 1 the 9-1-1 people say, "What's the emergency?" And they're 2 going to say, "Somebody needs an ambulance," and then 3 they're actually supposed to call -- at that point in time, 4 to call Kimble County and dispatch it that way. But Ilse 5 may have some more up-to-date answers to Buster's question. 6 MS. BAILEY: Just one quick question. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The protocols, as 8 agreed upon, whatever they are, by those who determine these 9 things, will it be attached to the contract? 10 MR. MOTLEY: It wasn't envisioned to be. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why shouldn't it be? 12 MS. BAILEY: 'Cause it's an operational 13 matter. If I could just address that, when we were 14 discussing the contract that is before you, in my 15 discussions with Bill Amerine and Bill Price, their concern 16 was, "Sure, you guys can write all the contracts you want. 17 How is it going to work on the ground?" And they make up 18 protocols all the time, and a lot of times they're not even 19 written down; they just say, "Here's how we're going to do 20 things." But this was so important that Bill Amerine says, 21 "Here's what I'm going to do, put it down and make everybody 22 sign it that's involved so that we can be absolutely sure 23 that we're going to have a seamless operation." 24 And, certainly, that's an important document 25 and you all need to -- to have that. I don't know that it 12-13-04 92 1 necessarily needs to be part of the contract, because it's 2 really not related to the contract. It says we're out of it 3 and Kimble County's doing it for you. You might want to 4 make it part of your interlocal agreement with Kimble 5 County. But, nevertheless, it's going to be signed by, if I 6 can recall, the Kerr County Sheriff, the Kimble County 7 Emergency Services providers, Bill Price with Kerrville 8 Dispatch, Bill Amerine with 9-1-1 -- 9 MR. MOTLEY: Marlene Jones. 10 MS. BAILEY: Marlene Jones over at Kimble 11 County, and their Sheriff. So, everybody who would have any 12 kind of connection with this, Bill Amerine just drafted this 13 up, wanted to make sure everybody had to sign it. Also, 14 the -- the -- I guess it would be Harry Budow, whoever's in 15 charge of the subdivision -- homeowners' association for 16 Y.O. Ranchlands, which is the group that originally asked 17 that this be done, so that they also -- their homeowners 18 would be aware of how this is going to work. 19 MR. MOTLEY: He's the president of that 20 association, so that would probably be appropriate for him 21 to do that. He's been talking to -- there's been some 22 meetings scheduled. I don't know; Harry and I haven't 23 actually talked to see if those meetings have happened, but 24 there have been meetings here and there, and partial 25 meetings between different components of that total group. 12-13-04 93 1 MS. BAILEY: And let me say that it's not 2 really an agreement, so it's not like any of those 3 signatories have the option to say, "No, I think you ought 4 to do it differently," 'cause in the last analysis, 9-1-1 is 5 in charge of how they do their own dispatch. It's more of 6 a, "Hey, guys, here's how we're going to do it, so make sure 7 you understand." 8 MR. MOTLEY: And there's a lot of -- there's 9 been a lot of information requested and input as far as, you 10 know, better ways to do things and -- and, you know, 11 everybody's kind of had a say in suggestions, and I think 12 everybody's -- there's been a real effort, I think, to 13 accommodate everybody's wishes on the deal. I will tell you 14 what I'll be happy to do is -- I have a tentative copy of 15 that agreement that they're working on now. I don't want to 16 represent any -- say it's anything other than a working 17 copy, but I'll be happy to circulate that to the Court. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the protocol is a 19 separate issue. I don't think it should be attached at all. 20 They may decide -- they might change it, and then you have 21 to change the contract. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. I agree with 23 that. I'm not trying to do that. I'm just trying to make 24 the point that, to me, this agreement is just worth the 25 paper it's written on unless the damn thing works. You 12-13-04 94 1 know, if you don't have correct protocol, if -- if the 9-1-1 2 call comes in to Rusty and he doesn't pick up the phone, 3 and -- you know, it just drives me nuts. I can see him out 4 there picking up a phone and calling Junction; "Hey, there's 5 a guy down with a heart attack out there in your 6 neighborhood." If that all doesn't work, this -- why would 7 you want to do this? 8 MR. MOTLEY: Well, I mean, you know, it's 9 important that all the protocols work. I mean, you know, 10 all protocols are -- are critical, and I think the thing 11 you're saying is the fact this is a little bit novel, little 12 unusual, there's a risk that -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm scared to death. 14 I think -- I think we're getting into dangerous, dangerous 15 territory here. I -- that's just my opinion, and I'm just 16 scared to death of this thing. 17 MR. MOTLEY: Well, the whole -- the whole 18 deal is an effort to provide more timely ambulance service. 19 I mean, that's the goal of the whole thing. And I think all 20 the signatories to the -- to the protocol are all of one 21 mind, saying there's going to be a way we will do this, and 22 we'll all agree to it, and we're all wanting a certain 23 outcome. And so I don't think there's going to be competing 24 interests once they sign the protocol, so hopefully that 25 would be -- you know, bode well for the situation out there. 12-13-04 95 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Buster's comment 2 is very accurate, because the current agreement also says 3 that Kendall County is going to service parts of Kerr 4 County, and there's no protocol; they don't do anything. 5 So, the part -- you know, that language doesn't exist until 6 we get a new protocol worked out. 7 MS. BAILEY: That was certainly in my mind 8 when we started working on protocols here. I want to make 9 sure that we don't, by doing something we think is going to 10 be beneficial to the public, cause more problems than we've 11 got already. 12 MR. MOTLEY: That's part of the reason I 13 think that the City of Kerrville has said that they feel -- 14 felt it would be wise, if you're going to service this 15 subdivision, to just go ahead and just take in the area 16 north of it up to the county line. And -- you know, and 17 that was -- part of it was a practical suggestion of how 18 these services could be better rendered, and -- and up to 19 the people out there, and I think it was well-taken. I 20 think everybody's agreed with that. So -- 21 JUDGE TINLEY: That was -- are you through on 22 that point? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Protocol. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah. 12-13-04 96 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'll make one comment on 2 it. I have signed the protocol, because, just as Elsa has 3 said, it's not a choice deal that we have. It's more of an 4 informative piece of paper that this is the way it's going 5 to happen. I agree with Buster and I agree with Jonathan; I 6 think this thing's a mistake. I think we're asking our 7 dispatchers to figure out exactly where these lines are. 8 And in the protocol, it does say even the fire protection 9 and the volunteer fire departments, you're going to have a 10 fire close to the Divide fire department and you're going to 11 be calling Kimble County, because that's the way the 12 protocol says and what you're required to do. And I think 13 when you start dividing up special things for different 14 parts of the county, we're all asking for a train wreck 15 where something bad is going to happen. And, unfortunately, 16 we -- because it is 9-1-1 and it is the protocol, we don't 17 have a choice in it with what's adopted. 18 MR. MOTLEY: Got any more questions about it? 19 Again, we probably didn't even have to do this. These 20 property descriptions, I just wanted to ratify it to make 21 sure everybody was on the same page and know that the change 22 was there. And we -- I don't like ratifying documents, 23 generally speaking; I'd rather do it right from the get-go, 24 but this was a very minor thing and not intended to fool 25 anybody. So -- 12-13-04 97 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 2 MR. MOTLEY: -- I thought we'd go ahead and 3 do it. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was under the 5 impression that the area you described was in what we 6 approved. I thought we -- 7 MR. MOTLEY: Well, Jonathan, let me show you. 8 Well, actually, what we've described -- and you have a 9 better copy of the deal in y'all's handout than I got. It 10 is technically within it, okay. This was the original in 11 pink. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. We approved the 13 brown. 14 MR. MOTLEY: That was the new one -- hold on. 15 That's what we did. But this is what we want to do now. So 16 it's a combination of the two. You see what I'm saying? It 17 has that notch out of the bottom. See, it's this, but for 18 that little notch. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 20 MR. MOTLEY: That's something -- 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I move we approve 22 the ratification. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 25 ratification of the previous agreements in the particulars 12-13-04 98 1 as indicated. Any questions or discussion? 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What -- where are we 3 in the signature process, David? We're starting over again? 4 MR. MOTLEY: No. The City has signed. The 5 agreement has -- the agreement that the County has done with 6 the City of Kerrville, the amendment to the agreement, City 7 of Kerrville, City of Ingram is done. What we did today, we 8 passed it first with basically the wrong property 9 description. We've now corrected that. City of Kerrville 10 has passed on it with the proper property description, as 11 well as has City of Ingram. That's a done deal. And I have 12 executed copies of that. I think they sent one to Pat. The 13 agreement with the City of -- I mean, Kerr County and Kimble 14 County EMS, a corrected set of documents was mailed on 15 Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, out to Ms. Jones. 16 We haven't gotten them back. We had already sent one out 17 there, and they had it on the treadmill to get signed out 18 there. We said, "Hold up. We're going to send you one with 19 the corrected property description, those two or three 20 little textual differences," and so that's on her desk. I'm 21 going to call her -- and I don't want to be pushy with her, 22 'cause, you know, they're being very nice with what they're 23 doing for us. 24 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We're not going to 25 throw the lever and put this into operation until we have 12-13-04 99 1 everything signed up? 2 MR. MOTLEY: Well, I thought that there had 3 been some changes affected as of the time, I guess, City of 4 Kerrville -- I think there's been some changes in operation. 5 I'm not -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought it was 7 January 1. 8 MS. BAILEY: No, it went into effect. It 9 went into effect when it was approved by all the parties, 10 except that there is an interlocal mutual aid agreement 11 between Kimble County and Kerrville, such that in this 12 interim period before Kimble County signs the agreement with 13 Kerr County, if there should be an emergency in that area, 14 the dispatch call would go to Kimble County, and they either 15 would show up anyway and service the area, or they would 16 call Kerrville through our interlocal mutual aid agreement 17 and say, "Kerrville, we're not on the tag yet. Y'all go out 18 there and do it." So, there is coverage, but it would be 19 more seamless when your agreement is completed with Kimble 20 County. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor the motion, 22 signify by raising your right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 24 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 12-13-04 100 1 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. The 2 next item is Item Number 12. Consider and discuss hiring a 3 chief deputy at 19-3. 4 MS. NEMEC: Well, my chief deputy position 5 became available December the 3rd, and I received several 6 applications, a few from within the courthouse, and we have 7 some really qualified employees doing other -- other duties. 8 I was kind of surprised to see that, but there was one that 9 just really stood out, and she has 35-plus years of 10 experience in the field that I'm looking for, with what the 11 job description calls for. So, for that reason, I'm asking 12 that she be employed at a 19-3 rather than an entry level. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the level of 14 the person that is leaving? 15 MS. NEMEC: 19-4. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And entry is 19-1? 17 MS. NEMEC: 19-1. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 35-plus years 19 experience, huh? 20 MS. NEMEC: 35-plus years. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the level of 22 this employee currently in their other department? 23 MS. NEMEC: She is at a 15-6 in the other 24 department. And, like I said, she won't start till January 25 the 3rd, 'cause they really needed her there, so I'm kind of 12-13-04 101 1 working with them on that. And I would like to hire her 2 effective January 1st. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you -- I guess, 4 what's the pay differential from where she is now to -- to a 5 19-1 and to a 19-3? 6 MS. NEMEC: A 19-1 to a 19-3? 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: From where -- 8 MS. NEMEC: Entry level to what I'm asking 9 for? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Well, from 11 what -- what the current -- 15-6? Is that what you said? 12 MS. NEMEC: She's at a 15-6 right now, and 13 I'm asking her to come into my office as a 19-3, which is 14 $3,269 more than the position that she's now in. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much? 16 MS. NEMEC: $3,269. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: That's a 15-6? 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 15-6 to a 19-3? 19 MS. NEMEC: Right. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's 15-6 to a 19-1? 21 MS. NEMEC: A 19 -- and, really, this is a 22 whole totally different job description that we're looking 23 at, so I don't really think that has anything to do with 24 what I'm asking. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well -- 12-13-04 102 1 MS. NEMEC: At all. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: What was your question, 3 Jonathan? 4 MS. NEMEC: What if I had hired someone that 5 wasn't in the courthouse that had 35 years experience? We 6 wouldn't be able to be comparing this right now. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: What is a 19-3? What is a 8 19-3? 9 MS. NEMEC: A 19-3 is $28,146. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. What is a 19-1? 11 MS. NEMEC: A 19-1 is $26,789. 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 789? 13 MS. NEMEC: $26,789. 14 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And what's a 15-6? 15 MS. NEMEC: $24,877. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right, you got 17 them all there. 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Current, Option 1, 19 Option 2. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would -- this person 21 would not be eligible or would be eligible for the one-step 22 increase after a year? That's a question. 23 MS. NEMEC: Would they be eligible for it? 24 This is -- I don't -- I don't really know. I'd have to 25 really look to see how the policy is written, but I believe 12-13-04 103 1 that there have been some employees that have been hired at 2 entry -- at higher than entry level, and I'd have to go back 3 and see what we did on those, if they were eligible for a 4 one, 'cause it's not really a merit. This is not a merit. 5 This is just coming in at -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a current employee, 7 though. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She's a current 9 employee. She's already gotten her one-year. 10 MS. NEMEC: Oh. Well, if that's the case, 11 then yeah. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wasn't that your 13 question? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. My question is, 15 would you get a one-year -- 16 MS. NEMEC: Okay. She got it this year. She 17 got her one-year longevity this year, so she would not be 18 eligible for two years as far as longevity. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Don't you also have one 20 after your first year of employment, you get a bump? 21 MS. NEMEC: Yes, for longevity. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's longevity? Okay. 23 MS. NEMEC: And one every three years after 24 that. So, for longevity, she would not be eligible again 25 until two years from now. 12-13-04 104 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, I think 2 that, you know, she has the money in the budget, so it's not 3 a budget increase. And with this person's experience, 35 4 years of experience, I personally don't see anything wrong 5 with it. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 9 approval of the agenda item. Any further question, comment, 10 or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by 11 raising your right hand. 12 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 14 (No response.) 15 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank 16 you, ma'am. 17 MS. NEMEC: Thank you. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: The next item on the agenda is 19 to consider and discuss the nomination of Mr. Johnnie L. 20 Hawkins to the board of Kerr County Emergency Services 21 District Number 1, effective January 1, 2005. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 12-13-04 105 1 approval of the agenda item. Any question, comment, or 2 discussion? 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. 4 Commissioner, is -- is someone's term up? 5 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Someone resign? 7 Somebody die? What? 8 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Elaine Castillo is 9 retiring from -- from the board. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh my gosh. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's a loss. 12 She -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She's the founder of 14 that thing. 15 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Styled her carreer 16 to start up the station, and she's done a terrific job. I 17 don't think you could have asked anybody to do better. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: She's incredible. 19 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: The good news is 20 Johnnie Hawkins is a civic-minded guy, smart businessman. 21 He'll be an asset to the board, too. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Johnnie will be great. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fantastic. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions, 25 comments, or discussion? All in favor of the motion, 12-13-04 106 1 signify by raising your right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Next 6 item is consider and discuss payment of the 2005 dues to the 7 Alamo Area Council of Governments. I put this on the agenda 8 when I received their request, and Commissioner Williams has 9 been riding herd on the -- 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a couple of -- 11 JUDGE TINLEY: -- AACOG functions, and he's 12 passed out some material here. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a couple 14 comments, Judge. I want members of the Court to have the 15 current budget, which you'll see is about a $25 million 16 budget -- 25,770,000. Local dues for AACOG for member 17 organizations, I believe, have not gone up for three 18 years -- at least 3 years. And, as you can see, the amount 19 of local dues paid, 210,000 with all the members, equates to 20 about a .0081 of the entire budget, so it's an infinitesimal 21 amount of the entire budget of $25 million. I'd move 22 approval of the dues. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 25 approval of the agenda item as presented. Any question or 12-13-04 107 1 discussion? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, do you have 3 an approximate figure as to how much money has flowed back 4 into Kerr County through AACOG? 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we get -- no, I 6 don't have the total, but it comes back in several different 7 forms. Comes back through Criminal Justice initiatives, 8 comes back for the senior programs, comes back through child 9 care, comes back through transportation. There's just any 10 number of ways that it flows back into Kerr County, and it 11 far exceeds $2,800, I can tell you that. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. That's what I 13 wanted to hear. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or 15 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 16 your right hand. 17 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 18 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 19 (No response.) 20 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Next 21 item on the agenda, consider and discuss having the first 22 Commissioners Court meeting of 2005 be held on January the 23 10th, 2005, at the Union Church building. Commissioner 24 Baldwin. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. This is 12-13-04 108 1 something that I want to do. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Been talking about it 3 now for two years. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Been talking about it 5 a long time. Previously we tried it, and the young County 6 Attorney, fine young man that he was, was wrong in how he 7 read the law. And we can do this, 'cause we have meetings 8 all over -- we can have meetings all over this community, as 9 long as they're posted, and I want to do this. I want to 10 bring a little bit of -- I think it would bring a little 11 focus to that facility that we own out there, and it would 12 just be a fun thing to do. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that a motion? 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second that 16 motion. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to 18 have the first Commissioners Court meeting of 2005 be held 19 on January 10th, 2005, at the Union Church building. Any 20 question, comment, or discussion? 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'm going to be in 22 an investment seminar on January the 10th out of state, so I 23 won't be here to break the law with you, Commissioner, but 24 I'm going to vote for you. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That may not be the 12-13-04 109 1 actual date. I just -- you know, it's the second -- second 2 Monday. 3 MS. MITCHELL: It is. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Whatever. I'm not 5 going to be here. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, did you -- 7 I'm certainly -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The question I had was, 10 wasn't there something about special versus regular 11 meetings, as to which one was -- and all that kind of stuff? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, there was. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, that's it. 14 That was the fine little attorney, good little guy, but 15 that's why he was wrong, is in that. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But isn't it the regular 17 has to be here, but the special can be wherever we want? Is 18 that our interpretation? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're exactly right, 20 and I appreciate you bringing that up. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: I think the statute calls it a 22 special term of court. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is correct. That 24 is exactly right. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the term we can 12-13-04 110 1 meet elsewhere. But which one -- I can't ever remember 2 which is our regular. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It would be the second 4 meeting. 5 MS. MITCHELL: Would be the second. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would be the second 7 meeting of the month that we're down there. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then we can 10 pretend it's our first meeting of the year. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. It's our first 12 special term meeting. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is the first 14 special term meeting. What's the date of that one? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 24th. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Will you be back, 17 Number 4? 18 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah, unless I can 19 think of something else, I'll be back. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They make leg irons 21 for all sizes now. So, that's my motion. 22 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion is amended to read 23 January 24th, 2005? 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further question or 12-13-04 111 1 discussion? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait. Can we be sworn in 3 there? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We've already got it 5 set up up here. Don't be trying to change things like that. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 8 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 9 your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I like that idea, Jon. 15 Let's change it. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You already got 17 somebody programmed to let you raise your right hand. How 18 are you going to get all that changed? 19 JUDGE TINLEY: The next three items on the 20 agenda relate to the detention facility. First item is to 21 consider and discuss extension of the temporary lease and 22 operating agreement at the Juvenile Detention Facility. To 23 refresh everyone's recollection, the -- the notice period 24 for extending the temporary lease and operating agreement 25 was reduced from 30 days to 15 days in order to continue it 12-13-04 112 1 on a month-to-month basis. So, we can continue it into 2 January with the pending purchase by giving notice on or 3 before, I believe, the 16th of December. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We have to do this, 5 and then determine the length of time we want to extend this 6 to coincide with the refinancing and all this kind of stuff? 7 JUDGE TINLEY: We can do it a month at a 8 time. And that's probably the conservative way to do it, is 9 just do it one month at a time, and then we'll see where we 10 are about this time next month. We'll actually have to do 11 it probably on the 10th, but we -- we're required to give 15 12 days notice. I, frankly, don't think it's that big of an 13 issue right now because of the pending arrangement that we 14 have to finalize the purchase, but we -- we need to keep 15 ourselves in compliance so that we don't have that 16 difficulty. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And would the 18 amendment that we approved the other day that had to do with 19 shortening the notification period, is that embodied as part 20 of this? 21 JUDGE TINLEY: That's already part of the 22 temporary lease and operating agreements. That -- that was 23 an amendment to those agreements, so it merely provides that 24 we just give 15 days prior notice of our desire to extend it 25 for an additional one-month period. 12-13-04 113 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- it seems like 2 this is kind of like the burn ban. We have to keep on 3 coming back. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's an analogy I 5 hadn't thought of. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: You know, you could -- you 7 could notice that, that we continue it indefinitely, unless 8 notified that we're -- 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, isn't there a way 10 that we can tie it -- the extension to a purchase -- the 11 purchase of it? 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Sure. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And make it so that -- 14 you know, maybe put a time on there so this thing doesn't 15 drag on forever, but I don't see any point in every 15 days 16 or every meeting, or even once a month coming here, raising 17 our hand saying we're going to extend this temporary lease. 18 Waste of time. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: To me, it needs to be 21 styled somehow to tie it to what we think the closing's 22 going to be, or tied to the actual -- you know, I have -- I 23 don't have a clear picture. Maybe I will after 17 and 18 as 24 we know what's ahead now. 'Cause I don't see any point in 25 doing this on a piecemeal basis. 12-13-04 114 1 JUDGE TINLEY: You want to just give them 2 notice to extend those agreements until the purchase is 3 completed? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. And maybe not to 5 go beyond March 1st or something like that, you know. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Long as we have a 7 cancellation clause. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: You got a 30-day cancellation 9 period in there now. That's part of the temporary. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why don't you just do 11 this this time, and then next time be prepared -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- to address dates 14 and terms. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm easy to get along 16 with. I'll go along with that. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move the extension 18 of the temporary lease and operating agreement at the 19 Juvenile Detention Facility for 30 days. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 22 extension of the temporary agreement through the end of 23 January '05. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other any question or 12-13-04 115 1 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 2 your right hand. 3 (Commissioners Williams, Letz, and Nicholson voted in favor of the motion.) 4 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 5 (Commissioner Baldwin voted against the 6 motion.) 7 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Next item, 8 consider and discuss and take appropriate action with 9 respect to acquisition of the Kerr County Juvenile Detention 10 Facility. I put this on as a matter of caution. I am 11 personally not aware of any specific action we need to take 12 at this particular meeting to move forward on that. The 13 financial adviser and the bond attorneys are working up some 14 of the documentation that we'll need to eventually adopt as 15 we go forward, but at this particular meeting, I'm not aware 16 of any particular action we need to take. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think there's some 18 comments that need to be made, though, Judge. Maybe not any 19 particular action, 'cause I don't think we're ready for 20 action, but I think this Court has said repeatedly that if 21 we're going to own it, we're going to operate it and it's 22 going to be treated as a department with respect to how we 23 have the oversight and the operation. I've asked 24 Ms. Mitchell to do some research in terms of existing law to 25 determine that there are no impediments to that, and if it 12-13-04 116 1 turns out there are impediments to that, then I -- I just 2 put the Court on notice right now, we need to address those 3 impediments through legislative action, if that's what's 4 required. So, you know, I just want to bring that up to the 5 front so everybody sees it and hears it. And we -- we're 6 doing our homework now. If we turn up an impediment, we're 7 going to have to address it, and address it quickly. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Weren't we told in 9 this courtroom that the law says that the Juvenile Board 10 shall be in charge? 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think we've 12 heard something very similar to that, yeah, and that's 13 really what caused me to say to Ms. Mitchell -- or she to 14 say to me, "I'm looking for the law so that we can determine 15 what needs to be done, if anything." Because you and I and 16 everybody agrees, we're going to be the operators of it. If 17 we're going to own it, we're going to operate it. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, I've 19 talked to Commissioner Williams a little bit about this, and 20 maybe legislative things can be done. But there's another 21 simpler thing that can -- I would think could be done, is 22 that the Juvenile Board, knowing that they don't get any 23 money unless they do this, can enter into an interlocal 24 agreement for us to operate it for them. I mean, I think if 25 they -- I wouldn't know why they're still in charge, then 12-13-04 117 1 they can then enter an interlocal agreement with the 2 Commissioners Court to be an operator of the facility, and 3 if they don't do it, they don't get any money. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think right 5 now we're shooting -- we're shooting in the dark, not 6 knowing -- 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- what the law says. 9 And by next time, I guess we'll have our answers. Won't we, 10 Ms. Mitchell? 11 MS. MITCHELL: Yes. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the type of 13 thing -- I would rather not go through the legislative 14 process if there's a way for us to do it through interlocal 15 agreements. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would much prefer to -- 18 rather than tie up the Legislature. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree, because it 20 takes time and -- whatever. I agree with that. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's very likely 22 you're not going to get any legislation anyway. Very 23 likely. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Local bill? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 12-13-04 118 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You never know. I 2 think -- 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Believe me. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me digress for 5 just a second. I have to tell you something that I think is 6 important in this whole thing. Only take a minute. It was 7 last Wednesday when we signed up for our insurance? You and 8 I went down there for the 1 o'clock session. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And that was just two 11 hours before we were going to meet to determine the fate of 12 the juvenile center. And who's sitting next to me signing 13 her insurance papers in good faith, looking to the future? 14 Ms. Harris. If that's not an act of faith -- a real act of 15 faith. And I commend her for all of that, and having the 16 faith to go forward and knowing that things are going to 17 work. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you hear about her 19 walking on water? Heard about that yet? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, she 21 demonstrated it for me. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wasn't supposed to 23 tell. 24 MS. HARRIS: That's for later. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other thing, I 12-13-04 119 1 guess -- you know, I don't know if this is -- this seems 2 like kind of a general item. Either -- if not now, then 3 surely by our next meeting, kind of a timetable as to what 4 -- what has to be done. I mean, it seems to me there are 5 lots of things that have to happen for all this to -- you 6 know, us to buy the bonds or certificates of obligation. 7 Just kind of what -- a timetable of the whole picture laid 8 out before me, be very helpful. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When will we actually 10 vote on a C.O.? 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I -- I had thought we might 12 put that on this particular agenda, and the bond attorney 13 and the financial adviser said not this particular meeting. 14 The impression I got -- and I think Ms. Mitchell may have 15 been listening to him at the time -- was very possibly the 16 next meeting, that -- that that's where the authorization 17 might come. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will we have -- will 19 our financial adviser and financial attorney, if necessary, 20 at that time be in a position to tell us how Kerr County 21 will be rated for our debt? 'Cause that's integral to this 22 whole matter. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: I'm frankly not sure. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- well, there's 25 also -- I mean, wasn't there -- and I know I had to leave 12-13-04 120 1 right -- maybe you had some conversation after I left the 2 last meeting, but wasn't there discussion that the banks 3 would be able -- or possibly be able do this kind of -- I 4 guess, not going through the regular market system; they 5 would just -- they would buy these -- 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Substitute issue. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, substitute them. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: It was left open as an option 9 that the existing bondholders might engage in a swap of the 10 new debt on a pro rata part, or some arrangement that might 11 be derived amongst all of them collectively, at a negotiated 12 rate. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: And that is an option. The 15 specifics were not nailed down, so that, you know, they 16 didn't obligate themselves in any specific amount at any 17 specific rate. But that -- that was an option that they 18 posed to us, and it's still an option as far as I know. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. But I think if we 20 just get, at our next meeting, a good idea as to what's 21 ahead of us. And my last comment is really more to the 22 County Attorney-elect, since a lot of this is going to come 23 together, I think, after the first of the year. I would 24 strongly recommend you visit with Tom Spurgeon, who has been 25 our bond advice, and Kathy has a phone number. He's our 12-13-04 121 1 attorney that has dealt with all this stuff, and is very 2 much aware of just the -- kind of where we're going. 3 Because, in addition to him having to sign off and approve a 4 lot of documents, I want to be looking to the County 5 Attorney's office to likewise be signing off on these same 6 documents. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Can I get just some 8 advice? You know, we talked during the last several 9 months -- 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not an attorney. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who do you want to 12 give advice to? 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I need some advice from 14 y'all on what I should do. As several of y'all know, with 15 our current situation in the adult jail, especially with the 16 females, as they're overcrowded. Several of y'all had 17 advised that I was going to come back after the first of the 18 year to seriously start looking at an expansion. And I know 19 there were some comments made about C.O.'s and doing 20 different things at different times. I'm just wondering, 21 would y'all want me to start looking into that sooner or 22 later? Or -- 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Later. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Later. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- analysis or what? 12-13-04 122 1 Just asking. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Later. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Later. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But I seem to recall 5 the financial adviser commenting that if we know certain 6 things are in the offing, and within a reasonable period of 7 time, we need to be thinking ahead, not to the specific 8 dollars, but as to how the new debt is structured in terms 9 of its payback. And so, you know, it's not too soon to 10 think about whether the Court will take a positive action in 11 the future about it. We just need to keep it in the back of 12 our -- front lobe, probably. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause what you're 14 talking about is going to go to the voters. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't know how y'all 16 want to do it. 'Cause if it's going to do that, I'd like to 17 get the Jail Commission to do an analysis first. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think all that -- if 19 you think it's time, you know, that that needs to start 20 being looked at seriously, 'cause that -- the new jail 21 addition, I think, has to be -- to go to the voters. 22 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't want to have -- 23 as long as I'm Sheriff, I don't want that much headache, but 24 we have bumped -- we have gone over our maximum amount. We 25 have -- the female situation has gotten critical at times, 12-13-04 123 1 and I just am wanting advice from the Court on which way to 2 go. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, my 4 advice is that if you need -- if it's at a point you need 5 the start planning for it, do what you need to do to start 6 planning. But this is the type of thing that I think needs 7 to go to the voters. That's one person's opinion. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Fine. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy? Tommy had a 10 question. 11 MR. TOMLINSON: Just a thought about 12 developing a budget for the -- it's fairly sure that the 13 County will be the operator of the facility. Go ahead and 14 begin development of a budget for us to work off of, rather 15 than piecemeal transfers from -- from the General Fund over 16 to the -- 17 JUDGE TINLEY: I think that process is 18 underway now, and has been for -- for a short period of 19 time, since probably last Wednesday? 20 MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That's what I thought. 22 MR. TOMLINSON: I just think we need -- I 23 just think we need that budget on the accounting system. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. 12-13-04 124 1 MR. TOMLINSON: Another issue that I thought 2 about, too, is we have -- there's -- Becky will tell you, 3 there's maintenance issues over at the facility. 4 MS. HARRIS: The new building. 5 MR. TOMLINSON: I think it's time that -- you 6 know, that the Court give direction to the maintenance 7 people as to whether -- whether they are involved in the 8 maintenance of that facility, because we do -- the County 9 does have agreements with contractors out there that -- that 10 provide electrical, air conditioning services under the 11 County umbrella. So, I had a question about that from 12 Mr. Holekamp, and -- 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, I talked to Mr. Holekamp 14 about that this morning. My suggestion to him was that he 15 and Ms. Harris try and formulate what -- what those things 16 entail, and to see if they could come up with something that 17 was acceptable to the both of them, but we would still be 18 able to allocate the costs so that we could keep an accurate 19 tab on -- on what it's costing for that facility. And he 20 indicated that -- that he would do that; that he'll get with 21 Ms. Harris, and they -- see what they could come up with 22 first, and then to the degree it needed to involve us, they 23 could come -- 24 MR. TOMLINSON: I just recall that we had bid 25 some of that work for the county, and we need to use the 12-13-04 125 1 same vendors for that facility, as well as -- 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Others. 3 MR. TOMLINSON: -- as other county 4 properties. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, on the -- going 7 back to the budget, so we all -- well, is there a way that 8 the -- the revenue that the facility generates, can that go 9 into -- or does it go into a designated fund, or can it go 10 into a designated fund so it doesn't get in the General 11 Fund? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: It always has been. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it's kept in a 14 separate fund? 15 MR. TOMLINSON: Oh, yeah. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we'll have another -- 17 a whole line in our budget summary sheet, then. 18 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, there -- we've had a -- 19 we've had a fund set up in our accounting system ever since 20 the beginning for -- for the facility, and it records the 21 revenues from -- from different sources in the accounting 22 system, and we have accounts for all different -- you know, 23 for payroll, all kinds of operating expenses set up in 24 the -- in the accounting system that -- that are -- give you 25 the history of -- of what's been expended over the last -- 12-13-04 126 1 ever since 1997. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would be very -- 3 because of this situation, probably more so than any other 4 county department, we could try to track the revenue next to 5 the expenses. I mean, I know we don't do it on the same 6 page, but if we can -- if it's accounted for in a 7 separate -- and you said it is, so it's easy to do. 8 MR. TOMLINSON: Already is. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we can look at a 10 revenue sheet, we can look at an expenditure sheet and know 11 how we're -- you know, if we're meeting projections. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tommy, are we going to 13 be able to classify the employees to be like county 14 employees? 15 MR. TOMLINSON: They virtually are already. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, let me get down 17 to the bottom line, then. 18 MR. TOMLINSON: The only difference that I 19 know of is that the -- that maybe the job descriptions 20 are -- are maybe some different than some of the job 21 descriptions in -- at the county. For instance, you know, 22 clerical people. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's what I'm 24 asking. 25 MR. TOMLINSON: Now, maintenance people, I -- 12-13-04 127 1 I don't know if -- if they're in line with the type of job 2 descriptions that we've -- that the County's developed 3 for -- for all the other departments or not. I don't know 4 that. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that was 6 actually my question. And along with that, then, is 7 salaries, amount of salaries and that kind of thing. So, at 8 some point, we got to look at that. That's my -- 9 MR. TOMLINSON: I think you're on the 10 right -- on a good track there. I think -- I think that job 11 descriptions should dictate what the salary levels are. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. 13 MR. TOMLINSON: And so, for that reason, I 14 think we need to have, you know, job descriptions available 15 -- developed that are -- that are in line with what -- what 16 we do as a county, overall. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you saying we 18 need to do that? Or it has already been done? 19 MR. TOMLINSON: There are job descriptions, 20 but I don't know if they're in line with -- with what we do 21 as a county as a whole. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That fall within the 23 existing matrix structure of what we have now. 24 MR. TOMLINSON: Right. Right. And I don't 25 -- I think that would have to be examined by -- by the 12-13-04 128 1 administrator and the personnel people. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. Of course, 3 you're not going to find that it's a perfect fit. 4 MR. TOMLINSON: No. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's just like the 6 adult thing. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, the -- you know, the 8 analysis would be with the -- a detention officer with a 9 jailer. They're similar. But not -- 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And a secretary -- 11 well, you can't use that term any more, can you? 12 MS. HARRIS: Administrative assistant. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Administrative 14 assistants or -- 15 MR. TOMLINSON: And they have -- and they 16 have people out there that -- that don't follow the job 17 description that anybody in the county would fall into. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Like the counselor. 19 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. 20 MS. HARRIS: I do have job descriptions for 21 every position at the facility. I developed a large 22 majority of the job descriptions. And what I can do is I 23 can take the job descriptions that I developed when I got 24 there, and take them to the Personnel department and let 25 them look at them, and see what revisions need to be made. 12-13-04 129 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, in the last year 3 I've seen a couple employees -- the paperwork on a couple 4 employees out there before you arrived, that I -- I'd -- I 5 really don't know what their duties were, but they were 6 making a lot more money than most people in this courthouse. 7 And that -- to me, that has to be addressed. 8 MS. HARRIS: Right. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're not going to 10 have a secretary out there making twice the amount as a 11 secretary in this courthouse. That just doesn't work. 12 Won't work. 13 MS. HARRIS: And I did place all of the 14 juvenile detention officers -- they were not in a pay group 15 step increase. I put all of the -- the detention officers 16 in a pay group step increase, and I did that when I first 17 got here. I did not do that with the rest of the employees, 18 'cause about that time things kind of went up into the air, 19 and I wasn't quite sure what was going to be happening. I 20 tentatively have everyone placed in a group step increase 21 pay scale, but not officially. Just only -- the official 22 ones are only the detention officers. And that's because 23 that's state law; they have to be in a pay group step 24 increase system. The others I know where to -- you know, I 25 know where they are right now. I know what pay group that 12-13-04 130 1 they're in right now. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will you have that 3 done in conjunction with the new -- working out a budget 4 that Mr. -- 5 MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think -- 7 MS. HARRIS: I did that in that budget that I 8 created in that proposal that I gave y'all. That was -- I 9 had that in mind, and I did it that way. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Once you get with the 11 personnel Office and see our current step and grade matrix, 12 there may be some salary adjustments needed, and it's time 13 to do that immediately. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So that we get the 16 adjustments -- we get them in line going in. And, you know, 17 I -- hopefully there's not a -- you know, any kind of a 18 significant downward for anybody, but if there is, they need 19 to have the opportunity to leave if they want, or -- or make 20 a decision to stay. We just need to get that -- this needs 21 to be done pretty quickly so we don't get down the road, you 22 know, treat -- doing something to the employees that isn't 23 fair out there. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question for 25 Ms. Harris, though. Has the word gone out statewide that 12-13-04 131 1 our facility is staying open for business? 2 MS. HARRIS: Yes, it has. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: I believe it went out late -- 4 late Wednesday and early Thursday, didn't it? 5 MS. HARRIS: Early Thursday. Yes, it did. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Probably a bus load 7 of criminals on their way right now. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Driving. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Driving themselves 10 down here, yeah. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: If we don't have anything 12 further for that item, we'll go on to Item 18. Pending a 13 fully developed budget, consider, discuss, and approval of 14 operational funding for detention facility. Where do we 15 stand on it, Mr. Auditor? 16 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't have anything to do 17 with it. 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Huh? You're out of the 19 picture now? 20 MR. TOMLINSON: I'm out of the picture. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who does? 23 MR. TOMLINSON: I mean, I'll -- actually, 24 I've never been totally responsible for the budget, anyway. 25 The director has always been the -- the person there that's 12-13-04 132 1 been the budget -- the person that develops the budget. 2 I've assisted, but -- 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we don't have a budget 4 at this point, and I -- I guess the need -- we may not have 5 a need to address it. Have we got enough to operate through 6 the end of the month, two weeks hence? 7 MR. TOMLINSON: I know how much cash we have, 8 but I thought you meant the budget to go forward. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: No, no, no, no, no. 10 MR. TOMLINSON: Okay, I misunderstood what 11 you said. We -- we do -- I think we need probably $20,000 12 to make payroll for -- for Wednesday. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For Wednesday? 14 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that -- do you have a 16 budget amendment for that? Or is it -- 17 MR. TOMLINSON: No, I didn't write -- no. 18 No, not officially. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: We don't have a budget, so we 20 can't do a budget amendment. 21 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What do we need to 22 do to get the money to them? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would that be in 24 addition to the 21,470 that's in the -- 25 MR. TOMLINSON: No, that includes the 21. 12-13-04 133 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we do have it in 2 front of us, then. 3 MR. TOMLINSON: What? We have -- we have 4 funds there, but there's not enough to cover the payroll 5 coming forward. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that's in addition 7 to the 21,470 that's in the book, right? 8 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. Well, that -- the 9 20,000 I'm asking for pays for -- will accommodate these 10 bills plus the salaries -- plus the payroll on the 15th. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Take care of the mid-month 12 payroll? 13 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it's added in the 17 bills. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it has to be in 19 addition to that. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Payroll. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Payroll. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we need a motion? 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, could we take 24 it up -- you need a motion now? Or take it up with the 25 bills? 12-13-04 134 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Well I -- since we don't have 2 a budget, we don't do it as a budget amendment, so I think 3 we just need to authorize the operational funding, an 4 additional amount of $20,000. The Auditor says he's got 5 enough money in-hand in the facility account to take care of 6 the bills that are listed here, plus a portion of the 7 payroll. He needs some more to make up the balance of the 8 payroll. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I will move that we 10 cover the payroll with the transfer of funds, an additional 11 $20,000, but what I would like to see in addition -- and 12 having said that, I'd like to see some kind of a statement 13 that indicates what the accounts receivable -- the status of 14 accounts receivable. What's out there, and what's the 15 currency of it, and how much is the whole magilla. I think 16 that -- is that possible? 17 MR. TOMLINSON: I know what receivables were 18 outstanding at the end of -- of 9/30, the end of the fiscal 19 year. I know -- I know where we are in the collections for 20 October. We -- I've only received three payments that I 21 know of for November. I have not -- I don't have a -- a 22 billing. I have not been furnished a billing for -- for the 23 month of November. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The billings don't go 25 out of your office; they go out of the Juvenile Detention 12-13-04 135 1 Center? 2 MS. HARRIS: Right. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: She sends them out. 4 MS. HARRIS: Right. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need to get all this 6 adjusted. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: I don't have anything to do 8 with it. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A lot of things we 10 need to pull together here. 11 MS. HARRIS: Right. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, you know -- I'll 14 second the motion. And I guess I'm thinking we need to 15 declare an emergency to do that transfer, but it's not a 16 budgeted item. I mean, it's increasing the budget, though. 17 So -- 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We've been doing that 19 all along. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. So your motion 21 includes declaring an emergency to do that? 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If that's what's 23 required. Is that what's required? 24 MR. TOMLINSON: I think so. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I'll second the 12-13-04 136 1 motion. Then I have a comment. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Motion made and 3 seconded to declare an emergency and authorize additional 4 funding in the amount of $20,000 to the Juvenile Detention 5 Facility to cover payroll. Questions or comments? 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Comment, I guess, to 7 follow up on Commissioner William's comment. I think at our 8 next meeting, I'd really like to see a spreadsheet at least 9 of, you know, kind of the receivable information you're 10 talking about, where we were up to the 1st of December -- or 11 November 30th, I'm sure; get the monthly billings, you know, 12 and also a tally of how much we have put -- you know, by 13 declaring an emergency, transferred into that. Just kind of 14 a balance as to where we are now. And in terms of 15 Ms. Harris to start working with the various offices in the 16 courthouse, whether it would be the Auditor's office or the 17 Personnel office or Maintenance, just to start getting that 18 facility assimilated into the county system as quickly as 19 possible. 20 MS. HARRIS: So, you would like Tommy and I 21 to collaborate on -- on a budget. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On a budget and on 23 receivables. 24 MS. HARRIS: Okay. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And where we are. 12-13-04 137 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the amount of 2 expense we've already covered. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, expenses we've -- 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Tommy has that. 5 MS. HARRIS: Okay. 6 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions? 7 Comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 8 your right hand. 9 (Commissioners Williams, Letz, and Nicholson voted in favor of the motion.) 10 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 11 (Commissioner Baldwin voted against the 12 motion.) 13 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Do we -- 14 any member of the Court have anything to go into executive 15 or closed session concerning? 16 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're not being sued 17 this week for anything? 18 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's early. 20 JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's just Monday. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's only Monday. 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that was last week. 24 Let's go to the approval agenda. Payment of the bills. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move we pay the 12-13-04 138 1 bills. And I've got some questions. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second, and I've got 3 two. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 5 payment of the bills. Questions? 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is just 7 probably a little bit of education process for me. Maybe 8 others, too. I'm looking at 570, Juvenile Probation, and 9 that's our Juvenile Probation Department here. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page are you on? 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Page -- excuse me -- 12 9, but mostly on Page 10. So, this -- these are expenses 13 against a budget for our county Juvenile Probation 14 Department. I haven't looked at it very carefully in the 15 past, and I see medical expenses here, and then I see 16 medical expenses over -- over in Juvenile Detention, a 17 different, you know, county department. What kind of 18 medical expenses do we have in Juvenile Probation? 19 What's -- 20 MR. TOMLINSON: I think they're psychological 21 evaluations. 22 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: This is for purposes 23 of placement and things like that? 24 MR. TOMLINSON: I suppose so. 25 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And they've got -- 12-13-04 139 1 MR. TOMLINSON: Probably drug testing also. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They've got 3 attorneys expenses -- oh, yeah. Back to Page 10, last three 4 items. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Kerr County Juvenile 7 Facility. This is what Kerr County is paying to house our 8 preadjudicated children? 9 MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 19,000-something. 11 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 12 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: And then Hays 13 County, a couple items. We apparently have a couple 14 children placed at Hays County, and this is what we're 15 paying them? 16 MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those are 18 postadjudicated. 19 MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm, yes. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm learning the 21 terminology. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To what? 23 JUDGE TINLEY: Getting ramped up, huh? 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Postadjudicated, as 25 opposed to preadjudicated we talked about. 12-13-04 140 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're going to learn 2 a lot of things here. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Of course, this is 4 paying bills; this is not a P and L statement, but somewhere 5 else someday, I'll see revenues. Here I'm -- on Page 19 6 here, I'm seeing costs of the Juvenile Detention Facility. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. They're -- you know, 8 if the Court wishes, I can give you a -- a copy of revenues, 9 you know, anytime. 10 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think that's what 11 Jonathan and the others were asking about, that someday soon 12 we're going to see a P and L statement of some kind, or 13 forecast of revenues and costs. That's all I got -- all I 14 have. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have a question -- 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: -- Commissioner Letz? 18 Commissioner Baldwin? 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. On Page 1, 20 Commissioners Court. The bottom one, Davidson & Moore 21 Court, court reporting services. What might that be? 22 JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Motley? There's a billing 23 that's charged to Commissioners Court. 24 MR. MOTLEY: That was one I believe I forward 25 on. That is costs of taking -- I want to say it was -- 12-13-04 141 1 JUDGE TINLEY: Deposition? 2 MR. MOTLEY: -- two depositions. I don't 3 know if it was two or three. Two or three depositions in 4 the E.B.A. litigation. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. Das gut, as they 6 would say in Comfort. Now, Page 20, we just authorized a 7 certain amount of money for salaries, I think. What is this 8 one here? Juvenile Detention Facility, 21,000. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Previous page. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Previous page. All 11 that's -- 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, that's the tail 13 end of all of that. I see what you're saying. Okay. I see 14 that the -- the dentist is being paid. Hallelujah. Okay, 15 that's the end of my questions. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have none. 17 JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or 18 comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 19 your right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We 24 have Budget Amendment Request Number 1. 25 MR. TOMLINSON: Number -- this budget 12-13-04 142 1 amendment is for the 216th District Court. We're asking for 2 a transfer of $3,775.01 from Court-Appointed Attorneys to 3 Court Transcripts. I have a bill for a transcript of 4 $4,216.95. The balance in that account is only $441 at the 5 present time. 6 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve. 7 MR. TOMLINSON: I do have a late bill 8 attached to -- 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Late bill attached to that? 10 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Need a hand check? 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tommy, is there -- we 14 only budgeted, I think, $1,500 for that. Is this a line 15 item that we don't use very often, evidently? 16 MR. TOMLINSON: Well, it's a line item much 17 like Court-Appointed Attorneys line item. It's hard -- it's 18 hard to put a number on -- on what that's going to be, 19 because you never know when there's going to be an appeal, 20 and that's generally what these court transcripts are for. 21 And -- 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, my question 23 was -- I mean, while we're doing it, should we put more 24 money in there to cover for the year? Or do we just not 25 know? 12-13-04 143 1 MR. TOMLINSON: I just don't know. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just don't know? 3 MR. TOMLINSON: No. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Hand check for $4,216.95? 6 MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct. 7 JUDGE TINLEY: To whom? 8 MR. TOMLINSON: Cindy Snider. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: Yes? 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That person is an 11 employee of the County. 12 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, that's right. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So you pay that person 14 a salary, and then you turn around and pay this person again 15 for doing the work. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why is that? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. We've 18 always done it. But -- please let me vote. 19 JUDGE TINLEY: Before you get to Level 3. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I'm reaching 21 Level 3 here. 22 MS. PIEPER: Judge, was there a second? I 23 didn't hear it. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was the comment? 25 MS. PIEPER: Was there a second on that? I 12-13-04 144 1 didn't hear it. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we approve 3 Budget Amendment Number 1. 4 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Does that include a hand 6 check? 7 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. 8 JUDGE TINLEY: For $4,216.95. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah. 10 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further question or 11 comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 12 your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we 17 have any late bills, Mr. Auditor? 18 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, I have one. It's 19 payable to Susan Edwards, the nurse out at the detention 20 facility, for $350. 21 COMMISSIONER LETZ: For? 22 MR. TOMLINSON: For her services. 23 MS. HARRIS: That's the contract. 24 MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, for November. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 12-13-04 145 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 2 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 3 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 4 approval of late bill, issuance of hand check to Susan 5 Edwards for $350 for services at detention facility -- 6 Juvenile Detention Facility. Any question or comments? All 7 in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Is that 12 all you had, Mr. Auditor? 13 MR. TOMLINSON: That's all I got. 14 JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. I have 15 before me the transcript of the Kerr County Commissioners 16 Court special session of Wednesday, December 8; transcript 17 of the Kerr County Commissioners Court special session 18 Thursday, December 9, which was reconvened from Wednesday, 19 December 8; the regular session of the Kerr County 20 Commissioners Court for Monday, November 8, 2004; special 21 session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court Friday, 22 November 12; insurance workshop transcript, Kerr County 23 Commissioners Court, Monday, November 15, 2004; and 24 transcript of special session, Kerr County Commissioners 25 Court, Monday, November 22, 2004. Do I hear a motion that 12-13-04 146 1 those transcripts be approved as presented? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 3 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 4 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 5 approval of transcripts as presented. Any question or 6 discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising 7 your right hand. 8 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 9 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 10 (No response.) 11 JUDGE TINLEY: I've also been presented with 12 monthly reports from the following: Kerr County Sheriff's 13 Office, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2, Justice of the 14 Peace, Precinct 3, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 4, County 15 Clerk, District Clerk, and Constable, Precinct 3. Do I hear 16 a motion that those reports be approved as presented? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have a report 18 here from Constable, Precinct 2. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He distributed his 20 also. 21 JUDGE TINLEY: Do you want to include it in 22 these reports? 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think it would 24 be wise, 'cause I -- 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 12-13-04 147 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- I haven't seen a 2 report from Precinct 1 in quite some time. I know it's not 3 required, but I highly recommend it. And I don't know about 4 4; I don't keep an eye on him. But -- 5 JUDGE TINLEY: I'll include within the 6 reports the report from Constable, Precinct 2 for the month 7 of November -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move acceptance. 9 JUDGE TINLEY: -- of this year. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move acceptance. 11 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second. 12 JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for 13 approval of the designated reports as presented. Any 14 question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify 15 by raising your right hand. 16 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 17 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. 18 (No response.) 19 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we 20 have any reports from any of the Commissioners in connection 21 with their liaison assignments? 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. Let me give 23 you a little update on the last Airport Board meeting. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which we're reading a 12-13-04 148 1 little bit about in the paper, and having to do with the 2 issue of where to locate the new terminal building. One of 3 the board members, Mr. MacDonald, questioned the -- the 4 existing site for -- indicating that it is really a very 5 constricted site that had been previously approved to -- to 6 locate the terminal building, and suggesting at the same 7 time that there is at least one other alternate site out 8 there that would be a lot less restricted -- constricted, 9 and provide for a great deal more parking than -- than the 10 current site allows. So, the board approved taking a look 11 at the site one more time, and we meet out there a week from 12 tomorrow afternoon to do just that, and look at the two 13 sites, the one that's selected as opposed to the one that 14 could be selected if the board chooses to do that. 15 Secondly, Commissioner Letz put together the agenda for a 16 day-long retreat for the Airport Board to study itself and 17 its issues and its future, and that was approved, and the 18 date set for that, I believe, was January 18th. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Birthday cake. Remember 20 that. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right, 22 birthday cake. So, other than that, we're humming. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I think I'll add 24 to that a little bit. I think the -- the board is going 25 through a few growing pains, trying to figure out really as 12-13-04 149 1 to -- well, I guess how to operate out there. And I don't 2 think it's a problem; I think it's a very good thing, and I 3 think it's really more of -- the growing pains are probably 4 more on the City staff side, as they are not used to having 5 a board that's going to operate the airport, as opposed to a 6 staff that's been operating the airport. And that's -- you 7 know, there's been a lot of -- you know, we spend a lot of 8 time on procedural things, it seems, these days. I did miss 9 the last meeting, but there was a lot of procedure talk 10 going on, which is -- which is very good and very healthy. 11 I think they are really growing pains, no problems. I think 12 the direction -- we're clear as to where the board and the 13 City and the County want the airport to go, so I just -- 14 it's an interesting evolution. But I think the board is -- 15 is truly working as anticipated. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. 17 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That retreat will 18 probably help a lot to move those things along. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. We talked about it 20 early on, and it took a little bit of time to get it 21 scheduled, and actually it turned out to be a good thing, 22 because we kind of know where the problems are developing, 23 and some of the communication and some of the things. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where's the retreat? 25 Las Vegas? Or -- 12-13-04 150 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wish. We're trying to 2 get one of these people to fly us somewhere, but they wanted 3 to meet at the airport, of all places. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good lord. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it's probably 6 going to be in that new G-3 Gulf Stream yet that's parked 7 out there; have it inside that. 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fly around in circles. 9 It's actually going to be at the Cailloux Center at 10 Schreiner University. And -- 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. No, the theater, 12 isn't it? Upstairs? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Theater? What theater? 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Cailloux Performing 15 Arts Center. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, I thought it was over 17 at Schreiner. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's double-check. 19 I thought I heard him say that there's a room upstairs, up 20 the staircase. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. We're going to 22 have to turn this over to Rusty to get it done; I can see 23 that. 24 JUDGE TINLEY: Houston, we have a problem. 25 (Discussion off the record.) 12-13-04 151 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, actually, I do have 2 a -- since the Sheriff walked back in, I asked Kathy a -- 3 oh, a couple weeks ago to research what kind of interlocal 4 agreements we have with the surrounding counties regarding 5 fire and Sheriff and all that stuff, and she said she 6 couldn't really find any. I think she talked to someone at 7 your office. I think that's something that, you know, don't 8 we -- isn't -- wouldn't it be a good idea for us to enter 9 into an emergency services interlocal agreement with all our 10 surrounding counties? 11 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well there's some -- 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mutual aid. 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Some you can and some 14 you cannot, by law, as far as law enforcement and going into 15 other counties and that and how that works. There's some 16 A.G.'s opinions on how we do that. We have one -- of 17 course, you have the 216th Narcotics Task Force. We'll see 18 what its future holds hopefully in the next few months. But 19 then we do have the interlocal agreement with the Special 20 Operations Unit, which is kind of the quasi-SWAT team, or 21 any, you know, even suicidal people. It's just -- and that 22 is between us, the City of Kerrville, and Fredericksburg. 23 That agreement, we do -- we do things jointly. I have two 24 people assigned to it. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, I know -- in 12-13-04 152 1 fact, you even told me not long ago there was a situation in 2 far east Kerr County when your -- where your deputies were 3 backed up by Kendall County deputies. I mean -- and, 4 clearly, there's not a problem that I'm trying to solve. 5 It's just, I think it would be -- to me, it would be healthy 6 to have interlocal agreements just kind of memorializing 7 that these -- you know, kind of that they exist. And I 8 think it's also good; it shows communication, cooperation 9 amongst the counties, and I think it shows the taxpayers 10 that -- because we have more and more, as we grow, residents 11 that are on one side or the other side of the county line, 12 and I think it's just good for them to understand that there 13 is coordination between your office and other sheriff's 14 departments and the volunteer fire departments, which those 15 were already really covered under those agreements. But -- 16 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, under ours, it's a 17 little bit different, 'cause peace officers are peace 18 officers across the state, period. They're actually 19 commissioned. And we do have our jurisdictional boundaries, 20 unless requested to assist, okay? And that's where that 21 comes in. All it takes is a radio call. You know, "Officer 22 needs assistance," or we -- "Will you help us?" And -- and 23 there's no actual written agreements. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, okay. 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay? So, law 12-13-04 153 1 enforcement-wise, we're covered. Now, fire departments, 2 that could be a whole different deal. I heard what you were 3 talking about earlier with fire departments. When I checked 4 out here, they were calling for EMS for -- on Hermann Sons 5 Road, and Kerrville was responding to that, and they were 6 still trying to get ahold of Comfort. But those -- you 7 know, there are agreements. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He had to do it, 9 didn't he? 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, okay. Law 11 enforcement's handled under law. 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, under law. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A lot of ours is. 15 JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any other reports? 16 COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just a quick 17 statement. I keep reading about the difficulties down in 18 Bexar County they're having with Animal Control, and looking 19 over my shoulder a little bit, and the good news is, we're 20 really in good shape compared to San Antonio. One of the 21 things they've got a problem with is that they're gassing 22 kittens and puppies under the age of six or eight weeks, 23 whatever it is, and that's out of compliance with state law. 24 I just wanted to let y'all know we're not doing that. We're 25 in compliance with state law. That's all. 12-13-04 154 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's good news. 2 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other reports? Any of you 3 gentlemen? Okay. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm hungry. 5 JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any other reports 6 from elected officials? I'm not going to call on the 7 Sheriff, but if there are any other elected officials, why, 8 all right. Anything else to come before the Court this 9 morning? 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nay. 11 JUDGE TINLEY: We stand adjourned. 12 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:17 p.m.) 13 - - - - - - - - - - 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12-13-04 155 1 STATE OF TEXAS | 2 COUNTY OF KERR | 3 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 4 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 5 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 6 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 7 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 20th day of December, 8 2004. 9 10 11 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 12 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 13 Certified Shorthand Reporter 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12-13-04