Commissioners Court –January 15, 2013 NOTICE OF A MEETING OF THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, TEXAS

This Notice is posted pursuant to the Texas Open Meetings Act. (VERNONS TEXAS CODES ANN. GOV. CODE CH.551). The Hays County Commissioners Court will hold a meeting at 9:00 A.M. on the 15th day of January, 2013, in the Hays County Courthouse, Room 301, San Marcos, Texas. An Open Meeting will be held concerning the following subjects:

CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag & Pledge of Allegiance to the Texas Flag ROLL CALL

PRESENTATIONS & PROCLAMATIONS Adopt a proclamation declaring January 21, 2013 as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. 1 4-5 INGALSBE

PUBLIC COMMENTS At this time 3-MINUTE comments will be taken from the audience on Non-Agenda related topics. To address the Court, please submit a Public Participation/ Witness Form to the County Clerk. Please Complete the Public Participation/ Witness Form in its Entirety. NO ACTION MAY BE TAKEN BY THE COURT DURING PUBLIC COMMENTS.

CONSENT ITEMS The following may be acted upon in one motion. A Commissioner, the County Judge, or a Citizen may request items be pulled for separate discussion and/or action. 2 6 Approve payments of county invoices. HERZOG 3 7-12 Approve Commissioners Court Minutes of January 8, 2013. COBB/GONZALEZ Authorize the transfer of funds from the County Wide budget to the Sheriff, Jail budget for 4 13-14 Laptop Warranties from a Securus contribution received in FY2012 and amend the budget accordingly. COBB/CUTLER Authorize County Judge to execute the 2nd Amended Master Services Agreement between 5 15-20 Hays County and Securus. COBB/CUTLER Authorize the County Judge to execute a renewal agreement of legal research materials for the 6 21-22 Law Library located at Hays County Jail. COBB/CUTLER Authorize the Sheriff's Office to transfer funds within the operating Jail budget for raised access 7 23-24 flooring in the 911 Center and amend the budget accordingly. COBB/CUTLER Accept a grant award from the Mary Bonner Community Needs Grant Program on behalf of the 8 25-26 Victim Assistance Division of the Hays County Sheriff's Office for $2,571.00 and adjust the budget accordingly. COBB/CUTLER Authorize the Personal Health Department to add a telephone allowance for the Epidemiology 9 27-28 Specialist, slot number 0271-01, effective 2-1-13 and amend the budget accordingly. COBB/GARZA 10 29 Authorize Institutional OSSF Permit 10703 Ranch Rd 12, Wimberley, TX. CONLEY/MCGINNIS Amend the County's purchasing policy to increase the minimum amount required to obtain a 11 30 purchase order from $300 to $500. Additionally, increase the minimum amount from $300 to $500 for the purchase of equipment requiring Court approval. COBB/HERZOG 12 31 Approve to reappoint James Holt to the Plum Creek Conservation District. JONES 13 32-33 Approve to appoint Paul Terry to replace Mark Schultz as a representative on ESD #5. JONES Approve to reappoint Eddie Gumbert, Ron Spangenberg and Ken Downing to the ESD #4 14 34 board. CONLEY 15 35 Approve the appointment of Ron Hall, Deputy Constable, Precinct 5. JONES/MANCILLAS Amend the 2011 State Homeland Security Program budget and authorize the purchase of a 16 36-37 Mobile Camera. INGALSBE/SMITH

ACTION ITEMS

SUBDIVISIONS 12-4-35 Replat of Lot 38A, Glenn H. Kothmann Properties Subdivision (2 lots). Discussion and 17 38-39 possible action to approve final plat; hold a public hearing. WHISENANT/MCGINNIS

MISCELLANEOUS Discussion and possible action to adopt a resolution in support of the HERO (Highway 18 40-41 Emergency Response Operators) Program extension into Hays County along IH - 35 up to Yarrington Road. INGALSBE/JONES Discussion and possible action to authorize the County Judge and the Criminal District Attorney to execute a contract between Hays County Dispute Resolution Center (HCDRC) and the Hays 19 42-53 County District Attorney's Office regarding Child Protective Services; and to ratify the execution of the Agreement for Alternative Dispute Resolution Services. COBB/TIBBE Discussion and possible action to authorize the County Judge to execute the application for the 20 54-60 Hog Out County Grants Program. JONES Discussion and possible action to adopt a resolution in support of the Hog Out County Grants 21 61-62 Program. JONES Discussion and possible action to change the effective date for the TVFC/Immunization 22 63 Specialist Administrative Assistant III position from January 8, 2013 to January 1, 2013. COBB/INGALSBE/GARZA Discussion and possible action to authorize County Judge to execute the Resolution of the Hays County Commissioners Court Concerning the Creation of a Conservation and 23 64-66 Reclamation District related to the West Travis County Public Utility Agency (WTCPUA). WHISENANT

WORKSHOP 11:00 AM Workshop on Recommended Hays County Transportation Plan. 24 67-99 CONLEY/BORCHERDING

EXECUTIVE SESSIONS The Commissioners Court will announce it will go into Executive Session, if necessary, pursuant to Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, to receive advice from Legal Counsel to discuss matters of land acquisition, litigation, and personnel matters as specifically listed on this agenda. The Commissioners Court may also announce it will go into Executive Session, if necessary, to receive advice from Legal Counsel regarding any other item on this agenda. Executive Session pursuant to Sections 551.071 and 551.072 of the Texas Government Code: consultation with counsel and deliberation regarding the purchase, exchange, or value of real 25 100 property related to the marketing and potential sale or lease of County owned properties. Possible action may follow in open court. COBB Executive Session pursuant to Section 551.071 of the Texas Government Code: consultation with counsel regarding application of the existing Collective Bargaining Agreement between 26 101 Hays County and HCLEA; and regarding the upcoming bargaining session in FY2013. Possible action to follow. CONLEY Executive Session pursuant to Sections 551.071 and 551.074 of the Texas Government Code: consultation with counsel and deliberation regarding the appointment, duties, and/or 27 102 reassignment of each individual employee of the Personal Health Department and the Director of the Development and Community Services Department. CONLEY

STANDING AGENDA ITEMS The Commissioners Court utilizes Standing Agenda Items to address issues that are frequently or periodically discussed in court. This section allows the Court to open the item when a need for discussion arises. 28 Discussion and possible action related to the burn ban and/or disaster declaration. COBB/CHAMBERS Discussion of issues related to proposed capital construction projects in Hays County, including but not 29 limited to the Government Center; the Precinct 2 facility project; and the Law Enforcement Center Immediate Needs Project. Possible action may follow. INGALSBE Discussion of issues related to the road bond projects, including updates from Mike Weaver, Prime 30 Strategies and Allen Crozier, HDR. Possible action may follow. COBB Discussion of issues related to the Hays County Water and Sewer Authority and the West Travis County 31 Public Utility Agency. WHISENANT

ADJOURNMENT

Posted by 5:00 o'clock P.M. on the 11th day of January, 2013

COMMISSIONERS COURT, HAYS COUNTY, TEXAS

______CLERK OF THE COURT

Hays County encourages compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in the conduct of all public meetings. To that end, persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need auxiliary aids such as an interpreter for a person who is hearing impaired are requested to contact the Hays County Judge’s Office at (512) 393-2205 as soon as the meeting is posted (72 hours before the meeting) or as soon as practical so that appropriate arrangements can be made. While it would be helpful to receive as much advance notice as possible, Hays County will make every reasonable effort to accommodate any valid request regardless of when it is received. Braille is not available. AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Adopt a proclamation declaring January 21, 2013 as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS January 15, 2013 N/A

LINE ITEM NUMBER N/A

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

INGALSBE INGALSBE N/A

SUMMARY

Please27B55B83B111B139B167B195B223B251B refer to attached proclamation.

4

PROCLAMATION DECLARING JANUARY 21, 2013 AS DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. DAY

STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF HAYS §

WHEREAS, the people of the United States will observe the federal holiday honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on January 21, 2013 to celebrate the birthday of this significant civil rights leader who inspired profound and lasting change in our nation; and

WHEREAS, local, state and national organizations will remember this great man by living the theme of the 2013 holiday: “Living King’s Legacy: Making a Career of Humanity” and

WHEREAS, 2013 marks the 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation issued by President Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863 during the third year of the Civil War that led to the end of slavery in the United States and the great journey to secure the civil rights of all people in America; and

WHEREAS, the citizens of, Hays County, San Marcos and Texas State University each year commemorate the contributions of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to our nation, our state and to the people of Hays County with special observances, a program at the Hays County Courthouse and this year with a walk to the unique crossroads of Lyndon B. Johnson Drive and Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in San Marcos, Texas; and

WHEREAS, at this intersection, our community will celebrate the groundbreaking ceremony for the “Crossroads Project,” a public sculpture by artist Aaron Hussey of Baton Rouge, LA., commemorating the historic connection between President Lyndon B. Johnson and Martin Luther King, Jr. as they transformed American civil rights in the 1960s; and

WHEREAS, the purpose of this holiday is to encourage all Americans to fulfill Martin Luther King’s vision of freedom, equality and opportunity for all people; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the Hays County Commissioners Court does hereby proclaim the 21st day of January, 2013 as:

DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. DAY

And calls upon all citizens to honor the memory of Martin Luther King, Jr. and participate in local observances that commemorate his important contributions to our nation.

ADOPTED THIS THE 15th DAY OF JANUARY, 2013

Bert Cobb Hays County Judge

______Debbie Gonzales Ingalsbe Mark Jones Commissioner, Pct. 1 Commissioner, Pct. 2

______Will Conley Ray Whisenant Commissioner, Pct. 3 Commissioner, Pct. 4

ATTEST:

______Liz Q. Gonzalez Hays County Clerk 5 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Approve payment of County invoices.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR APPROVAL: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Auditor’s Office HERZOG N/A

SUMMARY

6 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Approve Commissioner Court Minutes of January 8, 2013.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Gonzalez COBB N/A

SUMMARY

7

HAYS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT MINUTES

JANUARY 8, 2013 ***** ***** VOLUME V PG 61

STATE OF TEXAS * COUNTY OF HAYS *

ON THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY A.D., 2013, THE COMMISSIONERS' COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, TEXAS, MET IN REGULAR MEETING. THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS WERE PRESENT, TO-WIT:

ALBERT H. COBB JR COUNTY JUDGE DEBBIE GONZALES INGALSBE COMMISSIONER, PCT. 1 MARK JONES COMMISSIONER, PCT. 2 WILL CONLEY COMMISSIONER, PCT. 3 RAY O. WHISENANT JR COMMISSIONER, PCT. 4 LIZ Q. GONZALEZ COUNTY CLERK

AND THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HAD, THAT IS:

Gary Smith, Retired Air Force Chaplin gave the invocation and Judge Cobb led the court in the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States and Texas flags and called the meeting to order.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Sheva Kuvet Hart – Austin resident made a public comment.

28663 APPROVE PAYMENTS OF COUNTY INVOICES

A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Jones to approve payments of County Invoices in the amount of $1,531,755.44 as submitted by the County Auditor. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28664 APPROVE COMMISSIONERS COURT MINUTES OF DECEMBER 18, 2012 AND JANUARY 2, 2013

A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Jones to approve Commissioners Court Minutes of December 18, 2012 and January 2, 2013 as presented by the County Clerk. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28665 APPROVE THE RE-APPOINTMENT OF JULIA RAMSEY NEW AND ANNA FARR TO THE HAYS COUNTY CHILD PROTECTIVE BOARD

Both of these terms are up and Julia Ramsey New and Anna Farr both wish to continue serving on the board. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Jones to approve the re- appointment of Julia Ramsey New and Anna Farr to the Hays County Child Protective Board. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28666 AUTHORIZE INSTITUTIONAL OSSF PERMIT 141 DOS LAGOS DRIVE, DRIPPING SPRINGS, TX

Gary McGee is proposing an OSSF to serve a 9300 square foot office and warehouse building on 4.16 acres in the Dos Lagos subdivision. Water will be supplied by rainwater collection. This OSSF was designed by Don Perry, R.S. for a maximum of 140 gallons per day that is flow equalized throughout the week to a 500 gpd aerobic treatment unit and discharged to a drip irrigation drainfield. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Jones to authorize Institutional OSSF Permit 141 Dos Lagos Drive, Dripping Springs, TX. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28667 ACCEPT A $15,000 DONATION FROM THE BURDINE JOHNSON FOUNDATION TO THE HAYS COUNTY HISTORICAL COMMISSION FOR PRODUCTION OF A HISTORICAL DOCUMENTARY ON THE KUYKENDALL RANCH AND AMEND THE BUDGET ACCORDINGLY

The Burdine Johnson Foundation has provided funding in the amount of $15,000 to the Hays County Historical Commission to assist in the production of a historical documentary, “The 101 Ranch: The Story of the Kuykendall Family”. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Jones to accept a $15,000 donation from the Burdine Johnson Foundation to the Hays County Historical Commission for production of a historical documentary on the Kuykendall Ranch and amend the budget accordingly. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

8

HAYS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT MINUTES

VOLUME V PG 62 ***** ***** JANUARY 8, 2013

28668 RATIFY EXECUTION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE GRANT CONTRACT WITH THE TEXAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL REGARDING FUNDING FOR THE CRIME VICTIM SERVICES COORDINATOR POSITION IN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE

On August 31, 2011 the Commissioners Court executed a Grant Contract with the Texas Office of the Attorney General (OAG) for funding to support a victim service coordinator position in the Sheriff's Office. On August 7, 2012 the Commissioners Court accepted a second Grant Contract to extend grant funding with OAG for this position for a second year. The First Amendment to the Grant Contract will apply retained savings from the first year of the Grant Contract (FY2012) to the second year of funding (FY2013), increasing the FY2013 Grant Contract amount from $42,000 to $48,519.85. The contract period will end on August 31, 2013. The OAG deadline for submission of the Amendment was Friday, December 28, 2012, hence it was necessary to process this prior to the scheduled meeting of the Commissioners Court. Already budgeted for FY2013. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Jones to ratify execution of the First Amendment to the Grant Contract with the Texas Office of the Attorney General regarding funding for the Crime Victim Services Coordinator position in the Sheriff's Office. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28669 APPROVE AWARD FOR IFB 2013-B01 NUTTY BROWN ROAD DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO AGH 20 HOLDINGS AND AUTHORIZE COUNTY JUDGE TO EXECUTE CONTRACT

Commissioner Whisenant and Jerry Borcherding Transportation Director spoke and gave staff recommendation to award the bid to AGH 20 Holdings. Purchasing received 9 bids with AGH 20 Holdings providing the lowest and best bid. References were checked for AGH 20 Holdings and were found favorable. Bid Tabulation for IFB 2013-B01 Nutty Brown Road Drainage Improvements. (1) AGH 20 Holdings bid $66,625.00 (2) Smith Contracting bid $98,276.00 (3) Central Road & Utility bid $111,800.00 (4) ESSI bid $117,825.00 (5) Beck Reit & Sons bid $122,440.00 (6) Myers Concrete bid $148,426.00 (7) Aaron Concrete bid $148,133.75 (8) BPI Environmental bid $190,393.94 (9) Mac, Inc. $193,900.00. Amount required $66,625.00 line item number 020- 710-00-5448_010. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Conley to approve award for IFB 2013-B01 Nutty Brown Road Drainage Improvements to AGH 20 Holdings and authorize County Judge to execute contract. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28670 ACCEPT A DONATION TO THE CONSTABLE, PCT 3 OFFICE IN THE AMOUNT OF $445.00 FROM WIMBERLEY SPRINGS PARTNERS AND AN ADDITIONAL DONATION OF $890.00 FROM SAC N PAC STORES, INC FOR THE PURCHASE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT EQUIPMENT AND AMEND THE BUDGET ACCORDINGLY

Constable Darrell Ayres thanked the Commissioners Court, Sac N Pac and Wimberley Springs Partners for their support. The donations are being made to the Constables Office to assist with the purchase of duty weapons for the deputies. A motion was made by Commissioner Conley, seconded by Commissioner Whisenant to accept a donation to the Constable, Pct 3 office in the amount of $445.00 from Wimberley Springs Partners and an additional donation of $890.00 from Sac N Pac Stores, Inc for the purchase of Law Enforcement equipment and amend the budget accordingly. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28671 APPROVE SPECIFICATIONS FOR IFB 2013-B02 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS FOR CR 266 AND AUTHORIZE PURCHASING TO SOLICIT FOR BID AND ADVERTISE

Jerry Borcherding Transportation Director spoke of the Mandatory Pre-Bid Conference held Thursday, January 24, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. at the Hays County Road Department, 2171 Yarrington Road, San Marcos, Texas 78666. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Ingalsbe to approve specifications for IFB 2013-B02 Road Improvements for CR 266 and authorize Purchasing to solicit for bid and advertise. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED An amended motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Ingalsbe to include the change of the Pre-Bid Conference requirement. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28672 RATIFY THE EXECUTION OF THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN HAYS COUNTY AND STAUDT SURVEYING, INC

Stuadt Surveying shall provide surveying services for a 60 foot wide right-of-way on a portion of Bell Springs Road, Hays County Texas. Amount required $5,000.00 line item 020-710-00-5386. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Ingalsbe to ratify the execution of the Professional Services Agreement between Hays County and Staudt Surveying, Inc. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

9

HAYS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT MINUTES

JANUARY 8, 2013 ***** ***** VOLUME V PG 63

28673 AUTHORIZE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY TO TRANSFER FUNDS WITHIN THEIR OPERATING BUDGET FOR TRAVEL RELATED EXPENSES AND AMEND THE BUDGET ACCORDINGLY

During the FY13 Budget Process, several individuals travel stipends were removed with the intention of utilizing the Fleet Management Program at the Government Center. That program has not fully rolled out; therefore additional funds are needed to pay out mileage for these individuals that are traveling in personal vehicles. Funds have been identified within the District Attorney's budget to cover this increase. Amount required $1,000.00 line item 001-607-00.5501. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Ingalsbe to authorize the District Attorney to transfer funds within their Operating budget for travel related expenses and amend the budget accordingly. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28674 CONSIDER THE ACCEPTANCE OF ROAD CONSTRUCTION AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE CONSTRUCTION BOND, AND ACCEPT THE MAINTENANCE BOND FOR TWO YEARS FOR BELTERRA SUBDIVISION, PHASE 2, SECTION 7

Jerry Borcherding Transportation Director gave staff recommendation. The Transportation Department has inspected and approved the improvements and staff recommends acceptance of construction of roads and drainage improvements within the County ROW. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Jones to consider the acceptance of road construction and drainage improvements, release the construction bond, and accept the maintenance bond for two years for Belterra subdivision, Phase 2, Section 7. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28675 HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TO ESTABLISH TRAFFIC REGULATIONS ON CREEK ROAD IN PCT. 4

Judge Cobb opened public hearing. Commissioner Whisenant made a public comment for Glenn O. Rasbury. Judge Cobb closed public hearing. Jerry Borcherding Transportation Director spoke. This is to establish: a "YIELD to on-coming traffic" sign on Creek Road on the West side of a one-lane bridge over a tributary of Onion Creek between Dario Road and Pug Rippy Road. "One-lane Bridge" signs will also be placed. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Jones to establish traffic regulations on Creek Road in Pct. 4. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28676 APPROVE A NEW ROUTE DESIGNATION FOR AN ALTERNATE TRUCK ROUTE AROUND THE CITY OF WIMBERLEY TO INCLUDE WINTERS MILL PARKWAY

Commissioner Conley spoke. The Cities of Wimberley and Woodcreek have already accepted an alternate truck route to direct large trucks away from the Wimberley Square utilizing RR 12, FM 2325, FM 3237, and RM 32. This action would include Winters Mill Parkway in the new truck route scenario and the Cities need this approval from the County for them to send off to TxDOT for approval. A motion was made by Commissioner Conley, seconded by Commissioner Jones to approve a new route designation for an alternate truck route around the City of Wimberley to include Winters Mill Parkway and the emergency lane. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28677 REPLAT OF LOT 1, DRIFTWOOD BAPTIST CHURCH SUBDIVISIONS [12-4-47--2 LOT] APPROVE FINAL PLAT; HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING

Judge Cobb opened the public hearing. No public input was received. Judge Cobb closed the public hearing. Roxie McInnis Development Services Manager gave staff recommendation. Lot 1 of the Driftwood Baptist Church Subdivision consists of 12.00 acres along FM 150 in Precinct 4. The proposed division will divide the lot into two - Lot 1A (2.50 acres) and Lot 1B (9.50 acres). Lot 1B is currently developed and is served by a private well and on-site sewage facility. Lot 1A will be served by a private well and advanced OSSF at the time of development. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Conley to approval the final plat Replat of Lot 1, Driftwood Baptist Church Subdivision. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28678 CANNON SUBDIVISION [12-3-55 – 4 LOTS] APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAN AND GRANT A VARIANCE TO SECTION 721.5.07 (C) OF THE HAYS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS

Roxie McInnis Development Services Manager spoke. The Cannon Subdivision is a proposed four lot division of 26.24 acres located off of Flite Acres Road in Precinct 3. Water service will be provided by private wells and wastewater treatment will be accomplished by individual on-site sewage facilities to be permitted by Hays County. All four proposed lots are greater than five acres and will be served by a Shared Access Driveway. The Hays County Development Regulations allow for the use of Shared Access Driveways (to serve a maximum of five lots) in order to preserve the rural character of the land and to avoid excessive infrastructure

10

HAYS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT MINUTES

VOLUME V PG 64 ***** ***** JANUARY 8, 2013 costs. Section 721.5.07 (C) states that Shared Access Driveways shall not exceed 0.25 miles in length, however, the proposed drive will extend 0.54 miles to reach the lot furthest from the roadway. This tract was created as a "flag lot" in 1996 with a 31-foot wide strip of land extending 0.34 miles to the bulk of the remaining acreage. Given the existing configuration of the property, strict enforcement of the County's Development Regulations would not allow this tract to be subdivided. A motion was made by Commissioner Conley, seconded by Commissioner Whisenant to approve preliminary plan and grant a variance to Section 721.5.07 (c) of the Hays County Development Regulations. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28679 APPOINT RICHARD GARRETT TO EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT #2 AS A REPLACEMENT FOR MARK IBERG

Commissioner Mark Jones Pct 2 spoke. Richard Garrett has agreed to serve a two-year term beginning January 1, 2013. Mark Iberg chose to not see reappointment. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Whisenant to appoint Richard Garrett to Emergency Services District #2 as a replacement for Mark Iberg. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28680 APPROVE THE CREATION OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT III POSITION, TEXAS VACCINES FOR CHILDREN/IMMUNIZATION SPECIALIST, WITHIN THE PERSONAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT AT A GRADE 110 EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY

As part of the realignment of the Personal Health Department the creation of an Admin III position is proposed. This position will handle responsibilities for the Texas Vaccines for Children (TVFC) program and other public health functions as required by Hays County's Immunization Contract with the Texas Department of State Health Services. The proposed position will assume the duties of the current Admin I-Vaccines for Children position and portions of the duties of the Public Health Educator position. The Admin I-Vaccines for Children position and the Public Health Educator position will be eliminated in a proposed re-organization of the department for the January 15th Commissioners Court meeting. The new position will be funded by the Immunization Contract. Amount required $32,125 line item number 120-675-99-018.5021. A motion was made by Commissioner Ingalsbe, seconded by Commissioner Whisenant to approve the creation of an Administrative Assistant III position, Texas Vaccines for Children/Immunization Specialist, within the Personal Health Department at a grade 110 effective immediately. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

28681 AUTHORIZE INSTITUTIONAL OSSF PERMIT AND GRANT A VARIANCE TO SECTION 10-M(B) OF THE HAYS COUNTY RULES FOR ON-SITE SEWAGE FACILITIES AT 32780 RANCH ROAD 12, DRIPPING SPRINGS, TX

Roxie McInnis Development Services Manager spoke. Albee There LLC is proposing an OSSF to serve a construction office/warehouse at 32780 Ranch Road 12 in Precinct 4. This property is Lot 3 in Tom Dye Subdivision (11.47 acres). Water will be supplied by Rainwater Collection. This ON-SITE SEWAGE FACILITY consists of a standard treatment system in which the effluent will be pumped to a low pressure dosed dispersal field. The system is designed for a maximum of 180 gpd. The system designer, Jon Maass, R.S. is requesting a variance to Section 10-M(B) of the Hays County rules for on-site sewage facilities which requires flow equalization prior to the treatment tank. His justification for the variance is that equal protection to the public health will be provided by oversizing the treatment tank by 60% to eliminate the need for flow equalization, and that standard treatment is not susceptible to upset from slight flow variations, as is the aerobic treatment process. Variations in flow are expected to be slight with construction office employees and no customer traffic. A motion was made by Commissioner Whisenant, seconded by Commissioner Jones to authorize Institutional OSSF Permit and grant a variance to Section 10-M(B) of the Hays County Rules for On-Site Sewage Facilities at 32780 Ranch Road 12, Dripping Springs, TX. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 551.071 AND 551.072 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE: CONSULTATION WITH COUNSEL, DELIBERATION REGARDING THE PURCHASE, SALE, AND/OR VALUE OF THE LAND LOCATED AT 111 WOODACRE DRIVE IN WIMBERLEY, TEXAS

Court convened into Executive Session at 10:15 a.m. and reconvened into opened court at 10:42 a.m. In Executive Session were Commissioner Ingalsbe, Commissioner Jones, Commissioner Conley, Commissioner Whisenant, Judge Cobb, Special Counsel Mark Kennedy and Clint Garza Director of Development and Community Services. No action taken.

28682 ACTION RELATED TO THE BURN BAN AND/OR DISASTER DECLARATION

Clint Browning, Assistant Fire Marshal spoke about the drought numbers and he and Mark Chambers Hays County Fire Marshal feel comfortable lifting of the burn ban. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Whisenant to lift the burn ban effective immediately. All voting “Aye”. MOTION PASSED

11

HAYS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT MINUTES

JANUARY 8, 2013 ***** ***** VOLUME V PG 65

County Clerk’s Note Agenda Item #22 RE: DISCUSSION OF ISSUES RELATED TO PROPOSED CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN HAYS COUNTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE GOVERNMENT CENTER; THE PRECINCT 2 FACILITY PROJECT; AND THE LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER IMMEDIATE NEEDS PROJECT – was pulled

County Clerk’s Note Agenda Item #23 RE: DISCUSSION OF ISSUES RELATED TO THE ROAD BOND PROJECTS, INCLUDING UPDATES FROM MIKE WEAVER, PRIME STRATEGIES AND ALLEN CROZIER, HDR – was pulled

County Clerk’s Note Agenda Item #24 RE: DISCUSSION OF ISSUES RELATED TO THE HAYS COUNTY WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY AND THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY – was pulled

A motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Whisenant to adjourn court.

I, LIZ Q. GONZALEZ, COUNTY CLERK and EXOFFICIO CLERK OF THE COMMISSIONERS’ COURT, do hereby certify that the foregoing contains a true and accurate record of the proceedings had by the Hays County Commissioners’ Court on January 8, 2013.

LIZ Q GONZALEZ, COUNTY CLERK AND EXOFFICIO CLERK OF THE COMMISSIONERS’ COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, TEXAS

12 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Authorize the transfer of funds from the County Wide budget to the Sheriff, Jail budget for Laptop Warranties from a Securus contribution received in FY2012 and amend the budget accordingly.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013 $2,097.00

LINE ITEM NUMBER 001-618-03.5429

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS: Funds are available in County Wide Contingencies to cover this amendment.

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: BILL HERZOG

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

CUTLER COBB N/A

SUMMARY

In28B58B88B118B148B178B208B238B268B 2012 the Sheriff's Office and Commissioner's Court entered into a 5 year contract with Securus Technology related to the inmate telephone system. As an incentive for entering into this agreement, Securus contributed $40K to the HCSO for future Technology needs. The remaining funds were not rolled to the FY 2013 budget; however on Oct. 23, 2013 Commissioner's Court agreed to transfer funds to the Sheriff, Jail Division for technology equipment in the amount up to $20,000. At this time the Sheriff's Office, Jail Division is requesting an additional $2,097.00 to include:

Three29B59B89B119B149B179B209B239B269B each extended warranty services for laptops recently received in this fiscal year. The extended warranties could not be paid for with grant funds. The warranties were priced and will be ordered by I.T.

13 AMENDMENT NO.FY2013-009 CC FY2013 BUDGET 01/15/2013

GENERAL FUND (001): Appropriation Appropriation Dept G/L Account Number Account Description Before Amendment Increase Decrease After Amendment

Agenda Item #4: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5429 Software Maintenance 0 2,097 2,097 001-645-00.5399 Co Wide-Contingencies 731,161 (2,097) 729,064

*Move funds from Co-Wide to Jail from FY12 Securus Contribution for Laptop Warranties.

Agenda Item #7: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5741 Misc Capital Improv 0 3,670 3,670 001-618-03.5451 Bldg Maint & Repair 30,000 (3,670) 26,330

*Amend budget for raised access flooring in 911 Center.

Agenda Item #8: Sheriff - Grants: Incr(Revenue) 001-618-99-899.4610 Contributions 1,260 2,571 3,831 001-618-99-899.5551 Continuing Education 0 2,571 2,571

*Accept contribution from Mary Bonner Community Needs Program for Victim's Asst Training.

Agenda Item #9: Personal Health: 120-675-00.5194 Telephone Allowance 105 280 385 120-675-00.5489 Telephone Expense 5,314 (280) 5,034

*Amend for telephone allowance for Epidemiology Specialist position eff 2/1/13.

Agenda Item #14: EMC - 2011 GDEM CERT Grant: 001-656-99-072.5719_700 Misc Eqpt Capital 0 5,091 5,091 001-656-99-072.5391 Misc Expense 2,899 (539) 2,360 001-656-99-072.5719_400 Misc Eqpt Operating 5,540 (4,552) 988

*Amend for purchase of Mobile Camera.

14 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Authorize County Judge to execute the 2nd Amended Master Services Agreement between Hays County and Securus.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Cutler COBB N/A

SUMMARY

I25B51B77B103B129B155B181B207B233B n addition to the Applications currently being provided to the County pursuant to the Agreement, Securus shall deploy a Video Visitation System at the Facility(s) during the Term of the Agreement

15 SECOND AMENDMENT TO MASTER SERVICES AGREEMENT

This SECOND AMENDMENT (“Second Amendment”) is effective as of the last date signed by a party (“Second Amendment Effective Date”) and amends and supplements that certain Master Services Agreement with an Effective Date of February 16, 2012 (“Agreement”) by and between Hays County (“Customer”) and Securus Technologies, Inc. (“Provider”).

WHEREAS, Customer desires and Provider agrees to deploy an inmate video visitation system pursuant to the terms and conditions outlined below; and

NOW, THEREFORE, as of the Second Amendment Effective Date and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows:

TERM. This Second Amendment shall commence on the Second Amendment Effective Date and shall remain in effect through the term of the Agreement. APPLICATIONS. In addition to the Applications currently being provided to you pursuant to the Agreement, Provider shall deploy a Video Visitation System at the Facility(s) named in the chart below during the Term of the Agreement (see Attachment 1).

VIDEO VISITATION TERMS

The parties acknowledge that Securus Video Visitation shall be limited to 20 or 40 minute sessions. A session fee of $20 plus applicable taxes/fees/surcharges will apply to each 20 minute paid remote Video Visitation sessions. A session fee of $40 plus applicable taxes/fees/surcharges will apply to each 40 minute paid remote Video Visitation sessions. (As used in this section, a “remote” Video Visitation session means any sessions where Video Visitation traffic is routed over the Internet.) If customer wishes to offer free remote session(s) for any reason, the session fee will be deducted from the monthly commission payments. Customer agrees that Video Visitation must be available for a minimum of 50 hours per Video Visitation terminal per week.

If applicable, all recorded Video Visitation sessions will have a standard retention of 30 days from the recording date.

COMPENSATION

Provider shall pay Customer the commission percentage that Provider earns through the completion of paid remote Video Visitation sessions placed to Customer’s Facilities as specified in the chart below. Provider shall remit the commission for a calendar month to Customer on or before the 30th day of the following calendar month in which the paid remote Video Visitation sessions were held (the “Payment Date”). All commission payments shall be final and binding upon you unless we receive written objection within sixty (60) days after the Payment Date.

Type of Video Visitation Facility Name and Address Video Commission Percentage Visitation HAY Hays County Law Enforcement Center 20% beginning on the Second 1307 Old Uhland Road Remote Paid Anniversary of the Second San Marcos, TX 78666 Amendment Effective Date

Customer is responsible for all Jail Management System (JMS) and Commissary integration fees as well as electrical installation.

16

WARRANTY: We warrant that the services provided by us as contemplated in and by this Second Amendment will be performed in a good and workmanlike manner consistent with industry standards and practices. Provider further warrants that its agent(s) and/or employee(s) utilized by it in the performance of its obligations under this Second Amendment will be qualified to perform the contracted services. Should any errors or omissions arise in the rendering of the services under this Second Amendment, Provider will undertake to correct such errors or omissions within a reasonable time period. If Customer purchases from Provider any hardware components in connection with the services hereunder (“Hardware Components”), Provider warrants such components to be free from material defects under normal use, maintenance and service for a period of twelve (12) months from the date of installation of the Hardware Components. This warranty shall be conditional on Customer’s compliance with the provisions of this Warranty section. Provider makes no warranty with respect to low performance, damages or defects in any Hardware Component caused by misuse, misapplication, neglect or accident, nor does Company make any warranty as to any Hardware Component that has been repaired or altered in any, which, in the sole judgment of Provider affects the performance or purpose for which the Hardware Component was manufactured. When applicable, Provider shall provide the required replacement parts and components free of charge. THE WARRANTY OBLIGATIONS OF PROVIDER WITH RESPECT TO THE HARDWARE COMPONENTS ARE STRICTLY LIMITED TO THE REPLACEMENT OF ANY DEFECTIVE HARDWARE COMPONENT. IN NO EVENT AND UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL THE LIABILITY OF PROVIDER EXCEED THE UNIT PRICE PAID BY CUSTOMER FOR ANY DEFECTIVE HARDWARE COMPONENT OR PART THEREOF. EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH HEREIN OR IN A SCHEDULE TO THE AGREEMENT, THE SERVICES AND ANY HARDWARE COMPONENT TO BE PROVIDED HEREUNDER ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT ANY OTHER WARRANTY OR GUARANTY OF ANY KIND AND PROVIDER DISCLAIMS ANY OTHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. SOFTWARE LICENSE: We grant you a personal, non-exclusive, non-transferable license (without the right to sublicense) to access and use certain proprietary computer software products and materials in connection with the Video Visitation System (the “Software”). The Software includes any upgrades, modifications, updates, and additions to existing features that we implement in our discretion (the “Updates”). Updates do not include additional features and significant enhancements to existing features. You are the license holder of any third-party software product we obtain on your behalf. You authorize us to provide or preinstall the third-party software and agree that we may agree to the third-party End User License Agreements on your behalf. Your rights to use any third-party software product that we provide shall be limited by the terms of the underlying license that we obtained for such product. The Software is to be used solely for your internal business purposes in connection with the Video Visitation system at the Facilities. You will not (i) permit any parent, subsidiary, affiliated entity, or third party to use the Software, (ii) assign, sublicense, lease, encumber, or otherwise transfer or attempt to transfer the Software or any portion thereof, (iii) process or permit to be processed any data of any other party with the Software, (iv) alter, maintain, enhance, disassemble, decompile, reverse engineer or otherwise modify the Software or allow any third party to do so, (v) connect the Software to any products that we did not furnish or approve in writing, or (vi) ship, transfer, or export the Software into any country, or use the Software in any manner prohibited by the export laws of the United States. We are not liable with regard to any Software that you use in a prohibited manner. OWNERSHIP AND USE. The Video Visitation System and Software shall at all times remain Provider’s sole and exclusive property. Provider (or Provider’s licensors, if any) have and will retain all right, title, interest, and ownership in and to (i) the Software and any copies, custom versions, modifications, or updates of the Software, (ii) all related documentation, and (iii) any trade secrets, know-how, methodologies, and processes related to Provider’s Applications, the Video Visitation System, and Provider’s other products and services (the “Materials”). The Materials constitute proprietary information

17 and trade secrets of Provider and its licensors, whether or not any portion thereof is or may be the subject of a valid copyright or patent. LEGALITY/LIMITED LICENSE AGREEMENT: For services related to applications which may allow Customer to monitor and record inmate visitation sessions, by providing the application, we makes no representation or warranty as to the legality of recording or monitoring such sessions. Further, Customer retains custody and ownership of all recordings; however Customer grants Provider a perpetual limited license to compile, store, and access recordings for purposes of (i) complying with the requests of officials at the Facility, (ii) disclosing information to requesting law enforcement and correctional officials as they may require for investigative, penological or public safety purposes, (iii) performing billing and collection functions, or (iv) maintaining equipment and quality control purposes. This license does not apply to recordings of inmate visitation sessions with their attorneys or to recordings protected from disclosure by other applicable privileges.

All terms and conditions of the Agreement not amended by this Second Amendment remain in full force and effect.

All capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Second Amendment as of the Second Amendment Effective Date by their duly authorized representatives.

HAYS COUNTY SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

By: By: Name: Name: Robert Pickens Title: Title: Chief Operating Officer Date: Date:

Please return signed amendment to: 14651 Dallas Parkway Sixth Floor Dallas, Texas 75254 Attention: Contracts Administrator Phone: (972) 277-0300

18 Attachment 1: Video Visitation Schedule

Description One Time/ Responsible Party Type Recurring QTY Total Network Wiring Installation One time 27 $40,500.00 Securus Electrical Wiring Installation One time 27 $40,500.00 Securus Software Application Setup, including JMS import mapping One time 1 $5,875.00 • Securus Video Visitation Application Setup One time • Inmate Information Application Setup One time • Commissary Ordering Application Setup One time Installation and • Sick Form Application Implementation Setup One time Video Visitation Terminals – single handset (inmate side) One time 21 $84,000.00 Video Visitation Terminals – dual handset (visitor side) One time 6 $25,500.00 Recording 30 Day Purge Total Video Visitation Terminal Installation One time 27 $13,500.00 Annual Terminal Extended Hardware Maintenance Hardware (optional) Recurring 27 $5,373.00 Software Licensing Fee Recurring 27 $9,720 • Securus Video Visitation Recurring Software Software Maintenance Fee Recurring Miscellaneous • Training Per Day 2 $4,000.00 • Mobile Cart, including Misc. UPS Battery Back Up One time 2 $2,880.00 Term Re-occurring 4.4 $66,409 Total Value: $283,164.20 Securus Discount $283,164.20 Comment [MK1]: This term is undefined in the context of this Amendment. While I recognize that $0.00 Customer Pays: terms could have been defined in the original agreement, I believe we should reiterate this definition here, especially since it influences the * If the Agreement is terminated for any reason before the end of the Initial Term, Customer will refund to fiscal impact of this clause. Provider the prorated amount of the Video Visitation system expense. You Customer shall pay any such Comment [MK2]: If we are going to prorate this, refund within ten (10) days after any such termination, or at our Provider’s election, we Provider may then we will need a depreciation/amortization deduct the refund from any commission we Provider then owes youto Customer. schedule. Comment [MK3]: Which of the above expenses is included? Perhaps you could add the asterisk beside the amount that would be owed.

19

Hays County Texas Amortization Schedule for Contract ending June 17, 2017 For Video Visitation System

Upfront Recurring Costs Costs Costs Total Network Wiring Installation $40,500.00 $40,500.00 Electrical Wiring Installation 40,500.00 40,500.00 Total Video Visitation Terminal Installation 13,500.00 13,500.00 Software Application Setup, including JMS import mapping 5,875.00 5,875.00 Video Visitation Terminals – single handset (inmate side) 84,000.00 84,000.00 Video Visitation Terminals – dual handset (visitor side) 25,500.00 25,500.00 Mobile Cart, including UPS Battery Back Up 2,880.00 2,880.00 Training 4,000.00 4,000.00 Annual Terminal Extended Hardware Warranty - 4.4 years 5,373.00 23,641.20 Software Licensing Fee - 4.4 years 9,720.00 42,768.00 Total $216,755.00 $15,093.00 $283,164.20

Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 January $216,755.00 $167,675.00 $118,595.00 $69,515.00 $20,435.00 February 212,665.00 163,585.00 114,505.00 65,425.00 16,345.00 March 208,575.00 159,495.00 110,415.00 61,335.00 12,255.00 April 204,485.00 155,405.00 106,325.00 57,245.00 8,165.00 May 200,395.00 151,315.00 102,235.00 53,155.00 4,075.00 June 196,305.00 147,225.00 98,145.00 49,065.00 0.00 July 192,215.00 143,135.00 94,055.00 44,975.00 August 188,125.00 139,045.00 89,965.00 40,885.00 September 184,035.00 134,955.00 85,875.00 36,795.00 October 179,945.00 130,865.00 81,785.00 32,705.00 November 175,855.00 126,775.00 77,695.00 28,615.00 December 171,765.00 122,685.00 73,605.00 24,525.00

20 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Authorize the County Judge to execute a renewal agreement of legal research materials for the Law Library located at Hays County Jail.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013 $769.00/month

LINE ITEM NUMBER 001-618-03.5213 - Books & Periodicals

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: YES AUDITOR REVIEW: BILL HERZOG

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Cutler COBB N/A

SUMMARY

The27B55B83B111B139B167B195B223B251B Sheriff, Jail Division is requesting to renew the agreement for legal content provided by Lexis Nexis. By renewing the agreement it will extend for one year with a monthly commitment of $769.00/mo. The funds for this service are budgeted in Jail/Books and Periodicals.

21  SLGovt RENEW YOUR LEXISNEXIS® PRISON SOLUTION ORDER NOW BY SIGNING THIS LETTER AGREEMENT

Thank you for using LexisNexis as your provider of legal research materials for correctional facilities. We are dedicated to giving you efficient and cost-effective solutions, including the Shepard’s® Citations Service. Currently you are using the LexisNexis services pursuant to the Prison Solution Order (the “Order”) that allows you to use selected information relevant to your needs in exchange for a fixed monthly commitment. The Order offers you access to comprehensive content and ease-of-use. However, your Order will expire soon. By signing below, you may extend the term for the following period at the new monthly commitment rate indicated below:

Customer Name: Hays County Sheriif's Office Account Number: 0099572404

Extension Period Monthly Commitment

Beginning 02/01/2013 to 01/31/2014 $ 769

Beginning to $

Beginning to $

Customer hereby certifies that they have _____number of terminals/licenses/locations

These changes will be effective on 02/01/2013. Except as expressly stated above, all other terms of the Order will remain unchanged and unaffected by this letter agreement. If you have any questions about your new rate or would like to see a comparison of other pricing options, please contact me, your account representative, at: Veronica Vrancuta, Esq. Corrections Account Manager - West Region Direct - 916-380-8729 Fax - 866.960.4348 [email protected]

If you agree with the new monthly commitment and extended term, then please print this message, provide the information requested for the total number of terminals/licenses/locations then sign and date. Upon completion, return the signed letter agreement to me at the fax number listed above. In order for these changes to be effective on the date listed above, please sign and return this letter agreement no later than the 20th of January. If you do not respond to this letter, please be advised that the Order will expire at the end of the current commitment period and you will no longer receive updated materials.

Customer Name: Hays County Sheriff's Office

Authorized Signature:

Print Name:

Title:

Date:

22 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Authorize the Sheriff's Office to transfer funds within the operating Jail budget for raised access flooring in the 911 Center and amend the budget accordingly.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013 $3,670.00

LINE ITEM NUMBER 001-618-03.5741 - Misc. Capital Improvements

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS: See attached budget amendment.

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: YES AUDITOR REVIEW: BILL HERZOG

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

CUTLER COBB N/A

SUMMARY

The28B60B92B124B156B188B220B252B284B Hays County 9-1-1 Center is connected to a small room that houses all of the critical computer servers and back-up power supplies. According to the 9-1-1 Policies and Procedures manual through CAPCOG, each 9-1-1 center in the region is to “provide heating and cooling in the PSAP equipment room to maintain a constant temperature between 62º – 70º F”. Since the addition of the uninterrupted power supply (UPS), the average temperature in the equipment room in the Hays County 9-1-1 Center is between 75º – 78º F. This equipment room is being expanded to house a larger A/C unit that will provide adequate cooling for all of the critical equipment. The wiring for the equipment and servers are ran underneath a raised floor in addition to the A/C unit requiring the air flow to come up through vented panels underneath a raised floor. Therefore, a new raised flooring system must be purchased to expand the equipment room and install the appropriate A/C unit to provide the required cooling. The local vendor, Prestige, provides the appropriate raised flooring that also matches the current raised flooring system and will provide delivery.

Budget29B61B93B125B157B189B221B253B285B Amendment

00130B62B94B126B158B190B222B254B286B -618-03.5451 Building Mtc. & Repair Decrease $3,670.00

00131B63B95B127B159B191B223B255B287B -618-03-5741 Misc. Capital Improvement Increase $3,670.00

23 AMENDMENT NO.FY2013-009 CC FY2013 BUDGET 01/15/2013

GENERAL FUND (001): Appropriation Appropriation Dept G/L Account Number Account Description Before Amendment Increase Decrease After Amendment

Agenda Item #4: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5429 Software Maintenance 0 2,097 2,097 001-645-00.5399 Co Wide-Contingencies 731,161 (2,097) 729,064

*Move funds from Co-Wide to Jail from FY12 Securus Contribution for Laptop Warranties.

Agenda Item #7: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5741 Misc Capital Improv 0 3,670 3,670 001-618-03.5451 Bldg Maint & Repair 30,000 (3,670) 26,330

*Amend budget for raised access flooring in 911 Center.

Agenda Item #8: Sheriff - Grants: Incr(Revenue) 001-618-99-899.4610 Contributions 1,260 2,571 3,831 001-618-99-899.5551 Continuing Education 0 2,571 2,571

*Accept contribution from Mary Bonner Community Needs Program for Victim's Asst Training.

Agenda Item #9: Personal Health: 120-675-00.5194 Telephone Allowance 105 280 385 120-675-00.5489 Telephone Expense 5,314 (280) 5,034

*Amend for telephone allowance for Epidemiology Specialist position eff 2/1/13.

Agenda Item #14: EMC - 2011 GDEM CERT Grant: 001-656-99-072.5719_700 Misc Eqpt Capital 0 5,091 5,091 001-656-99-072.5391 Misc Expense 2,899 (539) 2,360 001-656-99-072.5719_400 Misc Eqpt Operating 5,540 (4,552) 988

*Amend for purchase of Mobile Camera.

24 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Accept a grant award from the Mary Bonner Community Needs Grant Program on behalf of the Victim Assistance Division of the Hays County Sheriff's Office for $2,571.00 and amend the budget accordingly.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013 N/A

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS: See attached budget amendment.

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: BILL HERZOG

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Sheriff Gary Cutler COBB N/A

SUMMARY

The27B Mary Bonner Community Needs Program Committee awarded the Victim Assistance Division of the Hays County Sheriff's Office a partial grant award of $1,969.00 in July 2012. The Mary Bonner Committee has made an additional award of the remaining grant request of $2,571.00 to be used for Victim Assistance Training.

25 AMENDMENT NO.FY2013-009 CC FY2013 BUDGET 01/15/2013

GENERAL FUND (001): Appropriation Appropriation Dept G/L Account Number Account Description Before Amendment Increase Decrease After Amendment

Agenda Item #4: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5429 Software Maintenance 0 2,097 2,097 001-645-00.5399 Co Wide-Contingencies 731,161 (2,097) 729,064

*Move funds from Co-Wide to Jail from FY12 Securus Contribution for Laptop Warranties.

Agenda Item #7: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5741 Misc Capital Improv 0 3,670 3,670 001-618-03.5451 Bldg Maint & Repair 30,000 (3,670) 26,330

*Amend budget for raised access flooring in 911 Center.

Agenda Item #8: Sheriff - Grants: Incr(Revenue) 001-618-99-899.4610 Contributions 1,260 2,571 3,831 001-618-99-899.5551 Continuing Education 0 2,571 2,571

*Accept contribution from Mary Bonner Community Needs Program for Victim's Asst Training.

Agenda Item #9: Personal Health: 120-675-00.5194 Telephone Allowance 105 280 385 120-675-00.5489 Telephone Expense 5,314 (280) 5,034

*Amend for telephone allowance for Epidemiology Specialist position eff 2/1/13.

Agenda Item #14: EMC - 2011 GDEM CERT Grant: 001-656-99-072.5719_700 Misc Eqpt Capital 0 5,091 5,091 001-656-99-072.5391 Misc Expense 2,899 (539) 2,360 001-656-99-072.5719_400 Misc Eqpt Operating 5,540 (4,552) 988

*Amend for purchase of Mobile Camera.

26 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Authorize the Personal Health Department to add a telephone allowance for the Epidemiology Specialist, slot number 0271-01, effective 2-1-13 and amend the budget accordingly.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013 $280.00

LINE ITEM NUMBER 120-675-00.5194

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS: See attached budget amendment.

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: BILL HERZOG

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Clint Garza COBB N/A

SUMMARY

The28B60B92B124B156B188B220B252B284B Epidemiology Specialist position requires the use of a smart phone in order to conduct daily activities. This authorization is for a new phone allowance. The County issued cell phone for this position has been turned in and service to that phone will be deactivated.

Budget29B61B93B125B157B189B221B253B285B Amendment:

Decrease30B62B94B126B158B190B222B254B286B Telephone and Data Lines: 120-675-00.5489 ($280)

Increase31B63B95B127B159B191B223B255B287B Telephone Allowance: 120-675-00.5194 $280

27 AMENDMENT NO.FY2013-009 CC FY2013 BUDGET 01/15/2013

GENERAL FUND (001): Appropriation Appropriation Dept G/L Account Number Account Description Before Amendment Increase Decrease After Amendment

Agenda Item #4: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5429 Software Maintenance 0 2,097 2,097 001-645-00.5399 Co Wide-Contingencies 731,161 (2,097) 729,064

*Move funds from Co-Wide to Jail from FY12 Securus Contribution for Laptop Warranties.

Agenda Item #7: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5741 Misc Capital Improv 0 3,670 3,670 001-618-03.5451 Bldg Maint & Repair 30,000 (3,670) 26,330

*Amend budget for raised access flooring in 911 Center.

Agenda Item #8: Sheriff - Grants: Incr(Revenue) 001-618-99-899.4610 Contributions 1,260 2,571 3,831 001-618-99-899.5551 Continuing Education 0 2,571 2,571

*Accept contribution from Mary Bonner Community Needs Program for Victim's Asst Training.

Agenda Item #9: Personal Health: 120-675-00.5194 Telephone Allowance 105 280 385 120-675-00.5489 Telephone Expense 5,314 (280) 5,034

*Amend for telephone allowance for Epidemiology Specialist position eff 2/1/13.

Agenda Item #14: EMC - 2011 GDEM CERT Grant: 001-656-99-072.5719_700 Misc Eqpt Capital 0 5,091 5,091 001-656-99-072.5391 Misc Expense 2,899 (539) 2,360 001-656-99-072.5719_400 Misc Eqpt Operating 5,540 (4,552) 988

*Amend for purchase of Mobile Camera.

28 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Authorize Institutional OSSF Permit 10703 Ranch Rd 12, Wimberley, TX

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013 N/A

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Roxie McInnis, Development Services Manager CONLEY N/A

SUMMARY

Michael26B Hogan is proposing an OSSF to serve the Freedom 14 camp event center and cabins at 10703 Ranch Rd 12 in Precinct 3. This property is 13.8 acres. Water will be supplied by Rainwater Collection.

The27B55B83B111B139B167B195B223B251B system designers David McGhee, R.S. and Greg Johnson, P.E. have designed a treatment system which consists of 4 pretreatment tanks, an equalization tank, and a 1500gpd aerobic treatment unit. The wastewater will be treated and dosed to a drip irrigation dispersal field at a rate of 628 gpd. ..

29 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Amend the County's purchasing policy to increase the minimum amount required to obtain a purchase order from $300 to $500. Additionally, increase the minimum amount from $300 to $500 for the purchase of equipment requiring Court approval.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013 N/A

LINE ITEM NUMBER N/A

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: BILL HERZOG

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Bill Herzog COBB N/A

SUMMARY

The27B55B83B111B139B167B195B223B251B Auditor's office requests that the minimum amount requiring a purchase order be increased from $300 to $500. The County's budget has increased significantly since we implemented the policy requiring a purchase order for any purchase of $300 or more. The additional risk of increasing the minimum to $500 is minimal and is offset by the reduction in cost in processing those purchase orders between $300 & $500. Additionally, our current County purchasing policy states that any purchase of $500 or more requires the purchaser to obtain quotes for the good or services being purchased. Therefore, our real interest and attention is reflected in a purchase of $500 or more. Currently our County policy requires an equipment purchase of $300 or more to be approved by Commissioners Court. For consistency purposes we would like to increase that amount to $500 as well.

30 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Approve to reappoint James Holt to the Plum Creek Conservation District.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Mark Jones JONES N/A

SUMMARY

James25B51B77B103B129B155B181B207B233B Holt has agreed to serve an additional term effective January 15, 2013.

31 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Approve to appoint Paul Terry to replace Mark Schultz as a representative on ESD #5.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Mark Jones JONES N/A

SUMMARY

Paul25B51B77B103B129B155B181B207B233B Terry has agreed to take the place of Mark Schultz who will be resigning from ESD #5 effective January 23, 2013.

32

Paul W. Terry

Profile

I have been married to my wife, Lori, for 24 years and have two sons, Luke (21 years) and James (15 years). I have been a restaurant manager in Hays County for that same period of time. I am currently the Owner/Manager of the Golden Chick franchise in Kyle, TX.

I proudly served in the US Army, Signal Corps, from 1982 until 1986, and the Texas National Guard from 1986 to 1988.

My wife and family have always been active and supportive in local politics and community. I became active in the Hays County Republican Party (HCRP) in 1994 at the invitation of Ernest Murray, Vice Chairman, to fill the Precinct Chair position in precinct 110. I served in that capacity until 2000 when my family relocated to the city of Kyle.

While serving on the HCRP executive committee, Stuart Hoyt, Bob Ronson, and I were appointed to revise the bylaws of the HCRP. The revisions were completed and adopted in 1996. I also served on the selections committee, with primary responsibility of interviewing people to fill vacant precinct chair positions. During the period from 1994 to 1998, we built a strong coalition of republicans and conservative democrats to elect a conservative county government. From 2000 to present, I have actively supported campaigns for local offices.

Other Community Service

Election Judge, 1994 to Present

Board of Adjustments, City of Kyle, 2007 to present Board Chairman, September 2012 to present Meetings 1st Wednesday of month, 6:00 PM

President’s Council of Golden Operating Corporation, 2007 to present Meetings 3rd Wednesday of month (out of town)

Financial Planning Committee member, City of Kyle, under Mayor Mike Gonzalez

33 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Approve to reappoint Eddie Gumbert, Ron Spangenberg and Ken Downing to the ESD #4 board.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

CONLEY N/A

SUMMARY

The24B49B74B99B124B149B174B199B224B term for all three board members is expired. All three wish to continue service on the ESD #4 Board.

34 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Approve the appointment of Ron Hall, Deputy Constable, Precinct 5.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Mark Jones/Matt Mancillas JONES N/A

SUMMARY

35 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Amend the 2011 State Homeland Security Program budget and authorize the purchase of a Mobile Camera for $5,091.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

CONSENT January 15, 2013 $5,091.00

LINE ITEM NUMBER 001-656-99-072.5719_700 Miscellaneous Equipment Capital

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS: See attached budget amendment. It could not be determined prior to the agenda posting if County purchasing policies were followed. PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: BILL HERZOG

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Kharley Smith INGALSBE N/A

SUMMARY

The28B61B94B127B160B193B226B259B292B CAPCOG Homeland Security Task Force approved the purchase of a Mobile Camera for the 2011 SHSP grant. The total award remains the same, $18,426.09, and does not require a match from the county.

Budget29B62B95B128B161B194B227B260B293B Amendment:

Increase30B63B96B129B162B195B228B261B294B Expense-Miscellaneous Equipment Capital 001-656-99-072.5719_700 $5,091.00

Decrease31B64B97B130B163B196B229B262B295B Expense-Miscellaneous 001-656-99-072.5391 ($4,552.00)

Decrease32B65B98B131B164B197B230B263B296B Expense-Miscellaneous Equipment Operating 001-656-99-072.5719_400 ($539.00)

36 AMENDMENT NO.FY2013-009 CC FY2013 BUDGET 01/15/2013

GENERAL FUND (001): Appropriation Appropriation Dept G/L Account Number Account Description Before Amendment Increase Decrease After Amendment

Agenda Item #4: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5429 Software Maintenance 0 2,097 2,097 001-645-00.5399 Co Wide-Contingencies 731,161 (2,097) 729,064

*Move funds from Co-Wide to Jail from FY12 Securus Contribution for Laptop Warranties.

Agenda Item #7: Sheriff - Jail Division: 001-618-03.5741 Misc Capital Improv 0 3,670 3,670 001-618-03.5451 Bldg Maint & Repair 30,000 (3,670) 26,330

*Amend budget for raised access flooring in 911 Center.

Agenda Item #8: Sheriff - Grants: Incr(Revenue) 001-618-99-899.4610 Contributions 1,260 2,571 3,831 001-618-99-899.5551 Continuing Education 0 2,571 2,571

*Accept contribution from Mary Bonner Community Needs Program for Victim's Asst Training.

Agenda Item #9: Personal Health: 120-675-00.5194 Telephone Allowance 105 280 385 120-675-00.5489 Telephone Expense 5,314 (280) 5,034

*Amend for telephone allowance for Epidemiology Specialist position eff 2/1/13.

Agenda Item #14: EMC - 2011 GDEM CERT Grant: 001-656-99-072.5719_700 Misc Eqpt Capital 0 5,091 5,091 001-656-99-072.5391 Misc Expense 2,899 (539) 2,360 001-656-99-072.5719_400 Misc Eqpt Operating 5,540 (4,552) 988

*Amend for purchase of Mobile Camera.

37 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM 12-4-35 Replat of Lot 38A, Glenn H. Kothmann Properties Subdivision (2 lots). Discussion and possible action to approve final plat; hold a public hearing.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

ACTION-SUBDIVISIONS January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Roxie McInnis WHISENANT N/A

SUMMARY

The25B51B77B103B129B155B181B207B233B Glenn H. Kothmann Properties Subdivision is a recorded subdivision located off of U.S. 290 in Precinct 4. The proposed re-plat will divide the 5.125 acre lot into two lots. Both lots are served by existing private wells. Lot 38A-1 is currently served by an on-site sewage facility and Lot 38A-2 will be served by an on-site sewage facility at the time of development.

38 %.#;610%18' - 56#6'1(6':#5 6859(<25 6127(6 1 6 * / %1706;1(*#;5 % # 4 0  012146+101(6*+557$&+8+5+10.+'59+6*+06*'  0  4 -019#../'0$;6*'5'24'5'0656*#6+ 9+..+#/%.'8'.#0&#0&%#41.;05%.'8'.#0&  $170+'51(6*''&9#4&5#37+('44'%*#4)'  6,7( 1 # & 190'451(#%4'51(.#0&1761(6*',1*0/E5*#0'5748';01+0*#;5%1706; &/$<721&29( <10' 5144 '. 6':#5#5%108';'&61/'$;&''&'&,70'#0&4'%14&'&+081.7/'2#)' .4& 1(6*'1((+%+#.27$.+%4'%14&51(*#;5%1706;6':#5&1*'4'$;57$&+8+&'#%4'5 5ž'ž  012146+101(6*+557$&+8+5+10.+'59+6*+06*' / 1(.#0&1761(6*',1*0/E5*#0'5748';0161$'-0190#54'2.#61(.16#1( $170+'51(6*'%1064+$76+0)<10'1(6*' #

4

6 6*').'00*-16*/#002412'46+'557$&+8+5+10+0#%%14�%'9+6*6*'2.#65*190

'&9#4&5#37+('4 + 0

 *'4'1057$,'%661#0;#0&#..'#5'/'065144'564+%6+105*'4'61(14')4#06'&#0&

4 & &1*'4'$;&'&+%#6'616*'27$.+%6*'75'1(6*'564''65#0&'#5'/'0655*190*'4'10  012146+101(6*+557$&+8+5+10.+'59+6*+06*' .

2 $170+'51(#0;/70+%+2#.+6;ž5%14214#6' 75 9+60'55/;*#0&6*+56*' &#;1( #& 7 %+6;.+/+6514#4'#1(':64#Ä6'44+614+#. +0 ,74+5&+%6+10

5

  $  012146+101(6*+557$&+8+5+10.+'59+6*+06*'   11  $170+'51(6*';'#4(.11&2.#+0#5 ž    &'.+0'#6'&10*#;5%1706;%1//70+6;2#0'. /27% '  9+..+#/%.'8'.#0&  %#41.;05%.'8'.#0&  5  %('&ÄÄ   2  /27$   $  ž 6*+5.16+557$,'%6614'564+%6+8'%18'0#065 #%4'5 ' 4'%14&'&+081.7/'2#)'81.7/' /2&$7,210$3 2#)'#0&81.7/'2#)'1(6*' 127726&$/( 56#6'1(6':#5 1((+%+#.27$.+%4'%14&51(*#;5%1706;6':#5 )(5*86210$3*5,' %1706;1(*#;5  616#.07/$'41(.165+5691 $'(14'/'6*'70&'45+)0'&#76*14+6;106*+5&#;2'4510#..;#22'#4'& 9+..+#/ #8'4#)'.165+<'+5#%4'5 %.'8'.#0&-019061/'61$'6*'2'45109*15'0#/'+557$5%4+$'&616*'(14')1+0)

0ž'ž 616#.07/$'41(.165#%4'514.#4)'4  +05647/'06#0&#%-019.'&)'&61/'*'':'%76'&6*'5#/'(146*'274215'5#0& 616#.07/$'41(.16561#%4'5  %105+&'4#6+106*'4'+056#6'& 616#.07/$'41(.165#%4'561#%4'5  5 616#.07/$'41(.165#%4'561#%4'5    )+8'070&'4/;*#0&#0&5'#.1(1((+%'6*+56*' &#;1(#&  616#.07/$'41(.165.'556*#0#%4'5   ž  '    6*+557$&+8+5+10+5.1%#6'&9+6*+06*'&4+22+0)     ž 524+0)5+5& 016#4;27$.+% *56#6'1(6':#5 #;5%1706;6':#5 5ž9ž  &4+8'9#;2'4/+6016' %1706;1(*#;5 0ž9ž +014&'461241/16'5#('75'1(4#1&9#;5#0&24'5'48'6*'%10&+6+1051(27$.+%41#&9#;501&4+8'9#; %105647%6'&10#0;.169+6*+06*+557$&+8+5+105*#..$'2'4/+66'&61#%%'551061#27$.+%41#&9#;70.'55 $'(14'/'6*'70&'45+)0'&#76*14+6;106*+5&#;2'4510#..;#22'#4'& %#41.;05 C #2'4/+6(1475'1(6*'%1706;41#&9#;4+)*6Ä1(Ä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

56#6'1(6':#5  &/$<721&29(  %1706;1($':#4

5ž'ž +*'4'$;%'46+(;6*#66*'#$18'2.#6%10(14/5616*'/+0+/7/56#0&55'6(146*$; 6*'6':#5$1#4&1(241('55+10#..#0&5748';+0)#%%14&+0)61#0#%67#.5748';/#&' 5'9#)'&+5215#.+0&+8+&7#.9#6'45722.;%'46+(+%#6'619+6 ž76+.+6;'#5'/'06 106*')4170&$;'/2.1;''51(9+.-+'5748';+0) 5 015647%674'+06*+557$&+8+5+105*#..$'1%%72+'&706+.%100'%6'&61#0 ž$.&)5'6$#%-.+0' +0&+8+&7#.9#6'45722.;14#56#6'Ä#22418'&%1//70+6;9#6'45;56'/&7'61    &'%.+0+0)9#6'45722.+'5#0&&+/+0+5*+0)9#6'437#.+6;2412'%6+8'190'45#4' ,'44;&9+.-+',4   ž    4')+56'4'&41('55+10#..#0&5748';1401 %#76+10'&$;*#;5%1706;6137'56+106*'5'..'4%10%'40+0))4170&9#6'4 ž ž   $ 7 . . #8#+.#$+.+6;4#+09#6'4%1..'%6+10+5'0%174#)'&#0&+051/'#4'#5/#;1(('4 6 ' & + .  2 ) 6*'$'564'0'9#$.'9#6'44'5174%' +  6   5 ; 7 '  /27 ' 6 ž 015647%674'+06*+557$&+8+5+105*#..$'1%%72+'&706+.%100'%6'&61#27$.+% # /27$ $ + 5 $&5(6 # 5'9'45;56'/1461#010Ä5+6'9#56'9#6'45;56'/9*+%**#5$''0#22418'&#0& ' % / 0 2'4/+66'&$;*#;5%1706;&'8'.12/'065'48+%'5 - 5  ' . $&5(6 0 $ + %(1-$0,1 (67(5 0 6 ' 01%105647%6+101416*'4&'8'.12/'069+6*+06*+557$&+8+5+10/#;$')+0706+. 1 3,&$6,2 *#;5%1706;&'8'.12/'062'4/+64'37+4'/'065*#8'$''0/''6 /6 '5 1 #4;

0ž'ž 6 /27% #0+ ž5  ž76+.+6;'#5'/'06  5  5 ,#/'5%.+06)#4<#&+4'%614 '  9#6'49'.. 2 $&5(6 ž *#;5%1706;&'8'.12/'065'48+%'5  ž   ž $ 0  ' '$9,'5(**/(5  ž  0 '

5

61/212'45%(/  '06   #5'/  6;'  6+.+ ž 7  *#;5%1706;(.11&2.#+0#&/+0+564#614 ž ž  7  $ 6 . + ž & . 

) + 6

 ; 5 '  ' '  6 #  56#6'1(6':#5 $ 5  # ' %1706;1(*#;5

% / ž /27$ - ' 9#6'49'..  0  . +.+<)10<#.'<%1706;%.'4-1(*#;5%1706;6':#5&1*'4'$;%'46+(;6*#610  + 6  0 ž5 # ' 6*'&#;1( #&6*'%1//+55+10'45%17461(*#;5%1706; 0 $&5(6 +6 # 6':#52#55'&#014&'4#76*14+<+0)6*'(+.+0)(144'%14&1(6*+52.#6#0&5#+&14&'4 4 ; ' 5 *#5$''0&7.;'06'4'&+06*'/+076'51(6*'5#+&%1746+0$11- 2#)' / 5 6    9+60'55/;*#0&#0&5'#.1(1((+%'6*+56*' &#;1(#&  ž76+.+6;'#5'/'06 ž  0ž'ž   '          #.$'46$'46%1$$/&.+<)10<#.'<  ž76+.+6;'#5'/'06  %1706;,7&)'%1706;%.'4- ž *#;5%1706;6':#5*#;5%1706;6':#5 5ž9ž /27 /27 /27 0ž9ž 56#6'1(6':#5 $&5(6 $&5(6 $&5(6 %1706;1(*#;5 5 5 5 58%(1 3(**< 67(9(+<1'6 7200<+<1'6 3,&$6,2 +.+<)10<#.'<%1706;%.'4-1(*#;5%1706;6':#5&1*'4'$;%'46+(;6*#66*' (14')1+0)+05647/'061(94+6+0)9+6*+65%'46+(+%#6'1(#76*'06+%#6+109#5(+.'&(14 4'%14&+0/;1((+%'106*' &#;1( #61ž%.1%-#/ 4'2.#61(.16#).'00* #0&&7.;4'%14&'&106*' &#;1( #61ž%.1%-#/+0 6*'2.#64'%14&51(*#;5%1706;6':#5+0$11- 2#)' -16*/#002412'46+'5

  :,/.,(6859(<,1*//& 57$&+8+5+10 .+<)10<#.'< %1706;%.'4- 4')+56'4'&241('55+10#..#0&5748';14 *#;5%1706;6':#5 21$1: .16#Ä#0&#Ä).'00*-16*/#002412'46+'5 5#0#0610+16':#5  Ä 5%#.' ž 57$&+8+5+10+0*#;5%1706;6':#5 9+.-+'5748';14";#*11%1/ ,1$07/$'4 39 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Discussion and possible action to adopt a resolution in support of the HERO (Highway Emergency Response Operators) Program extension into Hays County along IH - 35 up to Yarrington Road.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

ACTION-MISCELLANEOUS January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Mario Espinoza - CTRMA JONES INGALSBE

SUMMARY

The25B51B77B103B129B155B181B207B233B HERO program is a motorist's assistance program which helps with the removal of disabled vehicles, removal of debris and expedites clean up of vehicle accidents. This resolution will show support for the Mobility Authority's proposal to extend this service into Hays County.

40

Resolution of the Hays County Commissioners Court Regarding the Highway Emergency Response Operators (HERO) Program on Interstate Highway 35 in Hays County.

WHEREAS, the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (the “Mobility Authority”) was formed in 2002 as a local multi-county transportation agency tasked with improving mobility in Central Texas and is authorized under state law to partner with government agencies in the region to implement programs and services that expedite the movement of goods and people, and

WHEREAS, removing disabled vehicles from highways, picking up debris, and expediting the clearance of vehicular crashes as part of a motorist assistance program has a direct benefit on regional mobility by improving safety and reducing traffic congestion, and

WHEREAS, the Mobility Authority has been awarded a grant to provide these services on Interstate 35 through its Highway Emergency Response Operators “HERO” program, and

WHEREAS, the Mobility Authority is proposing to extend the operating limits of the HERO program into Hays County, and

WHEREAS, the Commissioners Court of Hays County recognizes the benefit to Hays County residents and all motorists of providing HERO services on Interstate 35 in Hays County.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

The Hays County Commissioners Court hereby agrees to the proposed operation and extension of the HERO Program along Interstate Highway 35 in Hays County by the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority.

ADOPTED THIS 15th DAY OF January, 2013.

______Bert Cobb Hays County Judge

______Debbie Gonzales Ingalsbe, Precinct 1 Mark Jones, Precinct 2

______Will Conley, Precinct 3 Ray Whisenant, Precinct 4

Attest:

______Liz Gonzalez, County Clerk

41 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Discussion and possible action to authorize the County Judge and the Criminal District Attorney to execution a contract between Hays County Dispute Resolution Center (HCDRC) and the Hays County District Attorney's Office regarding Child Protective Services; and to ratify the execution of the Agreement for Alternative Dispute Resolution Services.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

ACTION-MISCELLANEOUS January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Tibbe COBB N/A

SUMMARY

HCDRC25B51B77B103B129B155B181B207B233B shall extend professional services and duties to the DA's Office with regards to CPS cases and the mediation of those cases.

42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Discussion and possible action to authorize the County Judge to execute the application for the Hog Out County Grants Program.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

ACTION-MISCELLANEOUS January 15, 2013 N/A

LINE ITEM NUMBER N/A

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Jones/Nick Dornak JONES N/A

SUMMARY

The27B55B83B111B139B167B195B223B251B Hog Out County Grants Program is one developed by the Texas Department of Agriculture to allow citizens to assist in the eradication of feral hogs in Hays County.

54 [FOR TDA USE ONLY]

File No. ______

Date Rec. ______

TODD STAPLES, COMMISSIONER GTBD-130

APPLICATION DEADLINE: POSTMARKED BY JANUARY 18, 2013

SECTION A – APPLICANT ORGANIZATION INFORMATION County Name Hays Mailing Address 111 E. San Antonio St., Suite 300 City State Zip

San Marcos TX 78666

Physical Address 111 E. San Antonio St., Suite 300 City State Zip San Marcos TX 78666 Federal Tax Identification Number: (must be nine (9) digits) -

SECTION B – CONTACT PERSONNEL PROJECT COORDINATOR (Person capable of answering questions about the county’s feral hog activities.) Mr. Dr. Position Title Ms. Other ______Plum Creek Watershed Coordinator

First Name Last Name Nick Dornak Mailing Address City State Zip 1403 Blackjack St., Suite B Lockhart TX 78644

Phone No. Alt Contact No. E-mail Address

( 512 ) 213 - 7389 ( ) - [email protected]

COUNTY JUDGE OR AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL (Person authroized to enter the County into legal agreements.) Mr. Dr. Position Title Ms. Other ______County Judge

First Name Last Name Bert Cobb Mailing Address City State Zip 111 E. San Antonio St., Suite 300 San Marcos TX 78666

Phone No. Fax No. E-mail Address

( 512 ) 393 - 2205 ( 512 ) 393 - 2248 [email protected]

55 SECTION C – PREVIOUS PARTICIPATION IN HOG OUT COUNTY GRANTS

Has your County previously participated in the Hog Out County Grant? Yes No

If yes, what years? 2012* 2011

* By initialing, you certify that the number of hogs taken and educational programs in the county during 2012, as listed in Section D below, does not ______N/A include hogs taken using funding from your current grant award. Initial Here

SECTION D – IMPLEMENTATION OF FERAL HOG ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGIES

* Total number of feral hogs taken in the county, as certified by the county. 110 hogs

Please provide detailed information about the methods used and number taken by each method. (Additional sheets may be attached if more space is needed) Harvest methods were not consistently broken down on a per hog basis by participants. Results: 23 – Trapping; 1 – Hunting(Rifle); 57 – Dogs and Trapping; 29 – Hunting and Trapping

Total number of participants at all county-approved educational programs about 57 people feral hog abatement technologies.

* Please provide a detailed description of the county-approved educational programs conducted and types of abatement technologies discussed. Include dates and number of participants at each event. Sign in sheets will be accepted. (Additional sheets may be attached if more space is needed) General management, harvest methods and environmental impacts: Cabela’s – 10/25/12 (6), 10/28/12 (5); Hays County Extension Office – 10/30/12 (34); Volunteer Training: 10/2/12 (3), 10/3/12 (5), 10/17/12 (4)

SECTION E – CERTIFICATIONS By signing below, Applicant: (1) Certifies all information provided in connection with this application is true and correct to the best of Applicant’s knowledge; (2) Acknowledges any misrepresentation or false statement made by Applicant, or an authorized agent of Applicant, in connection with this application, whether intentional or not, will constitute grounds for denial of this application; (3) Acknowledges acceptance of funds in connection with this application acts as an acceptance of the authority of TDA and the State Auditor’s Office (SAO) or any successor agency to conduct an investigation in connection with those funds, and Applicant further agrees to cooperate fully with TDA and/or SAO or its successor in the conduct of the audit or investigation, including allowing TDA and/or SAO to inspect Applicant’s premises and providing all records requested; (4) Acknowledges this application and any payments owed to Applicant in connection with this application may be reduced or denied because of Applicant’s owing any debt to the State of Texas; and (5) By submission of this application, Applicant acknowledges as a condition of receipt of grant funds under this program the Applicant will be required to execute a grant agreement with the Texas Department of Agriculture, and further acknowledges that failure to timely execute the grant agreement will result in withdrawal of any grant funds awarded, and those funds will be redistributed to other qualified applicants in accordance with state law and TDA rules. Notice of Penalties: The penalty for knowingly making false statements or false entries, or attempts to secure money through fraudulent means, may include fines and/or incarceration and/or forfeiture of funds under applicable state law. Project Coordinator: Signature Date

Nick Dornak County Judge or Authorized Official Signature Date

Bert Cobb, Hays County Judge

Mark Jones, Commissioner Pct. 2

This application becomes public record and is subject to disclosure. With few exceptions, you have the right to request and be informed about the information that the State of Texas collects about you. You are entitled to receive and review the information upon request. You also have the right to ask the state agency to correct any information that is determined to be incorrect. (Reference: Texas Government Code, Sections 552.021, 552.023, and 559.004.)

56

Overview. The Texas Department of Agriculture (TDA) is administering the Hog Out County Grants Program (Program). The Program is designed to encourage counties across the State of Texas to make a concentrated and coordinated effort to reduce the feral hog population and the damage caused by these animals during the three month period of October 1, 2012 thru December 31, 2012, with the month of October 2012 being deemed “Hog Out” Month. This document sets forth Program requirements and procedures.

Notice of Intent to Participate. In order to participate, an appropriate county official must complete and return a Notice of Intent to Participate in the Program prior to the close of business on September 28, 2012. Any county that submits their Notice of Intent after the deadline will not be eligible to receive funds from the Hog Out County Grants Program. Filing a Notice of Intent to Participate does not legally bind your county to participate in the Program. Notices may be submitted via mail, fax, or email to one of the addresses below.

Mailing Address: Physical Address: Texas Department of Agriculture Texas Department of Agriculture Hog Out County Grant Program Hog Out County Grant Program P. O. Box 12847 1700 N. Congress Ave., 11th Floor Austin, Texas 78711 Austin, Texas 78701

Fax Number: (888) 223-9048 Email signed and scanned copies to: [email protected]

Program Process. Participating counties will be required to document the following results for the period of October 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012, by submission of a certified TDA Program Application (See Submitting an Application):

• Historical participation in the Hog Out County Grant Program. Counties that have previously submitted completed applications will be awarded additional points.

• Number of feral hogs taken in the county, as certified by the county. The county will receive five points per 10 hogs taken. A feral hog is taken if it is killed during the period of October 1, 2012 thru December 31, 2012, or if it is trapped, snared, or captured during this period for purposes of immediate slaughter. Hogs that are trapped, snared, or captured for any other purpose (such as transfer to an approved hunting area) are not considered to have been taken.

• Number of individuals participating in county-approved educational courses addressing feral hog abatement technologies. Participating counties will receive one point per participant in attendance at each educational course, as certified by the county. Educational content related to feral hogs should be at a minimum of 60 minutes.

57 Transporting a live feral hog to an authorized hunting preserve does not reduce the feral hog population and should not be counted in the county’s certification of the total of feral hogs taken during the activity period.

Eligibility Criteria. To be eligible for an award under the Program, the applicant must be a Texas county that timely submits a Notice of Intent to Participate. The county must have or develop a method to accurately track the number of feral hogs taken in the county during the period of October 1, 2012 thru December 31, 2012 (such as collection and notching of ears). Counties that received, or are currently receiving, grant funds from TDA’s previous 2012 Feral Hog County Grants are eligible to receive another award in 2013. However, performance submitted toward the current year program competition cannot be funded by TDA grant funds from a previous Feral Hog County Grant award.

Submitting an Application. Counties that participate will be required to submit a completed Grant Application and Resolution documenting the county’s results postmarked by January 18, 2013. Applications will be accepted beginning January 2, 2013, and must be submitted on Form GTBD-130 provided by TDA. Application forms will be available on TDA’s website at www.TexasAgriculture.gov or available upon request from TDA by calling (512) 463-6908 or emailing [email protected].

Applications must be certified and bear the signature of the County Judge and the authorized county official who signed the Notice of Intent to Participate. If the County Judge originally signed the Notice of Intent to Participate, a County Commissioner, duly authorized by the Commissioner’s Court, should also certify the results.

Applications should be submitted to one of the following addresses:

Mailing Address: Physical Address: Texas Department of Agriculture Texas Department of Agriculture Hog Out County Grant Program Hog Out County Grant Program P. O. Box 12847 1700 N. Congress Ave., 11th Floor Austin, Texas 78711 Austin, Texas 78701

Fax Number: (888) 223-9048 Email signed and scanned copies to: [email protected]

Award Information and Notification. TDA will make awards after all applications are processed. Grant funds will be available for county use on feral hog abatement expenditures during the 2013 calendar year. Awards will be made to the three highest scoring counties as follows: . the highest scoring county shall be awarded $20,000 . the 2nd highest scoring county shall be awarded $15,000 . the 3rd highest scoring county shall be awarded $10,000

All other counties may receive an award based on the number of feral hogs taken.

Counties that are awarded Program grants will be required to enter into a grant agreement with TDA in order to receive grant funds. Grant funds will be distributed on a reimbursement basis after awarded counties submit proof of expenditures.

58

Reporting Requirements. Counties that are awarded Program grants will be required to submit the following reports: 1. Project performance reports, on a quarterly basis, detailing the accomplishments of their feral hog project, including but not limited to the number of feral hogs abated and the number of educational courses held, and a budget report detailing expenditures during the quarter. Project reports are due within 30 days of the close of each calendar quarter. 2. Final project report due either upon completion of the project or within thirty (30) days after the termination of the contract. The final report shall be submitted in hard copy format and electronic format on a diskette or e-mailed utilizing Word. The final report shall contain: a. A project summary –history of the project, its effort, results, number of feral hogs abated, and the number of educational courses hosted; b. A description of the successes, challenges, and any limitations of the program; and c. A description of future plans, including if and how the project will continue after the grant is expended and how additional funding might address expansion efforts. 3. A final budget report that details all grant award expenditures.

Budget Information. Hog Out County Grants Program awards are paid on a cost reimbursement basis. 1. Eligible Expenses. Generally, expenses that are necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient performance and administration of a project are eligible; however, these expenses must be properly documented with sufficient backup detail, including copies of paid invoices. Examples of eligible expenditures are: a. Personnel costs – both salary and benefits; b. Travel – domestic only; c. Supplies and direct operating expenses – equipment that costs less than $5,000, such as research and office supplies, postage, telecommunications, printing, etc.; d. Contracts – agreements made with a third party to perform a portion of the award; and e. Indirect costs – TDA limits reimbursable indirect expenses to 10% of the grant award.

2. Ineligible Expenses. Expenses that are prohibited by state or federal law are ineligible. Examples of these expenditures are: a. Alcoholic beverages; b. Entertainment; c. Contributions, charitable or political; d. Expenses falling outside of the contract period; e. Expenses for expenditures not listed in the project budget; and f. Expenses that are not adequately documented. g. Capital Expenditures – Equipment that has a useful life of more than one year or a cost of more than $5,000. EXCEPTIONS FOR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES MAY BE GRANTED BY TDA ONLY IF THE COUNTY RECEIVES WRITTEN APPROVAL PRIOR TO EXPENDITURE / PURCHASE.

General Compliance Information. 1. Prior to accepting the grant and signing the grant agreement, grantees will be provided a copy of the TDA reporting requirements for their review. This document will explain billing procedures, quarterly and annual reporting requirements, procedures for requesting a change in the project scope or budget, and other miscellaneous items.

59 2. Any delegation by the Grantee to a subcontractor regarding any duties and responsibilities imposed by the grant award shall be approved in advance by TDA and shall not relieve the Grantee of its responsibilities to TDA for their performance. 3. All grant awards are subject to the availability of appropriations and authorizations by the Texas Legislature. 4. Any information or documentation submitted to TDA as part of the project grant proposal is subject to disclosure under the Texas Public Information Act. 5. Awarded grant projects must remain in full compliance with state and federal laws and regulations. Noncompliance with such law may result in termination by TDA. 6. Grant recipients must keep a separate bookkeeping account with a complete record of all expenditures relating to their project. Records shall be maintained for three (3) years after the completion of the research project or as otherwise agreed upon with TDA. TDA and the Texas State Auditor’s Office reserve the right to examine all books, documents, records, and accounts relating to the research project at any time throughout the duration of the agreement and for three years immediately following completion of the project. If there has been any litigation, claim, negotiation, audit or other action started prior to the expiration of the three-year period involving the records, then the records must be retained until the completion of the action and resolution of all issues which arise from it, or until the end of the regular three-year period, whichever is later. TDA and the Texas State Auditor’s Office shall be granted access to and the right to inspect physical locations related to any project activities. 7. If the Grantee has a financial audit performed in any year during which Grantee receives funds from TDA, and if TDA requests information about the audit, the Grantee shall provide such information to TDA or provide information as to where the audit report can be publicly viewed, including the audit transmittal letter, management letter, and any schedules in which the Grantee’s funds are included. 8. Grant awards shall comply in all respects with the Uniform Grant Management Standards (UGMS). A copy may be downloaded from the following website: www.governor.state.tx.us/divisions/stategrants/guidelines/files/UGMS012001.doc

Further Information. Additional information about the Program, the Notice of Intent to Participate, or the application process can be found under the Grants/Services tab on TDA’s website at www.TexasAgriculture.gov. In addition, organizations may contact TDA at (512) 463-6908 or [email protected] for more information.

Timeline. Sept. 28, 2012 County submits Notice of Intent to Participate. Oct. 1 – Dec. 31, 2012 County participates in program activities, including “Hog Out Month”. Jan. 2 – 18, 2013 County submits application, resolution and documentation of the following information between. . Number of feral hogs taken in the county, as certified by the county. . Number of participants at a county-approved education program about feral hog abatement technologies. February 2013 TDA makes awards. Feb. 1 – Dec. 31, 2013 Awarded applicants use grant funds to implement county feral hog abatement practices.

60 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Discussion and possible action to adopt a resolution in support of the Hog Out County Grants Program.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

ACTION-MISCELLANEOUS January 15, 2013 N/A

LINE ITEM NUMBER N/A

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Jones/Nick Dornak JONES N/A

SUMMARY

The27B55B83B111B139B167B195B223B251B Hog Out County Grants Program is one developed by the Texas Department of Agriculture to allow citizens to assist in the eradication of feral hogs in Hays County.

61

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION

Hog Out County Grants Program

A RESOLUTION OF THE HAYS COUNTY,TEXAS (the “Applicant”), DESIGNATING (an) OFFICIAL(S) AS BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR THE APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (“TDA”), FOR THE PURPOSE OF PARTICIPATING IN TDA’s HOG OUT COUNTY GRANTS PROGRAM (the “Program”) AND CERTIFYING THAT THE APPLICANT IS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE PROGRAM ASSISTANCE.

WHEREAS, the Applicant is a Texas county and is fully eligible to receive assistance under the Program; and

WHEREAS, the Applicant acknowledges the Hog Out County Grants Program is designed to encourage counties across the state to make a concentrated and coordinated effort during the three month period of October 1, 2012 thru December 31, 2012 to reduce the feral hog population in Texas; and

WHEREAS, the Applicant acknowledges that if the county is awarded funds, such funds must be used for the sole purpose of continuing feral hog abatement activities within the county; and

WHEREAS, the Applicant wishes to authorize an official to represent the Applicant in dealing with TDA concerning the Program;

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE APPLICANT:

SECTION 1: That the Applicant hereby certifies that it is eligible to receive assistance under the Program.

SECTION 2: The Applicant hereby authorizes and directs Nick Dornak to act for the applicant in dealing with TDA for the purpose of the Program, and Nick Dornak is officially designated as the representative of the Applicant in this regard.

SECTION 3: The Applicant hereby specifically authorizes the above-named official to do all acts necessary to apply for and receive assistance from the Program related to feral hog abatement activities that will take place in Hays County during the period October 1, 2012 thru December 31, 2012 and Nick Dornak is authorized to execute on behalf of the Applicant any licenses or other documents required by TDA for Applicant’s participation in the Program.

Introduced, read and passed by the affirmative vote of the Applicant on this __15th____ day of ______January______, 2013.

______Signature of Authorized Official Typed Name and Title

NOTE: All information shown in this resolution must be included in the resolution passed by the governing body of the applicant requesting program funds. The Authorized Official must be County Judge who has the authority to legally bind the applying county.

62 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Discussion and possible action to change the effective date for the TVFC/Immunization Specialist Administrative Assistant III position from January 8, 2013 to January 1, 2013.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

ACTION-MISCELLANEOUS January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

CLINT GARZA COBB INGALSBE

SUMMARY

As25B55B85B115B145B175B205B235B265B a part of the realignment of the Personal Health Department, an Admin III position was created on January 8, 2013.

This26B56B86B116B146B176B206B236B266B position handles the responsibilities for the Texas Vaccines for Children (TVFC) program and other public health27B57B87B117B147B177B207B237B267B functions as required by Hays County's Immunization Contract with the Texas Department of State Health

Services.28B58B88B118B148B178B208B238B268B

The29B59B89B119B149B179B209B239B269B effective date for the position was scheduled to be January 1, 2013, however, Commissioners Court was cancelled on that date. Action was taken on the item at the next available court date (January 8, 2013) and, inadvertently, became effective on that date. This action will change the effective date from January 8th to January 1st, 2013.

63 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Discussion and possible action to authorize County Judge to execute the Resolution of the Hays County Commissioners Court Concerning the Creation of a Conservation and Reclamation District related to the West Travis County Public Utility Agency (WTCPUA).

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

ACTION-MISCELLANEOUS January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Whisenant WHISENANT N/A

SUMMARY

Summary25B51B77B103B129B155B181B207B233B to be provided in open court.

64

A RESOLUTION OF THE HAYS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT CONCERNING THE CREATION OF A CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION DISTRICT

WHEREAS, the West Travis County Public Utility Agency (the “WTCPUA”) was created by concurrent ordinance of the City of Bee Cave (“Bee Cave”), Hays County (the “County”) and West Travis County Municipal Utility District No. 5 (the “District”) pursuant to Chapter 572 of the Texas Local Government Code; and

WHEREAS, on January 17, 2012 the WTCPUA executed an Installment Purchase Agreement with the Lower Colorado River Authority (the “LCRA”) whereby the WTCPUA would purchase the West Travis County Water and Wastewater System (the “System”) from the LCRA; and

WHEREAS, the WTCPUA intends to seek legislation to convert to a conservation and reclamation district under Article XVI, Section 59 of the Texas Constitution in the 83rd Session of the Texas Legislature; and

WHEREAS, a portion of this conservation and reclamation district will be located in the County; and

WHEREAS, the conservation and reclamation district will provide water and/or wastewater service within its boundaries and will have no authority to assess taxes; and

WHEREAS, the County desires to consent to the creation this conservation and reclamation district, and the conversion of the WTCPUA into such district.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, TEXAS THAT:

1. Hays County supports the Texas Legislature’s creation of a conservation and reclamation district that includes the land within the County.

2. The County supports the creation of this conservation and reclamation district by means of special legislation enacted during the 83rd Session of the Texas

65 Legislature, provided that the district does not have the authority to levy taxes.

3. The County supports the conversion of the WTCPUA into the newly created conservation and reclamation district.

RESOLVED, ORDERED AND DECLARED this ______day of January, 2013.

______JUDGE BERT COBB, M.D. HAYS COUNTY JUDGE

ATTEST:

______LIZ Q. GONZALEZ COUNTY CLERK

66 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Workshop on Recommended Hays County Transportation Plan

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

WORKSHOP January 15, 2012

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

Borcherding CONLEY N/A

SUMMARY

The25B51B77B103B129B155B181B207B233B purpose of the Hays County Transportation Plan (HCTP) is to provide for an expanded arterial roadway network in the County to match future growth as it occurs, with County population expected to increase from 157,000 in 2010 to about 370,000 in 2035. The draft HCTP was prepared throughout 2012 by a consultant team led by Parsons Brinckerhoff, a Technical Advisory Committee and a Citizens Advisory Committee. Public involvement included providing current information on the County website, two rounds of public workshops, over 330 written comments, civic organization meetings, and media information. The draft HCTP was also coordinated with the cities within Hays County. The draft HCTP consists first, of a planned roadway map showing location and size of recommended arterial roadways, and second of a roadway matrix table showing recommended arterial cross section, right-of-way and requirements, as attached. The HCTP consultants are recommending that the Commissioners Court adopt the HCTP as an official "Major Thoroughfare Plan" in accordance with state law (SB 873).

67 RR 962 Hays County Transportation Plan Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff

H A M IL TO N P O

O L DRAFT - January 8, 2013

B L U F F YON

N A

C

K

A

O E

V

I L

K

E E

R C

Y

O

R

R O Y O C N RWO OD R Blanco W E E IE

K V L IL H

County MC S

GRE R ING A E

G F

O OR S R AD LL SPR DLEH D O CE RN BE N 238 A WI 3 NC FM

D H

C E 2

N S

T A T

U S V

W E

S E E RI R RV V RR 1 W D E R R S ADDL E E D T R N E T A E A CA L I Travis ST

E V R W E A O L

A

K S FAW N County F OR E D S S R A T ER C E

W G DE E

K N N I

O E C R AM R R B S C P O Y N

E S

EK H

L A I NEER L M H LL W V I E E B

PIO R FITZHUGH R A N

ON E C T G

W R R H E

L

I U O BA

V ED B S T

T G T N N A O MA

L U 4

G V

A K

L L E E E R Y C R E 4 V IL

S S P

R D I

U Y A LLEY K N PA

L O D GVA

S S A A B L

T H M V L E

L E

M

H L E L

T T C L O

M Y N G R A N S A

N A P N

N R H L C R E S P I G N H

WI G O ND T GW Y H O N O S R S T R O O IL R L T D A H A L A L S L I O H S L

L O O IL N

I LE D A A

H C H

R K K R A I V S

N CO B

E E R UE E R NF 2 L L R W A L E L K B I N L M

K O E C H H

R A O S D D E

R L O B N L N IL E R L H O

R C

EA OAKW U 3

L LAU HI 2 O S U E D AK D G 3 C E R W N 2 H MEA O WIN N

R D G EN D O A OLD

O M HIL T L A H I

E L L R M L

US F A I S G D A

L

D 290 D P L E

U

N E T CARSON R KI L N

T HI LS

U

E T H W Y I I T D G I T ER E

L N T I I DAVY CR R D N M L R Y O A A R D S T C N V

B K

4 N E

C W

R E A T

S H T

O

R P Y6 U HENLY XP AS E W B N B S E N LDE Y ERCER E M M T

Z HO RAMIRE D WY M HAYS C SA VW E A DR A

A M A D R R M O R C N T B O I R E E Y N O E L R S K C TE R D E

I O A

A B A N HARR N H E K A ORTS PAR Y UCK F M R SP I C O NN 4 A N D D R N R E D O E

V N 5 F E E I K 6 E 4 ER E W 1 FI K L

D F E 1 M M 0 H S R C I 1 L P L E F 8 I E N H F L D C A I DW O W O N H S N H D R

S I A L

O

W X R N L 1826

O S P E O E E GRE E 5 Y 4 VE R RR S O T S 6 W 1 T D O A H P AK S D 3 O OODS

O P ROCHN W L OW A 4 DSTO 5

L N F 1 IE M F E ( MAD 4 N S 5 6 MAD 2 DARDEN HILL B W 1 LU R FF R M C )

R

A Y BLISS SPILLAR D S T M A TLEM T E AT A GA N L N INOR 4 OR C H B HI

T L LL S

W U

D A

F 4 H W F O ROBIN K D W O E

S W T E

A A

F G R

AIL

V O H

L LD E

I

OV I E T

M M E N QU

N D N

W W E P T P

G

U ROC K O R

R A

R A O C O TLI D S A N L I BROWNSON

E A N Y AUT CREE G UMN D 6 T 1 62 M FM 2 OA D K Y BUZZAR R KS H 12 T

I

R N YL

G

U OR

O

H GATL I L M N CREEK F CO N O B RR

M R AY N N K N A

T A T K ELL O E DA F

EE E R R P AD V 6 L C I W RANGER

OS T L RA ILL L A H S

N H

BBI R M 1 I 4 E 5

RE D O 5

N E 3 L Y

W FOX Y

T E T V L VE WILLE N ( A GRO 4 V A OAK O H I

MUDA N S K I I E 45 FRIO S 4 B E K ID Y A

E N DO E E

P X

U S

W A C

I

C O

S ) 5 S

T U 4 X PINE

S T

IH 3 35

E

R D IH E R

O 5

F V N

W HT 62 E

K

L IG A L

R O FM 1

AD 2 U TURNERSVILLE N M RR 967 C W E 5 TURNE G HY ER D H 3

L I RS O O OU ARISON N BAY V FM 1327

G D ILL HORN G MAIN MAD 6 E PALM E E EV L MIDDLE C Y

N A AN TOBIN B

RE LACK NY E CR

D H OLD B C OLO L 35 R N 45 E C O R I R A S L H C N L S F I

T I I F KA A

M O A I S R N G

RAL R 3 U DA G S N L

I R LE

H RE B AUS H R CE O

A

H D 1 V IL

I SKY P L E C E R

L OL S L C E P N L GOFORTH A SV A S S S R

T R O NF O L D FM 2001

O TURNER AEF H O AY K CR E 4 L T D S R EEK AN GR O

N O RT D Y R Y L

4 ROB ROLL D L G E

O E A R R

I AD 4 E M W IC

M T L H

P H O T O D 35 S E C A

S O C NF 1

T G IH K L GOFO G

E IN RA H R S E J M K I

LO S R N ISTI LILY G A

E D T EF R G O

P R C O 2 N A H T

3 O A L 35

N N

M OL

25 C Y MAU O J T K I N U IH A R H LON F KS W A P C E KS N MAN MOUNT E I

A C LSIDE L A R p D HIL R IN R O S OSS SE L M AC IA AK BUCKSKIN o M O S LD o OVE Y

O O L Y SUSAN LE BLUE S K MEYER N GE L S DI E MAD 2 SVIL R N e LIMES TO ER Y l 0 RN E 35

L y P U TU E L H Q A T P RR 2

IN 150 M L I T A R A R

SANDY PO R RR 3237 D A K T A

A 4 M

V E S S K H

T E MA

H L K L E E A R I O S L 4 A R

T L E E H ORT

E S KELLY SMITH G KS S T N E AI W R D I K G L I L NF L X U N Y N N O

M S P C LLI BR GOF

C L RO Q

A R B Y I I A P A D R O O K D L 4 IDL R W Z E P I A Y C ER M W L S S L Q A E H C JA N AK O U E L V C R E E D O E W R Y L H A N A ORTO S I A L A S D O Y I T N L GE LO N H R K K 5 IS E N O S P STO Y 3

T MA DY HILL

Y AUB GUSTA U

R

6

P T H W L R I E NT VA C I

E M ET A KAI V

V EAS L R E V L E E O K A

N E D TH

A IS A E I Y E A N R O L LERS S KOH

D L E K R OV S IE U K

AY M DER L D

B

S

H B Q A KE

E E R S

F L

S O R BER L CHUB Y I W

IE M U U

RA C L A L E GE R N EN L AL H S O M A A H R W D M H U K N PRI 1 BE IL M N C P E A RO RW D EN SE N 6 O E D RE O H S RT R F A 2 D T C S W A V TRASSE I NG S 6 R D N I O I STA BEBE O O F WO IO NT 1 G F CHA MP D E

H E 7

I R JA L T 5 RI 1

S A Y 3 N

L M ZET

M H G AS

S 2 H K I 1 T A C C I Y E HI

L M LE C ED I A R S

Y GE L N I AT AL

M SO E 35 S

T M

P M P E R RE N T C N

R U D M O ACY N C ODY D S S A T IH K D O ROHDE LO O

E N N U OUN S A E

A S S E Y F T

L T M O S R R L E O S V 4 F IS

R E E E

D Y C E A N OGA T U E A RE 4 K CAMIN K T R B W S R H H Y C B I T U OX CANY EBE E U D R K O R A O OO B H L N N A NCH T W S RROW L O R IT

O U C K S E B S M

O I 5 K A E N M 5 L T M SPA Y R 3 e V UM TTO B O P BU IE S AC NWOOD E Y 2 U IH R b W IL RLE CL C B I L

EY A LE S R A E N e

EAR LA N T E

T 1 B HO

F P R R e R 8 R I

U R B T G

H N

I A C

N IO B S N A

N Y A / FM

C T E II C A H CYPRESS A N D H S N N C FOX S W M 200 RE K A N O N A i T A H S E BL

R C AN E CO g

B R CEN G

TER I E

ER H ER L A 1 H T h N A E

H R IV

C O R N L L VAL S S H C I P G UT L T MOORE D D

F E S O O M E T L R H

I T B O Y T IGH O H LONIE L E FIRST N E H V O T H d H C U C 4 N T H U O

C S A B R R N F M 35 A

A E P KL M G I EHMA L IN EY

A 5 A IN O L L RIVER K H

R R M I B A C A WAY G A TW SIDE R O N E CR N 1 SLEDG 1 A I 4

49 L B W BUN D 2 O AG M E D I L N A I 35

DEER E L F ST T T T

L P S L A ON 2

C N D O L IH

D O

A T

A H

P I DAIRY H OL S COTTON GIN E D MAD 2 S S N L N

A MA K W OP O F S O O K O ccess AL RU P E A D E M I H S K E AK IG cy A RO E A LD K H IL R M en H E R I M LAN H C R D IG K F I C y OA K

O G Emerg H A E M B A R U O D E U E T N O N l L T K Only y L E AK E e P 5 O O S R D ST CR E I FLIN A A l E O R W T

K H K 2 T O S PO 1 A HN NOX I D e IH 3 P O A M E L R 58 W J K M I L E U S P O Y R S W R N R H L A k

U E D L V QU

A W STA N L O S R w

D T O T

M E O S o D AI

G T H D I F 1

I S

A W L IO

R SS E E CR S

I R I y

HEAD G L I

E A E S W R W N L L o I N N M I IDGE

FM 484 W B O N D 15 G A R W E L I I p RIST MILL P N D 8 E O V A S A

A A M M Y R R

ARRO

M P D

S E T E I S T L

A A

S L R L E T

C S

I GAP E M

CANYON D I O VA E KILN A V DRU

O E D S O E O RA H RRA L N L N C A N T C E LIM L A D

D O N F F

KWOO E D S CR 202 M 2 A D U N A S

E E O

O R R N O O L M 5 R 72

T W H B T T DRV 1

R S 3 50 0 I A Y M IL K 8 8FWY H N W I A 1 E O A R E W R RI L DRV R 1 4 FUL Y N # 2 P W G 4 Y T 0 3 E P T O O A ON O N M K K D F RR 32 R W AN CH FW 4 Y 4 P U 6 35 D R U H H I G H A # C I A LL C N O I T Z AR A A A M

O A D

M R R R H

I K

F Y CO U A N ER F

M O M D M O ND N N L LL 4

A 3

E N 1966 I OR HI

0 AVI WAN T B

A T E S 6 S

C G ERS

L O G L O H

AN N CO I 3

T E D A N P Y I 5 O D O T A M HARRI 6 C WO S O N S U O O A N L O T S W O M A B H L C C P D L R A A F A F C F8 IH 35 M # N HARRIS HUGO M L B IM 1 R 35 2 A E I L Y DLEW D K IL IH A O R 4 I HIL W O LBJ L UHL M H D EE O N L R N L 35 IG A D RA AND UH H N NCH REL IH LA T C PIO R LAU N D R H O O E V A DR W P S A D ALAMO 6 N IR K 1 SSOM A P O 2 E O M S R A A C E BRO F R A DA IV E K A D VIS R AIRPORT LBJ L S E COM W P I DALE RV E L M N E N Y D T W PERKI OO O S L P R AN

T E RU DARTMOU NS SCO H Y CH SH N AL R 5 4 O 3 BUGG F7 LE TT E D M 4 A IH N M M A W M A C

TH IT EATH S Y

O CH IH3 CHE M 5 N N DE CK VI K LL Y R L BARBARAA BEL M IE W ROB E W M L L IS N L O F O E B SUMMIT SNY AR 5 A E O C S R X 3 GRAVEL H E D D D I P D L O A S ER N C O D O K K Y A H SH S ILL 6 8 O O S 0 A T R ATE K P AR T IH 35

A IE A IA E S L O IC

R S G n A

G E IN C TR

L L OW R

P L L E PA

L RKER o

M O I E K i P A R W PA AH s E LA L A n 0 Caldwell 5 V O IH 35 3 D A L E Z 1 I IH e H M t 1 P x LLS A HI M 35 County Y E F B IH U AY LAZ D D S RIVER CASSO IE E 1 PI MAD 4 N RI R 6 VER LAZY A 2 RAN CH B CLOVIS BARK OAK S N H TA P S L 3 E F 35 S IH IH 35 E LL

R H 12 Q S 4 6 UAI SCU M Y FM L C W C W 30 H A IT R F 6 E 5 T T 5 Y H A 3 A IL H IH 3 RM I 6 N C ASH O E MA N N S T ASPE E FIR D 1979 M RP INE O P E M

I D 4 F N UC P

A I

T A 978 N SPR 1 D M T F RVW MESQUITE A D R 35 M E IH 2 IL T N Comal U H P O 5 S E 3 Y County IH

UM

L B

H 35 O I

I C A RE 2

0 D

1 W

2 1 OFF 0 OOD 1 K 1 M N BEBACK INN E E M F R F H MANN HILL

5 3 H YOR W I F LO R MA R

K CRE A PA R N I U D R C G

L E E P I S EK S T A S RK O FM F H RIDGE 6 A 2 R 1 H R FM 1339 O IS F NT F E M OI Guadalupe A N N E

E RP E BRAUNE R EGUIN 1979 G

S FM

N N

AN N

23 LD

CENT County S H O

O ER

H 1 H LEHM R ALLIS S MA S HARRI CI NN

RAN 3353

F FM FM

BER O LD Z DREIBRODT ORN [ HU 1 0 11 S Legend K M F I

P

L

E Add Lanes X Enhance to MAU 2

RANDOW Possible Connection

021 miles

68 Hays County Transportation Plan Roadway Matrix January 8, 2013

Roadways Thoroughfare Program Existing Recommended Recommended Roadway Name Segment Cross Right-of-way Requirements/Remarks Cross Section Section (Feet) STATE ROADWAYS IH 35 Travis County Line - Comal County Line FWY 6 Corridor Study CAMPO 2035 Plan - Corridor study, Travis County Lto San Marcos US 290 (W) Blanco County Line - RM 165 MAU 4 MAD 4 200 US 290 (W) RM 165 - NF 2 MAU 4 MAD 4 200 US 290 (W) NF 2 - RM 12 MAD 4 MAD 4 200 US 290 (W) RM 12 - Nutty Brown Rd./Travis County Line MAD 4 EXPY 6 400 SH 21 Caldwell County Line - CR 159 (Yarrington) MAU 2 MAD 4 200 SH 21 CR 159 (Yarrington) - SH 80 MAU 2 MAD 6 200 SH 21 SH 80 - Posey Rd. None MAD 4 200 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 45 (SW) Loop 1 - FM 1626 (Travis and Hays counties) None FWY 4 Toll 400 CAMPO 2035 Plan - Construction planned between 2020-2025 SH 45 (SW) FM 1626 - IH 35 (Hays and Travis counties) None TBD 400 CAMPO 2035 Plan - Environmental/preliminary engineering analysis SH 80 / Old RR 12 RM 12/Wonder World Dr. - Holland St MAU 4 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 80 / Old RR 12 Holland St - Lindsey MAU 2 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 80 / Old RR 12 / Moore St Lindsey - Hopkins MAU 3 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 80 / E. Hopkins Moore St - Loop 82 MAU 3 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 80 / E. Hopkins Loop 82 - CM Allen MAU 4 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 80 / E. Hopkins CM Allen - IH 35 MAD 4 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 80 IH 35 - SH 21 MAD 4 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 80 SH 21 - Caldwell County Line MAU 4 MAD 6 200 SH 123 IH 35 - FM 621 MAD 4 MAD 6 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 123 FM 621 - Wonder World Dr. MAU 4 MAD 6 Partnership with City of San Marcos SH 123 Wonder World Dr. - Guadalupe County Line MAU 4 MAD 6 200 Loop 82 / Aquarena Springs Dr IH 35 - Sessom Dr. MAU 4 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos Loop 82 / University Dr Sessom Dr - Guadalupe St MAU 4 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos Loop 82 / Guadalupe University Dr - Grove St (One way SB) MAU 3 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos Loop 82 / LBJ University Dr - Grove St (One way NB) MAU 3 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos

Page 1 of 7

69 Hays County Transportation Plan Roadway Matrix January 8, 2013

Roadways Thoroughfare Program Existing Recommended Recommended Roadway Name Segment Cross Right-of-way Requirements/Remarks Cross Section Section (Feet) Loop 82 Guadalupe St/Grove St - LBJ Dr (One way) MAU 3 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos Loop 82 LBJ Dr. - IH 35 (Two way) MAU 4 MAD 4 Partnership with City of San Marcos FM 110 (E) IH 35 (N) - Turnersville Rd. Extension (NF 1) None FWY 4 220 Turnersville Rd. intersection design TBD FM 110 (E) Turnersville Rd. Extension (NF1) - SH 123 None FWY 4 220 Partnership with City of San Marcos FM 110 (E) SH 123 - IH 35 (S) Partial FWY 4 220 Partnership with City of San Marcos FM 150 (W) RM 12 - RM 1826 MAU 2 MAD 4 150 FM 150 (W) RM 1826 - FM 3237 MAU 2 MAD 4 150 FM 150 (W) FM 3237 - Kyle Loop (SW) MAU 2 MAD 4 150 See Kyle Loop connection to IH 35 at Yarrington Rd. FM 150 (W) Kyle Loop (SW) - FM 2770 MNR 2 MAD 4 150 FM 150 (W) / Rebel Dr. FM 2770 - W. Center St. @ Rebel Dr. MNR 2 MAD 2 100 FM 150 (W) / Center St. Rebel Dr. - IH 35 MAU 2 MAD 2 Existing FM 150 (E) IH 35 - SH 21 MAU 2 MAD 2 100 Possible extension into Caldwell County east of SH 21 FM 165 US 290 - Blanco County Line MNR 2 MAU 2 100 FM 621 SH 123 - Guadalupe County Line MAU 2 MAU 2 100 FM 967 FM 1826 - FM 1626 MAU 2 MAU 4 150 FM 967 FM 1626 - Main St MAU 2 MAD 2 150 Partnership with City of Buda FM 967 / S. Loop 4 / S. Main St. Main St - W. Goforth MAU 2 MAU 4 100 Partnership with City of Buda FM 967 / S. Loop 4 / S. Main St. W. Goforth - IH 35 MAU 2 MAU 4 100 Partnership with City of Buda FM 1626 SH 45 SW - FM 967 MAU 2 EXPY 6 200 FM 1626 FM 967 - FM 2770 MAU 2 EXPY 6 200 FM 1626 FM 2770 - IH 35 MAD 4 EXPY 6 200 Partnership with City of Kyle FM 2001/Overpass Rd. IH 35 - Old Goforth MAU 2 MAD 4 150 FM 2001 Old Goforth - Goforth MAU 2 MAD 4 150 FM 2001 (new alignment - NF 11) Goforth - SH 21 MAU 2 MAD 4 150 New route to intersect SH 21 @ FM 2001 in Caldwell County (NF 11) FM 2439/Hunter Rd.) SH 80 - Bishop MNR 2 MNR 2 Existing Partnership with City of San Marcos FM 2439/Hunter Rd.) Bishop - RM 12/Wonder World Dr. MNR 2 MAD 2 100 Partnership with City of San Marcos

Page 2 of 7

70 Hays County Transportation Plan Roadway Matrix January 8, 2013

Roadways Thoroughfare Program Existing Recommended Recommended Roadway Name Segment Cross Right-of-way Requirements/Remarks Cross Section Section (Feet) FM 2439 / Hunter Rd. RM 12 - Centerpoint Rd. MAD 4 MAD 4 150 FM 2439 / Hunter Rd. Centerpoint Rd. - Comal County Line MAU 2 MAD 4 150 FM 2770 / Jack C. Hays Trail FM 967 / Main St. - FM 1626 MAU 2 MAD 4 150 Partnership with City of Buda FM 2770 / Jack C. Hays Trail FM 1626 - FM 150 (W) MAU 2 MAD 4 150 Partnership with City of Kyle RM 12 FM 3238 - Fitzhugh Rd. MAU 2 MAU 2 100 Add passing lanes RM 12 Fitzhugh Rd. - FM 150 (W) MAU 2 MAD 4 150 Add passing lanes RM 12 FM 150 (W) - Winters Mill Pkwy MAU 2 MAD 2 100 Add passing lanes, dedicate ROW to modify Winters Mill Intersection RM 12 Winters Mill Pkwy - FM 3237 MAU 2 MAU 2 Existing Partnership with City of Wimberley RM 12 FM 3237 - RM 32 MAU 2 MAD 2 100 Add passing lanes, dedicate ROW to modify RM 3237 intersection RM 12 RM 32 - Old RR 12/SH 80 MAU 2 PKWY 6 200 RM 12 (Wonderworld Dr.) Old RR 12/SH 80 - FM 2439/Hunter Rd. MAD 4 PKWY 4 200 Partnership with City of San Marcos RM 12 (Wonderworld Dr.) FM 2439/Hunter Rd. - SH 123 MAD 4 MAD 6 120 Partnership with City of San Marcos RM 32 Comal County Line - RM 12 MAU 2 MAD 2 100 RM 1826 SH 45 - Darden Hill Rd. MAU 2 MAD 4 150 RM 1826 Darden Hill Rd. - FM 150 (W) MAU 2 MAD 4 150 RM 1826 / Elder Hill Bypass FM 150 (W) - RM 12 @ Elder Hill Rd.(CR 170) None MAD 2 100 New roadway from FM 150 to RM 12 at Elder Hill Rd. (NF 12) RM 2325 Blanco County Line - Jacobs Well Rd MAU 2 MAU 2 100 RM 2325 Jacobs Well Rd - Wimberley City Limits MAU 2 MAU 2 100 RM 2325 Wimberley City Limits - RM 12 MAU 2 MAU 2 100 Partnership with City of Wimberley RM 3237 RM 12 - Flite Acres Rd MAU 2 MAU 2 100 Redesignate as RM 12 RM 3237 Flite Acres Rd - Winters Mill Pkwy MAU 2 MAU 2 100 Dedicate ROW to modify RM 12 intersection, add passing lanes RM 3237 Winters Mill Pkwy - FM 150 MAU 2 MAU 2 100 Add passing lanes COUNTY/CITY ROADWAYS Bebee Rd/High Rd IH 35 - SH 21 MNR 2 MAD 2 100 Centerpoint Rd. / CR 234 FM 2439/Hunter Rd. - IH 35 MNR 2 MAD 4 100 Partnership with City of San Marcos Centerpoint Rd. / CR 234 IH 35 - Old Bastrop Highway MNR 2 MAD 4 100 Partnership with City of San Marcos

Page 3 of 7

71 Hays County Transportation Plan Roadway Matrix January 8, 2013

Roadways Thoroughfare Program Existing Recommended Recommended Roadway Name Segment Cross Right-of-way Requirements/Remarks Cross Section Section (Feet) Centerpoint Rd. / CR 234 Old Bastrop Highway - Beback Inn Rd./Posey Rd. MNR 2 MAD 4 100 Centerpoint Rd. / CR 234 Beback Inn Rd./Posey Rd. - Frances Harris MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Creek Rd. / CR 190 FM 165 - Roger Hanks Pkwy. MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Creek Rd / CR 190 Roger Hanks Pkwy - US 290 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Buda CR 158 IH 35 - Turnersville Rd Extension MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Dacy Ln./Goforth Rd. Hillside Terrace - IH 35 MNR 2 MAU 4 100 Partnership with City of Buda Darden Hill Rd./CR 162 FM 150 - FM 1826 MNR 2 MAD 2 100 Elder Hill Rd. / CR 170 RM 12 - FM 150 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 See NF 12, add new road from Elder Hill Rd. to FM 150 @ RM 1826 Fischer Store Rd. / CR 181 FM 2325 - Comal County Line MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Fitzhugh Rd. / CR 101 Blanco County Line - RM 12 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Fitzhugh Rd. / CR 101 RM 12 - Travis County Line MNR 2 MAU 4 100 Flite Acres Rd RR 2237 - Little Arkansas Rd MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Wimberley Frances Harris Ln. /CR 265/ Old Bastrop Highway - Centerpoint Rd. MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Fulton Ranch Rd Little Arkansas Rd - RM 12 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Garlic Creek Pkwy (NF 14) SH 45 (S) - FM 967 None PKWY 4 150 Partnership with City of Buda Goforth St. W. / CR 228 FM 967 - IH 35 MAU 2 MAU 2 80 Goforth Rd. / CR 119 FM 2001 - Hillside Terrace MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Harris Hill Rd. / CR 160 Yarrington Rd. - SH 21 COL MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of San Marcos Hilliard Rd. / CR 222 Lost River Rd. - Powder Horn MNR 2 MAU 2 80 See NF 16, new roadway for emergency access Hilliard Rd. / CR 222 Powder Horn - Lime Kiln Rd MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Hillside Terrace / CR 133 IH 35 - FM 2001 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Jacobs Well Rd. / CR 182 RM 12 - FM 2325 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Kohlers Xing FM 2770 - IH 35 MAD 4 MAD 4 100 Kyle Crossing IH 35 - Kohler Xing MAD 2/4 MAD 2/4 80 Kyle Crossing Kohler Xing - IH 35 @ Old Bridge Trail MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Kyle Loop (West) FM 1626 @ RS Light - IH 35 @ FM 110/Yarrington Rd. Partial MAD 4 100 Extension from FM 150 (W) to IH 35 (S), partnership with City of Kyle

Page 4 of 7

72 Hays County Transportation Plan Roadway Matrix January 8, 2013

Roadways Thoroughfare Program Existing Recommended Recommended Roadway Name Segment Cross Right-of-way Requirements/Remarks Cross Section Section (Feet) Kyle Parkway/Bunton/Gristmill IH 35 @ FM 1626 - SH 21 @ Gristmill Rd. MNR 2 MAD 4 100 Partnership with City of Kyle, connect with FM 2720 @ SH 21 Ledgerock Rd. / CR 244 Mount Gainor Rd. - FM 2325 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Lehman Rd Goforth Rd - FM 150 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Kyle Lime Kiln Rd. / CR 225 Cypress Rd. - Hilliard MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Connect over Blanco River to Cypress Rd. Lime Kiln Rd. / CR 225 Hilliard - Post Rd. MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of San Marcos Little Arkansas Rd Flite Acres - Fulton Ranch MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Wimberley Lone Man Mountain Rd. / CR 183 RM 12 - FM 2327 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 See NF 24 - new road connecting to FM 2327 Main St. West Garrison Rd. - IH 35 MAD 2 MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Buda Main St. East IH 35 - SH 45 (SE) @ Turnersville Partial MAD 6 120 Partnership with City of Buda Marketplace Ave. FM 967 - IH 35 @ Burleson Rd. None MAD 4 100 Partnership with City of Kyle McCarty Ln. / CR 233 FM 2439/Hunter Rd. - IH 35 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of San Marcos McCarty Ln. / CR 233 IH 35 - Old Bastrop Hwy. MNR 2 MAU 2 80 See FM 110 (E) McGregor Ln. / CR 187 Blanco County Line - US 290 (W) MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Mount Gainor Rd. / CR 220 Gatlin Creek Rd. - Mount Sharp Rd. MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Mount Sharp Rd. / CR 219 FM 2325 - Mount Gainor Rd. MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Nutty Brown Rd. / CR 163 US 290 - FM 1826 MAD 2 MAD 4 100 Old Bastrop Hwy. / CR 266 SH 21 - SH 80 MNR 2 MAU 2 100 See FM 110 (E) Old Bastrop Hwy. / CR 266 SH 80 - FM 110 (E) MNR 2 MAU 2 100 Old Bastrop Hwy. / CR 266 FM 110 - IH 35 (S) MNR 2 MAU 2 100 Old Goforth Rd. / CR 119 FM 2001 - Hillside Terrace MNR 2 MAD 4 100 Old San Antonio Rd. Travis County Line - Cabelas Dr. MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Buda Old Stagecoach Rd Post Rd - FM 150 MNR 2 MAU 2 80 See Kyle Loop (West) for overlap Overpass Rd (FM 2001) See FM 2001 Partnership with City of Buda Posey Rd. / CR 235 FM 2439 - IH 35 MAU 2 MAD 2 80 Partnership with City of San Marcos Posey Rd. / CR 235 IH 35 - Old Bastrop Hwy. MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Posey Rd. / CR 235 Old Bastrop Hwy. - SH 123 @ Beback Inn Rd. MNR 2 MAU 2 80

Page 5 of 7

73 Hays County Transportation Plan Roadway Matrix January 8, 2013

Roadways Thoroughfare Program Existing Recommended Recommended Roadway Name Segment Cross Right-of-way Requirements/Remarks Cross Section Section (Feet) Post Rd. / CR 140 IH 35 - Aquarena Springs Rd. MNR 2 MAU 4 100 Partnership with City of San Marcos Pursley Rd / Creek Rd. / CR 198 FM 165 - Mt. Gainor Rd. MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Robert S. Light Blvd. / CR 132 IH 35 - FM 2770 MNR 2 MAD 4 100 Partnership with City of Buda Robert S. Light Blvd. / CR 132 FM 2770 - FM 1626 None MAD 4 100 Partnership with City of Buda, see Kyle Loop (west) Ruby Ranch Rd. (See NF 20) FM 967 - FM 150 (W) COL/- COL 80 Extend as collector to FM 150 through future subdivision Satterwhite Rd. / CR 107 FM 2001 - Turnersville Rd. extension MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Sawyer Ranch Rd. / CR 164 US 290 - Darden Hill Rd. MNR 2 MAD 4 100 Shadow Creek Blvd. Hillside Terrace - Bebee Rd. Partial MAD 2 100 Partnership with City of Buda and Kyle Williamson Rd FM 2001 - Travis County Line MNR 2 MAU 2 80 Winters Mill Pkwy/Wimberley LoopRM 12 - FM 3237 MAU 2 MAU 4 Existing ROW Dedicate additional ROW to modify RM 12 and RM 3237 Intersections Windy Hill Rd. IH 35 - Turnerville Rd extension. MNR 2 MAD 2 100 Yarrington Rd. / CR 159 FM 110 - SH 21 MNR 2 MAD 4 100 Intersects Turnersville Rd, possible extension into Caldwell County NEW FACILITIES NF 1 (Turnersville Rd.) SH 45 SE - FM 110 Partial MAD 6 150 Extend from SH 45 (SE) in Travis County to FM 110 (E) NF 2 - Dripping Springs US 290 W - US 290 E (North US 290 bypass) None Partnership with City of Dripping Springs NF 6 RM 12 - IH 35 @ FM 1102 (Comal County) None MAD 4 100 Partnership with City of San Marcos and Comal County NF 7 (Craddock, Eastwood Ln) SH 80 - IH 35 @ River Ridge Pkwy Partial MAU 4 100 Partnership with City of San Marcos NF 10 - Dripping Springs RM 12 - US 290 (E) (Southeast bypass) None Partnership with City of Dripping Springs NF 11 (FM 2001) FM 2001 - SH 21 @ Rohde Rd. None MAD 4 150 Realignment to eliminate FM 2001 offset @ SH 21 NF 12 - Driftwood Elder Hill Rd. - FM 150 @ RM 1826 None MAD 2 100 Add new road from Elder Hill Rd. to FM 150 @ RM 1826 NF 13, 23 (Escarpment Blvd.) SH 45 - FM 150 north of FM 3237 None MAU 2 80 Connect to SH 45 or to RM 1826 north of Bear Creek Dr. NF 14 (Garlic Creek Pkwy) SH 45 - FM 967 None PKWY 4 150 Partnership with City of Buda NF 15 (Lime Kiln Rd, Cypress Rd.) Blanco River crossing Partial MAU 2 80 Reopen county road connection across Blanco River NF 16 (Hilliard Rd.) Fulton Ranch Rd. - Lost River Rd. None MAU 2 80 New roadway for emergency access NF 17 - Kyle FM 150 - Kyle Loop None MAD 4 100 Connection from FM 150 via Kyle Loop to IH 35 @ Yarrington Rd. NF 18 (FM 150) Dripping Springs US 290 (W) to RM 12 (Southwest bypass) None MAU 4 100 FM 150 extension, partnership with City of Dripping Springs

Page 6 of 7

74 Hays County Transportation Plan Roadway Matrix January 8, 2013

Roadways Thoroughfare Program Existing Recommended Recommended Roadway Name Segment Cross Right-of-way Requirements/Remarks Cross Section Section (Feet) NF 20 (Ruby Ranch Rd.) FM 967 - FM 150 (W) Partial Collector 80 Extend to FM 150 through future subdivision NF 21 (Lone Man Mountain Rd) Mt. Sharp Rd - RM 12 @ Lone Man Mountain Rd. None MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Wimberley NF 24 (Wimberley) Lone Man Mountain Rd. - FM 3237 None MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Wimberley NF 25 (Jacobs Well Rd) FM 2325 - Wayside Dr. None MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Wimberley NF 26 (Ledgerock Rd.) FM 2325 - Fischer Store Rd. None MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Wimberley NF 27 (Sachtleben Rd.) Wayside Dr. - RM 32 @ Purgatory Rd. None MAU 2 80 Partnership with City of Wimberley

Page 7 of 7

75 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Map ID/Comment # Venue Comment Category Survey # 2IH‐35 from austin to san marcos continues to be the highest traffic in hays county. diverting people to other roads General Comment can only go so far. Survey # 2 against the proposal General Comment: Non Supportive Survey # 2 Yes, I would like to see bike lanes added to any upgrading especially 1826. There are many cyclists on the dangerous General Comment: Bicycle Facilities road now, and an upgrade to include bike lanes would not only be much safer, but it would significantly enhance the recreational aspects of the hill country and its conneciton to existing trails and population centers. It would also enhance business opportunities by more tourism. Survey # 21. The Violet Crown Trail and a greenway should on the map and it should connect Austin to San Marcos as a biped General Comment: Bike/Ped Facilities; facility 2. Make watershed protection a cornerstone of your engineering. Lead the research analysis and design Environment; Funding improvement process. Roadways are not singular entities, they become a highly (if not the highest) impactful part of the county's ecology. Be smarter, be leaders. 3. Is the money raised through county property taxes within municipalities spent proportionally in those municipalities or are urban dwellers subsidizing the exurbanites? Focus on increasing mobility in the dense areas not the distant places. It saves gas, reduces pollution, reduces open land consumption. Survey # 2 greenbelts and greenways are generally a lower cost method to take citizens of the roadway while serving as major General Comment: Bike/Ped Facilities traffic corredors, particularly for students in San Marcos or other people who travel by foot or by due to necessity or personal preference. The less cars on the roadway, the less roadway maintenance which will be needed and less degradation to the environment in terms of surface and air pollution. Survey # 2 Please construct Sidewalks and Shoulders General Comment: Bike/Pedestrian Facilities Survey # 2 Bike lines are crucial to have. I much like the design of the ones similar to Texas State's. Otherwise, expand sidewalks General Comment: Bike/Pedestrian to be able to accomdoate both bikes and pedestrians. Facilities Survey # 2 All upgrades/expansions need to include wide shoulders to accomodate cyclists. General Comment: Bike/Pedestrian Facilities Survey # 2 All upgrades/expansions need to include wide shoulders to accomodate cyclists. PKWY drawing shows cyclists on off‐ General Comment: Bike/Pedestrian road pathway with pedestrians. This needs to be a VERY wide pathway to avoid user conflicts. Better to put a wider Facilities lane or shoulder on roadway for bikes. Survey # 2 Provide more bike lanes or develop shoulders to serve both vehicles and bikes as a Hays County Transportation General Comment: Bike/Pedestrian Standard Facilities

Survey # 2 Please add bicycle and pedestrian facilities to any new construction or renovations in the future. Focus on the General Comment: Bike/Pedestrian East/West thoroughfares under IH‐35 in San Marcos. They are outdated and dangerous. Facilities; Focus Growth in Corridors

Page76 1 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Emailed When the I‐35 southbound access road in Kyle goes to one way, traffic from west of I‐35 in Kyle to shopping & General Comment: Connectivity medical facilities on FM 1626 must go 2 miles farther on Center Street & northbound I‐35 access road to FM 1626. (submitted prior to draft plan presentation) This will cause much more traffic congestion on those routes. An alternate route on FM 150, FM 2770, Co Rd 171, and FM 1626 will add more than 4 miles for residents to shop or receive medical care.

A new road from Burleson Street to Marketplace Avenue & FM 1626 would reduce congestion and distance for residents and Emergency Vehicles. We in Kyle west of I‐35 are very dismayed that this road has been removed from a high priority for construction.

Survey # 2 Please make sure the company that does the work does a quality job. The last company that repaved Lone Man General Comment: Construction Mountain Road actually made the road worse instead of better. Survey # 2 Can we lose chip seal while we are at it. It is noisy in cars and dangerous for bicycles. In the eastern Blackland clay it General Comment: Construction seems to crack sooner than blacktop. Survey # 2Do it under budget, on time, and no frills. General Comment: Cost Survey # 2 Just a general caution that development of a karst aquifer recharge zone cannot be fixed, once you cause the dense General Comment: Environmental development that follows roads. Concerns Survey # 2 please keep issues of water availability and environmental quality in mind when planning General Comment: Environmental Survey # 2I would like to see Hays County make an attempt to be more ecologically responsible. I would like to see the same General Comment: Environmental from TXDOT. Survey # 2 There seems to be a propensity for cutting new roads through undisturbed land as an expedient way to relieve General Comment: Expand Existing traffice congestion. Rather than further spoil our hill country views and wild areas as well as pollute sensitive aquifer Facilities, Limit New Facilities areas ever more, I suggest that more consideration be given to expanding and improving existing conduits. In addition, there seemingly has been little effort to consider issues beyond traffic convenience such as pollution and aesthetics which, in the long run, are economically very important. For instance, there was no overlay of the City of Austin Conservation Lands on the maps shown to the public. At least one of the proposed roads looked like it would probably cut through a big swath of those lands south of the damaging 45 extension to 967 and on to 150. That, I think, is a very bad idea. The County needs to consult professionals who are not just traffic analysts but also planners. Survey # 2 Keep the scenic and beautiful areas intact. Only expand already‐used high‐traffic roads. General Comment: Expand Existing Facilities Survey # 2I appreciate the efforts in the Draft Plan to confine the road improvement & creation largely to the Highway 290 and General Comment: Focus Growth in the I‐35 growth corridors. Corridors Survey # 2 Please try to keep roadways that would serve development along the I35 and TX290 corridors, and preserve the General Comment: Focus Growth in natural environment of the other areas of the Hill Country such as the Wimberley Valley. Corridors Survey # 2 Remember that the Federal dollars will be shrinking. Figure what we can do with Texas money, and local bonds first. General Comment: Funding

Survey # 2 Nesc. funding needed to address infrastructure demands General Comment: Funding

Page77 2 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2We don't believe it is appropriate or fair to force Hays County taxpayers to pay for roads for the city of Wimberley, General Comment: Funding or any other city. Survey # 2 These expansions are unnecessary, for the most part. Our back roads should remain two‐lane, country roads, with General Comment: Limit Expansion adequate maintenance to keep them safe. Our two‐lane roads do not need to become four‐lane highways, with people driving higher speeds, and the resulting collisions with deer and other cars having even more damaging impact. Survey # 2 Don't expand roads more than they need to be (especially Hunter Rd.) General Comment: Limit Expansion Survey # 2 General Comment: Limit Expansion, Please keep the Texas Hill Country beautiful. Do not just pave over. We can exist with smaller roads. Let's be Preserve Character reasonable about our needs, not over reactive. Tread adult drivers like adults and expect them to be thoughtful drivers...we do not need too much space for driving.

Survey # 2 Please, please keep in mind that even though there is growth in our community and surrounding areas, that General Comment: Limit Expansion, hardworking people are going to affected in the areas you want to extend. We want to be able to live in an area Preserve Character where our children are safe and not have to dodge major traffic and have clean air to breathe. Do not disrupt our way of life. Instead look for a better solution to this extension. San Marcos is good place to live because you can live in town or on the outskirts like I do where my children can go outside and play or ride their bikes without major traffic in our backyard. Survey # 2 Expanding new roadways will provide no solution to the overcrowded roads of Hays County. This will only enable General Comment: Limit Expansion, more people to move to an overcrowded region, and will increase traffic in the remaining rural parts of the county. Sustainability I'd rather see development eased than see the roads I grew up on fattened to hold the girth of traffic created by greedy, ignorant people from out‐of‐town building monstrous new developments left and right across the county. I think that these proposed roads encourage an untenable situation that will ultimately result in an even worse water crisis than the one we are already in. It is upsetting that I have had to lose all faith in any ability of our County to plan for the future of the people living in it. Survey # 2 The focus appears to be on supporting development rather than preserving water quality and the environment. The General Comment: Limit Growth more roads, the more land will be developed and Hays County will be like Travis County and Williamson County. We will build ourselves until what makes Hays County unique will be used up. Hays County will be strip malls and cookie cutter neighborhoods on which outside interests profit. Outsiders will make millions and we will be left to deal with the clutter they create and profit off. Survey # 2 Important Projects to Hays CISD provided to Jean and Meeting. Sub base on the roads indentified to Jean seem to General Comment: Maintenance have failed sub base and continue to degrade. Survey # 2 Please repair existing roads that have not been repaired in past year. General Comment: Maintenance

Page78 3 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2As someone who grew up in Dripping Springs and drives across it frequently, I find that the design of these new General Comment: Non Supportive, roads is not one that will aid myself and other citizens. These proposed roads will only increase congestion and Sustainability; Limit Growth traffic to the remaining quiet and peaceful parts of Dripping Springs, and the development that will ensue from the addition of these roads is unsustainable and will only further distress those who live here. I urge those proposing these roads to consider that covering even more valuable aquifer recharge area with impervious cover and drawing more people to live here will exacerbate an already unsustainable situation that is a direct threat to the health and future of the current residents. I can no longer access safe drinking water on my property, and my ancestors would never have believed that the springs would go dry. Is this the situation the county intends to inflict on all its residents? Is the county trying to ensure that no one will have clean water or peace and quiet out here? This proposed plan will only create problems for the existing residents. If the health of the people of Hays County matters more than the money earned from potential developments, this plan will not go through. Enabling more Survey # 2 These new road proposals essentially carve up our open spaces and open up our private properties to new and General Comment: Non Supportive, unsustainable growth patterns. This entire process, where appointed associates of County Commissioners and Sustainability; Limit Growth; Planning persons with already‐voiced interests in either building roads or being involved in development, sit down and decide Process for the rest of the citizens (and LANDOWNERS) of this County what should happen to their lives, is undemocratic and should not be tolerated. The people know little or nothing about these new proposed roads, and there has been NO PUBLIC INTEREST in building more roads, instead this is a top‐down process of handing over public money to private entities in the form of road contracts and eventually housing and commercial development. Our lands and our lifestyle are not for sale, and not open to your decisions about where cars and polluttion and noise and new houses should be directed. Survey # 2 Please consider the residents your plan is imposing and intruding upon. People choose their neighborhoods based General Comment: Non Supportive, on quietness and peacefulness and off main roads. You will be upsetting whole subdivisionsby ruiining that, Neighborhood Disruption decreasing property value, and cause people to move vbecause they are no longer in a quiet area or an a side road that currently, is access t the subdivision only. Emailed Request for extension of comment period to January 31; additional concerns noted regarding new facilities, General Comment: Planning Process environment, natural character of county. See full comments submitted by Jim McMeans 11‐14‐12 Emailed So so glad to hear this project was not rushed along but perhaps well thought out planning. Too often plans are General Comment: Planning Process rushed and then the mission is lost. Thanks for responding and I will be at one of them PW #2 San Marcos I was confused by the roadway matrix board, map and cross sections boards side by side. They each had colors bt General Comment: Planning Process they didn't coordinate. I think the cross section board could have had more explanation about why there were more than one image for each kind. Thank you for hosting this event! Survey # 2I can't find enough information on line about these projects. There is NOT ENOUGH TIME for public comment (Nov 8‐ General Comment: Planning Process 30) considering the Thanksgiving holiday. Why is the comment period so short? What is the rush? I request that the comment period be extended at least through December 2012 to give everyone more time.

Survey # 2 Again, not enough information is provided in the map and simply not enough time to find the information online. General Comment: Planning Process

Survey # 2 There should have been more involvement of local residents. General Comment: Planning Process

Page79 4 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 property owners of record should recieve notices direct on planning issues that impact their immediate community General Comment: Planning Process or property via Hays County Property Tax roles Survey # 2 General Comment: Planning Process This survey was not very well designed

Survey # 2 General Comment: Planning Process I would like advanced public notice and additional public meetings in San Marcos before the close of the "Final Draft Review" of the Hays County Transportation Plan.

Survey # 2 Use the work done by Envision Central Texas Support alternatives Think long term to include securing ROW before General Comment: Planning Process they are lost to development Lobby Tx Leg for more county control in metropolitan areas Survey # 2 Prioritize projects, with reasons, and give cost in detail to the public. General Comment: Planning Process Survey # 2 GET THE WORD OUT. Citizen participation is crucial, and with only a handful of people knowing about this it General Comment: Planning Process becomes less driven towards what the citizens need. Things to consider would be higher use of social media or other similar tactics other than sending out one or two emails a day before the event. Survey # 2 While orderly development of new roads is necessary, they should have a minimal impact on the current limited General Comment: Preserve Character urban/rural setting of the county. This is a cornerstone of tourism, one of the main economic drivers in the county

Survey # 2I cannot tell if there is any consideration being given to "scenic roadway" as part of the plan‐ if not, it should be as General Comment: Preserve Character important a factor, along with projected population, major traffic flow, etc. Planning for growth is important, but if the inherent natural and ecological character of the area is not considered during the process, it will certainly be lost‐ and newcomers will have no reason to care about or protect what is left. Survey # 2 Leave the scenic and beautiful areas alone. Expand only already used roads that have high traffic. General Comment: Preserve Character, Limit Expansion Survey # 21. The map legend does not provide good definitions. 2. I like most of the improvements in yellow assuming they General Comment: Project Materials; create shoulders of at least 4 feet in width for safer passing, breakdown and bicycle traffic. Support for Plan Survey # 2 There's been a numerous amount of problems I've had with transportation in San Marcos. First, to my knowledge General Comment: Public buses currently don't run after 5pm. This is a MAJOR issue. Most people don't get out of work until 4PM, and people Transportation are more out and about after 5PM than any other time. Secondly, there's only a handful of visible stops. We need more like the bus stop by the big HEB that's made fully visible that it's there. Third, buses don't run as often as they should. As an expaning city we must be able to accomodate for more people, and to reduce traffic we need people to turn to public transportation. Lastly, we need to be able to know when buses come electronically (although this is least critical on the list). If we don't know where to locate a stop or when it gets there, transportation would be useless. Survey # 2 Yes. Please put in a placeholder for limited public transportation to serve our disadvantaged citizens. For example, General Comment: Public the county supports the development of the Cypress Creek at Ledge Stone Apartments, in which only families with Transportation restricted incomes will qualify for residency. Survey # 2 public transportation design of the roads General Comment: Public Transportation

Page80 5 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 This appears to be a roadway plan ‐ not a tranportation plan. Any real transportation plan needs to include some General Comment: Public provision for mass transportation. I for one commute by car every day into Austin, and would love to have an option Transportation other than running up the mileage on my car, or using Capital Metro's Rideshare program. Survey # 2We need some form of non‐private auto transportation that connects to austin's transit system. General Comment: Public Transportation PW #2 Wimberley I think it’s a great idea to work with Texas State on extending a bus line to a park and ride in Wimberley. Even just General Comment: Public one at 8 am and 5 pm would give commuters a good option. Also I don't give a damn about bike lanes until those Transportation; Bicycle Facilities fools pay taxes. Survey # 2 Keep future transit stops, and pedestrian flow to work places in mind. Do not make it so that people have to drive General Comment: Public and park everywhere in the county. Transportation; Commuting Solutions

Survey # 2 Simply continued safety awareness on our County roads. General Comment: Safety Survey # 2 Road conditions are a direct cause of a number of worker comp cases filed by our bus driving staff General Comment: Safety, Maintenance Emailed I would like to bring to the attention signage for the very dangerous curve on 1492 at Blanco Bend East and West. General Comment: Safety, signage Most of the signs have been knocked down,the speed limit sign coming South is ignored. Entering 1492 from Blanco (submitted prior to draft plan Bend East or West is a chance you really don't want to take. Please help.. presentation) Survey # 2 General Comment: Safety, Speed Too many drivers driving at excessive speed along Jacobs Well Rd. including Wimberley ISD school buses with children aboard.

Survey # 2I like and accept your plan and recommendations General Comment: Support for Plan

Survey # 2 Good job. General Comment: Support for Plan

Survey # 2I think the propososed improvements are very good at this point for this category General Comment: Support for Plan

Survey # 2 These only foster development and Hays County needs to consider natural resource availability/sustainability first. General Comment: Sustainability

Survey # 2 After a visit to Italy during the Thanksgiving holiday I am amazed at how easy the traffic circles move traffic rather General Comment: Traffic Circles than the US system of stop signs at every corner. I encourage you to consider these circles in place of stop signs.

Survey # 2 Your response to the initial outcry to the plan a few (6? 7?) years ago, shows you listened, went back and studied, General Comment: Support for Plan and, most of the NF ideas notwithstanding, came up with some pretty smart and forward‐thinking plans.

Survey # 2 Most people are going to be against said road proposals because they say not in my back yard. If then whose? By the General Comment: Support for Plan time you get everyone on board ,EPA, environmental Selits Etc. I'll be 6 feet under anyway. Built it, Built it now!!

Page81 6 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 Extremely and unduly disruptive to the community and wildlife. Unnecessary to consider based on expense and General Comment: Non Supportive utility. Survey # 2 water issues first!!!!! General Comment: Water Issues aPW #2 San Marcos Priority 1: Specific Project Comment FM 150 (W) / Center St. Rebel Dr. ‐ IH 35 FM 150 (E) IH 35 ‐ SH 21 FM 1626 SH 45 SW ‐ FM 967 FM 1626 FM 967 ‐ FM 2770 FM 2001 Old Goforth ‐ Goforth FM 2001 (new alignment ‐ NF 11) Goforth ‐ SH 21 Bebee Rd/High Rd IH 35 ‐ SH 21 CR 158 IH 35 ‐ Turnersville Rd Extension Dacy Ln./Goforth Rd. Hillside Terrace ‐ IH 35 Goforth Rd. / CR 119 FM 2001 ‐ Hillside Terrace Hillside Terrace / CR 133 IH 35 ‐ FM 2001 Lehman Rd Goforth Rd ‐ FM 150 Main St. East IH 35 ‐ SH 45 (SE) @ Turnersville Partial Marketplace Ave. FM 967 ‐ IH 35 @ Burleson Rd. Niederwald Strasse FM 2001 ‐ SH 21 Overpass Rd (FM 2001) See FM 2001 Satterwhite Rd. / CR 107 FM 2001 ‐ Turnersville Rd. extension b Priority 2: Specific Project Comment (Continued) FM 150 (W) FM 3237 ‐ Kyle Loop (SW) FM 150 (W) Kyle Loop (SW) ‐ FM 2770 FM 150 (W) / Rebel Dr. FM 2770 ‐ W. Center St. @ Rebel Dr. FM 967 FM 1826 ‐ FM 1626 FM 967 FM 1626 ‐ Main St FM 967 / S. Loop 4 / S. Main St. Main St ‐ W. Goforth FM 967 / S. Loop 4 / S. Main St. W. Goforth ‐ IH 35 FM 1626 FM 2770 ‐ IH 35 FM 2001/Overpass Rd. IH 35 ‐ Old Goforth FM 2770 / Jack C. Hays Trail FM 967 / Main St. ‐ FM 1626 FM 2770 / Jack C. Hays Trail FM 1626 ‐ FM 150 (W) Elder Hill Rd. / CR 170 RM 12 ‐ FM 150 Harris Hill Rd. / CR 160 Yarrington Rd. ‐ SH 21 COL Hilliard Rd. / CR 222 Lost River Rd. ‐ Powder Horn Hilliard Rd. / CR 222 Powder Horn ‐ Lime Kiln Rd

Page82 7 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

c Kohlers Xing FM 2770 ‐ IH 35 Specific Project Comment (Continued) Kyle Crossing IH 35 ‐ Kohler Xing Kyle Crossing Kohler Xing ‐ IH 35 @ Old Bridge Trail Kyle Loop (West) FM 1626 @ RS Light ‐ IH 35 @ FM 110/Yarrington Kyle Parkway/Bunton/Gristmill IH 35 @ FM 1626 ‐ SH 21 @ Gristmill Rd. Lime Kiln Rd. / CR 225 Hilliard ‐ Post Rd. Old Goforth Rd. / CR 119 FM 2001 ‐ Hillside Terrace Old San Antonio Rd. Travis County Line ‐ Cabelas Dr. Old Stagecoach Rd Post Rd ‐ FM 150 Robert S. Light Blvd. / CR 132 IH 35 ‐ FM 2770 Robert S. Light Blvd. / CR 132 FM 2770 ‐ FM 1626 Ruby Ranch Rd. (See NF 20) FM 967 ‐ FM 150 (W) Williamson Rd FM 2001 ‐ Travis County Line aa Emailed REVIEW OF HAYS COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PLAN BY CARD: Specific Project Comment ISSUES • Major growth in Hays County will be focused along the Hwy 290 and IH 35 corridors, while the interior (central area) of Hays County will have modest growth per CAMPO 2035 Plan.. • Our water supply in central Hays County is primarily from groundwater pumped from an underground aquifer and must be protected for the future. By keeping open spaces, the rainfall can penetrate into the soil and crevices and refill the aquifer, thereby insuring a sustainable water source. • New roads NF 21, NF 24, NF 25, NF 26, and NF 27 were recommended by Wimberley five years ago, but are outside the city’s jurisdiction and will create a burden on Hays County taxpayers.

TRANSPORTATION PLAN COMMENTS • Current residents of the Hill Country treasure its rural character, open spaces, and clear flowing creeks and rivers ‐ an important factor in Hill Country property values. • New and improved roads in Hwy 290 and IH 35 growth corridors are consistent with CARD’s plan to support growth in those corridors, while central Hays County remains low impact rural development with special attention given to environmentally sensitive areas. • Expansion of FM 150 to four lane divided from Dripping Springs to Kyle/Buda directs traffic away from the rural interior and is recommended. • RM 12 from Dripping Springs at FM 150 south through Wimberley is a two lane road and is recommended.

Page83 8 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

bb Emailed Continued: Specific Project Comment • RM 32 west of the Wimberley Junction through Devils Backbone is one of the county’s most treasured drives, and should remain as a two lane divided road per plan. • Remove new road NF 12 due to impact on Onion Creek watershed and Edwards Aquifer Contributing Zone. • Remove new road NF 26 due to conflict with Mustang Valley subdivision. • Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and rugged terrain. • Remove new road NF 25 due to crossing environmentally sensitive aquifer recharge area and limited use. • Remove new road NF 21 due to disruption of existing area creating cut through for truck traffic. • Remove new road NF 24 due to limited use and high cost. • Designate NF 16 for Emergency Access Only and construct as a gravel road with gated access. • Remove new road NF 7 due to duplication with RM 12. Emailed For a host of reasons I'm vehemently opposed to the construction of this new road. [NF 27] Specific Project Comment

Emailed Please put me on record as being opposed to the plan to extend Sachleben Road through the River Oaks Subdivision Specific Project Comment and connect it to RR32 via a new bridge.

Among the many reasons I have for taking this position are the noise, pollution, and traffic that it would bring to our (reasonably) quiet neighborhood. We can already hear the exhaust noise from the throngs of motorcycles that pass along RR#2, more than a mile south of us. I can only imagine what it would be like having a new route for them that would pass within a ¼ mile of our home.

There is also the cost to the taxpayers to acquire the route (presumably through condemnation proceedings), build a bridge and maintain the roadbed once it is built. I can see no pressing traffic need for this route and I believe it would significantly degrade the quality of life in the region, were it to be built

Emailed Comment asks that NF 27 be removed for several reasons including disruption of natural character, distruption to Specific Project Comment landowners and current and future purposing of the land, proximity to large homesites, decrease in value; Asks planning team to visit each proposed facility site and notifications to all landowners in the area. See full comment from Dr. John Gay submitted 12‐6‐12 Emailed We respectfully request the proposal for NF 27 be abandoned because of Specific Project Comment The disruption to all residents of River Oaks Subdivision The adverse impact on property values in River Oaks The great cost the county would incur for a bridge and the building of a road on the other side of the river across very rugged (and beautiful, unspoiled) terrain The destruction of the peace and serenity of our property See Full Comment from Mrs. John H Gay submitted 12‐6‐12 Emailed There is not a need for this Craddock extension especially because the expanded 150 is now and will be the main Specific Project Comment route that Wimberley and northern Hays County residents will be taking to Austin, not RR 12.

Page84 9 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Emailed Comment suggests chosing a different alignment for NF 27 river crossing due to geographic challenges and Specific Project Comment destruction of natural character of area. See full comment from Phil Hosemann submitted 12‐3‐12 Emailed Because of all the problems we have in this area (it seems sometimes that we are either in a drought or it's Specific Project Comment flooding!) coupled with heavy growth, sometimes it appears that lots of roads would solve some of the issues but in looking at the plan, I feel that some of the proposals are uncalled for. So here goes:

‐ Yes on new and improved roads in the Hwy. 290 and I35 corridors, trying to stay away from environmentally sensitive areas ‐ Yes on the expansion of FM150 to a four lane, divided highway from Dripping Springs to Buda/Kyle ‐ Yes to RR12 from Dripping Springs at FM150 south through Wimberley stay a two‐lane road ‐ RR12 from the Wimberley junction East to San Marcos should be downgraded from a six‐lane to a four‐lane highway ‐ RM32 west of the Wimberley junction through the Devil's Backbone should remain as a two‐lane divided road per plan ‐ Remove new road NF12 due to impact on Onion Creek watershed ‐ Remove new road NF26 due to conflict with Mustand Valley subdivision ‐ Remove NF27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over the Blanco River and rugged terrain adding to construction costs ‐ Remove new road NF25 due to crossing environmentally sensitive aquifer recharge area and limited use ‐ Remove new road NF21 due to disruption of existing area creating cut through for truck traffic ‐ Remove new road NF24 due to limited use and high cost ‐ Designate NF16 for Emergency Access Only and construct as a gravel road with gated access ‐ Remove new road NF7 due to duplication with RM12 ‐ New roads NF21, 24, 25, 26 and 27 were recommended by Wimberley five years ago but are outside the city's limits and will create a burden on Hays County taxpayers. Hays County should not be paying for the city of Wimberley's roads

Page 1085 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Emailed Please consider or forward these comments as you can. My wife and I are property owners in the River Oaks Specific Project Comment subdivision. Specifically, our property entrance is on Oak Run. We are concerned about the proposed NF 27 road extending / connecting Sachtleben and Oak Run with a new low water bridge and continuing onward to Devil's Backbone. Our concerns include: • Aquifer, water retention issues related to a new, expanded road • Another low water bridge/dam between the one on Wayside and the one at CR1492 near 7A • Traffic & Safety issues on Oak Run; River Oaks has been considering speed bumps for some time due to speeding and safety issues on the main subdivision roads; Sachtleben already has these due to the property road access on properties there. • Road‐noise issues with the road potentially being a high use, high volume thoroughfare • Property values declining with a major road / thoroughfare boarding the subdivision and affecting so many individual property owner's land • Right of way issues with the possible 80' extension of the county right of way and interfering with mature, stately oaks on the front of many properties • As a consideration, could the existing low water bridges at CR1492 / 7A and the one at the end of Wayside Drive be widened or improved to facilitate better traffic flows without creating another low water bridge to impede the Emailed San Marcos River Foundation is concerned about about the extension of Craddock Avenue, planned to run over Sink Specific Project Comment Creek on the northwest side of San Marcos for environmental and cultural reasons. See full comment from Dianne Wassenich submitted 12‐3‐12 Emailed • Expansion of FM 150 to four lane from Dripping Springs (DS) to Kyle/Buda would help direct traffic from the rural Specific Project Comment interior of the county and is recommended. • RM 12 from DS at FM 150 south through Wimberley is a two lane road and is recommended. • RM 12 from the Wimberley Junction east to San Marcos should be downgraded from a six lane to a four lane parkway. • RM 32 west of the Wimberley Junction through Devils Backbone is one of the county’s most treasured drives, and should remain as a two lane divided road per plan. • Remove new road NF 12 due to impact on Onion Creek watershed and Edwards Aquifer Contributing Zone. • Remove new road NF 26 due to conflict with Mustang Valley subdivision. • Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and rugged terrain. • Remove new road NF 25 due to crossing environmentally sensitive aquifer recharge area and limited use. • Remove new road NF 21 due to disruption of existing area creating cut through for truck traffic. • Remove new road NF 24 due to limited use and high cost. • Designate NF 16 for Emergency Access Only and construct as a gravel road with gated access. • Remove new road NF 7 due to duplication with RM 12.

Page 1186 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Emailed Concern and objection the movement of the the proposed route of the FM110 extension aligned with Yarrington Specific Project Comment road and connecting to Kyle loop.

We would like for it to remain along the Etj boarder between San Marcos and Kyle. The proposed route cuts dead smack down the middle of our entire property. It also cuts through the cemetery adjacent to our property.

Emailed The widening that has been done on RR ‐12 from the Junction to San Marcos has made THAT PART of the route Specific Project Comment much safer. But the stretches that have not been fixed remain hazardous just as I witnessed the other day with a West bound truck turning left into a property, “just over a hill“, which luckily resulted in a NEAR MISS. Parts of the Junction to San Marcos road that have not been upgraded at all CRY OUT to be fixed. I don‘t know of anyone who opposes this? My wish and that of many people I know is that the upgrading of the route from The Junction to San Marcos BE COMPLETED all the way. PW #2 Wimberley We would like to see NF‐13 termniate and intersect north of York Creek on FM 150 West and not intersect into FM Specific Project Comment 150 and 3237 PW #2 Wimberley Please do not use 1492 [because]: it’s a new road, fairly recent; 2 lane road; ruin area where 1492 meets 7A, Specific Project Comment Wayside, River Rd; increase traffic in tourist area; is already a speed area in 30 mph limit; our only way out is the low water xing (except during flooding) and on 1492 to RR 12. Wimbeley Hills is a private road and chained off; lower house values; higer traffic in rural setting ‐ Thank you PW #2 Wimberley 1492 is a small residential road. Do not want to see it turned into a major road to wayside. There would have to Specific Project Comment have a bridge built to cnnect to it. Do not widen 12 from 3212 except for Bike lanes. People moved to Wimberley to live in the country not have it improved like the city. PW #2 Wimberley I just found out about the open house this morning. Our home is on the Blanco River. We are against changes to Specific Project Comment Flite Acres Road. On the river side are houses and on the other side in areas is a bluff. It will be expensive to modify. Flite Acres is a o ne road subdivision. Families jog on it. Sometimes one sees parents pushing baby carriages. There are a lot of bicycle riders also. Please leave Flite Acres alone. PW #2 Wimberley Leave Flite Acres alone. Who is going to pay for this? Our taxes already out of sight. Leave our downtown like it is Specific Project Comment (small) PW #2 Wimberley I am very concerned about any proposals on Flite Acres Road. I do not want the county to have the "opportunity" to Specific Project Comment make Flite Acres Road safer. I do not want it straightened, or curbs addede, or a larger right of way created. I suggest you leave it alone and focus on making RR12 or 3237 larger. Survey # 2 Please consider the FM621 enhancement to a MAU 2 to include wider road, bike lanes and sidewalks. The students Specific Project Comment from Goodnight Middle School and De Zavala Elementary School have to walk in the grass along FM 621 and it is not safe. Survey # 2If you are upgrading Old Bastrop, why not use it for the SH 21 extension? Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2I am against the proposeing SH 21 EXTENSION right behind our subdivision (hill of hays)!!! Not a good idea. You have Specific Project Comment Bastrop Old Hwy why not extend that road!

Page 1287 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 Yes, I ask you to please consider the FM621 enhancement to a MAU 2 to include bike lanes and sidewalks. The Specific Project Comment students from Goodnight Middle School and De Zavala Elementary School have to walk in the grass along FN 621 and it is not safe. Survey # 2 Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and Specific Project Comment rugged terrain Survey # 2No to Oak Run expansion in River Oaks. Noise, environmental impact on wildlife and human life, destruction of trees Specific Project Comment and personal per petty will be termendous ! I reject this proposal. Survey # 2 Our opinion on the proprsed changes for Wayside, Sachtleben & Fischer Store Road is that these roads should Specific Project Comment remain in a minimal change status, thank you. Survey # 2 yes, as a resident whose home backs up to Jacobs Well Road, I am very concerned that traffic noise will be more of a Specific Project Comment problem than it is now is heavy truck traffic is allowed on this road. If increased traffic is forced to take this route, then a sound barrier should be planned to provide peaceful existence in this residential neighborhood. Even at present, the speed, noise level, and exhaust emissions are a problem. Consideration should be given to residents living along this stretch of road. Survey # 2 Kohler's Crossing in Kyle does not need an upgrade Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Yes, I would like the county to leave Flite Acres alone & not develop it any further. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Enhancements to Old Bastrop Hwy and Staples Road (FM 621) is long over due. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 The yellow roads through Dripping Springs would help greatly with future expansion in Dripping Springs. This would Specific Project Comment allow for expansion beyond just the RR12 and Highway 290 intersection. Survey # 2 Elder Hill Rd. ‐ clackers on the pavement to the outside of the curves could help alert drivers to slow down. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Yes don't mess with fulton ranch road and especially Flite Acres Road. We don't need more traffic. We all moved out Specific Project Comment here and know how long it takes to get places and were fine with "traffic" as it as and don't mind if it takes longer with an increased population. Survey # 2 avoid the sink creek area and protect that area because it is recharge for the san marcos springs and river. avoid Specific Project Comment roadways in close proximity to waterways, other than greenways and bicycle trails which have little environmental detriment to water sources. Survey # 2 Weigh the feasibility of safety improvements on SH 123. From the intersection of IH‐35 through to RR12 and Specific Project Comment Redwood Road.It is very dangerous and people have died. Divided roadway, bike lanes, sidewalks, lower speed limits, lighting and any other device that could allow local vehicle and pedestrian's much safer commutes.

Survey # 2 Yes, you have Bastrop Hwy that will better fit in your plans. Make more sense that using a residental area. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2I also ask that SH123 also include bike lanes and sidewalks. I am happy to see the proposed improvements to this Specific Project Comment road through the area.

Page 1388 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 Can you start with turn lanes on RR 12 for the Mountain Crest and Skyline subdivisions? I like the idea of routing Specific Project Comment traffic down FM 150 instead of RR 12. How soon can the county start? Survey # 2 Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and Specific Project Comment rugged terrain Survey # 2I believe a 4 lane road with a turn lane (5 lanes) would destroy to "scenic" designation of the roadway. Since it is also Specific Project Comment over a recharge zone....encouraging more traffic...by increasing the road size will cause more contamination of the water under the recharge zone. Survey # 2 Very, very concerned about widening 150 into four lanes over the double Onion Creek Crossings. So unnecessary. Specific Project Comment Hardly ever any traffic on that road, and I'm so concerned about the environmental and aesthetic impact!!!! Please don't do this!!!! Survey # 2I am absolutely OPPOSED to MAD 4 for Hwy 150 from Hwy 12 (outside Dripping Springs) to the intersection with Specific Project Comment Hwy 3237. This road crosses Onion Creek three times, twice in close succession and in the contributing zone to the Edwards Aquifer, at those two crossings is just upstream of the recharge zone. It is also one of the most scenic roadways in the county and should NOT be turned into a 6 lane divided road. Survey # 2 Leave RR 12 alone. We have far too few "blue highways" left in the hill country. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 When my colleague, who attended the Wimberley meeting last week, told me about the plans for SH150, I was Specific Project Comment amazed. When she told me the traffic counts and destinations for that traffic, suddenly the plan to enlarge 150 made perfect sense. It does and I support that, as well as the idea of guiding truck and through traffic via Winters Mill, even if the section from that road to RR12 doesn't lend itself well for this as currently configured.

Survey # 2FM 1826 does need to be 4 lanes but also needs a center turn lane at Nutty Brown and Bear Creek Dr. Yes Nutty Specific Project Comment Brown does need to be 4 lanes. Yes, FM 1826 should be staighted and reduce the major hill tops at Bear Creek Drive and North Madrone Trail‐‐grade has been too steep for some oversized loads permitted to use this route by TXDOT, also poor visibility and hazardous in ice storms and wet weather. Survey # 2 MAD 4 in Kyle should continue to be called Bunton (NOT Kyle Parkway). Road named after very important person in Specific Project Comment Kyle. Would like to keep our hist. Survey # 2 Adding Additional Lanes to Old Bastrop Hwy and Staples Road (FM 621) should be considered as well since Specific Project Comment enhancements are already considered in draft plan. Survey # 2 The expansion along Highway 290W through Dripping Springs is causing a lot of congestion between 8 and 9am and Specific Project Comment between 3 and 5pm. Survey # 2 Regarding this category, I think the proposed improvements are well thought out. Regarding RR 12, I think a MAD 4 Specific Project Comment or MAU 4 may be necessary for the segment between Wimberley and Dripping Springs as the County continues to grow in this area. Survey # 2 Yes don't mess with fulton ranch road and especially Flite Acres Road. We don't need more traffic. We all moved out Specific Project Comment here and know how long it takes to get places and were fine with "traffic" as it as and don't mind if it takes longer with an increased population. Survey # 2 again avoid contact with sink creek and the upper san marcos river watershed. Specific Project Comment

Page 1489 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 Please construct Sidewalks and Shoulders Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Please reconsider the placement of SH 21 extension across the rivers and skirting Hills of Hays. It would put undue Specific Project Comment hardship on our property values, safety and tranquility that drew us to our neighborhood. Consider alining Proposed SH21 with Loop 110 to save taxpayer dollars and keep traffic moving along SH123 as well with fewer intersections.

Survey # 2I support NF16 which will bring Wimberley and San Marcos closer together with little cost or disruption. But I object Specific Project Comment to NF27, as it will terribly disrupt a peaceful community, cost a huge amount of money and further stress the Blanco River area with unnecessary construction. Survey # 2 Please remove new road NF 27 from the Plan. This road would cause great disruption of the River Oaks subdivision Specific Project Comment where my home is, due to the increased traffic. The new bridge over the Blanco River would be very costly to build and would have a negative impact on the river environment, to say nothing of the property values of the homes near the bridge. The rugged terrain on the other side of the river would present costly engineering challenges, to say nothing of the environmental impact of the road on the land. Survey # 2NF 27 would be very intrusive on us and would negatively effect the Blanco River which we live next to. The sound of Specific Project Comment the traffic that this road would be disturbing, and destroy the peace and quiet that we moved here to enjoy. We regularly travel the existing roads in this area and find that they are very adequate to serve the needs of people living here. Please remove NF 27 from consideration as a new connection. Survey # 2 Yes, I am concerned about how close the Hwy 21 Extension is to the Hills of Hays neighborhood and De Zavala Specific Project Comment School. I am also concerned that this will negatively effect the value of the homes that are in the area as well. Was expanding or making improvements to Old Bastrop Rd. an option? Would that save tax payers dollars? I am against the proposed Hwy 21 extension. Survey # 2 Please remove NF 27! This will be very disruptive to the River Oaks subdivision. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2I object thr project NF 27 thru River Oaks. I will create traffic, noise, destruction of privateproperty and wild life Specific Project Comment issues will be created. Survey # 2I do not approve of the highway 21 extension. Staples road has enough traffic as it is and we do not need any more Specific Project Comment potential accidents leaving the Hills of Hays subdivision. Survey # 2 Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and Specific Project Comment rugged terrain. I am against this road being built. It is just wrong on so many levels. Survey # 2We are against new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, building an expensive bridge over Blanco Specific Project Comment River, and rugged terrain. This road in conjunction with NF 26 would make this a very busy road essentially running from Dripping Springs to New Braunfels. We moved to the River Oaks subdivision because of the rural, quiet, scenic beauty. The addition of these roads would destroy that. Survey # 2 Remove new road NF27 not necessary, too expensive, disruption to River Oaks subdivision Specific Project Comment

Page 1590 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2I would like to make a few comments about the NF 27. This would be a road cutting right by my house, almost Specific Project Comment exactly through the property line. My house is at the very end of Oak Run Dr. It is one of the most beautiful spots on the Blanco River and I would hate to see our county ruin this natural beauty with a road and bridge. This Planned road, NF 27, would bring a major traffic load through our rural community also causing an uncontrollable amount of trespassing to a very private part of the river. I am a new Dad. As the property is right now my daughter would be free to roam and play in our yard without the worry of a passing car. Not after the road NF 27 is built. We would constantly have to worry about the traffic coming right by our house and worry about our daughter’s safety in our own yard. Being a major concern of mine, I took the time to look at some of the numbers via Google Map. From the planned start of NF 27 to San Marcos currently is 18.4 miles with a drive time of 32 minutes going through Wimberley. Alternative route across Bendigo Crossing by John Knox it is 23 miles and 38 minutes. Estimated distance of NF 27 would have to be around 3‐4 miles, making the trip 16‐17 miles and drive time around 22‐23 minutes. I do Survey # 2 Envoromental impact, wild life impact, noice level and personal peoperty destruction will give a negitive impact to Specific Project Comment River Oaks and other surrounding land. I oppose to this project and recommend it is deleated from the books

Survey # 2an access corridor to FM32 is long over due. When it floods we have to detour several miles around low water Specific Project Comment crossings Survey # 2If you improve/upgrade Old Bastrop and make it the SH21 extension, you could probably do away with the proposed Specific Project Comment SH21 extension & proposed FM 110 (south of 21). Wouldn't that disrupt less neighborhoods? Survey # 2 Yes. I oppose NF 27 because the project will negatively impact the River Oaks subdivision, require a large, expensive Specific Project Comment bridge project over the Blanco River the rough terrain from the Blanco to RR 32. The project is not cost effective based on current and projected use and alternative routes using existing and planned infrastructure will suffice.

Survey # 2I do not want any new roadway connections. Instead improve Old Bastrop Hwy and connect the two roads for better Specific Project Comment access to San Marcos High Schoo. In addition I do not want this connection because pollution from vehicles whether they are trucks or cars will endanger my home environment for myself and my family. Survey # 2 NF27: This proposal negatively impacts a quiet neighborhood where residents regularly walk, bike, horseback ride, Specific Project Comment and exercise their dogs. A bridge over the Blanco River at this point would further endanger the fragile ecosystem and is unnecessary as access to RR32 is provided by way of Fischer Store Road or Mail Route Road. NF 26 would conflict with Mustang Valley subdivision. Remove new road NF 25 due to crossing environmentally sensitive aquifer recharge area and limited use. Remove new road NF 25 due to crossing environmentally sensitive aquifer recharge area and limited use. Remove new road NF 21 due to disruption of existing area creating cut through for truck traffic. Remove new road NF 24 due to limited use and high cost. Remove new road NF 7 due to duplication with RM 12. Survey # 2 The SH 21 Extension runs way to close to the Hills of Hays subdivision. It seems like a waste of money when there Specific Project Comment are other alternatives like the Old Bastrop Road. Survey # 2I would like to see the proposed SH 21 moved further south east or perhaps improve Old Bastrop to handle the Specific Project Comment traffic so as to avoid negatively affecting the property values of the homes in the Hills of Hays subdivision or the living conditions of the residents.

Page 1691 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 Concerning your project at: highway 123 and 621 in San Marcos, Texas. I live in the Hills of Hays sub‐division, and Specific Project Comment this project will be in our BACK YARD'S. Do you know that a 48" oil transmission line runs near the back side of the Hills of Hays. This means your roadway would be OVER this pipe line? By tying to moving traffic "better" east and west in and around San Marcos with your new roadway: this would cause a a new traffic. One which would be where ever your new roadway connects with Farm to Market Road 621. Also are you aware of a large stock tank that also sits near your project site. How do you plan on building a roadway over or around this stock tank? And if your roadway is built, will it DEAD END into Farm to Market Road 621. Would this be a wise thing to do? What about using old Bastrop Highway as a connecting point to your project? All you would have to do is widen a roadway that already exist?. Survey # 2I ask that you please not extend SH 621 along its proposed location. The area is hilly, it would cross two rivers, your Specific Project Comment proposed route goes through the La Vista Senior Community Home (which is not shown on your map), http://www.lavistaonline.org/location.shtml, on Redwood Road, and the road would literally be across the street from me and in my neighbors backyard. To put it mildly, it would disrupt our single‐family neighborhood where I am raising our two children. I prefer that you use and expand existing roads, such as Bastrop Highway and save the taxpayers some money. Survey # 2 The SH 21 extension and the FM 110 plans seem redundant. Plus, not to pull the NIMBY card, but the SH 21 Specific Project Comment extension appears to be planned for, uhm, my backyard. Survey # 2 Sh21extension why not use old Badtrop highway. This is so close to an elementary school and a busy subdivision Specific Project Comment that has a couple of hundred residents. Please go out further in the county if this road is really needed. Once Cape Road is reopened traffic will settle down some. Please DO NOT bring this so close to the Hills of Hays subdivision and DeZavala Elementary. Survey # 2I submit that there are no justifiable reasons that N27 should be considered. Traffic needs should demand such Specific Project Comment projects, and none exists. Further, property values will fall along this route which will reduce tax revenues. Drop N27 now. Survey # 2 Please do not build new roads through river oaks not necessary Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over the Blanco River, Specific Project Comment and disruption of sensitive eco system along the blanco river. Survey # 2We would like to oppose the NF 27. This road connecting our subdidivsion to 32 is unacceptable. Not only the cost Specific Project Comment of the road and a bridge but it would completely change the complextion of our neighborhood. Survey # 2 Oak Run Drive is a residential street in a rural subdivision. This will greatly diminish the quality of life for the Specific Project Comment residents of River Oaks. You can't be serious! Survey # 2NF 27 that is routed through River Oaks Subdivision would provide a negative impact on the community, and size of Specific Project Comment any bridge built over the river would be the same in scope as one on an interstate highway exchange due to the elevation change. Use of the exixting Wayside bridge and road would have less impact on the community

Survey # 2 Absolutely do not make a new road through River Oaks subdivision to cross the Blanco river and connect to Devils Specific Project Comment Backbone. The road would be incredibly expensive, it would decrease property values in River Oaks, pollute the river, and increase traffic in River Oaks.

Page 1792 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2NF 27 is a totally unnecessary road that would be an expensive waste of my tax dollars. I will work against this Specific Project Comment squandering of cash in any way I can. Survey # 2 Please remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oak Subdivision, it would be a very expensive bridge to Specific Project Comment construct over the Blanco River due to its rugged terrain. Survey # 2 NF27 (particularly Wayside Dr./Oak Run portion) is where my concerns are. Wayside cannot handle increased Specific Project Comment volume of traffic in its current state. It will require major renovation in order to take it to a condition that would allow that. Oak Run is a residential street and needs to stay that way. To do otherwise would impact property values and present an extremely dangerous situation for residents. The expense to put a bridge across the river is also unacceptable just for access to Hwy. 32. It is easy enough to go Wayside to 32 rather than to disrupt a residential area. If one wants to put a bridge across the river, replace the "Slime Bridge" at Bendgo and redo Wayside from there on. Survey # 2 While it is understandable that another all weather crossing may be desirable between CR181 and RR12, careful Specific Project Comment thought is needed in the planning of NF27. Current alignment will encounter rugged terrain on the south bank of the River. The alignment using the existing "wet" crossing and the end of Wayside drive (CR179) should be considered.

Survey # 2NF 27 is objectionable as proposed. Should this area be treated as a hill country retreat, embracing solitude and the Specific Project Comment natural environment or treated like a major thorough fare which is would be out of scale with the surroundings and serve "for convenience only" a few vehicles. Existing routes and low water bridges are currently in place. I suggest improving those is you must Survey # 2 opposed to ND27 Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2As a property owner in the River Oaks subdivision, I am completely opposed to the expansion planned along Oak Specific Project Comment Run and the impact the increased traffic will have on this secluded neighborhood. Due to the water limitations in the Wimberley area, I don't see how the creation of this roadway will facilitate future landowners when growth is constantly being curbed by the restraints of water availability. The creation of this roadway will also have a negative impact on the curb appeal of properties in River Oaks affecting property values, not to mention undermining the very reason people have decided to move to this subdivision in the first place.

Survey # 2 yes. I object to plans for NF 27. This is an unnecessary use of tax dollars that will negatively impact my quality of life Specific Project Comment and decrease my property value. Do not build NF 27 Survey # 2 The proposed extension of Oak Run through the River Oaks subdivision and the associated bridge over the Blanco Specific Project Comment River (and neighborhood river park) is a disaster for the residents in the area (myself included) and frankly a waste of taxpayer money (myself included). The proposal would greatly diminish not only our property values but also the quality of living that was the reason we bought our land and built our home. PLEASE reconsider this ill‐advised recommendation. THANKS! Survey # 2 Specific Project Comment No to NF 27. Negative environment impact on wildlife and noise, traffic , destruction of trees and property as well as aquifer recharge zone impact. Please remove this project from the proposed expansion plan,

Page 1893 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and Specific Project Comment rugged terrain Current residents of the Hill Country treasure its rural character, open spaces, and clear flowing creeks and rivers ‐ an important factor in Hill Country property values. • New and improved roads in Hwy 290 and IH 35 growth corridors are consistent with CARD’s plan to support growth in those corridors, while central Hays County remains low impact rural development with special attention given to environmentally sensitive areas. • Expansion of FM 150 to four lane divided from Dripping Springs to Kyle/Buda directs traffic away from the rural interior and is recommended. • RM 12 from Dripping Springs at FM 150 south through Wimberley is a two lane road and is recommended. • RM 12 from the Wimberley Junction east to San Marcos should be downgraded from a six lane to a four lane parkway. • RM 32 west of the Wimberley Junction through Devils Backbone is one of the county’s most treasured drives, and should remain as a two lane divided road per plan. • Remove new road NF 12 due to impact on Onion Creek watershed and Edwards Aquifer Contributing Zone. • Remove new road NF 26 due to conflict with Mustang Valley subdivision. • Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and rugged terrain. • Remove new road NF 25 due to crossing environmentally sensitive aquifer recharge area and limited use. • Remove new road NF 21 due to disruption of existing area creating cut through for truck traffic. • Remove new road NF 24 due to limited use and high cost. • Designate NF 16 for Emergency Access Only and construct as a gravel road with gated access. • Remove new road NF 7 due to duplication with RM 12.

Survey # 2 NF27 is planned to go through a quiet, neighborhood subdivision, River Oaks. As a resident of this subdivision, I Specific Project Comment strongly object to putting a connection road through here. Besides decreasing land value and ruining the quiet subdivision we have, there is the risk of children and elderly in the neighborhood thatt take walks on Oak Run Rd to get hit by a car since the traffic will be busy and there are side walks there. Please reconsider this throughway.

Survey # 2I oppose a new roadway NF 27, from Wayside to RR 32 along Oak Run Dr. Traffic does not justify this project Specific Project Comment through existing neighborhoods as the existing and other planned roadways are sufficient to service current and future needs. Survey # 2 Specifically NF 27. We are property owners in River Oaks (RO's) on Oakrun and are extremely concerned about the Specific Project Comment effect of high volume of traffic would have on the environmental area of RO's, along with the 80' easement and impact on some stately, mature oaks on our property near the road, and a concern of noise issues. Additionally, and what may be of concern to Hays County will be the impact of declining property values with a road of the magnitude of NF27 adjoining the properties on Oakrun. There is also a safety concern, as RO's has continued to debate the need for speed bumps in the area. A road of the nature of NF27 would certainly raise speed and safety concerns.

Page 1994 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 Several of the suggested new roads west of the Wimberley area are very disruptive to existing properties & Specific Project Comment neighborhoods, will be very costly due to terrain and water features and most importantly, they are not needed. Projected 2035 population density west of Wimberley indicates very limited growth – certainly not enough to warrant millions of dollars of unnecessary new concrete. I agree with observations below from CARD: • Remove new road NF 12 due to impact on Onion Creek watershed and Edwards Aquifer Contributing Zone. • Remove new road NF 26 due to conflict with Mustang Valley subdivision. • Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and rugged terrain. • Remove new road NF 25 due to crossing environmentally sensitive aquifer recharge area and limited use. • Remove new road NF 21 due to disruption of existing area creating cut through for truck traffic. • Remove new road NF 24 due to limited use and high cost. • Designate NF 16 for Emergency Access Only and construct as a gravel road with gated access. • Remove new road NF 7 due to duplication with RM 12. Survey # 2NF 16 & NF 15 are critical in addition to NF 8 to provide alternative routes for Lime Kiln. I have property on Alpine Specific Project Comment Trail and have been unable to leave during a flood event. What about extending the NF 8 connection to Harris Hill Road? It would provide a connection all the way over to SH 21. Survey # 2 I'm very skeptical for the need of a road (NF 27; new road? since there's evidence a road once went across the Specific Project Comment Blanco) at the end of Oak Run in River Oaks subdivision, connecting Sachtleben to Fischer Store, much less NF 26. Indeed, most of these NF roads seem more pie‐in‐the‐sky ideas than possessing a truly practical need in any of our lifetimes. Survey # 2 Yes, NF 13 shows a connection to FM 1826, this should line up with either Bear Creek Drive or North Madrone Trail Specific Project Comment and may need a turn lane and or traffic signal Survey # 2 Delete NF6 ‐ crosses Purgatory Creek and a dam. road not necessary. Delete NF 20 and NF 17 ‐ roads go nowhere Specific Project Comment Need new road connecting FM 150 and Bunton and connecting to MAD 2 between Lehman and Heidenrich in Kyle (per Kyle Transp Plan) Need connection between Goforth to Kyle Parkway near Seton Hospital (per Kyle Transp Plan)

Survey # 2 Extension of Hwy 21 from Hwy 80 to Posey Road is a WASTE of taxpayers money since proposed FM 110 loop and Specific Project Comment Old Bastrop Hwy enhancements and expansion (if done correctly) will provide plenty of east/west access south of I‐ 35. Survey # 2 The loops around Dripping Springs would be very helpful to help relieve congestion along 290W through Dripping Specific Project Comment Springs. Survey # 2My only comment would be regading SH 45 and the NF 13 and how realistic are these roads to happen. Of course, Specific Project Comment we all know about the CAMPO plan and how Travis County has switched back and forth regarding its existence in the plan. To me, these roads are necessary and I'm happy to see them in the plan. Survey # 2 Curious as to the timeline for the connecting roadway north of the existing Elder Hill Rd. This connection would help Specific Project Comment address some of the dangerous curves on Elder Hill Rd. Survey # 2 Yes don't mess with fulton ranch road and especially Flite Acres Road. We don't need more traffic. We all moved out Specific Project Comment here and know how long it takes to get places and were fine with "traffic" as it as and don't mind if it takes longer with an increased population.

Page 2095 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 21. NF 8 from Craddock to Lime Kiln which is a bad idea. The environmental impact would be too severe on Spring Specific Project Comment Lake, the aquifer and the San Marcos River. It is conceivable that a 'grand bargain' might be struck whereby significant purchase of conservation easements in the headwaters were secured in order to protect the watershed and enable a high standard roadway that captures and thoroughly cleans its run‐off 2. The Violet Crown Trail and a greenway should on the map and it should connect Austin to San Marcos as a biped facility

Survey # 2 NF8 should not be done for the reasons stated above. the result will be the end or certain serious degradation of the Specific Project Comment quality of the ground water, river and lead to a decline of the tourist element that brings money to the community as well. Survey # 2 Connections for Hillard and Lime Kiln for safety / access for county citizens need to be priorities. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 NF8 appears to be routed over environmentally sensitive area. We should not be building more roads/subdivisions Specific Project Comment so close to the headwaters of the SM River. Survey # 2 NF20 needs more justification before $ is spent on a road to nowhere. Dripping Springs needs a bypass, high Specific Project Comment priority. Survey # 2 Delete N26/N27 Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Consider a traffic light or turning lanes on Staples Rd at Hills of Hays. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Again, strongly against the proposal behind Hills of Hays Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Improve FM 621 by making it safer for vehicles especially school buses that pick up and drop off our children to and Specific Project Comment from school. Survey # 2 Will you please create a road to access the garbage transfer site from the south or east? Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Only about what effects river oaks Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2An additional bridge and road through this rural area (NF 27) is unnecesary and costly. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and Specific Project Comment rugged terrain Survey # 2 Reduce the amount of truck traffic during evening and early morning hours and weekends along Jacobs Well Rd. in Specific Project Comment Western Wimberley. Survey # 2 Increase the size of the RR1492 low water bridge over Blanco would improve trafic flow around Wimberley Specific Project Comment

Page 2196 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2We are not sure if this has been addressed or thought of, but why would there be a need for another low water Specific Project Comment bridge, when perhaps the ones at CR 1492 (by 7A) could consider widening along with the consideration of bridge improvement for the low water bridge at the end of Wayside? If these areas could be made to accomodate 2‐way traffic, would there be a need for a new low water bridge? Perhpas improvements to CR1492 could alleviate the need for NF27. Thank you Survey # 2 Yes, get those responsible for the Brody Lane/William Cannon area to consider using the right of way already owned Specific Project Comment by the City to expand Brody instead of extending 45 over extremely sensitive areas of the Aquifer to little benefit of anybody. Survey # 2 Make the existing RR12 and FM3237 wider. Do not develp neighborhood roads. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Only enhancement and extension of Staples Road (FM 621) that we have discussed with Commissioner Ingalsbe, Specific Project Comment TxDOT, and the City of San Marcos for over 10 years. Survey # 2 The traffic from Wimberley through Elder Hill Rd. continues to get worse. The road isn't designed for the amount of Specific Project Comment traffic it's getting. Survey # 2I don't like your plan regarding Flite Acres Road. Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Provide a connection from Hilliard to Wimberly Specific Project Comment

Survey # 2 Hays County Transportation Plan Opposition to N26/N27 Henry Ford said: “We all want progress, but if you're on Specific Project Comment the wrong road, progress means doing an about‐turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.” In reference to N27, the Hays County Transportation Plan is on the wrong road. The most insidious effect of constructing N27 is the access it would provide to humans and their tools of destruction. The health of this property demands restrictions on human access and behavior. The N27 transportation project would destroy this environmentally sensitive area including wildlife. Over the last few decades, studies in a variety of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems have demonstrated that many of the most pervasive threats to biological diversity are aggravated by roads. This road would disrupt the subdivision of “River Oaks”. The people who live in “River Oaks” wish to maintain the tranquil lifestyle of the Texas hill country. N27 would not only be costly to build/maintain, but it would also decrease all property values in the area. I am a homeowner/property owner in this area and I strongly object to any change for any reason to this property. My family has owned property here in this area for over fifty years, including a home on the Blanco River. This proposed road would be within view of our front yard. It is not too late to do an about‐turn and save the natural beauty of the hill country. The disturbances promoted by this road access and perhaps the most devastating, is development. Highways introduce pressures for commercial development of nearby land. Why would we want to fix something that isn’t broken? As responsible citizens we must look ahead and understand that building this road would do more harm than good. Future generations would not have the opportunity to enjoy the natural beauty and tranquility of this area. Delete N26 & N27 from any planning proposals.

Page 2297 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 Focus on existing roads. There are too many new roads on your proposed map. I want a better, more improved Specific Project Comment transportation system, not a bigger one. Just in my section of southeastern Hays county where you propose the SH General Comments: Limit Expansion 21 extension, and FM110/FWY4, and Old Bastrop Highway all within a very close distance and making a mess of the stretch of 123 from WonderWorld Drive to Old Bastrop Highway. This is just one example of what you are proposing throughout Hays County. I am disappointed. Survey # 2 I'm reluctant to endorse improving‐‐widening to more than 2‐lanes, or straightening out (Fischer St Rd and Mt. Specific Project Comment Sharp/Gainor)‐‐simply on the basis that most traffic seems to more or less adhere to the posted speed limits (more General Comments: Limit Expansion the latter than the former examples), and enlarging these roads more than they are or already have been, creates the venue not just for more through traffic, but faster‐moving through traffic. As an avid cyclist, some of these roads are becoming less scenic (losing that Hill Country flavor), and more heavily trafficked, and I would rather see the money spent on guiding this (frequently commercial) traffic away from these roads, rather than giving these drivers a better reason to use them. Survey # 2I objectto NF26, NF25, NF24, NF21, and NF16. Specific Project Comment Survey # 2• Current residents of the Hill Country treasure its rural character, open spaces, and clear flowing creeks and Specific Project Comment rivers ‐ an important factor in Hill Country property values. • New and improved roads in Hwy 290 and IH 35 growth corridors are consistent with CARD’s plan to support growth in those corridors, while central Hays County remains low impact rural development with special attention given to environmentally sensitive areas. • Expansion of FM 150 to four lane divided from Dripping Springs to Kyle/Buda directs traffic away from the rural interior and is NOT recommended. • RM 12 from Dripping Springs at FM 150 south through Wimberley is a two lane road and is NOT recommended. • RM 12 from the Wimberley Junction east to San Marcos should be downgraded from a six lane to a four lane parkway. • RM 32 west of the Wimberley Junction through Devils Backbone is one of the county’s most treasured drives, and should remain as a two lane divided road per plan. • Remove new road NF 12 due to impact on Onion Creek watershed and Edwards Aquifer Contributing Zone. • Remove new road NF 26 due to conflict with Mustang Valley subdivision. • Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and rugged terrain. • Remove new road NF 25 due to crossing environmentally sensitive aquifer recharge area and limited use. • Remove new road NF 21 due to disruption of existing area creating cut through for truck traffic. • Remove new road NF 24 due to limited use and high cost. • Designate NF 16 for Emergency Access Only and construct as a gravel road with gated access. • Remove new road NF 7 due to duplication with RM 12

Page 2398 of 24 Hays County Transportation Plan Summary of Public Comments Received December 11, 2012

Survey # 2 NF27 ‐‐ Not needed, not wanted. This is not your "garden variety" road expansion proposal. NF27 requires taking a Specific Project Comment lot of acreage from land owners, building a 45 foot bridge over the Blanco river and pushing a long road through an area where none exists ‐‐ for what reason? People live, retire and visit rural parts of Hays county because of the beauty of the area, the wildlife, the solitude. New bridges across the Blanco, with new and expanded feeder roads will assuredly add to the population density of the area. With added density comes an increased demand for water, waste disposal, and sadly diminishing habitat for wildlife. I own property on Oak Run including a Blanco river house that will be in the shadow of this 45 foot tall bridge spanning the Blanco. This particular stretch of the Blanco, downstream from El Rancho Cima is one of the most beautiful spots in all of the Texas Hill Country. To deface this area with a high bridge over the river is unconscionable. I just can't fathom how an agency of my county could be so insensitive and out‐of‐touch to float this proposal to the public. For over 50 years, my family has owned property here in this area including the house on the Blanco river. I enjoyed then and I enjoy now seeing the turkey, deer, and Survey # 2 Specific Project Comment Strongly against the extension behing Hills of Hays!!!!

Survey # 2Is TXDOT in sync with Hays County's plans for RR 12? Specific Project Comment Survey # 2 Remove new road NF 27 due to disruption of River Oaks subdivision, very expensive bridge over Blanco River, and Specific Project Comment rugged terrain Survey # 2 Water quality will be significantly impacted by revamping Wayside Dr. and/or Oak Run. Runoff will be greatly Specific Project Comment increased due to increased traffic loads. That is unacceptable and should be paramount in consideration when planning is done, especially in light of the current drought situation. Survey # 2I hope it's not too late but I think widening current roads (RR12) is better than widening all of these alternative Specific Project Comment routes. People moving out here creates traffic conditions but then fixing all the road way problems on gives more people a reason to move out here. Please leave the Wimberley part out of the discussion. I'll gladly send my tax dollars to Dripping, Kyle and San Marcos road work. Survey # 2 Please reconsider NF 27! Thanks Specific Project Comment Survey # 2It is good to keep RR 12 smaller, as you have, but I am concerned re the recharge zone for the Barton/Edwards Specific Project Comment aquifer region, too. Water is so precious and dense development on recharge zones means we will have less General Comment: Water Issues recharge in the future, not just because impervious surfaces cover the percolation area, but because increased speed of runoff from impervious cover then has a domino effect, causing a sharp decrease in recharge in the creek beds. Any watershed scientist can show you diagrams illustrating this, and I have some that I should share with the county commissioners. I used to do that every year after new commissioners are seated, but I've not gotten around to it lately. I Emailed Please do not put in this road from Oak Run to Hwy 32. Specific Project Comment Survey # 2I have submitted a brief note specifically addressing the alignment of NF 27 via Specific Project Comment "[email protected]" I would appreciate e‐mail confirmation of receipt.

Page 2499 of 24 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Executive Session pursuant to Sections 551.071 and 551.072 of the Texas Government Code: consultation with counsel and deliberation regarding the purchase, exchange, or value of real property related to the marketing and potential sale or lease of County owned properties. Possible action may follow in open court.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

EXECUTIVE SESSION January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR APPROVAL: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

COBB N/A

SUMMARY

100 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Executive Session pursuant to Section 551.071 of the Texas Government Code: consultation with counsel regarding application of the existing Collective Bargaining Agreement between Hays County and HCLEA; and regarding the upcoming bargaining session in FY2013. Possible action to follow.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

EXECUTIVE SESSION January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

CONLEY CONLEY N/A

SUMMARY

Summary25B51B77B103B129B155B181B207B233B to be provided in Executive Session.

101 AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM

Hays County Commissioners Court Tuesdays at 9:00 AM

Request forms are due in Microsoft Word Format via email by 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday.

AGENDA ITEM Executive Session pursuant to Sections 551.071 and 551.074 of the Texas Government Code: consultation with counsel and deliberation regarding the appointment, duties, and/or reassignment of each individual employee of the Personal Health Department and the Director of the Development and Community Services Department.

ITEM TYPE MEETING DATE AMOUNT REQUIRED

EXECUTIVE SESSION January 15, 2013

LINE ITEM NUMBER

AUDITOR USE ONLY AUDITOR COMMENTS:

PURCHASING GUIDELINES FOLLOWED: N/A AUDITOR REVIEW: N/A

REQUESTED BY SPONSOR CO-SPONSOR

CONLEY N/A

SUMMARY

Backup24B49B74B99B124B149B174B199B224B to be provided in executive session.

102