Travis County Commissioners Court
August 23, 2005
Items 4 &10, Afternoon Discussion
Let's call back to order the voting session of the Travis County Commissioners court. When we recessed this morning we were discussing items 4 and 10 which we called up together. And those items regard the citizens bond advisory committee recommendations. And 10 has the various subsections that we'll need to discuss when we get to that point today. There were a few other residents who had signed in to give testimony that we did not reach, and so unless there is something else to discuss, we need to do that first. Susan bright. Susan bright. John hutchinson. Christina kuback. Craig smith. Good afternoon.
>> good afternoon, Commissioners and judge. My name is john hutchinson, for the record. I知 here to speak in behalf of arterial a and I understand there's now apparently a tier 2. I壇 like to keep us in the -- in that position for the time being, as best we can. You've heard people speak this morning, some of them rather vigorously, and I would like to correct a couple of things. When we went throughout the three neighborhoods to seek petitions, we were very, very specific on what we told people, what we showed people. We took maps, we took aerial maps, we took the road plan he should by Travis County, we did everything as above board as we could physically do it. I did not want to be called in here to ask if I had misrepresented anything, and I have not misrepresented anything to you folks. I have used the information I have gleaned from your staff, t.n.r. And city of Austin and txdot. I will not stand here to win an argument and lie to you folks. I知 not going to be called to the carpet on that. I will not allow my name to be mudded with some b.s. From somebody. I知 going to tell you the absolute truth. Simply put, what they are not really address ing is the 30,000 trips a day that will be on arterial a. They are coming. There's 3,000 houses coming in now. 5,000 to 6,000 to 8,000 between harris branch and samsung. That's a given. There's just no debating that. What I would like you to do is understand that right now we are lacking at a massive growth in our area and I hope those people have a way to get from point a to point b because sitting idles at the light is the same as driving 40 miles an hour. You are burning the same amount of fuel and we don't have time for that. Right now I don't know what mr. Mcaffee told the neighbors that he got to sign his petition, but simply put, mr. Martinez spoke that he did not understand where arterial a was going to involve the houses and how it was really going to affect the landfill. I don't think he understands because I don't know what they were shown in the way of photographs, but when waste management goes in to cells 9 and 10, that's 700 feet from his house. 700 feet -- I know guys who shoot deer from that distance it's not that far. You will be able to read license plates on the back of trucks on their facility. If they close 9 and 10, it will be moved over another 700 feet. That's 1400 feet. That almost meets the requirements of the future possible t.n.r. Rules for siting. It's 1500 feet, I believe, on that. It doesn't move any closer to any other neighborhood. Actually, the new neighborhood that will be coming in, the crossings, will be over 2,000 feet away. Simple math. Leave us in the bond package. Let the people of Travis County decide whether or not the money needs to be spent at some time for this road. But the simple fact is they have has the opportunity to fight waste management on their siting of the wild wood tract. I知 not asking to you buy out 9 and 10 and give them the wilder tract. I知 saying put the money in the alignment or in the process, put our road in the process so that if they get their permit, notice the word "if" they get their permit, waste says they are not in 9 and 10, they will never go into 9 and 10. If they get the permit to the wilder tract, they will just go there and leave 9 or 10 fallow. If that happens, you have a way to build the road. I知 not asking you to fight for waste management to get into the wilder tract. I知 not asking to you oppose it. They are. I would just like to see if the chips fall where they are. I think that personally waste management is going to get the wilder tract. I truly believe that. There's nothing that I know of that's going to stop them other than public sentiment. And if you all have been listening to me the last 10 years, you know I致e fought that landfill for 10 years. The best I can say is leave us in the package, let the package stand on its own merit. If the road gets built, the road gets built. If it doesn't, that's going to be too bad for my neighborhood. I知 tphol asking you to fight for waste management. I知 asking to you let the road stand on its own. Let's see what happens. And mr. Daugherty, you asked a question last week when I spoke before you did I fully understand what this road would do. I truly understand. I really do understand. So do most of the people that signed that petition. I truly believe. That I explained it to the 25 signatures that I got, I explained it absolutely. One guy said I don't care, john, I know you're not going to do anything to screw up my neighborhood and he started to sign and I said no, you read the petition before you sign it. If you don't know what you signed, you could have signed over the deed to your house. I said just read it. So b.f.i. Is different than waste management. B.f.i. Is a 24 hour a day, seven days a week facility. Waste management closes at night, covers up their debris and opens up the next morning. B.f.i. Is running with lights all night long and it's just a whole different package. If they went away in 10 years, I would be absolutely elated. But I知 willing to live with waste management if I get the road because I think that road is going to be absolutely mandatory for the people of northeast Travis County because there is no road. And the people that keep talking to you about that road, against it, keep telling you they have an alternate route. Judge, you told them to show it to mr. Geiselman. He's yet to do that to the best of my knowledge. He hasn't shown you any other alternate route. If for people to leave and not come down my road, to go back to harris branch, come down harris branch and 290, that's three miles every today to and from work. That's one way. That's six miles each day. At the price of gas, you can figure the math on that. Let's not make people go around the world just to get out on 290. That's where most of the people are going unless they go to samsung. Thanks very much. Thanks for keeping us on tier 2.
>> thank you.
>> I知 christina kubeck. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. The need for a new north-south road in northeast Travis County is very obvious. I知 sure we could analyze the situation perpetually. I have proven that there is great support for arterial a with the petition. There seems to be a petition frenzy going on with much confusion. The Texas campaign for the environment canvassed our area as well with a petition of sorts and asked for money. I have not misled anyone. I distinctly opponent out on the map this is where the landfill will give up the right-of-way for the road. And since they are giving up that space, they want to expand on the other side. I pointed out on the map here's where this is, there's where that is. I showed people. I spent a great deal amount of time talking to all -- you know, the 100 people that I got signatures from. You know, there's approximately 700 feet, and I致e said it before, but there's approximately 700 feet between the current permitted landfill area and the nearest homes. That's, you know, pretty close. And they are on a hill so they get the birds-eye view. On the other side, you know, the outer edge of the expansion area, there's about 2,000 feet between the edge of the expansion and blue goose road with no development or homes in between. There's nothing there right now. The road will push the landfill back further from the nearest homes and it will add water detention to the base of the landfill that would not otherwise be required. I致e been, you know, fighting landfill issues since 1998 and I知 quite the champion at it. I mean my complaint getting filed with tceq resulted in the fines that were levied against both landfills. Because of storm water runoff and pollution coming off those landfills. There's a tremendous amount of runoff coming off those landfills. They were not required to have water detention when they were permitted. Pushing them back would require them to have it. It would be an improvement to the area. Traffic is reality. The time is now to secure funding for this road project. Please let the people of Travis County vote for their future. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> there's one other thing I wanted to mention because I won't be able to come back later. The letter I知 sure was addressed to you from david lowery, the director of the Travis County health and human services department. And the subject is potential health effects associated with the landfills. It says in here the Texas department of -- state health services and the Texas cancer registry, t.c.r. Branch conducted a cancer includeser investigation of the area, and further down it says these findings are consistent with a review that was conducted in 2002 for the Austin city council. Based on that review of monitoring results by multiple state agencies, it was concluded that while nearby residents were experiencing quality of life issues associated with odors and related eye irritation, headaches, nausea, there was no evidence of long-term health effects. That's from david lourie. Again, thank you.
>> thank you.
>> is david lourie here today?
>> he was here this morning.
>> mr. Smith.
>> hi. Judge, Commissioners, I知 craig smith and I知 on the board of directors of the save Barton Creek association. And I知 here to support all the recommendations of the citizens bond advisory committee. I壇 like to just make a couple of comments on the results of the poll that I知 sure you've all seen that said that the citizens of Travis County would support a $60 million bond proposition for accession of natural areas even if that meant a one cent increase in their ad valorem tax rate. Two observations. One, I think that this poll indicates that the people of Travis County love this county. And they believe that there are special places that need to be preserved not just for this generation but for generations to come. And they are willing to pay for that. Then second, the voters believe that this is about the last chance to get some of these places before they are either changed forever or become two expensive to afford. And so they want to move now to acquire some of these beautiful places while we still have a chance. Now, I understand that the court must be fiscally responsible and I知 not urging you to cross any white line if you are able to figure out where that is. But what I am urging you to do is to authorize a bond proposition for natural area of protection that goes right up to that white line. And I believe that the poll results and my sense of the people in general is that the people will be on your side. Thank you.
>> thank you. Anybody else to give comments today whether you signed in or not?
>> susan, county auditor. I would like to make a few comments, if I could. And that is, it was interesting watching this morning the projects that citizens want, all of which will require an increase in the property tax. And it is a very different feeling than the feeling over at the legislature which is consistently telling us that people do not want to pay property taxes and a very concerted effort to put caps on the revenues that we have to spend. And the retort from the legislature when we point out that we are having a difficult time funding mandatory programs is, well then don't do anything that is non-mandatory. So I guess my comment would be that I am hopeful that the citizens that are here today will in fact support us over at the legislature. It would be useful to have resolutions from them when we go over there saying that they do not support capping revenue here and they do support the increase in property tax money for these kinds of projects because that's what the people who live in Travis County want. Because that is not the message even to our own delegation that has been heard. The other thing I think that is somewhat frustrating when you sit where I sit is that these projects don't stand alone. And that is, they are part of everything else that happens. And there never seems to be a lot of supported and money for those everything else that happens in order to do that. If we build more roads, our people need to repair those roads. And as you well know, our people are not getting market wages for those roads. And everyone is in the same situation, I知 just picking random examples. Even in my own office, if these projects were passed, there's a significant increase in workload for the people in the auditor's office and the county attorney's office and the purchasing office. All of those things are funded by the general fund and because the property taxes are a major revenue source, it will have an increase in taxes. And people often forget that these bond issues do have to be paid back and they are paid back with property taxes, and they carry with them operating expenditures that need to be financed with sp epld m&o and they need to be paying wages consistent with the employees in the private sector are getting for doing the same work. So I just wanted to add that because it's such an enthusiastic crowd and they are so supportive and sitting there listening it's kind of hard to disagree with them. But on the other hand, when you'll are out there trying to raise taxes, you are by your loan some. When I知 over here fighting against revenue caps, I知 by my lonesome. When you have to support these when you have to pay for these things and furthermore in the legislature to do that because once these projects are approved, there's the money. I just thought I would like to interject that since it's sort of on my mind. Thank you very much.
>> thank you. Move that the public hearing in number 4 be closed.
>> second.
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, August 24, 2005 10:47 AM