Travis County Commissioners Court
June 6, 2006
Item 18
18 is to consider and take appropriate action on the transportation department's request and budget amendment to add a civil attorney and support staff to assist in the implementation of the 2005 bond program. Anybody here from pbo?
>> we proposed this item as an additional civil attorney to help with the transactions on the capital improvements program. And therefore to the extent that that attorney and the support staff is working on that stuff that's reimbursible from the bond proceeds and we will have sufficient funds to do that. The county attorney's office has requested that the position be funded out of the general fund and be managed as all the other attorneys on their staff. And they have committed to submitting timesheets for the attorney in billable hours and then on that basis the general fund would get reimbursed from the bond funds. I guess the issue for pbo in trying to represent their viewpoint here is that that has not been done in the past and they want some assurance that if this does go forward that in fact the general fund would be reimbursed.
>> but if it were in your budget, would it be for the duration of the bond program and then wouldn't that work as --
>> that is not the way I interpret the attorney general's -- the county attorney's request. When that goes away, I would say yes, --
>> that's what I知 asking, if it were in your budget in tnr's, then once the work, the bond work got done, then that position would go away.
>> or a new bond election. Like the right-of-way.
>> I would prefer it be in the tnr budget.
>> I知 not sure the county attorney would agree to that request. They would prefer the position be in their own budget.
>> my point is what would be the difference? Even though it's something that you have done in the past, there's nothing wrong with rolling that over to where the bonds are and putting it into the county attorney's budget, and of course allowing that to be used out of the bond proceeds. (indiscernible). ... Let that come out of the general fund. I really don't see a problem with that.
>> if it's out of the tnr budget, they would concentrate on that only, on bond projects only.
>> but not to put it in tnr's budget the county attorney would supervise them. Can we delay this item until -- for 15 minutes or so and give the county attorney a chance to get down here? John hilly indicated that the county attorney has pretty strong feelings about how this is done.
>> it might be at this late hour perhaps just roll it until next week.
>> let's give him 15 or 20 minutes. If not, we'll take it on next week.
and did you and john reach agreement out there? Let's take this up and then we'll call you. Let me call that item back up, first. That was 18, the matter involve is the transportation department's request and budget amendment to add a civil attorney and support staff to assist in the implementation of the 2005 bond program.
>> let me put another perspective on this. When I talked about the work load, is really is a combination of things. We've been using tomite quite a bit on policy issues such as pass-thru tolls, lane issues and whatnot. I think what we're really seeing is a combination of things. The reason tnr needs another attorney for civil transactions and cip is because we can -- tom's got too many other things on his plate.
>> there's a trigger point on this, and I think the county attorney is trying to make the point you can't just add on an attorney and not add on the support staff that go with that attorney.
>> that's in the package that there's an indirect way that accomplishes all the support staff. The attorney bills on billable hours, but there is an indirect cost that's added to that that covers all of the support staff. The request covers not only the attorney, direct cost from the attorney, but all the indirect cost of the clerk, the secretary and the parallel that support him or her.
>> Travis County planning and budget office. Maybe a brief background. We met a may 15th, the county attorney's, tnr and the budget office. At the time tnr felt the need was 1 or 1.5 f.t.e.'s for their program. The county attorney's office submit add budget request for next year for three and a half f.t.e. Related to this program. There was a disagreement about the staffing that was needed based on what you talked about. I知 currently reviewing the budget proposal for next year and will make a staffing recommendation in the preliminary budget that can be available sooner, I just don't have that information with me right now. I知 still reviewing the staffing patterns and the ratios based on what given to me.
>> what would happen is we would hire the attorney first and then that attorney would have a hand in taking the parallel and the law clerk and the secretary. So the rest of that team may not come on board until almost October 1 anyway. Joe was saying give me the lawyer now.
>> we're not sure related to bond stuff, there's probably going to be a significant amount of bond work related to other cip, and I知 just thinking in terms of the jail project. So I知 -- the idea that it's almost a tnr. If it is the county attorney's office, and it's related to cip, it definitely is more time and attention that gets charged back, but it could be there are charged back hours as well related to the jail project, which is 63 million.
>> the one difference in that is joe has accounted for in the managing of the whole bond projects that he had been planning all along to reimburse for that time with an attorney. I don't think roger in calculating the costs for the jail did. He didn't set aside that amount of money. For attorney work. There is some administrative cost. I don't know if it included legal or not. Tnr's administrative cost, which can includes legal for sure, is eight percent, and that would cover the legal costs that are being requested here.
>> so the best possible circumstances, how quickly could an attorney get on board regardless of funding source?
>> I could have somebody in next week.
>> you could have somebody in when?
>> I致e got a law clerk who has already passed the bar who could be working next week.
>> that's a law clerk. I asked about an attorney.
>> this person has already passed the bar. In fact, in fact, I致e got two in that category and it would be david reviewing them to see if he's comfortable with hiring them.
>> well, I never ask too much one way or the other. I don't know which is the most comparable way of dealing with that. You or the county attorney would have to deal with it. It's something you would have to work out. But I do know the need is there. I知 going to make a motion to move approval of item number 18.
>> it sounds like they don't have all the information.
>> the whole -- is the whole team reimbursible or just the attorney? , I did receive an e-mail from the county auditor's office, from shaun, that lays out the formula, and it does include attorney hourly wage, legal secretary hourly wage, parallel hourly wage and -- paralegal hourly wage and/or law clerk hourly wage. Obviously the preferred scenario would be 100% bond funded. The way the county attorney set up, I don't think that they believe that's feasible. And if they don't believe that that's feasible, then the county auditor is not going to be comfortable. There is, like you were mentioning, the ability to reimburse the general fund for those costs. That's what we want to explore. [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>> the other thing is if it's in the county attorney's budget, then what assurances would I have that that person would spend all the time necessary to get these tier one projects up and running. And done?
>> we prepared a report for p.b.o. And submitted it this morning and so I apologize for sending it kind of late, but it gives a perspective that we are already spending a good deal of time on this now and joe is not really -- not really giving us all the work that I think he wants to give us. So -- so it's -- it's definitely for sure these lawyers, that includes my time, and includes the attorneys that are already on staff, we are all going to be throwing bodies to get this project done.
>> just to summarize john's information, if I -- if I知 reading this correctly. So far in fy '06, 591 hours have been spent on 849701 and 05 bond projects. What we are going to hopefully work with now is to get the county attorney's office to get the costs reimbursed to the appropriate bond funds.
>> > what I don't want to have happen here. 10 attorneys spending 10% of their time on bond related stuff. I don't want this to be a simple swap out of oh, cool, now I can get you to sign those costs and wind up having those attorneys doing more work and it doesn't get us any more hours. It's just -- just reapportioning and -- and rearranging the deck chairs, so to speak on the titanic. The intent I think of all of us is to get more people -- more hands on deck related to the c.i.p. Projects. And not to get cute and crazy about -- about oh, cool, now we can figure out how to -- a way to palm this off officially on to the c.i.p. Fund and we don't get any more net hours. Or the hours get freed up to work on other transaction things which are very important, but that's not what we are trying to solve there. I am going to be reorganizing the division so that -- so that that effort will be t.n.r. Effort rather than right now what it's kind of a split administrative services t.n.r. Effort.
>> I知 trying to get tom nuchols squared, you know, I知 trying to get a -- assistance there.
>> I don't think that can be done.
>> I know. But this is not a -- not a way to try and just reapportion transactions and get the c.i.p. To pay for work that's already being done. It's to create more -- more time.
>> right.
>> to get things done.
>> we have similar projects that need to get done.
>> where is the money today?
>> if the court wished to address the position today, I would recommend this year's funding come within salary savings from the department, that we could come back with that funding recommendation for fy '07.
>> which department?
>> county attorney's office.
>> [indiscernible]
>> yes, sir.
>> with that information that I have gotten, Commissioner Davis, I will second your motion then.
>> thank you.
>> keep in mind that -- that salary savings ideally the working performed on the c.i.p. Program would be reimbursed to the c.i.p. Program. What p.b.o. Is trying to do here is to make sure that the -- that the appropriate funding sources used and also to protect the general fund when it -- when these resources do not need to be expended out of the general fund if they are c.i.p. Related.
>> so salary savings reimbursed from the c.i.p. Fund at the appropriate time?
>> that was correct.
>> I don't have any feel for what david or jim collins might say to that. That was the first time that I致e heard that.
>> come back and see us when you do. If there's an issue with it.
>> okay.
>> I don't think -- to me six of one, half dozen of the other. This is the most efficient way to do it right now, no problem. You will be reimbursed by the way.
>> right.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. If there are issues with it, come back, we will address those.
>> [indiscernible] reminder, you wanted to see the letter.
>> probably be good to see the letter in executive session, we can read it, come back and deal with it. Okay?
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, June 7, 2006 12:54 PM