Travis County Commssioners Court
October 15, 2002
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.
Agenda Item 4
Four is to consider appointment of members to the intermunicipal rail district board and take appropriate action.
>> you know we passed the resolution last week that some three-quarters of the way there in forming the commuter rail district. The last we heard was that the san antonio city council would act no later than November 7th. We have an appointment to make from the membership of this court and we also have the duty of making an appointment to represent the rural transportation.
>> before -- I just had a few questions after you finish.
>> well, I'm finished. Number one, we need to talk about who from this court would be a good representative on the board. And then what process we want to use to make the appointment to represent the rural transportation.
>> I'm saying that the representative cannot be an elected official.
>> that's correct. Well, can be a member of this court, but should be --
>> but is it actually somebody on carts, representing carts, or is it to actually represent the issues of rural transportation providers? Those are two way different things. And actually it might tie into the issue we had on the previous item. How do we make sure that the rural transportation needs, desires and issues are appropriately covered? I don't think it says it doesn't have to be somebody from carts or even representing carts.
>> I think the statute left it to your judgment --
>> do you have a statute with you.
>> I didn't bring it down.
>> I didn't either.
>> I can get somebody from my office to bring it down.
>> I can't remember the precise language.
>> it been interpreted in several -- it's been sprepted in several places an a representative. It doesn't have to be somebody on carts. It doesn't say that.
>> the impression I always had that it was never that specific in terms of talking to senator bar yes or no toes and senator went wentworth, they were never that specific. It was to ensure that rural transportation needs are addressed.
>> it says one member appointed by each county in which a creating municipality is located to represent transportation providers that provide service to rural areas in the county.
>> that's why, because it says transportation providers.
>> so that would be -- that would be a person from carts.
>> it doesn't have to be carts.
>> yeah, because --
>> if he's not, I don't know why we would have him on there, but if he's interested in trying to promote --
>> and he's kind of like the staff person for all the rural counties and the rural transportation needs. So it sound like that person from -- yeah, the executive director.
>> I think what we're discovering from our discussions with campo is this is going to be a very active board and it needs to be a very proactive board. And we need to make sure whoever we put on are folks who will bring their running shoes because we need to be very careful and thoughtful about who we put on this board. And I just want to make sure while we say it will be the staff person at carts, we need to find the appropriate person to go on there.
>> but he's really well informed with the whole process, makes trips to washington, d.c. To lobby for transportation dollars. And he's pretty knowledgeable.
>> we might need him to come in and have some meetings with us, two on two kind of things or a subcommittee process so we can have those appropriate discussions. But I don't think we ought to just --
>> I think it would be appropriate for the carts board itself to comment, not that they can dictate who the appointment would be, but to comment on --
>> the only concern was that there wasn't going to be another board meeting until, gosh, December maybe. So that's a little late, so we needed to poll them by telephone.
>> let me say this. Do you know who in December?
>> no, I don't remember.
>> well, here's the situation -- on the timing, campo is not going to be able to -- actually, campo acted last night. The comiltion for the -- the Texas department of transportation commission will not be acting on this until November 21st and they have two appointments, so it may be that the December date is not that late. We have some advice that is once the four founding members, the creating members that made their appointment, those members might be able to call a meeting and get the word out that it's time to make your appointment. But if you think that polling the membership is a good thing. I would like to know what the carts board itself would suggest as a good way to --
>> you would want to chat with the executive director to see if he's interested. He may take the position that he can't dedicate the time and energy necessary, but I know he's been active in rural transportation matters forever.
>> yeah, since the '70's or '80's.
>> we need to have a discussion about rail because we've always talked to him in relation to the carts bus program. And it may be a perfect fit and it may not be.
>> commissioner Davis has a few questions.
>> thank you, judge. Tom, i'd like to ask you this: is there any legal statutory requirements on resolutions passed to create a commuter rail freight districts? Is there any time constraints that require by statute that says we have to make an appointment to this district board at this time? What are the guidelines on that.
>> the statute guidelines on when you make the appointment, there's no deadline that forces you to make the appointment.
>> there's no legal -- okay. Because what I'm hearing is that meets are to be held in December and all these kind of things, so we do have time to actually -- since the statute isn't solid with that, we do have time to wait until appropriateness to make that appointment.
>> the only issues you need to consider there are the practical ones. Once the four creating entities have each passed their resolution, then legally the district will exist. And if the other entities all appoint their members and there's enough appointees to form a quorum, I don't see anything that keeps the board from going ahead and meeting. The decision then for y'all will be do you want to meet without Travis County's appointee.
>> I guess the question is do we know whether or not the other entit have made their appointments to this?
>> Some of the counties have and the city of Austin told us it would active in the next --
>> either the 24th or the 31st-- I need to know if members that made their appointment, those members might be able to call a meeting and get the word out that it's time to make your appointment. But if you think that polling the membership is a good thing. I would like to know what the carts board itself would suggest as a good way to --
>> you would want to chat with the executive director to see if he's interested. He may take the position that he can't dedicate the time and energy necessary, but I know he's been active in rural transportation matters forever.
>> yeah, since the '70's or '80's.
>> we need to have a discussion about rail because we've always talked to him in relation to the carts bus program apeecit and it may not be.
>> commissioner Davis has a few questions.
>> thank you, judge. Tom, i'd like to ask you this: is there any legal statutory requirements on resolutions passed to create a commuter rail freight districts? Is there any time constraints that require by statute that says we have to make an appointment to this district board at this time? What are the guidelines on that.
>> the statute guidelines on when you make the appointment, there's no deadline that forces you to make the appointment.
>> there's no legal -- okay. Because what I'm hearing is that meets are to be held in December and all these kind of things, so we do have time to actually -- since the statute isn't solid with that, we do have time to wait until appropriateness to make that appointment.
>> the only issues you need to consider there are the practical ones. Once the four creating entities have each passed their resolution, then legally the district will exist. And if the other entities all appoint their members and there's enough appointees to form a quorum, I don't see anything that keeps the board from going ahead and meeting. The decision then for y'all will be do you want to meet without Travis County's appointee.
>> I guess the question is do we know whether or not the other entities have made their appointments to this?
>> the some of the counties have and the city of Austin told us it would be active in the next --
>> either the 24th or the 31st.
>> I need to know exactly who has already made the appointments.
>> bexar county.
>> to the board.
>> and have the staff get back with me. Joe, anybody from tnr to get back with me before the day is out to give me that answer of who actually have made the appointments, and that means the municipalities and also the counties. Number two is that last week it was discussed about the possibility of sh one 30 -- and I think sensitivity is going to be very critical in my mind of who is going to serve on this district. Sensitivity to the entire community of Travis County when you're looking at commuter/freight rail. Last week we discussed -- there was a discussion that was made from this dais of shifting commuter rail to the sh 130 corridor, which also is inclusive -- and again, i'll say this, that this commuter rail district is enter 29 twined with freight rail. You can't separate them from the other. Even according to the american-statesman it was proposed that freight rail would be moved east, which is in the precinct east northeast which I represent. So since that's the case, after that meeting I went and had some research done because I wanted to do due diligence before we do things. And, of course, I wanted to review and look at the sh 130 corridor, what type of I impact would that have on sh 130 if the commuter rail would locate -- commuter/freight rail would locate within the boundaries of sh 130. There's a 120-foot right-of-way in the center of sh 130 that may be available for -- the 120-foot right-of-way would be available for ail and also for bus way; however, it's not designed and wouldn't be -- the right-of-way wouldn't be perfectly all encompassing to serve rail. And the reason for that is the grade transportation -- and since you have the type of grade you may cause negative impacts to a rail system being located on there. So the steeper the grade, of course, the more engines you will have to have, something that could pull a load with one engine, if the grade is steep, then it may require two engines. And, of course, so it's not ideal to rail. Number two on that is that we're now talking about possibly having bridges and a whole lot of other things within the sh 130 corridor that would support that type of grade for rail. I really don't know if the persons or the railroad that will be looking at locating there would actually be inclined to locate there because of the hardships that it would probably cause them financially and everything else for locating on sh 130 corridor. Also, there have not been a decision made for rail within the corridor of sh 130 at all. This decision has not been addressed. So what does that mean? That means that there will have to be a separate new process, the natural and environmental policy act, along with an veerment al impact -- environmental impact statement that must go with this process. I don't know how long that will take, I don't know who is going to pay for that. I don't know any of those above. However, just as we dealt with sh 130, it's supposed to go west of decker lake, it would have wiped out many of our communities over there. The neighborhoods I named last week would be impacted and i'll repeat those again, the l.b.j. Area, the colony park, prairie wood, chavelier park and others north of that, the impact even up as far as -- well, I don't remember. Chimney hills and I guess that over there. There was a serious problem with the eastern boundary even as far out as Williamson county. We heard those persons even up there protesting about that western alignment. Of course, when the environmental -- the process was concluded, it was decided that they would go east of decker lake. However, that process is still intact. This coming Saturday I will be in a people from a lot of these neighborhoods that are particularly concerned about this and how it would impact them. And within that there are certain things that are under mitigation and things of that nature there. There are certain things that the minority communities have protection under the law. And tom, if you could tell me what those things are, I would appreciate that, under the law in the process, what is the process itself.
>> look at all the alternatives in achieving the goal you're trying to achieve. And there are protections with regard to protected classes that basically say you've got to choose the alternative that has the least impact on them. , in a nutshell. Obviously that's heavily fact dependent. It's going to depend on what the project is, what you're trying to achieve, what all the alternatives are, and that's really why you have to address that during the process. That's really the only way you can do it, during that very intensive period when you're gathering a lot of facts and doing a lot of studies and having a lot of experts examine different things. So it's very much wrapped up into the niva process.
>> > and looking at the process, there are public hearings and things of that nature?
>> definitely.
>> and they have to be adhered to and mandated by the process so that the community will have an opportunity to participate in and to voice their concerns?
>> yes.
>> and I don't know what time frame that takes place, but I do know as far as priority is concerned, it appears that freight is being pushed up front as far as the transportation of freight, using the commuter freight rail system, that's being pushed more than anything else. It seems to have taken priority. So since it has taken priority, these are the things that we must examine very carefully as the process goes through. Now, it may be that the freight carriers may decide not to even locate on sh 130 and then use esting rails. I really don't know. But I do know that probably a significant cost to upgrade sh 130 as it is now within that 120-foot right-of-way of sh 130. So again, I would like to point those things out and I again would like to continue to have tnr staff to -- of course, I think i've mentioned this -- to bring me renderings -- I don't care what kind of map it is, but I like to see where the rail layout is. I think we can come to a win-win situation here addressing commuter rail that hauls passengers, commuter rail that -- commuter/freight rail that accomodates freight. I think we can have a win-win situation. I've looked at this the best I can, but I'm trying to be sensitive to the needs of this community, not that nobody else is not, but I think we need to put stuff on the table to show the sensitivity of this and the process that we must go through before we get there. So that's basically the poipts that I wanted to bring out at this time. And, of course, I will hold a meeting with the community in precinct 1 on some of these impacts. So I don't have a map, but I will have it before this coming Saturday, and I would like to get it as quickly as possible this week. So those are basically my requests. And I think until we find out where we are in this, i'd like to again have staff to get back with me today, before the day is out, and let me know where the other counties are before we go forward with this. And i'd like to maybe postpone this until we get that information. Thank you.
>> is mr. Olig the right person to initiate a discussion about his desire to be on the board, what it is -- I assume we need to have a conversation. The second part of this would be to, I guess, ask commissioner Gomez to informally discuss with other board members -- I was on the board before. That will take a week or two. But the request would be that we get a report back at the appropriate time. So I would say in that order, if you ask the executive director first, make sure he understands, and if he is willing to serve, then we get commissioner Gomez to chat informally with the board members and report back to us and let us know whether to pursue another choice for the rural transportation person on whether we think we have one in hand.
>> judge, I think it's extraordinarily important for many of the reasons that commissioner dave has raised for Travis County to have a voice at the table as these issues are brought up. And one of the reasons to go ahead and get this formed is to try to get access to the $5.62 million of monies, planning monies to do many of the very studies that commissioner Davis is wanting to get done and to get some answers related to sh 130. You're correct, there are some serious questions about the grade and whether the turning radiuses are appropriate for rail. You are absolutely correct. We have got to get that rolled into the discussions with fluor daniel and lone star infrastructure right now or else something that could be a 25-million-dollar change order to put in a rail could be a 100-million-dollar change order to do rail and make it very, very unaffordable. Just for everybody's information, bexar county has appointed commissioner tommy atkinson, he's the commissioner for precinct 4, to the rail district board. The information I got from judge wolf is that the npo down there will be making their selection shortly. Last night campo selected senator barrientos to be the representative of campo on the rail district board. And mayor garcia said that the city council of Austin will be making their selection on either the 24th or the 31st of October. And I think it would be very appropriate for us to go ahead and get on board, no pun intended, in terms of getting our representative there. And to me it seems the name that makes sense is our representative to the Austin-san antonio corridor council. And I would move the appointment of commissioner Moore to be Travis County's voice on the rail district board as our representative.
>> second.
>> any more discussion of that motion?
>> yes, I would like to discuss it. Imen, last week -- again, last week on this dais, it was proposed to move freight rail from wherever it's hauled to east Austin. Even the newspaper indicated that. Most of the areas as far as sh 130 has 34 miles within Travis County. Of the 90 proposed in sh 130, 34 miles is in Travis County itself. 14 some-odd miles is in precinct 1. Another 13 is in -- a little more than 13 is in precinct 4. The other remaining is in precinct 2. Last week it was talked about to move freight rail to the eastern part of the Travis County. That kind of alerted me to the -- I think without going through due process. These things that I brought up today about the impact on sh 130 is something that I did not know during the discussion, but I found out and I resemped it. And, of course, I'm going to be holding meetings within my precinct. I'm duly elected to that precinct and I'm going to do everything I can to make the protection of any impact negatively a hardship that may come forward in the past. And I hope that the sensitivity of my precinct, Travis County as a whole is still there. It won't impact anybody negatively, but I think there is a win-win situation and I'm working on it. However, I'm just stating the fact that the impact of what's being proposed here will be felt in predominantly the area -- if we want to look at the alignment of sh 130, most of the mileage is in precinct 1. So again, I want to make sure that whatever what happens, but we are sensitive. And I don't think we have to appoint people because they serve on things, I think we have to work at it in the way that you look at the sensitivity and the needs of the community and the person that understands the community itself, living in the community and know the hard environmental impacts that we've had to deal with. And it goes on and on and on. And I could be here all day telling you about all the environmental, the unwanted things that are happening without the input from the elected official that really lives there. And we can't really do anything about it. So that would be my concern now is how can we address the sensitivity and the needs of the people, the residents of eastern Travis County where they will be impacted probably more than anywhere else, how do we address those concerns to make sure that they get the attention they deserve. And we can go from the landfills to the whole nine yards of a lot of stuff that's happened over the years. I dopt want to see a new entity created that will have a deaf ear to the residents on which I represent in precinct 1. And that's my concern, when the board is created, who will be echoing and rallying the cry for the persons of the residents in precinct 1, which this will mostly impact. So that's my concern, is that I want to make sure that happens.
>> any more discussion on the motion?
>> I support the motion because the commissioner Moore is the court's representative on the Austin-san antonio corridor council.
>> all in favor of the motion? Show commissioners Sonleitner, Moore, Gomez and yours truly voting in favor.
>> and I'm voting no because of the fact that I think I still need to see that information. I'm still going to have a meeting with the community to see what they have to say about this and who they would like to really have to represent them on this particular deal, will they be there for him.
>> voting against is commissioner Davis against. Thank you.
>> I move that we ask he joe to contact the executive director of carts.
>> dave marsh.
>> I was upstairs trying to set up that meeting. And I think he'll be ready to meet with you.
>> you'll get together on it?
>> yes.
>> and if he is willing then, maybe informally get feedback from the court. The other thing is that if there are other -- we have an appointment -- a person familiar with the rural transportation issues, I guess is generally what the requirement is, if there are other recommendations that you share them with the court between now and next Tuesday, it seems to me we could easily do the same due diligence with that person, if there are any.
>> so we will have this reposted, judge, for next week related to the other appointments potentially?
>> right. Assuming we can get it done in a week.
>> we'll just roll it then?
>> somebody from tnr and I can meet.
>> good work.
>> thank y'all.
>> that's a motion.
>> second.
>> seconded by commissioner Gomez. Any more discussion? The motion really is for us to see if dave marsh will be the rural transportation representative for us, and if he is willing to get informal feedback from the board that it's okay for him to do that, the carts board.
>> you're not making an appointment?
>> no, sir.
>> he may well say I'm too busy to do it.
>> and my concern, judge, again is the understanding and the sensitivity of the concerns of the residents in my precinct. And I want to continue to echo that through this whole process because over a period of time over the years it hasn't been reflected as such and I'm very much concerned about that. So whoever this other person is, it's going to have to be some sensitivity and I want the -- I don't want the concerns of my community falling on deaf ears. I'm serious about that.
>> I hear you loud and clear.
>> all right.
>> all in favor? Show commissioners commissioner, son lighter, Moore and yours truly voting in favor. And showing against --
>> just no vote. I'm waiting to see what's actually going on.
>> commissioner Davis abstaining.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 2, 2003 10:25 AM