Travis County Commssioners Court
February 4, 2003
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.
Item 26
26. Discuss and take appropriate action on an agreement with the city of Austin for the conduct of elections and a plan for county clerk reorganizaton. We actually approved the interlocal last week. City of Austin, put it on consent for last Thursday or this coming Thursday?
>> last Thursday, they did it Thursday. They passed it 7-0 vote. They actually pulled it off consent and had a discussion item. So it's on tv if you want to see it.
>> I actually watched you, you did very well.
>> well thanks, thanks. They -- they -- the process that they are now prepared to present back to the commissioners court is they have authorized the city clerk to be able to receive your documents signed, sign it back and then return it to the court's record. And they did vote 7-0.
>> okay.
>> that's scary to get a 7-0. We may be sending you over there more often.
>> it's such a good deal, they couldn't turn me down. [laughter]
>> do we need to do anything.
>> yes, please, theres a couple of things that I need for you to do today. It may raise more discussion for you before you are finally ready. What I need for you to do today is to approve the contract and reorganization. With the contract and the reorganization, approved, then it will be -- it will fall to the court to have a discussion and -- and a follow-up agenda item for the long-term space consideration. But the two things that I need today are contract and reorganization approval. And -- that's -- the contract and the reorganization sort of begs the question about all right, how are we going to handle our long-term approach andyian in a ramirez from p.b.o. Is here to help me answer your questions, we do have revised numbers for you on revenue, space concerns, pat ford is here to talk about space. Lots. The numbers I gave you turned out to be more conservative, so the picture is actually even better than I said it was. Was.
>> what would lieu toik --
>> that old memo about how we would use money generated --
>> I never --
>> leasing equipment to -- leasing the new equipment --
>> there was not a memo that specifically quantified how much revenue would be coming in, and how it would be going back to either paying for the debt or going back to the general fund. I went back and looked at minutes, I looked at -- at agenda backup, I looked at the videotapes. Going back a couple of years and couldn't find a specific memo that quantified it. There was a lot of discussion and conversation about the interlocal going to bring us some good revenue, people -- our elections partners are going to be able to help us with the purchase of the equipment basically, the equipment use fee. But I could not find anything that had the specific numbers. There was one memo back from December of '01 where the county clerk identified some savings that would have -- would occur based on phase 1 implementation and complete phase 2 implementation. Those savings were took into consideration as we developed the target budget for each fiscal year because with the -- with the clerk's elections division, what we do is p.b.o. Works with the -- with the department directly and basically every year we wind up building the budget from zero up. Depending on how many elections because every year is so different. How many elections, are there more early voalght locations or mobile voting facilities. Those kinds of things. So basically what happens is as the budget was built within the targets, then we went ahead and just didn't include the money that wouldn't be necessary anymore for ballot printing or staff for central counting station to do early voting counts. Those kinds of things.
>> if I may just add to deanna's comment, we were -- we were pretty clear about quantifying what we were not going to spend as a result of and it was mostly paper ballot expenditures and ballot allocation expenditures, we were real clear with everybody about what we thought those were, p.b.o. Plugged that into our budget. I tried to be very scrupulous about not ever saying what we could expect in terms of revenue until after p.b.o. Had helped me plan for what was a reasonable, model, to base the -- the cost, the charge to the other entities on and then went to the other jurisdiction and got some level of confirmation on that before I ever said what I thought the revenue level would be. And there's a real good reason for that, I wasn't going to pledge anything that I really didn't know.
>> that -- that -- those statements I could find in p.b.o. Watching the videotapes and looking at the minutes of the clerk saying, yes, I'm expecting revenue, expecting our partners to be very excited and interested in participating in this. And that she was working on a model and she, you know, they have been sending information back and forth to us to -- to work on how it would be split and all their assumptions.
>> our agreement which I -- when I recollect that we were told part of the money that we receive from leasing this new equipment can be used to satisfy the debt.
>> uh-huh. Right, no, that's correct.
>> that's -- when we looked at the latest figures after we -- after we did some scrubbing this last week, the estimates based on the model right now, would show that over an 8 year period, which is a period that -- that everyone is estimating is about the life of the -- of the equipment, based on the manufacturers -- speaking with the manufacturer, would be a little over $3 million. It's revenue over the 8 years. And that would -- that's an estimated -- estimate based on the city of Austin interlocal agreement and then future interlocal agreements with other traditional partners, aisd, a.c.c., Those kinds of organizations. And this would amount to 45% of the total estimated cost of the equipment. That's the debt -- the debt service, the lease space and maintenance agreements in the future. Over that 8 year period. So it's 45%. If you net that out, against the -- against the clerk's estimate for the cost of the -- of the reorganization, the amount of revenue approximately would be $2.4 million coming into general fund for debt service or for whatever purposes that the commissioners court decide and that's about 36% of the total costs over the 8 years. I guess he's saying about 8 years before we have to look at something else?
>> no commissioner.
>> is that -- I never really know what the life span for the equipment was to begin with. Once you buy -- how does that work? As far as the -- the maximum use of it --
>> the estimate for the financial model that p.b.o. Helped us develop is based on 8 years. Actually the -- but the actual life of the equipment, how long we anticipate using it is going to be about as long as we used our optical scan system perhaps longer, we used our optical scan system for 12 years. I'm anticipating a 15 years usage for our equipment. For one thing, it's -- when you upgrade this equipment, you do nothing to the hardware.
>> right.
>> it's a simple box. So it doesn't cost us anything to try to -- you know, add new features to it. In terms of replacing the hardware, I think we are looking at 15 years and that may be conservative.
>> okay. I just wanted to -- to put --
>> it is a little bit different model than the real life model.
>> right. I just wanted to put something as far as that model, as far as -- as far as continuing to use the equipment, of course, to -- to also be generating revenue from the equipment that we are using.
>> absolutely.
>> that's why I had to ask the question. How long can we look at this type of model as far as generating revenue based on the life of these --
>> part of the reason why the financial model is more conservative is that we want to make sure that we have collected revenue, collected enough money to pay for it before, well before it extend its useful life.
>> right, okay.
>> so I should be looking at the -- summary of election agreement, page 2? No no, what should I be looking at now to get the latest numbers?
>> I would say, let me just -- perhaps if I give this to you it will be easier.
>> thank you.
>> the last page of this happenedout are the last number that's p.b.o. Has helped us scrub. I think that's the one that you are looking for, judge.
>> that's what those cumulative numbers that I just read of or based on over the last call on the total revenue, minus cost of the reorg front number and even numbered years. Key [inaudible] of that, minus the -- the ten year -- the 8 years, excuse me, cost of the equipment.
>> numbers came back better.
>> only cost of reorganization is with in what column.
>> the cost of the he reorganization is the first column, the total cost, is the first column, total ongoing costs for the reorganization. The second column goes into, okay, how much is already in their budget. Based on their current usage and -- in fy '03. So that -- that includes 60,000 for the reclassified enhanced program manager position, and 134,451 for the temporary employees for a total of almost $200,000 almost in the fy '03 budget. The next column the amount expected to be reimbursed by the city of Austin is based on the calculations on the equipment use fee. That's 228,567. That's based on the special project temporaries actually -- those temporaries being special project temporaries. The city reimbursing for their -- for their -- their salaries and their fringe benefits as well.
>> so then the subtotal for -- for like odd numbered years would be 423,065, reimbursed by the city, that leaves the difference is 157,911. These are all annual numbers, so '03 would be a little less because we are part way through the year. '04 we built a target budget again from scratch depending on what the assumptions are.
>> > so the reorganization will cost 17911.
>> of the -- 157911. Total revenue, yes, I'm sorry, 415 yes with the administrative fee. Uh-huh.
>> did the 172 change, dane take?
>> no, sir. The -- there are going to be two categories of [inaudible] that we take in revenue for this. Part of them is the 172,000 for equipment, then there are additional money that's we will receive for using our temporaries or using our facilities.
>> okay.
>> that will be in addition -- and our 10% contract fee and that's in addition to what the city of Austin is spending just for the regular conduct of the election costs.
>> this also doesn't count if we do more than one election?
>> correct.
>> so this is --
>> baseline.
>> this is the baseline, one election, this is what you get.
>> that is right, I'm saying the right thing.
>> these are the numbers based on the city of Austin regular election and runoff election, too.
>> it does include the runoff.
>> it does include the two elections for the city of Austin and from what the county clerk and staff have told me, this last year was the first year in I don't know how many years that they have counted that there wasn't a city of Austin runoff. In every previous election they've had a runoff.
>> right, I remember that conversation. We did decide to put the runoff numbers in there because chances are they are going to have a runoff. Especially with the way we are already seeing the mayor's race turn out. So we don't have a ballot certified yet, but I think we are safe to make that sums.
>> tell me how the difference from the estimated revenue for equipment use, city of Austin, versus what's in our packet on if we do two elections a regular election in may and June, that being 172,376 times two, to the 344,072, versus the 315,543. What -- did we just go down, what did we change in the 172,376 figure.
>> the 172 is going to be there twice just for equipment, so that's 344,000. Then we also have an amount of money that is for temporaries only, just the reimbursement for our part of it. That's what he's asking, what's the total for both of those on the splitout.
>> so your question is the difference between the odd numbered and even numbered year numbers or from the previous --
>> '03.
>> I'm assuming this is an '03 the backup -- [multiple voices]
>> I was looking at the backup material, the back page, which is the sheet that dana had given us last week when we were looking at it.
>> the difference, right. The difference is that up until last week the forms that the county clerk had given you on this, the equipment usage fee was based on an estimate.
>> okay.
>> of the deck service for face 1. So since that -- those have already been issued. We looked and said let's be as precise as possible where we can be. Where we have exact numbers let's use them. We went back and did have a lower interest rate. Snet of the 5%, it was 4.23 principal amounts were slightly smaller because there were some savings. When we did that it turned out to be a bit of a lower amount. It's basically in the debt service for phase 1.
>> that explains it's, that's the figure that threw me.
>> that's the difference.
>> what's the assumption for the space needs for the [inaudible] temporary employees?
>> well, it's kind of a lengthy answer, I apologize for not being at my best today. 12 will be year round part of the organization. There's a whole space consideration. Which part did you want me to address.
>> we were told 28 work 11 months a year. So do we provide space for them? During that time.
>> there's 12 of them that are -- I'm sorry.
>> what's the 28 then, whatment am I missing? 28 sticks in my mind.
>> remember dana we were talking about that was the number of people that you said that we wanted to bring on and if we put them on this and put them on a continuous basis that --
>> I'm so sorry, it's 12.
>> 12.
>> yes.
>> 12 special project temps. I'm so scenario, it's 12 people.
>> we do hire more temporaries but they come on just for the project.
>> those 12 -- [multiple voices]
>> the fringe benefit costs for those 12 is how much.
>> the fringe benefit cost for those 12 -- [multiple voices] matches up with this morning.
>> I thought I had a total.
>> their second page in the handout that I just handed you.
>> I'm just trying to find --
>> the number is what I'm looking for.
>> exactly. It's about -- about 10 -- about $120,000 for all the fringe benefits. Some of those are already now included in there. It would be just the difference would basically be the amount of the hospitalization and life insurance, which is about -- about $4,500 a popper person per year.
>> it's got to be more than 12 we are talking about. [one moment please for change in captioners]
>> so how many? Because my next question is if we're providing space for all of them right now.
>> okay.
>> yes, we are. They're going to the --
>> the pool of people --
>> what is the assumption as to the future, we can't use them until they change. Is there space over there for all of them?
>> correct. That's why you added on to that. So that part is taken care of at least temporarily. Sorry.
>> that's okay. I wanted to know about the money for the total number of temps, and that ought to be easier than we're making it. And what the cost in fringe benefits is.
>> and I'm aiming for a per capita cost, but I can provide it myself if I need to. Because we're discussing the space inc. In there right now and in my view it's overblown. This is a whole lost bigger than it ought to be. I don't know where we'll end up on it, but I can't go for eight million dollars. I thought we talked about something smaller the time before. Perhaps there was something I haven't heard. In my view, after the executive session we'll see where the court stands on it. It might not matter anyway. But when we started talking about space for the equipment and your needs, I had in mind a figure that had to be a fraction of what we're looking at. We're bringing in all kind of other departments that maybe they ought to go somewhere too, but I'm not ready to go there, especially and spend this kind of money. So my question really was hopefully accommodating, that is, if we bring this number of temporary workers in, won't they need space, and if so, are we taking care of them and is there an assumption of how we take care of them in the future?
>> yes, sir. I see what you're trying to get at.
>> and judge Biscoe, I have been working with the department and with pat ford and some other works in my office to try to put a very detailed break down of what's happened and where everything is and all the numbers. And I just got some final changes today at noon, so it's seven pages of findings, there's a couple of page -- cover memo with some observations and recommendations from pbo, but one of the things that at least we discussed with the county clerk is perhaps that there is a way to separate out the interlocal and the reorganization from the had lease space. And with the lease issues and the space issues, there have been multiple options presented to court, leasing, purchasing , building. And each time there have been different players involved in the options. And I think that it might be very helpful to everybody involved if there's a way that we can somehow narrow the field down and say what's really necessary? And once that's done then we can focus on square footage issues because that can be debated forever. And i'll be happy to give copies of this to everybody too now that we finally have -- it's finalized basically. Except I need to add the per capita cost of the benefits for the 12 special project temps.
>> but I need to be clear that what I need from court today is the symbol agreement with the city of Austin and the proposal for the one and a half basically new people and the 12 temperatures, just the reorganization plan.
>> well, we did the symbol last time.
>> in concept only. And not -- [everyone talking at once]
>> so do we know the changes -- was changes made by the city?
>> no, there were no changes made by the city, except --
>> our concept was just the symbol. We just came out -- interlocal.
>> I can't deliver on that contract without the resources that are in the reorganization.
>> you have come through loud and clear on that. Let's simplify the numbers is what I'm trying to understand. We were talking today in the session, is that right?
>> yes, sir, there is one thing I can clear up for you right this minute and that is the scwairm necessary for county clerk elections and county clerk recording. Those programs have been very -- have been studied in great detail by a registered architect for the state of Texas. Those numbers that are presented to you are the numbers. If we house them in france, if we house them in south Austin, north Austin, they need 27,123 square feet to do their job in elections. Recording needs 9,750 feet. We're rounding it up to 10,000 square feet. Those have been -- that's been analyzed and analyzed.
>> I don't know that I'm on the record as supporting moving recording.
>> I idea that.
>> in fact, every chance i've gotten I have expressed my strong reservations and strong objections. Every time I see a price tag over five million dollars, my reservations get stronger. The price tag we'll see in a few moments is eight million bucks, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> I thought we turned down five million. Eight million is three million more. I mean, I'm missing something. [everyone talking at once]
>> you did not turn down five million.
>> I'm just trying to figure out how to get france -- [everyone talking at once].
>> I'm just saying those numbers have not -- the scwairnl numbers necessary -- square footage numbers necessary for this department has been very, very closely analyzed. Those numbers --
>> I'm not arguing about the square footage. I was asking what your number is and I forgot about that and started talking about the numbers. But I'm happy. What you're saying is don't approve an interlocal without -- [everyone talking at once].
>> well, those are the numbers --
>> yes, sir. I'll go get them.
>>
>>
On number 26, we left with a few simple questions outstanding. And we are now eagerly awaiting simple answers.
>> on the benefits the simple answer is that the county clerk needs $7,842 in additional fringe benefits costs per special project, temp, the total is 94,115.
>> did we ever figure out the total number of temporary employees that we are talking about.
>> yes, sir, we are talking about 12. Range 13.
>> that's the plan. Move approval.
>> second.
>> any more discussion?
>> that is of the reorg, just for melissa so she's knows --
>> that's the only plan dana has given us.
>> correct. It has one enhancement -- one enhancement [multiple voices]
>> clarity is a helpful thing.
>> it's the reorg plan thank you.
>> > we expect this to be covered by the -- more than covered. Yes, sir.
>> okay. Any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you very much.
>> thank you.
>> all right.
>> hope you feel better.
>> thanks.
>> let's change our -- change concept, contract, move approval of the interlocal agreement.
>> second.
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 2, 2003 10:25 AM