Travis County Commssioners Court
March 25, 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 12
Number 12 -- (inaudible) a, purchasing and renovation of office building, b, the purchase of 911 rdmt raid I don't sees, and, c, purchase of mobile data system. Are you on this, too?
>> if you would prefer having the budget do this, I can go back and sit down, but I'm --
>> you're fine?
>> I think I'm pretty well familiar with all this one. Actually number 11 and number 12 go together. The reimbursement of course is to -- which is b, purchase of 911 rdmt raid I don't sees, this is -- radios, this is now to get tous where we can actually purchase the mobile radios and the consoles for all law e
forcement agencies in Travis County. And, of course, what we tried to do here is to time this just right so that we keep our warranty and so that's why even though we've had all year to purchase the radios, we don't purchase them until we need them and so now is the time to purchase, and it's a critical time because of the fact that we are going to have law enforcement already on their portable radios in may and so if you look at the timing as to how long it takes to purchase the radios, to program the radios, to install the radios, then it's now time for us to go ahead and purchase this $1.7 million worth of equipment. The consoles are simply -- the dispatch consoles which are at the 911 center, there are eight that are located there and, of course, we'll have two that are nr. So that's the radio portion of it. If you remember, we had initially for this year $3 million but we decided to split that in order to help with the budget process last year. So that's why we're going with the $1.7 and then of course next year we'll stage in the remaining $1.3. But that's the radios. If you have any questions in regards to that, we'll move right into that aside. Are y'all okay with me talking? The purchase of the mobile data is, that is the $1.2 million that you approved in the budget process. However, we're not needing the $1.2 million. We're going to need the full $1.2 million, but $1.1 is in co's, an this is for that mobile data solution. Now, the sheriff's office were the ones up here justifying all of last year and of course I was up here supporting that, and that is, they must have a mobile data solution by October because that's when we switch over to the new cad system and so in order for them to have their functionality, we came up with an initial solution that we had to come up with, which was to get a mobile data client to come in and also for us to interface with our current tiburon cad. Since that time we have now partnered with the city of Austin because as soon as the city of Austin found out that we had this $1.2 million, they decided to go forward and see if they couldn't collect money and rebuild their network and so it's not now their network network. It's now going to be city and Travis County network. And so now we're going to be getting, for the same amount of money, we're going to be getting a lot more benefit because of the fact that now they are building their system and we've decided on a system together. For instance, on just the infrastructure, we were going to have four towers. Now we have the potential for ten. Well, that increases our coverage to that extent and also in regards to the units themselves because the city of Austin is coming in and partnering with us, then we're going to be able to get our units cheaper. I mean, the whole thing now has kurnd out -- turned out to be a lot better than we ever anticipated with just the $1.2 million. We were just going after a solution. Now we're coming after a brand-new system that will give us the same amount that we anticipated plus a lot more with the $1.2 million. The $1.2 million also, about $500,000 is for the infrastructure part, and I don't know if you remember, but when we initially signed an interlocal agreement back in 2001 -- I wasn't here -- but it allowed us to use their current mobile data system, the city of Austin system because we didn't have one and so that agreement now is going to be changed to where, instead of they own everything, now we own a portion of it. In fact, we're going to own 30% of that. And that's what we want to do in Travis County is not have a situation where we're totally dependent -- remember this, I talked to you about this -- we were talking about this $1.2 million, we don't want to be just totally dependent on anyone. We want to either have an ownership of something or own it entirely so that we have some control and say in our destiny. And the city of Austin, because of our partnership with rdmt, were receptive in coming in and presenting this partnership to us and I'm delighted with all the staff for so many months in making all this happen to come to you today to say, even though we're talking about reimbursement here, in two weeks I'm coming with that amendment to that existing interlocal which will explain all this to you and in even more detail than what I'm explaining it to you today. But it turns out that where we have an added benefit that we didn't think we were going to have when we were asking for the $1.2 million and that's what that's for.
>> and when you come back, also I would like to see the time lines on all of this. When everything would be implemented as we go forward.
>> I would be glad to. And that's why --
>> this is very significant because I know this has been on the books a while. You mentioned 2001. I was here in 2001. With commissioner daugherty and there has been a lot of stuff that transpired, however we are not there yet. With rdmt stuff, a whole bunch of these things are finally becoming to a state of being implemented, but working together I still, as I sell joe holland, I'm still waiting to see the completion date realized on all of these things because it's going to be all interrelate to do what we're doing, all across the board. So those time lines are very important as far as you getting that back to us, wen that interlocal.
>> you'll have it.
>> I appreciate that very, very much.
>> we have separate resolutions for a, b, and c?
>> obligated, no. I asked bond council and bond council reviewed them and I did not get a response back saying it would be okay for them to put them together. So I viewed that from his silence that he chose to keep them three resolutions.
>> three resolutions?
>> that one resolution with the different projects and amounts stated. That looks like it's gonorrhea imbursement resolution crazy out here.
>> the one for a has different legal authority, if you notice that their sidelines, than b and c.
>> I didn't say one resolution with two pages. One resolution with 20 pages. Yeah.
>> well, we all have them on the same day, though.
>> if we have anything else to talk about, then I guess we can get it done with 11?
>> a-1 through 3 takes care of the reimbursement resolutions. A-4 is a small transfer out of allocated reserve in the records management fund.
>> I should note that the reimbursement resolution for the office buildings of $7.7 million which is a rounded number, at a recommendation of the county attorney's office, you'll recall that a few weeks ago you approved a budget adjustment for $151,000 within facilities management. This is to secure the reimbursement for the general fund of most of that, I think $26,000 might not eligible, but the rest of it should be. And it also will allow the department to work with the commissioners court if the purchase price of the building is needed before mid-may which is when we project the proceeds from Austin to come in.
>> i'll move for approval of the separate and distinct resolutions covering these three projects.
>> second.
>> any more discussion?
>> just a question. Obviously with -- I guess you are doing it right, but technically all we're doing today is saying that here is the price that we have got, that we are basically locked in on, these are the dollars that -- I mean, in the event that everything complies with all of our contracts and everything, that we will have the ability to go and purchase the airport boulevard building; is that it?
>> that is one of the reimbursement resolutions, it will allow for the purchase of that building and then to be reimbursed once the proceeds come in so that the general fund is not footing the bill for a session.
>> so what happens with us on this deal if they come back and we don't get to buy this building for this amount? Do we have to -- do we do it all over again?
>> no, it sets aside an amount that you can reimburse yourself. It can be less, it can be none at all, but it sets an amount that, in the next two years, if you should do this, here is a resolution which would allow you to pay yourself back if you use the funds through that function.
>> what if it's more?
>> more, we'll have to come back. That's why I round it up.
>> I mean, because that's what I'm fearful of. I mean, is that --
>> let me assure you that you don't have to have that fear.
>> okay.
>> this number is rounded up per the county attorney's recommendation. It is more than the project costs.
>> okay. All right. Good enough.
>> the law used to be that you could not borrow money to reimburse or go backwards. So in other words, if you weren't going to get your money until may 30th, the law used to be that you couldn't spend money until then. And then they changed the law and say, well, you can because of timing, as long as you pass a reimbursement resolution so that ahead of time u know that that's going to be reimbursed. So it's just really putting that on notice that the only down side is that if you send the money, you have a reimbursement resolution and for some reason you don't issue, then you know that comes out of the general fund. That's how. But that's the reason, and the judge is right. The fewer, the less complicated it is. (inaudible) that should be rolling ahead on the latest time frame. But that's why there's a reimbursement resolution in there. We can't just, you know, spend money and then borrow money later and say, well, we're going to keep this money or let's say we use this for this.
>> can I ask one question about rdmt?
>> sure.
>> since I'm in the middle of integration now more than I ever wanted to be in my entire life. We are not doing anything in rdmt, are we? I hope we're not, that does not integrate into the integrated justice system that we have now, or letting anyone make a decision that wouldn't do that? I guess that's the question, we're not, are we? No? So all of this will integrate, we're sure, into the tiburon systems and we don't have to replace anything that we have already or any technology; is that right?
>> they passed this morning saying --
>> come up to the table.
>> I'm just, want to make sure that we all know, we've had so many integration issues and we have a huge investment in our integration systems.
>> I'm david the rdmt project manager for the county. This morning we passed a $29,000 agenda that will allow us to transfer all of the cad data from the project. It's almost the identical data that's set into the system this minute.
>> we're not going to hear, like, a month from now the city's made some decision and we now have to do something that changes our integrated justice system in any way?
>> no. That's what we're there to protect against.
>> that's one of the benefits of the team is we've always got somebody like david that's looking after us.
>> I know.
>> any other questions about the motion covering 12-a through 12-c? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 2, 2003 10:25 AM