Travis County Commssioners Court
August 5, 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 22
Number 22, consider county policy in conducting public hearings of fee increases in the fy '04 budget. I have two ideas. That is that I do think we ought to put all the fees together at one point and schedule those for a public hearing at 6:00 o'clock. Historically we have not gotten a whole lot of participation, but I do know that on the park fee recommendations, we will have some folks down. If we can identify the other fees or fee increases that we have in mind, I think we ought to give ourselves an opportunity to receive public input, and I guess my recommendation -- we have a public hearing next Wednesday, that may well be too soon for this. That public hearing was advertised on the budget. My recommendation bob that we -- would be that we schedule that public hearing on fee increases where we give residents at least 10-day to two-week opportunity to receive notice. The other thing is that we will get a few phone calls for backup that we ought to give ourselves an opportunity to generate appropriate backup so we can send out information to interested residents.
>> judge, we always have a list of what i'll call the must-do that even if we don't change them one penny, we have to readopt them. And I'm thinking in terms of the sheriff's and the constables' fees, is it your intent when you're talking about pulling together all the fees that they would be in that category as well?
>> my recommendation covers fee increases. So if -- whatever fees are recommended to be increased, I would put on that list.
>> so only increases?
>> right.
>> because the current fee, I see no reason to promote agony over those.
>> okay.
>> but on increases, I think that we ought to hear input just in case there's something we've overlooked that we need to hear about. To be honest, historically we have not gotten a whole lot of input except from various groups of people who use parks. And most of these are the ones that have organized sports. But we ought to listen to them. And who knows, some others may be interested in coming out and chatting with us too. If we do that at 6:00 o'clock, it may be fairer to those who work during the day.
>> and this hearing is next Wednesday?
>> there's one next Wednesday on the budget. I'm suggesting that on the fee increases that they will -- that that will be too soon.
>> this t. Probably is. I need to get the backup to the folks who use the sports facilities. And while they've set it since '95 that I remember, while they are sort of organized, they are not so organized that they make big, big money. So we're continuing to operate under the assumption that their organized and they make money. They don't make huge money. When you're really well organized, you make huge money. And that's not the -- what's happening here. And so if we could get tnr to absorb that information, they may be a little organized, but they don't make huge money. And so we need to -- I need that backup so I can get it to them.
>> what's the first day of budget?
>> September 10th.
>> then I would say two weeks from next Wednesday, which would be the 27th. Is that on Wednesday?
>> that's the -- that is Wednesday.
>> Wednesday or Thursday the 27th or 28th. Any preference on that?
>> for the fee increases?
>> a public hearing on the fee increases.
>> that would be good.
>> all right. I'd say all of them. And what I'm is we give ourselves three, four, five days to put the backup together and then we go ahead and post that, running on each week's agenda, and also maybe advertise it and expect phone calls. We'll have a packet of information to send out to various persons.
>> judge, the only other category fees that i've heard about, and just questioning in terms of are you doing it, are you not, where's the backup, is whether there's intent by tnr to make any changes related to subdivision fees. And the last I got from joe is probably not. Just because of the huge reorganization happening over at the city of Austin. And the second is what are we doing on septic? Is that pulled down for good or just pulled down for the moment? And if it's just for the moment, we just need to get information out to the industry so that we can have a good discussion as opposed to not.
>> as far as the subdivision fees, you are correct. Joe and lisa have spoken and they are hopeful that we will do some external audit review of the fees as a whole because at this point we're confident that our fees should go up based on some of the issues that we're going to have except some of theirs should come down and the subdivision of lab is still an -- division the labor is still an a issue that they're working out. One of the issues is let's get an outside auditor to review what you do and I do. So the subdivision fees will not be in -- at least not within the budget cycle right now. As far as the septic fees, we made some cursory review and I had the financial staff go out and work with our program managers: and what we found is our fees are accurate. We are not willing to change those fees, increase those fees at all this year. We have pulled it off the agenda in its entirety forever.
>> so we can pass on to the industry nothing is happening on septic. They're where they need to be.
>> part of why we had put an increase initially was because we thought enforcement was costing us a lot of money. We have don't have enough data to be able to verify that that is so. So we thought let's -- what we are charging for permits is accurate and we should go ahead and leave it as is.
>> so if you're listening, that was for you.
>> the only one we have is parks, and we've added a public meeting at night and there's another one scheduled tomorrow night.
>> and judge, to make sure I understand, and we want to have that one here in Commissioners court at six p.m. The 27th?
>> right. Wednesday rather than Thursday?
>> I think so.
>> that's fine with me.
>> we can do that as a scheduling matter. Schedule a public hearing on recommended fee increase. Just as a reminder, on the preliminary budget, we have public hearings scheduled for next Wednesday, which is the 13th. And in this courtroom at six p.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, August 6, 2003 4:52 PM