Travis County Commssioners Court
August 12, 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 15
Number 15 is to discuss and take appropriate action on providing office space for the tax office collections division, including consideration of the first floor lobby vending area in the blackwell-thurman criminal justice center.
>> good afternoon. You have some backup that was distributed this afternoon and I would like to refer you to that. There is a graphic that shows the layout and also a very nice drawing of more or less what the area would look like. I went with jim barr last weekend, visited with judge john whisler, and the memorandum, they wanted to assure whatever was constructed would adhere to standards appropriate to the existing structure and respectful of the judicial environment. They -- a judge expressed the desire to keep some cafe operations in the building, some food and drinks are usually not permitted or not permitted in the courtrooms or conference areas, and they said that jurors do utilize coffee and snacks. The service provides a convenience to jurors and employees. A judge expressed the thought perhaps at some point the court considering a cafe-type tables and chairs in that area, but they wanted to keep both the vending machines and some cafe-type operations in that area. And then the third really has to do more with protocol, and they asked the court if you permit that staff would take drawings to them before they were presented to the court so they could approve them or at least review them before they came to the court. Other than that, given the instructions from the judges -- I mean from the court last week to go ahead and build out for four, we have -- or jim barr has drawn out a sketch and also has information on what the budget would be. And this would be to accommodate both the cafe, the vending machines and put four people in that same area, which is where the large windows are in the cjc and this would be for the tax operation from the tax office for collection of fines and fees.
>> I have a question before we --
>> yes, sir.
>> if we move with four people, we don't believe we have space in the current tax assessor's office for them? And I'm thinking that when we really make final decision, a final decision on this office, what we do with our people in cscd as well as these, the office may well end up being larger than the space before. In my view, we really ought to land on that in some final order in '04. And the sooner the better. We've got a task force working. We said come back to news three to four months. It may well be eight, nine or ten, but I'm thinking it could be eight people, could be ten, or it may be four. I mean at least we will know then -- will it be better to wait and just whatever space we need, we have a final deal? Or do we think this is so critical that we ought to move this temporary matter to the cjc? And dusty, may need your input on that too. I'm sitting here thinking, now, this is not the most major change, but it is a kind of big one. And it has fiscal consequences.
>> yeah.
>> and there may be reasons why we want to get them out of the building across the street.
>> well, as we -- on about September 20th -- I'm sorry, jim barr with facilities management. On September 20th we're moving the tax office to the airport building and very shortly after that we'll begin demolition and reconstruction of the old tax office space to accommodate the domestic relations office. So whether that happens, there won't be any available space in the downtown campus that we've been able to identify that meets the tax office criteria for housing their folks for the purpose of collecting money from these court cases. So this was the closest space we could find, and we went ahead and designed it for the four people. It's set up to be dismantled. When I conceived this space, I didn't want to punch holes in the floor, didn't want to do any damage to the criminal justice center that we couldn't easily repair and couldn't pack this up and move it somewhere or reconfigure it.
>> well, that helps some.
>> one of the considerations was you wanted to have something that was going to be convenient. When the judge said before you even leave the building kindly sweep on by and see these folks as opposed to I can see somebody finding any kind of excuse when they leave the criminal courts complex, which is not the old historic complex, it's another block -- it is a block, especially when it's 100,000 degrees outside. But to get across guadalupe into another building, it is not the easiest thing to tell people how to get to the tax office right now, especially when it's not even going to be the tax office. To me it's one of proximity, which I think is important. I agree in terms of do we expand, this could be expanded. There's real questions about whether we should even have the vending stuff in a building where we say you are not supposed to be eating and drinking in that building. So that's another issue about whether that is doable or not. But to me this works a lot and that area right now is way, way, way too big for its stated purpose, which was basically to have a whole bunch of machines and no ambience whatsoever in terms of anybody wanted to hang out in that area. I think this accomplishs both things. Proximity, grow the program, the ability to expand in that same space, but still accommodate in the meantime the vending and food service area.
>> this is [inaudible] worth of temporary proximity, though. We think this is a good investment? And if we decide, okay, we need eight people, we wouldn't put them here, would we?
>> we could reconfigure it for eight people as we had done prior to this, but it moves the vending area outside of this space.
>> I guess my point, though, is that this is basically new money. We're looking at the [inaudible], of course the tax office going in there. I don't know if we have taken into consideration or anybody taken into consideration that yes, the collection end of the tax office as far as fines and fees, new fines and fees from these -- the cscd operation and also the court system needed to be in close proximity. I didn't anticipate that when I looked at the airport location, I was hoping it would all be all encompassing for the tax office. And even though this would be looking at new moneys, I was hoping that it could have basically been accommodated in the airport location. When I first looked at this again, and this is a modified version of what -- before today we were looking at a little more than $61,000. Now it's been broken down to, what, 44,000, somewhere around a little more than 44,000. And I guess my whole point is -- and I'm really concerned about this whole big picture of fines and fees whether they are new or whether they are old, how we collect it and how it pays for itself. Now, if this is something that pays for itself, I would like to see evidence of it. And if it's not, then of course that's still evidence. I want to make sure even though it's the other part of the project and i've heard the auditor say this and i've heard dusty say what he's saying and i've heard it all, but as far as generating and putting revenue in the general fund instead of taking revenue out is a big concern of mine. And I haven't yet been convinced that this is going to do just that seeing what the numbers are, and I hear what dusty said, i've heard what the county auditor said; however, I'm still not convinced because I'm still having problems with the fines and fees getting to the old status of the $17 million, whatever that amount of money is that we haven't collected yet. This may be some stuff that maybe slips through the cracks and added to that total. So I'm having some real problems. Until somebody can convince me this is the right thing to do, that we need to do this, and also spending new money. This is not old money, this is new money that we're talking about here. Am I incorrect in that assessment? Or aim right in that assessment? Could somebody tell me?
>> we would recommend this funding come from [inaudible] reserve.
>> and some of this is stuff that even if it were expanded, moved, whatever, it's stuff that can move wit. It's what I would consider one-time, one-time expenditures related to the furniture. If you add four more people, we'll have to add more furniture. But this furniture is still good stuff as opposed to painting, you go someplace else, well, that's painting that's down the tubes. But that's very small amount here related to this. And we never have talked about this division going to airport boulevard. It never was going to happen. It has always been brought to us that they were not part of that move because people would never get over there when they've just completed their business with the criminal courts.
>> the Travis County bar has complained we're across the street. They don't like it people have to walk to the tax office at this point in time.
>> so they want it closer to them?
>> to the other building, yes.
>> what's your position on this? How critical is it?
>> we have to have a space for the people, if you all want to continue, they have to be somewhere.
>> but we brought them in and they move into the build across the street, do they just move in a sheriff's space with people already there?
>> we rearranged the tax office to make room for the people. They are basically up against a closet. We've moved a couple people to another area. And so we just basically took over some space. We did want to move the tax office. The thing that happens right now is that they are on the first floor, the lobby area. There are probably 50 other tax office employees that are there with them. The public is coming in. You know, we get 800 people a day walking through here so there's a lot of people there. And so you have a certain feeling of safety in numbers. There's a lot of people around you. Take this same four people and put them in the basement by themselves with these individuals, no one feels comfortable about that, and I don't think ms. Spheres would go along with that at all.
>> the only space in this building?
>> well, the building -- we have the first floor and the basement of the university savings bank building across the street, and both of those spaces are going to be remodeled ultimately for the domestic relations office. But there is some vacant area in that lower floor in the basement floor that's not going to be used by d.r.o.
>> but the basement is not a good idea, you think?
>> no, sir.
>> allen, enlighten us.
>> I was going to say in the f.y. '04 preliminary budgets move costs and buildup costs that would be a savings, would be a deduction from that budget if you went ahead and did the buildout now. That's just for information purposes. We have 56,000 budgeted to build out for eight staff positions and provide security equipment. That's what's budgeted in the preliminary budget. So if you built it out for four positions and gave us directions, we would reduce the f.y. '04 budget accordingly.
>> and here's my other point related to the security. We are talking about folks who have just concluded business upstairs in courtrooms and to get to those courtrooms they had to go through security and clearance to go to do their business. The tax office, these are folks just trying to do stuff and there's no determination as to who it is that's walking in that door. They are not people who are doing business with the criminal courts. Necessarily. And with the d.r.o. Folks that is correct is a civil matter largely, and so in terms of compatibility, to me, this is a compatible kind of thing that needs to be occurring in the criminal courts building because why would you have these people clear security to go talk to a judge, but you wouldn't have them clear security to go visit with somebody that's demanding money out of them? And we are not going to have the ability to have restrictions related to concealed weapons in that other building compared to the c.j.c. Because of the action of the legislature. So I'm just -- security-wise, this seems to be an operation because it's related to the criminal courts that ought to be in a secured building where there's security and no guns allowed.
>> but they haven't been in a secured building since they've been working in that program.
>> I don't say that's not a good thing.
>> if that were critical, we would have done it from day one. What source is funding is recommended for the 44,000?
>> [inaudible].
>> [inaudible] reserve.
>> car reserve? Now, on this modular furniture, this is new.
>> yes, sir, it is.
>> we don't have furniture in-house we could use? We looked?
>> yes, sir, and part of the reason for the new is this is a very small space, and the furniture that might be available at the warehouse, we looked at it, it's not exactly suitable. It would also be too large. So these are some fairly compact stations that would --
>> the judges have cleared this built on a limited scale. Where jurors and others can get coffee, snacks, whatever they get now.
>> yes.
>> move approval of this.
>> second.
>> could I say something judge?
>> yes, sir.
>> well, I think there are a lot of reasons why this makes sense to get over to this location. And especially given that you would like for people to go down and pay something before they leave. And this may be -- this is obviously the most convenient place. I just am of the opinion that we could sharpen the pencil on the outlay of 44 grand. I mean, for example, I don't know why you need to pay $200 for a reception area seating. I mean, heck, I can go back four chairs -- buy four chairs at four places I don't have to spend $200 a chair. I'm not looking for -- it's not like we've got somebody that's camping out there. I just -- and if this is truly going to be more of a portable structure, which, you know, given that we don't know that's going to be large enough or we're going to have to enlarge it, I would just really like -- I mean given that we do seem to have an account that we can find a lot of different money at a lot of different times, I would really like to see a effort to go back and to take that $44,000 down, you know, considerably. But the concept I'm very supportive of what we're trying to do with this thing because I do think we're going to -- in the long run, going to benefit from having this in this particular project. So that would be my --
>> okay. If it's friendly to the mover of the motion for us to continue to work on ways to reduce these costs.
>> did you say something about some savings. I was trying to interject. That you mentioned something about some savings earlier. At least that's what I thought I heard you say.
>> Commissioner, we have funds budgeted in f.y. '04 related to the move costs of this project. Of course if the move is fund understand f.y. 2003, some portion of that wouldn't be needed. Our calculation is based on providing spaces and costs for eight f.t.e.s. I'm not sure what the reduction needs to be of the f.y. '04 dollar a there would be a reduction in the funds that would be necessary in the [inaudible].
>> that's -- okay.
>> there will be a recommendation on that Thursday afternoon on one of those lists.
>> for example, are the blinds for the back wall or where there's the windows, is that what the blinds are needed for?
>> yes, sir. I'm contemplating putting those about halfway up that wall. It's a west-facing wall, and particularly we've been in there, it's quite hot.
>> could we tint it? Could we do something -- that's a -- a blind is a pretty specific -- I mean, you know, you just can't take that blind down and stick it over here. I mean, you know, it's not the typical -- those are the kind of things that I would look at doing. I mean, you know, some sort of window tinting that you can even remove at some point in time if that's the case. By the time you start whittling a couple of these, you know, $2,000 deals here, I can see where you might be able to chop 10 grand off of this thing, I mean maybe you can show me, hey, you don't know what you are talking about, Commissioner Daugherty.
>> the motion includes the memo from -- regarding the protocol with the judges, corrected?
>> yes, ma'am.
>> great. I think that would be part of it. Does it fit in with the rest of the building.
>> the friendly has gotten friendlier. To seriously look at trying to reduce those costs.
>> like I say, I'm going to moderate this as much as possible as far as making sure that even this probably would pay for itself and it does the things it's intended to do. I think it's going in that direction, but I don't have enough data at this point to support a lot of things, but I'm going to support this motion, but with the mindful eye and watchful eye to ensure that I want to watch to see how it pans out. I'm really very serious about that.
>> I appreciate that, sir, as we all will be watching.
>> exactly.
>> and I -- under the office depot contract, we get very deep discounts, so Commissioner, I share you. Even after a discount it still costs 200 bucks? I bet we can find some very handsome chairs with the deep discounted and be consistent with what you are asking us to do.
>> we'll do our best on that. I'll --
>> [inaudible] to have plenty of company. And a memo from me. [laughter]
>> any more discussion?
>> would you clarify the funding source, the car reserve?
>> the car reserve.
>> is that part of the motion?
>> yes, sir.
>> we do have a maximum of this much in reserve, right?
>> all I want to say, reduction on [inaudible] have to make it efficiently and functioning and aesthetically pleasing on this particular project and all projects. One thing I just want to mention is the time is of essence here if I want to get things going. It might be folks are going to sit in a temporary place for about 15 days because it's going to take about, you know, a month and a half, six weeks, you know, because of the long lead time for the modular furniture and all, so they must -- there will be some kind of a temporary place. We're going to work with dusty and have the tax office see where we're going to place temporary for about 15 days until we finish the project.
>>
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
Last Modified: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 7:52 AM