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 35
Item no. 35. Consider and take appropriate action on proposed agreed order from tceq regarding waste management of Texas, incorporated's alleged violations, including the following: a. Use of certain funds to address illegal dumping; b. Recommendations from neighbors on the best way to use remaining funds; c. Recommendation that Travis County use remaining funds to address waste water issues at northridge acres; and. D. Restrictions on how such funds may be used. Tceq -- their policy on how -- on how set funds can be used and I did send copies of those to ms. English, I believe.
>> uh-huh.
>> the restrictions on -- I think that I showed those to the court, also.
>> yes.
>> after -- two weeks ago, we had a discussion of this matter under citizens communication. And agreed to agendize it a week later we were -- we were subsequently asked to delay it one more week, so here we are two weeks later. For the discussion. As far as I know, the proposed agreed order is still outstanding. Do we have any information indicating otherwise. We did get from ms. English recommendations on how she would like to see remaining funds used or they for the residents and I asked -- I asked -- I was trying to figure out whether those proposed recommendations would meet with -- with tceq's approval. And I don't know that yet. Anybody else know anything? Anything different?
>> [indiscernible]
>> curt?
>> [indiscernible]
>> come on up.
>> good morning, trek english. When we originally had heard that they wanted to do a -- a supplemental environmental project, several -- several months ago, actually. We had talked with several people and -- and one person told us that our suggestion that the money be used for them to relocate, of course at the time we were looking at a much larger amount. It was something that the tceq could consider. And that's when the idea of having Travis County involved for us was -- was -- was a feasibility because if we had to find relocation, a new location for them, then we thought that the county should definitely get involved because of the -- because of the ratification for the -- for the regional capacity. And we felt that it met the criteria, which is that it must be environmentally beneficial. This would improve the environment and reduce environmental risks to the public in the community. They have also said that they would -- they would consider relocating if we could come up with the viable location. So -- so I think that -- I think that since they are not making any effort to look for a new location, we thought this would be the best -- the best suggestion that we had. And I have not been told by tceq that that was not acceptable. As an option.
>> did they say why? Tceq?
>> did they say why?
>> yeah, why it was not acceptable.
>> no, they didn't say it was not acceptable. They never said it was not acceptable.
>> I thought that's what you just said.
>> I said we were never told by tceq that this was not a viable option. That we could not offer that. But of course we knew that they would discuss this with -- with the Commissioners, so -- so we didn't know anything about it until it came out a couple of weeks ago. That's why I was so surprised when -- when -- when they came out ahead of its -- we were supposed to meet with tceq and put forward our suggestions so that they could discuss it with you. But instead the -- the order came out before then. We feel that everything else that -- especially the illegal dumping would eventually benefit them. Mainly because if you look at page 2, it says that it could -- it cannot be something that they had already committed to. It says -- I'm trying to see -- you have completed or that you have already committed to a -- it's not an acceptable project. To us this illegal dumping issue is something that we had discussed with them for at least two years and asked them how much of that is your burden since a lot of the debris that this is on the road right now is caused by -- by material falling off their trucks. And that is not something that we are just bringing up now. We have been bringing it up for several years now. And then, of course, the -- the -- the garbage that is being dumped, people going to the landfill, then you have people that literally just dump it because they have nowhere else to put it or don't want to put it in the landfill. You have three things, my concern is if you use the money for picking up all of that, then we will have people bringing even more, they will say, oh, it's being picked up. How do you say that this does not benefit them. By picking up all of this loose barrage all over in a three-mile area. I was under the impression that their permit said that they have to pick up litter within a two-mile radius. And I'm sorry, I don't have the language with me, but it's -- I thought at one time we had discussed that with -- with the p.r. People for the landfills, that's what they told us, that they had an obligation to pick up within the two-mile radius. And I need you to just check the permit to find the language. If this is the case, I don't see why we should spend money, or you should spend, you know, this money to go and do what they are supposed to do under their permit.
>> so, trek, I guess, I know howfl on what you're saying there. I didn't really know about this and [indiscernible] I -- I got a phone call and was informed that this order has been issued. I was just as surprised as the neighborhoods and I'm the Commissioner of that precinct. This appears that -- that we should have been notified, at least me as a duly elected officials of precinct 1 by tceq if there was going to be such an order proposed from them. I'm concerned because the neighborhood was not involved in the discussion with tceq to decide what -- what needed to be done with the 50% of this $239,000. I did get a chance to -- I did get a chance to -- to look at this. I did get a chance to look at your e-mail. My question to you is did you get an opportunity to talk to tceq since this order has been sent and sent down here to the Commissioners court for us to look at? Have the neighbors actually had an opportunity to do that? I'm very concerned about the input from the neighborhood, something that's impacted the neighborhood, and the money that's been assessed on w.m.i. For their -- for their fines.
>> no, we were supposed to meet with mr. [indiscernible] and mr. [indiscernible]
>> when.
>> basically the day that the order came out. Since we haven't seen the order and it was almost a done deal at that point, we -- we didn't meet -- we didn't have a -- didn't have a date sit, but that was the week that we were suppose -- a date set but that was the week that we were supposed to meet because the order was supposed to come out. We were trying to have some input into their process. You can't tell them what to do, you just say can we suggest what we feel would be an environmentally acceptable project. One of those suggestions was going to be whether or not the money could be used to help them relocate in a community that may need additional income or whatever it is that -- that they would provide for that community. And -- and that was our -- that was, you know, our plan all along is to -- to -- to get to a point where -- where these landfills could -- could slow down and eventually close. And, you know, find a place where they could really provide the capacity for the region, for the future.
>> tell me -- [indiscernible] as far as the procedure, john, [indiscernible], as far as the procedure, aspects of -- of fines and fees when they are -- when there's a noted violation and actually fines assessed for those particular violations, environment tall violations -- environmental violations, how is that basically handled? Is that something -- how is that basically handled? In other words, if -- if -- do they encourage or invite persons that's around the area where the violence have been -- prominent to be a part of the process? How does that work? Because the real -- I have some concerns because I wasn't aware of it, I would like to ask the question, were you a-- when were you aware of it, john?
>> I was involved in any of the discussions with tceq.
>> you weren't involved.
>> I'm not really sure.
>> none that I know of, if you go look at tceq's rules on -- on supplemental environmental projects, they don't have a process, they don't have in their rules, any guidance documents, any written form, a process where they go out and -- and solicit proposals or ideas or get input from -- from the unfaferked parties, neighbors, whatever, it's basically tceq's decision, it's an agreed order that tceq will sign, the violator will sign, it's fine money, so tceq is saying pay this fine, it's just -- they are saying it's not going to go into the state's general revenue account. It's going to go into some source that will spend it to produce an environmental benefit. That's the gist. Ultimately, it is -- it is strictly tceq's decision on whether that fine money goes into a supplemental environmental project rather than going into the state treasury.
>> okay.
>> and they determine also how the money is to be spent, the fine? They make that determination, also?
>> yes. Their general rule on supplemental environmental projects is up to 50% of the total fine can go to a supplemental environmental project.
>> well --
>> Commissioner Daugherty?
>> are you through, Commissioner?
>> no, I wasn't. But i'll go ahead -- I wasn't through, but go ahead [multiple voices] i'll follow [multiple voices]
>> all right. Let me say something. I think the record ought to be made clear last time there were a lot of insiniations -- insiniations, accusations, et cetera. I did not make the phone call to tceq. Commissioner Daugherty's office did. I agreed with him in this Commissioners court to try to help north ridge acres. The communication to tceq was to raise money for north ridge acres and they agreed to come over and meet with us. We basically asked them for a grant. That had nothing to do with waste management or b.f.i. We were looking for money for north ridge acres. The problem with north ridge acres is that it has a water and a wastewater problem. And what I learned from kennedy ridge was if you go in there and improve the wastewater and you have got failed septic systems, you exacerbate an already very, very bad situation. So -- so for north ridge acres the remedy is a water and wastewater system. We had a list of people to meet with. We met with the receiver, the speaking people in north ridge acres were saying we cannot afford to pay off a $400,000 loan. Seems to me that's true. I understand they were told 200,000 to get it done, that amount doubled. If you are looking at roughly at most I guess 200 customers, that's a lot of money to pay off. That's just the water. So we were trying to figure out grant options. We had a list of people to visit with. The receiver started with, we met with tceq. They showed up and said here's an option, I hadn't ever heard of that. We just put that on a list of other things. We also met with, I put it in my memo here. One meeting with s tech. That's the only -- with tceq, that's the only conversation that I remember having with them about the matter. But we met with a gentleman Sam tessin of the office of rural community affairs about the same th ng, grant money basically. And everybody was sort of in agreement that it really takes a water and wastewater solution and you need money for everybody saying we don't have funds readily available, but we will try to work with you. We also contacted the city of Austin and said, look, if we get this system installed, will you agree to be the owner and operator and send the people the bill because just putting the system in place is one thing, you have got to have an owner-operator -- an operator afterwards. So I think all of a sudden the implication that we met with tceq to take advantage of the waste management penalties is the most outrageous charge that I have ever heard. Nothing could be further from the truth. The other thing is they never asked me what should the fine be. I mean, they had asked me that, I don't know what I would have answered anyway. Nobody has ever come to me and asked me. Like most politicians I had an answer probably. So when I saw the proposed agreed order, I was surprised as anybody else. I wasn't surprised, though, that they put in what they had said they could do. The thing about the three-mile radius I came up with because I recalled illegal dump sites within a three mile radius of the landfills. But they said basically, here's what normally happens. They said we do cleanups. This is not the first fine or the first opportunity they've had to -- there have been smaller ones they said. They also said look, these come up all of the time, Travis County ought to put together a list of possible projects. We said we would. I understand that the other types of waste facilities have the same option. But the amounts of the fines may be smaller, we said okay. I think it's totally incorrect to insinuate that we met with them and initiated a conversation about the use of the waste management penalty money. They offer that as an option. We didn't turn it down. But even looking at $100,000, if you got -- if your goal is 900,000, that's what you think you need. The 100,000 won't help us unless we raise the other 800,000. If there is a better residence recommendation that tceq finds acceptable, I have no problem with that. I would just rather not see the money go to waste.
>>
>> [one moment please for change in captioners]
>>
>> we just wanted -- we actually always wanted the money to go into an escrow county with the county so that we knew there would be some problems rising out of this whole situation, and we felt that that money could be used at that time. Even if we had to go back for approval. I'm not sure it can work that way unless they put it in the order. See, what tripped the --
>> shall we postpone this item another month to give you a opportunity to --
>> I think perhaps yes, if we meet with tceq and it's acceptable with them.
>> I have no problem.
>> it's just a proposed item. [inaudible].
>> it's not our money. It's whatever -- and, you know, northridge acres, 40% or so is in Travis County. We are huffing up money from the state. Whatever Travis County can do, whatever city of Austin will give. Williamson county at some point. We're looking for partners, but at the same time it won't hurt me a bit if not a penny is used on northridge acres. Commissioner Daugherty and I agreed to give it the old 110% effort. Our goal is not to hurt somebody else in the process. Let's just postpone it a month and give Commissioner Davis wants to take the lead, work with tceq, I bless that. Use my name in whatever way will help if it's truthful, or I can -- if I can get involved, let me know that too. About one month from today is when we'll have it back on again, and if I can help in the meantime, let me know. John?
>> one public notice thing that the neighbors and anybody who is interested in kind of keep an eye on is any discussions at the tceq commission meetings that pertain to agreed orders should be published in the Texas register. So probably want to keep an eye on the register, and if that comes up before -- obviously before our item does here in Commissioners court, you know, make sure to be there.
>> right. The problem is once it goes into text register, [inaudible].
>> I think that would probably [inaudible].
>> all right. Okay.
>> and the one little thing that's complicating all of the efforts and I think very good efforts to try and find a resolution for northridge acres is under the c item of this is that they already had a grant for more than $300,000, and they had to give it back. So, you know, to try and hustle up $800,000, $900,000 in grant moneys that don't have to be repaid, there already isn't a very good track record, their having been given money. If they had been successful as kennedy ridge has been, they would have been eligible for around 2, 3 and 4 and I'm really pleased we had on today's agenda the rounds 3 and 4 related to kennedy ridge of we got if water in, the wastewater in. Now we're adding fire protection. But they blew the first grant so it's going to be extraordinarily difficult to find more grant money that they had originally had give ten track record, and nothing has changed out there.
>> let me conclude with saying this, and I need to maybe talk with mr. Tyson with archer because I think kennedy ridge is a classic example of how the step program can work with the granted money that's been approved and even fire plugs. We're talking about almost a million dollars. $95,000 to be exact. And of course the volunteer effort to get the labor to supply and do the necessary thing to complete the water and wastewater end of the project for colonias. And if there's anything I can do to assist as far as displays of it, and like I say, I need to talk with mr. Tyson with the [inaudible] to see if some of this wastewater through the grant program still may be available for that portion of Travis County northridge acres. So that's bit. But as far as kennedy ridge is concerned, it's completed. We just now have to go ahead and put the labor in and -- so the project can go ahead and come to closure, and that's going to happen. And we can see it happen at northridge acres also.
>> anything else on this item today?
>> one thing. Trek, I couldn't articulate any better than what the judge did with regards to what happened, remember I made the phone call to tceq. It had nothing to do with you all's deal. I mean, we were just looking for northridge acres. So anyway, but what I will do, I don't mind calling tceq and saying, listen, whatever you find them or whatever you are going to find them, as far as I'm concerned, they have a menu list of what they would like. And as far as I'm concerned from my office, I'm going to say tceq, whatever they would like in their list, whatever you can apply that to, then let it go to the neighbors. I mean, you know, because I agree. I think what we're looking for at northridge acres, this is an insignificant amount. So whatever u all would like to have that money go to, I will say that's fine, that's what they want it to go to. If they will put tonight an escrow, if they will do whatever. I mean, I will tell them that from my standpoint it's okay with me.
>> do you think the county is willing to have an escrow account set up for this? Is that something that's easily done? I don't want to create any more problems for you.
>> well, I seriously doubt tceq would write a big check to Travis County without knowing what it's going to go for first, so I imagine what would happen is rather than -- if there's not agreement on what is done with the money, tceq would probably hold that money until there is agreement, then sign an agreement with Travis County and transfer it at that time.
>> okay.
>> and that may be the solution. If tceq feels like they need to get this order final, and hopefully if there's not consensus yet on the s.e.p., They could just say 50% of the fine money will go into s.e.p. To be agreed upon with Travis County.
>> I think you can indicate to them were willing to work in whatever way we can to help.
>> okay. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> September 9th, judge?
>> September 9th is about a month. Is that all right? And in the meantime, if something develops that requires us to take action sooner, if you let us know, we'll put it on the agenda earlier.
>> okay.
>> thank you action trek.
>> oh, just a question that is probably one to give to the auditor. If there is some kind of an agreed order, how would the auditor recognize that revenue if we don't know of its existence before we adopt our budget? This is just a question to ask her because on grants it can be recognized, but I don't know about fine money. If you could have the appropriate conversations, john, with [inaudible].
>> Commissioner, I think I can answer that now. We will have to sign an agreement with tceq, that's an interlocal agreement, so I think it comes into that provision.
>> an interlocal agreement. Great suggestion. Thank you.
>> we'll have it back on September 9th unless we need it before then.
Last Modified: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 7:52 AM