Travis County Commssioners Court
March 16, 2004
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 32
Number 32, consider and take appropriate action on request to reconsider decision to locate tax assessor satellite office at precinct 1 j.p. And constable office. We had asked others to look at -- increase utilization of the I guess foyer. Is this the same one we've been provided already?
>> roger, is this the same one that we already have, you just handed us?
>> yes.
>> we are returning to work out another alternative.
>> okay. First, the last time you requested from us to give you the breakdown of the j.p.s and constables for precinct 1 through precinct 5 and the tax office in each precinct and that's what we have on the spread sheet showing square footage each j.p. And constable office had. The direction -- went in the direction and revised the whrob I area, -- lobby area, and you have the two options right there in front of you. Option number 1, we took out the vestibules, which is 125 square feet and some 60 square feet from the j.p. Area. And that can give you 448. And the cost on that is about $3,000. 20% contingency. The vestibule right there but we kept the j.p. Area the same and that's going to cost about 11,675. As you can see on your -- on the option you have on the top right here, option 1 and option 2, on option 1 you see about 13,000, but we did reryan it to 11,675.
>> what's that final figure? 11,000 how much?
>> 11,675.
>> and number 2's revised figure is what?
>> it's 11,675.
>> that's option 1.
>> option 2 stays the same.
>> stays the same.
>> yes. Because there's a demolition and there's the reconstruction of the window.
>> [inaudible].
>> what that means, option number 1,ist waiting area will go up to 375 square foot. Option number 1 also has about [indiscernible] which is furniture and book case as you can see on the drawing right there it's showing the chairs and the book case as you are coming into the courtroom to your left, there's a box right there, that's where the book case is. And the table. I should say the table. These are the option right now in front of you all and for consideration.
>> and then just to recall where were we before any renovation occurred in terms of the size of the lob eye size of the lobby 440.
>> so 440 was the current space.
>> before the --
>> have to get my numbers straight.
>> sure.
>> so option 1 we are still not at where we are today, and option 2 would get us to a place where it is basically status quo related to the size of the lobby.
>> that's correct.
>> by the constable and j.p., How much [indiscernible].
>> beg pardon?
>> does this provide remedial relief for you?
>> what we have is some pictures to show how that would reflect by doing either one of those things. It only adds to the traffic bottle neck and flow. We can pass these out. And we have put in picture form so you could see.
>> we already have this.
>> no, no, youon't have this.
>> these are newer than the ones we got yesterday?
>> yes, that's just to show you my lobby area with my amateur photography. You couldn't get actual. This is with the vestibule part.
>> these are the same ones, aren't they?
>> [inaudible].
>> the -- [inaudible].
>> the design of the building does not lend itself even with the construction to add other than what we show you the table for the two chairs in the vestibule, and when that door is open, you can see that the inclement weather, anything can distract or cause confusion at the person seated at the table when you come through the vestibule. We tried to put the table where it is designed by the facilities. And when you go through the vestibule into the main lobby, that door could either cause confusion or distraction. The people there trying to do the work or fill out the forms. It does not lend itself even with that additional space to facilitate a lobby that is functional. We also have -- we tried to take pictures of persons using the facility, and we could only do what we have. We just not get back up to speed in setting cases. Just yesterday our lobby was -- we did have those pictures where people are standing around seated in the conference room waiting for service. And we can only take what we have at the time. But it does not lend itself either when you take either one of those options that is being presented. We see where you can put the forms on themselves. That's good. But there's still no place for the customers to sit and fill out paperwork. We can use clip boards, but the overflow seems to go to the conference room immediately adjacent from the lobby area. And by adding the extra vestibule with the seating does not address the issue, does not address the flow, the congestion. It does not address it.
>> but option 2 would. Option 2 would keep the 125 square foot veibule, it stays there, then there is an additional 448 in the lobby. Is that correct, roger?
>> no, this is total 448. The lobby is 250 plus 125 for the vestibule, plus 60, that's 448.
>> then the original figure of the full 40 of what the lobby used to be does that include the vestibule or not?
>> there was no vestibule.
>> there was no vestibule.
>> no.
>> so you've only picked up eight feet.
>> picked up?
>> you've only picked up eight feet.
>> back from the original. We tried to get as close to the original as possible.
>> when you talking about option 2, Commissioner Sonleitner, if you are talking about taking space back that was given, it still does not lend itself to address the issue of area as far as the persons visiting who are there doing business. There's nothing there that can go there. You can't put a table there, you can't put two chairs there, it's just space.
>> are you telling me in 60 feet you can't put a table there?
>> that's the facilities. What can we put there?
>> well, on option number 2, we can put -- as you can see on option number 2, you can put some chairs for that space right there. Option 2 is right there.
>> you are talking about right there.
>> uh-huh. We can put some chairs.
>> you've got 60 square feet. You've got 5-foot by 12-foot. You can put tables and chairs there.
>> I wish we discussed this when we talked with the persons when they were out there with us on the design that we have. Let me show you. The design that was shown us when we were discussing it --
>> that's the chairs right there.
>> would it help to go out over lunch and visit about this? Between now and 3:00 this afternoon? Would that help any or just further delay?
>> i'll be glad to discuss anything, judge.
>> I guess would it help the [inaudible] or would it just further delay?
>> my feeling is it's just going to further delay what's going on. I think we're already aware what's happening now. From what I?m seeing right now, we're seeing some diagrams and things we were not shown in the beginning, but it's just a matter of going through the tradition and still come back with the same results.
>> could we also get some discussions occurring over at precinct 2? Precinct 2 is basically the same size as you all's building and they do three and four times the number of cases and people come up to the window. Every time i've been out to visit the judge or the constable, we do not have issues about that the lobby somehow is undersized. It just doesn't work that way. I think maybe some flow discussions with folks that have just as small a space and three and four times the volume of people going through that facility. Somehow they've figured it out.
>> how large is the courtroom, Commissioner? I don't know what -- how large is the hall way they have?
>> I have to find out for you, judge, I don't have that number for you.
>> the hall way for customers visiting precinct 2?
>> precinct 2 has a hall way that's like a common hall way. Each one of them has a -- like, for instance, on the j.p. Area, the hall way in the j.p. Area, it's smaller than what you have right here.
>> if you start dividing up space based on offices, then we divide half of this with the constable and half with the j.p., We don't have as much. We combined our space. That is totally space for the justice of the peace per se in the other courts. If we start trying to divide space pwaoeudz that, if you just divide it down the middle for what is j.p. And what is constable, then we have a whole new ball game.
>> ms. Duffy has been here patiently since 9:30. Can we get her comments?
>> thank you.
>> good afternoon. Almost afternoon.
>> hello. Thank you, judge. I came after having watched the Commissioners court last Tuesday. I was live individual. -- livid. To watch our elected officials in precinct 1 who were elected by the voters just as each of you, were, to watch them be bashed and battered, I didn't like, and a lot of other people didn't like it that happened to have been watching it. I don't know what the reason is that every time something comes up for precinct 1, we have to go through the korean consulate to get anything out there. First of all, that building -- it is too small, period. The building was built too small. It is too small. Now, what you do about it at this point, I don't know and i'll leave that up to you. But I want to tell you it is too small. There is plenty of room out there to have added more to it than what was added. And here again just like judge scott, constable mercer does not know about [inaudible], neither does i, and I don't think neither one much you are experts on footage either, you know, when it comes to just looking at this, you say looking at this. Nobody can go by that unless you are in that field. The building is too small, and Commissioner Daugherty, I appreciated your stance last week because like you said, nobody can just take this and look at it if you are not familiar with that kind of stuff. And I don't think they are. Judge scott is a judge. Luke mercer is a constable. So I don't think they have the expertise just looking at it. Somebody need to do have sat down and talked to them and explained to them in laymen's terms, like you suggested, Commissioner Daugherty. And it just behooves me that every time something comes up with precinct 1, you've got to go through all this hullabaloo. Your body language tells us a lot, first of all. We elected these people because that's who we wanted. Now, you don't have to like them personally, but you need to respect the office that they hold just like you expect to be respected. And I don't think you all gave them the respect that they were due last week and the way they were being badgered. Now, let me tell you I go out there many times, going into the constable's office, I got clause troe tpoeb kwrafplt that little old space you got to stand there, I?m just throwing that out, what you do with it now, I can't say. But I want you to know that people in precinct 1 don't appreciate -- and i've seen precinct 2's office where ben bree is. It's a huge office. All the others, precinct 1 is the smallest out of all of them. Now, when I went out there no longer than yesterday, the glass where there was additions added is so dirty you can't see through it. Now, I don't know whose place it is to keep that up. The paper that was stripped off of the glasses is still there. It's horrible. It's dirty. Now, I don't know who -- and I asked them whose place is it to keep this clean. I don't think you can walk in in any other precinct's office and see it look like that. And you know, frankly, I?m tired of looking -- you know, acting like you all acting like precinct 1 is a stepchild. It's always been. And you know, we really are tired of that. There's not a sign telling you what this building is. The grass gets overgrown. A whole lot of times. There's not even a wastewater fountain in there. It's just ridiculous what you threw out there for us to accept. And I think, judge, that you all need to take into consideration a whole lot of other things, you know that is correct needs to be done out there. You've been the Commissioner for precinct 1. You know how it goes. Commissioner tkpwoe Gomez, you know how it goes because you've been around the county as long as it operates. I thought the day was over when one Commissioner would control the whole thing. So I think as a group you all need to consider, you know, precinct 1. Because when you do things simply because of the person, you are hurting the whole precinct. You all need to understand. That we elected judge scott. We elected luke mercer and Ron Davis. Those are our elected officials. The voters did that just like they elected you, and I think they need to be treated with respect if nothing else. And that's why I?m down here today to tell you we don't appreciate our officials -- treat them like you do everybody else. I watched the Wednesday work session. Everything was ha-ha with all the other judges, but ours had to be badgered. I don't think that was necessary. And I?m here to tell you that and i've been in precinct 1 all of my life and will be there. And if need be, I can fill this room if that's what you all want. If you got to have some other people in precinct 1, I can fill this room for you. But you need to look at our precinct just like you do everybody else's. And those windows and doors need to be cleaned. Immediately. And I don't think it takes adding on to clean those windows. Thank you, judge Biscoe.
>> thank you.
>> roger, let me ask you a question.
>> we either need to --.
>> [inaudible].
>> but if you can, just real quick like, could you give me a cost estimate to -- of course look at the square footage for the tax offices located in the other precinct buildings, precinct 2, precinct -- proposed precinct 3, and also precinct 4 tax offices and come back and see if you can give me something further to look at the proposed tax office the square footage being 615 for precinct 3, 961 square foot for precinct 4, and then precinct 2 has 680 square foot for their tax office. Give me a cost estimate of what that would be -- not saying we aren't going to move forward with this, but I would like to have some equity across here as far as that facility out there. A detached site as far as the tax office. If you can give us a number on that, I would appreciate it.
>> okay.
>> we want to bring this item back at 1:30. With the corporations, I would suggest they come down at, say, about 4:00. This looks like an all-day deal. I suggest to them 4:00 unless there is somebody from out of town or something. Why don't we do that, bring this item back up at 1:30 this afternoon and try to get it done. I think it would be a lot more [inaudib] than we are now. A couple folk have lunch commitments they have to run to. Next week we'll have two members of the court gone so we're looking at April 6th if we can get it done today, it would be best. See if you can work on that over lunch. Move we recess until 1:30.
>> second.
>> that passes by unanimous vote.
just before lunch, we were discussing item no. 32. Consider and take appropriate action on request to reconsider decision to locate tax assessor satellite office at precinct one jp and constable office building at springdale and mlk blvd. And [indiscernible] this morning?
>> good afternoon, alicia perez, executive manager for administrative operations. We did take the time and ask the -- as the court requested --
>> can you speak up just a little bit.
>> is this mic on? Good. We took the time at lunch to meet with constable and the justice of the peace for precinct 1, we do have some items to consider a decision tree really for the court to consider. Would you like to have us talk about that now, judge?
>> this is something that we heard this morning.
>> that's correct.
>> yes, ma'am, let's hear it.
>> option number one that was discussed in terms of an alternative was not to have the tax office located in the precinct 1 building. We are talking about 200 square feet. If it is not located there, then it would provide the expansion that both the constable and the justice of the peace believe is necessary to accommodate the current business and also allow for growth. If you -- so you decide yes or no it goes there, 200 square feet. If you decide that it does not go there, then the second item would be for the court to consider a stand alone facility as part of the fy '05 budget. And we would be talking anywhere between 75 and $85,000 for 600 square feet facility with a drive through. If you -- if the court decides to leave the tax office as it is designed, then the question the court -- to the court would be do you want option 1 or option 2 as was presented? This morning.
>> let me pose this question. When we left I concluded this morning, I asked basically at that time what -- what will the -- square foot sizes of precinct 2, 4, and 3 office building that houses the tax assessor, of course, precinct 3 has not been -- has not been constructed at this time, per se, but the square footage that I have, according to the backup, was that in precinct 2 for their tax office was -- was 680 square foot, precinct 4, 961 square foot, precinct 3, tax office located at that site, 615 square foot. I asked that question because I want to make sure that precinct 1 gets comparable square footage as the other precincts do -- and also [indiscernible] I could live, I guess, basically with some of the things that have been proposed to ensure that number one this Commissioners court take strong consideration into this fy '05 budget coming up this year with inclusion of the tax office with drive through capabilities, 600 square foot or better, detached on the same property that would serve that community very well. Of course, looking at the -- before we get there, we can also look at the other site as far as the tax office on airport, but with the growth potential that's going on in that area, I can basically see looking at that because I definitely want to see comparable size. The thing is about the precinct 1 building, it was constructed I guess back in the mid 90s, I guess, 95, 94, whatever it was, judge, I wasn't here at that time, somewhere around that area. Of course at that time the tax office was located downtown as an effort to decentralize, we ended up moving the tax office from downtown, but in the same vein we ended up moving the tax offices at different precinct office buildings. And so I?m -- I?m looking at that type of consideration. And to see if that's something that, number one, the j.p. And/or the constable can live with if that space was basically revisited and looked at and could have the use of the current walled in 200 square foot place that's set aside right now for the tax office. I don't know if judge or constable mercer would be something that they could agree with, look at, as far as reusing that particular square footage as far as it's included in the whole scope of the operation for that building. If I could hear from either of those folks that represent that area I could entertain that?
>> the question is can we reuse it?
>> the question is that if -- if we were to -- if this court would strongly consider, I?m saying coming up this fiscal year, '05 budget process, to look at a detached building that would house the tax office, of 600 square foot, not -- not a part of the existing precinct 1 building, but out in the same area, of course we have -- we bought adjacent property. Basically for expansion purposes. So I?m just wondering if that is something that can be considered as far as the direction we need to go in and I could kind of direct -- leaning that at that particular time to ensure that you have the adequate space, the 200 square foot space that's in that particular office at this time.
>> obviously, that's an option that you are looking at for fiscal year 2005. For stand alone building.
>> yeah, stand alone. Is that something that you can consider? Would support.
>> we wo ld consider anything that would be beneficial for the citizens of precinct 1. But in the interim period between now and then, I would hope that instead of the 200 square foot, feet, that we are talking about, that we would use that for the justice court and constable.
>> right. That is the direction that -- that is what the bottom line is. To take the existing 200 feet, that's been walled off, set aside for the tax assessor's office to use that particular area to be included in this square footage that's -- that you figure is deemed necessary for the constable and also the j.p. Activities in the precinct 1 office building. I?m asking is that something that you consider, getting these additional 200 feet back.
>> yes. Definitely. Yes.
>> yes. Do we have a yes on that?
>> yes.
>> well, I would like to hear from the elected official from the tax office.
>> right. Hold on Commissioner. I would like to hear from them, also. But right now I need to let them know that we definitely want to be sure that our tax services are still rented out there in precinct 1 because we are a growing community and of course I want the same thing for precinct 1 that's in the other precincts. But I think it's important for us to look for equal -- for equal footing and I think this will bring some equal footing and -- and roger, if you properly can tell me, roger -- roger el khoury, if the court decides to go in this direction in the form of a motion, how long would it take the residents of precinct 1 from the design work and end the construction if this was to actually happen to have a drafts in the tax office in precinct 1.
>> that would number January of -- of January -- let me put it this way. If I get the direction from the court to get the design going this year, and we are going to -- to the budget, the budget approve and I can get -- start the construction in October, I need about three to four months construction. That's what I say it would be in January.
>> uh-huh.
>> just a clarification, the 680 square feet, that is not located in the j.p. And constables office.
>> it's attached.
>> no, no, no, neither. Precinct 2. Located in Pflugerville with our community center and our clinic and the only way that the tax office was possible was with a new construction and a new building. It was impossible to add it on to the j.p. And constable facility located on burnet road because we are seriously land locked there.
>> right. My point was square footage more than anything else.
>> I?m saying that the square footage was not possible until we go a brand new --
>> exactly.
>> as opposed to we are dealing with right now the renovation of an existing space. And that would not have been possible at the precinct 2 j.p. And constable's office at all.
>> okay.
>> nelda?
>> judge, Commissioners, I don't have a problem with the proposed detached building to house the tax office with the drive through, I don't have a problem with that at all. The -- the 200 square feet that is in the current construction process is really too small. I pointed out last week that -- that a person in a wheelchair can get in there and turn their wheelchair around to the counter. It's 200 square feet is too small. We will not have the same where we need to store supplies in this 200 square foot space as we do at the -- this -- the substations in the other two precincts where they now exist.
>> well, my motion is that we -- that we basically delay completion of construction of this space for the tax assessor and definitely that we indicate our intention to revisit this item on an appropriate agenda item as soon as it's ready. Now, I have had questions about these satellite offices, one question would be basically how much they are used. My understanding is that they are so knew that we don't know.
>> we can provide you with that information.
>> it would be good to have that. Let's have another agenda item when we look at it. If we need a drive-through window that's larger than the current space then I?m supportive. Bui do think that use of this space for the tax assessor creates a whole lot more problems than it solves for us. It seems that -- that it really is not the positive project that we had in mind.
>> correct.
>> it's a situation, I think, that looked a whole lot better on paper than it has in real life. Now that it's been built out, now that we actually see what the impact is on the office there. So I mean I do -- I?m not sure that it would be appropriate to approve the other project today. We could certainly give directions and notice of our intention to come back with a specific agenda item where we provide a tax assessor satellite office remedy.
>> judge, to let everyone know what our intentions are in this particular regard and I -- I would like to work toward that end and roger, if you all will, I will let to have some language, basically put together for the agenda item just to address this particular concern, that is to make sure that we -- that precinct 1 office building, look at the drive-through situation, look at nelda's numbers of the other precincts that are using their tax office at their precinct locations and we go from there. So but -- but I definitely would like to have it, specific language and we will deal with that. And then come back to the Commissioners court with that language. And also that -- the information that -- that you have provided as far as the cost of it, also the time lines as far as getting it done. And the amount of money that it would take to do all of this. So I would like for that to be -- to be entered also into the direction that we are going.
>> do you need a motion or just --
>> I?m trying to have a motion. Let's have a motion, if it's seconded we'll have discussion.
>> that's the motion.
>> let's repeat it then.
>> okay. The motion is for roger el khoury and the tax assessor and others to come back with specific language to address a detached tax office at the precinct 1 office building for 600 square foot or more, and that comes back here to the Commissioners court with that specific language to go in that direction and look at the -- of course nelda's information would also be looking at the use of -- currently, of the tax offices that are existing. That's kinds of early, I don't think she may not have the accurate numbers, but I still think that it's something we can look at.
>> is it friendly for us to authorize the continued use of this new space by the constable and j.p.?
>> yes.
>> I second the motion.
>> yes.
>> is that friendly.
>> yes, that is friendly to the motion, yes.
>> Commissioner Sonleitner.
>> just a clarification. I?m going to go along with the piece at hand, if I am looking correctly at the sheet here, roger, this is room 102 is what was on our map originally as going to the tax office, we are talking about that room 102 would go back to the joint use, talking joint?
>> yes.
>> joint use of the j.p.'s and consbles related to that space. Here's the clarification that I need. What is or is not happening to that separation what use tobd the original entrance and what we will call the vestibule. It's there a -- he is there a space in between there or not? I can't tell of what I?m looking at here whether that stays or whether that leaves?
>> which option are you looking at there?
>> I?m focusing on option 2. Which basically eliminates that dual opening there. Otherwise, the same folks, using the same building, it makes no sense for us to have that double set of double doors. Are you following me?
>> we can remove one of those doors, which is the one in the middle.
>> because that also, judge, I think that it's not just simply a matter of that will give them overflow space. The lobby itself needs help. And so my question is on the option 2 map, it would be the elimination of that set of double doors here to make it a bigger waiting room. Now, my second question on that is also on option 2 when you talked about trying to reclaim about 60 square feet of space. If you compare to what's on option 1 appears to be a lot of wasted space that's in the original version of it in terms of the space for the staff area of the j.p. My question there is is that also something that may be worthwhile is to reclaim that 60 feet there, kind of scrunch in a little bit. You still respect that there e two stations for people to work in on the j.p. Side. Just there's a lot less what looks like dead space there. That, too, would add to the lobby area. I?m thinking for the future in terms of at whatever point we do get to a decision, related to a stand alone tax office, perhaps on the same property, that that is something that would make sense to go ahead and get done now because that would be necessary for the future.
>> that is not necessary, this space, equipment, office equipment, is to be moved, is to be moved --
>> I?m looking at what's -- what's supposed to go in those spaces.
>> do we need to take the internal [indiscernible] out, internal walls out or leave them as they are.
>> my suggestion is leave them as they are.
>> leave the walls as they are?
>> yes.
>> that creates more wasted space.
>> that's the motion and second. Any more discussion? I understand your recommendation. We can always come back later and do that if we want to, right. It's easier to take it out than to put one in, I?m thinking.
>> absolutely. [multiple voices]
>> easier.
>> yeah.
>> the motion right now is to authorize use of this space out there by the constable and j.p. And direct staff to bring us back a proposal after further discussion I guess of a satellite office for the tax assessor/collector, one that residents will have access to without going through the j.p. Constable space.
>> drive through.
>> any more discussion? [ phone ringing ]
>> all --
>> only one thing, judge. If we can request some flexibility with the 200 square feet just to continue working with the two elected officials, as long as we have a consensus and we don't need to bring it back to court.
>> we have that understanding. All in favor of the motion? Show Commissioner Davis, Gomez, Daugherty, yours truly voting in favor. Abstaining Commissioner Sonleitner. Thank you all very much. Thank you for coming back.
>> good afternoon, let's call back to order the voting session of the Travis County Commissioners court.
Last Modified: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 1:40 PM