Travis County Commissioners Court
August 24, 2004
Item 6
Number 6 is to distribute and discuss budget preference worksheet to support
the budget mark-up process.
>> you may remember at the beginning of your budget hearings
you were distributed a document entitled the budget preference worksheet and
that essentially listed every single budget request, both reductions and increases.
There were 470-odd items, and 100 or more were discussed during budget hearings
and during those budget hearings in some cases alternatives were identified.
Different options were identified. And so what you have before you is a complete
list of every request that was a part of the budget process that started on
may and early may when the departmental budgets were submitted and then on
the left hand side there is an asterisk next to every item that was discussed
at a budget hearing. There are about 140 asterisks, 570 lines, so roughly
a quarter. And this -- these items have been shared with the departments and
so they've seen did language and the numbers have been scrubbed so the numbers
are accurate. Now, the purpose of this form is for you to consider these items
and to determine whether or not you wish to discuss them during mark-up and
in essence is an agenda-building tool, that's all it is. But that it should
be. That's all it should be. And that's all it is. Because the decisions are
made during mark-up. So in essence what we do is we ask you to look at the
items that were discussed and you could obviously put on the agenda things
that weren't discussed, but typically it's things that have been discussed.
And then in the privacy of your own thought process and public policy consideration
to independently make any check marks that you wish to have them be brought
up for discussion with your colleagues during mark-up which will begin on
September 8th. We're asking you to fill this out and makes a many check marks
as you feel you wish, and to return it to the county judge's office by the
close of business on Thursday, September 2. That is 9 days from now.
>> this is a better form.
>> I知 -- I知 glad it will help you. Now, we actually have
another form that may each help you more.
>> thank you. I was going to ask for it.
>> I have it if you wish it. But I知 starting the complete
picture and then I can give you a different tool if you wish it.
>> I wish.
>> in any event, then what will happen is I will pick up
from the county judge's office your marks and then will synthesize them including
any notes or comments that you wish. I will not edit your comments, I will
just repeat them. And because sometimes you mite want to say check -- I want
to talk about this in mark-up and might want to make a note or two, and that
will be on one sheet of paper that you will get just before mark-up, so you
will then see there are x number of the members of the court who wish to talk
about this during the mark-up process. Now, it is also conceivable that some
of you might want to remove something and some of you might wanted to add
something and that will be different check marks on the same item, that's
fine, that will all get worked out during the three days. So that is in essence
the process that we followed and I知 going through it in some detail to remind
ourselves as well as anyone that is looking to see how this budget is built,
and it really is built from the -- in many ways from the ground up on budget
request.
>> let me understand why we decided last year or the year
before that a better delivery place is the county judge's office instead of
the budget office's office.
>> because, the county judge is the office that determines
the agenda. Not a staff member. Staff members don't determine what the court's
agenda looks like. The county judge's office is the agency that as the presiding
officer of the Commissioner's court determines the agenda and we would never
be so bold as to determine what the agenda is without the county judge's impermatre.
>> [multiple voices]
>> i've been through the turnip patch more than once.
>> Commissioner, can you explain something to me because
as I知 going through the big thing, you've got some items that are clearly
with a line through them and other departments who chose not to have any discussions
with us but are dropping issues that there are no lines through them. I知
wondering what constitutes a line being drawn...
>> the department that I wanted off the table.
>> thank you.
>> the absence of a request does not a line make. So if they
were silent, we leave it there. If they said take it off. We draw a line through.
>> it's not a problem.
>> but that's a departmental request. So that doesn't mean
you, in your deliberations, you might want to still talk about it in which
case you might should put it -- I do have what we call the short form and
all that does is list on a smaller piece of paper, 8 pages long, the asterisk
items, so if you only want to look at the things that were discussed at a
budget hearing, you can look at the short form. I'll be glad to pass it out
if you want to use it. It depends on how you wish to work, but the short form
is a subset of the big form. The big form is what we really need because it
is complete. If you would like to use it, we have a copy now and we have appropriate
size fonts for you.
>> yeah, I知 going to use that only because it's helpful
that I don't miss something in the big thing. Judge, for your preference,
what do you want turned in? Do you want the big one turned in to your office
or do you want that one turned in so I know which one to do. Do you have a
preference?
>> what's the court's preference?
>> well, the short one contains all of the bold items on
the large sheet, right?
>> yes, both the short one and the long one... Right.
>> ... Contain boldful all bold means is it was an additional
item added during a budget meeting by a department, usually it was an option.
>> right. So really the only things that we're including
or voting on when we get to mark-up are the items that we discussed budget
hearings. The other items already sort of there.
>> that's your choice.
>> those that are not bold are already in the budget more
or less?
>> well, no.
>> no?
>> items -- to know what is in the budget, you have to look
at preliminary budget amounts, so there are really two big columnsment one
is verified requested amounts. Those are -- this is what the department asked
for and then if you look at preliminary budget amount, you'll see whether
it's in the preliminary budget or not. Most -- now, you're right that most
of the items that were discussed at a budget hearing have a big zero next
to them in the preliminary budget. But that is not universally true. Because
in some cases they were partially -- some items were partially funded. A recommendation
was made not for the full amount but by a partial amount and the department
says well, that's fine, but we still want the full amount and here is why,
court, please consider it in your mark-up process.
>> really...
>> the short sheet does not have -- the short sheet does
not have space for us to make comments.
>> that's correct.
>> that's true.
>> trying to keep it simple that way.
>> how important are the comments I guess should be the question.
>> historically have the comments been important or...
>> the comments have helped other -- your colleagues to know
where you're coming from. So simply sometimes it's funded out of fund 21 or
I want to talk about it but only fund half or, you know, it is -- you're signalling
a little modification to just a simple this is what I want. That's all those
notes are. And what we do is we just add the notes together and some of the
notes are mutually exclusive. Sometimes those notes say I want to do this
and sometimes they say I don't want to do this, and that is part of the agenda,
in essence it is a record that then you use during your deliberations to actually
take the votes and determine...
>> the judge's preference is the large sheet.
>> to turn in at the judge's office, copy bold enough to
notify christian when I have received all five so we can pick them up.
>> i'll be bugging you around 4:00 on Tuesday -- on Thursday.
>> Thursday.
>> that is September 2.
>> and what we will have is we will have the long holiday
to make sure everything is complete so that when mark-up starts, you will
have a full and complete record.
>> anything further on number 6? One comment.
>> yes, sir.
>> a far left hand column is a reference number and that
was added this year. It's consecutively numbered so that whenever you talk
about an item, if you use that reference number, then Commissioner Davis's
sheets are referenced the same because of the page numbers are different,
so if we could in mark-up come off of that reference number, it helps.
>> plus it will help you make any hooks between the short
form and the long form so that the short form will have that reference number
jumping, it will be 21, 30, 32, 40, because those are all that were discussed,
and it's a perfect match to the long form. It's just a way to keep track.
>> there is one thing I知 seeing that would have this be
helpful information as a reminder out there. Thank you very much. On our last
page that you put down all of the reserves, but what we do not have here is
against the allocated reserve any kind of ear marks to remind us of what actually
is in the preliminary budget related to an ear mark that's in a place that's
right with everything else that we've got. Is that possible to get us?
>> very easy because it's in -- there is one page in the
preliminary budget that describes the ear marks. If you would like, I will
forward an an addendum to you...
>> that would be great.
>> which would be page 18, which is simply what the ear marks
are against the capital acquisition resources account reserve as well as the
allocated reserve. Those are the two reserves that have ear marks on them.
>> would you mind formatting it so it can easily be attached
to the back side.
>> you can clip it and we'll have it that afternoon because
that is an easy thing to do.
>> that would help me to be reminded of the actual ear marks.
>> maybe a dozen ear marks on reserve and maybe half a dozen
against car.
>> okay. Renormally begin mark-up with a discussion of the
revenue picture.
>> yes.
>> why wouldn't it make sense for us to have a preliminary
discussion on revenue next week? You won't before the preference sheets are
through.
>> you will be having -- the auditor's fourth revenue estimate
is out, and I believe there is going to be a request to put it on the agenda
for next Tuesday.
>> okay.
>> and I believe the auditor will be prepared to share with
you the revenue picture.
>> there are other revenue options which depend on action
by the Commissioner's court.
>> yes.
>> my question is why wouldn't we ajendize that for discussion
next week which would be a few days before the due date of these worksheets?
>> specifically you have in mind what?
>> any and all possibilities.
>> actions of the Commissioner's court can take to free up
revenue, basically.
>> okay. Okay.
>> the advantage is it gives us a few more days to think
about that and when we do the budget worksheets, we'll have that in mind do
you see what I知 say something.
>> yes.
>> certain actions I think that depend on us formally taking
action. There are other things on some issues like star flight, it's not a
revenue thing, but I think we ought to really have a short discussion of exactly
where we plan to go with that and before Thursday of next week whether it's
still on the list of things to do 405 or what. It's a real big item and it
seems to me that it's not going away and if we do nothing, we basically have
chosen a course, so I guess my thinking is why wouldn't be agendice that and
have a five or ten minute additional discussion and I can think of three or
four items that we need to look at. The other thing is we talked about that
one penny for transportation. Mr. Guzman indicated he thought he had enough
money in reserve to cover transportation projects at least one year, maybe
two. We would discuss that next week and land on it. In my own mind I知 trying
to figure out why I would be real happen to let things be approved that would
cost when there's no money to do it.
>> correct.
>> I set myself up a disappointment.
>> that will help immensely. Those items that you just mentioned
will set the stage for a mark-up that could very easily be accomplished in
less than three days.
>> judge, could we ask our friends on the housing finance
corporation and the health facilities corporation to have a similar agenda
item next week because to know what might be coming from the corporations
I think it's like zero from housing, but there may be a number on health facilities,
that would also allow us to incorporate that with any kind of revenue projections
if there's going to be any kind of a corporation transfer.
>> yeah, we'll have harvey prepare that for you and get --
I think he sent about 30 days ago a e-mail with some of that information.
We'll have it updated as back up for the agenda item.
>> thank you.
>> some of those projects seems to me are like multiyear,
and it would help to know that piece, if we do it, that piece must be funded
in '05. That piece can easily be kicked to the '06 budget cycle. I知 thinking
of a handful of them that are big enough to matter and make a difference.
>> okay.
>> let's see if we can do that.
>> so that would be like a part b of the revenue report from
the auditor's office.
>> yeah.
>> we have other items that just follows it.
>> the one penny is really not revenue. It's a redirection
of existing resources.
>> right.
>> and should you land on that, that will set a substantial
stage for finalizing your agenda building process for mark-up.
>> but I think we would want -- I forget how much advance
notice we gave joe last time. We would want to let him know, look, bring this
to us and give him a chance to really consider all of the ramifications. Different
components of it. I mean last time we were just kind of casually discussing
it, I think, but if we're seriously thinking about doing it, we ought to give
him advance notice, let him know to bring the report, look up specific projects,
put a price tag on them, make sure we can get through the '05 fiscal year.
>> I think i... Two fiscal years.
>> right. Lisa said he had enough to go through two fiscal
year, I want to see how that is going to impact my position.
>> certainly.
>> so I don't want to short change precinct 1.
>> I wouldn't want us to back off from that and I don't think
there's any intention.
>> I don't think any of us want to short change any of us.
I think what I asked is there's got to be something in between no transfer
and all of it being transferred. There may be some very good reasons why we
hold back a little bit of that address some of those outstanding issues that
we aren't going to know until the new pavement study comes out, so it maybe
absolutely appropriate to hold back a little bit to make sure we've got all
that stuff covered. We don't want to short change anybody.
>> I will make sure that tnr gets alerted and if it -- having
it on the agenda will foster that occurrence.
>> if we could do that item and then say include and list
specifics that we know for sure and have the wording others come to mind between
the posting and next Tuesday, we'll be able to lawfully discuss them.
>> i'll --
>> and if any come to mind, let us know between now and --
actually about noon Friday because we can add an item put on Friday, as late
as Friday.
>> anything else under 6?
>> one member of the court did have a few legal questions
by the county attorney to address us on regarding the use of our preference
worksheets, so we'll discuss that in executive session.
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.
Last Modified: Friday, October 28, 2005 8:25 AM