Travis County Commissioners Court
August 31, 2004
Item 15.g
G is other opportunities and obligations that may have an impact on the '05
budget process. We are interested more in revenue opportunities, I believe,
than obligations.
>> is this where we talk about the sweeps, encumbrances sore
that a discussion for markup and I can wait?
>> it's as you see fit. You have a letter from me dated August
27th that identified a variety of opportunities to generate resources. And
i'll be glad to review that with you or allow that to be reviewed with you
at the beginning of markup or at any other time.
>> but this is also a good time to mention something that
is really important to me. I think that we would have additional money resources
to d some things that need doing if we had less money in the risk management
reserve. To settle lawsuits. I know that sometimes that's really harder to
address than we think, but for me, I think it's possible. Otherwise I wouldn't
feel the real tug here that, you know, I wish I could say let's transfer some
money out of that risk management reserve because I know we're not going to
need it for lawsuits, and yet I can't say that. And so what it does say, what
I can say is if I had that money available, we could take care of a lot of
stuff today.
>> what if we say let's review the risk management reserve
between now and next Tuesday and see if we can reduce it.
>> I sure wish we could.
>> item number 7, he thinks 100,000 could be eliminated without
damaging --
>> 100,000 doesn't help us. It's a drop in the bucket given
the needs that we have today on this list.
>> yeah, there were two pieces to that discussion. One is
there is a recommendation in the preliminary budge total add 100,000 t-fr
into the risk management fund and we believe that's not necessary knowing
what we know today. The issue that Commissioner Gomez is raise ing is a much
more powerful issue which is the manage attitude of that fund and how much
protection is appropriate and the difficulty there, naturally, is you don't
know what lawsuit you are going to be hit with in may of '05. And -- because
it hasn't happened yet. And you don't know what your -- you have a general
sense of what your risks are, but those are -- can be quite variable. And
there is nothing worse than an imprudent amount to protect you, on the other
hand, how much is too much. And that is a judgment call and I think having
the auditor's office involved because of the -- as well as the risk management
office involved could be a fruitful discussion.
>> this gets back to a point Margaret and I have talked about
and we've never gotten to the point this is the beginning of the fiscal year
and we do it. And that is that these lawsuits get charged back in the next
fiscal year to the department that incurred them. Because sometimes that is
the only way that we get the message back to those departments that you have
to take accountability for those actions is if it hurts the allocation for
that department related to pay. If over knows then that they have the full
responsibility for what goes on there, I think we send a message out there.
I can guarantee you that the minute we started basically making folks accountable
for the automobile accidents and that we talked about them openly and who
they were here in Commissioners court it had an effect on departments that
it wasn't going to be hidden within the budget; it was going to be transparent
-- one of my favorite new words -- and that it was not going to be a good
thing and it had a good impact on driving records. We have seen a substantial
decrease in the number of wrecks that were avoidable. But I知 ready to charge
back departments on lawsuits that are related to avoidable activity. And conduct.
>> and a lot of times to make it unavoidable, you provide
training and to every single employee, especially supervisors for, you know
employees even to try to avoid those lawsuits. Because I just see that as
money just getting sucked out of our treasury. And then when we are faced
with some real needs that everybody has, I always think of that money. If
I only had the money that we had to pay to settle that lawsuit, I could apply
it to this. You know. And especially since, you know, there's the need to
limit the tax increases that we have. And yet there's a need to meet needs
of employees so that they can pay their taxes, so that they can pay their
health insurance, but it's a real difficult job to balance that -- balance
that out.
>> so your feeling about the first $100,000 is there is that
amount in preliminary budget that we can take out.
>> right, and i'll take that.
>> the second point is let's take a real good look at risk
management reserve, see what formula we can apply and see if we can free money
up there and at least take a good look-see between now and next Tuesday.
>> yeah. And I really think that's the issue of charging
back the lawsuits to departments that has merit because all of us need to
hurt in the pocketbook before it makes sense.
>> okay.
>> and I do urge you -- I don't know if you want to have
a discussion during markup about this whole question of the structure of the
risk management fund as a body or not.
>> well, I depend heavily on susan's opinion as to what it
needs to be, and I respect that in terms of what needs to be booked in there
because when you underreserve your risk management fund, you have consequences
to that too. And the city of Austin is the perfect example of them having
to borrow money for two very large lawsuits that they did not fund appropriately.
>> my idea, christian, was to agendize it for next Tuesday.
>> and we'll do that, we'll look at it -- the fund is in
good shape because we've always taken that approach, there may be -- I just
don't know off the top of my head.
>> the other thing for the county attorney's office is we
are [indiscernible] historically and we also resolve a lot of lawsuits during
each fiscal year, county attorneys, so if we can [indiscernible] the pending
litigation list and lawsuits that have been disposed of, we pull those off,
look at those and see if we think the amount set aside is about right or whether
we can reduce it. Please do not ask us to increase that amount.
>> how much do we know is in there right now? Anybody --
>> reserve is 5.5 million.
>> see, we could do a lot with 5.5.
>> is that frame of the 100,000, is that ongoing money?
>> ongoing.
>> oh, that's a good side.
>> you should be -- I would urge you, and we'll be glad to
go over it now or at another time, I really urge you to look at the last page
of the letter that you received because in essence it shows $1.6 million worth
of expenditures that are not in the preliminary budget that will be needed
in '05 and a million six worth of fund sources. The judge mentioned the allocated
reserve of 1.9, if our recommendations were followed, we suggested $200,000
going from that reserve to fund some of these needs and taking the emergency
reserve to zero. Now, that is only because we don't know how many other options
there are available. If the discussion, for example, with t.n.r. Was fruitful,
might not have to do that.
>> okay. Christian, the -- the capital funds, we have half
a million to $1.5 million. Is there a better way to -- can we get more accuracy
with the estimate? I mean, we think we can rely on the mid point there?
>> well, I believe it is safe to assume that the scrubs that
you will see by approximately September 10th and usually would be agendized
for the September 14th Commissioners court meeting would generate at least
$750,000. And that the outer limit would be a million and a half. I知 being
cautious only because of our experience in the past that it depends upon savings
and it depends upon interest and there is a wide variety of data that must
be put together by one analyst. And at this point I have pushed that analyst
to see whether or not we could get it done by September 8 or 9 and she has
suggested September 10th.
>> how firm is number 11? Reimbursement of some of the costs
of the elections equipment?
>> the county clerk in a phone call with me a few days ago
indicated that -- in a question that I asked her what do you believe is the
percentage likelihood that we will be reimbursed at least a half a million
dollars by thanksgiving, she said 97%.
>> one-time money.
>> one time.
>> and did she say what that was based on?
>> her judgment. It was based on the fact the federal government
has already provided resources to the secretary of state's office. The secretary
of state's office is currently in the process of seeing whether or not by
the end of September resources could be transferred, but it was 50/50 for
this amount or maybe more. Maybe as much as a million by the end of September.
And by -- it might be in early October. And the reason for those -- that hedging
is the experience with the secretary of state's office over the last year
or two has been one of fits and starts and fits and starts and forward and
backward. They are apparently close to having everything tight and resolved,
but, again, in that world sometimes things happen. So that's why I asked for
the outer limit by November of half a million.
>> okay. On the budgeted car, do we have -- budget of c.a.r.,
Do we have specific items already identified or do we set that amount thinking
that during the budget procession the items will total about that much? You
know what I知 saying?
>> no.
>> are there specific -- is there specific equipment that
would add up to $8.8 million?
>> yes, there is an entire list -- pages and pages of equipment
that is contained in your preliminary budge that's total $8.8 million. Now,
there are two different techniques to deal with generating resources. One
is a technique that you heard earlier, borrow more and reduce that. That's
one way. The other is expand less. And if you wish to -- spend less. And if
you wish to spend less, we should be able to find a way to spend less. Those,
we believe, are solid recommendations. We're not saying those recommendations
are unsound. We are saying, however, that there is some portion of that 8.8
million that we believe could be delayed or deferred. And we believe also
that every department that had a project delayed or deferred will come to
tell you that's not appropriate. But that still is our judgment.
>> okay.
>> okay. What else do we have on the --
>> judge, what about number 12 on that list? The consider
reducing the compensation increases. I would not be in favor of that. So I
think -- yeah, I just kind of want to send a signal, though, because this
is Tuesday and we're posted, I would not like to see that happen. And as a
matter of fact, I wish that we could find some additional money because I
really would like for us to raise the hourly rate from $9 to $10. And I don't
think we ought to wait on any other entity to do that. And I think that's
better than getting, you know, health and human services eligibility and,
you know, whatever else -- whatever other good service that we provide, but
I really would like to have that considered.
>> anything else under g?
>> and as a matter of fact, I think that if we do that for
all funds, it's like $280,000. And unless we do it just out of general fund,
then it's a little less.
>> road and bridge is flush.
>> we have your assurance and leroy's too that you all are
not holding back some positive revenue possibility for sort of last-minute
dramatic effect?
>> for Commissioner Daugherty, benefit, a third of a penny
generates $2 million, in answer to your question.
>> I知 sorry, I missed that. What was that?
>> what is the [indiscernible] individually, but 15-d in
itself, are you asking the court to come back -- because I did hear joe say
something very significant and that was a p.m.s. Survey that is going to come
forth sometime in October. And so I知 just trying to figure out what disposition
the court is going to look at. I don't want to put the cart before the horse.
>> my own view is that we look at the options that and at
some point, no later than next Tuesday, come back and say basically if we're
headed in this direction, here's what we ought to do. Now, in my view we ought
to make sure we can continue the same transportation projects we would do
if we were not to take this action. And the level of the reserve that i've
learned about indicates we can do that. We would be postponing sort of a general
fund infusion of money, but if we can do that for a year or two and take care
of some of the other needs this budget process, then I think we ought to do
it. So I don't know that I知 ready. I got a good feel for how we cold do them
-- could do them, but I don't know I got the kind of information I could get
if I sat down with the appropriate people and closed the door and worked a
little harder.
>> okay. I just wanted to make sure we get a clear picture
of --
>> well, that plan is really important because, you know,
and I don't know if conditions have improved in precinct 4, but I remember
driving with law enforcement officer out there, and those roads need to be
in good shape or we're going to have some accidents. And so -- and especially
having to drive as fast as they do to cover, you know, from north down to
southeast. I think that the plan will avoid accidents.
>> the kind of thing that sometimes changes with revenue
because sometimes we get good news at the end, everything is really pretty
well set. What is not known until closer and closer and closer is the actual
ending fund balance as we see what's really spent out. So that sometimes changes.
But in the past the actual revenue estimate hasn't moved a whole lot in terms
of new revenue, but that ending fund balance as we get further -- because
one of the things that -- and we've had these discussions a lot more I guess
a couple years ago, but, you know, the budget process is going on, but the
business of the county is going on as well during this month so people are
still spending money and they are operating like they all do. And, you know,
there's an estimate and both p.b.o. And our department tries to be fairly
conservative so we have to pull back and say we estimated too much. But that's
really -- if you get a little extra money, it's usually in that ending fund
balance. But the actual revenue -- I mean blaine, would you agree with that,
we're pretty -- down going revenue probably isn't going to change a whole
lot.
>> seems to me maybe next Tuesday we ought to have some specific
recommendations to vote up or down. I think it may require a little more work.
We kind of threw out a whole lot of options today. I think we have a pretty
good feel for what makes sense, what does not, what we ought to pursue, what
we ought to back off from. On the [indiscernible] it really is how do we identity
in such a way that we minimize the adverse impact and I just think we need
to work a little harder on that. The -- so in terms of these compensation
issues that I知 about to call up, what's the date on determining them? During
markup?
>> from a implementation viewpoint, judge? Is that what you
are asking me basically?
>> right.
>> that is not difficult because part of it will be -- you'll
want some of it to be across the board and since we've got the automated system
we can program a flat across the board fairly quickly. It wouldn't come out
until -- because we're on delayed payroll, people wouldn't get it until their
October 31st pay period so we've got that first couple of weeks in October
to do that. So that, you know, from an implementation viewpoint you are in
good shape. You know, I just as a department head here really applaud you
for wanting to hold on to the 5.75. I think it's real important for our workforce.
You know, we're a service organization. It depends on people doing hard work
and when things were tight they kept right on working.
>>
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
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: Thursday, October 27, 2005 11:04 AM