This is the official website of Travis County, Texas.

On This Site

Commissioners Court

Previous Years' Agendas

Intergovernmental Relations Office

Administrative Ops

Health & Human Svcs

Criminal_Justice

Planning & Budget

Transportation & Natural Resources
 

On Other Sites

Travis County Commissioners Court

September 7, 2004
Item 6

View captioned video.

Number 6, consider and take appropriate action on budget amendments, transfers and discussion items. Questions by the court on one of them or more?
>> there is one item posted for discussion and that's the reason that p.b.o. Did not want this placed on consent. And I just want to make one clarification, I was just discussing with the department and that is for fund 501, the exposition fund. The department is requesting to use 45,670 in utility savings and one note I wanted to make in our memo we are saying that we had to be conservative, already projected this action. However, since there is a general fund subsidy being considered for the exposition center next year that's why we place it as a discussion item. The department wanted me to reiterate they have the current savings to do this, but i'll be happy to answer any questions.
>> any issues with the other items?
>> I would like to clarify one point, I think it's been clarified. A-4 through 13 represent the budget adjustments necessary to enact the lump sum awards, the temporary pay policy for records management. A-4 through 8 represent the three that are proposed in the text week on personnel amendments. 9 through 13 represent the one on approval for today.
>> need to discuss any of the other items?
>> let me just ask this. How much have we spent -- speaking of temporary pay, how much have we spent so far total?
>> a running tab?
>> I知 sure do you.
>> total out the door is over a million dollars.
>> on the temporary pay?
>> on temporary pay. But a few hundred thousand is with cscd so I think it's around 800 and some change.
>> does that include general -- I mean road and bridge?
>> total road and bridge and other special funds as general fund.
>> that's good to know. So we'll kind of have an idea, you know, Commissioner Daugherty, when we start talking about what's being collected.
>> if you want to go through what all of the funds and number of employees, I知 not sure you want to look backwards as opposed to look forward, but those are rough members.
>> thank you.
>> christian -- Commissioner, I知 sorry, were you finished?
>> go ahead.
>> is there any way possible you can get those numbers out per department as far as the temporary pay?
>> it would be relatively simple to do.
>> it would be good to know. And I would like to have the full -- list he had by department. Then as we go through this process --
>> we can show you by department, number of employees, general fund out the door, special funds out the door.
>> I would like to see that.
>> and cscd is a large number, but they were using other resources.
>> I understand.
>> move approval of all the items except ds 1.
>> second.
>> discussion?
>> we have a second on that, judge.
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Any questions? So your point was what now?
>> the reason this is posted for discussion is that there is a general fund transfer being -- or subsidy being considered for the expo center fund and in so much as resources are not spent in the expo center fund that subsidy would be less. That's why it's been placed as a discussion item.
>> is there a subsidy for this particular item?
>> the subsidy is -- for the fund is a whole as being considered. I知 not sure I understood the question.
>> would that subsidy cover the request?
>> if you spend this $45,000, 45,670, then the transfer to the expo center would need to be by definition --
>> let me just make one point however. We have assumed already in our ending fund balance this action. Therefore the subsidy under consideration would not change. If it was not approved that is correct subsidy would --, that subsidy would decrease.
>> there is money left over in the utility line item.
>> that's correct, for the utility line item on the expo center, left over our projection is between 42,000 to 65,000. We're asking for the 45,000.
>> we think that these improvements are necessary because in the long run that would be energy savings.
>> that's correct. We will save about 11,000 per year, the return on investment is about four years.
>> and that's why I知 supporting it because it makes sense. I wish this were a money generating department. I think they are right on the edge. But this is a wise investment and I would move approval.
>> second.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you.

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 10:34 AM