Travis County Commissioners Court
December 21, 2004
Item 34
Number 34 is consider and take appropriate action on budget amendments, transfers
and discussion items. I think some of them seem to be fairly rue type and
others were [inaudible] because of the amount of money involved.
>> i'll be happy to go through. If there are no questions
on the capital list change that is just moving, changing the vehicle, a 1
is reimbursing from one department to the other department, that is pretty
straightforward, but then Commissioner's court approval. A 2 through a 5 require
a little bit more understanding.
>> from the allocated reserve [inaudible]
>> those are allocated reserves within the existing co balances.
>> okay.
>> and basically i'll give the quick version. If there's
any particular questions i'll be happy to answer them. A 2 is 27,000, it's
an error, actually, we overscrubbed is what happened. We tried to keep a balance
between our scrubbing process and using the reserves, when the actual balance
comes in we do it on projections and that 27,000 is a emaccommodation from
pba to fund sheriff's vehicles and we were a little short, so we're recommending
that one of those vehicles be funded from a different fund that we had originally
asked for. A 3 and a 4 are related to some accounting technicality, full,
in with facilities management. They had due to the new classifications and
some overaccruals, they had [inaudible] budget, so when pba went to budget,
their balances weren't being rolled over, not up creasing project budget for
airporter we're returning funds that were originally appropriated by the court
for that project. The 153,000, however, is for a different project, since
available bonds, scrubbed that 153,000 but I shouldn't have. I didn't realize
those were related to those airport funds. A, 5 is actually tnr error. They
had a $245,000 project they they had forgotten to request to be rebudget and
during the car rebudgeting process, it never showed up on anybody's radar
screen, so in the spirit of trying to get this from co balances and not the
general fund who has now found a recommended funding source for that that
does not affect the jail fund and t 1 through 256789 is $12 million which
is related to -- we don't need those funds for that project this year, so
instead of issuing that 12 million for local project,, we're saying let's
use cash on hand and doing it there, but it holds less the overall project
budgets if the court wanted to go back...
>> a good surprise.
>> very good surprise. I'll be happy to answer any questions.
>> nip on the court have any further questions on...
>> i'll second that. All those in favor?
>> passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you.
>> take a look here. Is the judge back? I think the judge
mentioned that he wanted to take the subdivision hings in order so if you
wanted to start making your way toward the chairs on item number 30?
>> and, joe, and gang.
>> what about $3 million of pbo?
>> oh, we went ahead and approve it.
>> I can probably answer that question.
>> the rebudgeting of using lesser bond proceeds to not have
to...
>> actually, my [inaudible] just the opposite. My amendments
I thought you understood.
>> > what is the deal on $10 million?
>> we have initially txdot will not need the 10 million to
complete state highway north. And then they got in some condemnation cases
so I said look, we're doing to go ahead and use our carbon other road projects
of this same type of bond so we're not holding $12 million in the bag for
no good reason, so go ahead and use the cash that we have on hand and in the
event they still need any portion of that 10 million, we'll go back and sell
additional bonds, so we still have the allegation to txdot where we are just
using our cash for other cip projects, but...
>> what do we do with txdot needs the money for highway 45?
>> guys it's yet to be determined whether they do. They're
not telling me right now they absolutely need it. The outcome of their condemnation
case will decide just how much of that they will need. So we may need, I don't
know, months, maybe years before we know that. And then when we do k we'll
go ahead and program it in for additional issuance.
>> the ten million dollars is sealed?
>> no, it's in road bonds.
>> road bonds?
>> road bonds, right.
>> okay.
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:
Wednesday, October 26, 2005 2:27 PM