Travis County Commissioners Court
June 28, 2005
Item 25
25, consider and take appropriate action regarding implementation of and public outreach efforts associated with a new county low income repair assistance retrofit and accelerated by associated f.y. '05 budget transfers.
>> good morning. Sherlene walker. On may 31 I presented to the court the county's terpb's recommendation to the Commissioners about how to proceed to implement the low income repair assistance program as part of the early action compact. On that date the court unstrict turn to move forward with the preparation for the posting of a new f.t.e. Position to assist with technical assistance for this program. This would be a technical person under the fleet management division who would work with the recognized repair facility who is integral to this program. They are folks -- we don't know how many there will be, but they are the folks who will be making the repairs who will be getting the reimbursements from this grant program. And so we felt that was important to get that person in here as quickly as possible. The court put aside in f.y. '05 budget, you reserved $50,000 to implement this program. As you recall, we did not know whether or not some changes would be made to the program via the 79th legislature. That bill did pass. We did not know that last time I was before you. The bill did pass, was signed into law, house bill 1611, and went into effect immediately.
>> what did that bill do, remind me?
>> the bill basically did two things. Most important to us, it changed the parameters for what are considered programmatic costs under the lirap program. It said 95% of the funds had to be spent on retrofits or repairs. The legislature in 1611 said actually grant funds can be used to actually operate the program as well, not just for the repairs because if nobody knows about the program, it's not doing you a whole lot of good. And there was experience in the dallas and fort worth areas that they had quite a bit of funds left over and they could have used more to let people know about the program to pay for some of the programmatic costs such as the staff to run the program. So the legislature agreed that was a good idea. They also changed the eligibility for the cars. So it used to be that a car had to be registered in your county for two years before it was eligible to participate in the program. They changed that to one year so it made it easier for folks to participate. In your backup, t.n.r. Has basically put together an estimate and based on the years that we feel are appropriate for the actual programmatic costs. We need to get this program up and running before the September 1st deadline. We need to have our people in place, equipment in place, computers, telephones for the call-in center. Before the program actually starts on September 1st. But the contract with tceq says that we can't be reimbursed for any funds before September 1st, 2005. I just this morning received a new draft of the contract from tceq. They incorporated the changes from house bill 1611. There is a phrase in there that says all fixed costs are considered reimburse I believe, and I don't know if that does allow us, but right now we're moving forward with a few of theser marked funds to get the program up and running and i'll work with the county attorney's office and tceq to make sure that if we can be reimbursed for any of those costs, we will certainly be reimbursed.
>> remind me, when we okayed the $50,000, was it predicated on reimbursement?
>> no, it was not. We did not know what the legislature was going to do and so we put aside the $50,000 because from t.n.r.'s perspective we really had no idea whether or not these changes were going to be made. We also didn't know when the program was going to start. We had requested that the I and m program and the lirap program started in may of 2005. Tceq came back and said no, it's not going to start until their fiscal year 2006. Those were some of the decisions that went into putting that money aside.
>> christian had a similar recollection.
>> it was earmarked against allocated reserve of $50,000. We've recommended to the court, I believe in consistent with t.n.r.'s observation that -- am I right -- if this program waits for implementation until September 1, we know we can be reimbursed 30,000. If it gets implemented before September 1st, we may or may not be able to be reimbursed for 30,000.
>> the $30,000 is another --
>> public information. I wanted to just make sure that the court was aware of that issue.
>> repeat what you are saying.
>> if the -- my understanding from -- and this is written and material to the court both from t.n.r. And p.b.o., if the program waits until September 1, we are assured that $30,000 of the 50 can be reimbursed by the state, and that 30,000 is the public information campaign. If we start the program before September 1st, there is some likelihood that the court will not be reimbursed for the $30,000 worth of public information. So it's a --
>> it's changed since the last time.
>> it's a judgment call as to whether to wait or not.
>> but just so we're clear, under our new estimates that we went back and worked over since we last talked to you, it's approximately $15,000 are needed to get the new f.t.e. Here, to get the telephones purchased, the hard costs, the programmatic costs up and running before September 1st. That would leave approximately $35,000 for public education and outreach efforts to begin before September 1st. And there was discussion about whether or not you all wanted to proceed in that direction, and so we're just bringing it back to you to get your final say on that decision. Christian is correct, the $35,000, if it were -- if we did start that program, any funds expended before September 1st are not allowable to be reimbursed.
>> let me ask you this. The starting date of September 1, all of these facilities as far as the persons that would be able to deal with this --
>> recognized repair.
>> -- everything has been, I guess, confirmed that this was something that we can have up and going by this September 1 date, because it looked like everything is out of the chute by September 1st.
>> right. That is --
>> in other words -- I知 sorry. So I guess what I知 trying to suggest, because there's a lot to this, especially if you're talking about the lirap program itself, there are other counties that have dealt with the lirap program that were establishing doing this before we were though they were kind of mandated to deal with it ahead of us, so these things that we have in place to ensure that the eligibility criteria is in plays with h.h.s. Staff, all the staffing and all these other kind of things, something that we feel that needs to be in place before September 1; otherwise, after September 1, these folks may get left behind.
>> we'll be playing catchup and that's what happened in dallas and fort worth and there was a lot of confusion.
>> I don't want to be in that position of having to catch up because it just appears to me that eligibility must be dealt with, all the logistical stuff that needs to be on the table, in my mind, needs to be there. September 1 open up for business and we're ready to, you know --
>> the great news is we already have in place a very sophisticated eligibility review process in our h.h.s. Department. I worked very closely with executive manager sherri fleming and her staff. They are very confident they will be able to incorporate this program into existing operations seam lessly. They have a great computer system which tracks it which is wonderful because that is one of the key pieces that's required.
>> but as far as the low income repair, the lirap program itself, that is strictly for Travis County residents.
>> yes, sir.
>> is that correct?
>> there will be a separate program in Williamson county. They are running their own program. Two counties. But our program will only reimburse Travis County residents.
>> okay. Okay. So one other question. Do we have any comparative -- comparative data or any suggestion that we may can learn from as far as other counties that have had to deal with the -- with this program or how they dealt with the low-income eligibility as far as dealing with some of this for those counties that's been mandated. Dallas, harris county, I guess some of those.
>> data about how many cars are repaired or data --
>> yeah. In other words, what are we really getting into. In other words, what did they have to do or how did they match -- what can we learn from as far as what they are doing?
>> we've learned a lot from them. Our program is basically based on the program in the north central Texas region, which is a nine-county program essentially run by their c.o.g., council of governments. I've gone up and visited with them. I talked to them weekly about their program. I get weekly reports on exactly how many can cars they are repairing every week. I would be glad to share them with you. But that is basically the model for our program. The good news is we're able to do most of that in house, whereas the nine counties in that area contracted with their c.o.g. To do it and run it centrally.
>> contracted with who?
>> I知 sorry, their council of government. The north Texas council of tkpwoflts. But it's because they had so many counties getting involved. With a lot more population.
>>
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>>
>> ...there's not a grace period or sort of educational period between [indiscernible]
>> no, sir.
>> there's been some advertisement, psa's mostly that you have heard about the program. -- [speaker interrupted -- multiple voices] I have heard a number of them on the radio.
>> billboards went on June 1st -- [speaker interrupted -- multiple voices]
>> effective September 1, you go in for your inspection, you have this issue, you have to make the repair.
>> yes, sir.
>> so I misunderstood that. Maybe -- I hope for that three or four month period. Now so if we expend the 15,000 between now and September 1st, it would enable us to get equipment and do what else now?
>> get this additional f.t.e. That would be working with the recognized repair facilities in place.
>> okay.
>> which we prepared the posting as you directed last time I was here.
>> if we really -- say we gave ourselves a month to blitz the public education, public outreach effort. Say during the month of August. How much of $30,000 would we spend?
>> yeah, let me --
>> you wouldn't have to spend 100% of it, would you?
>> let me see if I can -- the $35,000 is [indiscernible] issue. Come September 1st, all of those stations that are doing inspections need to have something in their hands to hand to a person that may be eligible for this program. That's part of the public outreach. I think that does have to be in place September 1st. Even though props on the 12th, all registered vehicles in Travis County will be there on September 1. So -- so it will be taking place throughout the year. Only a portion of them will fail the inspection, a portion of them will be low income. But we still want all of the stations equipped. The second part of this is the mailout to all those target populations that may be subject to this program or eligible for this program. You might want to delay that until after the -- it becomes eligible for grant funding because I think people will start to wake up to the program September 1. And it will start building. You want -- you want all of your inspectors ready and prepared, including our people who work with us, so everybody knows how the program works, we know how to process the papers. We have public information papers we can hand to people when their vehicle fails. A second part of it, though, is once the information starts getting out, that may be the more appropriate time to do a mass mailout to say, "oh, by the way here's a program you might be eligible for". You might be able to split this in some way that you have? Some public outreach bare minimum before September 1st.
>> if you on goal is to be as fiscally frugal at the director of planning and budget would have us be, we would be able to go back through and pull out the specific pieces and say measure each one and determine what we think we'll need to do before September 1st? And then what we think can wait until after September 1? Then -- see what I知 saying? Because it seems to me that if in the end the success of the program really depends on how many people know about it, then you would spend a lot more if your public education level is higher, which means that your reimbursement rate would be higher, also. Do we have reason to believe that we will have an opportunity to get fully reimbursed? After our -- after September 1st?
>> no, sir, for the whole 50,000?
>> well, whatever we spend after this 50,000 and later.
>> yes, yes, yes, we will be fully reimbursed. The recommendation from t.n.r. Is that we definitely go ahead and allocate from the allocated reserve, transfer from the allocated reserve, $14,844, for the list of projects that is on page 3 of your backup memo.
>> okay.
>> then the proposed public education and outreach program, we recommended in the backup, that you go ahead and allocate, transfer that full $35,000. We could start with just a part of that to get some brochures manufactured. The brochures need to be in at least english and spanish at the very minimum or we could wait for the whole thing. I don't want to mislead you. There will be information at the inspection stations provided by the state and on the computer printout. Whenever you get your car inspected, you will get a computer printout, whether you pass or fail, that will have the application for the lirap program and our phone number on that. That will be there, but it will not be highlighted very much, the -- there will not be a separate brochure really talking about the program that the inspection stations will be able to hand to people.
>> why can't I get that information like at the end of this month? I have a vehicle-- why can't I get that information. Reminding me as of September 1 that program is going to be in effect.
>> I think there's a lot of people talking about it at the inspection stations, but you are not going to be hooked up to the machine, the actual emissions inspection machine is the one that prints that report right now. That's the only information that the state is providing at the moment. There will also be a brochure. I don't know if it's ready yet. But it will be tailored to our region. Their brochures for the dallas and houston region, our tests are different.
>> so why couldn't we --
>> I don't know when those will be available.
>> why couldn't we let people in Travis County know when they are registering their vehicle.
>> that we use those phones to do that.
>> on registration from the tax assessors office, the inspection. Let me ask this, though. If we say we need this english and spanish, pamphlet or whatever it is, and it's delivered on August one and we pay it September 2nd, is it a post September 1 expenditure. -- [speaker interrupted -- multiple voices]
>> by the way we will pay you for this.
>> I think what you contract for, at that point it's no longer eligible for the grant if it's done September 1st. Once you commit to that consent agendature, the auditors I知 sure will find some request for purchase, that's -- it's history at that point.
>> I wouldn't dare be deceitful, joe, but it seems this is the time for financial flexibility.
>> i've had so many invoices rejected under grants, I知 fully aware what they will pay for, what they won't.
>> we are agreement in the 14 a 44, right? In our challenge really -- isn't our challenge really to spend only as much of the 35,000 as we believe necessary to ensure the success of this program before September 1st? You see what I知 saying?
>> that's -- that is true because, also, [indiscernible] we are hoping what we are doing at least gets a minimum amount of information out for people at the time they become -- they need the information, it will be available. What we are not doing is generally broadcasting ahead of time that this program exists. So it's pretty much upon demand will the information be available to them. And I think what shelly was trying to do is kind of get out ahead of things, advertise the program before it even started.
>> we need to do that, too.
>> yeah.
>> I think to show up on September 5th your inspection and you pass everything except this part, this new part, then you are told you got to have this repair done before we can approve your inspection.
>> that's a different -- that's program advertising. Which is going on right now. What this advertising is for is primarily the lirap program, which is only going to affect a portion of those who show up on September 1. I think --
>> this is Travis County saying hey, we have some money for you and we're trying to relieve people's anxiety about this new test. It would be Travis County's opportunity to say, hey, come to us, if you fail, come to us and we will give you some money to make these repairs.
>> if the people who do the inspections know about the lirap program -- i've got a filling station, doing the inspections, john doe's car won't pass, I say john this will cost you x amount of money, he said I can't afford it. There's a program available in Travis County, you know.
>> right, there are some inspection stations in the dallas/fort worth area that are very good about that. There are others that are not so good about that. So you are just trusting a relationship that we have no control over. But there are some who get it and want to do a service for their customers. There are others who are just getting cars in and out don't ever even talk to their customers quite frankly.
>> maybe part of the performance of how well they are doing their job.
>> seems to me that we ought to raise our expectation of -- [speaker interrupted -- multiple voices] inspection station goes we have no report with. D.p.s. Certifies those, they don't ever have a relationship with us. There's two different groups of facilities we are talking about. There's the inspection stations which Travis County has no relationship other than we ask them to hand out brochures for us and talk about the lirap program, they don't come to us for money, they go to the state for reimbursement. Then there's the recognized repair facilities, if you come and get money from Travis County to get repairs made, you can only go to a recognized repair facility. Which is not necessarily an inspection station.
>> [indiscernible] I知 sorry, go ahead, judge.
>> how many inspection stations do we [multiple voices] do we think we may have?
>> there will probably be -- right now there are about 300 inspection stations in Travis County and Williamson county. There will probably be about 50% of those on September 1 that have brought the equipment and are up and running. Generally, after the first year, you are back up to about 75% of those. So 150 stations. Throughout --
>> service, too.
>> I知 sure we will hear those that are not good and can always find someone who is.
>> that's what this new f.t.e., that is what we -- this new f.t.e. Is supposed to be out there talking to the inspection stations, talking the program up. Making sure that they understand that it exists. That is what this new f.t.e. Person is going to be doing.
>> well, then you're going to get more out of this by -- if we are willing to sign-off from the 14,000, and there are only -- I mean, if you have to call every station, I mean, if that person were to say you know what the first thing that you do is to call the stations and to make sure that they have all of the information about the lirap program, where -- I mean there is no way in god's green earth that we can take $35,000 and make any dent at all on educating people. I mean, let me tell you what, I mean, we're pretty smart. Get your car, roll your car in, we voted for the emissions deal, we knew we were going to have these kind of things to deal with. You find out now when you roll your car in if it's September 1st. And I think that we do need to work with d.p.s. Or whoever it is to make sure that we are at least a partner to make sure the stations know that -- tell people what the lirap program is. Before we start trying to go out and do mailers to certain areas, I mean, I can just imagine what this thing is going to be. It's going to be bulk mail or whatever we would do. In my opinion that's not the way to do it. I do think we need to work with the stations and make sure they understand, they know who our coordination person is. If they need any sort of written material which they are going to have because the state is providing that.
>> the state is providing that one brochure about the I and m program that will have the lirap application on it. That's all the state, the state made it very clear --
>> the people will get that. I mean -- to get your car running, to get your car inspected, you have got to do this, people are pretty resourceful, I have to do this to my car, I wish I had known more about the emissions testing ahead of time, but we passed it, we're going to do it.
>> you are worried about getting word to the -- to the people who may need financial assistance?
>> yes, sir.
>> about the availability of the Travis County program post September 1.
>> yes, sir.
>> if we hit the county and city clinics --
>> uh-huh.
>> -- we will have a pure hit of a lot of those folks, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> but we control the staff that work at the clinics?
>> right, we have income -- other income verified programs that we could work through. We could also do a -- bill -- a lot of Travis County employees are going to qualify for this program, as are city of Austin employees, this is 200% of poverty, it's a pretty high level. We can get word out through, you know, that's 15,000 people right there. There are ways to do it free. There are also -- this recommendation 'em not pulled out of thin air. It's the experience of the central Texas cog, they have done extensive testing for radio ads for lirap or newspaper ads or a mayoral mailer and tarrant county spent money to do a mailer to their subtarget group population, that's when they received the most calls about the program. That's what it's based, that's why the recommendation is being made for that particular device. But there are certainly more than one way to -- to --
>> what method do we use -- move we use a total of $25,000 under 50 to cover your 14-8, give you another $10,000 as creatively as you can.
>> second.
>> and then in a month from now, we look at it and see how we're looking. Maybe in a month from now we'll have the person on board, the implementer, master implementer, then we will figure out how to go from there. -- [speaker interrupted -- multiple voices]
>> I would call the state, though, joe, ask tceq, say by the way we are thinking about ordering some pamphlets, we need them by September 1, we plan to pay for them on septembe 10th, is that eligible for reimbursement?
>> we will clarify that.
>> don't use my name when you make the call but [laughter]
>> that's my motion.
>> second.
>> half of the $50,000, 25,000, which covers the 14-8 plus another 10 plus thousand dollars and we have a report back in 30 days.
>> the motion must state that the transfer is from allocated reserves.
>> we will do whatever our budget director insists of having. On having. Including that language. It comes from allocated reserve from the $50,000 earmarked. Was there a second?
>> yes, Commissioner Gomez seconded it.
>> yes, sir?
>> I just have a couple of things that I would like to also maybe have you look at. And that is that -- that -- when you -- when you are looking at all of the other avenues of -- of possible outreach to make sure that -- to -- all of the other avenues of outreach, it would be good to do an assessment on the remainder of those dollars if necessary prior to September 1st. I think some of the discussion here we've had today suggested that -- that, you know, the hhs, the clinics, may be posted in -- in different places where people congregate. I really don't know all of the -- of the outreach avenues. But -- but it would appear to me that -- that if you all could basically come back and identify more of those outreach deals for the remainder of this $50,000, and if we need to necessarily move forward prior to September 1, I would like to see that come back to the court when you report back to us.
>> okay.
>> prior to September 1. So if you can do that, I would appreciate it. And I still would like to see what those other counties did, also, specifically, with that type of outreach --
>> okay.
>> it would be good to know exactly what they did to make sure they reached the people. I guess sooner or later, after everyone kind of get used to this, then, you know, your mission and goal would have been accomplished because everyone would know about the program as we get deeper into it. And as time progresses. So that would be something that I would like to see when you come back.
>> okay.
>> Commissioner Daugherty?
>> judge, I wish that we could vote on the 14,000 and the 10. I mean the motion is we have to vote on the 25,000?
>> uh-huh.
>> that's included in it --
>> I知 willing to vote on the 14,000, I知 not willing to vote on the $10,000.
>> okay.
>> I just think that it's throwing money out the window.
>> okay. Let's separate it then, that's fine. First part of that motion for the 14 -- what's the exact amount?
>> 14,844.
>> 14844. Any discussion of that part? All in favor? Show -- that passes by unanimous vote. Second part of that is the difference between that number and $25,000, and the motion basically is to use that as creatively as possible, to implement the program over the next 30 days and report back to the court so we look at the status and decide how to proceed from there. Any discussion of that? All in favor of that part? Show Commissioners Davis, Gomez and yours truly voting in favor. Voting against Commissioner Daugherty. Thank you very much.
>> thank you.
>> thank you very much.
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:
Tuesday, June 28, 2005 5:23 PM