Travis County Commissioners Court
November 8, 2005
Item 10
10. Consider and take appropriate action on request to identify source of funding for the following projects. A. Gardner-betts juvenile justice center renovation, 2006 phase 1; b. South Austin building, ada improvements; c. Post road building renovation - design phase; d. Eastside service center; e. Purchase of the south Austin building; f. Hot mix, f mix - tnr dept.; g. Drainage study - tnr dept.; h. Parking lot projects - tnr dept.; i. Arterials and collectors - tnr dept.; j. Other park/transportation related projects; and k. Mobile data computers for constables. Christian and I talked about this yesterday, clearly most of these are co issues, in terms of source of funding that is it. What is not clear and which we have to spend a little time on, would be one, the specific amounts of each one of them, I think that ought to be a listing. Two, would be exactly what part do we do in 2006. The reason that's important is that we need to start worrying about the amount of debt that we issue, right, mr. Smith? For example on the jail construction project, if we issue the co, then that's not even on this list right here. The question is how much do we do in '06? And them start looking at the other. Christian's idea made sense to me, that we give our, just assume, let's -- that we give ourselves a little additional time to study specifically how much we need in each one of them, how much we need in '06, then we total those up? '06-07 to do it that way, right? The other thing is that the county depends on how the election turns out today, also. We can factor in debt that's authorized by voters or if it's not authorize we don't have to worry about it on some of that.
>> well, you are suggesting judge that what we do today is look at these particular concerns and then maybe come back next week after the election to see where we are or what are you suggesting.
>> yeah, I don't want to assume anything about the elections. I think we need to let voters go ahead and vote through today, then we can see what we have -- and roll over for a week. Also in the meantime, that gives us, all of us time to figure out how much for each project and -- and then -- then I think we need to not assume anything.
>> mccracken: how much you need in '06.
>> yeah.
>> at some point we have to look at the total, try to figure from the voter approved stuff of those amounts how much we would likely issue in '06 there, there is on the white educational materials at the bottom an approximation of what we should issue. The other thing would be the 4 million of co's for the jail construction project exactly how we would use that. That's important.
>> for example on post road, I’m not questioning at all, yes I want to do all of these things. On post road I need to have clarity for next week whether the -- if we stay in -- in the building that legal aid just bought, does that complicate in any form or fashion getting into the post road facility in terms of how much square footage is available. So I just feed to get that cleared up. On the east side service center, clearly we are not going to spend 100% of those dollars in the first year. Because it's going to take some design, et cetera. So the question is is there a phased amount of what needs to be done during fiscal '06 to get it completely designed -- there's just that phase 1 work. The question is on the drainage study, is that even eligible for co's or did we get clarity that --
>> I need to ask david escamilla on that ir. From our conversation it sounds like it would be co eligible because it would be a contract for professional services. I would like to make sure of that, though.
>> we need to have clarity. Again is that all going to occur during '06 or is that one that's good to be a multi-year drainage study. A question of whether it can be split into issuance. The biggest question that has been raised by folks that I have been visiting with is try to be helpful related to the jail co's, since we are talking about that being a design build, whether that can be split into two pieces because clearly we are not going to be spending $63 million in one year. Now, we need to deal with the auditor because it has to be certified with the contract. But if the contract is written so that it's in two separate pieces, kind of like dealing with the helicopters, to help us out there, that we still get our two helicopters, but we worked it out in a way that made it possible to not have to have all of the dollars on a particular day when two weeks later we would have new money with the new fiscal year. So the question is whether the jail contract can have a -- a design element piece and then there's a separate piece, whether it can be split on make it easier for us to bond funds.
>> okay. If you want to look at this --
>> I’m sorry, do you have the answers to any of those?
>> we will take a week to provide the answers basically.
>> what I thought maybe would be helpful for the court is for you to see once the bonds pass or not, but assuming -- one or more of those propositions pass, we currently have cash flows backing up, proposed cash flows, which obviously are modifiable, but we do have those proposed cash flows for each of those propositions. I believe it was $39 million. In the first year. We have a $7 million issuance from the '01 authorization. From t.n.r. We have a certain amount of the 40 million-dollar long-term co. We -- and then to say in essence we assume all of the projects that have been put on the table, would be favorable to the court to adopt, not make any distinctions just say -- assume that you would approve them all, there are some -- some other projects that are not on this list having to do with building acquisitions, we can provide you with a range because there are multiple building acquisitions that have been discussed in one form or another. That will total a certain amount of money. We would like to show you what the impact on debt service would be, what the impact on the tax rate would be, what the impact would be on the homestead owner, what the impact would be on the white lines. That then provides you context, physical context for you then to go other layer lower which says this project, that project, post road, drainage, park, et cetera, timing, contracts, knowing whether you have or do not have a fiscal constraint. Some of you may feel a fiscal constraint. Some of you may not. But at least you see the whole picks up front. -- picture up front. We don't know what to do about the big number on the propositions. Does that make sense because most of these projects you have already hashed multiple times.
>> there is one other that I would be remiss if I don't mention it to the court. But just in the time that I spent at medical examiner's office, there is a -- there is a current capital improvement project for about 300,000. And I need to discuss that project and perhaps a change in scope of that project with my subcommittee. I am trying to schedule something for early next week, with both Commissioner Gomez and Biscoe and have facilities on join line and the doctors at the me's office online to discuss that. That may also require additional funding. I think based on our discussions this morning, how we were to do the fix on wells branch parkway, we need to make sure that joe can get us some more information about whether there are some other issues related to some of the costs of some of our projects simply because of steel, concrete, petroleum based products and that would include the f mix and hot mix. I think there's some things here in play, but we need to get a better sense of market. To be prepared in case some of these things have changed. It's nobody's fault because the market conditions changed, that hurricane thing.
>> is a week long enough.
>> we can do it in a week.
>> do a good job in a week?
>> we can do a good job in a week.
>> let's do a week, let's take a week. We will have all of number 10 back on next week. I guess a general item to pick up general items as alicia described, at some point need to be dealt with.
>> I believe the item probably needs rewording, the current item is source of funding, source of funding is very easy. It's fiscal impact. I think that you need to say fiscal impact of the projects, plus the bond propositions that pass, plus the authorization in '01 plus the non-voter approved bond for the jail, plus any other building acquisitions. I believe that -- we could work on the wording. But I do believe fiscal impact is the most important because source of funding is easy.
>> strategy on issuance and timing.
>> and timing because scheduling, you may want to do certain projects, but not necessarily do them all at once.
>> my note says christian will provide new wording [laughter]
>> okay. 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:
Tuesday, November 8, 2005 6:21 PM