Travis County Commissioners Court
March 21, 2006
Housing Finance Corporation
Now let's call back to order the Travis County housing finance corporation. Number one is to consider and approve request to approve an invoice for the Travis County employees wellness program.
>> good afternoon. I知 manager for the corporation and I received a request from dance mansour from the wellness committee to pay an invoice from sear's and this is for two exercise bikes.
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> is this to pay an invoice or to approve an invoice, meaning that they're not here yet, but --
>> they're ordered.
>> they're ordered. Is that what it means?
>> it's to pay and approve. Right. The invoice is not here yet.
>> the equipment is not here yet?
>> right. The equipment is not here.
>> they'll have to order it, yet.
>> we need to order it and it will be here April 12th.
>> where does this lead? I see a gym niceium getting here soon. Trampolines. We are not in the business of opening a spa. I am very pleased -- I know it's a long way, but it sturts getting there. Pedometers, how many did we buy?
>> I believe 450.
>> and that's the status on the pedometers? I know that some people wear them and use them a lot. I think all 400 are using them a lot?
>> I wouldn't say all 400, but I would say the majority are using them. We've gotten requests for second and third pedometers from people who have won them out or broken them or lost them.
>> how many are b and c? I mean, I don't -- I知 really pleased with the wellness program. I mean, it's really, I think, done remarkable things and as you know, I was probably one of the bigger critics and skeptics of it. But it's done a good job and turned some people into doing some things they wouldn't do. But this is frightening me with exer cycles and when do you use them, do you need showers? I mean, do you get your gym clothes handed out to you? I just -- just be careful with me on this thing. I know that I知 just one up here, but there are a lot of places in town you can do this. There are a lot of places in town that you can go and get deals. We have a great deal I think if it's still offered us with the downtown place. So I don't want this thing to be moved by a very few people that want to see this thing happen because I just think that pretty soon somebody goes, I don't get enough exercise with the exercycle. I want a rowing machine and I want...
>> the purpose of having the recumbent bike in the exercise room is so individuals can learn to increase their heart rate progressively and to manage it that way. We have dr. Turner, who is doing some of the training, we have leta core milk, a certified trainer. I think he told me he had 13 people in the class this past hour. So it's both training and exercise. And I expect people that want to develop the capability of doing this will take their exercise into a gym or into their home.
>> okay. If we let it clearly be known that we're not moving towards opening a gym, then I知 probably okay with it.
>> I think our little room is not quite large enough for a full gym.
>> but we seem to find places for wellness clinics and -- we're looking for a way to make it a slim gym. You hear what I知 saying. I just want us to be careful with this move.
>> I understand.
>> did the doctor say -- last time you came up before the Commissioners court on this and we had in-depth conversation on the equipment that we thought would be the most beneficial. As far as dealing with the heart rate and things like that, if I could understand what happened and recollect correctly, and that was that these particular bicycles are better for -- you can get just as much out of this as -- more out of it than walking, if I can remember right. In other words, you can walk, walk, walk, but they were saying the bicycle riding and things like that, these particular apparatus is just as or more beneficial than actually having a walk. And I think I remember something to that magnitude.
>> I think you're correct. I think your recollection is correct. It gets your heart rate up faster. And not so much as on the treadmill because it's lesser impact on the knees and hips.
>> okay.
>> it's not -- that's not absolutely the case. I mean, a recumbent versus a bicycle, it depends on what stress -- you can put it in different modes. You know, you can get as much -- granted, people can't walk the stairs, but -- some people can't walk the stairs, but you want -- there are a lot of ways to get your heart rate up. Like what we've got going today.
>> I don't know about the idea of one bicycle and one treadmill.
>> we did canvass the employees that come in and the bikes won out.
>> this is the home of lance armstrong, remember?
>> I haven't ridden a bike in five years. I hadn't been on a treadmill in six hours. But let the people speak. This is a typical delivery within two to seven days. You say we are about -- we will have them when?
>> they're on a back order and they will be in April 25th.
>> we can't go up to sear's and get the same deal?
>> we've checked all the sear's stores and they are not to be found in any of the stores. They're all on back order.
>> there goes my leadership opportunity here at the opportunity here county. I値l keep exercising at home. All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. My last suggestion is let's get delivery before we hand the check over.
>> thank you.
>> number two, consider feasibility of creating the Travis County education and housing corporation, adopt a resolution and take any other appropriate action.
>> as you recall, we had several agenda items and discussions about the scholarship program, which is the principal rationale for setting up an education and housing corporation that would be -- a tax exempt 501(c)3 organization. I have talked with the american housing foundation people, the organization that approached the corporation about the scholarship program. They have assured me that they're still intending to implement or provide the funds for the scholarship program, that their delay is due to needing an i.r.s. Private letter ruling on how they can spend funds on an apartment complex that they are negotiating, selling in florida. However, if the scholarship program doesn't happen, which, you know, we can't be sure that they will come through, even though they promise and promise that they will, the -- this corporation, which would be an arm of the housing finance corporation, can serve useful purposes in that we could have a vehicle for people to make donations for affordable housing projects that could be used by the housing finance corporation. The principal donor that I can think of right now would be commercial banks that have community reinvestment act obligations and which we have received in the past funding from a bank, but they need a vehicle, a nonprofit organization, to make those kind of payments to.
>> so do we have -- we've never got our arms completely wrapped around the american housing foundation who had left the discussion before us as far as the scholarship program that would come from the procedures as far as what they came before us to deal with. I don't mind going in the direction -- I think it's a good idea to have a vehicle in place as far as dealing with the scholarship programs and stuff like that for other persons -- for other entities to participate, but I知 still kind of concerned on where we are with the american housing foundation since it was kind of predicated on what they had discussed themselves and here we are today trying to have something-- to receive those type of contributions. So my concern is still because they said a lot of interesting things back then and it stirred up a lot of interest in the community, especially with the first time family member being able to attend a college and we'd be able to qualify for some of these particular monies that would be made available through what they had said to us at this time. So I知 kind of concerned, we're concerned that they need to -- as Gerald Daugherty would say, belly-up to the bar and see if that's what the real intentions -- are they still intending to do those things.
>> all I can do is report to you that I have talked with them in the last week. That they have expressed to me their intention to implement this program. That they're still on board and that they -- however, they do not expect to be able to complete the sale of the -- they're selling two apartment complexes, one in Travis County and one in florida, and this completion of the sale is being -- is what has been reported to me is being held up because they're needing this i.r.s. Letter ruling and that they would not be able to -- be able to close on the refinancing transaction until about June. So there's no guarantee that if the board approves establishing this corporation and we go down the road of submitting the paperwork to get the 501(c)3 status that we would have a scholarship program to -- for it to receive funds.
>> so I guess then the refinancing aspect of this, I didn't know it was predicated or contingent on the sale of properties. I thought that the whole intent -- I知 saying that the american housing foundation, I thought the whole intent was for them to come before us looking at the opportunity as far as us allowing them to do the refinancing which would of course realize the profit because of the way the refinancing had taken place to move forward.
>> and you're correct. When they first approached us, that was -- they told us they wanted to refinance their five apartment complexes in Travis County and use the savings by having tax exempt bonds. They were going to share the savings and provide funds for a scholarship program. Then in December they said, well, we've suddenly had these great offers to sell two of the apartment complexes. This is a booming market in Austin and we have an opportunity to sell these at a great price and we need to complete that transaction before we can do the refinancing transaction. So that is what's happened as far as why -- why this delay has happened and what's been expressed to me.
>> I知 just trying to figure out now where did that put us? What disposition did it put us in hire to these kind of things that have just been revealed. I don't really know, but I知 still holding on to the belief that something will happen positively for us to move forward, especially in the scholarship program for these -- the persons in this community that really kind of looked to us to move forward to this. Judge, that's where I知 at on this.
>> Commissioner Daugherty?
>> this thing may be a lot more innocent than what it sowrndz, but -- sound, but it is a little disturbing to see these things start unfolding or unraveling a little bit. We are in a position that we're beholding to this. We make fees off of it. We have a need -- we have a desire to do these things. But whenever you read the recap of what's going on now where these things seem to be owed, we weren't really sure that we knew we were going to have an opportunity, oh, we're going to sell one of the properties in florida. I mean, then you start asking yourself, well, is one of the facilities that you're selling in Travis County, is it something that we've done with you before, is it something where you've got the tax exempt bonds. Leaving a lot of not suspicion, but a lot of thing that lead you to believe that perhaps whenever you start dealing with folks like this and using our corporations that maybe not everything is completely set up and dealt with. I mean, I don't know why in the world you would -- I guess it's the transaction of -- the likely transaction of selling two properties that is smu going to spawn some -- that is going to spawn some questions about the 501(c)3 status, but it does. I知 like Commissioner Davis, it seems like after we've thought that we were buying a good deal, even though I can remember at the time that the scholarship thing was a good thing for us. It's got everybody jazzed because everybody comes and says it's a great prom, do it. What's the downturn? Only to find out that maybe there was something in the people's minds about how they were to do this and what may happen. Obviously it's not like we have any great liability here other than -- the scholarship deal was not an absolute guaranteed.
>> please understand that we have no relationship with american housing foundation at this time. Those apartments that they own in Travis County are financed with bonds that we have not issued or we have -- if they come in with a proposal and the board has agreed that they are interested in pursuing it and the ball is in their court to come back --
>> but we did agree to not object to the florida corporation refinancing these two deals, one out of state and one in Travis County.
>> at this point I don't think we've agreed to anything, but I do believe we've said that we would consider their requests.
>> we're not committing --
>> we have no objection in exchange for $300,000 for the scholarship.
>> and it would all be done by a florida issuer so we wouldn't have any liability.
>> let me ask you this then. What harm is there in us waiting and seeing if they get the letter that they need from i.r.s. To proceed with the two transactions?
>> none really. We can get the nonprofit corporation formed in a couple of days. If we need to get the application in and processed, that will take some time depending upon the processing time at the i.r.s., but anywhere from three or four months up to a year or so. When you get the application in, i.r.s. Kind of grants the conditioned exemption based on your spending and receipt of funds over the next year or two, right?
>> assuming that you ultimately get your exemption, as long as you make that exemption in the first 15 months of your existence, it's retroactive to the date the corporation is formed. So eventually it should all work out, though it would be somewhat of a timing issue.
>> I don't have any issue, but if two members -- do you want to hold off on this for awhile? I don't see any great harm in that. It's not like we have a contributor waiting on this being set up. I guess we should communicate to them that if they would let us know as soon as they get clearance and plan to proceed, we'd appreciate it. That way we will go ahead and expedite setting up the five o one c see so we can receive the funds as soon as possible and implement the scholarship program. On the other hand, there is still some work to be done on putting together the scholarship program, right?
>> yes.
>> now, if that's not real, real labor intensive, it makes sense to me to go ahead and dot the I痴, cross the t's. A whole lot of work has been done, because I know mr. Davis collected the dallas papers and some other scholarship programs too, right,, and we've been chatting with the housing authority. We seem to have momentum on those. I壇 go ahead and set them up and hope that this foundation does well and the money comes to us. That make sense?
>> that's fine.
>> well, I don't want it to sound like we don't have anything -- we don't have any skin in the game here because we do. We have a relationship with them, if nothing else, through the tax exempt bonds.
>> exactly.
>> and coming through the corporation, correct?
>> no, these projects are six projects in Travis County. They were financed with taxable debt at this point, so there is not -- in fact, if you'll recall, they did come and request the corporation to issue tax exempt debt to financees and the corporation declined to participate, and so they went ahead and the financed these with traditional -- they issued their own bonds to purchase the properties. So at this point the corporation does not have any financial relationship with american housing at all.
>> so is it strictly that the scholarship program is the only reason that we've got this before us?
>> yes, sir.
>> they will expect us not to object to the florida corporation relative to these transactions. And when we looked at it last time, I thought we were unanimous in our conclusion that it made sense to us as long as we didn't have to issue the bonds ourselves. Their thing was the florida corporation will issue the bonds. If you object, then they will have to go to the city of Austin or some other entity. Right, mr. Davis?
>> that's right.
>> and I believe there are some issues that they've got to get through, both with the i.r.s. And some other legal issues to make sure that they can -- that the florida issuer can actually issue this debt for those properties. I don't think that's been finally determined. If they reached a point where the florida issuer would be able to do that, all we would be doing is giving a consent, we would not have any liability on that debt.
>> how long would you say that they are requesting? As far as time lines are concerned? Dealing with the florida situation, how long are we talking about?
>> they said in June.
>> in June?
>> that was their prediction.
>> anything further? Let's mull over this. The next time it comes back, if we have additional questions, we'll just raise them. It may well be that there is an unsure monthable -- unsure monthable obstacle for them, but if they get the green light, let us know and we'll prepare to receive the $300,000, I hope. Let's skip to number 4. Consider and take appropriate action on request to approve resolution authorizing the issuance, sale and delivery of single-family mortgage revenue and refunding bonds, engine my may and fannie mae mortgage backed securities program, series 2006 a, approving the form, substance and execution of documents convenient and necessary for the issuance of the bonds bonds and establishment of a single-family mortgage program and other provisions related to the subject. I think that pretty much covers everything, doesn't it?
>> yes, sir. I知 here with ladd patillo, elizabeth rigby with our bond counsel with vin son and elkins. We did discuss this -- these bonds extensively last week and I think we're here for approval. The bond resolution, nothing has substantively changed last week. Other bonds would still be $15 million. We are -- as part of the resolution we're asking that the president be authorized to set the issuer fee once the bonds are priced and I believe the pricing is supposed to take place tomorrow. And this is so that the mortgage rate could be set at a rate that would be better marketable. You would want a rate, say, of 5.99 instead of 6.01. And so this is so we would get with president Biscoe after the bonds are priced to set the issuer fee and that would be the final component to establishing the mortgage rate on these bonds.
>> what's the market today?
>> the way the market is running today,, it looks like we did like 432 this morning on our g.o.'s, on these it might be somewhere around 470. And if we got that, we could easily make this 595 rate even with an issuer fee in there. But we don't know what the market is tomorrow, but we'll see when we get into it.
>> so the state does not have a bond program active now? Does the city of Austin?
>> the city has not had a bond program in several years. They have elected to have mortgage credit certificate programs instead of bond programs.
>> so if we close on these in the next few days, we would be the only program available? Locally.
>> correct.
>> and our program would be available county-wide, including the city of Austin. But there's some value in moving expeditiously if we're going to do it.
>> second.
>> move approval. So at the right time during the next couple of days, someone will say we need to move now. And if this passes, we'd be able to go ahead and move.
>> I think we ought to get into the market tomorrow and be in touch with you.
>> (indiscernible).
>> and immediately after that we need to get out word that those are available and what the interest rate is and down payment assistance is how much?
>> four percent.
>> four percent grant.
>> any discussion?
>> and it can be used in combination with the Travis County housing finance corporation's down payment assistance program that gives an additional $8,300 in down payment assistance. So that's a great opportunity for first time home buyers.
>> we need to move.
>> sounds good.
>> let's go ahead and vote before you change your mind. [ laughter ]
>> question. I知 sorry, I missed this last week. What progress do we need to make in terms of the disposition of this money to show that we are indeed doing what we promised to do when we got this allocation of funds. I mean, it's one thing to have a great program, but if people aren't using it, then it might hurt us in future years when we really do want to have an allocation and we haven't done what we've said we are going to do. How do the whatever appropriate entities measure success here that we have properly represented that we can indeed turn this money into mortgages?
>> the allocation that we receive from the Texas bond review board was six million dollars, and what they have -- and we have to use that money in order to be able to receive a full allocation next time we go back to the Texas bond review board for private activity bond allocation. What they have said is that in this 50-million-dollar program that the first six million dollars that is used outside the city limits of Austin will be considered bond allocation usage. So in our opinion, the risk is much less that we would be penalized in future years by a low allocation usage because this -- the way that they have said that they would compute our usage of the allocation.
>> so getting to what is really the heart of the question, and that is how have we been doing in terms of using up the allocations, and the allocations that become the reuse of previous allocations because a lot of these programs are limited to first time home buyers and a lot of people have become first time home buyers and they're no longer eligible. We've cut out certain portions of the county. At some point, is this the best use of this money? Are we going to make good use of this money? Because I think quite frankly there must be a reason that there are other entities that aren't offering the programs right now and it's not because there aren't people out there who don't need to get to house. It has to do with concerns about utilizing what resources you're being given.
>> and our past -- our usage in prior years of single-family bond programs has not been as good as it was, say, in '99 or 2000 -- 1998. We feel like that things are different this time because interest rates are higher. Which makes for better bond programs will do better when interest rates are higher. And in prior years interest rates have been historically low, unbelievably low. You're talking about the one percent type range for short-term.
>> and the lenders, our participating lenders.
>> right. We've had tremendous interest when we solicited lenders. We had $22 million in requests for funds, we limit it to $15 million, partially to address the concerns you had of not wanting too big of a program that we couldn't fully utilize. So we have more demand than we're having in bonds, and the fact that we have this window of opportunity where the state does not have a program and that the city of Austin and the city of Pflugerville, which also had to give permission about a population over 20,000, that they've given their permission so that we can market this program county-wide.
>> how long do we have to dispose of this money?
>> 12 months, with an opportunity to extend it for another six months.
>> what's everybody's been as to the likelihood that we will do exactly as has been laid out and that is that we will go through this money in the next six to 12 months -- the 12 to 18 months?
>> our window is shorter than -- smaller than --
>> Commissioner, I believe --
>> it seems to indicate we're in a rising interest rate environment, which is a good time to have something like this fixed. We've been caught in the last four years sometimes with the way the rates have gone up and down and other products are in the markets and other competing programs to where that's hurt our ability to get our money out. And it's just a matter of the supply and demand and the price. And if our price is fixed and it's a rising interest rate environment, I think that the program will go well.
>> what's the maximum mortgage that somebody can get off this program?
>> it's like 2 -- 220,000, I believe.
>> 220,000?
>> it's over 200,000.
>> that's based on federal tax law gives us those limits.
>> I知 just trying to marry -- but at the same time interest rates are rising, so are the prices of homes and the ability for a person to afford this, you know, to even get into the market. And it's just -- okay. Y'all can proceed on.
>> any other questions? All in favor? Show Commissioners Gomez, Davis, Daugherty and yours truly voting in favor.
>> I値l be abstaining, judge. I just am lacking some information here.
>> Commissioner Sonleitner abstaining. Anything further on this item? Let's go back and pick up number three then. That's to consider and take appropriate action on request to waive issuer fees on restructuring of multi-family housing revenue bonds, west chester woods apartments, series 2002.
>> the corporation issued $15 million in bonds in 2002 for this 250 unit apartment complex located in Pflugerville. Attached is a letter from the developer requesting -- informing us that they have had ongoing financial difficulties with the project, that the developer has had to put money into the -- into the trustee to prevent the bonds from going into default and that they are working to restructure the bonds which might necessitate a refinancing of the bonds. Our policy provide that if you refinance our bonds, then we have a fee of 25 basis points at closing. They are asking the corporation to waive that fee. If this becomes a refinancing arrangement, to help them in their financial difficulty. They did state, and I will confirm to the board that they have been and are current on paying their annual fees. In fact, they pay -- in this situation they're required to pay the annual fee on a monthly basis, so we have been receiving the fees ongoing.
>> what's happened is this property -- when they do these financings, the underwriters call for a stabilization amount and this property is not stabilized. And I got an e-mail yesterday that they have reached an agreement with the financing team, but I don't know the terms of it, but as of a couple of weeks ago they were indicating they were going to have to reduce the debt on the property by at least three million dollars. And so that -- whatever form this request will come to us in, probably in the next few weeks, will involve some type of restructuring or refinancing of the debt that will reduce the amount of bonds outstanding on the property by at least three million dollars. And they will have to come up with that through probably some type of additional equity financing. I知 not sure exactly how they're coming up with it, but our debt will be reduced considerably from what's on it now.
>> but they're not asking us to waive the monthly fee, just whatever closing fee we would get?
>> right.
>> and at the time of refinancing?
>> and they did pay the initial closing fee in 2002 of 50 basis points on $15 million, which would have been $75,000. And so this -- if this is in the neighborhood of 10, $12 million on the refinancing, that' fee would be 25 to $30,000, somewhere in that range, that they're asking.
>> and then --
>> somebody needs to reflect if we have to do any kind of work at all related to taking a look at this and passing through all the various hands that it needs to. Because quite frankly, the stabilization should not be on the backs of this corporation. The stabilization needs to be on the backs of the people who finance this deal to begin with. We have been asked way too many times to be the stabilization force and what it means is that the deals that got cut related to somebody getting tax exempt status and moving forward, they back out of it or they don't come through. And I just want to make sure that if there is some thought that they do need to go through a reif structuring or reissue wans, that if that involves work on the corporation by the satisfactoryious hands that tha it has to pass through that we get compensated for that. But the answer's not zero but perhaps the answer's not 30,000. But there's a number and I think it's going to be based on what works, what work gets done and that it doesn't get done for free so somebody else's investment makes money for the people on the backs of a tax exempt corporation.
>> they have not asked at this point for any of the professionals or other parties involved to agree to any -- well, those fees have been negotiated for any of the professionals, but y'all did not pay your bond counselorrer out of that issuer's fee. In a normal transaction that is all paid by the borrower separately and not all that fee you accept.
>> second the moas.
>> I think your question may be that we, our staff put in time on addressing these. The board puts in time within the county and maybe a couple thousand dollars or $5,000 perhaps might be appropriate to cover --
>> let's get expenses reimbursed. Expenses would be y'all's time, keep a record of that, and he's one of the more highly paid lawyers in town. But maybe that will provide incentive for them to keep our work to a minimum. But whatever we expend, we would expect to get reimbursed, otherwise we would waive the tree fooe and try to assist in that way. I would try to clarify that the monthly fee we've been getting, we would expect to get that at the refinancing.
>> that is clearly part of their request. That would not change.
>> I知 fine with that, judge. I don't want to get it too strung out. We've been burned too many times that we have to start asking these kind of questions in terms of making sure that the deals that got cut with this corporation are followed through on and that we use whatever leverage we've got and right now we have a little bit of leverage power. I知 fine with that, judge. We would expect to be reimbursed for actual expenses.
>> harvey, when this kind of thing comes up, how extensive are we at verifying everything that they are telling us? Because we don't ask for an audit, do we?
>> no. They're financial. No.
>> how much do you take them for their word? How involved do you get on making sure that what they say are their problems and issues that actually are -- it's real easy to say -- because I would think that the -- the thought in this community is not that apartment housing vacancy is up. I mean, unless you're really old properties and they're so worn out, but I don't know what the -- I don't know what the occupancy is in town, but it's well over 90%, I think.
>> yeah. I do know that this project has been before the board several times in the last couple of years because of their not being able to fill up -- fill their apartment complex in the time line that they're supposed to to comply with their tax credit obligations.
>> there in lies the issue probably, complying with the tax credit.
>> but we rely on the official documents at closing. That professionals and the applicant put together filed with other governmental entities are closed, right?
>> there's underwriters involved from the bond issuance side that underwrite it and check all the numbers. And at this point they've just communicated to me that the property has not performed as expected and has not stabilized. They haven't given me very specific reasons. We can certainly make that part of the requirement is that we want to know exactly what the issues are as to why this property hasn't performed as expected.
>> and this is up in the Pflugerville area and you talk about an area where the population is exploding and they have very few options related to multi-family up there, which is something that I think has held them back of kids as they graduate from high school and want to stay in the community, and they don't want to live with mom and dad anymore are people needing to have other housing options out there. They haven't had many housing options out there and this is needed.
>> assuming they'll move forward, we'll tell them as part of the application process there needs to be an explanation of the reasons.
>> do you have a motion?
>> my motion would be that we send a message back related that we would expect to have them pay the actual expenses -- what?
>> my motion is that they would be expected to pay actual expenses and other folks involved in this on our end need to keep good track of what we were doing and we would expect a follow-up report related to their stabilization efforts.
>> second.
>> otherwise we'll be inclined to consider the request for waiver.
>> yes.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Now, number 5 is to consider and take appropriate action on memorandum of understanding between the Texas department of criminal justice and the Travis County housing finance corporation for the construction of a proposed visitation center at the Travis County community justice center. We talked about this with alternative funding services, the general fund, allocated reserve of Travis County for the Travis County housing finance corporation and for a lot of reasons the corporation makes a lot more sense than the county. For one thing is that legal had some concerns about the county's ability to contract with the state in this manner. In my view we really ought to try to pursue a three-part contract but the law would require us to get the approval of the community justice council. And I知 not sure when they'll meet again, so my recommendation is for us to proceed with the two part with the corporation and the state, and try to work on getting authorization or approval from the community justice council to make it a three-part in future. I wouldn't hold it up, though, because the board meets again when?
>> in April.
>> in April. And we need to go there and tell them basically it's green light. But what I will do is get on the agenda of the community justice council at their next meeting because I think it would be in the spirit of collaboration, cooperation, etcetera, for Travis County and the housing finance corporation and the state to partner on this.
>> second, judge.
>> and we'll have to juggle this a little bit with mr. Davis over the next few months and see how the cash flow goes, right, mr. Davis.
>> that's right. I think we'll have sufficient cash to fund this. It's a little tight, but it's there.
>> and kimberly, if we miss the April meeting, it's like three months later?
>> I think the next meeting will be in July.
>> and they already skipped the last one. So we don't want to miss our window of opportunity.
>> we try to do everything we can when they meet in April.
>> I second the judge's motion on this. And we'll proceed and move forward as expeditiously as possible and get something back, especially with the other parties that still need to look at this.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Thank y'all very much.
>> this is related to the county's agenda. Is item 34 on consent? It's the -- it will be done?
>> the motion to adjourn passes unanimously too, 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:
Tuesday, March 22, 2006 7:57 AM