Travis County Commissioners Court
July 25, 2006
Item 13
13. Consider and take appropriate action on certain requests to address traffic issues on brodie lane, including but not limited to the following: whether to close brodie lane to all traffic immediately north of fm 1626; revise traffic signal timing for brodie lane at capistrano and for brodie lane at green emerald terrace; construct a sidewalk along the west side of brodie lane from el dorado street to green emerald; relocate the school crossing zone on brodie lane to the signalized intersection at green emerald; e, use existing flashing assembly poles to mount radar-activated speed limit display signs; f, install new traffic signal on brodie lane at frate barker road; g, encourage the Texas department of transportation (txdot) and/or the central Texas regional mobility authority (rma) to expedite the environmental clearance and initiate the construction of at least two lanes of sh 45 sw from loop 1 to fm 1626; h, continue to meet with representatives of txdot, hays county, the neighborhood groups, and environmental community to mediate a plan and schedule for the completion of sh 45 sw; i, purchase right of way necessary for txdot to improve the intersections at fm 1626 and fm 2304, and at fm 2304 at frate barker road; j, seek federal/state funding authorization to upgrade fm 2304 from slaughter creek to fm 1626 and fm 1626 from the hays county line to fm 2304; and. K, execute advanced funding agreement with txdot for fy '08 stp-4c funds to improve frate barker road from fm 2304 to brodie lane. Joe, I did receive an e-mail indicating that we may be -- have created some confusion by referring to farm-to-market road 2304 that way. The other is manchaca or manchaca road.
>> but the correct wording is the farm-to-market road by number. It is a state highway, we have a common mame for it, but officially it's recognized by its numerallic number.
>> the intention was not to confuse but to be correct. However, for today's discussion, when we say f.m. 2304.
>> manchaca road.
>> we also mean manchaca road.
>> okay.
>> well, we have certainly discussed all much these issues in -- and various things. The list has grown over the months, so I think today is really a matter of making final determination on what, if any, of these measures the court would like to take action on. And I'm -- I'm available for any additional comments or questions if you have any. But I think that we have discussed this, we have backup that kind of brought us to this point. We have -- we have quite a bit of analysis on all of the different alternatives, we have met with -- with various neighborhood groups who have public hearings, so I think that we have fairly well voted the issues -- vetted the issues, now it's a matter of which one the court would like to take action on.
>> yesterday we chatted that we can break these into three categories. One is whether to close brodie. Two is what was your two?
>> other traffic control measures?
>> traffic control measures.
>> that might address the traffic on brodie lane. Short-term measures.
>> what we can do immediately, also.
>> that may provide short-term relief.
>> that's correct.
>> three really is working with the state and anybody who will help to try to get shhh --
>> the more capital expensive improvements that require third parties such as the state of Texas.
>> okay. Why don't we go ahead and take on the closing brodie issue.
>> judge, should we -- should we hear from -- from -- I know that we have a new neighbors that want to speak to this. I know that we have heard some of this before. But perhaps we should ask if there are any new things that -- that need to be brought to our attention with regards to -- you know, to brodie.
>> that's fine with me.
>> are you talking about the one that's live within the subdivision, the ones that live outside of the subdivision, what are you suggesting?
>> I haven't precluded anyone from participating --
>> just anybody that want to speak on the subject matter?
>> hopefully we will be a little more narrow than that. We have received hundreds of e-mails.
>> exactly.
>> I have read all of them at least once. We received testimony in court last time we had this discussion. However, we may need to be reminded of some of the points. I doubt that we need to be reminded four or five times today. But once or twice. And that may well be new and different points that we need to be -- that need to be called to our attention. So this is -- an opportunity for those who wish to address the court on whether or not to close brodie. The reason for or against to address the court. If you can give us your full name, we would be happy to get your comments. And we have four chairs available. To give others an opportunity to come, and to make it clear that there is a seat open after you finished giving your comments and you're done, if you would vacate your seat and let somebody else come and use that, we would appreciate it. Okay? Good morning.
>> good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak and I apologize that I have been out of town on every other occasion that I have had the opportunities, so I appreciate you open being the forum today. My name is stephanie miller. I live in southland oaks section 1. I have approximately 300 plus feet of frontage on brodie lane. I do agree with the points that you raised already that there is really some short-term actions, some long-term actions. I think everyone is in agreement on the long-term action about s.h. 45. I am here to talk to you about what some short-term actions could be that I didn't see on the list that was presented on the agenda item. I essentially break it down into three types of users on brodie lane. One is a feed through motorists, two are local motorists, three are neighborhood and pedestrian usages. I think we all agree that safety is our number one concern. And long-term relief is -- with s.h. 45 is another agreement that we have. Where we tend to disagree is how to solve the short-term or immediate problem. Feed through traffic does not want to have any kind of resistance to their traffic flow, whereas local motorists and neighborhood model, wants to have a reduction in congestion there be increasing the safety -- there by increasing the safety of our families and our children. So if you break it down, I agree that g through k, long-term, let's them continue to approach that. I hope you vote positively on those measures. But after looking at one of the proposals that we institute new traffic lights or retime traffic lights, I would have to disagree with that as a solution of temporary nature because I do live at the green emerald light. I am typically first on the scene with my house phone to be there to help an render aid to the victims of people who are trying to beat that light. Beating the light means speeding up to get through that intersection. There by causing a more significant accident. I have been on the scene where a 12-year-old was with his father in a truck, making a turn from green emerald, when a southbound truck t-boned them. Admittedly ran that red light. My husband and I have also been on the scene where a large garbage truck has won the red light, guess who won that battle? We all know who. Okay. So what I would like to propose is a very inexpensive solution, which might solve both the safety and congestion problems on brodie and that's just to reduce the speed limit to a residential speed of 25 miles an hour. 25 miles per hour would do two things, right? It would increase the safety of everybody on that road and those who want to feed through with the need to speed can use the 55 miles an hour manchaca or f.m. 2304 road to get to their final destination. But those people who want to use the residential road can be using it as a slower rate of speed, which would then allow everybody on that road to have an increased safety and that's what I would like to -- to raise as another idea that I don't see on the current agenda as a possibility. So I believe it's cheap, it's immediate, just put up a couple of sign, it's safe and it will be effective. Thank you.
>> judge, since you don't have david grier here, he's our engineer, receive fanny. Have you asked the -- the folks that have been meeting so far, you say that you haven't --
>> I have been out of town at every single one, I'm so glad it got postponed to the 25th, because I was out of town on the 11th as well. I haven't spoken to david --
>> I know that 25 miles an hour is a major issue for us in a number of places, I mean, we just came off of marley, I was through there the other day. David has real issues I guess from an engineering standpoint as to whether 25 is something that he can --
>> [indiscernible] basically an issue of enforcibility. Typically what we do is take the 85 percentile, go out there and do a time study. Set the speed at the 85th percentile of what people are travelling the road at. When you start posting speed limit, artificially below that level, people will ignore the speed limit and which means that you have -- you have a constant enforcement by your sheriff deputies and it's just very, very difficult to get people to conform to a speed limit that's lower than what they feel they can travel the road safely. And that's -- that's what the issue is. Your ability to -- to dedicate enough resources to actually enforce the lower 25 miles an hour speed limit.
>> in response to that, I do know that there is constable hired by shady hollow that does patrol that area in addition to the sheriff's office. As well as I have been just trying to travel at 35 to 30 miles an hour down that road and people tend to see -- tend to see the 35 miles an hour speed limit as a 35 miles an hour speed minimum and the aggravation that I have seen tells me that people are -- local traffic people who turn when I see them turn behind me, no one is beeping at me. People who continue through the light that I turn at, will be beeping all along as they travel past me as I'm going between 30 and 35. So -- I believe it's the feed through traffic that wants to go through fast. Local residents, we are on our way home, going slow, you know, we know that it's for our own safety and the safety of our neighbors. So I agree with the enforcement, but I also agree that it can be -- I disagree that it can't be enforced. I agree that the constables at shady hollow provides as well as at the sheriff's office.
>> e, not only about enforcement, but about reenforcement, the signs that flash up to you the reality of how fast you are going, have been very, very successful. We have got one up in wells branch, the speeding on wells port, it arms you with knowledge of what your speedometer ought to be telling you in materials of your speed. They have also been using those with great success along the new access roads on mopac in terms of the understood tolled extension. It is a reality check of please pay attention to your speed, also a very low cost way to do that. Legal question, when you talked about people running through red lights, do we have the ability to do the red light cameras? That are being talked about? Certainly in cities, I think we ought to. We can't always have officers there, red light cameras have been utilized in other places with great success in terms of those tickets.
>> thank you, ms. Miller.
>> thank you.
>> good morning, I'm craig [indiscernible], current president of the villages of shady hollow, also the interim chair for new organizations at -- that we have established since the last court mechanic on this issue. Wotiwtz. I would like to give you a resolution, I will speak only to the issue of closing brodie. The new organization is a travis-hays alliance of communities. Goes beyond just roads, but I do have a resolution supporting keeping the roads open. I would like to pass that to you.
>> [indiscernible] folks down in pace county?
>> yes, sir hays county.
>> yes, sir, involves travis and hays county. The -- it will explain that.
>> thank you.
>> give you the original, judge.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
>> basically the alliances come together and support -- and support the improvement of roads, does not support closure of roads. And fully supports the -- the building of state highway 45 to relieve congestion. In the area. We have spent the last three months coming together as an organization. We have proved our -- approved our bylaws which are similar and we are modeling ourselves after the oak hill association of neighborhoods. And so -- so we will become a lot more active as we pursue other communities to join our organization. And be involved in this as well as other issues.
>> what you are saying, if I am hearing you correctly, what you are saying is the s.h. 45 extension all the way to loop 1.
>> yes, sir.
>> from 1626 I guess.
>> absolutely.
>> all the way up to loop 1.
>> yes, sir. We support that and we are also in support of keeping brodie lane open. And we didn't specifically say that in our resolution. We want to keep all roads open and we want to improve --
>> verbally saying that today?
>> yes, sir absolutely.
>> okay. Then I will come back and speak to the other issues about improvements which when that was appropriate.
>> may as well go ahead and lay it on us now.
>> all right, sir. With regard to the section 2, I -- I both for my community and the fact that we support those issues of b through f, we do take exception to the wording that's not present on this agenda item. That was -- that was from mr. Gieselman's office. It says that they would set traffic timing phases, to restrict the capacity of brodie lane. We think that's counter productive. And would not support any such movement in that regard. Because that just brings -- brings another set of problems and -- in their experiment I think they saw that -- that in the last couple of weeks, when you -- when you mess with the timing of the lights, it's backing up traffic, creating congestion where there wouldn't otherwise be congestion. Mr. Ken bresnin has already sent you a letter laying all of the specifics of his study in that regard as well as the -- the references as to why you would not could that. So I will let -- why you would not do that. So I will let him speak to that later.
>> let me say something about that. I agree and I spoke with joe this morning about it. After having come out and met with -- with, you know, you all, the shady hollow people, jim, a couple probably about three or four weeks ago when we were talking about these particular issues and the light at freight barker, frate barker, it was the intent of the room that what we were going to do with that light is to do anything other than it is -- it is something that -- that is helpful and controlling the -- the numbers that come up brodie lane. Now, some people may see a light as a deterrent, but quite frankly I mean what we are really trying to do with that light is to gap the things so that people can get out during -- can come out of their -- of the neighborhoods along brodie lane. So it is not my intent that that would -- that that is necessarily what this is for. I mean, some people may see a light, like I said, they see stop signs, they see speed bumps, they see 25 miles an hour speed limits, they see all of those things as -- as "negative things." really what we are trying to do is we are trying to provide -- given if we are going to leave brodie open, we need to find a way to allow some gaps in there, and a light is generally more effective than a stop sign we think because people will roll through that stop sign. Not to say that, you know, we don't have people roll through red lights, we do. But that's -- but I'm in agreement with that. I think that after joe and I talk about that, I'm not going to be supportive of -- of getting crazy with that light, making it a 15 minute light. I'm going to go through there. That's not the intent of that.
>> okay, well I'm --
>> what was written.
>> it did get yours, ken's, a number of people's attention, but that was not the intent of that.
>> and the last point that I would make is that on this point to see the restriping of brodie lane removed from the recommendations, I still would support -- a restriping allowing for -- for a middle turn lane that would allow left turns in both directions. I think that it would help the congestion and give people the opportunity to turn into or out of their community. And joe, photo put you on the spot -- not to put you on the spot, but david never had gotten back to me with regard to working with the city. I still support the fact that -- that even though the county makes all of these moves, if you don't deal with that section of brodie lane north of shady hollow, that belongs to the city, and you don't improve that part of the roadway, everything that you do is not going to have -- to have the -- the desired effect because you create another bottle next right there in fronts -- bottle neck right there in front of oak park. So that needs to be addressed with the city.
>> it needs to be addressed with the city just like we are trying to address txdot, trying to address a number of these things, quite frankly I can't hold the city down. I will tell you if we are though the getting back to you, it's because we are not getting perhaps the information back from the city. I will continue to work , you know, we work with the city, you know, all the time and we do know that you can, you know, it's like a balloon, you can squeeze it here, it comes out over heir. Those are the things that we need to deal with. And I think that we will continue to work with those. I mean the city has, you know, given -- has certainly worked with us on a number of things along there, I'm not going to give up on those things, but sometimes we can't get the word back as quickly as we would like. But I agree that we need to work with that.
>> related to the restriping, the only way that you can get that middle turn lane is to take it from the bike lanes. I'm here to tell you at least from this person's vote that is a losing proposition, not going to happen from my vote. Not for bike lanes. You have got to work with the right-of-way that you have got, if it means no bike lanes, not my vote.
>> we know that that was the deal when we met that day and there was -- it was the opinion of -- of the majority of the room anyway that -- that left-hand turn lane, I mean, different opinions. But it was pretty clear to me that the bike lanes needed to stay, that's what people wanted, that's the reason, you know, that I find that acceptable.
>> and the only point that I would make is you have 90 feet of right-of-way, you are only using approximately half of it. So you could do it and improve the road to allow for bike lanes as well. And so -- so I understand what -- what Commissioner Sonleitner is saying. You could do both if you had the desire to do them.
>> okay.
>> thank you. [one moment please for change in captioners] sfroo from our standpoint, very much appreciate leaving it open. I would oppose leaving the things that -- in f, so we would be -- we would be in favor of all of the other -- other aspects that you have there.
>> who did you say that you worked for?
>> bob fulbright, the president of marbridge foundation.
>> you oppose the signal at frate barker?
>> no, the communication that says that you -- that discouraging traffic from 1626, same thing --
>> got it.
>> what it reads --
>> it's okay [multiple voices]
>> sounds as if you are going to mess with the traffic lights to hold things up.
>> got it.
>> thank you for your time, sir.
>> thank you.
>> my name is jim mann, I am recenting shady hollow this morning for probably the 45th time that I have been before the david letterman show here. I appreciate you all taking the time to consider this. We have been down here so many times over the years. So I want belabor the point. The reason that we came this time was that we have been working on a regional solution for this problem for over 10 years and the traffic and the danger associated with it had just gotten to the points that we had to do something and this was the only effective solution that we could come up, we are proposing to restrict traffic on brodie. We appreciate the idea that there are other solutions that can be -- can be done on brodie. We don't really think ultimately that they are going to do much for the problem. But hopefully that will help some. We still believe that restricting traffic on brodie is the only solution that's going to deal with the traffic hazards that exist on brodie. As far as brim solutions that are being proposed, we are deeply concerned about the notion of restriping, it would force traffic to the edge of the road, eliminate the bike lane and pose problems for people walking on the sidewalk. We want to keep those bike lanes for the safety of folks in our neighborhood. Thank you so much.
>> jim, that's not on our agenda, that one did get struck. It was in a backup memo, it did not get posted.
>> as I say, for over a decade, you have patiently listened to us, we truly appreciate it. Thank you so much.
>> my notes say restrict traffic. Is that a euphemism for close brodie or just restrict traffic.
>> you can close brodie at 1626, just one solution. Another solution is to restrict at the peak hours, so that there will be less traffic during the times of the day when there are the most problems, during the midday, the extra traffic from hays county is -- is not as problematical as it is during peak hours.
>> how would we restrict traffic during peak hours.
>> we could have turn signal limitations at those hours restricting type of thing.
>> you are aware that that is, txdot has got to do that. That's not us. And they have not -- they have not come to the table saying that that is something that they will do and I don't know, I mean, you are an attorney, you cannot do it -- can you not do it? Do it, I haven't had them tell me they will, they won't. They have, they haven't. At this stage they are the ones, judge, that will really necessitate allowing that.
>> in the meeting we had with txdot, they at least pledged to work with us in every way possible. I think it's worth at least approaching them on that issue.
>> with bob day or somebody else?
>> with bob day, yes, sir.
>> thank you all.
>> thank you.
>> my name is charles [indiscernible], I have lived in this area that we are talking about longer than most of those subdivisions have been there. Traffic has always been a problem out there. Back when I was -- my parents used to bring me out on manchaca road, there was barely enough room for two cars to pass on the road. What we are looking at here, all of the discussion talking about closing and alternates and restricting traffic, what we are looking at basically, if you take it back, one sad thing to think about, we are talking about pitting one neighborhood against another. One neighborhood's children are more important than somebody else's. One school district, one school area is more important than another. And I don't think that's right. I don't think this court should fathom that idea. To -- to take one neighborhood against another. I live where I live, actually my -- my address I live in Travis County, but I own land in hays county. And I can see both people's point of view. I see the people's point of view in -- in shady hollow. I have driven brodie lane many, many times, I have watched and since I'm retired, or sort of retired, I have gotten to where I will follow people where people go. I follow them, I find that people that run the traffic lights and that speed live in the neighborhood. Because I follow them to their house. If you go out there and do that, you will see the same thing. But likewise, there are people that are coming from hays county or wherever that are also running red lights, going too fast. But that's true all over the county. All over the state. So what I'm asking is that the -- that the court think about that it's not just one neighborhood, it's a whole group of neighbors. And when you close one road, you put them on -- on 1626, you run them down to manchaca road, which is inferior track of road, cannot take the traffic, you run them right by another school, and that school is not sitting way back off in the neighborhood, it's sitting right on the corner of manchaca road and 1626. If you haven't been out there, I encourage you to go look at it. It is a mess. And nobody is doing anything about it. Manchaca road, you cannot -- I don't know who can travel on it at 55 miles an hour. If they do, they are crazy. It cannot handle traffic that it has. And through all of this additional traffic on it is again a very dangerous situation. There are wrecks on manchaca road, much more frequently than there are on brodie lane. So again I ask the court to think about -- about being fair to everyone and not restricting or taking one group and saying, well, you are more important than these other citizens over here. Thank you.
>> so can you tell me exactly what you are in support of?
>> I'm in support -- supporting the extension of 45. The improvements of 1604 and 2304 manchaca road, living brodie as it is, leaving it as an access for people to travel. At some point in the future, as -- as Sonleitner pointed out, it could be and should be upgraded. Brodie lane is a thoroughfare through -- from 290 to 1604 or back to those neighborhoods. Anybody that lives in that area, anybody that has seen those roads, seen the traffic, knows that it is. Just like manchaca road is the same thing. There's lots of people who live on manchaca road. I am sure that they would like to -- people that live on manchaca road up by, say, north of Williamson creek would love to be able to shut the traffic down, not anybody go out that way. You can't do that. We all have to live together. The city, the council, the Commissioners court and the state should work to improve the thing for everybody and quit playing these games.
>> charles, let me ask you something. If -- if you think that I'm a game player, then you don't know me. We have been asked to do something, well, what you just asked us, I would probably turn around and ask you what is the solution? The answer is there is not a solution. Other than building 45 southwest and all of us are supportive of that, charles. I mean we are not playing with anybody out there. We are not trying to pit one group against another. As an elected official, I have had a large number of people come to me and ask me for help. Does that mean that other people are going to be affected? Absolutely. I knew that from the get-go. It is a no-win situation for the five people that sit up here because what you have is you have competing needs. Everybody knows that pushing traffic to manchaca road is absolutely ridiculous. But everybody also knows that the amount of traffic that's coming up brodie lane off of 1626 is also ridiculous. So it is not a simple matter of -- well, do the right thing. Because -- because I will ask you, you tell me what the right thing is. Because you are going to pit yourself against another side. That's where we are. It's not like that we are out here trying to craft a -- a situation where we are pitting neighbors against neighbors. That has never been the situation here. What you have got as an elected official is that you are being asked to help somebody, when you help somebody you hurt somebody else. That's, you know -- so it's not a -- I just I always get a little bothered when somebody wants to send me, you know, an e-mail or give me -- or make a phone call to me that I'm insensitive to this. It is the fartherest thick thing from the truth. If I had the ability to snap my faingers and all of these -- my fingers and all of these would go away, my god every one of us would do that. It is a situation that is gut wrenching, a situation that there really is not a real answer other than 45 southwest and every resolution and I applaud everybody that's doing that, because it is the thing that we absolutely have -- that we have got to have. Thank goodness we have some people that just walked in, that are from congress. And I would -- I will assure you that I have been working with both of those offices to help us and to see if we can move 45 southwest up the list. Unfortunately, we are up against u.s. Fish and wildlife federal law. Federal law trumps everything with regards and that is the problem that we have with building 45 southwest. It is federal law that txdot just cannot automatically start 45 southwest next week, next month or six months ago. I mean --
>> but everybody understands that and realizes that, you know, 45, of course the frate barker probably, also a -- to bring [indiscernible] into the back side of mopac, the city of Austin I understand got that killed. So every proposal that comes around gets killed. But to close brodie lane at 1626, would be grossly unfair to people who live in the other neighborhoods.
>> I understand.
>> I mean, it's not a solution. It's a band-aid, but it's going to cause a lot more wrecks and harassment to people on 1626 and manchaca road as you just mentioned, all of those trying to go to 35. 35 can't handle any more traffic.
>> thank you,.
>> yes, sir?
>> my name is jerry werner, past president of the [indiscernible] ranch homeowners association in hays county. I'm actually making this presentation for my friend who is the current president of the [indiscernible] ranch hoa, jerry lazono who is out of town consulting today. What I would like to do is make the statement and then I would like to comment on some of the things that I have heard earlier that might be helpful to the court. Commissioners and staff of Travis County, thank you for hearing me, my name is jerry werne, appointed by the la ranch homeowners association board of directors to speak on behalf of our residents. I carry with me a letter authorizing me to speak on their behalf, which I can give you if you would like. As you know by now, we are residents of northern hays county, off of f.m. 1626, brodie lane represents a primary thoroughfare into Travis County. It's the most direct path to our closest grocery, drug store, many other types of shops and restaurants that are part of our everyday lives. We thank you for considering alternatives to the dismal thought of the outright closing of brodie lane. This would have been disastrous for our neighborhood, a heavy burden for virtually all of our residents. We remain concerned and contract for our shady hollow neighbors who apparently for 30 minutes of full rush hour have a difficult time exiting their neighborhood. We endorse therefore the reasonable efforts to offer fair access to brodie lane from shady hollow. For example no objection to the addition of traffic lights to brodie lane. However, we were alarmed at the t.n.r. Department's suggestion that a new proposed light at brodie lane and frate barker would be such that green time on brodie lane would restrict the capacity of brodie lane and would overcompensate for the frate barker approaches, unquote. As we have stated time and time again, the use of public roads is the right for all citizens, not just those in the single subdivision. Why do you insist on considering proposals that grant "special rights" to a few select citizens in one selected neighborhood? We do not believe that special rides or privileges are fair, warranted or in the best interests of generating community harmony. Again, our proposition is simple, straightforward and imminently reasonable. The use of brodie lane should be fair for all who use it. Every citizen.
>> have equal access to the road without the need for "over compensation" or the arbitrary "restriction of capacity" from non-shadow hollow directions, your t.n.r. Wording was offensive and the inclusion of such a proposal in the recommendation greatly concerns our neighborhood. But again we wish to state that most of the proposals from t.n.r. Regarding brodie lane were fair and reasonable and to those we have no objection. For example, we applaud the effort to increase the capacity of brodie by adding an additional turn lane. Please take our comments and concerns accurately. We suggest one correction to the t.n.r. Proposal, not a rejection of the entire content. Thank you for your time. That's a statement that I would like to make, I would like to make a couple of comments on things that I have heard earlier. I have consulted in an area called intelligent transportation systems, most recently for the federal highway administration for about seven years. And we were talking earlier about automatic enforcement, possibly, of speed limits and of stop signs, I think that's a genuine possibility on brodie lane. In fact, you know, that's going around, been a political football for years in the Texas legislature, but I believe it is now legal. I think that would be an excellent solution to ensure these gaps we are talking about, if you want to let people out. I would like to make one other comment, too, about the s.h. 45 southwest project. I have talked to some folks in txdot, there may be a way that Travis County can help accelerate the -- the availability of the s.h. 45 southwest. You may be familiar, there was a project from dallas called the high five project. It won all kinds of awards for being done way ahead of schedule. They did that with -- with some incentives to the contractors to -- the earlier they got done, the more money they got. It's an interesting model that worked out very well there. And I have talked to folks in txdot about that, I would be glad to -- to fill in the -- in the court about that, but there may be a way that Travis County can help add some of those incentives to get s.h. 45 southwest done earlier. So I -- I would be glad to talk to you about that off line.
>> jerry, have you talked to bob day? I mean because the high five project I'm very familiar with that, I mean, our problem with 45 southwest is not how fast we can build it. Our problem is when can we start it.
>> I don't believe that --
>> that is absolutely the truth. If --
>> the president of our hoa has a letter or an e-mail from the s.o.s. Saying they have no problem with it. At least that's what the letter says.
>> it's not -- and txdot has said it's not an s.o.s. Deal.
>> I understand. We believe that txdot needs to speed it up. I have been trying to get a meeting with bob day as a matter of fact. But I think once all of the plans -- I think right now is that the plans are taking their time getting done. There doesn't seem to be an urgency from my point of view anyway. Once the plans are available there, I think the issue is how to expedite the deliver of it. I think that can be done using some approaches to get it done. I mean the idea that that would take four years is really pretty ludicrous. The problem is on the part of state agencies, that's typically the way they tend to think. They work on designs and, you know, four to eight years the road will be there. I think we need to speed it up in this case because specifically the issues of brodie lane what that's doing potentially pitting neighborhoods against neighborhoods.
>> joe, aren't you -- you and I are on the same page with regards to the issue here. If we could start the project tomorrow, we probably could get the project done in 12 to 18 weeks.
>> I believe we could.
>> we absolutely could, jerry, that is not the issue, the issue is -- this comes from the district engineer, now the only person that I know that -- that usurps that is the executive director, I don't think that mike barrens would tell us any differently.
>> I have met with mike and I know him. I think that we need to exert pressure to get this thing done quicker. I don't know any other way to do it.
>> we have got -- we have got efforts that we are going to put forth, I mean, once we get this deal done to go to the commission because I quite frankly think that that may be something that we could, we don't have anything to lose to go to the highway commission and let everybody know exactly how important this thing is. But I don't want anyone to leave this room thinking that -- that this is anything other than -- 45 southwest, is getting it started. We can't go out there and move one inch of ground, I mean, until we are given the okay from u.s. Fish and wildlife, they have got to be eis is the thing that has got that thing stopped in its tracks, period. Now, if you have got other information that is beyond that, I'm all ears burke I will tell you as many meetings as I've had with them, jerry, that is really the issue here. Thank you.
>> but your recommendation is for us to do whatever we can to expedite construction of s.h. 45, that's what I am hearing.
>> specifically to try to get the plans done as quickly as possible. I don't believe they are done. Secondly, once the plans are done, I think there's a possibility for Travis County to put some of the incentives. I talked to a person at txdot about the high five project and of course that got a lot of accolades and stuff. The person that I talked to was up in north Austin, said that txdot is concerned about -- about those kinds of incentives because the -- they can't budget their money because they don't know how much they are going to spend on the incentive. So if Travis County could help provide the incentive, that would -- I think that would -- that would work, be it sort of a -- sort of a -- if Travis County could help incentivize the contractors to get it done early, that would be kind of a novel way to do it, I think that would overcome txdot's objection. I think there's two parts to it. One to find out where the planning is, why is it taking so long, light a fire under the folks that are doing that, two, to come up with a scheme to accelerate the deployment of it once the plans are done.
>> thank you, mr. Warren.
>> thank you.
>> yes, sir.
>> my name is [indiscernible] a businessman in Travis County, a residents of hays county. With regard to the issues on the table, one, I would like to say that we should not close brodie. Secondly, I have looked at all of the recommendations by t.n.r. I think they are well thought out. I believe at minimum they won't hurt, possibly could cause some improvements around the margins if they were to be implemented. Provided, however, that they are implemented in a professional way according to the Texas manual operating traffic lights. The -- the -- only other thing is a follow-up to my rather lengthy presentation last time. I do appreciate your indulgence on that occasion. Since the school zones had been off, I went out and basically repeated the -- the test during the northbound and southbound morning rush hour. The northbound rush hour was the only time where there was any kind of a backup or slow down of the traffic. Of that stretch. Since the school zone has been off, there is no traffic congestion, no backup of cars, it takes four minutes to five minutes very consistently across all the times of the rush hour from 7:00 to 8:30 to get through that section of road. 2.5 miles. The -- the fastest that you can go through there legally is four minutes. So -- so I don't believe even though there is a large volume of traffic on brodie, as a practical matter, the street is well designed, doing what it's supposed to be doing, I do not believe there are any traffic problems on brodie. I thank you.
>> thank you.
>> thank you. Anybody else on -- whether to close brodie or not? If so, please come forward.
>> good morning.
>> good morning.
>> good morning.
>> my name is marie white. I work for shade dough hollow homeowners association, I have had the privilege of watching this issue come before you from the grass roots all the way to where it is today. I really have nothing more to add than just to tell you that -- that as I have watched it, I have been reminded of the fact that it reminds me of a dr. Seuss story, horton hears a who. One of the things, I don't know if you are familiar with that story or not, but what it talks about is a small little community that is heard by a large elephant, not that I'm calling on the large elephant or big ears or anything but what I wanted to share with you is the fact that I know that I personally have seen how difficult this issue has been. Not only for -- for our community, but for our Commissioners and for this Commissioners court. I believe when a hard job is done, pressure needs to be brought to bear on people that are working hard to find a solution, that includes not only shady hollow and this court, but all of the people that are now stepping forward to look at the issue. This is my gift to the Commissioners court, a book that I hope, I know that we don't have a library in -- in Travis County, it's not intended to request that you start a library in Travis County. But I would like to -- to publicly recognize our county Commissioner Gerald for all of his hard work on this issue. I hope that you know that that means that we appreciate what you have done. I personally appreciate it. And I know that the people in our community know that you are working for us. I hope, I know that we will eventually find a solution to this. But the end of this story talks about us all, the horton and the other people who have finally discovered that there is a problem for a small community, all working together to try to protect the thing that is important and that is the rights and the needs of the people who really do reside here. In this country. In our small communities and in our homes. Thank you very much. And I would like to present this to Gerald at this point if I would be allowed to.
>> marie, there is also a real important lesson in that besides the one that you just mentioned there. It has to do with horton made a promise. And I meant what I said, I said what I meant, an elephant faithful 100%. The other side is that you have an elected official who made a promise to that community to not only hear you, but no matter what in terms of people saying things, people e-mailing things, people saying some not very kind things, made a promise to take your issue to the Commissioners court. And it is appropriate for something of this magnitude to be discussed. Even if it turns out that I think that it's unlikely that we will follow through with the simple request related to the closure. But he followed through with what he promised you. So that is also the lets son of that book besides hearing those that do not have voices, but people make promises and your representative kept his promise to bring this forward on your behalf.
>> I love the fact that you noticed that. Thank you.
>> thank you, ms. White.
>> thank you.
>> it's an elephant, Gerald. [laughter]
>> thanks, marie.
>> Commissioner Daugherty has a reputation for not sharing his books, so we will try to get him to provide an executive summary for the rest of the court to look at. [laughter] is there a motion on a?
>> judge, I'm going to -- as marie had mentioned, and I'm -- I also want to say that I -- that I'm appreciative of everybody that's gotten involved in this thing because it has been -- it has been probably the four years that I have been here, the most -- most contentious issue that I have had before me. As I -- as I continue to try to tell the people, it was never my idea to close brodie. But being the precinct 3 Commissioner, people came to me and said, you know, can you -- can you help us. I will say that the people did what I asked them to do, which is I need to get buy-in, I need to get a lot of buy-in. A lot of buy-in to me means that -- that I need 75% participation from -- from the neighbors out there and, you know, the five neighborhoods, I think the only neighborhood that wasn't part of it was the oak heart neighborhood. Quite frankly, I mean, then I said then I need 75% of those if you can get 75% participation, to give me a thumbs up that, yes, they want to close it. And I will tell you that when they left that room, I did not think that cindy and I didn't think that you could do that because I know how difficult it is to get two votes sometimes with me up here, I mean,, you know, when you have got five people. So thinking that if I got the bar set that high and that was something that somebody would reach, then I ought to respond to those people. That's exactly what happened. I mean we got a little over 57% participation -- 75% participation, a little over 80% of those that participated has said that yes we want to close it. I think that probably 99% of the 81% that voted for the thing probably would agree that -- that god this is going to cause appear another problem for some other folks because we have openly talked about that, knew that that was going to be difficult. [one moment please for change in captioners]
>> I second that motion.
>> seconded by Commissioner Davis. My understanding from legal is that it would take a unanimous vote of the court.
>> one vote against would kill the motion.
>> it has to be unanimous.
>> all in favor? Show Commissioners Daugherty and Davis. Those who --
>> it just died.
>> failed for -- you don't have a majority of a court.
>> and let me state this --
>> it dies at this point. You can go ahead and vote if you want, but two out of four is not enough for it to pass.
>> let the record show that our lawyer, tom knuckles, has indicated that the motion failed because it did not have a majority of the court support.
>> and Commissioner, I would like you to know that I seconded that motion basically because you had made that motion, you had given a commitment and of course you were bound to make that motion, and since you did that, I wanted to honor you as far as seconding it.
>> I appreciate that, Commissioner.
>> because you were bound by that. And before we go to the next motion, judge, I need to ask a question from staff.
>> there's more discussion that have motion, it looks like?
>> more discussion of this one?
>> I want to be respectful of the neighborhood. If you want us to follow through and give you who are the no votes on this order of abstentions, I am willing to respect whatever the neighborhood wants. Want to leave it as it is and it fails, it doesn't change the end result, but I want to be respectful to the neighborhood that if they wanted to vote, they ought to have a complete vote and not a partial vote just because that's where we can stop if we so choose.
>> procedurally the motion failed and the residents saw who voted.
>> just want to make sure.
>> Commissioner Davis, you have something else?
>> yes, judge. We did receive significant e-mail from those persons that live in that area that supported closure of brodie lane. Of course, again, as I stated earlier, it's important -- the Commissioner's motion, because he did make a commitment to the neighborhood and those folks that wanted this road closed he needed to have a is second for discussion. Otherwise his motion would have died without a second. Number two is that on h of this particular -- joe, if you could possibly give me an answer.
>> we can work our way --
>> okay. We'll follow the process. Okay.
>> b is to --
>> I'm sorry, this is about the closure situation, if I can --
>> this is b.
>> no. I'm still on a. One other thing about here. In terms of this closure motion, I think in terms of just so people know what my thought process was, I absolutely validate the concerns that have been brought forward by the shady hollow neighborhood. I do not want you to walk away from here and somewhere somehow think that your issues were not considered, they weren't thought about seriously, and Gerald mention this had on the radio this morning in terms of this is like solomon. You can't split the baby here. It's just one of those impossible situations. But if you have to ask me today, July 25th, 2006, whether it's appropriate to close it, I have to say no. Now, I will not be here in 2009, but if you were to ask me that question in 2009 and I remember this court and sh 45 still had not been started, I would vote to close that road. A lot of my vote is predicated on the fact that people have made certain promises to get things moving, and mr. Warner, wherever you are, we're having to work through this process. And everybody is trying to move this thing forward, but if that halts, boy, if I were on this Commissioners court then, I would vote to close it if people did not follow through with their stated promises that sh 45 is going to get done, ground will be broken and by January 2009 people will be going, oh, gosh, what that all about? It will have happened. So to me this was a premature motion and therefore I could not support it.
>> 2009 I hope to pull over, take my cell phone and call you from sh 45 south.
>> and I'll join you on this. And jim, if in 200945 southwest has not opened or -- has not broken ground, I will be joining you at those microphones there as well to remind everybody about the broken promises in this. I will join you, but I'll just do it on the other side of the microphone.
>> b, revise traffic signals timing for brodie lane at capistrano and for brodie lane at green emerald terrace.
>> judge, I do think it makes sense, although I'm trying to respond to the correspondence that I got back from the group that I had gotten with two or three weeks ago where that was not one of them, but I don't know that it is -- that it is necessarily a bad -- I mean, jim, since you're representing -- are you representing the association here?
>> yes, sir.
>> how do you feel about the -- doing this with the light at capistrano?
>> I think we're supportive of it because it would at least allow some turn possibilities for folks in the neighborhood. And again, we think then that would offer some safety improvements over what we currently have where people are having to almost force their way into traffic, which causes really unsafe conditions.
>> then judge, is that -- is yours a move?
>> I think we need to find out from joe what we need to do to make that happen if we're supportive.
>> the city of Austin maintains our traffic signals, so we would just write a letter to them instructing them on the signal timing.
>> but david greer, our engineer, said that that is something that if you just ask that that would be done.
>> no, it's not a big deal.
>> we have everything available to make this happen.
>> I move approval.
>> immediately.
>> second.
>> discussion? Any objection to b that we need to hear about? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. C is to construct a sidewalk along the west side of brodie lane from el dorado street to green emerald.
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> how long would it take to make this happen, mr. Gieselman?
>> we need to have our sidewalk contract amended, actually probably put in place first and then amended to include this section of sidewalk. I don't think it will be a funding issue.
>> this is designed to assist those walking to and from school?
>> right.
>> promote safety?
>> that's right.
>> any opposition? Allin favor? That passes by unanimous vote. D, we locate the school crossing zone on brodie lane to the signalized intersection at green emerald. We have the authority to do that?
>> we do.
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> working with the school district? Or on our own?
>> that's actually our own call. We certainly advised the school district, but where we place the traffic zone is our decision.
>> this will help, we think?
>> it will actually improve I think by crossing the amount them at a signalized intersection.
>> any opposition?
>> [ inaudible ].
>> do that? Anything else? All in favor? That carries unanimously. E is use existing flashing assembly poles to mount radar-activated speed limit display signs.
>> that's another thing, jim, that wasn't on y'all's list, but I can't imagine that that's not something that would be helpful.
>> the display sign is actually provided by the hoa. This is -- they just asked that they be able to mount it on the pole that we vacate when we move the flasher.
>> our community is going to supply the flashing speed limit.
>> those do seem to help those who are heavy on the pedal. There's an issue or problem, you come back and let us know. Please come forward. This is one of those signs that says if it's a 35 speed limit and it's 45, 45 flashes.
>> that's right.
>> I appreciate the fact that the shady hollow m.u.d. District would provide those, but I think that's an unfair burden on those people that are paying those taxes and that it should be provided by the county. And I would ask the county to come up with the funding for that as opposed to having the m.u.d. District do it.
>> the wells branch m.u.d. District worked cooperatively with Travis County in a joint project and therefore you're not being asked to do anything another neighborhood is not volunteered to do on their own.
>> if there's an issue with the funding it will be brought back to court. We may need to pass the hat on this one. We'll get it done, though. Any more discussion of e? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. F? New traffic signal on brodie at frate barker.
>> judge, I certainly will support this. And obviously with the language out of what we've had -- it wasn't part of the agenda, so it really is not an issue, would not be an -- with it not being on the agenda.
>> Gerald, in terms of funding on this one, is that going to be a part of the ftp 4 c project because of what's going on on frate barker between that segment? Can that be part of that?
>> I think this is a short-term measure. You can actually get the signal in much quicker than we can --
>> I was thinking more in terms of funding when it's an eligible expense under. Under --
>> probably would be eligible, but it might delay.
>> we don't want anything to delay.
>> name then comments, please.
>> I live at 3206 twilight trail. I wonder why we need the traffic light at frate barker and brodie. I take that route everyday when I go to my post box. I also take it when I go over to manchaca to go over to the bus stop to go into town on rush hour. I've never had a problem in either direction at that road. The traffic is spaced by the light that's at 1626 and it's spaced by the light that's up at capistrano. So there's always an ability to get out. Unlike the intersection at manchaca where frate barker people are turning left and they have to cross traffic. The people who are coming outgoing to Austin on brodie come out and turn right and so there's -- I don't see the need for the traffic light. From the west there is no traffic because the road is blocked. So you're really talking about a single road of which the majority of the traffic is turning north.
>> tell me your name again.
>> don.
>> don, let me tell you -- and I may agree with part of that with you, but let me tell you one reason I think that it's needed. If you go out there and you find the speed between 1626 and slaughter lane, the area that has the most excessive speed is that area. Now, at first I thought about a stop sign. I said let's just get people stopped, but if for no other reason, I'm also trying to do something with some speed out there. But the main reason I'm supportive of it is that we've gone over this with the neighborhood group and this is something that -- just another thing that we feel like that we can -- is another tool to space the traffic. And you're right, you're going to come to emerald green, but if you can stop some, a few down the road, maybe you'll have fewer at green emerald.
>> the idea might be useful if the traffic lights could be synchronized. I don't see that happening, particularly because of the distances involved.
>> I think that we will be able to adjust -- if we see that we need to make some adjustments on synchronization with the lights or whatever, then I'm happy to take a look at that at some point in time, but at this stage I'm certainly supportive of the light at frate barker.
>> here's another reason. Today you can indeed get out of there, but there have been some platting decisions that have been made by this Commissioners court and there was a thing on -- I was watching a replay or it was live at the city of Austin. You have no idea how many more subdivisions are coming in, and in fact I stopped voting for any more subdivisions coming -- that take access off of frate barker, but they keep coming and they've been approved and you have no idea what's fixing to hit you in terms of what's been approved for construction. So to me this is proactive as opposed to where the heck is the light? We do it when we see the need that's coming down the line. I'm glad you can get out now. I don't think I could -- you could make that same statement 18 months from now. It's going to get bad.
>> if I could make a very quick comment. Jerry werner again. It seems there's two issues, speed and access. You're trying to use a stoplight for the speed issue right now, but that's not necessarily the best technology to use for that. We talked earlier, perhaps some of the signs that show what speed -- is that where you're going to put some of these signs on brodie lane, showing people what speed it is or if you want to have automatic enforcement, that's something specifically designed for speed. I think a stoplight is more for the access issue. As he says, the access is not an issue right now. Your point is it may be down the road.
>> oh, it's happening. We have platted so much stuff off of frate barker, you have no idea what you're going to get hit with.
>> traffic lights can be installed fairly quickly.
>> no, sir, they can't.
>> don, here is the way it really is. We are trying to do as many things up and down this road that we can to assist these people and still have the traffic coming down the road. I'd be telling you something that wasn't true if I told you anything other than the fact that this is -- we've got buy in from folks, we're trying to get people to a spot where they feel like they're getting something short of -- not getting the road closed and we can come up with all sorts of ideas about speed and access and those kind of things, but that's the reason I'm really for it.
>> this is recommended by the county engineer, joe?
>> yes, it is.
>> any more discussion? Did we get a motion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Now, if we were to look at g, h, i, j and k, they really pertain to a strategy that requires us to work with txdot and others, right? So why don't we try to have one motion to try to cover all of these. And let's --
>> I'm not going to be able to support one motion for all because I have some significant -- I had a question.
>> you want to go through individually.
>> I think so.
>> then let's take g.
>> I wish I could take h first, if you don't mind, because I have a question about h and it's going to impact on what we do about g.
>> h is to continue to meet with representative of txdot, hays county and the neighborhood groups and environmental community to mediate a plan and schedule for the completion of sh 45 southwest.
>> my question is, joe, where is the environmental community at this point on sh 45 southwest? And I know that u.s. Fish and wildlife, they have their thing that we still need to adhere to and also obey until whatever happens with that position as far as those folks are concerned, but at the end of the day I have not heard specifically -- I've heard a lot of comments from a lot of folks, but I have not heard specifically where is the environmental group in h on this particular sh 45 southwest project? Where are we with that group?
>> I'm really not I think in a position to represent the environmental community. And further, I don't think there is a single voice necessarily in the environmental community on 45. People speak of s.o.s. And we certainly have talked with s.o.s., but I think there's a broader environmental community, and I'm just not in a position to voice an opinion for a broad segment of our community on this issue.
>> well, I saw it on h and I know it's just maybe for future discussion and stuff like that, but the environmental community I have not heard from them per se as far as what are we going to end up dealing with and how do we deal with sh 45 southwest. So that's my concern at this point. So I just wanted to bring it out, judge, and maybe see exactly where we are in this particular h stage of this and just maybe we need to hear from the environmental community also.
>> judge, let me make a comment on that. Commissioner Davis, I think you're probably reading that fairly accurate in that s.o.s., even though they've come to the table with us on this whole brodie lane and have told us that they're willing to help us with this, but you have heard them come before us and s.o.s. Is not supportive of any road that's being built over recharge or contributing zone. So I would think that if you were to ask them what their stance would be, they'd probably say we're not supportive of that. I'm just giving you that in my opinion because I don't want you to feel like you're jeopardized that you may be safe on this deal abstaining.
>> but when you say meet and mediate a plan, joe, what do you mean?
>> it's a fairly complicated issue. It ranges from anything from direct mitigation of water quality effects of the highway, which I think the state is very focused on, and that has to do with wait the highway is designed.
>> the hope is to meet with interested parties and discuss the issue --
>> and mediate in part because it ranges from not building 45 because the fear of it inducing corral development over the aquifer. That's one set of issues. So mitigating direct impacts of the highway itself. So mitigate means where in all of this do we go to get a highway built, but still mitigate its environmental impacts.
>> but the implication is to really work through the issues and try to get sh 45 southwest constructed.
>> that's right.
>> and if the meeting, etcetera, lead us to the conclusion that we cannot get 45 southwest done, what that tells us is we've got to move to another strategy. I mean, I'm trying to be as positive as everybody, but there is the possibility that this road can't get done. If not, the problem doesn't go away. It will require us to do -- take some other steps to address it basically.
>> and I will be supportive of this item when it is made for a motion. And second, I'll move, because it's always good to talk, it's always good to see what everybody's issues are, but I am absolutely going to be respectful of the voters in 1997 that at the same time that we were approving things related to brodie, sh 45 was approved on a separate ballot proposition by more than two to one margin. So I'm going to be respectful of the voters. This has been in the campo long range plan for the 12 years that I have been on campo, so in this case I don't say this is -- I'm not going to pay any attention to the environmental concerns. I think the environmental concerns and the mobility concerns can be both addressed. It's not one or the other, it is both. And we have a fiduciary responsibility. We've already bought the right-of-way, so I'm not going to walk away from something just saying oh, this is hard, I don't want to work on this anymore.
>> well, the spirit of this is for us to move sh 45 southwest to the front burner. And do what we can to get the project done.
>> to the extent that we in Travis County can serve as an intermediary between txdot and the environmental community, I think we may be in a position to do that.
>> how can we be helpful.
>> or we have objectives on both side. We are a permit holder of the bcp. The environment is one of our core businesses, so we watch out sfrierment, but we also want mobility. And I think we have a role in both areas. So to that extent we hope that we may influence the discussions going on between the state and the environmental community.
>> and the environmental community is hopefully here because we want -- any more discussion of the motion? Show Commissioners Sonleitner, Daugherty, yours truly voting in favor.
>> and I'd like to abstain until I know more detail about the environmental community.
>> g is encourage txdot and rma to expedite the environmental clearance and initiate the construction of at least two lanes of 45 southwest from loop 1 to fm 1626.
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> the spirit here is if the four-lane project is the problem, try to get the two-lane done asap.
>> two lanes would get the traffic done on brodie lane. We're focused on at least two lanes. That's not the way it was being designed, but if we can get two lanes built it will certainly help.
>> four possible, two if not.
>> and this is a voter approved project.
>> g and h are really sort of en29ed I take it -- entwined, I make it? All in favor? Show all Commissioners in favor except Commissioner Davis abstaining.
>> for the same reasons I stated earlier.
>> Commissioner Davis.
>> I is purchase right-of-way necessary for txdot to improve the intersections at fm 1626 and fm 2304, otherwise known as manchaca at frate barker road.
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> and we will do this for the improvement of 2304.
>> actually, it improved both intersection improvements.
>> okay.
>> 1626 and frate barker.
>> and this would be our requirement anyway in terms of a joint local-state project.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. J, federal, state funding authorization to upgrade fm 2304 from slaughter creek to fm 1626 and fm 1626 from the hays county line to fm 2304. This requires us to work with hays county, I take it, and we will. Second? Discussion? All in favor. That passes by unanimous vote.
>> and k, execute advanced funding agreement with txdot for fy '08 stp 4 c funds to improve frate barker road from manchaca to brodie lane.
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> and txdot knows about that.
>> we were able to get that project through campo meeting before last in terms of them dividing up the approximately $30 million and we were successful. We'll take their money, I hope.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. We are out of parts of this item. Any closing comments that must be spoken by any of our residents or visitors?
>> thanks for your involvement.
>> thank you very much. We appreciate it.
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, July 26, 2006 10:34 AM