Travis County Commissioners Court
February 13, 2007
Item 17
17. Consider and take appropriate action on requested authorization for use of $340,000 from the open allocation funding account of the 2005 bond program for contract expenses associated with engineering design work for reimer's peacock road and acquisition of right of way for the rm 2244 roadway improvement project in precinct three
>> this truly is an accounting item. We got a little ahead of ourselves on our work on both of these projects. One on the reimers peacock, we cash flowed enough money to do the first phase of engineering. We are actually moving into the final set of plans. So -- so -- so then on -- on rm 2244, those are parcels that we need to acquire for the widening, the state's widening of the farm-to-market road around Bee Caves, we have gone through condemnation. Ready to pay for the acquisition and -- but did not cash flow for that purpose. So we're -- what we ask is that we be able to borrow from the unallocated amount that we did cash flow.
>> [indiscernible] it's basically a loan from the unallocated, so we can finish our work and then next year when we go ahead and issue new bonds, new cash from these -- from the pop position we will pay -- proposition we will pay that so everything is whole. We have the money, it's just not cash.
>> tell me a bit more about the unallocated reserve.
>> when we put together the bond election in 2005, we allocated -- we added some additional unallocated amounts that were going to be available for cost overruns in the event that the -- we were watching the construction costs go up dramatically at the time that we were going out to the voters. So we said that it would be wise to go ahead and ask for some additional money, put it in an unallocated amount, so that we have a cushion in case the listed projects went overbudget because of the prices. We had approval money that we could use to do that: that's what this $4.8 million is.
>> why is it that we don't have part of the proceeds that voters in fact approved?
>> yeah, we did -- t.n.r. Did not -- did not think ahead that we would actually get this far along in those two projects. That was our error.
>> so -- so by the way, this is the -- the issue was raised by a resident. So we basically have gotten to this project sooner than expected.
>> that's right.
>> yeah.
>> what we would do really is to borrow from the unallocated reserve for these projects. And then next time we issue debt, issue an amount to cover all of these proper projects.
>> that's right.
>> and reimburse the unallocated.
>> that's correct.
>> this is sort of typical, we have done this many, many times before. It gives us more flexibility in terms of cash flow in several projects.
>> yes, it does.
>> then this -- this accounting doesn't accelerate this project in relation to other projects in the -- in the -- in the -- bond distribution. It's still in the same place in the queue as it were.
>> both projects are starting. We just didn't put enough money in the front end. It's not relative to the total cash flow. It's not a whole lot. It's just the -- kind of like we brought half the -- bought half the loaf, mow we have to buy the rest of the loaf. One is under contract, the engineering for rhyme percent peacock -- reimers peacock.
>> move approval.
>> can you give the amounts for the record.
>> 140,000 for reimers peacock and 200,000 for f.m. 2244.
>> any more discussion of the snotion all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
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, February 14, 2007 8:07 AM