Travis County Commissioners Court

July 3, 2007
Item 1

Number 1 is a public hearing to receive comments regarding a request to authorize the filing of an instrument to vacate a 7.5-foot public utility easement located along the west side of lot line of lot a of westlake highlands, section 2-a, a subdivision in precinct 3.

>> move the public hearing be open.

>> second.

>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.

>> good morning, carol joseph, t.n.r. The owners on lot a is requesting a vacation of the public utility easement so they can modify their house that's already existing on the lot. The public utility companies have no issue with this and neither does t.n.r.; therefore we recommend vacation.

>> would anyone like to give testimony during this public hearing?

>> move the public hearing be closed.

>> second.

>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. And this is action item number 9 today, which I’ll recommend be part of our consent motion. ___________________________________ cc the citizens communication is next, and this item gives residents an opportunity to address the Commissioners court on any matter not on the agenda for up to three minutes. Dessin andrews is first and she will be followed by stuart gerstacker. Those were two that signed in. If you are here on citizens communication and I did not call your name, you should come forward also. Ms. Andrews is not here?

>> I don't think she showed up.

>> mr. Gerstacker, then.

>> good morning. For the record, I am known as stuart thomas ger stack oh, a public minister, I come in peace and humbly invoke the blessings offal might yoa god. I’ve come to deliver a message of peace and new hope. I forgive you, I love you and I want you to be happy. You still have to repent your sins and make restitution from what you have stolen from me and others in the community and I’m going to continue to come down and exposing the truth. Your continued presence is an abomination against this land. We all know Margaret Gomez stole her seat from mike hanson. I was there on election tonight when the computers were repeatedly crashed and programmed in new vote tallies. What sad, sorry people you are to allow these abuses to continue. Your policies and practices of usurping lawful power from us, stealing our money, our houses, our children and property without warrant and generally terrorizing us with your naked aggression are beyond treason. Your actions are an abomination in the eyes of god and man. You have become oner out. S to the people. Because of your continued abuses, I now declare a state of emergency caused by the breakdown of lawful power in Travis County. This emergency can only properly be rectified by the people of Texas acting independently in our sovereign capacity. Most folks in this country have not gotten to be true and free people so I see it fitting on the eve of independence day to remind the people and all who would presume to rule over us exactly who it is that is the source of power in this land. We hold to be self-evident that all men are created equal and are endowd by certain rights and powers which only we the people can bestow upon you our servants. It's not proper for you to rule over us, it is only proper for you to rule over you. You servants in government appear to have no fear of god or the people and we the people have allowed this to go on far too long. We have no one to blame but ourselves to. Correct this intolerable situation, I am taking this opportunity to announce the new independent state gathering. Exactly one year from today, on the eve of July 4th, 2008, we the people are going to peacefully surround our Texas capitol building and our Travis County courthouse complex and we are going to camp out and have a huge party. It will be large, it will be like nothing you all have ever seen and it will not end until all of you have gone away. Then wee the people with tons constitute a new republic. Together we the people will peacefully shake off these tie rantses and give this world an independence day that will not ever being forgotten. Amen.

>> thank you, mr. Gerstacker. Will we be invited to that big party next year?

>> say again.

>> will the court members be invited to the July 4th?

>> my problem is I’ve had my house and sovereignty stolen from me and all I’m looking for is recourse.

>> I just wanted to know whether we are planning to be there.

>> I apologize for some of the things I’ve said in the past, I’ve been very rude because I’m so angry at things and I truly forgive you for what you have done and it's nothing personal. This is just something that I have to do. I hope you all can find it in your hearts to forgive yourselves and forgive me and make true changes in the way you run things around here because things are simply not tolerable for the way you are.

>> I forgive you.

>> say again?

>> I forgive you.

>> anyone else on citizens communications where you signed in or not? Then let's go to the consent items. _____________________________________ consent posted for consent are c-1 through c-3. C-1 through c-3. Let's consider adding the following items to the consent motion. If anyone would like for us to discuss any of these separately, please say so as we call out the number of the item. Number 2. 3. 4-a and b. 5-a and b. 6. 7. 8. 9. The one we had the public hearing on. And for 9 we skip to 15-a. Number 16. 18. 19. Now, 23 is one we have the work session on. I understand what they want is for us to authorize roger l. Corey and his staff to try to find suitable space and if they do that report back to us. That's where the state would put up operating funds. So in 23 I understand us to say let's go to the next step and see. The state will quickly run out of money when it comes to dealing with urban counties. Any problem with that being on consent? That purpose really is to authorize facilities and try to find space. Then we'll add 23 to the consent motion as the final item.

>> move approval of consent.

>> would anyone like for us to discuss any of these items separately? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. ______________________________________ a1 and who is here on a-1? Okay. Pete?

>> good morning, judge, Commissioners, pete baldwin, Travis County emergency management coordinator.

>> pete, just one minute. Let the county judge be county judge for a while.

>> all right, sir.

>> a-1 is to receive briefing on recent flooding in Travis County and surrounding areas. And take appropriate action, including flooding disaster declaration. That's so the whole world will know what we're discussing.

>> appreciate that. As you know, June 26th we had some significant rains up in the marble falls, burnett area causing Lake Travis to rise. Now, overall Travis County has received that runoff and that rainfall and our primary issue has been Lake Travis rising and flooding. We have not a lot of damage throughout the rest of the county, but we have been declared in the -- by the governor of the state of Texas in his state disaster declaration as one of the 37 counties. I think from our benefit it is prudent to go ahead and issue the disaster declaration not so much based upon the actual damage that we have seen but what we will be getting into once the lake starts to recede. We will be getting into a debris removal issue. We have seen this in '91, we saw it again in '97, and currently the lake level this morning at 9:00 was at 700.7. And it is fluctuating. They are hoping to hold it in between 700 and 701, but with the rains they had last night, we may get up to our '97 level which was 704. And we hope and pray we don't get to the '91 level, which was 710. But the point being is by issuing a disaster declaration, that puts us in line for any state assistance that might be available. And then once we submit this paperwork, then there will be a damage assessment done, and then we'll be requested up to the federal level whether or not we receive any money for public assistance, what they call p.a., which would include debris removal, it would include emergency personnel response, it would include those types of issues. I will be honest with you, with over the years of the disaster declarations I have worked, I don't think that we will qualify for individual assistance, much like they are attempting to get for young county, stevens county, burnet county, some of the hardest hit areas. But it is a way that we could be able to be eligible for some assistance in debris and removal and if possible any of the infrastructure repair.

>> so for the average individual, say they live in western Travis County and may have received flood damage, what does this mean?

>> this basically means that we are going to be making every means and efforts to find assistance. And whether it be through -- if burnet county is declared under a presidential, then Travis County being adjacent county will ought mat likely be qualified for small business stones. So low interest loans will be available. That is one issue. But by pursuing the disaster declaration, then we open up the doors to explore any and all possibilities for funds either for individuals and/or to repair roads or to help with that debris removal.

>> once the water starts recedingist when we'll actually start seeing the flood damage for the most part in western Travis County.

>> yes, sir. Our problem right now is that while marble falls and our counties to the northwest have been in an immediate response mode, we -- our response mode really won't start until the water starts receding, and that way we can move into the recovery effort to start helping with that debris removal.

>> questions? Our damage has really been quite small compared to damage in some of the counties west of us.

>> considerably. We have had some damage out in the northwestern part of the county, cow creek has received some damage, but in the magnitude of what went on in marble falls, it's fairly small. And I will tell you this, that if that were the only damage that we received, we would not be included in any disaster declaration. But due to the fact the lake is flooding and currently we know we have got somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 to 70 homes with water on them, in them, around the lake. Graveyard point having the most, around 30-something homes up there. Singleton bend has some on it. Thurman bend in western Travis County. We've got homes scattered, pockets around. However, other areas such as volente, the park has water in it. Lago vistas has been three to four homes down at the end of bar k ranch, but volente is not reporting any, point venture is not reporting any. There are pockets when the water backs up and gets high we get water into homes.

>> your honor, I’m not -- Travis County sheriff's office. I certainly echo what pete is saying. I’ve been deployed in marble falls since last Wednesday at approximately 6:00 a.m. After the flood. One of the responses -- we are currently in response mode moving into recovery mode in that community. One of the things that we have targeted starting yesterday in our debris removal is to try to grab all the hazardous material or large items that we can so that they do not get into the colorado and come downstream this way because they would affect every community from here to the coast. Again, I think I’ve kept some of you all updated on this. We have large-scale damage, the flood in that area has surpassed the 500-year flood plain in two of the major creeks, businesses wiped out, communities. Hopefully fingers crossed by noon today we'll have potable water at faucets in that community. We've been pushing through about 40,000 gallons of drinkable water to the community by hand each day. The sheriff's office currently has myself and two other individuals deployed in that community for citizens along with military aid and communities from throughout the state. But I agree with pete that I know there's been a lot of debris go into the river that will be headed this way. Once the water recedes, then it will be -- understanding in burnet county we are still in the situation that a quarter inch of flood brings our creeks up two feet. So we have crews in those creek beds trying to remove debris, get it out, but with the weather situation and the prediction for heavy rain the next few days, this is going to be a long haul for that community. We're trying to prevent further damage to infrastructure in their community. We've lot a lot of roads both in marble falls and in burnet county and we've been meeting with the county judge and county officials up there.

>> are we having any disruptions to the point where --

>> there has been some damage. In fact, we received some photographs yesterday on cow creek where we've had some low-water crossings blown out, we've had some culverts, some as facility removed from roads, and a few other small places. We'll find that once the road goes under water and sits there, the base gets wet, it pops up. We will have some repair to be done. But compared to the damage that was done in marble falls, it's fairly small. And I would like to take this opportunity to say that mike is part of our regional incident management team that we have formed in capcog, the whole 10-county area, and we have deployed at least three if not four management members to gowp and assist the communities with just paperwork, getting your logistics in place, doing your plans, just providing that assistance. So we have been working on this concept for some time and it has come into play and has worked very well. So I commend all those members.

>> every time we have one of these serious flooding events, we kind of get crosswise with fema, which provides the flood insurance in this county. And lately they have been pretty adamant if your home is in -- home or any structure in a flood prone area and you receive substantial damage, they don't want you to rebuild. And we get requests, applications to rebuild. And so our transportation and natural resources folk I guess need to anticipate conversation with fema as well as with Travis County residents about rebuilding these structures.

>> and several of these structures are repetitive structures. They are ones that flooded in '91. They are ones that flooded in '97. And we will again face those issues of whether or not they are allowed to build where they want to build and not take any federal assistance or whether or not they are made to either relocate at a higher elevation or just not rebuild.

>> and the fema threat is not to deny insurance on that particular structure, it's whether to deny insurance Travis County-wide. It's kind of a big deal.

>> that's correct.

>> is there any other significant flooding in the rest of the county? I know we just spoke about western Travis County, but you know water goes downstream. It does flow through the rest of the county. Has there been any other significant flooding events as far as Travis County is concerned?

>> we've not received any reports of major flooding in any other tributaries. We've been watching onion creek closely because we know that's one of our big issues. Walnut creek, any of those. But after that initial rainfall, now, if we get three or four inches today and three or four inches again tomorrow, we may have some problems with other tributaries. But at this time it's all been confined to the highland lakes watershed which is Lake Travis, lake Austin, town lake, those kind of issues downstream. Now, one of the things that I do need to tell sue that right now we have four gates open on mansfield dam. That is regulated by the corps of engineers how many they can open. We asked would you consider opening five to help lower it a little faster. They can't open five unless the water hits 710. Personally I’ll take four and a slower recession than, you know, with it at 710 because the damage it would do. But the other issue is they look at the gauges downstream. They look at three gauges, the one at Austin, bastrop and columbus to determine how much water they can push down the colorado river. If any of those exceed the limit, then they have to stop, they have to start backing off the release. Well, currently the one at Austin is at its limit, just south of Austin, south of longhorn dam. The one at bastrop has about five to seven feet of play tonight, and the one at columbus has about 12 feet. So we have a lot of room downstream. All I’m saying is that we could not get another drop of rain in the upper watershed but get a heavy rainfall downstream and they would have to start shutting gates on mansfield which would cause the lake to continue to rise. There's a lot of variables playing in trying to manage this amount of water.

>> in some of the counties a sign that says "closed road, dangerous low-water crossing" are misinterpreted.

>> yes.

>> for Travis County residents, closed road really means do not cross this point. And we try to identify detour routes for them, right?

>> yes, sir.

>> but it's kind of amazing that annually these signs are ignored and lives are lost. And I mean all you have to do is read the newspaper and you see not one but numerous incidents like that. So for Travis County residents, these are dangerous times especially in the areas with -- where heavy rains have occurred. And kind of not necessarily flooding but where there are low-water crossings, most of the residents, including me, I know in my area where the low-water crossings are and after heavy rains I know I should not really go that route if I can avoid it. And so you cannot be too careful, right?

>> we preach the gospel of turn around, don't drown. I saw one photograph that bob Moore sent me yesterday is a perfect example. You've got a low-water crossing completing blown out. The road approaches are there, but the low water cross ing is completing gone. If that were full of water, you would never know that and think that doesn't look too high. And you will drive off down in it and drop off in it. It is a very significant issue and we've lost a significant number of lives just in central Texas due to flooding and we hope that people heed, you know, the warning of turn around, don't drown.

>> in comparison to other natural disasters, how does flooding, fatalities from flooding rate in Texas?

>> it's number 1.

>> I used to think those rushing waters could identify me and would leave me alone. They really cannot, right?

>> no, sir, they take no prisoners.

>> > move that we basically approve the flooding disaster declaration. Is that signed by the judge or the whole court?

>> that is signed by the judge. There are two documents we're asking you to sign. One is a letter to governor perry requesting assistance, and the other is the disaster declaration. They will both be faxed at the same time. A quick little emergency management lesson here, if I had gone to the judge on Saturday and said we need this signed today, he could have signed it under the authority that's given him under chapter 418. However, it's only good for seven days unless ratified by the Commissioners court. By putting it off on to Tuesday, because once said, we're not in a huge rush, we're still waiting to get through with all of our damage assessments which will be a couple weeks down the line. By doing it now, then you have ratified this document and it will stay in place and we won't be needing to redo it every week or anything. It will be in place until such time as we close this out for this disaster.

>> and the second part of that motion is and that the county judge be authorized to sign both documents on behalf of the Commissioners court.

>> yes.

>> second to both.

>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Thank you all very much. Should we carry a similarly worded item for the next couple of weeks?

>> I think it would be beneficial and that way we can give you updates from the work that's being done by our instant management team and some of those folks, and also we can come back and tell you -- give you better updates on what we're finding also.

>> okay.

>> thank you all.

>> thank you very much. Appreciate you all's work during these tough times. ________________________________________ consent part 2

>> may we revisit the consent items just for clarification. I cannot be voting on the consent item regarding the minutes from -- the previous minutes. If the record would reflect that I am present but not voting on consent item number --

>> 3.

>> I guess I wasn't here either.

>> without objection, those two will be a stain. -- will be a stain. Will abstain. ______________________________________ 21

>> number 21. Is to receive briefing and take appropriate action on the status of collections from the following programs. A, current and delinquent taxes from the tax office; b, criminal fines and fees from the tax office and planning and budget offices. Good morning.

>> good morning. Judge, Commissioners. Nelda wells spears, Travis County tax office. We're here to give you a brief report this morning on where we are as of this date. July 1st is the day that most tax offices are delivering delinquent tax rolls to their private attorneys. Today we have 20,253 delinquent taxpayers owing approximately $34 million in tax penalties and interest. If we used a private attorney, we would be attaching an additional $6.8 million in liability -- tax liabilities upon these taxpayers. Many of them are already struggling to pay their back taxes without this additional burden. Your county tax office and county attorney's office will continue working with these taxpayers to get their taxes paid. If absolutely necessary, we will file lawsuits to collect. Last year we were forced into the position of filing 676 lawsuits. And to date this year we've filed 456 lawsuits. These are the most extreme cases which after all our efforts have refused to pay their taxes. And some will result in being taken to foreclosure. In March, it was reported that foreclosures were especially hard on east Austin residents. This information was contrary to what I knew to be fact. We contacted the city of Austin and the lbj school of public affairs to review their data. According to their data, 327 properties were taken to foreclosure in the calendar year they sampled, 2006. Of those, 211 were outside the city limits, outside the city of Austin; 116 were inside. The city of Austin boundaries. 147 of the properties actually sold. None of the properties that sold were homesteads. The 30 properties -- there were 30 properties located in central east Austin. Review of those 30 properties revealed that all 30 were vacant lots. As a result of this review, dr. Robert l. Wilson, associate dean for academic affairs and research for the lbj school wrote: we conclude that these sales did not lead to residential displacement but in fact vacant lots were being brought into the market as a result of the sales, end quote. Each month my office sends you a listing of properties that we're considering for foreclosure for your review. There are other occasions when we've asked you to help us out with specific delinquent tax cases, and I want to thank each one of you for your help and your assistance with these accounts. With your assistance, many were paid in full. On July 1st, we had 344,662 property accounts paid in full for the current tax year. These properties represent 1.819 billion, that's a b, billion, dollars. And we're at 98.4% current year taxes collected. We're on target to reach 99% again by the end of this fiscal year. I want to thank all of these taxpayers because they are the ones who provide the majority of funding for the '96 taxing jurisdictions in Travis County. In January of '03, we started to collect county court fine and fee. Since then we've received 19,690 cases and collected an additional $10 million in fines and fees. In the first nine months of this fiscal year, we've received 3,534 cases, assessed at a little over $2 million. We've collected 1.99 million of that this year. The program spikes at the beginning of a probation cycle and at the end of the probation cycle. The defendants that we don't collect 100% in the beginning are monitored and by working closely with cscd, we collect any balance before the defendant gets off probation. I want to thank the courts and the county clerk and cscd for all their help in getting this done. In April of last year, we started the j.p. Court fine and fee collection. We've received a total of 29,365 cases with an assessment of $6,088,110. I’m pleased to report we're importing cases on a daily basis from the j.p. Court. In the first nine months we received 27,744 cases. We processed 8,999 payments for a total of $987,187. Part of this money has come from collections from j.p. 3, constable 3 and the third-party vendor for j.p. 3. We've received 1,107 new cases from constable 3 and j.p. 3 for collections and transfer to the third-party vendor if we're not successful in our collection efforts. My thanks go to the j.p.s and their staff for their collaboration in this endeavor. It's been a learning curve for us and we appreciate the patience shown by the j.p.s. My staff and I will entertain any questions you may have regarding this report.

>> first and foremost, I want to say thanks so much for the report, and I guess I just don't remember getting the report before, and it's really good to get it. Let me tell you. And because this is where I know we can get the facts straight and not have to read it somewhere elsewhere it's interpreted very differently. And so thank you to much for the report, and I guess I can look forward to the report every year.

>> yes, ma'am.

>> okay.

>> if there aren't any other questions, I would like to turn the remainder of this reporting over to leroy nellis of planning and budget.

>> thank you. I just want to take this opportunity to applaud nelda and her staff, dusty, renee and all of the central collection staff on the job that they've done on these criminal fines and fees. You may recall when the court first designed planning and budget to kind of spearhead this, we -- you know, it was a challenge. And it remains a challenge, but I think thanks to nelda and dusty, renee and their staff, we have been able to collaborate with the justice of the peaces and come together and put together a very, very reputable central collection unit in the tax assessor's office and I applaud them for that. Assisting these men, travis and deanna from the planning and budget office. Without their help and the justice of the peace, we would not have been able to bring this unit together under nelda. The electronic transfer of these cases has not come easy and I know that dusty and renee and staff have worked endless hours with our outside vendor to make that electronic interface possible. And all of these improvements, getting these cases into central collections, is some of the cleanup that's required in the conversion to facts, which will be coming in the latter part of this year. I did submit to you the backup that the office of court administration furnished us on the period, the collections by court from December 1st of '04 through November 30th of '05 in which they had indicated on the graph on page 3 of my backup that out of all of the people participating in the mandatory 1863 collection improvement program, that Travis County was third in the state for that nine-month period. This was actually April of 2006 through December 2006. Of producing an additional $749,000 to the state, third only to the city of fort worth and the city of houston.

>> and this graph doesn't reflect per capita collection, this is just a straight sum.

>> this is just straight dollars. And, you know, it will be a combination obviously of the increased collection efforts of our central collection. It would be also any increased -- increase of existing fines and fees due to volume. So -- but it is an indication of the result of the efforts of centralizing and implementing state-of-the-art collection procedures on these fines and fees. I might mention that the collection of delinquent taxes also is a big, it helps in collecting current taxes. So it all goes hand in hand and we look forward to pushing many more cases from the constables or bringing out cases that have warrants on them that have exceeded the 120 or 150 days. Those will be going back to the j.p.s and then will be electronically transferred to central collections. On the next page, you'll see by court the collection rates, and as we pointed out in bold on the first page of my memo to you, these collection rates are cases without conviction or non-adjudicated cases are not included in these statistics. One of the big challenges has to be with collecting those failure to appear cases and what we're getting hold of with the central connections clunt, the ones that fall even outside these collection statistics that you sigh. Because these statistics are actually higher than what I had anticipated, but it leaves out a large percent of those northern adjudicated cases, all of those. So we're looking forward to getting all those cases into the central collections, and then eventually we do have a draft r.f.p. That we're going to be sending out to all the elected officials involved for a third-party vendor to pick up the cases that central collections has not been able to successfully collect. So as we had indicated previously, we'll be bringing a draft of that to you probably late July, early August, and with the revisions that the elected officials have made. Hopefully we can get it on the street August, September time frame.

>> that's way beyond our three or four-month commitment of five months ago.

>> well, I think what I had indicated to you, judge, was that we would attempt to get you, the court, the draft the latter part of July or the first part of August. I think that's consistent. Now, if the court has no revisions to that draft, we can get it out the first part of August. As soon as we have the county attorneys review, comments, we're integrating that into the r.f.p.

>> when will it be on the court's agenda for approval? July 17th?

>> no, we have not sent it out to the elected officials. We've worked with a small study group on it, and I would say that the last Tuesday in July or the first -- I’d feel more comfortable with the first Tuesday in August to be on the agenda.

>> I just think we ought to go ahead and do it. There's nothing magical about an r.f.p. It's been a year. Not to cut you off. I’ve got three or four questions after you get done.

>> I think there has been some sticking points that we were trying to work out.

>> we can't work them out without seeing a draft. They may be worked out. It's been six months since we discussed this.

>> we will be glad -- if the first Tuesday in August is okay with the court, I know that we can get you the draft in the state it's in at that point to the court.

>> for me it's been longer.

>> a couple questions.

>> yes.

>> senate bill 280 provided a reward for those who voluntarily complied. So do we sit in eager anticipation of delivery of our reward or have we earned it?

>> senate bill 280 did not pass. Almost passed.

>> sorry. I was looking at the part that says with a reward for doing so.

>> I understand.

>> have we earned a reward?

>> it almost passed, we almost got it.

>> so the reward is gone.

>> the bill did not pass, is my understanding.

>> okay. How do we compare the precinct 3 collection effort where we have a private vendor available to take I guess the worst of the cases and the other precincts where we don't have the pilot in place?

>> the total collections?

>> right. Do we think it was dramatically better thanks to the pilot program or can we see a difference?

>> absolutely. I mean it's -- there's more collection.

>> total collection rate is just --

>> those cases were the hard cases. Did they fit the criteria that of the established by the comptroller's

>> [inaudible] of not including -- did they include those that had f.t.a.s, the truly hard cases eye can get the answer some other time.

>> there were different procedures that were in place in j.p. 3 than what are in place in the other j.p. Offices. I think if you look at the pre -- well, we need to get back to you with the collections.

>> we need a apples to apples comparison to make the call. The question is whether we expanded from one precinct to five, right?

>> right.

>> but if the advantages are not there, another question would be why identity. If the advantages are there, then we ought to do it, but we need an apples to apples comparison is my point. Next question: who keeps up with the community service projects? I mean does -- is that out of ms. Hale's shop?

>> I assume it is.

>> because what we're doing is appropriately converting some of the fines that we're not getting anyway to community service, and I just -- we -- it ought to be possible for us to keep a list of necessary community service projects and, you know, work against that list. So they may have more than they can do already, but if not I think we can probably get with some of our department heads and supplement the list.

>> we will be glad to survey and see what type of community service projects and an evaluation from their point of view as to whether they need more community projects and how many hours they believe they could fill. We'll be glad to report that when we bring the r.f.p. Back.

>> judge, I want to go back to the point about the third party. There is no question that having the opportunity for a third party to collect delinquent fines and fees is something -- I will tell you as a taxpayer, I would insist that you have it. We have a system set up now that we have our people take every one of these cases that the j.p. And the constable doesn't do, which is that sort of middle gap that we didn't have before. But there are those cases that you all say for me to continue to work on these, I am spending money, I am spending man-hours on something that my return is not very good. Those are the ones that need to go to third parties. I mean because whatever the third party collects is more than we're not going to have. I mean we do have a system now that we will give you every opportunity in the world to pay your fine and fee. And quite frankly, you owe the people of this community the fine and fee just like you owe your ad valorem taxes. That is something that this Commissioners court, you know, we have a fiduciary responsibility to do. So I don't want us to think that third party is something sinister. I mean the only reason that you are getting it is because we have exhausted everything that we can do to collect. But we still need one other shot, and the unfortunate thing about it is if you get pushed to that being the source that is going to do your collections, guess what? Yes, it is going to cost you a little bit more, but you have to have somebody doing that business, and if they are going to do that business, there's got to be incentive for them to be in business. So there's nothing wrong as far as I’m concerned. I’m very willing to, you know, I got a parking tirkt out in the middle of Austin, I come back and I write it right then. Because that's what you are supposed to do and that's what is expected of us. And so I think that we give --

>> those of us who supported the pilot program, including the county judge, supported it because it was necessary to see hard data. And a pilot program would enable us to do that and we ought to do that is all I’m saying.

>> and we will. Sure. And I don't think there's any question that the pilot program with the third party vendor was very beneficial and collected a lot of fines.

>> I just wanted that recognized.

>> right. I don't have facts to contradict that conclusion.

>> right.

>> but I don't have facts to support it either.

>> [laughter]

>> the only facts that we've reported to the court have been periodic third-party vendor statistics. What we've not reported to you and we will, we'll come back, are those comparison percentages of the j.p.'s, the once using versus the ones that were not.

>> and there are questions that can be address understand the r.f.p. One is the definition, a specific definition of what are hard cases, the ones referred to as ridiculously difficult to collect. Have you to define that, and we can, that's not an insurmountable hurdle. And the second is the availability of statistics from the private vendor in order to include our sentencing policies so we can increase our collections not just for the sake of collection but for the sake of justice and appropriate sentencing. And those are two issues that can be addressed in the r.f.p. And my understanding was we were working toward addressing them.

>> sure.

>> thanks for stimulating our interest again in this fascinating area of public service.

>> thank you.

>> thank you all very much. See you all real soon with that r.f.p.

>> you will. ______________________________ 12

>> number 12-a, consider and take appropriate action on a plat for recording in precinct 3, the vistas of pedernales canyon trail, a revised plat of lot 13, pedernales canyon ranch phase 2, which is a total of 11 lots. Acknowledge 12-b, approve subdivision construction agreement with vistas at pedernales canyon trail subdivision.

>> good morning.

>> hi, anna bolin, Travis County t.n.r. Since this item was at Commissioners court the last time, we've had a couple of meetings with the owners and the neighbors and we have come up with some plat notes with the help of our county attorney's office to allow this to be a rain water harvesting subdivision. There are nine plat notes. These notes will be put -- are on the plat, if they are not already, I have a sharpy, I’ll write some on myself, and we're also repping these be in the deed restrictions. But the purpose of those notes is to make sure that all future owners that buy into this subdivision understand that this is rain water harvesting, that they won't be doing an individual well, and we want to be sure everyone has fair notice of that. Also these notes indemnify the county. Some of staff's concern was rain water harvesting, there's not set guidelines associated with it, and these notes serve the purpose of letting everyone know that that's the case. That there are guidelines and we don't have something to fall back on and say hey, you didn't meet these guidelines. These notes do give us, I think, some cover there and appreciate all the hard work everyone has done to get us there.

>> judge?

>> yes, sir.

>> I think the last meeting that we had before this group -- I was out of town last Thursday, but I understand that tinley and anna were there with the applicants and neighbors, and let me just say that I’m really proud of the process that's taken place both from the applicants and the neighbors. This has clearly been one of those things that I actually think is going to come out of western Travis County where we might have -- if not 100%, I guess there may be somebody that's not happy wit, but I think 99%, which is exactly what we're trying to find and people put a lot of time and effort into this thing. I know that some of us had discussed a bit of uneasiness with regards to what step are we taking with the county with regards to is this something that is going to be precedent setting. I think it obviously will be precedent setting. Now, from a legal standpoint, I mean I know that there still are issues with is this going to be something that you are going to be able to force, you know, people from now forward, you know, to use as a primary source of water. That is, of course, unless they can get surface water delivered to them. I think that tinley is comfortable with where we have plat lines and the cover, so to speak, with regards to the county not building themselves into a corner.

>> that's correct. The --

>> [inaudible] to address one point you made, specifically state as anna alluded to that the county doesn't have in place currently regulations addressing this type of alternative water supply system and can't be really relied upon for that purpose. And these plat notes and deed restriction will serve notice to potential property owners of that. In addition to which it also states it's not intended to be, these plat notes and this approval of this plat under these circumstances is based on this voluntary agreement by the developer and adjacent landowners which the county has decided to honor, but that it is not intended to be precedent setting. So that's specifically a separate plat note. In addition the plat notes address the fact that in the future if the county does want to go down that road with the final rules and adopt regulations once it's educated itself, staff is comfortable with what type of water -- alternative water supply systems are available, what the standards should be, how they will function, how they will be operated and maintained, et cetera, et cetera, then the property owners are also put on notice that they will be obligated to upgrade or retrofit their systems in accordance with standards that will later possibly be adopted by the county when the county is ready to go down that road.

>> judge, are you going to have any sort of legal question that you want to take in executive session because I’m certainly willing and ready to recommend approval of both a and b.

>> and I’m ready to second.

>> I think if there are others who come today, give them an opportunity. Do recognize the motion and second. Last week we thought we were close to reaching basically a compromise between residents who had concerns and the developer who was trying to work with residents and had the need to get the project down the road. And basically the water collection system is working in this area for a whole lot of residents based on the e-mails I have received. By the way, I’m becoming more of an expert on water collection systems myself thanks to you all and this project. But I guess I was left with the impression that if there is basically spirit of compromise and we can work out the details especially to the satisfaction of t.n.r., then the court should bless that and that's my position today. The e-mails I have received pretty much have been supportive, but if there are those who wish to give a short statement, now is the tie. And if whether you are for or against, we would like to hear you if you would like to express an opinion. I assume when you put one of these systems in, you will get a list of dos and don'ts sort of like a vacuum cleaner.

>> [laughter]

>> you receive an operating manual.

>> right. Good morning.

>> good morning. Pepper morris speaking on behalf of property owners in pedernales trail as well as hill country alliance. We held a meeting September 17th. Karen and I were able at that meeting to enlighten those that were present about this project. And without doubt everybody just gave us two thumbs up. So we are very, very happy that you all are thinking outside the box. Thanks to our developer, and we really appreciate this. And on behalf of h.c.a., we feel the same way.

>> you just said September 17th.

>> I’m sorry. Sorry. June. June 17th. Thank you.

>> I’m here representing the hill country alliance and I have been part of this process, and it was just real positive. The developer suggested great things. The community went along with it. And county staff really pulled it all together. And hopfully this is going to be reflective of future subdivision applications.

>> thanks for working hard and to the developer as well.

>> when I -- what I found out looking at the material regarding rain water collection, I do some but not to this extent, but it was good. It was all very positive and so I think, yeah, it was --

>> and these folks have experience doing rain water collection in other

>> [inaudible].

>> and the other interesting thing was there are already people doing the rain water collection without any guidance from anybody but themselves. And literature that's available on it. So this is a very exciting --.

>> congratulations. I think this is wonderful.

>> I also would like to step away from characterizing it as a compromise and maybe move toward a characterization of this as a -- as a -- words escape me. I didn't talk much more two weeks and that's probably a good thing. It's an innovation and a partnership in innovation and I’m glad we could be a part of it.

>> it's almost like it's the first win-win that western Travis County has experienced and it feels really good.

>> thank you all for that. You all set the wheels in motion, both the concerned residents and the developer. I really appreciate both of you for that. We just rode your coat tails.

>> we appreciate it.

>> thank you.

>> anybody else? Last opportunity. There's a motion and a second to approve 12-a and b. Right? Discussion? All in favor? Show a unanimous court with Commissioner Davis temporarily off the dais. Thank you all very much. ______________________________________________ 13 number 13 is consider and take appropriate action on the following: a, variance from section 82.202 l 2 b, standards for construction of streets and drainage in subdivisions in Travis County. 13-b is preliminary plan in precinct 3, rgk ranch preliminary plan, 1508 total lots. And 15-c, phasing agreement between rgk and Travis County.

>> hi, anna bolin, Travis County t.n.r. This plat we originally received on March 14, 2005, and that was prior to the suspension that we had of preliminary plans. And they got a hardship waiver to be able to -- to continue with their development, and one of the reasons why we granted that was some of the things that they agreed to do along with -- while they developed their development. Some things such as they will develop the entire preliminary plan with less than 20% impervious cover. They will adopt the buffer zones for the waterways as required in the interim rules. They will agree to an integrated pest management program and require native vegetation throughout the development and impose night lighting restrictions on the development. Those were some of the things that they voluntarily agreed to. While this has been going through the development -- or the review process, txdot reviewed their preliminary plan and their two proposed access points. They obtained their approval from lcra, lower colorado river authority, on their master plan, and they will be compliant with their alternative performance standards. And they will be getting their water and wastewater from the lazy 9 m.u.d. The variance that they are requesting is for block links. For a block link that exceeds 12,000 linear feet. Due to topography and the fact that we don't really desire to have a lot of cut and fill, staff is recommending this variance for safety reasons and for environmental reasons. So that is the variance that's before you today. There is also a proposed phasing agreement, and basically it lays out when rhymer's peacock road would be built for it's built by the county what their porption would be, or if they get their first, what their obligations are. This is a sensitive area of Travis County. All of Travis County is sensitive, but in this area we have received comments about this is a very urban subdivision and a very rural setting. We have heard concerns over the stream crossings, and we have seen or heard concerns about the fact that we don't have density controls out there, out anywhere. And those are the concerns that we have heard on this development. As far as whether or not it meets -- this is reviewed under chapter 82. Staff feels that it does meet the requirements of chapter 82, that's why it's recommending its approval.

>> how do we address the complaint about the 13 stream crossings?

>> the stream crossings, based on the lay of the land, they made sense. Any crossing will have to be built in an environmentally responsible way. When we look at final plats and site plans, that will be something that we look at very closely along with our environmental people here at the county.

>> I will have four or five legal questions and basically spring from e-mail and fax I got late yesterday. So we will need to discuss that with legal. My recommendation will be that we not take action today on this but take action next week. Will that cause a problem?

>> this is a preliminary plan so ultimately that's a question for legal. I don't think that it will, but it's our attorney's opinion that --.

>> I don't think the applicant is bothered by the fact that that may be the case as well. Is that right?

>> yes. He would like to move forward. I don't want to do this over some long period of time.

>> [inaudible].

>> is she speaking for the hill country? Or is she just speaking for herself?

>> christy is here in the audience. I don't want to put words in her mouth. Let me ask her.

>> I’d like to hear from christy and see exactly because I saw something there that you had brought up in an e-mail, and my question is are you speaking as christy or for the entire organization? If so, it needs to be on the letterhead or something.

>> you bet. I’m speaking as myself as a resident of southwest Travis County.

>> all right. That was my question.

>> there may be some points that I made that could be made on behalf of the hill country alliance. I didn't run -- I can submit comments on behalf of the alliance too. Most of these issues I think were completely together.

>> okay. Thank you.

>> the three or four points I guess I have seen surfacing from the e-mails I received and comments, one would be the streams. The other one would be was there approval of the phasing agreement with its details really requires the county to approve a formal plat that has the same details?

>> the primary concerns are the traffic and the water. We're in an extremely stressful situation in western Travis County. We're having accidents, many of them very serious. The traffic situation I would hope would be looked at more carefully. This is a unique situation because what we understand is the development won't be under construction for many, many years, likely, and the landowner wants to get this entitled or get this locked in under the original subdivision rules before the interim water quality rules were approved. So there's a lot of unknowns. Sweetwater, this -- this was originally -- some of this property, I’m not sure all of it, I don't have a map to show, but much of it was originally where the -- it is part of the lazy 9 m.u.d., but some of these homes were originally in the sweetwater original plans. And we had so much controversy over that and that development hasn't broken ground yet. It's difficult to tell in time what the effects of sweetwater are going to be. So my concern is if this is something that's not going to happen for many, many years, let's hope we look carefully at everything we're going to be entitling or grandfatherring in so we don't have regrets years down the road.

>> what is our response to the traffic concerns?

>> well, traffic is a concern for us as well. The county including 71. We did have the developer work with txdot to be sure that those locations, those intersection locations were appropriate, and when -- one of the details of the phasing agreement is when they start to build, they will have to do all the design work with txdot and enter into an advanced funding agreement and indemnification agreement with the county to make the necessary improvements so that you can get in and out of the subdivision safely.

>> but that only applies to 71, correct? It wouldn't apply to reimers peacock.

>> well, in the phasing agreement, depending who gets there first, there are provisions -- I mean they already have access rights off of an access easement that they would get to build on. They would still need to work on being able to have that easement intersect 71 in a safe manner. Whoever makes that intersection is going to have to do that.

>> may I speak? I guess that's a question I’m going to have to ask my board, it seems like. We are stressed by the rate of growth and that's been on the table since '04. The only tool we have really to deal with growth out there is our infrastructure planning. It's really the only thing we have. And I am a little concerned about the fact this project seems to be a major force in reimers peacock road and I’ve seen a plat of the water lines and now their future plans go down the proposed reimers peacock road to the property. And this particular piece of land is right where both of those major pieces of infrastructure will be built. So if the development is not going to be done for many years down the road, seems like we're using this as a tool to get that infrastructure up and running. I propose maybe we take a look at are we ready for that much -- that many new homes in that area and what tools do we have to make a better plan. Highway 71, all the way out to marble falls, is getting ready to be built out at an unbelievable pace. There's a project being proposed in burnet county that could potentially bring 20 new residents along that highway. And I would hope maybe we could take a look at some plans, some progressive plans for highway 71, look at some of the park way ideas, look at some long-range visioning for highway 71 and how we want growth to shape out there rather than moving forward on a new road, new large plats of development before we're ready for it.

>> any other questions, comments? I will have about four legal questions, most of which are in the memo that I gave you a copy of yesterday.

>> good morning, laura grelke, a resident in Travis County and represent the travis settlement homeowners association which is a neighborhood across highway 71 from this proposed development. We are, of course, very concerned about traffic as christy indicated, but I’ve received many e-mails from folks in our homeowners association who couldn't be here today who are really concerned about the way the intersections for this proposed development will match up on 71. One of our neighbors was injured in a car accident this past week right after the one that occurred with the teachers, and it's a very dangerous section. Even the new improvements are dangerous. There's a lot of water flowing over that road. I hydro planed on it just last week. And concerned about exactly how we're going to improve the traffic before we put all the rooftops out there. There's going to be a plan for that piece of property, it's a valuable piece of property, but whether we grandfather in what they are asking versus trying to be progressive in looking at some -- what the county can do to assist us out in Travis County, in the western part of Travis County to maintain our personal state and water quality. Right now it's really flooded out there. I can't imagine getting more rain and more runoff from homes that aren't even built yet. We haven't even seen the effects of what's going to happen with the sweetwater development. I want to be an active part and have been an active part since 2004 in planning for the southwest part of Travis County and I was in part of the dialogue where we came up with the interim rules and I’m a little disappointed this project may skip over the rules and just be another buildout with a lot of runout. I live on bee creek. My kids and family swim in the creek. We've had tons of rain. It's running clear. It's really nice. I can't imagine what's going to happen to it when you start pouring polluted water off developments into that creek.

>> have you received significant flooding in your area?

>> the lake is up 20-something feet. Excuse me?

>> have you received significant flooding?

>> flooding but not --

>> pardon me?

>> flooding but not to a danger point. Low-water crossings are flooded, but there's other ways to get around, but it's important to improve highway 71, and I would be very open to working with groups. We're working with several developers in the area now to improve and maintain bee creek road. As we get a ritz carlton development out there, those developers are very open minden and cooperative with the community so far because -- seems to be open in the communication. We want to be a part of it. I think the rain water collection example just prior to this issue is very positive stuff. So things are moving in a good direction. I just want to see that continue and the county to support that. I thank you for your efforts with the rain water collection and I would like to see whatever we can do with campo, txdot, whatever it takes. I know some of you are involved with campo. We need to make sure we're looking outside the box and not creating 183 with lots of driveways, traffic lights and heavy development in a part of the county that cannot sustain it very well. I’m committed to be a part of it and hope to continue to work with Commissioner Daugherty when I get back from vacation. I wanted you to look at the issue in a thoughtful way before we pull the trigger and say this is how it's going to be because this is an opportunity. For us

>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]

>> there are need for roads but how way do that I think we need to look at closely. One of the issues, I haven't seen a map of how the intersections match up, hidden creek and creek meadow and haystack cove, we are concerned. If we are adding intersections, let's combine with one that is already there if we are going to make it safe, if that is indeed the route you go. Thank you for your time in listening.

>> thank you. Yes, sir.

>> I like this. You just come up and sit down and start talking.

>> this is Travis County.

>> you they'd to state your name.

>> my name is craig powell with concept development planning. I represent the rgk ranch and the family. I have a presentation that I was going to do that has a lot of these issues in it and I understand that you want to postpone until next week. I don't have a problem with that but I’m wondering if you would like to see the presentation. Maybe that would help with what other discussions you want to have between now and the next Commissioners court court.

>> let's see it.

>> it's powerpoint. Where do I plug in? Everybody can see that?

>> not yet.

>> ñi. .. . .

>> I’ll true to go through it quickly. You know, I think it will be helpful just based on the discussion that you have already had. This is a map as you can see of western Travis County. The yellow ish green colors are preliminaries that have been filed. You can see west cypress hills and annexation. You see rgk in between those those. The portion that was spoken about that used to belong to annexation, you can see within that r gñcious k black line, that was basically property that the family when they realized that there would probably be homes on that hillside looking at their family compound, went to annexation and bought that property from them so they would not have people looking down on their festivities area. They also purchased some property on the western side to butt up to reimer pee cock knowing they would need additional access at some point in time, especially if they were going to be going through an entitlement process with the county. But you can see a lot of growth and a lot of develop development that is ongoing in west Travis County. So it is definitely an additional pressure on highway 71. The consultant team starting late in 2004 started working with concepts, and one that jumped out of all those processes was the more conservation approach, in other words, the idea that if you just located your development on the uplands and not on the steep slopes, that it would do two things one, obviously, it would be more sensitive to the land out there, which the family time and time again has proven that they care about and are good stewards. But it would also create an exclusivity, setting itself apart from other develop developments in the area that are more typical suburban developments. This uses down to 50-foot lots, which, let me see if I can get the cursor to work, right in this area. That is a hill top that at night you can see the lights of Austin from that location location. The smaller bungalow type houses would still be exclusive with that type of amenity in place. The rest of the lots obviously would have for the most part canyons as their backyard. It's harder to see on this but there is a blue line that is the floodplain that is in the those drainage ways and the red line that is the butter off of that, the lcra buffer, which is more stringent than the Travis County interim ordinance buffer. The other thing we did, and this slide basically demonstrates that if you were to have gone out there and painted all the roofs yellow, orange and blue, this is what it would look like if you flew over the development. The purple is the buildable area of what we are calling mixed use. It kind of demonstrates what it looks like on the land. Again, you know, the idea being that this was our idea of a conservation develop development. It's iranic in a way that later on the county develop development an optional conservation ordinance but this is, this was the direction that we took originally. The chronology of this, we started looking at concepts in late 2004. We submitted the preliminary on the 14th, I think the 15 15th that the county declared that it would no longer accept preliminaries. The interim rules were adopted. I’m in the real sure on the date on that, but the county begins development of the conservation development option in 2006. So we were well ahead of the curve when we tried to come up with our own conservation plan. I think our philosophy, and a lot of that had to do with the fact that we felt like centralized water and wastewater was the safest way do that. In order to pay for it, obviously, you have to have a denser pack of homes around the light where the line would go. This is an instation that shows the lay out of the lights but shows both the floodplain, the county's buffer, and the lcra buffer. As you can see, we kept lots out of all those buffers. In fact, on the western edge it's kind of hard to see at this scale, but you can kind of see the rim rock that runs along the edge of those drainage ways. And we are, I guess in a way respected the discussion at that time about the setback away from that rim rockas being some environmental valuel feature, I think it was called. Just to demonstrate the amount of buffer floodplain setbacks, et cetera, this is just the floodplain. This is with the lcra buffer buffer. And then this is with the open space, the property that is not platted and does not have lots laid out on it it. It's over 55 percent of the property. This shows--

>> 5 percent percent--5 percent is open space ?

>> yes, sir. This shows it with the build buildable portion of the mixed use being in the purple. Now, one piece that doesn't show up on this is down in the very south corner. It's about a 2.6 acre tract that we were going to dedicate for ems and fire, being basically evenly spaced between 71 and hamilton road. We felt maybe that would be a good location for a facility such as that. Here is the aerial underneath that same illustration, showing the green space, mixed use areas and platted lots. You may recognize some of the graphics in this from the booklet that I passed around some two or three months ago , to the Commissioners and you, judge judge. Just as an information piece here is another page from that. And the idea being that it was kind of what I call the fun facts, you know. You talked about the floodplain being approximately 70 acres, the open space being 885 acres, or 55 percent of the property. 13 creek crossings planned. Roughly 1470, 1480 lots ranging from 6500 square feet lots to over 20,000 square foot lots. Sixteen miles of roadway, total property 1596, impervi imperviouk cover. We felt even when they add in the mixed use areas you're still going to be under 15 percent if they try to max that out. The illustration in the bottom corner is basically this. As we were going through our discussions on conservation plan, obviously the devil is in the details. So the kind of the things that you do when you plan it have more to do with how it affects the land than anything else. What we were talking about doing is requiring, let's say, a 12 had00 square foot area could be irrigate--1200 square foot area could be irrigated in one of the rots rots. So the yard would not be a factor. I think as you know we put 7 70 percent of potable water on the yard anyway as a rule rule. Anything we can do to reduce the amount of irrigation that occurs, I think that is a true conservation measure there. We talked about doing the tract driveway. I think you all were recalling my grandparents had two strips of concrete, I’m sure an economical way to do it, but also last impact on the land and less imper viouk cover. This also demonstrates I think the beauty of the area area. Probably the important factor to remember in that, that is why this land is so sought after for development development. It's kind of a chicken and egg scenario that we go through with development on a regular basis. To protect the mere beautiful areas, we try to impose tighter restrictions and regulation on them, which makes them more exclusive, which makes people to spend more money to figure out how to develop on them. Including even going to the legislature because we have seen that occur a few different times. So it really is a situation with where we do need to figure out how to cooperate on these things. We need to figure out how to come up with strategies and incentives, if you will, to do the right thing out there there. Personally, I mostly do urban design. And one of the trends that I think is occurring and will probably occur over the next 8-12 years, especially as my kids start buying houses, what's important to them is how green is this. You know, what is the carbon impact of what is occurring. And those kinds of things are going to start becoming sale factors for homes and businesses over time. This illustration, the two green dots show where it it intersects 71. Both of those in the discussions with tex the dot and the approval with they will, included turn lanes, protected turn lates in the center, and expanded shoulders that could be used for acceleration, deceleration lanes out of the subdivision. This shows an end view of how much wider the pavement section would be in order to do that but it all stays within the current state right-of-way which just gives you an idea of how huge the right-of-way section is out there for 71, and its capability to accept a different cross-section. You know, anything from a boulevard to parkway. Lots of things that could occur. Split level roadways, things that are more scenic and probably safer.

>> is there any way to quantify how much safer these three improvements would make? For accessing 71 ?

>> you could based on the idea that tex dot has includ included those types of safety improvements in their safety manual, and so you can back into how that safety manual, that particular cross-section, was developed, and what their estimates, therefore, were in the less vehicle accidents and so forth by us using that kind of traffic control device. But you can quantify through the manual that this is the way that you control those kinds of intersections. For 71 to be as safe as 360 is, the only thing, you're going to have as many traffic lights as you do on 360. If you recall, when 360 had had very few traffic lights, people drove the same way on that that they drive on 71 right now. I hate to say that. In many ways from transportation standpoint, it just creates problems over time, traffic lights, but that is basically what does it. You start stopping people at intervals and it slows down that overall average speed the. This is a map that shows the congested roadways, and it's accepted by campo. Sorry.

>> have we chatted with the tex dot engineers about increased safety as a result of these improvements ?

>> we certainly have chatted with them about what improvements will need to be in place with the subdivision, including the center turn lanes and the widened shoulders. That we've talked to them about.

>> okay. There's another question. The question rale is, if we make these improvants, how much benefit do we get? How much safer are they? And I would think this is what engineers do, isn't it sm.

>> theoretically.

>> I’d get their take on that and then run it by ours and see. Sorry to cut you off there.

>> no, that's fine. As a matter of fact, break in any time as I’m going through this. My wife says I rattle on a lot. These red roads on this map are all what campo and therefore tex dot recognize as highly congested. It's hard to see down here, but 71 is one of those. I think these were 2006 traffic counts. The one to note over here crossing the river, you know shows 10,780 cars, trips per day. You can imagine, then, what it would be back here as you load out into the subdivisions, but obviously they didn't do a traffic count along that section of the roadway. So in the campo plan, in what was adopted as the transportation improvement plan, here is where the safety improvements were. One was basically turn lanes and shoulders, turn lanes and shoulders, turn lane and paved shoulder. The same thing we are doing at the intersections that we are improving. More importantly, how do we raise the issue of how you ultimately improve 71 overall. I think we do that, you know mostly by cooperation of the different groups out in the hill country, the developers developers. I can easily say the family would be happy to engage in those discussions. I think at least two times greg has been on the cell phone with me and told me he almost had a head on on 71. So this is a big concern for him too. So I think it's identifying the issues are important not only to the county and state government, but they are important to the landowners and the residents out there, and figuring out a way to put everybody together to go solve those issues. And you know, obviously, we have been volunteered to help with that. That is the end of the presentation. As you guys go over your issues or what other questions you may have through this next week, I was hoping maybe that would help with some of it. And if it would be helpful, I could always print out this powerpoint and provide it to you if you think that would be helpful as well.

>> it would be helpful to me.

>> okay.

>> have you had a chance to meet with the residents?

>> we had, yeah, we had a great little get-together out at the precinct office and went through a powerpoint of what we were trying to plan, and we have talked a few times. Yeah, we have been trying to at least keep everybody informed. I’m not going to claim that we changed anything big-time as a result of any comments, because again, you know, the issue here was to put en entightmentelments in application. I’m not going to say one way or another what the time frame would be that the family would be interested in ever turning this over to a develop. Nevertheless, you're going to see more and more property , especially where they have the means to do so go to a consultant team and put a plan together and get it entitled because we have all seen over the years things become tougher to do as time goes by. And the only tried and true way to do this is to go through the preliminary plan process, you know, file a plat and lock it in, and then you have something that's been tested and case law in Texasrs land law over time to stand up in court. And that is basically what our mission was. As to when anything ever happens on this or if somebody comes back and changes the plan, you know, I can't say. For something as complicated as this, I have never seen anybody go in and just plat something the way it was without having to do a preliminary plan amendment.

>> if the county were to insist on some sort of timetable, would would we ask?

>> we on would have to, the family would have to take that to their board and discuss it.

>> okay. Questions ?

>> I have one question.

>> all right.

>> it's been partially answered before by mr. Howel howel. But perhaps I need a little more clarification on it. In what ways does this preliminary plat differ from the Travis County conservation development option?

>> let's see. You know, it's probably more stringent. Especially when you include the almost cra--lcra, mps master man improvement that we have, which is more stringent than water quality that were built into the interim Travis County code. You know, I think we probably meet or exceed everything that is within the interim ordinance. But because we didn't follow it exactly, you know, obviously, I can't articulate exactly what those differences were. I didn't really study that ordinance of we were already going down another path.

>> and do you have any bead on what the differences are?

>> one of the differences that comes to mind, the first that that comes up is the archeological assessments. They probably did a component of that with lcra. It's kind of hard to gauge give than they were down a path and probably did some of the same pieces but just since we weren't reviewing that, by we I mean either dropment services or natural resources group, that we will be working heavily with when we do these conservation ordinances, but that is one thing that comes to mind right therethere.

>> since it is aed to be at least in keeping with the conservation approach,, would the family be interested in looking at the possibility of the conservation development option? Since it appears to be close to that in any case.

>> the difference would be that it would require us to go back and modify the plan. Go back basically through a process again. I don't think they are interested in at this point in spending more money on me or engineers or the consult consultant team. Especially since they are at a point where they feel like they have something that's been recommended by staff that meets the requirements. I think they are going to want to move forward. I am 90 percent sure that is probably their position on that, but I would be happy to go back and ask them if they would consider that.

>> it's my an understanding, and correct me if I’m wrong, but generally speaking, I’m not leveling an accusation, I’m saying if you're looking for the most conservative approach to an entitlement you're looking to get the greatest latitude in your platting possible. In your preliminary platting so that you will have the greatest amount of flexibility for the future. Of course, our, of course, I as a Commissioner have some difficulty with that in knowing, and I think we all in this room know, that we are going to become more stringent in development guidelines in western Travis County because of water quality, traffic, quality of life issues. So am I hearing that, I seem to be hearing two different messages here. One that this is it, and then another that we are willing to negotiate. On some aspects of it. Is the negotiation only available after the preliminary plat is approved approved? And therefore we are working from an entitlement position position?

>> again, I’m 90 percent sure that that is, that would be the position. If you want to propose something different, like I say, I would be happy to take it back to the family.

>> okay.

>> you know, and rick was just pointing out, as we went through this, the concepts on this, obviously, one of our choices would have been to do, to take the lots that had already been laid out by sweet water on the pork of the property they bought and do something similar but the family opted not to to that approach. I guess in a way when you say, we want the most flexibility, I don't know that anybody feels like they have, when they get an entitlement, they have locked themselves into any real flexibility. They feel like they have locked themselves in for at least a known quantity. They realize, in this ever- ever-changing regulatory environment, and we have only seen it go one direction, and probably rightfully so, over time, that to go back and change their plan will bring them in under a new set of rules. Does that make sense ?

>> uh-huh.

>> in a way it's not is much that you are getting this great flexibility out of this approval. It's just you are getting something that is a known quantity. You know, so you are satisfying the fiduciary responsibility you have to the trustees and at least being able to lock it into that value.

>> what is your response to the concern that if you have about 13 stream crossings, the likelihood of polluting some of these streams is much greater than say you had a smaller number?

>> I suppose that would be true if we were talking about a lot of commercial traffic, benzene trucks or fuel tankers. From the standpoint of a residential development, I don't know that 13 versus five or six or whatever it may be makes that much difference. I think it's probably inconsequential, would probably be my opinion.

>> have you given any thought to--

>> it's much more expensive to build 13 crossings than it is to billed six.

>> have you given any thought to safeguards that will be talk to prevent another hit creek type situation? I think everybody learns lessons, I guess I won't call them bad actors, but un unfortunate events. We all see the fallout. Obviously, the changes in regulatory requirements that the county is going through, a lot of that was spurred by that event. You know, I was a project manager for developments for quite a few years. Personally, I wouldn't try to do the clearing, the road grading and everything at the same time that could cause a blow-out like that if you had a rain event. They were just, got in a hurry and they blew it. But I think given that one little slide I showed that showed, talked about how you could possibly reduce the amount of irrigated drain on somebody's yard, there have been some discussions about that. But again, those kinds of details are probably what are included in the subdivision process. When somebody actually wants to come develop, that is when you get into those kinds of details. But I guess I’m saying that the family is concerned about those kind of the things but they are not something that gets considered in a preliminary plat typically.

>> my last question, if you give us a copy of your presentation today, it will have the total acreage set aside for open space, buffer the other things us mentioned.

>> yes, sir.

>> okay. Any other questions from the court ?

>> let me ask. When you say 20 percent or less than 20 percent of im imper viouk cover, is that grows or knit? What do you calculate ?

>> a gross percentage for the acreage.

>> okay.

>> you think it's actually around 11.

>> it's 11 percent based on the plan bee--plan we have today for the residential. In the purple areas you see on the map, if they were to max those out, build out, it would probably be closer to 15 percent.

>> anybody else? We'll have this back on the court's agenda next week.

>> all right. Thank you.

>> thank you very much.

>> judge, item number 12, the previous.

>> show Commissioner Davis voted for that.

>> item 1.

>> instead of being off the dias.

>> thank you very much. Mike, still in the courthouse? I saw you and was thinking of a 1 instead of this other item that you are here on.

>> that's okay.

>> we didn't know you were here until I looked up and saw you.

>> it's raining again.

>> number 22, consider and take appropriate action on request by Travis County sheriff's office regarding disposition of reimbursement funds to Travis County from the state of Texas for hurricane expenses related to Travis County sher you have's office deployment to cameron parish in 2005.

>> I’m the planning manager for the agency. In hindsight, if I think the mashel false incident is another insurance department of how we at Travis County can assist our communities and nation. The rather lengthy memo that you have is basically a request to utilize the check that we have received now from the state of Texas, of course it went to the state louisiana and fema, to utilize the funds to go into our emergency response equipment. We have people and we have good people. I see evidence of that as I have two of my staff up there right now of what we still have shown defirst assist is is just hard equipment. We get our best bang for the buck out of people certainly but they need tools. Over the last few years we have been waiting on this money, foregone some internal expenditures due to it during the year that we had the expenditures and have kind of held off on some funds request because I know that question has come up in my conversation with pbo. Again, I have talked to the auditor of fleet services, various parties that have been involved and I think at this point have support from them to be able to pull this off. Again, my request is to, since this is money that was it's not certified yet, it would be kind of un unanticipated revenue coming in, is to reinvest that into Travis County's capacity to serve not only our citizens but neighboring citizens in a time of need.

>> questions? This would be sort of a first impression. I did see the reference to the money back in 2001. Your testimony today is that this equipment is needed.

>> yes, your honor.

>> in response to the question, then why isn't this in the sheriff's budget request, the implication seems to be that you were anticipating receipt of these funds, and after we received them, had you had the list ready to bring to the court and ask that the fund be dedicated to meeting these needs.

>> that is absolutely correct, your honor. We talked to pbo in the last two years and discussing items of this nature and knowing that this reimbursement was kind of hanging out there in the federal government, in discussion with them, we made a decision to try to get by until this reimbursement came in and made a request. I would have been overjoid if this would have come in prior to our budget submission. We would have done the combination there but the timing of the receipt of it was after the submission was already in.

>> does pbo have a position? That means are you deferring to the Commissioners court.

>> yes, sir.

>> county judge needs one week. I’m favorably inclinedless pbo.

>> last week, seems to be a reasonable list.

>> we have your assurance, based on your reputation as a public servant, that in fact all this equipment is needed in the sheriff's office.

>> again, I assure your honor that the list that we kind of have on hand, the list you have is prioritized prioritized. We looked at our need and looked at what we call the debriefing for any incident and we will have certainly one for the marble falls deployment. I can tell you for my testimony from having spent the last week up there, the majority of the equipment on the list that you have today I could have utilized had I had in my hands.

>> okay. One sort of minor legal question that should be footnoted, if these funds were not, let's get the answer between now and next week, if these funds were not certified in this year's budget but are delivered, whether we are authorized to dedicate them to this specific request that we have before us. See what I’m saying? Typically the money would just be there in the year-end balance and we would budget it next year.

>> very much like the cap money that you accepted this morning.

>> right. What you would like to do really is go ahead and order this equipment if we next week say we approve the requestrequest. So rather than wait until next year we would go ahead and place the order. Some would be delivered this year, I take it, and maybe some as late as after Octoberagain, your honor, in talking to the auditor's office as well as fleet management, we would like to get the request approved and get on the ordering process to get the equipment in.

>> may I make a comment, judge? Because there was something similar to in in the past but the timing again was somewhat like this.

>> okay.

>> acceptance was about two or three years ago. And in that particular instance the money was available a bit earlier and it was folded into the budget process and used to fund items that were directly requested at that particular point in time. So I don't know if this is similar to this in the sense of your question, but certainly we can find out the answer to that question.

>> yeah. Kind of minor, but I recall the law is kind of funny on that. I’m not sure funny in what way. But I do recall it being a bit peculiar and I was kind of surprised at the answer the last time something like this came up. The safe thing to do was let that amount roll into the year-end balance and figure out another way to cover the purchases.

>> as we did the scat money.

>> right.

>> I do need another week to mull a little bit. If I don't come up with more specific objections next week I would recommend this be on consent anyway. If we they'd the equipment, we need it--need the equipment, we need it. This source is as good as any, and the money is coming from a similar purpose. Right ?

>> correct, this is very similar to what was done with the emergency services and star flight on a hoist, money was received from reimbursement from hurricane ca trib--ca trino with response locally.

>> and we'll will have emergencies. We will have it back on next week.

>> we may have one brewing now.

>> thanks for your patience.

>> thank you, sir.

>> we have tnr here. Let's call up number 11. To consider and take appropriate action on a resolution supporting the Texas for clean air cities coalition's participation in an appeal of the oak grove power plant permits.

>> on June 13 the Texas commission on environmental quality voted to approve--

>> you are still adele noel.

>> yes, I amokay.

>> voted to approve two permits to move forward with the construction of two power plant units that are filed by lig net coal in robertson county. The two facilities together are known as oak grove facility. Tc e q approved the permits despite the recommendation by the state office for administrative hearings to deny the permits. Their request to deny the permit was based on the fact that the oak grove facility would not be incorporating the best available control technology at that time. The process at this point, there's one organization called our land our lives who plans on appealing the permit. They have standing in this case. It is the only organization that has standing at this time. They will appeal within the next 20 days. The permit was issued on June 20, and they have 20 days from that date to appeal. Tceq will either consider changing the permit or just go ahead and approve the permit as is or not take any action at all. They have 45 days to do that that. After that, the organization our land our lives, a non nonprofit made up of property owners, can appeal the decision again in district state court or federal court. The Texas cities for clean air coalition is willing to move forward and join our land our lives in this appeal process, putting their attorneys behind it and their finances behind it to continue the appeal process. However, they need the Austin area's agreement to move forward. They have asked the clean air force, clean air coalition, Travis County to vote approving their moving forward to back them on this appeal process. This comes to light, also important to note that epa is considering lowering the eight-hour ozone limit from 85 parts per billion to 75 parts per billion. They are taking comments and this they are considering. Austin's air quality is currently at 82 parts per billion and the limit is 85. Modeling shows that oak grove alone on high ozone action days to increase this area to 84 parts per billion almost two additional parts. Which would push us into non nonattainment under current standards but we could possibly be designated as nonattainment if epa lowers to 75.

>> what would that particular plant become operational if all the other things that we are talking about today, the appeals process doesn't go through as far as what we would see it go through, tceq, when would that be realized as far as the nonattainment? I guess it would be predicat predicated on when that facility may be constructed. I’m saying may be because we don't know what is going to happen at this point.

>> the facility, tctq has already billion discussion. They expect it to be completed late 2009.

>> late 2009.

>> yes, completed and operational.

>> and operational. Okay.

>> move the resolution.

>> second.

>> took the words out of my mouth coalition did not have a quorum out our meeting last week. What we are going to try to do by teleconference call get a fer and favorably response. This is one of the deals we were told it would not take additional money from us. I use think we make it clear if they think they need additional money at some point we reserve the right to say yea or nay at that time. But even if tceq does in the reverse the position and even if litigation is not successful, I think the way you keep this on the radar for the company is by continuing to apply whatever pressure you can. I don't know that we have much choice. The only good news about epa looking at lowering the standard is that they would do it not immediately, but is it 2010?

>> yes, that is the proposed date. They have taking conths. They proposed to lower before and they did no do it at that time. They kept it at 85.

>> it would impact numerous communities like us nation nationwide.

>> correct.

>> it would be a real big deal.

>> yes.

>> so does the court sign that resolution or just the county judge?

>> the court.

>> okay.

>> I had a couple other questions. I wasn't quite finished yet. I’m not opposing the motion that was made, but I had a couple other questions that I think needed to be asked. The second question that I wanted to pose to the folks, who would have to borrow the brunt of the penalties on all the things placed on you when you are in a non nonattainment status? Who is responsible for bearing that consequence? Because with a situation like this, for example, they would be partly responsible for us getting into a status that we also are dealing so hard to make sure it didn't happen. I’m looking at the other side. If that is the case, there are consequences that are assessed when you get into these different statuses. I’m just wondering, is there any part of the process to get out, to help you get out of that situation, is there any part of the process to teach folks that help you get into that situation can offer some relief to get out outout.

>> own oak grove would not be under any obligation to assist the area in meeting attainment areas. The city, the county and the residents would bear the brunt.

>> would have to bear the brunt. Okay. I wanted to make sure the public understood that it's just not a cut and dry issue you know, just not cut and dry. As we have seen there are a lot of consequences that may come out of this. Hopefully, tceq will reverse their position. Thank you.

>> as a final comment too, in this community, we have adopted, voluntarily, numerous measures to enable us to deal with air air--air.

>> yes.

>> this plant on any given day could really wipe out whatever benefits, inspection and maintenance, some of the other stuff. Right now, trying to figure out a way to better education and ence force because we know that is a big problem. All together I think we had 15 or 20 measures here and most of the other surrounding counties heavily hit by this, especially hays and william son, I think we kind of have been going above and beyond the call of to do what we can to stay in near nonattainment and prevent going into non nonattainment. So it really is kind of a big deal really.

>> statistics are wonderful and have you been able to reduce our emissions by two parts per billion, but the memo also states that, by credible source, that this oak grove is likely to be able to increase our parts per billion by 1.71 parts on any given day, which as the judge points out, would pretty much wipe out our gains.

>> exactly. Somebody ought to be -- --responsible for that.

>> for people that are oppos opposed, the organization that is opposed, have they gone in and asked, would you be willing to do this plant, you know, under the coal gas ification process? Is this a deal with people say we just don't want you to build, or we want to you build with this new technology. Because there is, you would think, some sort of cost benefit analysis. Not that any of us want to go out of nonattainment. That certainly is not good. But I don't know. I think this is is a very confusing subject for the average every day person. If you read the media, it immediately puts you in the state that you've got to be opposed to this. I think that most people probably are opposed to it if the industry is not trying to do the right thing thing. But obviously, there are at least some people that think that cost and, you know, the grid needs and everything that we have got to have, because I don't think that anybody questions whether or not we got to have ample, you know, electricity to operate. What is the, I mean is it just that particular, is oak grove just saying we are not interested in trying to use the alternative, even though it may be more expensive. I think that people in central Texas will probably say okay fine, if it's a little more expensive, then fine, but bill us for it but billed--build it so that we do not go out, at least have the potential of non nonattainment. What do you think about that that?

>> it's my understanding that oak grove is going to use lig nite coal. They have the south right there.

>> exactly.

>> they have been approached with not building the facility but building it someplace else that would not impact the central Texas area so greatly. And that was not agreeable to the company. Then it's also my an understanding they were asked could you use a different type of coal that is not quite so dirty burning. It's my understanding again that the owners of oak grove said no, we're not interested in doing that. They were also approached with using different technology, with integrated gas ification. They said no, we're going to build a facility like this.

>> where are we on any possibility either at the state or federal level for emission credit that would provide incentive to use those technologies? Any kind of emissions credit system being contemplated?

>> not specifically.

>> it really hasn't come up as a topic in this context. There are programs like that around the country. There are name of utilities all across the country taking advantage of that. In this instance, txu has moved aggressively, they proposed a large number of plants but there has been no talk, although they don't rule out the possibility that they could use potentially some kind of a credit system as part of their overall package, in this instance, they are committed to the lignite fuel at this location. You probably recall there are a number of other plants that were proposed that are now in abeyance, not really gone but not moving forward.

>> in anticipation of the purchase.

>> correct.

>> would emission credit. Credit.some sort of incentive for the use of either cleaner burning fuel for the plant or for more advanced technology?

>> it's difficult to see how that would play out in this scenario unless you have a lot of very in depth understanding of their total holdings across the country. The way I am an understanding it as I’m looking at the media reports across the country, they wouldn't be looking at their plants here in Texas as providing credits but perhaps plants in other locations may provide the credits that would allow them to produce to use these plants here.

>> we only have a voluntary system at the federal level for reporting of emission. At this point having any incentive for the use of higher technologies is pretty low since nobody is required to report their emissions except roll tarly.

>> it may be voluntary but it is nevertheless a matter of their permits. So they are depending on how vigorous the enforcement agency is locally, they are varying levels of teeth.

>> how vigorous is in inenforcement locally? You don't have to answer if you don't want to.

>> we would defer that to tc tceq to deal with that.

>> okay.

>> judge, since kind of the same subject matter and it was at least brought up, should the court try to put something back before us with regards to this new epa issue with regards to taking it from 85 to 75? I’m not to sure on the face of it it seems like a community would want that to happen, but that is pretty frightening to think that we at some point in time shouldn't weigh in to that.

>> I think we plan to. Epa is considering this but there is no formal rule yet.

>> correct.

>> proposed. Yeah. Are they taking comments yet yet?

>> they are having hearings, three hearings on it.

>> the formal process is what you normally, where you take comments. But I think the coalition and clean air force and then the governmental entities may as well informally take a position. The question really is what impact will this have on us. Clearly, you know, can't say what impact it will have two and a half, three years down the road. Unless things change dramatically, we won't be under 75.

>> right.

>> now, when they lay out adverse health effects, which they think is a justification for this discussion, they can be kind of frightening for certain individuals. If you are a healthy person, you may not feel these today today. But if you suffer from asthma, some of the other illnesses, you are more likely to be impacted. Right ?

>> correct.

>> from air pollution.

>> yes.

>> this is kind of early in the process. But I do think we should start getting ready to give comments because there is a reality check on reducing it that much. The other thing, we don't get energy from txu, I think the new name is tep, we get energy from Austin energy. But the impact from the txu facility in oak grove would effect us.

>> correct.

>> yeah. Anymore discussion?

>> just one point.

>> there was a typo on the first page and we have corrected that and I would like to bring it up to the court.

>> let's see if it passes first.

>> okay.

>> all in favor. That passes by unanimous vote.

>> okay. You can read those, can't you, ms. Noel? You do a lot better job than I do. Thank you very much.

The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.

Last Modified: Wednesday, July 3, 2007, 8:00 AM

July 3, 2007 Item 1

July 3, 2007
Item 1