Travis County Commissioners Court
August 14, 2007
Item 29
Now, 29, consider and take appropriate action on request for approval of Travis County facilities management department to build a 72-bed addition to community supervision and corrections department, cscd, smart residential facility, and then lease the space to cscd utilizing state grant funds. We thought it would important for the court to receive the presentation today, ask whatever questions we have, and maybe have it book the agenda next week for action, preferably next week.
>> that sounds good. While they're setting up, I'm happy to say that our state of Texas has exceeded my expectations in term of funding some of these critical services and putting their money where their mouth has been during the recent years, and for those who are prepared to take advantage that have bonanza, there are many, many opportunities, and this is yet another one.
>> yes, there are. Let me start by saying that we have presented you with a summary fact sheet.
>> and that's dr. Nagy here.
>> yes. Cscd. And I will use the backup materials as we go through my short presentation, but I have provided you with a fact sheet that puts everything together in one piece front and back that you may want to use as a reference. I thought that would be convenient for you. There's been a few changes. We have been told that we can now lease the facility and only last week a very recent change, we have been told that we could lease the facility from the county. So this is an opportunity for us to not only take advantage of the state money vrks a few bed substance abuse facility that would help us alleviate jail overcrowding, but also to have a facility which eventually would be owned by the county. And essentially pay for it through state funds over the course of the lease. Which we'll get into more detail in just a moment. This initiative is needed for a number of reasons. An important reason, of course, is the waiting list that have we have. We presented you with information before. For your reference it is on the fact sheet that in '06 we had about 197 people on a waiting list for smart. If you took a conservative estimate of their wait time, around 25 to 30 days, and looked at the cost savings, it would be around 118,000 annually.
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>> as I said, this would increase the residential treatment from 76 beds to 148 beds so we would have 72 new beds. The state funding would provide for the lease payment. So when we present with you with the money that we're asking from the state that has actually gone up quite a bit because now included in our request from the state is the lease payment for the building. So they would fund staff and operations, utilities, et cetera. Our original request was around 1.5 million. Now we're looking at about 2 million for 2008. That would include support for the 28 beds interim program that we would have with the sheriff's department building, and also we're asking for some contract beds so that we could do more than 22 beds over the course of 2008 while the building was built. 15 contract beds. And the county would, as I said, own and maintain the building. Just quickly because you've heard this before but just as a reminder, we would utilize 24 beds at the tso building. You voted on that in July and agreed to that m.o.u. And we would do that until the 72-bed permanent facility was built. And then that's when the lease would begin. And we can access state funds in just a few weeks. We should know about their decision prior to 9-1-07, and then we would begin getting funds in 9-1-07. The benefit to the county is that you have this program that supports all staff and operations for the 24-bed facility, and keep in mind those individuals are in the jail anyway so now they would go to the 24-bed facility which would be operated through state funds.
>> what's the effective date of that 24-bed --
>> just as soon as we get word and we can bring it online and we're planning now to do that. So in September, October, just as soon as we can possibly manage that.
>> okay.
>> so that would allow us to leverage funds for the 24 probationers. Okay. Roger is going to talk a bit about the cost of the building, a couple of options of where we could put the building.
>> thank you. Good afternoon. Facilities management director.
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> the 72 beds at this time, we are
>> [inaudible] existing over there and the existing is about 17,000 square feet of the building. 17,000 square feet of the building includes a kitchen. The new buildings proposed would not include a kitchen and still would like to build it for about 17,000 square feet. So only about 500 square feet less if we don't build a kitchen area. But in any case, we have a building square feet about 17,000 and we have two sites would like to propose. One of them is on county lane and the other one on the cscd land, you know, to be owned by the cscd. The preferable -- the best location is to be on the county land. This is a building site a. I don't know if it's shown on the --
>> yeah, we have it here.
>> building site a is a -- is going to be on the county owned land which is right now utilized as a baseball facility, and three baseball facilities, those supposed to bring the bond election in 1997. Those are the three facilities, baseball fields supposed to go to southeast metro park. And we build them at southeast metro park, but we kept them on operation. So --
>> if we were to choose build site a, the county owned property, we probably would get some objections from the residents that now use the fields to practice and other stuff. Do we know whether there's some sort of restriction based on the method of funding to acquire these fields? That is to say, did we use, like, park funds to acquire these fields?
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> that may be okay, it may not, but we would have to jump that hurdle for sure if we choose site a. I'm not necessarily choosing a or b. A we own already, but we have to understand the minute we suggest another use for it, probably those who do the youth sports that use the field now.
>> well, the youth sports fields are already closed down and they went to the little league there in the southeast. But the adult fields we said we were going to keep operational until we finally decide there was another need for that land. But the only thing is that the adults have not been using the fields at southeast metro and I wonder if they are still using these others.
>> I don't know how often they are used, but I do know there are games over there from time to time. But that's just a footnote.
>> and if we build on either -- build a, site a or site b, the cost for us for facility management to build it is going to be the same as far as building is concerned. And we have a figure on the construction including contingency is about $2,489,000. Now, we would like to add to it the other items such as planning -- the planning is 8,000, design about 73,250. This is we're going to design it in house, but this is a 73,250 is to have other designers help us and the mechanical system and the structural system and also we have to pay the city for a utility connection 2003 and city review if we have to do it on the site building b. If you do it on site building a, the city will not review the -- will not pull a building permit because it's outside the city limits in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. So those would not be needed if we built it on site a.
>> why do we think site a may be available?
>> site b --
>> site b is the land that the current facility is on that we are in a lease purchase right now. So that would be available and we've already checked to see if the county could build on it. But it would not be county owned land. And one possibility is to look at a lease agreement so that if for some reason or another the state no longer funded this program, then the county could own the land. So that's something to look into.
>> so i was told cscd will own this land out right in about five years when the current lease is up. We think the bank would not have any objection to cscd contracting with the county to build on this land in the meanwhile.
>> right.
>> and I asked the question what happens if a new legislature comes to town years from now and decides to cancel this deal, if we own the building and the property, you know, we can always use 72 beds. And both of these sites are in close proximity to dale valley so I'm thinking we'll have a rehabilitation, jail sort of related need if we were to wake up one morning owning these and need to go use them. But the plan is for the state to lease them long enough to recoup our dollars and for to have the program running and operating expenses funded by the state during that time.
>> right.
>> and the costs also include i.t.s. Figure for 92,400, and also the i.t.s. Is for the funds which is cabling and
>> [inaudible] to connect to that new buildings and also only we have equipment costs which is for a dishwasher in the kitchen because I would like to have a dining room next to the -- dining room and after they eat they can -- I call it kitchen, but it's going to be there only for a dish washing, so this way they can take care of the dishes in the new building. Only the equipment we have is $10,000 right now is allowance for a dishwasher. Fixtures at zero. Furniture, we're not providing furniture. The cost is zero. And the move is zero. So the total construction costs including all the equipment, design -- and by the way, the construction costs include contingency to 11% to a total of $2,723,515. That's our estimate based on what we have existing and we projected that the construction will be done no 2008 and it's going to go toward the fall of fiscal year of 2009, but let's say December of 2008 so as not to confuse the issue between cald year and fiscal year. But we'll have to do construction design for five to six months, two months procurement and five to six months construction and that will end up sometime in the fall of 2008. And that's what we have on the construction. Turns out if it's a lease site, facilities management will recommend that we will do only the maintenance and do routine maintenance and repair to the building and that will be included in the lease agreement. If we do a maintenance and repair, the cscd will take care of the facility directly and the custodial and the grounds keeping. So facilities management will
>> [inaudible] the cost of the maintenance and repair. I believe the terms -- I'll turn to dr. Nagy for the terms.
>> the term of the agreement would be 15 years. That would really mirror what we're currently doing with the smart facility where we have a 15-year purchase agreement. Also one of the things I wanted to point out about the current facilities, smart, we do have some history of continuously being funded. The smart facility has been funded for the past 10 years and, again, has been funded, we've already received verification that it's being funded for the next two years. And we have also received an audit from -- a pretty comprehensive audit on best practices and quality of the program and we scored in the highly excellent area so they are very satisfied with our current smart facility and I expect it to continue to be funded for some time. As I noted before, the current smart facility will be owned by adult probation in September 2012. Just a few summary points and then you may have some more specific questions from our budget and in list, bob claypack, or for roger or myself, but this is a very unique opportunity. As I said, the state has put 32 million into these beds. We, I believe that this is not going to happen for some time to come, possibly never, so I think it's an opportunity that we need to take advantage of now. I know that the state is very interested in getting these beds out here. The state is also suffering from overcrowding and they prefer to fund treatment facilities over state jails and prisons. Something that everybody doesn't know, just offhand, one-third of the prison population is probation revocation. The
>> [inaudible] would be an early projection for 2009 and they say a growth of close to 9,000 beds from January of '07 to 2009 if something doesn't happen. They did invest 32 million in probation last year and realized the cost avoidance of 67 million. And so that's why they are doing it again this year and the projected cost avoidance for the state is 65 million up until 2012. So they are very vested in this. We do have a performance measure of reducing revocations, which we didn't put in our budget, but that is a requirement that we have for state money and we have a good track record and being able to do that. So it is a unique opportunity and I hope we can take advantage of it. I think that would benefit us all.
>> so we think that the amount needed annually to operate 72 beds is how much?
>> for 2008, it's -- let me get that number. I want to make sure I give you the right number. For 2008, it's 1.9 million, and that's going to operate the 24-bed and the 15 contract beds while the building is being built and plus we'll start bringing staff online. Then in 2009, it will be $2.8 million, which will allow us to run and operate the 72 beds, make the lease payment and purchasing such as equipment and vehicles with state funds.
>> I guess my only point is if -- what makes this interesting to me is that the amount that we would issue debt for and construct a building, the state in '09 really is spending that much annually to operate it. Now, you know, reality check yesterday to me was that when you are dealing with the legislature, you never know what they may do when they get here, but at least this funding is locked into place for the next two years, right?
>> right.
>> and I didn't know they had basically paid to operate our smart building for 10 years and the budget is there for the next two, so that's 12 altogether. Now, if we do this, at the end of the lease period, we would own the building. The reality is just that in the middle of it, anything can happen. But they have urban counties statewide that will be affected. And the other thing is we don't have to give a firm commitment on this until they give a firm commitment on the money or we don't have to spend a penny until we know exactly that they have bought into the deal.
>> yes.
>> so I don't see them lightly just backing off statewide once you got other counties out there with programs up and running. And if the programs aren't work, I guess we would expect the state to do the right thing, either modify them and make them work or redirect the funding hopefully to some our county treatment program. Questions? They were nice enough to spend an hour with me yesterday so the more I heard about it really the more attractive it looks for us locally if we think that treatment is important, and to be honest, you know, we have talked about the need for more treatment for Travis County offenders as long as I've been part of county government and that's a long time.
>> have I missed something? Where -- who picks up the interim costs while this thing is being done? Because we don't start getting payments from the state until the space is occupied. Is that in here somewhere? What's the financing schedule for that? I mean because you've got -- you can build a $2.4 million facility how soon, roger? In a year?
>> yes, it takes design and procurement and build is about like a year and three months. Put some contingency time in here.
>> and the lease is going to be predicated on a 2.4 milliondollars debt service.
>> it's going to be on the total which is 2,723,000. Because you get to include the cost of planning and design and i.t.s. And also security, I did not mention earlier, I included the security for 63,700 and equipment 10,000. These are the 2,723,000,000 to construct the buildings. In addition to that, it will be added the cost of annual cost of maintaining the facility and routine maintenance and repair.
>> and that's what the state is paying for, all of these things included. So who picks up -- I mean who picks up the interim costs?
>> you don't have a lease number in front of you. Roger needed to finalize his number, but p.b.o.'s intent is we would run this through, look at the cost of the money over the life of the issue which would be a 20-year obligation. That would be run out evenly across a 15-year period to set the base rent. So it will include your issuance costs and your cost of money for issuing this debt as well as the actual 2-7, which is typically how we do a pay-back. We would do it the same, run on a 15-year schedule with kind of a flat because of the state funding issue. We don't have that day. In addition to that is correct as roger said, the maintenance costs would be factor on top of that, part of the term of the lease when you actually start -- if the state funds, you will actually be looking at the cost of that. So on a typical schedule if you were to issue the c.o., you would have one payment in 2008, but I can verify that for you before you would very least payments coming in.
>> the state allows you to add all of those things in there with a lease payment.
>> and it's typically how the cost of base rent would be so that's what we're going to do.
>> do we know what the terms of the lease are before we spend the money, so obviously we would prefer a certain sort of lease arrangement and shift to sherri guess is how I would put it so you aim to shift, but if you have to share a little bit of it, I guess it depends on how the other payments are spread out. But certainly we would try to recoup cost.
>> what's the average time that we have somebody in our custody or in our program, whenever we start taking on things like drug issues? What's the average length of time that we --
>> for the program itself? The program is four months and then included with this, which is state funding as continuing care where they continue to go to counseling and get intensive supervision for another six months, I believe. Four months. So it's eight months total.
>> is that -- I mean everything that I've always read about, you know, taking on this, I mean it's better than nothing, but if you really want to take on the ills of society whenever it comes to drugs, doesn't it take a much more intense program than what we're really able to really take on?
>> three months is not long enough. Six months is ideal. And that is one of the reasons why we do the continuing care. And we also have as a pilot a drug reentry course which we're testing at this point, and drug courts show a good track record.
>> what we're hoping for next week is basically to authorize telling the state that we are ready for the deal, and once we get the ts crossed and is dotted, we want to partner with them basically.
>> okay.
>> but we need the money to take the call. And so if there are additional questions, we can either contact dr. Nagy between now and next Tuesday or have an opportunity to get them answered next Tuesday, right?
>> right.
>> should we have a letter prepared to share with the state or will they take your word to speak for us?
>> you know, probably a letter would be great. I think they would take my word, but something in writing always has a little bit more, so yeah, if that's possible.
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> I know you have a close working relationship with them.
>> yes.
>> anything else? Questions?
>> okay. Thank you very much.
>> see you next week. We'll call you all up early in the day because looks like it may be piloting.
>> thank you.
>> thanks for your patience also.
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, August 15, 2007, 18:30 AM