Travis County Commissioners Court
November 20, 2007
Item 13
13, consider and take appropriate action regarding update on a day counseling center for the community supervision and corrections department. We chatted about this one last week. There was the need to -- Commissioner Davis wanted to contact a resident and then we would get a report back today.
>> what did you say, judge?
>> on number 13, you said last week you wanted to check with the neighborhood association out there and we would get a report back today. And further discussion.
>> well, they are -- well, we did -- what happened was that on that item they did submit some letters and also they submitted some things I think as far as postponement of this item. So I知 just -- I think each and every one of you do have that request, and judge, I think the e-mail -- they e-mailed you and I both on that item requesting a postponement.
>> okay. Unfortunately I just got mine 10 minutes ago because I was out yesterday. Where are we on it? So is there a request to postpone it?
>> yes, I知 here on behalf of the neighborhood association and e-mail went out late afternoon. My name is buck mckinney, a board member of the guadalupe association for improved neighborhood. And we've requested information that was not sent to us until the end of the day yesterday. We have had a brief opportunity to review it, but we've asked for a postponement so we can have additional time. In the interim, the neighborhood has already voiced its opposition to this day treatment center and unless we see something in these materials that indicates otherwise, we are opposed.
>> okay. Will a week make a difference or --
>> we are getting external pressure from our nunding source, the state, to move ahead with this. It's been since October 10th that we have received the money. And we do have pressure to go ahead and move along with it. It's been over a month, close to six weeks since we've received notification that we would receipt the money. And in addition to that, we have applicants on hold that we would like to offer positions to. So there are some considerations regarding a delay.
>> okay. Would a discussion this morning help any?
>> perhaps, but I知 only one from a neighborhood that has asked for -- in good faith for information from Travis County which they didn't provide to us until the 11th hour last united, and really I think the neighborhood should be afforded an opportunity to discuss this.
>> are the questions that are still remaining, are they the questions regarding parking needs, number of clients to be served, hours of operation, zoning regulations, crime statistics and potential benefits through services?
>> those are some of them. We've also requested input from neighborhood associations in other areas where they've located similar facilities. They haven't provided anything on that and they've only provided incomplete information on some of the items that you just mentioned there.
>> all of these issues as well as the effect on other neighborhoods were pretty openly and exhaustively discussed previously in open session with the court.
>> we've received no input from the leaders of the other neighborhood associations and that's one thing that we've asked for. And I don't know how exhaustively things were discussed, but we requested information to be delivered to us. We've been waiting on that information, and at 4:20 yesterday afternoon it was e-mailed to us, we understand several days after it was sent to the Commissioners court. We truly do not believe that Travis County is dealing with us on a good faith basis. They are not providing --
>> can you
>> [inaudible] on contacting the guadalupe neighborhood association?
>> on September 20th, we met with the neighborhood associations as a group. We did talk about some of the issues. They have requested a
>> [inaudible] for the various locations that currently provide counseling with some of our counselors attending those sessions. But the most compelling is information we provided September 20th which is the individuals that have gone through treatments, tracking them with dps records. They have a substantially -- about six and a half times less arrest rate statewide not only here in Austin than those who do not receive treatment. We provided that information on September 20th. We have provided them information that we should not get arrest rates. The information we sent yesterday is information that we feel is inconclusive as it's based on offensive reports. It's very difficult to interpret this information because there are many factors that contribute to crime either going up or down in these --
>> is this the same information that you all provided to us last week regarding the crime rates around treatment centers throughout the county?
>> yes, it is. We do not operate any other treatment centers in Travis County. These are vendors, they are businesses, which provide counseling to probationers as well as other individuals that may be there at those counseling centers. So we don't currently operate a -- our own counseling facility. These are businesses.
>> so the information that you provided to the guadalupe neighborhood association yesterday is the same information that you provided to us in open court -- was it last week or two weeks ago?
>> it was last week.
>> would you all be able to get together Friday?
>> excuse me.
>> would you all be able to get together Wednesday, Friday or Monday?
>> the following -- Wednesday.
>> we can put it back on next Tuesday. That leaves Wednesday, Friday, Monday or the weekend to meet so will you all be able to do that?
>> are you talking about meeting here next Tuesday?
>> I知 talking about meeting with them before next Tuesday. So next Tuesday at least you will have had an opportunity to ask questions and get the information that's available before we act on it.
>> I don't know that I can get an answer to that for you right now, your honor. I don't have the neighborhood here. We are entering a holiday weekend. I would like to correct a few things. We did not meet on September 20th. We met on October 27th with a representative and that's when all these questions were posed by the neighborhood association. That was less than a month ago. We've been waiting on that information. If there was a hearing here last week, it was after informing us that it was going to be delayed. We didn't know bit and I wasn't here and I don't believe anyone from the neighborhood association was here. We believe the neighborhood should be offered an opportunity to provide some input on this. At this point they already have and we're opposed. Emphatic ily opposed based on the information provided so for.
>> to get additional information as far as everything discussed in open session, that's also available on the website in pdf and video.
>> we were informed there was no hearing, it was being delayed.
>> I知 saying in regard to getting additional information between now and Tuesday, if anyone in the neighborhood association would like to also view what was discussed last week, it's all available in video on the web. You just choose the agenda item and up pops the video.
>> great.
>> we would be glad to meet with the association. I think that's an important thing for us to do so we would be glad to do that. We don't have a lot to add in terms of those particular questions beyond which we have provided to the court. We also sent the fact sheet that we provided to you with the hours of operation, the fact that we believe that we can accommodate parking, et cetera. I think part of the issue here is that there's some uncertainty. We are a program that's being designed at this time and we can't say at any particular point in time exactly how many individuals will be in that building, and I think that's one of the things that the association would like us to be able to say.
>> you have stated what the maximum number is, though, correct?
>> we anticipate that, but there may be occasions where there's a few more individuals than that. But we're going to do the best we can to manage that. The maximum that we provided is substantially less than the amount of parking spaces that are available there at the church or other parking spaces. There's 17 other parking spaces that are also available to us. So there's about 75 to 80 parking spaces available to us, and we have -- we anticipate about 45 at any point in time. It could be slightly more than that.
>> Commissioner eckhardt, these are exactly the kinds of responses that we've gotten which have not been particularly helpful to the neighborhood association.
>> let's clarify it. What would be the maximum that would be in the facility?
>> the maximum, we anticipate that it will be around 48. Including staff. However, when people get -- if we have -- if we can accommodate more and we can utilize the parking spaces that are there and we have a waiting list and we can utilize and there's parking available, we would like to be able to do that.
>> so would we max at 70 because that's the number of parking spaces?
>> yeah, we won't go beyond the number of available parking spaces.
>> but you don't know exactly what that figure is as far as what's beyond. You say you anticipate -- exactly because of what you are doing. Judge, what he was basically saying, hopefully you all can get together between here and next week or whenever and try to iron out whatever needs to be ironed out. But what I asked last week was because -- let me go back to last week. What happened was this. This item appeared on the Commissioners court agenda. And as I normally do when I see things on the Commissioners court's agenda, if there is a neighborhood impacted one way or the other on a lot of things because we do have some controversial, hot button concerns here in this concerning, I normally notify the neighborhood associations. That's what I traditionally do. And in this particular case, I notified the neighborhood association because I had no idea that this was even coming up on the Commissioners court's agenda, period. So I notified them when I saw it on the agenda. Just like a whole lot of things that I do, as I stated earlier. So from that standpoint, what I requested was something in writing because when we deal with these things, I try to get something in writing to substantiate or the reasons -- your positions and whatever incumbent for the court so we can put them before the matter of record. Now, those two letters that came from the neighborhood association, we received those yesterday evening late. But anyway, they were here. And I had an opportunity to distribute those letters to the persons on this court and also to the clerk. They have copies of the neighborhood letters. And this morning we could hear testimony I guess whatever the position, the person asked, there was still a lot of unanswered questions. And it appears today there are still some unanswered questions that need to be answered. So with that, I think it's a good idea for those questions to be answered, those that got the answers and those that got the questions I think need to get their heads together and go ahead and try to get this thing together. I知 hearing different things. I致e heard October 27th is when the neighborhood was contacted, I heard another day and I don't know what is what. But I do know there appears to be a need for a meeting of cscd and also the bona fide neighborhood associations. Because this particular facility is within the boundaries, official boundaries of these neighborhood associations. So it just appears that that's what the judge has recommended, I think that's what we may need to do and head in that direction. What was your name, sir?
>> buck mckinney.
>> buck, is there any way possible you can get word out to the folks in your neighborhood group to let them know that there's a pending meeting that needs to be held per the request of what the court is trying to get to as far as a meeting of the two groups? Is there any way possible?
>> absolutely. And I値l do that this afternoon if we can agree on a time.
>> could you all exchange telephone numbers? You and dr. Nagle. Exchange telephone numbers so there won't be no margin of miscommunicate which happens if you both got each other's telephone numbers and you can call and set up that meeting when you need to do it. And I just think we need to head in that direction. But it appears there are a lot of unanswered questions we're getting and those things need to be addressed. So let me suggest that as far as part of this resolution. As far as on this particular item.
>> may I clarify one thing? We -- there tends to be some confusion about the history here. The September 20th meeting, that was with all the associations in the area and then we met specifically with
>> [inaudible] on October 27th. And we have had regular e-mails conversations with them.
>> what I知 hearing is two different things, that's what I知 saying. I知 hearing something here that we tried to have meets and haven't been available and all this. So I知 hearing different stuff and that's why I think it's really good for you all to exchange some telephone numbers this morning and move forward where you could hear the questions and you could provide the answers.
>> Commissioner Davis, if I may, here's what we do know. They tried to sneak this in on the agenda without getting back to us on the questions we had before. They've had our contact information, they had a meeting with us and now they try to get it on the agenda again this morning after forwarding this information on the 11th last night. They just haven't shown good faith in this process. I hope that Travis County will try to show a little more good faith if we're going to extend this and afford the neighborhood a meaningful opportunity to review the impact on the neighborhood. And we have no doubt that there are some numbers that show that these treatment facilities are a good thing for the participants they are in. That's what she talked about before. What we want to know is the impact on our neighborhood. That's what's important to us. We've asked reasonable questions, they've not been answered, and this thing has been scheduled twice now without proper notice to the neighborhood association to try to get it pushed through. We weren't even told at the October 27th meeting this thing has been funded. We were told otherwise, that it hasn't been funded, that the status was indeterminate and we had no idea they were trying to get this through in such a rush manner. The neighborhood has been completely in the dark about this and I think that's something that the Commissioners need to know.
>> I would like to allow staff to respond to that. I get concerned when there are accusations that we're sneaking things on to the agenda and acting in bad faith because that's a serious charge.
>> it's a sincere charge.
>> if that's the case, we need to do some real work. And at the same time the other neighborhood associations have been involved. Of course, these agenda items were posted in advance. The information is available on the website as far as all of our discussions in open court. We had other individuals here last week representing ebenezer church.
>> but they knew about the hearing, we didn't. We weren't provided any notice of that hearing, and we were also told they weren't going to make any moves until they had gotten back to us. We were specifically induced to believe that we were dealing with them in some sort of a negotiation process when meanwhile they were trying to get the thing passed here.
>> what do you think the motive in -- as you say, sneaking it on to the agenda?
>> I think they want to get it passed with a minimum of opposition. I don't think they really want to provide the neighborhood with an opportunity to provide the Commissioners court with the benefit of our particular position on this situation.
>> okay.
>> well, judge --
>> hold on. Hold on. Do you have a response to that?
>> there was no intention to do that. Some of the information that we had, we had just compiled right before the Commissioners court meeting, and during the meeting, for example the crime statistics, we just had that. We hadn't hidden that information. We don't feel like that information is very useful and that it doesn't really say much, but we still provided it during Commissioners court to try to address the best we could their concerns about the future.
>> okay. Mr. Johnson.
>> yes. The comment that I would like to make while you are --
>> the name of the association.
>> vandyke johnson, the east Austin economic development corporation which owns the thefacility. The point I would like to raise while I know you are going to postpone this thing, it looks like it's moving in that direction, you did that last time, there is no way -- and remember I told you this, you are not going to resolve this issue with guadalupe because it's their primary goal to stall, stall, stall and delay. We have a 20-year history going through this and doing this. And as long as you postpone and stall, that's what the objective is. If you want to, we could sit down and discuss the whole history with you of all the projects and what has taken place there. And I think one of the things when you read the report that came back from guadalupe, they mention in here and I just looked at a little bit of it, a statement they made was the county disrespected them. Now, that's big ego. When you really think that -- when you want to control the destiny of other people and everything else. Ebenezer has been there with that land for 125 years. We run programs like this all the time. The police department has run a program like this before. No problems, no opposition. But wherever -- wherever -- wherever gain or guadalupe, and they are one and the same, can stall and block with us in progress that they are not running or controlling, it's going to happen. So you are going to come up with the same answer next time. And I can tell you some stories and you can ask the Austin city manager about the last ones. But it's not going to go anywhere. We're just going through a process.
>> all right. Two more questions. One is this is one of the deals where the state has said you provide the facility, we'll provide the money to operate it.
>> right.
>> so what timetable are we on? As to state money.
>> well --
>> can we take another week?
>> we can take another week.
>> okay. The question for guadalupe between now and next week is -- and by the way, I do think we ought to take action one way or another next week because if this facility is not available, we need to see if we can find another one. So the question is if we were to put in place a one-year contract to give us an opportunity to have a look-see on impact whether that would make a difference. Just give me the answer next week. What we request then unless the court objects, and if a member objects, we can do a motion, but my recommendation would be that we allow another week to get questions answered, and where answers are not available, then just say information is not available. But we need to see that too.
>> okay.
>> and it would help us to see what questions are asked, what answers are given, et cetera. And if you cannot meet in person between now and next Tuesday, then I suggest telephone calls, e-mails, however you can make it. If you can't find a place, we'll make a place available here at the Commissioners courthouse.
>> I earlier stated that you all need to exchange some telephone numbers and I think it's very appropriate because I知 only one person on this court. But, of course, this is in precinct 1. And it's very important to me that each one of you exchange the question and answer session like I think is very important to do. And it appears that it's going to be for action next week. Just from what I知 hearing, the action -- and what I知 hearing from the cscd folks, they are on the time clock too, it's unfortunate a lot of time has elapsed and we still aren't where we should be as far as you being able to examine what you think your impacts are and them being able to provide some questions to you to say that the impact won't be that. I don't really know. As far as the data. But I think it's very important that you all exchange phone numbers and if it's going to be on next week for action, then I guess that's what it is. Let me ask you this question. Is there any opposition to that suggestion that's been brought here today, cscd, neighborhood association?
>> I値l only express a concern that we have enough time with the holiday coming up and people leaving town starting tomorrow to pull all that together. And to change meaningfully with these folks with the holidays coming up.
>> let me ask this question to cscd. How long do you actually have actual time available since that response has been made by the neighborhood association, as far as a time line? One week? Two weeks?
>> I would need to contact tcj. We have stated that we would begin putting this program in place when we receive the money. So we're already about six weeks behind and so we have lapsed money for about six weeks of operation that they will need to return that will not be used for treatment. And that was a major concern for them last legislative session and was a major issue regarding providing cscd with the funding.
>> could you make that call and then alert facilities manager lisa perez -- alicia perez and anybody else that wants the answer to that question that I just told you, call and find out how much time you actually have. But in the meantime, I think that the conversations on the question and answer meeting need to commence as soon as possible. In fact, within a week. But I知 still looking at --
>> for Tuesday is what we're talking about, before next Tuesday.
>> but if time allows, and I understand the concerns of what the neighborhoods are saying as far as the holidays and stuff like that, I understand that also. If you have been president of a neighborhood association you know.
>> we need to move as quickly as possible because that's what they've told me already and have expressed concern about the delay.
>> well, give me an answer. Give me something in writing to let me know exactly how much time that you need.
>> ... That we are unable to come up with
>> [inaudible]. It may be best for us to take action on the rest if we don't get this one, find another one if we can.
>> let me just clarify. I just want to get the time frame correct. My understanding from our backup is there was a meeting on September 20th.
>> and there was a member of gain there.
>> and there was a member of gain there but you dispute that.
>> there was not a meeting with the gliewp area guadalupe neighborhood which is where --
>> that's not what I知 asking. Was there a --
>> [multiple voices]
>> can I finish answer?
>> then you can say what you like. So my understanding there was a meeting on September 20th and a gain member was there and that's undisputed.
>> right.
>> and that there was then a questionnaire sent out like this on October 9th to all the participants in the September 20th meeting? Is that correct?
>> that was sent on October the 1st.
>> okay. October 1st. Did anyone to your knowledge in gain receive this?
>> yes, we requested --
>> [multiple voices]
>> you said yes and that was the answer. After that there was a meeting on October 27th?
>> first there was a reminder on October 9th.
>> that there would be a meeting.
>> that we did not receive the questionnaire.
>> ahh.
>> and then we had a meeting with gain specifically on October 27th.
>> then a specific meeting with gain on October 27th. Then we had a posting of an agenda item regarding this for last week.
>> [inaudible] because we wanted to get additional input to give gain an additional option for input and we're postponing it again today to give gain an additional option.
>> no, we're expecting it so we can get the information that Travis County promised to us so that we could provide you with our input. We've been waiting on this information throughout this entire process. After the initial meeting we requested -- after the initial meeting we requested a meeting with them which we had on October 27th. On October 27th we requested information with them so we could make some informed input for the benefit of the Commissioners here. We've been waiting on that information. It wasn't given to us until 4:20 yesterday afternoon. There's been no delay. Actually the comment over here, I would like to say this isn't about ego. I have a 4-year-old daughter that lives in that neighborhood. We have 10 children that live on east 10th street directly adjacent to the facility. This is about families and an opportunity to provide input which I believe the neighborhood should be afforded in this instance.
>> and that's my point in drawing out the time line here. In showing all of the opportunities that gain has had to have meaningful input on this facility.
>> we've opposed it. We've opposed it based on the information we've had. And we weren't provided any additional information until 4:20. If he would like us to reconsider our position we will and we'll have a meeting with them. Otherwise we are emphatically opposed because they haven't provided us with the information. The information they have provided indicates an increase in crime where these facilities have gone in.
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> we provided them with the fact sheet and the information from a.p.d.
>> okay.
>> and the zoning and addressed the parking issue.
>> okay.
>> so those are the four issues that we addressed in the correspondence that we sent them yesterday.
>> we'll give you a chance to finish.
>> I just want to make a point. This is about our neighborhood, about our families. It's not about egos, not about delays. It's about meaningful procedure where both sides have an opportunity to provide input. We have provided input so far. We're opposed based on this process, their failure to keep news the loop and the information that they provided us at 4:20 yesterday, we're opposed. We will meet with them again and we would be happy to come back and let the Commissioners court know if we've changed our position, but at this point we're opposed.
>> mr. Johnson.
>> I would just like to add, and since we're expecting this again, this organization, they were opposed to senior housing that ebenezer built. Same thing. We went through it forever until the city just got frustrated with them and we built it. They were opposed to day care that ebenezer was running. No real substantial reason. They were opposed to the housing that's up there now. They have opposed every single thing that anybody wanted to do there, and ebenezer has been there for 125 years. So basically they -- you know, we really object to them dictating ebenezer's ministry after 125 years. And trying to control the ministry that comes out of ebenezer and it's nonprofit. These are things we've done for 125 years. And it's not new, it's not unique. We've been there for 125 years. These are new kids on the block trying to control and run things that they have no right to. You know, what about us.
>> we will not have complete harmony next week, but we will have a vote. And I hate to postpone this, but we've learned patience on the court. Sometimes when we reason through these we can achieve consensus, sometimes we cannot. Let's make another run on it and use your judgment about whether to call the state. But next week we'll take the facts as we have them and act on them. And I do think that if there is additional information that you all need, if you could give specific questions, that would help. It may help if you would send those questions to the court too.
>> exchange telephone numbers.
>> are we definitively on the agenda for next Wednesday or how will we know?
>> Tuesday.
>> we are on the agenda for Tuesday. We are to meet before Tuesday morning over a holiday weekend is what you are telling me.
>> let me say this to you. I have as a Commissioner, the judge is the only one here that can set the agenda, unless we have two or more members on the -- well, two members, we can kind of tell what we want on the agenda at that time. But otherwise the county judge is the one to set the agenda. So I think it's important to me to know exactly how much time you do have. I don't know how the vote is going to come out next week one way or the other. So in preparation to not knowing that, I would like to see from the state in writing the amount of time you actually have to deal with here in this particular regard.
>> if they simply just said --
>> pardon me?
>> because I believe what they are going to say the same thing they've told me since we've received the money.
>> I didn't understand.
>> it's doubtful they are going to give me a date. They are going to say the same thing they have said since we received the money which is we need to move as soon as possible.
>> well, that could be -- that's like reasonable. How do you define -- I don't want to get into semantics here, but I do want to come up with something pretty much dad-gum concrete that can look at -- look at this objectively and so we can move forward one way or the other. And not knowing what that information is is kind of handcuffing me by not having the information. I知 quite sure the state -- unless you want me to call the state, they may give me an answer, I don't know. But the bottom line is that we need to know how much time we have available.
>> okay.
>> so I知 still looking for that information from you. And you all exchange telephone numbers. That would be real good.
>> thank you. Commissioner Daugherty.
>> judge, just real quickly. It is not reasonable to ask somebody to do this over the thanksgiving holiday.
>> thank you.
>> it is just not. Why don't we just agree that a week from Tuesday, before that time, you have a week from this coming -- I mean I would think -- because all it's going to do is throw gasoline on the fire to just force somebody into, well, we've got to do something with the holidays. God, we've got family members. No group would want to have to make this calling over the thanksgiving weekend.
>> thank you. I agree.
>>
>> [inaudible] at least the first contact I know of was September 20th.
>> well, I知 just saying that it is -- we are saying you go get this thing handled by next Tuesday, and whoever was on the other side, no one would like that. I wouldn't like it. They don't appreciate it. You are right, mr. Johnson. The answer may not be what they want to hear and I think that, you know, we see that in this community all the time, it doesn't make any difference what information you give people, the information you give them is not what they want to hear and it's still going to be a fight. But I think that the respect for -- and given the fact that I do see one thing, this information was gotten to me yesterday, gotten to judge, yet he saw it this morning, it's too late to get that information I think they are entitled to a week from Tuesday and I think that this date just needs to -- the state needs to deal with that and say we're working on this as hard as we can, but after all this is Austin and Austin neighborhoods demand to be heard. That is the way we do democracy in Austin, Texas. If you don't like it, you better move because that's how we all do things here. That's what we've got to do and I just think we need to give them a week.
>> that's why I think it's very important, and when I made the statement for the cscd representative to get with the state and ask them if we have more time that's actually allowed here. And I don't think that's a pretty hard request to make.
>> another two weeks? Can we live with two weeks? Two weeks it is. Unless there is a motion to the contrary.
>> I have one question. Do we risk losing money for treatment purposes if we wait two weeks?
>> I don't believe two weeks will be too late.
>> I was trying -- anyway.
>> two weeks from today it will be back on. Thank you very much.
>> thank you.
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, November 21, 2007, 18:30 AM