Travis County Commissioners Court
January 8, 2008
Item 19
19. Consider and take appropriate action on request to appropriate $15,000 for a community opinion survey on county land use authority and authorize staff to prepare the necessary request for proposals. Judge this is one that I did.
>> I was about to ask you that.
>> I name is associated with that. I did. I talked with joe gieselman said let's go ahead and move forward with this first year and come back to the court to see if they would like to allow the court $15,000 to go through with this particular community opinion pole survey on land use. Of course there's a lot of moving points. I figure that the court would probably maybe want to add some things or include some things. Recently we -- there was a meeting, goodness gracious I would like to say November of last year. Commissioner eckhardt, you may recall with the league of women voters, was that November of last year?
>> I believe it was December.
>> December, okay. That we did discuss this and as -- there was -- there was different elected officials were asked to make comments, but one of the hot button topics at that time, it's been a hot button topic here before this court, the land use authority, of -- within Travis County. Of course the league of women voters at that time stated that they even looked at this. This has been a big high priority issue for them also. Not only local by state-wide. So -- so with that and trying to move forward with that I figure that would be a good time for us to bring this before the Commissioners court to look and see if there's a possibility for us to go out and get an opinion of -- of a survey on such authority and joe, I guess you can fit in all of those bits and pieces as far as this is concerned. But I know the court will probably want to have input as far as the scope and all of the other lot of things, who the stakeholders ought to be a whole lot of other things moving parts so we can at least have something binding and tied up with -- to present to the legislature. We even had a legislature there at that league of women voters meeting who -- belinda, she was in support of land use. There's a lot of support for it, but we really haven't heard from the residents of Travis County and how they really feel about county's land use authority, possibility. So joe, with that I would just lay it out and let you go from there.
>> run with it, joe.
>> well, in my opinion I think there can be a legitimate use of this public opinion survey, not as a push poll. We are not looking for a predetermined support for land use authority, but a legitimate exploration of issues that have in the past inhibited track getting authority, legitimate issues. They vary by stakeholder groups. I would see this opinion survey as more of a stratified sample. Meaning you would poll different organization, different groups of -- of stakeholders to find out where they are. There may be not a straight -- a black and white answer. It may be yes we would like, but within these limits. And we ought to find out where those limits are if there are and in what area would they entertain additional authority at the county level. For whatever reason, the counties have sought this authority in the past, have been unable to convince the state elected officials that we should use that authority, what's the problem. I think the poll would help us support that.
>> you did mention stakeholders. That's what I wanted to underline is stakeholders, it's various stakeholders that need to be included in this particular opinion analysis so I want to make sure of that.
>> well, a survey is only as valid or meritorious as the questions. Who would draft appropriate questions for us to consider?
>> I think that's probably a combined effort of the county and the consultant that we would employ to do this. There are ways of asking unbiased questions. Absolutely professionals, there are professionals who are experts in that area. The subject, land use authority, that's going to have to come from the county, my staff and others who are intimately familiar with development regulations what they do in such a way that we can lay those out and work with the consultant to find out what's a good question --
>> how long would it take your staff to put together a description of the requests that would be given potential consultants?
>> I would say let's give it three weeks to put together a proposal. A request for proposal.
>> and a list of possible stakeholders?
>> you bet.
>> if those are the two things that we are looking at.
>> yes.
>> it may be a real good exercise, I just think there's a little bit of work we need to do before we get to the next base. If we can come up with an instrument and list the stakeholders that we think could assist us, I think it would be well worth an investment of $15,000.
>> yeah.
>> it's just that I do think that we ought to go ahead and do in-house what you are saying may take two or three weeks. If we get it done before three weeks. We will put it on earlier.
>> I have some additional information to throw into the hopper. Late yesterday afternoon in speaking with -- with sally campbell from envision central Texas, they are entering into I think they are calling it a vision assessment where they are going back into the community to survey opinion makers and decision makers as well as do field work in making presentations and also a survey of the public about the successes in the envision central Texas plan as well as the impediments to achieving it. We may be able to ride some coat tail there perhaps. I would love to see this poll, this idea of a poll fit into a larger field plan.
>> third question is whether that's a good idea. Bring that back, too, how is that?
>> that sounds good. This will give us some time to explore that. Also the possibility of a follow-up poll after some time to see whether any opinions have changed or why. The only caveat that I want to put out there is we might have 80% public opinion in favor of land use and still fail at the legislature because the impediment is really with the makeup of the legislature beyond the Travis County delegation.
>> right.
>> and those stakeholders I guess --
>> suggest a land use to the average person he or she won't know what you are talking about. That's why you have to be real specific in exactly what you're surveying. When we see a draft of that we will know.
>> I spoke my point being we may want to expand out the base of the people that we question beyond Travis County perhaps in areas in the state where we have the most difficulty explaining our need.
>> you can't
>> [indiscernible] you can't even touch it. For 200 grand. Especially if you are going outside the area.
>> we are trying to refine that and get that to joe. We will look at it. I have got four things here. I have question and description, that's for us to look at. And sort of a -- of a refined what it is that we seek and if you can't convey that to a consultant, my guess is you greatly limit what the consultant can do for you. Then a list of stakeholders. Then I got e.c.t., whether collaboration with them will help or harm. Then I have 15,000 and I have a big question mark. It seems to me when we can anxious the first three, we may well determine what it's worth to us. If we think instead of $15,000 there's another amount that may be more appropriate, but that amount would be a good investment for us.
>> define -- I?m sorry --
>> questions, description, two stakeholder, three ect, and four really is cost. I got 15,000 and a couple of question marks. Did we leave anything out?
>> no. I think that about covers it, judge. Did you -- well stakeholders I guess -- let me ask this question -- well -- I guess when you come up and identify the stakeholders I will know exactly who they are at that time. When we at least identify who we think they are.
>> get them to us as backup before the item, that way if we have some to add we can do it.
>> right now I don't know exactly where we're going as far as all of the stakeholders are concerned, but we want to make sure to include those that maybe have not been included and those that have some weight over at the legislature and everything like that to ensure that their input is also included, whether they are opposed or whatever their position is. They just need to be a part of the process. I want to make sure that we are as inclusive as possible to make sure that we get something that's pretty pervasive.
>> I just added number 5. Which is January 29th, '08.
>> '08.
>> or earlier.
>> yeah.
>> that means not later. Mr. Gieselman. Or earlier.
>> [laughter] yes, sir?
>> why wouldn't we ask our lobbyist to also start asking some questions about what are the things that are deal killers for -- I mean from these committee members. Get them to start doing a little leg work on this stuff. They know that county regulation is something that we're very interested in. But I do -- maybe we just need to let bob and chris know that we're going through this process, but those are -- those are the people that stop this stuff and you might as well get the -- our lobby guys, you know, to ask some questions.
>> they are already on it. I did visit with bob last Friday and we talked about this poll as well as his efforts. I think he's got a pretty good understanding of where we're going. He's already initiated some contacts with the who's who in the legislature.
>> okay. Number 6. Keep engaged. We are engaged already, keep them engaged. More information that we come up with, pass it on to them. How's that?
>> good enough.
>> okay. Any objection to this being our direction? With don't need a formal vote.
>> as long as we are moving forward, report back in January 29th or 28th.
>> 29th.
>> 29th is -- should be a Tuesday, right.
>> or earlier.
>> or earlier.
>> with that --
>> joe remembered that part.
>> we didn't -- if you can get things to us before then as it comes in it would be great in case we need to add something to what may have been left out. If possible.
>> okay. Sounds good to me.
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, January 9, 2008 8:00 AM