Travis County Commissioners Court
January 22, 2008
Item 29
29, consider and to appropriate action on directing county staff to develop additions to the code relating to acquisition and sale of certain types of county owned real property unrelated to road construction. The only backup here is the memo that joe shared with us? This memo is county policy cu))q'a&v?
>> it's the guidelines court for real property assessment. And that came about when we were talking about the disposition of the satellite three yard on hamilton pool road. Basically the process we would go through thether minq the county has any need for a piece of property and whether or not we should sell it or hold it or lease. So it doesn't really speak to the process of once yu determine to sell it, how to go through the sale process. %uauhgets you to the point of putting it on the market. I think what we are talking about is where you take it from there once you determine that you want to sell a piece of property, how do you go about selling it. Other than road and right-of-way and I think this primarily came up at least in tnr with regard to the johnny morris road facility and then facilities has property that they sell periodically. So I think what we're trying to do is get a general policy that applies to not road property but more like facilities and area land that we may own that we have determined that we want to sell, what process do we go through to do that.
>> do we need more time on this item? Not quite the backup I thought we would have. On the johnny morris road "eujsummary of what we to put did on burnette road, and that's item number 39 which is an executive session discussion.
>> and we provided that same process, judge, to the Commissioners coward to consider for this particular item, if they wish to follow that process or work with that to develop a process.
>> do we need an additional week or are we ready?
>> can I make a comment to staff with permission from the court. Listen, joe, I guess with your particular policy that you already have in place, there was an item in there, in your particular request, 3 c. Can you tell me exactly what the public involvement is? Ublic e it says conside) quasy, public request per se. What does that really mean? I think of the things that that Commissioner eckhardt and I both reviewed, and we saw maybe some adding from this point into a process as far as policy is concerned, that particular information, I guess everyone has a copy. I don't know. I thought we disseminated that to everyone. To look at, from 3 c, and look at that added language there to ensure that policy is adhered to. But I need to get a definite, a defined, I guess, definition from you, from staff, to tell me exactly what this means, what process alking about.
>> what 3 c refers to is even if the county had no need for our own property, would another government entity have need for it, would we consider, for instance, instead of selling the satellite one facility, say the city of Austin had a need for that property, would we be willing to give it to the city of Austin for use. I think that's what that refers to. It's not public in generally. It's another public agency that may have need for our county owned property. That's hat that refers to.
>> that's what that refers to.
>> rightcame. I was hoping to, I guess, under public, there might be another government entity or minute else. I guess my concern was having to fit into this to take some of the suggestion, I think Commissioner eckhardt and I both had meetings on this. It just appeared that we needed a jump in point with the current existing policy. That didn't seem to be a door open, but the door may be opened there because it did refer to the public. Of course, did you get a copy of the information that was disseminated as far as backup is concerned to look at some of the modifications or additions, I guess, to existing policy? Did y'all--
>> I got what analicia sent out, and I got proposed procedure for real property owned by Travis County former market template.
>> yej.
>> and then of course a third is the guidelines that tnr distributed. Had a is the backup that hi--that I had.
>> so you didn't get that. Commissioner eckhardt, do you have an objection maybe to allowing them to have an opportunity and digest what you looked at?
>> absolutely, I think that would be fine.
>> okay. > members of the court need to see backup of some sort.
>> I thihat to we sent everyone. I’m almost quite sure that we sent that.
>> the rules require that the backup be given with the agenda item or here after. We normally accept it up to the 11th hour. Any time up until five o'clock this if there's no backup. Maybe it would be a good idea to take this since it's already adopted and have a public input section. Makes sense to me.
>> if you look at the farmers market starting at step number 18, that does provide, if the court would want to consider neighborhood meetings and providing information, sample questionnaire.
>> questions igs --acquisition and sale of certain types of travis cijeayreal property. These guidelines cover acquisition and sale or just the sale?
>> this is the sale.
>> soud we change the wording of had this item next week? Are we really focusing on sale or acquisition too? 29 says acquisition and sale. Are we really focusing on sale of county owned property? Looking at this language, it "jjamean.
>> we had two separate items on the draft agenda and there was some confusion as to whether we were acquiring or selling. In order to get everything to kind of gathered together in one discussion, I think we melded them to one agenda item, acquisition and/or sale. I think what we are looking for is a general policy on either this acquisition or sale, what type of public participation would you want in either one of those. I think that is what we are talking about here. F thethink that the issuq sale of Travis County owned property is certainly a hotter issue right now.
>> yesand we could probably separate them out again as we had it before and look at acquisition issues separately. Do you think there is utility in looking at them together? For unified policy?
>> I think as we discuss, usually on acquisition, we look but I do think that separate from this, when we start talking about planning in this particular area that we can address that.
>> on acquisition we have used the real estate exception to the open meeting act up until the very very very last minute. And I assume at benefitted us in terms of negotiating a better price and other terms and conditions. So that is a big deal. I hout we were looking at public input opportunities for the salethat's exact.
>> that's exactly my point.
>> I think we can focus on that.
>> whatever item you give me we'll but on the the agenda and have the agenda setting meeting tomorrow at 1 30. The aqs ill be on next week unless I’m told we need to wait another week. I do think we ought to have !p()uthrjjrby Friday if possible for us to review in preparation for next week. In view of the time, yes, sir.
>> just to make sure u two separate processes, one for acquisition and one for sale?
>> I’m not ready for acquisition myselfment whatever item is submitted to the county judge, the county judge will put on the agenda. My only request is that there be appropriate backup, preferably ar+q.xt frr"pv
>> this was the area that we discussed about sale. And Commissioner Daugherty may have asked the question at the time, what is the process. And of course, we didn't get a chance to respond to that that the particular time. But since then this, there has been a process for sale that we have come up with. So we'd love to make sure that that stays on course and on track as far as sales are concerned.
>> yes. Now, in view of the hour, and the fact that 31 is really a kind of, we could take that in executive session, can't we?
>> qakharj.
>> consultation with attorney.
>> right, mconsultation with attorney, of course. I think we ought to try to discuss it. It's a kind of unique deal. And this way, I appreciate it. J that will give us this afternoon for executive session.
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 23, 2008 8:09 PM