Travis County Commissioners Court
December 16, 2008
Item 22
>> thank you, Commissioners.
>> now, 22 is consider and take appropriate action regarding the transfer of 826.546 acres volente mitigation tract from grayson volente investments, ltd., to Travis County and acceptance of operation and maintenance responsibility to be managed as part of the balcones canyonlands preserve. And john hilly wanted us to discuss this. Is john hilly planning to be here for the discussion?
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> my note just says john wants to discuss. Maybe he's listening.
>> I'm hoping john will come because we need him here for this discussion. We, Travis County t.n.r. Staff, natural resources staff have been negotiating with the volente folks for a number of years and this is a property that they have a 10-a permit and this is their mitigation. They are developing a number of acres and that for the development that would impact endangered species, they were required by the u.s. Fish & wildlife service to set aside this mitigation land on 827 acres and to manage it to a certain level to protect it for the endangered species. They have approach Travis County and are interested in transferring that to us and they are going to deed it to us so we would own that 827 acres. So john hilly has been working with us to work on a purchase contract and a warrant deed for the transferral. Natural resources to be part of the bcp.
>> this would count toward our become commitment.
>> it would, but be aware since this had a 10-a permit that was issued a number of years ago, that property is already in the acreage count that we have given you previously.
>> not an increase.
>> it does not reduce the amount of acreage that we still need to acquire. But what it does is this brings 827 acres that is more securely managed and protected than it would have been if it was -- if it was managed by the developer. Remember that fish and wildlife service has been very generous to us in allowing us to count properties that are part of somebody else's 10-a permit, that they are actually letting us count those on our permit. But that sometimes developers are not the best stewards of these lands, they are not in the business of protecting endangered species habitat and it's a risk if something happened in the future and those properties were not being managed to the way fish and wildlife wanted, we would volente to buy an additional 827 acres. So it really works to their benefit, to the developer's benefit to transfer it to us because they know that it's going to be protected so they are kind of off the hook, but also it's beneficial to Travis County and the city of Austin to ensure long-term protection of those properties that we can use for our permit.
>> there's an interesting couple of provisions in here. One is basically kind of a see saw provision that once the tax benefit financing mechanism generates sufficient revenue for basic land management, it's at that point we start paying for it, for the actual land management portion.
>> for the first number of years there's bridge financing from the developer so. The developer is paying Travis County to manage these properties or this 827-acre property. Until such time as the tax benefit financing generates enough tax money that it's redirected tax money or the tax benefit financing. At that point then enough money will be coming off the development of that land that will provide money for us to manage those properties.
>> and then the other interesting aspect of it is the option for the volente homeowners association to have limited access.
>> yes.
>> that is supervised, educated access. A specific trail.
>> that was something that was debate on how to do that and they chose to retain a license, and john hilly could possibly explain how that works a little better, but they retain that right, that they retain that license for their residents to have access on to trails, that it's very limited, it's only during the nonnesting season for the golden cheek bachelors, it's controlled and their residents would have to go through a training program to even walk on that and it is something their homeowners association would manage and monitor and that it could be withdrawn and if there are problems that we can close those trails. So we -- we put in quite strong self-help rights on our part to make sure we had those rights to protect that land if there were any problems. Since the developer has not broken ground yet on the development, they wanted the right to not turn this on yet. They have to pay additional money, they are paying us for basic land management and then they will also be paying for that additional resident access, but they didn't want to turn on the resident access cost yet because they haven't broken ground and there are no houses and no residents yet. So they will notify us six months in advance so we can ramp up for staffing because this is a significantly large property. And so we don't know at what point they may choose to do that or who knows if they ever will choose to do that. It really will depend on the development and the residents and if they choose to take on that additional cost.
>> and then interestingly -- this is just interesting in regard to the previous conversation we had, there's a life estate in a home on the tract with an agreement to scrape the house once the life estate expires.
>> yes.
>> so we won't have to deal with it as we have the other properties on the bunton and stratton tracts.
>> that's correct.
>> but on those two points, there's still points that we're negotiating and that's part of the reason I was hoping this wouldn't go on consent so I could let you know I'm still talking with their attorney as of late yesterday afternoon on the terms on the life estate, we wanted to make sure that we got to sign off on anybody that they assigned those requirements to raze the build organize whatever. As you now they just wanted to assign it to whenever they wanted. We want to be able to sign off on who that person was. And secondly on the elements of the license agreement, they had tried to inject a number of provisions in -- well, in the deed as well that continue to say that we have to comply with their requirements of their permit. And rose has pretty well held the line on the negotiations all the time that no, we're managing this property according to Travis County requirements of our permit. And so they are still trying to make sure that they are comfortable with those provisions. The developer is consulting with their lawyer and hopefully by tend of the day will resolve this. But I wanted to make sure that y'all were comfortable with what's going on. And I didn't want to recommend approval of this until I had the signed document in my hand. I don't have that yet.
>> well, why don't we wait until we have that? Tuesday of next week.
>> it's moving at their speed and so they've -- they will move --
>> if it's that important, why don't we delay action until we get the documents back.
>> that would be plenty of time for us, I think, a week.
>> how do we determine how much the county is paid to manage the preserve?
>> we have formulas that we use and that we itemize each specific task that we have to do. When we take ownership of a property or management of a property, that there are number of things that our permit requires us to do. And so golden cheek warbler surveys is one of those, fencing is one of those, deer management, many other things. And so we use our finance formulas and figure, okay, how much staff time would be required to do this task and figure out --
>> the answer I'm looking for is we'll be reimbursed 100% of what it costs us.
>> we will be paid for what it costs us to manage these properties until such time as a tax benefit financing money begins to come in. So we are paid that. I will tell you that there is one little difficulty as the money comes in to pay us for that management, but we are not instantly able to hire staff to -- to do that management. And so in the short term is that the staff that we have today, like if we close on the property in a month, then our existing staff on the ground has to take on management of a district 827 acres without additional staffing. And so we will be discussing with joe how to work on staffing and potentially would come back during the next budget session to hire staff with the money that we have collected. So we'll have the money and it will be sitting in our bcp account, but to be able to spend that on staff will take some additional work.
>> and this makes sense for Travis County to do it because?
>> because this property is -- will be beneficial to ensure that our bcp permit conditions and terms are met. And it will help us manage this property better than the developer would be managing it. It will ensure that our permit is protecting our residents so that they can continue -- remember this is a take permit so it allows endangered species habitat in western Travis County to be taken so that those areas can be developed. So this is the mitigation for that development.
>> questions? Makes sense to me to wait until we get the documents here. Our lawyers are involved so we know it will be expedition.
>> [laughter] I'm serious when I say that. Let's do the right thing and let's do it right, john. Next week okay?
>> very good.
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:
Tuesday, December 16, 2008 1:45 PM