Travis County Commissioners Court
December 16, 2008
Items 23 and 31
>> 23 is to consider and take appropriate action on federal economic stimulus package, including list of projects submitted by the Texas department of transportation.
>> judge, would you consider also calling up 31, which is a related item?
>> 31, consider and take appropriate action on request from the national association of counties regarding county infrastructure survey of potential projects for federal economic stimulus.
>> these two items were intended to tee up discussion on what projects we would recommend, we as a county would recommend to the federal government in the event that they authorized federal funding as part of the economic stimulus program. We were made aware of this about two weeks ago when we received txdot's list of economic stimulus projects. And at the time we were of the opinion that there are was the conduit for the federal funding that basically the federal government would use the d.o.t.s throughout the nation as the vehicle for spending quickly on capital projects to get people back to work and employed. I think we have a better understanding now that there are perhaps was just a piece of the picture. That txdot in fact was moving quickly in response to what they perceived as being the need. On the other hand, we also were aware that the conference of mayors and the national association of counties were also soliciting from their members, cities and local governments, counties, a list of projects that these local government might consider to be worthwhile also for capital projects that could be done in a short order. So we thereby have two agendas. And we're not certain at this point what exactly the federal government is going to do. But I think we want to be there when it happens and we want to be in a best position to capture whatever we can on behalf of Travis County and central Texas. So the first item is really we know that the list of projects that were submitted by txdot did not have any priorities. And so they are seeking some guidance from the local governments as well as campo or for doing that. There is a -- as you may be aware, a debate going on right now about what -- what the federal government is trying to do. Is it short term or is it a more extended program? Are these projects merely something to -- like a maintenance project or are they more multiple-year projects? So the list that txdot put together, the criteria they used were are these projects ready to be put in the ground by June of 2009, within six months. That means by and large they are ready to bid. They've gone through all the environmental clearance, they've been designed, right-of-ways have been cleared, they literally -- they could be put on the block for bidding and be done very quickly.
>> some of them
>> [inaudible], joe.
>> most of them are maintenance projects.
>> I know, but we have some that are controversial. I guess my whole point in a lot of this stuff and I sent everybody here a letter asking each and every last one of you that anything that would affect either the matter in who is -- these happen to be in pyrene to let that Commissioner or the representative of that area know what's coming down the pike. I did go through this and I don't mean to cut you off, but it's just a matter of I think respect and recognition for a person that represents an area that's on this list and we have had some significant inquiries, public comments and other things on some of this stuff, and I just think you as an executive manager, and you got my letter, but you say it happened two weeks ago but you just got the letter the other day, but it would be good to mow what's coming down so you can be prepared.
>> that's exactly what this agenda item is about is to inform you and all members of the court about this list.
>> but the point is -- the point is I don't know if you are acting us to act on this today.
>> I am not.
>> pardon me?
>> I am not.
>> well, that's good because there is a lot of questions I think that need to be still addressed in.
>> that is the pickup of this agenda is to get this discussed so the court can make a decision at your discretion. One decision may be to make no priorities. Or the digs is get to information out so everyone can see it. Leading off, this whole program is still somewhat influx. We have no guidance from the federal government about what they want to get accomplished and how. We are trying to get aheard of the curve by informing the court these discussions are going on at various levels, city council chambers, Commissioners courts, txdots around the country, aen to get prepared for a response when that's needed.
>> well, are we playing two roles now? Regarding item 31, I guess my question in item 31, are those basically just county projects or is it something that also may facilitate txdot? We have got txdot on one end and I see you are going to do a survey to look at that infrastructure, but is that basically infrastructure just for county infrastructure?
>> Commissioner, internationaller governmental relation coordinator for tract. The service asked for input about a whole variety of projects. If you look at the handout on, the left hand column, you can see they ask for actually a broad range of types of projects. Airport construction, water systems, school construction, county buildings, hospitals and so forth. So the --
>> well, my question --
>> I'm sorry.
>> but my question is is it just county related, because I'm thinking about jurisdictional situations because if you look at some of this stuff that's being presented, have you to really watch the lines. Some of these things are maybe within the range of the city limits or right on the verge of being in the city limits and some it's outside of the city limits. So my question is to you, the information as far as you surveying, is in the unincorporated areas.
>> actually I don't think I can guarantee that. What I did, Commissioner, was I polled the executive managers and asked them for a list of pretty much ready to go projects of whatever types that they would recommend including in our survey to naco. I don't think the naco survey is positive of wheat Travis County is going to do, but I thought it was a good opportunity to begin a conversation, as joe mentioned, about what are our priorities. If we are going to apply for this money, what's the best use of the money, what are the kind of projects that bet serve the needs of Travis County. So this is just a comprehensive list of projects suggested by the executive managers broken into the categories that naco asked for. As joe said, it's really presented to the court do as the beginning of a discussion of how do we want to -- how do we want to articulate our position with respect to a federal economic stimulus package, what kind of projects do we want to see funded. So we want to try to put together as a county a list of priorities we would like to see funded and begin working with our federal legislators in washington to get that included. As joe mentioned, this thing is very much in flux so in a lot of ways we don't know what we're talking about yet. Speaker pelosi said $600 billion package, 200 billion tax cuts, 400 billion infrastructure projects. She was very company about what infrastructure projects meant. What we want to do is get ahead of the curve and have some idea if they called us up and said what would you do about a billion dollars, we would have some answer for them.
>> I think this is a really good start for identifying all of the infrastructure projects that we have. Let me throw out a couple of other place that I think we might should look. We might look to the corporations to tell us what infrastructure projects they are working on as well because I know that the corporations were contributing some dollars toward some educational facilities and other things that might -- might fit on this list somewhere. Also, I was wondering about whether the health care district would do a separate list or whether we should incorporate theirs. I wanted to ask t.n.r. Whether parks and bcp preserve projects would be included on the list.
>> we do have some parks and I'm presuming whether or not it's short term, long term, whatever it does has to create jobs.
>> correct.
>> so it's not just a matter of acquiring property, it is doing something with our projects that create jobs.
>> right, and I'm thinking of --
>> I would include parks.
>> I'm thinking of ranger houses.
>> right. We do have some of those in our list. We also have -- we didn't -- it's really almost like a triple auction. One, it was just txdot. We had a recommendation for that. If it were short term, we have a recommendation for that. If they relax the ready I to go for more than six months, they allow us two years, we've got a list of projects for that. So we are truly paying the entire field here hoping we'll be in a position to respond whatever way it comes down. Whether it's just road projects or the full gamut of i.t. Projects, buildings, courthouses, parks, so truly your staff is trying to watch the ball as it's ping-ponging around deciding what avenue to take when it comes down.
>> and I appreciate. That I think that's definitely the thing to do to identify the broad spectrum so we can hit the ground running when we get more definition. The other areas I was thinking we might want to inquire into for a complete list would be to look to hhs for their housing rehab and residence utility assistance. If it does -- if we are looking at economic development and economic stability, it might be ancillary list that we want to look to. Northridge 5:00ers perhaps could be included to list in terms of water -- water projects. And then -- and then second to identifying the full spectrum of possibilities, I was wondering, you know, how we might go about estimating the economic stimulus aspect of these projects. How many jobs would it take to do the project directly and home jobs or other economic ancillary effects might the project generate.
>> and see if we can rank projects according to those sorts of criteria.
>> because I mean I think it's important for us to identify every ornament that could go on the christmas tree, but after we pull out all the storage boxes and look in there, to then cherry pick which are -- I anticipate, and I could be completely wrong, but I anticipate the federal dollars are going to be earmarked for things that will actually maintain or create jobs. Short term and long term.
>> and as well they were mentioning also that anything -- a project that would call for repairment, repairing. So I don't know if they are still working with the definition of what, you know, is going to be the result.
>> and I know that yesterday speaker pelosi in her press conference also mentioned some more block grant money or more money to state for medicaid, anticipated medicate shortfalls or increase this the population. Some of it in package may not be designed to create new jobs but maybe to address people who are out of work or something like. That some of those possibilities ought to be considered by us and we ought to keep our eyes open for that.
>> maybe the rental and utility assistance and the homestead rehab out of hhs may be appropriate for a secondary list to that purpose.
>> I'll follow up on that.
>> you also indicated earlier that you had talked with the executive managers, and I guess when I looked at -- went through all the list, the different priorities, priority 1, 2, 3, on down the line, going into priority 3, for example, who assigned that stimulus money of $504 million for six-lane toll from 183 at 290 east to 183 and just east of sh 130? Who proposed that?
>> you are talking about the txdot list? Yeah, well --
>> who proposed that?
>> t.n.r. Recommended these list.
>> based on what.
>> safety being the first concern. That's why the bridges and the safety projects rank number 1. Number 2 are the maintenance projects quick to get underway. The third my or the would be the added capacity project. One of the thence you're Wednesday we had about the 290 project was the price tag being $504 million. It was a significant capital expenditure and it was untypical of other projects in txdot's list. And we're a little concerned that if you rank that first priority that you really wouldn't get any of the earth. And you might not even get that one because of the nature of the project. This speaks to the debate going on on whether or not this money should be spent on routine things like maintenance, even though they are easy to spend money on. We truly have a lot of road that need repairs but job creating ability of a maintenance project is different from a capital project like 290 that would be under construction a period of years. So the arguments going on right thousand do we spend the money on maintenance or infrastructure-type promise that may have a longer life. There's even some debate on whether or not this whole thing will take more like a two-step process. The unusual slug of money comes from something done quickly followed by appropriation that has longer life to it. So again, all of this is speculation. We don't know exactly highway the law will be written and we didn't create the list of projects but we were act to prosecutor.
>> ties them and I just laid that out.
>> I understand. But if you are to look at this just looking at the situation that you just discussed from 291 and 238 east going on east sh 130, six lane toll. But if you noticed what connects this together is an action that campo took recently on December 2nd with the marion expressway which would probably go from a that point all the way to elgin. Which would mean toll from elgin all the way to I guess -- all the way to 290 at 183. And it would almost appear that you are suggesting a phase 1 and phase 2 is a theiry here as far as toll off 290. Which I think there was -- in fact, the last meeting I understand that the December 2nd meeting comments were not allowed by the public at that meeting. Which is a highly controversial position. You know, when I -- when the president-elect was here, president-elect barack obama, when he was here in Austin, I was fortunate to do a sum of things. I was fortunate to take photo with him and I spoke with him directly. And I really do not believe in listening to his campaign during this election for him and working from grass roots with poor people and people that are execly disanded, I do not believe that he -- and once a man complained about the toll is -- that it's an islamic hardship for the people in prez 1. In fact, priest 1 is checkly disranked than any other in tract. I just not believe he would just stimulus money to allow disadvantaged people in this community to suffer and continue to be disadvantaged and help play tolls and all that justify. I don't think let's the devil intent. I'm kind of caution and look at very cashly how we could use this amount of money. But he misnot only did he talk about infrastructure, he talked at things they could look at as looking a the situation arrest far as the is concerned. All of these things, the emission of vehicles in mentioned. So I think he has a long list of not only infrastructure but transportation situations. Can this stimulus money be used for maybe like supporting a rail? Maybe from helping to downtown to elgin? Another situation that looked at, does that mean this -- what is your reading to transportation needs of this money, that all infrastructure or it just basically goes to other transportation needs as far as the sim husband money is concerned. I'm just asking the question.
>> are you asking me?
>> however wants to take a bite out of the apple. Has there been a definition on what this stimulus money can be used for. Because I've heard a few things brought up on the dais that maybe there's some more room for stimulus money object be to be used in other categories.
>> I think it is very much a moving target, Commissioner, and I think that there certainly has been conversation about transportation projects, but I know there's also conversation about, again, providing -- increasing medicaid reimbursements to the states. Perhaps some of the rental assistance projects Commissioner eckhardt spoke about might be eventually included. Workforce development projects. I don't think that the congress knows yet what it wants to do with the money. As I understand it, the obama transition team and the congressional leadership are visiting with each about it, but there's not a bill yet. We don't anticipate one probably until January at the earliest. So it's still a moving target.
>> he's concern about global warming and a whole bunch other things and I think we need to look into some direction as far as I think the administration is trying to do with some of the money they let out to the community.
>> and I think that with respect to particularly some of the green initiatives that president obama spoke about during his campaign, president-elect barack obama spoke about during his campaign, my impression is that he would like to include some of those in this economic stimulus package, but that's balanced with this desire to have an immediate impact on the economy. And so, you know, maybe some of the sort of green things are not really ready to go.
>> right. That's very understandable. And I know he's trying to get a jump start. That's his intent is trying to get a jump start with the economy. And this will help that. But I just wanted to point out some maybe balances that we need to look at as we go through this process as far as using this stimulus money.
>> if you get stimulus Monday to do a road project, why would you toll it? You wouldn't need to. If I asked the government for a half a million dollars to build a road, ie, 290 east, I wouldn't toll it. I would just say, okay, we're going to build this road, we're going to create jobs, we're going to do exactly what you are asking for. But in my view, the need to toll it goes away. Because we've identified a source of funding.
>> it should.
>> it also should go away at least by vote under the covenants at campo if an alternative superior source of funding becomes available, then it comes to campo for a decision to remove the tolls.
>> repeat that.
>> the covenants that were passed last year, October 2007, one of the covenants requires that if an alternative superior source of funding becomes available that it comes back to campo for a vote on removal of the tolls.
>> okay. Does that also -- with that vote -- judge, that's a good point. And that is some of the same questions that have come to my office
>> [inaudible] they said listen, Commissioner, we would like to have free -- we don't mind the road being improved, but it should be free to us. And we're poor folks over here and we need free access. So that would be something good. But would this toll -- eliminate toll funding made available remove the toll, would that also apply to the manor express from -- from the point I guess from parmer lane or sh 130 all the way to elgin? What would happen with that portion?
>> the manor expressway is part of the campo 2030 plan and -- and as a toll road, it would -- it falls under the covenant as all of the roads that were identified as phase 2 toll roads do.
>> so --
>> so if alternative federal funding became available for the construction, the covenants covered that possibility. Of bringing it to a vote to campo for removal of the toll.
>> removing the toll of that second portion too.
>> uh-huh.
>> okay. Well --
>> don't spend that half a billion yet. We don't have it yet.
>> in regards to the public transit --
>> yeah, public transit.
>> -- options, have I seen a list -- I believe cap metro has developed a preliminary list as has the city of Austin. And as the public transit service operator, they have several items, cap metro has several items including the expansion of the red line. They can't include the green line that goes out to elgin because it's not in the 2030 plan. But they do have additional bus services on their wish list and the city of Austin is also included the funding of the freight rail relocation at the state level. Which we should consider both in our legislative wish list as well as perhaps on this list.
>> have you all received enough guidance?
>> now what?
>> well, seems to me there are three or four categories and we don't know where this is headed so if we want to put a comprehensive wish list together, we may well want to have different projects in each category. That way next week, Commissioner, if we want to vote on qualifications or limitations or if we want to take some out, then we can just take action on doing that. I do agree, I heard today three or four categories of projects and it may be a good idea to come up with a different list. Naco I assume is just sort of anticipating that the congress will respond favorably to what the governors told the president-elect. But when I've been watching t.v., looks like every time there's a national leader talking about a stimulus package, they are saying slightly different things.
>> yes, sir.
>> so I don't know where the criteria will end up. I assume that when they adopt the criteria, they will also let you know what the deadline is for submitting your list, so I do think it's important for us to proactively start putting our list together. And what we may want to do too is capital metro mass a list, look at that list, city of Austin.
>> it would be good to see that.
>> health care district. If they don't have a list, maybe suggest they ought to come up with one so we can all kind of sing from the same hymnal.
>> and the other problem they will have, judge, is there's got to be a delivery mechanism for this money. One of the reasons why the transportation planning in a sense has moved forward at the pace it has is that -- there's a delivery system where the congress can allocate money to the local, state -- to the state transportation departments and that's -- that's the delivery mechanism. Some of these other projects, presumably connell will have to address some sort of delivery mechanism for how the money gets to the states and down to the local entities. All of which is unknown at this time.
>> right. And that's why I asked about this jurisdictional thing. I asked about the lines. Because if the city of Austin is involved, who is going to receive the money? Will it come to the county or would it go between the city -- or the cities in the county as you cross that jurisdictional boundary? I'm kind of -- you know, I don't know. And I understand we prioritize and things like that, but how would the money be distributed. First of all we get the money, I guess, but the point is as far as receipt of the dollars. That's my concern, would the counties be in receipt or would it be the municipalities within the counties that are in receipt? Because they all probably got projects within their boundaries that they may want to see pulled off also.
>> sure. And if I were, you know, hazarding a guess here, because -- I mean presuming we're halfway through a recession, they are going toment to spend this money in the next year. The easiest way to spend this type of money is by handing it off to the d.o.t.s around the country because they do that. They spend massive amounts of money quickly on capital projects. So if I were to hazard a bet, that's the conduit this money is going to come down because it's a known mechanism. As opposed to distributing it to however local governments there are in the united states, the transaction time, you will not be able to spend this kind of money that quickly by distributing it across multiple jurisdictions. So my -- my sense in this --
>> but if the goal is generate jobs, you wouldn't just want to generate construction jobs, would you? Seems to me you would want to --
>> other categories.
>> green build is a kind of big deal.
>> that's true, but --
>> [multiple voices]
>> how do you get that -- you have to have some ought itable track. They are not just going to dole this money out. They have some fiduciary responsibility to make sure it's spent well and you have to create the rules in order to spend this kind of money. They are not going to create that new.
>> the other thing that has been discussed and construction jobs only help a certain sector of the population and generally it leaves women basically out of the mix. And so there has been --
>> that's a bad thing, joe.
>> there has been some discussion about that, but joe has a good point, the likely conduit for that money is probably going to be state workforce departments. And not down to the local level because of the -- because of the need for speed.
>> this has been a fascinating discussion. I can hardly wait until next week. Is that enough time?
>> I really think we're waiting for see cues from the federal government on what to go -- we're ready, we'll continue to get ready.
>> we can put our list together and kind of describe projects we would do if the money were available.
>> that's right.
>> so I think if we accomplish that part, it will be giant step in the right direction.
>> and it won't be time wasted even if not a drop of money comes from the fed. This is a good exercise in regard to the coming year.
>> the list that joe had, the other attachments that came back from t.n.r., especially with a lot of bridges and stuff like that, you would still bring that back to us, right, joe?
>> those are all in play.
>> all right.
>> if I may make a suggestion, judge, he was hoping next week we could talk about the county's legislative agenda in anticipation of the 81st legislature. So could we come back to this on the 30th?
>> on did we have that much time? If we do, we need to touch base with the other entities, makes sense to me.
>> that will give us more time to put together a more comprehensive list.
>> is that okay?
>> uh-huh.
>> all entities, judge? I pointed off entities within the county or just the city of Austin?
>> I had in mind the big ones, city of Austin, health care district, but I guess may want to touch base with lcra and see when they are thinking about, right?
>> yes, sir. And the -- and the Commissioner eckhardt mentioned the corporations, seeing if there are any projects they have.
>> well, you are looking at corporations now. This is the board of the corporation.
>> I understand.
>> but to answer your question, I guess I would be -- I would err on the side of being overly inclusive. If we think that another entity that we hadn't thought about might have a list that impacts us, or for that matter city of Austin, Travis County residents, I would want to touch base with them and see what they have in mind. They may have a project that would be a priority of ours if we thought about it.
>> sure.
>> I think -- and I think I can own this on my own. I would like to get in touch with the city of manor and -- it's in my jurisdiction and see if they have anything on board. Because they just may have something that they are not putting on the table so I can do that on my own.
>> that's fine. Are we in agreement on the 30th instead of next week?
>> that will give enough time, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> okay.
>> thank you very much.
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