Travis County Commissioners Court

December 23, 2008
Item 28

Number 28, receive update and take appropriate action on the proposed homestead preservation reinvestment zone, a tax increment financing zone supporting affordable housing in the homestead preservation district.
thank you very much.
the last time we discussed this we did ask staff toward the end of the meeting to meet with city staff, try to work through some of the questions that we discussed that day.
why don't we get a briefing from staff, then I know that we have residents who have come down to address us on this issue.
we'll just give them an opportunity.
okay?

>> that would be fine.
that will be fine.

>> I'm sorry, Commissioner.

>> no, I was just basically wanted to make sure that everyone understands that the information that you have there has been I guess some handouts that I think those persons that are here be looked at.
in other words, we submitted 26 questions to the city.
and, of course, the city responded.
some of those questions that they responded to were new answers and, of course, we're talking about a big deal here.
and I want to make sure that we understand that we're talking about property, increased value over a 10-year period going from $60 million to over $775 million.
and we also want to make sure everyone understands we're talking about 40% of that increased value with Travis County matching dollar for dollar.
so we're actually talking about over $13 million that will be taken off the table as far as taxes are concerned to deal with this.
so it's a lot that's in play here.
a lot of folks weren't aware of it.
we've contacted several churches for an example and if you notice in the community where we're really suggesting a lot of those church's members live in the area and the ministers, if you know how it is with churches, they announce things every Sunday, have no idea what's going on.
so it's just a lot of information that's missing.
and this is a real monumental, big ticket item as far as money is concerned.
so I just want to make sure everyone understands that

>> [inaudible] I think that is very critical to, in my opinion, the participation that Travis County would have to deal with.
thank you.

>> mr. Nelis.

>> leroy nellis.
rodney and myself met with the city after the last agenda item with Margaret shaw -- who else was at that meeting?

>> good morning, Margaret shaw, city of Austin's neighborhood housing and community development director we had representatives from the finance office and the city's legal office that have been meeting regularly with your staff.

>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]

>> those are millions of dollars of subtax revenues.
we are cautious and we have asked the court not to establish the tif until we have been able to, number one, see what our fy '09 revenue stream looks like.
we've been advised by the tax collector that it's probably going to be the end of the first week in February before we will know exactly what the trend looks like for fy '09.
and we're really right now only guessing, so we don't have that information.
I'd like to briefly talk on a couple of things.
there is a misconception in the public that tif's create additional revenue from home appreciation.
that is wrong.
there's not one extra dollar of tax revenue that is generated from home appreciation.
under the effective tax rate, it's just picked up by somebody else.
in this case, if you establish a tif in the footprint of the home preservation parcels, you will literally, in order to get the same amount of tax dollars for the operating budget, you will be taxing every taxpayer in Travis County, including montopolis, del valle, Jonestown, lago vista, for the tif that's generated here.
I might say that when I read the backup from the city in answering the questions that we very hurriedly put together and that the city very hurriedly answered, there were eight of those questions that were answered with the statement, the details of how the programs will be administered and resources allocated have yet to be determined.
I can tell you that your budget rules and your budget guidelines to the planning and budget office, if we receive the same request from a Travis County department, at department we would earmark those funds against allocated reserve and we would ask that those funds -- that program be developed more completely before we would fund it.
at a minimum we would only fund those requests with one time funds.
you have in your fy '09 budget 1.5 million of pilot programs: those programs, some of which have been funded with one-time money for three years.
those include 400,000 for a mobile crisis van.
they include after school programs. They include social service contract incremental funding due to the fact that we have an economic turn down.
I'm just -- I know that we have not made a recommendation to you.
I'm just stating the facts.
if in fact you go to the city's backup that they gave to you for the first agenda item, you will find the difference in the taxable value of each one of those parcels.
and what you will find -- I think it's on page 10 of that document.
you will find that the city's taxable value for that footprint is 1,124,971,617.
you will also see that the county's taxable value is 1,024,000,000, 133,255.
there is a difference in the taxable value of the same parcels of $100,838,362.
if you take the city's tax rate and multiple that by the city tax rate, you are giving those parcels a tax relief of $406,782 per year.
based upon those figures presented in their report.
I maintain you are already preserving homesteads over there above the city at 400,000 per year.
and I would recommend that we evaluate the continuing funding obligations of a program based upon what you require of Travis County departments when they submit budget requests.
that is, put together the proposal and let's fund it on an annual appropriation.
I mean, the projections that harvey Davis presented to you yesterday show that for 2009 at a 40%, you would have about 98,000 dollars' worth of tif.
we asked county departments to turn in a fully baked plan and then evaluate it on an annual basis against objectives as pointed out.
you can fund this thing annually.
you can do a calculation that would create the same number of dollars and evaluate it against the performances as laid out.
we would suggest that we look closer and get more revenue information before you make a decision.
the earliest would be the first week in February.
and I'll be glad to answer any questions.
I apologize that I didn't get these thoughts to either you or the city.
I actually have been spending a lot of time commuting between here and temple.

>> leroy, I think what I have thought early on when the item was first brought to us by the city of Austin was just that very fact, that because there's so many unknowns in the whole tif as to how it would really work out, that we will take time to do some homework.
and then also to do -- approach it like a pilot project to see what rolls out in actuality.
and then the other thing was very important that everybody understand this.
the same way that we understand the buyout for the fema program that we have in Travis County.
it's totally volunteer.
and people -- I think I've read the material from the city of Austin.
it is volunteer.
no homeowner would be forced to participate in this tif.
so that also gives us the opportunity to find out who were those people who approached the legislature or the legislator that this kind of legislation was needed?
surely there's some people there who thought that this was going to address gentrification, going to address the high value of property in east Austin because of just the evaluation of property in because we know that eventually all that process was going to reach everybody in Travis County and in the city of Austin.
so it would give us an opportunity to see by approaching this -- and I think you're not saying pilot project, but you're saying on an annual basis.
and since it is true that we do give, you know, a property tax relief up front through our -- through the exemption, the homestead exemption, and then on top of that the 65 and over, and then the disabled.
so I think that we do indeed give out tax -- we address tax relief right up front before we get into the budget for county departments and other programs that we want to implement in Travis County.
but I think there's a lot of room for a lot of homework still to be done so that we can fully understand.
the other thing that you brought up that brings other tif's into question for me is if this is the way this tif is going to work, then why aren't other tif's working the same way in terms of other projects that we've approached as tif's?
because we give the tax relief up front, and so that would -- I'd almost ask for more information about getting involved in tif's to begin with.

>> are you finished?

>> I'm through.
thanks.

>> thank you, Commissioner.
and leroy, I think what also needs to happen is that those recommendations that you just suggested be put in writing and given to us at some later date.
really I don't think it's necessary for us to take action here today.
I think we ought to delay this thing until we can flush this out accurately because as you know, the tax dollars are very limited.
especially with the county government.
county government can only get its revenue through property taxes, fines and fees.
that's it.
and the constitution let's the state legislature change the law, then we have to continue to operate the way the law dictates, whereas the city can basically generate revenues just about any way it possibly can.
they don't have the same restrictions as the county.
it's possible I think for us to bring some leverage to the situation.
Commissioner Gomez I think brought up some good points.
when she stated that the county, Travis County -- here's what we do, folks.
we appraise your property, whatever the appraised value, right off the top.
you get 20% if you own the property, homestead exemption.
now, if you are 65 years or older, then you get $65,000.
or if you are disabled we have a lot of senior citizens in this district.
believe me, we do.
there's demographics and things to let you know that we have a lot of senior citizens who need help.
they need some tax relief.
and by us allowing those type of exemptions, it reduces our tax burden on those property owners who need tax relief more than anybody else.
now, what the city does is this.
the city allows senior citizens $51,000 exemption.
that's off the top of their appraised value of their property, $51,000.
that's it.
they do not allow a homestead -- the senior citizen may own the house.
they do not allow the 20%.
the 20% is the maximum percentage that the state of Texas will allow us to -- for an exemption.
the city does not do that.
they allow for the senior citizens, but they do not also allow for disabled.
you don't have to be a senior citizen to be disabled.
what Travis County does is that we allow for disabled persons to also take advantage of the 65,000-dollar hit.
off of your appraised value of your property.
I think if the city -- one of the questions was that we asked the city to look at other alternative ways to see if they could allow -- max what the county is doing per se.
the 65,000 dhar and also homestead exemption across the top, which would be a tax relief product to make those questions that are struggling in that community, make their houses more affordable by offering tax relief.
one example that I have for an example, 126,000-dollar house with the same scenario that Travis County is offering, with those type of exemptions, you end up paying $149..54 a year.
if the city would play the same deal, different tax rates, apply the same thing with what they're doing right now is $203.54, according to my sources.
that's tax relief for those folks that are struggling and that is possible I think to happen.
I'm looking at this, but I'm looking at the city needing maybe to bring more to the table as far as asking for these types of things right now.
it appears this is something that needs more investigation.
it doesn't seem to be -- I'm not criticizing the city, but I think it needs to be a lot more investigation, especially with people not knowing.
7,000 some-odd parcels of property in precinct 1.
in this district, 7,000 some-odd parcels pieces of property.
of those 7,000 pieces of property, 500 so were delinquent taxes.
of that 2052 persons were homestead.
we still don't know if those other delinquent property owners are homestead or can qualify for homestead.
we don't know if the 200 something persons are delinquent taxes.
what are the demographics?
are they senior citizens?
are they 30, 40, 50% below the median family income?
what are they?
we don't know the disposition of those things.
so it's research needing to be done.
nowhere else in the state of Texas is a program like this structured as such.
we need to be careful where we spend the taxpayer dollars because we don't have the leverage to acquire additional funds to fund the services that Travis County render.
and we have a lot of things that we need to fund.
so I'm going to leave it with that, but I would like the recommendation that you have made and have those come to me in writing.
I would appreciate that.
thank you.

>> I'll be glad to provide those to the court next week.

>> later.
I don't think it will be on the agenda next week.
if I have my way, it won't.

>> ms. Shaw, let's give you an opportunity to give comment.

>> thank you, judge.
I'm here to actually answer any of the questions.
it was a pleasure working with your staff.
you're right, the last couple of months have been moving quickly and we've been together a lot in the last few weeks to help to try to answer some of those questions.
I'm pleased to see that our responses got to you last night and gief you time to reflect on them too.
I think some of our points, there is a lot of misunderstanding about the proposal that's before us in the legislation.
and we look at it as we all do as public officials.
this is a great -- affordable housing is a critical need in our community.
no one doubts the fact that in central east Austin many of those property values have been rising at much higher and faster rates in the last few years than anyplace else in the city.
so I look at it as yet another tool in the tool box.
as we said in our responses, the city has a wide variety and diverse tools for financing affordable housing.
we use everything from -- we appropriate general fund, we use our federal grants.
we use bond fund, both general obligation pond funds as well as private activity bond funds.
this for us is just another source of funding over the course of many years that as I said in our responses helps provide some assurance and surety to the development market.
obviously affordable housing runs just like a real estate market where if you know those funds are available and financing is going to be available, the developers and other partners, nonprofit partners that we use, can help plan their program.
but I certainly appreciate leroy's comments.
it is very difficult from a staff perspective to design a program when you don't know what the budget is.
so a lot of that is centered around how much money the difference between both of our elected officials are going to pledge $500,000 to a million dollars, your program has to adjust accordingly when there's orders of magnitude.
so what we've tried to do is give you the best possible examples of how those funds could be used.
there's a lot of flexibility to it.
we also put forward a budget on how it's used because of the statutes is very specific and the targeted incomes we have to serve through the tif funds, but we're very much open to discussion on how the administration of these programs would be used.
I'd also like to clear up the misconception too -- and I think Commissioner Gomez touched on it.
there's no forced participation on this.
people's land values under community land trust would never be involuntarily forced.
it's just a tool that we use in santa fe, portland, vermont and other places voluntarily for folks to be exempted from paying property taxes on their land.
you would only be paying property taxes on -- we're more happy to continue the conversations and work closely with your staff.

>> right.
but you do not own the land, though.
that's part of the situation.
you really don't own the land.
you don't have ownership of the property any more.
let me ask you this one question.
we have -- let's see.
there were 14 churches that some of them I contacted personally, walked and talked to the pastors of the clergy or even the father at holy cross catholic church.
I spoke with each one of those particular clergy, and I asked them about the homestead preservation district.
they didn't have any idea of what homestead preservation district was about.
and you say, well, Commissioner Davis, why were you asked to do these things?
because of the anger of a lot of dissemination of information in the community is done through the churches.
they have members that live in the area.
they have members that maybe own property in the area.
yet this information was not available to them.
and I was shocked, but I personally went in the cold yesterday, for an example, and Friday and Saturday, as much as I possibly could, to get this information to the clergy to find out if their membership were aware of what's going on.
and each one of them that I personally spoke to said no, Commissioner, we had no idea of what's going on here.
and can you attribute and find out why this information was not disseminated to the entire community such as the 7,700 parcel owners that own property?
because they are the ones that will be -- the appraised value, increase in appraised value will come from those parcels.
can you tell me why that wasn't done?

>> absolutely, Commissioner Davis.
as you know, as a public servant we continue to work and improve on how to do our outreach and marketing efforts better.
I think we find that across the board of how we get our information out.
we did some research after we came before you last month, and state representative eddie rodriguez has a regular mailing list that he updates folks, as well as councilmember martinez.
and my department has been involved in that.
most of those notices, as I can acknowledge, go to neighborhood associations, advocates and some of the nonprofits that work in that area.
so we have and my staff has tried to reach out to aim and some other folks.
you're absolutory right that churches are an important community component on getting the outreach out.
so we've had a variety of different efforts both on e-mail.
obviously at council and through a bunch of different public notices that we've done.
but we can always do better in getting our outreach.

>> thank you.

>> any other questions for ms. Shaw?

>> I have a couple of questions.
I'm sorry, I'm a visual person, so I want to do this real quick so I can describe what I'm asking for.
I'm really excited about seeing how these tools work, the land trust and the land bank, but I want to be as mindful about it going in.
what I'm looking for -- sorry.
what I'm looking for is what's the current bell curve in the district in regard to income distribution.
and I'm assuming it looks something like this, with this being the median family income of Austin in the statute when we refer to mfi we're referring to Austin's mfi, but it not explicit.
but I'm assuming the bell curve looks like this with the majority of the current residents being -- having this shape in comparison to the city of Austin's shape.
do you know what I'm saying?

>> correct.
we addressed some of the income and ownership split in the question 15.
but we'd be happy to put together different charts on the critical need.

>> but I'm just explaining chart right now.
that's not the question.
you already answered this question, including this piece here, which is the yellow piece, the number of people inside this curve below 50% of mfi that are homeowners, you already answer that had curve.

>> yes, ma'am.
on question 15 we actually numbered those.

>> correct.
but what I'm asking for is what the no action curve will look like with projection of the no action curve is in that district.

>> so a projection of income for owner versus renter.

>> if we were to not do a tif.
and the reason why I'm asking that is I'm speculating -- it's just speculation at this point.
but I think we need to be mindful going into using these tools.
I'm speculating that there's going to be an overlap section, this cross-hatched section, where even if we do nothing, this housing stock will remain.
it's this housing stock that's going to go away.
I'm speculating that this housing stock here and this portion here is what we're -- what we really are worried about.
the people who are at the -- at the lower end, the 30% and below mfi.
and particularly those that are current homeowners.
so what I want to know is what the no bill looks like so I can figure out who's in this piece.
I want to know more details about the population of this piece here.
who they are, what age they are, whether they're disabled, whether they're delinquent on their taxes.
so these are the people that are going to need the help the absolute most.
if not these actual folks, this housing stock will remain, even just due to economic forces if we were to do nothing.
but I want to identify this piece here.
and then further, I want to identify what the curve should look like if the homestead preservation district works.
if this is the do nothing curve and this is the current baseline curve, I want to know what the curve looks like if we -- if it works.
and I want to know how that looks laid on top of that chunk there that will be the people most in need, particularly these people in the yellow who are current homeowners, but they're just -- they're not making it.
because I want to be able to encourage that home ownership.
so those are the kind of numbers that I'm looking for because -- again, this is speculation, but I'm hoping we can prove it up between your staff and our staff is through the use of the homestead preservation district and the land trust and land banking tools combined with more robust general revenue investment.
we need to find the right calibration between those two so we can maximum flexibility because again, I'm really thinking this housing stock remains even if we do nothing.
it's this housing stock that goes away.

>> so can we generate that information and how long would it take?

>> since we're going into the holidays, not in the next couple of weeks.
I think part of the difficulty we have -- we as a city have just engaged a private firm to do a comprehensive market study that should be available in a few weeks for us.
it's citywide, but it's looking at much the same questions that you respond.
we'll obviously be happy to share that with harvey and your team because I'm really looking forward to understanding more about what what are the critical affordable housing needs.
we're doing a snapshot today obviously citywide, but looking at subdistricts of what is the condition of our housing stock, what is the demographic population by income, family size, and then also projecting out 30 years to know how many houses we'll need, what the home ownership rental splits.
we don't have that data for several weeks, but the specific questions you asked, getting it down at the census track level is actually very difficult, very expensive.
the city -- the census bureau is really the best information we have on housing data at that level of detail.
and obviously in 2000, which is the data we have the best of right now, won't be updated for a couple more year.
so we're working off of projections.
so my guess is we could get that back to you sometime in four to five weeks.

>> that would be great.
you might also look to case studies of other neighborhoods that are ajay sent to the downtown area that have general trafide.
I can think of travis heights, clarksville, several other areas where we might be able to look to case studies of what their income distributions are currently.
obviously there was -- there was no -- a homestead preservation district there, and perhaps use that as case studies for the no action scenario.
because I hear you, it is very difficult to get down to the census track level, particularly since we're in the middle of our decade.
but I think we can get some proxies.
we just need to be -- like I said, I'm excited about these two tools.
but I want to make sure that we're really mindful about what how we're using them because while I agree with you -- it's obvious that -- it's a fact that the participation in the shared equity programs that are envisioned by this are voluntary, the tax burden shift is not.
and so we need to be very mindful about that.

>> judge?
judge?
ms. Shaw, let me ask you this one question.
and -- it's a response actually.
I didn't receive the questions -- the answers to -- the 26 questions that the county submitted to you and your staff.
we didn't receive an answer to those questions until it was on the -- I guess on our computer on the e-mail internet portion of it until after 6:00 p.m.
last night.
of course, we just received it this morning.
there's no way in the world, of course, I can digest all of this.
and folks in the audience that had access to some of the questions, of course now they have the answers, so I'm quite sure they are struggling also.
and of course there's eight things on the questions that we need to flesh out according to our staff, leroy nellis that need to be flushed out more.
there just needs to be a lot more time in this; however, I think some of the suggestions that have been made, I think we need to flesh out.
and of course with a new person coming in here as Commissioner, Karen hubert has suggested, and we submitted that letter to staff, and also to the clerk and to the court, that she said she would even need more time because it impacts our budget.
and no disrespect to Commissioner Daugherty, but we have a person coming in that's going to have to deal with our budget come next budget cycle.
so there's a lot of stuff on the table here, and of course I'm quite sure that folks out in the audience may have some things to say about this also.

>> now, residents have come down and waited patiently for an opportunity to give comments.
this is your opportunity.
we have four chairs available.
so if you would like to give comments on this item, please, sir come forth at this time.
and if you would give us your name, we would be happy to get your comments.
and as one speaker finishes, we would like for another to come forth so we can keep it moving like that and then we can efficiently receive comments from residents.

>> judge?

>> yes, sir.

>> I know that people have come down, they've been -- obviously our custom is to let people talk when they want.
it sounds like that this thing is not going to get voted on, and as opposed to asking people to come down again and do this whole thing over again with a new Commissioner, if you're here, you want to talk, but most likely that's what's going to happen.
I mean, because I don't get the sense that we're going to vote on this thing today.
if we're not, I mean, everybody at least needs to know that you're probably going to get the opportunity to do this over again where you've got at least 20% that sits up here that's going to be different.
but if everybody wants to come and talk, just know that the next time you will get to do it again.

>> I think those that took the time to come down here should get the opportunity.

>> absolutely.

>> but I do agree that we will probably take no action today.
my own view is if there's not enough support to get it done, it should not be back on the agenda again.
if we get additional information, we may need additional information to make that decision.
but when I put it on the agenda this time, it was because I committed to get a staff briefing, hopefully some of the questions that we asked last time it was on the agenda before us, before the end of the year, because I know representative rodriguez and city council representatives wanted some action this year if possible.
but it seems to me that in view of all the questions that are still outstanding, that is not possible and I don't know that I sense a majority of the court supporting that.
so I do think it's fair to say we will not approve this today.
whether it gets pack on the agenda again in the future I think should depend on answers to questions that we have and an opportunity for us to mull over the information provided a bit further.
the other question is instead of a tif, if there's another way to provide the same relief, then that may make a lot more sense than the law.
let me give y'all an opportunity to give comment.

>> my name is reverend ricky moreland.
born and raised in Austin, Texas.
first of all, I just want to get a commitment for proper dissemination of information about this.
we had no idea -- for folks getting ready to leave a place of worship to go home and enjoy a meal with their families and then get hit with information like this is unheard of.
so I think dissemination just totally was wrong.
it was misplaced and it was an oversight.
obviously.
you have a lot of people that are gone out of town, who live in those communities visiting with their families out of state, out of the city, who would show up here today with more information and more questions that will give this board more insight of how they feel that it will affect their communities.
the timing being the holidays, and then lack of proper dissemination really casts a negative shadow on these efforts.
so that's first off.
and then you have what's known as the vicious cycle.
we all know about that, studied about that in high school all the way up to college.
who are the people that's going to be moving in these low income homes?
who are the folks that's going to exactly benefit?
are you taking people out of the community who are going to lose their hope and moving them into these homesteads?
is there a new pool of people that you plan to move into these homesteads?
and then I already see a lack of infrastructure in that part of town.
you have the airport.
a wal-mart or something that should have been built there to support folks who don't have proper transportation, to support the elderly who at this time given the weather don't want to get out or can't get out and get on the bus stop.
so you move a larger population into this section of town without improving the infrastructure and helping the means to survive.
so what they can stay in houses?
but if they can't get proper value of food or home supplies, they're sitting in the home and they're starving.
I don't see any means to support the infrastructure in this plan to support those people in the communities.
and then there's also -- it seemed like this is a band-aid of fix.
you have folks who may not have been disabled, may not be survive years old of age, may fall below who are in this same situation.
those folks are going to lose their home and there's no provision for them.
they're able bodied people that have fallen on some economic situation that there's no provisions for I see in this plan.
and it seems it's a band-aid fix for the disabled, for the elderly, but I don't see any provisions.
and then the second question that was posed to me to ask to you was why east Austin?
why east Austin?
you have land out there elsewhere that you can use.
why specifically east Austin?
people have stayed in their community, worked hard, did what they need to do to obtain loans.
they want to stay in their houses obviously, but now they're depending on the community that they helped built to help sustain them.
those people have participated in after school programs, pta, whatever in those districts, trying to raise the educational level of the kids in the community.
now they're depending on the community to take care of them.
and when you move people not from their community into there, then all you're doing is encouraging the vicious cycle.
and it's nothing -- no tool, no mechanism in this plan to say we're moving these low income people in.
we're also moving the problems associated with these low income people into this community.
and there's no provisions to break out of the vicious cycle.
there's no community centers being built to help the additional folks that are coming in.
there's no drug prevention programs, no teenaged pregnancy programs, none of this is available and in this plan to help break the vicious cycle that is going to be put upon this community.
and mainly elderly community.
so I would like to see provisions in that plan to do so.
also, the tax burden.
you are going to make money somewhere for us.
somebody has to pay for something in all this.
and you have people that are making it right now.
they'll move from the dem dprask where they might be on one side of the bell curve and feeling comfortable to maybe the left side of it.
then you also have the power of ownership being taken away.
this gives -- the power of ownership gives the person a sense of pride.
and when you take that away from people in a struggling community, you are adding on to this vicious cycle.
you're adding fuel to the fire.
and if you don't own the land, what do you own.
how do you sell your house?
the provisions or regulations say you can't sell your house above this amount of money.
then that's going to impact the people who want to sell their house oh have been there that don't support this plan at all.
there's just so many unknowns in this.
and I probably sound like Commissioner Daugherty when I said you can't vote on this.
the main thing is getting the proper des sem nation out.
I understand the time on the calendar.
this can't be done during the holidays.
this could be a very good plan.
if all the information was out there.
but given the season, given the lack of dissemination, this casts a shadow on a lot of this.
and a lot of folks will come back from the holidays upset, word is going to get out, the interpretation of the people who actually made it to this meeting could be put on a positive or negative.
that word of mouth is going to get back to the people coming back to this community and that proper information is not readily available.
what the board wants the people to know, that's not going to get disseminated.
what is going to get disseminated is people's opinion.
we all know how people's opinions sway.
right now there's a negative shadow cast on this because people feel like they were absolutely left out.
I would like to see in this plan how a person -- if they fall into a situation where they lose their job, what happens to their house if they stand in one of these low income homes?
will they have the same type of rights of folks who stay in this community and don't participate?
can they rent out their house, for instance?
are these communities going to be gated?
there's no sense of ownership.
there's just too many holes is all I'm saying.
I would like clearly for the board to ask for a plan of dissemination of this information.
how many days, how many weeks does the community need to know before you guys are going to vote on this again?
clearly it should be a month minimum, three weeks minimum.
not days.
not days at all.
and if we can get that, I'm sure that there's a lot of ministers out there, a lot of pastors out there and a lot of people in the community that's going to take that information, use the time to disseminate that information to the community and then have the community have a chance to respond, gather and respond to some of this.
that's what I would like to see.

>> thank you.

>> yes?

>> my name is scottie ivory and I'm a member of the chestnut neighborhood association, a member of missionary baptist church and I'm a member of the weed and feed program.
I've worked with the east central command with the commanders forum.
I'm very active in the neighborhood.
I've been since '97.
and if you don't mind, I'd like to tell the truth this morning.
do you mind the truth?
I'm going to tell you truth this morning.
I'm going to bring you up to date.
can I bring you up to date?
okay.
I'm sure all of you remember ara.
when h.u.d.
gave us nine million dollars to revital size liez 11th and 12th street.

>> the Austin revitalization authority?

>> yes.
you know what happened to that?
I remember councilmember goodman said let the plan be neighborhood driven.
and the one that was in charge, and you know who it is, he promised us -- because -- first I'm going to say I've been on 12th street 50 years and over, right at walking distance from the capitol.
and I've been there.
I've seen the changes and all the promises.
and the first thing I want to's tell you, I don't trust the city and I don't trust the county.
because east Austin, central Austin, they seem to zoom in, target us and put everything that's unwanted in central east Austin.
now, why central east Austin?
my goodness.
what else are they going to put over here?
but it just seems that we are just fighting all the time.
they come in with this program, that program, and it doesn't work and it close.
and what I think about this program today, the one we're talking about today?
see, let me tell you.
a leopard does not change its spots.
in the city they will throw a bone at you with a string on it.
and he pulls that bone back.
you really -- who would want to own a house, don't own the land, don't own the air rights, and the city owns it and it pull it out -- if the thing is not working he it pull it wherever he gets ready and there's nothing we can do about it.
we do not trust the city, we do not trust the county.
y'all have to do what you say you're going to do.
I believe in a person saying what you say you're going to do, don't just trying to make it look beautiful when we know it not right.
I want you to know sometime to come out into the community.
walk and talk to the people.
stop making decisions up here and stop making decisions with those city workers.
they're look outing for themselves.
they're not looking out for nobody but themselves.
talk to the common person walking on the street.
walk on 12th street.
come by myself and talk to me and walk with others that know the city.
and you will find out, you will get the best answer, but whatever you want, but this program you're talking about -- see, I'm not thinking about going to no -- I've been talking about affordable housing.
I don't know how long.
I've talked with each one of these leaders about affordable housing.
they always come up with some kind of program.
here they come with this, affordable housing, the city owns it.
I didn't mean that.
why can't they just adopt a neighborhood and let it be a pilot program and see how you can take that neighborhood and revitalize it and it be worthwhile and be affordable housing.
don't you know where I live and further out think don't make much money?
I don't get much money.
I couldn't afford -- look what they did on 11th and 12th street.
brought all these townhomes.
who do you think can live in them?
we cannot live in them.
and they built the homes out off of airport?
do you know who they're looking out for?
the city is looking out for the university of Texas.
they will provide for the university of Texas.
they've been wanting our area for the longest and also downtown want our area.
they're not worried about us.
and even if they -- the person want to take advantage of that program you're talking about, they're presenting, they'll maybe move out and want that house, but they won't be able to move back in it.
you watch and see.
they won't be able to take advantage of those houses.
the university going to take care of it.
the teachers are going to take care of it.
the dom doctors are going to take care of it.
you take the commuter rail.
they come into the neighborhood telling you what they want from the commuter rail, how they're going to serve us.
I was told that the neighborhood association, that yeah it's going to come and do a turnaround on mlk and they'll have a transfer and they'll get on this commuter rail.
but y'all can't ride it.
that's what you mean you can't ride it.
we pay the taxes.
we are able to -- should be able to take advantage of it.
and a lot of things are presented, but we can't take advantage of it because we're not able to.
east Austin, how where I am, it's beautiful.
I love all the progress being made, but those poor people.
I'm concerned about the oppressed people.
and that's who the city want to take advantage of, the oppressed.
and I speak for that group only.
I'm a servant of the people and will serve, but I don't like a lot of stuff.
I don't like a lot of stuff.
and I just like for you just to be truthful for a change and let's all do the right thing.

>> how many more people want to speak?
we've got six seats available.
mr. Pena?

>> good morning, judge, Commissioner gus pena.
native east Austinite, central east Austin.
one of the things I would like to say is this, and I want to correct respectfully ms. Ivory, since been very active since 1994.
er remember the gangs, drug dealers and prostitutes?
we've been active very many years and I appreciate your activism.
economically depressed, suppressed and oppressed.
that's the way east Austin remains.
I visited my house.
every time I can on 23, 27 east -- no improvements other than remodeling back in -- 20 years ago.
affordable housing I have asked this elected body and also the city council to clearly find a clear definition of affordability, what could be affordable affordr myself or ms. Ivory at $60,000 a unit.
the folks from california can afford $500,000 homes or a-million-dollar homes, we can't.
lucio, my boy, won't be able to afford a house in east Austin.
he loves east Austin just like I do.
affordability is not there.
funding, nobody spoke about funding.
we're in an -- we're in the recession, deep heavy recession.
where is the funding going to come from.
that's right, we've been burdened by taxes.
my dad remembers he established east fifth street back in 1929.
he was born in 1898.
how much longer do we have to put up with programs that are alleged to help out the people who really don't help out the poor, needy, have not's and disadvantaged, the people left out of the loop.
variables, a lot of variables are being unanswered.
this is on a fast track.
you can't have that.
it is not proper.
you have a fiduciary statutory responsibility to the taxpayers to do a good work product and paper product so that all citizens are included this this process and that excluded -- I have a big difference of opinions on some people that stated that people were included that they have not.
I think I'm -- I'm not smart or intelligent.
I think I'm fairly well versed on a lot of issues.
we were not contacted.
I don't know what representative eddie rodriguez looks like, but a lot of folks in east Austin and east fifth street, seventh, chavez, holly street were not notified.
so my statement to this issue is slow down.
get your facts straight.
get more quedz available and more answers available for the questions so that all people are included in the process, but let me tell you one thing, the first and foremost issue is this, funding, funding, funding.
you're going to take funding from other programs, I don't think so.
you're going to have a big uproar in the community about social service programs funding being cut.
other funding, other programs being cut also, child care, etcetera, not good.
listen to your folks.
I listen to what susan said, and I'll tell you what, we are very concerned about this.
it scares the heck out of me to look at this issue and say, this is going to cost this much, it's going to do what?
it's not clearly defined.
include the other people and make sure you include the churches.
the pasters are a very good avenue for educating the community, but I will go one step further that I said at the school board meeting when I was with the dropout taskforce for three years.
get the youth involved, 18 and over.
these young people are eligible to vote and they vote, but they're not educated by us more mature voters.
please include them in the process, please include everybody else in the process.
let me tell you something, I have grave concerns with this issue.
the other thing, also hispanic quality of life was never addressed.
what level are we on that?
and yet we're talking about another funding mechanism, funding where it's going to do what?
I question this.
a lot of people question this.
they called me.
and in my situation, judge, people want me to represent them.
I don't represent anybody, but I'll bring their concerns and comments over here to this elected body and the city council.
thank you very much and please slow down this process.
look at the funding mechanism.
thank you.

>> thank you, gus.

>> okay.
sir, can we get you that way.
right where you are is fine.
all those mic's ought to be live.

>> good evening.
my name is elmer finney and I have a couple of questions and one is very important, wunt that Commissioner Ron Davis brought up.
the question is who really owns the property, who owns the land?
I mean, currently you're building these expensive houses, which is increasing the property taxes of the people that live over there already.
and a lot of people are living there on fixed incomes, so as the tax value goes up, they're getting into the position where they have to participate in your tif.
then if they participate in your tif, that means who owns their land now?
yeah, they stay in their homes, they're not paying taxes on the land, which means they're paying less on taxes, but then who owns the land?
and isn't it kind of like renting?
because when you're renting you stay in the house, but somebody else owns the land and therefore it makes them renters.
and then they're kind of at the mercy of the landlord, which would be the city of Austin.
and then let's just say since I'm reading the economy changes and someone wants to come in and put in a big manufacturing company that would boost -- which would boost Austin's economy.
and well, we've got this land owned by the city of Austin under the tif, they may want that land.
again, these people would bety mercy of you guys.
so if you wanted to increase the economy of Austin and you just wanted that land to put something on, what do they have to say about it?
and what about the children?
if they don't own the land, just the house, what about the inheritance?
who is going to get that?
are the children going to get it or does it belong to the city or the county of Austin?
and the other question I have is the tax burden.
who is going to pay for the taxes?
they're not paying taxes on the land.
is that going to be issued to the other homeowners?

>> ms. Shaw and staff correct me if I'm wrong, but on the shared equity tool that's inside this tif, which is only one of the tools.
there's a whole bunch of other things that the tif money could be used for, but for the shared equity aspect where nonprofit corporation that is affiliated with government owns the dirt.
it's kind of like a condo circumstance where the individual living in the home owns that portion, and this other nonprofit owns the dirt.
but it's kind of like -- it's kind of like they jointly and severally own it.
you know, you're in partnership.
you're right, you're in partnership with a quasi governmental entity who has interest in your home.
and you're also right that when -- if you're in this shared equity circumstance and you sell the house, you're going to be getting less because you're only selling the house, you're not selling the house and the dirt.

>> and that question on the taxes, if that property is taken offline, even what they're doing here now, what they're proposing to do now, the -- all of the taxpayers in Travis County would have to pick up the tax burden on this.
exactly.
to get the same effective tax -- the effective tax rate.
that's what you end up going by and you look at that each year.
but the question is every taxpayer in Travis County will have to pick up the tab on those taxes that are being lost.

>> let me play devil's advocate for a moment.
staff knows this stuff better than I am because I'm just a mouthpiece.
of course that's the issue whenever you do a government program.
if we're going to provide after school care for children, that's also a shifting of the tax burden.
we're giving a benefit to some, and taxing others to pay for it.
so I don't think that that aspect alone is a reason to dislike this program.
it's just that we have to be mindful about who we are giving the benefit to and who we're shifting the burden to.
and I think that there are some unanswered questions in that regard.
and in terms of the shared equity, the reason why I say I'm enthusiastic about figuring out how to use this tool, but I want to be mindful in using it is that I think it would be a wonderful third way -- there are some people who can afford to rent, there are some people who can afford to own out right.
we have yet to see a circumstance where someone can own a portion.
and as they say, half a loaf is better than known.
I would be happy to own 50% of the overall piece of property rather than to own none of it if I can't afford 100 percent.
so I see that it might be an interesting tool for that middle way where you can build equity in a home.
but I too am concerned about what the ramifications we have on someone's estate, if this is a senior citizen and this is their legacy that they're leaving to their family.
these are questions that we need to be real mindful about answering and understanding.

>> and see, the point is that generation after generation after generation after generation of property owners in this area have kind of passed things along to their children and on and on and on.
and there is a lot of property that's still owned by generation after generation after generation where folks didn't have no other place to live but there.
that is the only place that they allowed folks to stay here is on the east side because of the way the 1928 -- let's go back to the way it really is.
1928 the city said if you do not live in a certain part of the city you do not get infrastructure.
you do not get water, you don't get utilities.
so a lot of folks had -- were forced to live in this area.
and of course so generation after generation after generation of folks have had to endure and live in this area, and of course we're not -- nobody is knocking that, but if you take land -- it's just like a choto.
if you take land off the tax roll, then somebody else have to pick up the tab on that property and that means the taxpayer have to pick it up all over Travis County.
that's a fact.
that's a fact.
but again, generation after generation after generation passing property on to their heirs that were forced to live east of i-35 or forced to live in other areas because of the cities, the city's 1928 ordinance or whatever they called them back then, you must live in a certain part of this city.
otherwise you do not get the services of the city.

>> judge, what are -- what are we -- what are we doing here?
this is -- I mean, this has gotten so out of hand as to what the subject matter is that -- there obviously are people concerned and confused about what some of these answers are.
but I am having a real difficult time understanding -- it almost sounds like -- all right.
we don't believe the city.
okay.
I'm not here to try to talk you into believing the city.
but there is something else going on here other than what this subject matter seems to be about.
and I for one am not here to tell you that I'm trying to pull the wool over anybody's eyes.
you don't have to worry about me in another 10 days because I won't be here to vote, but I do not think that this program is what this is about.
first of all, it is voluntary.
yes, there are things that have gone on for a long time that may not be right.
now, if that is a subject matter that we want to gather, have a gathering and talk about it, then fine.
but we are way off of what we're trying to do with this particular subject matter as far as I am concerned.

>> it's just that the people of east Austin have gotten promises, things that the city is going to do.

>> [ inaudible ] that's why there's some mistrust in the council.
you know, it's not that we don't trust you, it's just that past experience has shown us that we have to watch the council to make sure that they're really going to do what they say and not something else behind it.
that's all.
affordable housing is great.
it's great.
we need it.
but we just have to watch how we're doing it because if you're going to put mansions and call them affordable housing, raise the taxes on the people that are on fixed incomes now, then that's like causing them to participate because if I'm not making enough money -- this sounds good.
I participate, give them my land and I don't have to pay taxes on my land, I can make it.
but 10 or 20 years in the future if you want that land, that makes me a renter at the mercy of the city of Austin.
if you want me to move --

>> no one is making you do this.

>> all right.
let me play county judge.
the gentleman has to leave soon.
you will be next, soon.

>> Commissioners, I have to pay the meter.
it's running a little low.
I have two questions.
and it's real simple.

>> could you state your name.

>> my name is pastor robert walker senior.
and the majority of the people that will be affected by this are members of our church.
I have two questions.
has this program been implemented somewhere else before?
and how good is it working?

>> no.
this is --

>> no, it has not.

>> this is -- a version of it has, but the specifics of this particular -- it's my understanding that -- I've done some -- I've looked.

>> Commissioner, I just want to clarify of the community land trusts and shared equity, we already have shared equity using.
we already have over 100 participants right now and community land trusts are used all across the country.
there is no other homestead preservation district.

>> correct.
that's the distinction.
the tools that the homestead preservation district would utilize have been used elsewhere, but creating a district in which the tools are concentrated has not been done before.
am I correct about that?
is that a fair description?

>> the answer to the question is no.

>> the Texas increment finance district in which the tax increment must be spent within a specific zone has not been -- that aspect of it has not been used before?

>> will you all make it so simple next time that you get the information out that we can explain it to our congregation before they leave the sanctuary because a lot of folks are working and they can't come down.
and I would like to be able to go back and give them the right answer if they ask me as their pastor.
and will you notify us enough times instead of a couple of days.

>> exactly.
and I wanted to bring your attention to an earlier question that I asked staff.
the question that I gave to you Sunday was the same question that we have sent the city, Travis County, the city of Austin, to give us answers to.
now, it was mandated, in my opinion, as far as outreach is concerned, I asked ms. Shaw earlier what type of average did they contact the churches in the community whose members reside in the area?
was that done?
she said -- I think she said no, they didn't really contact the churches in the area.
and of course, that was their responsibility to do this.
I saw that early on, so to continue to make sure outreach was possible for the time frame that I had, because if you notice the questions that you received were dated I think December 18th.
and so I had a very small window to operate to make sure that the churches got the information since the city didn't do it, I took it upon myself to do it.

>> thank you, Commissioner.

>> thank you.
will y'all make it so simple that you can explain it when the information does come to us?
I need to go pay this meter because I can't pay a fine.

>> [ laughter ]

>> thank you, sir.

>> I'm anthony mays.
I pastor the mount sinai baptist church in the city.
mount sinai has its origin in central east Austin on 22nd street just south of manor road.
that means that many of the members are our church are affected by what this district promises.
I understand the circumstance that no action will be taken.
I would want to raise for clarity's sake this program is stressing volunteer participation so that no one is going to be forced to participate or their circumstances being put in such a way that this really had no other choice but to participate.
volunteer is an important thing to come about.
getting the information out in our community, we can be of help as pastors of congregations.
we do have persons that do look to us as pastor walker has said that expect us to convey to them accurate, helpful information.
I would want -- if there's any way possible, every group has its specialized language, terms, terminology, and sometimes when you send it out, you send it out with your special terms and terminology, and along with what pastor walker is saying, that as you send it out into the community, would you try to make the language more universal.
I know I can talk religious talk and the people that are in religion will understand my terms. But when I'm trying to speak to a broader audience, I need to be careful of that.
and there are some things that you throw out very cases wally that when I go out and use those terms, I want to be sure that the people understand them.
you understand the tif when you throw it out, but personally when I throw it out in the community, will those persons hearing me understand if I just use the word tif?
I understand ty '09, but will those members that I'm speaking to if I use that specialized language.
and then I want some clear understanding about this business of those that may participate.
I understand that they will be taxed only on the improvement, but I'm hearing that and I just want very bluntly to be told does it mean that those who participate will no longer have ownership right to the dirt if they participate?
they will lose the right of ownership to the dirt so that I'd say to a person, if you participate in this, you will have ownership of your improvement, but you will have some kind of joint ownership with some governmental body that owns the land, which actually means that you now cannot sell that land.
so because the participation is surrendering the land.
and those are some of my questions.

>> you're seeking an answer now?

>> if I could get one, yes.

>> miss shaw?

>> thank you very much.
I appreciate the opportunity.
these are very complicated tools and they're the first time they've been used in Texas.
Austin is kind of on the forefront in Texas for doing that.
I think one of the broad statements that I made in the letter, and I also want to make here today is the discretion to emphasize that no one's land is going to be taken away from them without their consent and approval.
and it is a very important decision that you're not going to make overnight and there will be a lot more conversation about it.
and I also want to make sure that we've clarified that the tif monies that we collect, just a new way that municipalities collect monies for affordable housing, would also be used for putting roofs on people's houses, fixing their foundations, addressing a lot of the electrical and plumbing problems that we see, and none of those would have to require a shared equity or land trust model.
in fact, the way the city of Austin uses those tools for sharing in the equity is that if we invest more than $40,000 in your home, what we're saying is that we need a way to recycle that substantial investment in that house.
if you're going to share in that gain where we've seen houses go from $100,000 to $300,000 in seven years, we want to be able to capture some of that 200,000-dollar increase so we can help the next person?
because as you see in the questions, there are thousands of people in this district that need these tools.
the way a community land trust works, and Commissioner eckhardt, you've done very well, is either a nonprofit or a governmental entity owns the land underneath, so they own that, but they have a contract with that buyer for decades.
they live in that and can live in that home in perpetuity, and then what happens is absolutely some of the speakers are correct, if they want to sell that house, we do it in a fairly complicated way of where you calculate what the fair market value is so another low income buyer can stay in that house.
it's often not used for existing homeowners.
that's also another thing I want to clarify.
it's typically used in new construction where you're creating several homes or a subdivision where that land is owned by a nonprofit and those folks can afford to buy the purchases.
in santa fe right behind the georgia owe ceef museum right off the plaza that's what it looks like.
it's a condominium.
the purpose of it is that you're staying in a location that that family earning $35,000 could never hope to live in that geographic area.
so I just want to clarify that I do not expect these funds to be used only for a community land trust or shared equity.
I think what we've lost in the conversation is that we use our funds again to do recovers, plumbing, foundation, a lot of the real basic repairs that we see that are desperately needed in the community.

>> ms. Shaw, hold it.
I don't mean to cut you off, but the question was that the ownership of the land.
and I believe if I'm understanding you correctly, andic this is the way it is, the person doesn't have ownership of the land if they go into this situation.
so I think he was looking for a direct answer, and that is ownership of the land.
you can own the dwelling, but you do not own the land.
that's the answer he was maybe looking for.

>> I'm sorry.
I'm wordy.

>> I understood that.
I understood what you were saying.
and I'm hearing that you intend to use this as a tool more so not for existing homeowners.

>> only if they choose to do that.

>> only if they choose to participate.
it's a way to relieve the tax burden so then you would only be paying -- they may choose to did that, but obviously -- I want to stress again, it would not happen without a lot of conversations and a lot of understanding and so folks understand the risks and rewards that come with that.

>> so the vulnerability of an existing homeowner is that if the surrounding properties increase the value and they choose not to participate, then they are vulnerable to what tax increase would operate without their participation in this project?
do you understand what I'm saying?
if around them in the territory around them they chooses not to participate, but because of the upgrades around them their property chris in value so they're vulnerable to the increased tax rate or the money owed so that this is a circumstance which kind of puts pressure on them to, if you understand what I'm saying.

>> this would also -- could happen without the community land trust.

>> and I understand that.
that it could happen.
I'm also raising -- for education, for the purpose of education, that we want to be on someone's list so that we get this information.

>> yes, sir.
I'm collecting names and phone numbers and e-mails.

>> and I would include as far as our community to be upon that list because I don't want to hear about this in a panic situation.
in a kind of response where you hear something halfway and it sets off an alarm.
because there's things that are going out there that are true and some things that are not true.

>> I am so sorry foe that.
I think I've learned that just in the last week that there's a lot of disinformation.
and I apologize for that.
if there's anything that my department has ever done to do that, I apologize.
there is a lot of disinformation that's gotten out recently about this, and I want to make sure that we're clear that nobody's land is getting taken away.
this is not a city of Austin eminent domain or case along that lines.

>> that's the kind of information that kind of was going on.

>> I'm sorry for that.

>> I want to thank Commissioner Davis for raising the level of interest and that got me to this point so that I want to make sure I'm giving out accurate information and that we can make informed decisions.
and so I appreciate it.
I thank the court for allowing us this time of expression.

>> thank you, pastor.

>> yes, sir?

>> good morning.

>> morning.

>> my name is her better johnson.
and I'm the chair of the deacon poured of saint stephen's baptist clurch and also am a homeowner in east Austin.
I'm disabled, my wife is disabled.
but we do own our home.
we make payments, I must say.
I have a question that I would like to have answered today if possible because when I heard about the last meeting, y'all adopted east Austin for this project.
why don't you adopt some other place.
Commissioner Daugherty's presing for this project?
why don't you test on somebody else?
instead of testing on us.
we already have the sewer plant.
we already have all the gas running all over everywhere that they put in east Austin.
what's happening now in central east Austin, you build a few nice projects on the other side of town, and the property values go up.
you haven't done anything up to this point.
if you go to the phone book and you decide that you want to hire a plumber to come to your house, you look in the phone book right now and you will see that it's plumbers in west Austin, there's plumbers in south Austin, there's plumbers in north Austin, and it will say central.
nobody is east.
there's not a plumbing company registered east.
if somebody in east Austin wants anything, we have to leave, go buy it, bring it back and still pay the same taxes as everybody else.
up until this point you've done nothing.
you've actually done nothing for east Austin.
why don't you adopt another part of town to do this project?
central east Austin, the people that are there, the rail system has got to go out to the airport, the movie industry is going to move in there, and all the property is going to be-- is going to start to be very valuable in that area in precinct 1.
and everybody in precinct 1 realizes this.
my family owned a small construction company for 35 years in hays county.
and I was a licensed general contractor with the state of Texas at one time.
I'm disabled now.
and so you say that you want to build affordable housing.
do it somewhere else with this project.
because I don't like the idea of not thinking that the struggle that I have to go through now a lot of times may wife and I are we're not even able to afford medicine that we actually need.
and that my children would have to give up the property that the house is on.
and I just think you ought to adopt some other part of town to do this.
don't do it in east Austin.
I don't think we asked you.
I'm all for affordable housing, but don't just pick us for the project.
do it somewhere else.
you know, we've got heferg.
we've got all the bad stuff that the city doesn't want.
it's already in east Austin.

>> mr. Johnson, do you -- is it mr. Johnson?

>> yes.

>> do you realize that the only reason that we have this thing is because we were asked by your state representative that represents your area.
and the first question that I asked eddie rodriguez, I schedule I've got some people in western Travis County that I represent that, you know, are poor or that can't afford some of the kind of things that we're talking about, and one of the issues that I had with it is that you take one side of town that is deemed the poorer side of town, and I said we've got those kind of issues all over Travis County.
but it wasn't that this court came up with this to do to east Austin.
we were asked by the state representative that, you know, represents your area.
have you had this kind of conversation with representative rodriguez?

>> absolutely not because we didn't know anything about this.

>> okay.

>> now, I don't know -- no.

>> well, this is not this court's -- we didn't come up with let's roll this thing out and do it in east Austin.
that's not where it came from.

>> what I'm saying to you is since it's presented to you, and my opinion I would say try it on somebody else for a change.

>> the difficulty that Commissioner Daugherty refers to is that the statute that enables us to create this, the statute that provides us the option of creating this homestead preservation district defines its physical location.

>> right.

>> so we can't move it to montopolis.

>> where they don't do it.

>> we can only -- if we choose to use the mechanism, the whole package, we have to use it in the specific geographic area.
but the reason why that geographic area was chosen is a good reason I think that we would all agree on that the reason why that geographic area was chosen is because it's gentrifying so fast is that it's pushing people below the median family income out of the area.
and the intention of representative rodriguez was to preserve homestead and rental properties for people at 50 and 30 percent and below mfi so they wouldn't have to move to Pflugerville, move out to del valle.

>> well, all right.
I appreciate your concern.
wow.
but the thing is simply this.
I'm disabled, I filed for disability.
I filed for homestead.
which brings my taxes to where I can afford them.
what I am saying is that I don't buy this.

>> I hear you.

>> I don't like it.
I don't think that you ought to try this project.
maybe it's a good project.
try it on somebody else.

>> mr. Johnson, mr. Johnson.
let me also respond to something else.
if the city -- the county allows you a 20% homestead exemption, we also allow you a 65,000-dollar disabled exemption, now, if that was applied by the city of Austin, the same exemptions, your taxes would even be reduced more than what they are now.
so I'm looking for tax relief in the situation and other means of doing it, other alternative ways.
so ask the city of Austin, hey, grant me a 20 percent homestead exemption.
grant me more than the $51,000 of senior citizen exemptions.
I'd like to have a 65,000-dollar disabled exemption as the county is doing.
and your taxes would even be reduced more than what you're paying now.

>> and they could do that for the people.

>> they could do it.

>> for the people that are 65 and older and that have been in their home for over 30 years.

>> exactly.

>> there could be something else that could be done besides this project.
and that's what I'm saying.
there's poor people all over town, sure.
I understand that.
but we have enough in east Austin.
everything that's unwanted, y'all send it to east Austin.

>> thank you, mr. Johnson.

>> yeah.
you're welcome.
and I'm just saying please, if you're going to do the project, try it somewhere else.

>> last call.
anybody else?
last call.

>> I have one other question --

>> [inaudible - no mic].

>> we'll need you to get on the mic, reverend.

>> I just thought about something.
if you're not going to own the land, but you're going to be taxed on if you choose to participate, home improvement, then that will force somebody to build up instead of out.
how would that work?
if you want to add an extra room to your house and you're not able to own the land, how -- how exactly would that work?
are you forcing me to build up because I own the house?

>> no.
I think essentially what it would work out to, and you would have to tell me if I'm wrong about this, is you have free use of the air space.
so if you want to add a room, if you want to build a garage, that's all good.
that's a good thing that everybody wants to see happen, that the improvements in the air above the dirt happen.
and there would, I think, probably be some restrictive covenants on the types of stuff you could build, but I think it probably wouldn't be -- actually, it's even much simpler.
you just have to abide by whatever the compatibility zoning rules are that you have there.

>> whether you own the dirt or not.

>> whether you're on the dirt.
it's an agreement you would work out with that nonprofit or city entity that owns the land.
it would not restrict the ability to do the renovations other than the typical -- applicable laws that would happen.

>> that would be something that everyone would benefit from, if you wanted to add a garage or put a garage apartment in or something like that.

>> so you mentioned nonprofit.
this is what I think the folks are not aware of.
this actual project could actually be turned over to a nonprofit.
and of course there are nonprofits in the area that may be interested in this.
and I think they need to know.
and it comes up with some what's called accountability.
and nonprofits are nonprofits.
and you do mention that.
and this may not be something the city will bring on, but you may be releasing it to a nonprofit.
and I think that the community needs to know that a nonprofit may be having jurisdiction on a 7700 parcel jurisdiction in that area.
so that's significant in my opinion.
thank you.

>> that answer your question?

>> yes, sir, it did.

>> thank you very much.
appreciate y'all's input.

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 23, 2008 4:27 PM

December 23, 2008 Item 28

December 23, 2008
Item 28