Travis County Commissioners Court
February 10, 2009, 2009
Item 20
20.
consider and take appropriate action on the following: 1.
reimbursement resolution for fiscal year 2009 vehicle purchases; 2.
modify fleet by adding five electric vehicles and removing two pick-up trucks; 3.
request to purchase one trailer maintained message sign; and 4.
use of the local initiative project (federal grant funding contract) to pay for 50% of the propane powered lawnmowers, electric vehicles, hybrid vehicles, solar powered changeable message sign, propane school buses for manor independent school district, flex fuel vehicles for the city of manor and hybrids for the city of Austin.
is it fair to say up front that d is federal money and ab and c are county money?
>> no, judge.
>> then I take it back.
let me listen.
>> okay.
actually the lip fund is from state money.
>> okay.
>> they are all related and there are -- there are elements of local money and state money and -- and.
>> but for our residents then wondering in d, while we're buying for manor, the city of Austin --
>> yes, that's correct.
that is money that we will pass through to these other agencies.
>> okay.
>> not county money.
>> that's right.
>> okay.
>> I was shocked when I read this first time myself is why I thought that I would put the court at ease.
let me --
>> this is a fairly complex agenda item, so I'm going to try my best to make sure that you see how all of these pieces link together.
the first item is a reimbursement resolution, this is because we have -- we are not going to sell bonds as early as we thought we would because of the markets, financial markets, I think we're waiting for -- for new york to kind of turn around and therefore we're going to have to borrow from the general fund and the purpose of -- of a is to reimburse ourselves when we do sell bonds later on this year.
why do we have to sell bonds?
why do we have to -- why do we need the county money now?
because we typically place our orders for vehicles in February.
that's when all of the manufacturers take in orders so that we can have them available and delivered later in the year.
we have deadlines to meet, not only for ordering vehicles, but also for the state grant which we hope will reimburse us for about half of d.
and that way you can see how all of these things are linked.
b on the other hand is somewhat partially related, partially unrelated.
so -- so do I need to say anything more on a, first of all?
>> how much money are we talking about?
>> the reimbursement resolution is for $1,328,530.
>> are we getting a good deal on the price?
the prices of those vehicles?
>> yes, sir.
>> we are getting an excellent deal.
this is -- adds up to about 53 units that was scheduled, budgeted for and in fy '09 budget under the co's, we are just in order to meet deadlines we are just asking for a reimbursement resolution so we can free up some money so we can go out and do some purchasing.
but also encountered 27 of these 53 units will -- will be involved with the grant money that we will be asking for, which is a 50% match, that's an excellent deal with the county.
>> but the market now is such that it should be good prices, right?
>> purchase prices.
>> they are still governed by the contracts that we are buying off of, the prices, we usually have a good price to begin with.
a bomb line -- the bottom line what they can.
we are still paying about the same prices we've always paid for the vehicles.
>> I would make some phone calls to make sure that we cannot greatly --
>> several.
>> and I understand what you are saying and that -- that's out there.
in reality because of the government buying powers that we get up in contracts and stuff, that we have already -- we are already getting great prices.
>> well, does -- looking at this, for the public's point of view, to show how aggressive Travis County is being as far as -- as far as environmental tale sensitive, could you just maybe rattle off some of the types of vehicles that -- that -- more than all of these other kinds of things that we are investing our money in, of course, reimbursement, through the reimbursement resolution, but with this particular type of initiative, to let folks know what we're doing environmentally so could you just basically rattle off a few of these vehicles and all of these other things, source of power, some of them electric.
if you don't mind going to --
>> don't mind a bit.
>> thank you.
>> as I said earlier, we are looking at about a total of 53 vehicles, 27 of which will be grand funded.
the grant funding side of it we are looking at hybrid vehicles, electric, gasoline powered vehicles.
hopefully get anywhere advertised the s.u.v.
that we are looking at for the law enforcement agency to put in for constables and park rangers, it's advertised at 27 miles per gallon.
it will be replacing a ford explorer that's been getting about 14 and 15 miles per gallon.
>> some of these other vehicles will be propane powered lawn mowers that we'll be trying out versus the gas or diesel powered lawn mowers.
outside of those alternative fuel vehicles, there's a few regular sized ford, crown vic police cars, a couple of service body pickup trucks that we use in road and bridge just do the nature of the beast that we need heavy duty vehicles to carry the load out to the road projects.
and we try to get the best vehicles we can for that project, but still hybrid and some other alternative fueling type of vehicles haven't quite got into that market yet.
so -- so that would probably basically make up, a couple more regular lawn mowers that will be gasoline powered.
that would make up -- the bundle.
and one motorcycle, excuse me.
>> and also did we get to the solar sign.
>> that will be in here, also.
>> it won't be hackable to say nazi zombies run, will it?
>>
>> [indiscernible] that won't happen, so --
>> [laughter]
>> I guess I'm kind of surprised at the answer to my question about a.
have you been working with purchasing?
>> no, sir, not directly just yet.
as soon as I start getting prf's together, I'm sure that I will be working closely with them.
>> I would like you to confirm what you just told me about a.
i don't have any independent knowledge except I've been watching ads in newspaper and television.
i understand that the government rate for the entities on whose contracts we purchase normally is a pretty good deal.
but I don't know why that deal wouldn't benefit governmental entities.
based on the percentages that I have been seeing, I mean, if we -- if the government deal is -- is better, fine, if we -- if going alone is better, you know, maybe we ought to.
i support the reimbursement resolution.
that simply means the cash is available today.
we will reimburse the general fund after we issue the debt.
but I'm -- the up front price, though, I mean the market is such that for regular vehicles, I just thought it was -- it was incredible.
now, you know, maybe I'm -- maybe the government contracts got ahead of the eight ball on that and -- and kind of flies in the face of -- of ads that I have been seeing.
>> we'll double check it.
>> all right.
>> and judge, with regard to the -- the reimbursement resolution, this is just a -- a year unlike any year that we have before, so I guess that I'm overly cautious, we are saying that we are going to borrow that from the unallocated reserve and needless to say we hold that unallocated reserve as the untouchable reserve, 11% that we don't eat into that.
if we would eat into that when we close our books at the end of the year, we would have to file a disclosure required under the securities and exchange commission because we had dropped into that reserve.
not the end of the earth, but not a good thing.
so jessica let me see the reimbursement resolution in your -- your intention is to issue before the end of the fiscal year but I just caution you on that.
if there were money elsewhere I would feel bad about borrowing it from there.
>> what's in the allocated reserve?
we put a lot of money there, in fact we put almost a million dollars as a fuel reserve.
>> good afternoon, jess ask
>> [indiscernible] planning and budget.
the allocated reserve currently has a balance of $6.2 million.
there are some earmarks against it.
if all of those earmarks were to come about, then we would have a reserve balance of 2.9 million.
there's also a healthy car reserve at the moment of approximately 2.9 million.
the real question is going to be, we've got other departments contacting our office for additional reimbursement resolutions.
the 1.3 million that is being discussed today for vehicles could certainly come out of car or come out of allocated.
the question will be in a couple of weeks when we hear from its, some other departments that have contacted us, when that number starts to grow.
>> how long does it take to get the reimbursement money back in house?
>> what generally happens Commissioner is if the court approves it, this does not include a budget adjustment here today, that will have to come next week or the week after.
>> I understand.
>> that the funds are transferred over to the department and then once we sell the cco's -- co's and have the -- ...
>> ballpark --
>> if we receive proceeds in may, June, then -- then within that month we would be expecting the department to transfer the funds back.
once they get the administrative portion of that done.
>> this is a real big deal.
i'm tickled about the efforts being made here, especially on -- we say we want to do things to ensure that -- that we have -- help in assisting and making sure that -- that our air quality is to the point where we won't go into -- non-attainment.
of course these vehicles and all of these other things being listed appear to be -- to be how some of those qualities as far as air quality but there are also other
>> [indiscernible] ta list that we have where several cities across the state I guess are maybe looking at some similar stuff, either doing things I guess -- similar to what I guess we're doing and where the whole initiative I guess of trying to ensure, across the state of Texas trying to ensure that we -- that we deal appropriately with the air quality that -- that's being emitted to be sure that there is a decrease and ensure that -- that non-attainment situation doesn't become deadlocked grip around the necks of all of these urban cities.
so I guess I can applaud what we're doing here today in the interests of what we discussed this morning.
and the big -- the big push type initiative for air quality, but it just appears that this is -- this is kind of a -- of a hand in hand approach to -- to ensure that what we do is -- we're putting the action where it -- where the action should be taken, this is similar to what we're doing here today.
so --
>> so the other procedural things in a we just question that, but these other items up under that, the number of vehicles, the relationship with other cities and entities, as far as some of those left over grant money being used, but -- buses that run on propane and all of these other kind of things, so this -- it's a big deal.
so I just -- I just want to applaud you for what you're doing as far as ensuring that we -- that we make an effort to -- to ensure that our air quality is what it should be.
and I think the -- the community need on know what Travis County is doing towards this end.
so I just want to applaud you.
i know there's still a process that we need to go through.
i guess my next question is those other departments are seeking reimbursement type resolutions that will be coming on later, I guess my question at this point is if this was to be granted we -- we end up taking positive action on this and approving it today or whenever, how would that impact what the other departments will be looking at as far as reimbursement resolutions for what they -- what they are looking at --
>> my understanding, Commissioner, why this reimbursement is here today is because there are some deadlines that the department is trying to meet on the grant side of it and trying to maximize those grant dollars.
>> right.
>> I think that we would need to look at the merits of each request of each department.
>> I know it's a real small window on this one here especially.
>> is the fuel reserve in the allocated reserve now?
>> no, I do not believe so.
let me see.
i got that separated out.
>> the fueling and utility reserve is 1.1 million in its own reserve.
>> this instead of unallocated reserve, seems to me that we ought to track the allocated.
unallocated is the untouchable.
allocated is what we normally spend part of that anyway, the fuel requirement, fuel cost so far have been much, much lower than expected, that could go up before the end of the fiscal year, but we're talking about three months here before we can reimburse, March, April, may, three or four --
>> so I do think, too, that as part of the budget guidelines and stuff for -- for Thursday's work session, you give us a status -- we may ought to see what other requests for reimbursement resolutions that we have.
i agree with you at some point we ought to start evaluating them and trying to figure out what in fact can wait, what cannot.
>> judge, you know, it is -- it is with our financial position in that, it's unlikely that we're not going to be able to issue, but this year is so unpredictable, the markets are so unpredictable.
if I were sitting in your seat, I wouldn't put anything out for reimbursement that you weren't willing to pay for this year if you had to.
for some reason we could not issue everything out on a reimbursement, it's just going -- owe going to hit what we are, hit all of the reserves that we have.
and -- and, you know, I would just -- I would just be cautious over that because once we have got those out there, and if for some reason we couldn't issue or we couldn't issue as much as we would like, I -- I have no reason to believe that's going to happen.
but I wouldn't say it's impossible to.
then -- then you have got enough money to operate.
so that would be only my caution and I know the departments want these capital things and normally we issue earlier, it's just a very strange year.
so that --
>> seems to me the allocated reserve makes more sense.
we built it up to deal with unexpected.
>> I agree with that, judge, that's a good point.
>> in a, I move that we approve the reimbursement resolution but substitute allocated reserve for unallocated.
>> second.
>> > any discussion of that?
>> can car also supply some of the money at least?
supplement?
>> big reserves in car.
>> we may need that for the computers because I know there are computers they say we need, its requests.
>> okay.
>>
>> [indiscernible]
>> okay.
>> so I mean that's why I think that it's kind of good for us to get an overall view of this on Thursday afternoon, see what else is requested.
may have to go to some of the departments and say hey you made this request for 100 of them, can you really do with 50 of them if you have to, see what the response is.
okay?
any more discussion of a?
>> this is kind of where we borrow money against reserve funds contingent upon issuing debt.
when we get proceeds from the debt issuance.
>> it used to be the counties could never do that.
if you wanted to buy these things, you were going to borrow, you had to wait until you actually issued the debt.
if the law changed saying if you know you are going to issue debt it would be okay to forward the money, it has to be repaid within 18 months.
the problem with the 18 months is when it crosses when you close your books, whatever is out there you book.
so really the realistic guide line is that it needs to be reimbursemented before year end when we chose our books and pull those balances in.
and in normal years, we never have a problem with this.
it's just this is not -- this is not a normal year.
>> all right.
>> congratulations on being first, joe.
>>
>> [laughter]
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
>> all right.
>> I have a question on b before --
>> okay.
>> and this is just a bit of a side.
but have we run any analysis, I applaud the move towards electric vehicles and -- and hybrids, things like that, have we done any analysis on operation and maintenance and replacement value as it relates to other expenses related to these items?
>> we have on operations, I'm not sure that we have on replacement.
>> maintenance.
>> maintenance actually --
>> maintenance on the few that we have been -- have run in the past has been low.
no major problems.
we haven't replaced any of the electric motors.
mainly it's just replacing the batteries and then they have little small brake systems on it, it's just a light duty vehicle that doesn't wear out parts as much as an -- full sized vehicle does.
again we have only had the opportunity to do a few vehicles.
we've never done this extent before.
but we have gone off and this is a little side bit I guess, we have gone off, 19 hybrid vehicles we have been running for a few years, six priuses, four ford escapes.
fortunately they are still in warranty.
i kind of like to keep them as long as we can.
if we replace one battery pack in a ford escape, that was the factory cost and not ours.
other than that they've done very well.
escape from 27 to 29 miles per gallon, priuses 47 to 49 miles per gallon.
we have increased our miles per gallon to the vehicles that we replace.
we are moving in the right direction.
the cost of operating and maintaining -- hasn't been bad.
hopefully won't go that way.
we are not anticipating --
>> going to the electric vehicles, utility carts, the parks, I don't expect anything out of the ordinary to hit us hard on.
>> also I understand that the battery packs are getting longer life in the newer electric hybrids.
>> absolutely.
the batteries are constantly getting better.
there's been a big push for them for several years now.
even new telephones you notice they have gone from four to five hours to 40 hour batteries.
the batteries are smaller, so --
>> I want to know how you are getting 47 mills to the gallon on -- miles to your gallon on the prius, I'm only getting 46 on mine.
>> you don't do enough downhill travelling.
>> there you go.
>> [one moment please for change in captioners] all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
that -- that maintained message sign in c.
>> we're going -- this is basically -- normally we power our message boards with diesel fuel and in this case it will be a solar powered message board.
>> okay.
>> and it is also eligible for the grant.
>> move approval into second.
>> discussion?
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
now we have come to d.
>> where will, we are asking for approval from the court today for the use of a local initiative project contract to pay for 50% of the following item.
five propane lawn mowers, two electric vehicles, 22 hybrids, one solar message sign, six propane school buses for the city of -- for the manor independent school district, three flex fuel vehicles for manor city, and 9 hybrids for the city of Austin.
so the way the local initiative program works is they will reimburse the county once these projects are completed and we have turned in all of the necessary paperwork, 50% of the costs of these projects, this money for this -- if this grant is from the state of Texas and came from our I and m program, the air check, when you go and get your vehicle emissions tested, a certain percentage of that money goes into a pool which we get back to approve air quality projects.
Travis County will benefit from these projects by getting rid of old polluting vehicles and replacing them with much more efficiency equipment.
transitioning to cleaner burning vehicles is part of our job in improving air quality for Travis County.
one requirement of this grant, though, is that for every one that you get, you get rid of one.
you make it -- you render it useless.
for example for the vehicles that will be replaced you scrap the engine, put a hole in it, sand in it, so it cannot be used in all of the emissions equipment as well as the lawn mowers and every one of these.
the reason why we are going with school buses and we brought in other counties and cities to help them.
is if they have available funds, Travis County projects will receive first priority for this funding.
if we have extra funds over, which it looks like we will, then we will disburse this to be used for the school buses and for the cleaner burning vehicles for the cities, tceq has to approve all of these projects and floss -- we have to wait to see which ones that they will approve.
>> I move approval.
>> also folks -- we get a partridge in a pear tree.
>> okay.
>> will there have to be an interlocal.
>> to come back to court to approve the interlocal agreement.
>> for manor and the city of Austin after approval if tceq decides to approve it.
so we'll look for those interlocals.
>> susan?
>> these are funds getting them from the state pass through funds and we are passing them on to other entities, they are subrecipients, you have heard me speak of that before.
i want to make sure the court understands what we are doing with this subrecipient grants.
what this means is we need to be responsible to make sure they comply with all of the grant requirements that the state has.
t.n.r.
has -- these are very time consuming.
t.n.r.
has said that they will take over the subrecipient monitoring of this grant.
there are three subrecipients that they have got city of manor, manor independent school district, city of Austin.
we have sent a memo just to clarify this because it's important as we are accepting these grants that we understand the work that goes with them because that's not free.
subrecipient grants are complex in nature and as t.n.r.
is the financial officer for the grants which they agreed to be, we want to make sure that your department, t.n.r., is aware of the subrecipient monitoring related to this grant.
t.n.r.
will need to perform subrecipient monitoring of the funds provided to the three entities.
due to its size the grant will most likely be at major program for audit by the external auditors, fy '09 single audit.
that means they will be looking at every transaction in that grant.
the external auditors want to review t.n.r.'s file to make sure that the subrecipients are documented for the single audit.
cynthia has agreed they will do that.
when subrips are included in a federal or state grant t.n.r.
will be responsible to ensure that all of the requirements to which t.n.r.
is being held are also carried out by the subrecipients, these requirements are included in the omb curriculums for federal funds and ughums for state funds.
also specific requirements are included in grant itself.
for this grant what we're taking on, t.n.r.
is taking on is the agreements with the subrecipients include all of the appropriate grant requirements that are imposed on the county through the grant document with the grantor, such as various terms and conditions of constituent and federal agencies, the program and financial requirements of the grantors are monitored by t.n.r.
to ensure compliance by the subrecipients.
this includes, among other things, a review of the subrecipients internal controls, review of supporting documentation of their various transaction, asset inventories and site visits to ensure that the assets acquired are sufficiently safeguarded in verification of the assets being replaced are also dispossessed in the grantor's terms.
we will help them because we monitor a lot of subrecipients, I want the court to understand it's not a free lunch when you get this subrecipient grants and that we have a responsibility.
if in fact we give the money out and we don't do this, and the state comes in or the federal government and find out we didn't, they will expect the county to pay for those things and reimburse them.
so it's very important that we do that.
i wanted to -- to bring this forward on this particular grant because t.n.r.
has agreed to do it and looks like a lot of work, but I'm sure we're going to have more down the road.
>> how -- how long would we be carrying, well, Travis County, be subjected to the subrecipient grant as far as time is concerned?
>> let me ask you a question real quick.
this is not like one of the typical downstream deals where you provide grant funds down to a subcontractor to do hhs work.
i'm not even sure the funds are ever going to leave the county's hands.
we're going to have an interlocal agreement, daniel bradford and my office is drafting that up.
should be ready next week, I guess, which we will say that we will be buying the vehicles for these entities, deliver them the vehicles, really I don't know how we can mess up on this one because we are controlling the fund and controlling the delivery.
this is the best possible situation to protect --
>>
>> [multiple voices]
>> which is a good answer, but I really was trying to also jump on the monitoring, having the personnel to make sure that everything is in compliance as far as the grant is concerned.
>> yeah, everybody is --
>> [multiple voices]
>> normally does those grants.
>> they said they will.
>> my final question was for how long.
in other words not forever, is it?
>> [multiple voices]
>> till the grant closes
>> [multiple voices]
>> come in, did what they were supposed to do, then we closed the door on it.
>> uh-huh.
>> okay.
that's --
>>
>> [multiple voices]
>> our --
>> [inaudible - no mic] will be expecting from us.
giving us this --
>> [indiscernible] demolition or destruction.
and that happened with the other vehicles
>> [indiscernible] paid for, that's -- that's basically the end of the -- of the oversight.
>> okay.
>> just to add to that, we already have a manifest process in place to track the destruction of the vehicles.
>> okay.
>> so d involves how much money?
all of the items in d?
>> the Travis County projects total -- I'm going to say approximate, just in case I'm off, but I believe it's a little over $839,000 of which we would receive about 50% from the state.
then there's -- there's the additional amount that -- that would -- that would go to the three entities outside of us.
>> okay.
>> we will know whether -- we will be reimbursed before we advance the money in d.
so we wouldn't go and -- manor independent school district bus, buy one, unless we had every reason to believe that half of this would be reimbursed.
>> correct.
>> correct.
>> so are we buying -- who is covering the other half?
for manor?
in my example?
>> they are making their payments.
>> they pay 50% and the grant pays 50%.
>> right.
>> so -- so we pay 0 in that case.
we're just -- the facilitator.
>> yes.
>> okay.
>> but on the county part we pay 50% hopefully the grant will pay the other 50% for our equivalent.
>> right.
>> okay.
>> for -- the motion and second, any more discussion?
or delay?
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you all very much.
>> thank you so much.
>> we hope it comes again next year.
>> good move.
>> we will take up a 1 after executive session.
that's the employment practices solutions contract.
modification.
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, February 10, 2009 2:00 PM