Travis County Commissioners Court
February 17, 2009, 2009
Item A2
A2.
consider and take appropriate action on request from the envision central Texas work group for comments on process and recommendations regarding county growth management authority.
>> I got an e-mail late last week, why I put that on.
they were asking us for their comments on -- on -- on an e-mail and information contained in it.
i thought if they really wanted our comments we probably ought to send this over to joe, let the court have an opportunity to look at it.
unfortunately the deadline was 5:00 yesterday a county holiday.
i think that I got this in the mail on Friday.
i did request that they give us until tomorrow at 5:00 to give comments.
but if I'm not mistaken, that work group meets tomorrow morning, doesn't it?
>> that's I think what the e-mail said.
so I guess one good question is whether we ought to worry about this now or just -- or just see what they did this morning, see what they do tomorrow morning.
>> who do they report to after that meeting tomorrow?
>> we have been getting -- getting e-mails from the director and the assistant director and -- and so that -- the work group has been reporting through the -- through the director.
>> all right.
>> the director does a pretty good job of just copying everybody who has been a partner in the past.
the problem is some of this stuff is on a pretty short time line.
if you have been involved with the working of the work group, a week is plenty of time.
when the deadline is set a week away and you get your e-mails out three or four days later, you don't give people like us an opportunity to provide much input.
so you and I have been going to those work group meetings, have you?
>> I have read the document.
i do have some comments, but I don't know if this is the appropriate place to lay them out.
>> are they delicate or are you thinking about the time --
>> they are fairly -- it's a fairly -- I would say it's a very aggressive stand on the county land use authority.
so it's just a matter of whether you say good luck and go forth or actually try to modify the language.
>> I agree with you it is aggressive, but it is their stance.
am I not mistaken they are asking for our comments, but it is their stance and I could -- seems appropriate for them to be -- to be as aggressive and out front as the statement is.
>> the only sentence that I would differ with you on he is where they limit our agenda.
that's -- that's the sentence that says other kinds of land use regulations such as zoning and building permits should remain within municipal jurisdiction only.
>> good point.
>> that is contrary to -- to where we have been going with some of our land use authority.
>> that's a good point.
>> I would not want us to be on opposite ends of the -- of the table on that.
>> but that's an example of where they are not being aggressive.
>> exactly.
>>
>> [laughter]
>> I guess are they aware of what our position is on --
>> I have talked with shaun moran, their director of planning, I don't think this is coming out of shaun's shop -- excuse me, council of government.
now I have not talked with envision central Texas on this subject.
>> it would be good to let them know the direction we are going with so we won't have conflict I think.
we definitely need to be on the same page, that's for sure.
especially under this -- you know, under this topic and other topics.
>> if we have the opportunity for them to respond to questions that we have as well in the work group tomorrow, on item no.
5, you know, we keep hearing current statute gives counties authority to more active role.
i would like to see someone expand upon that and say exactly what counties aren't using that could be used.
i don't know if it comes internnally from us or --
>> yeah, that's -- I didn't really critique the -- the verbiage or the narrative that led up to the position.
i think there's some -- some well just some things in there that I don't agree -- I would disagree with, but the position that they are taking on county land use authority.
>> me do temper that statement later on, I'm looking for, they essentially say that counties have begged off using some of the authorities because of the vagueness in the language, I think it's 6.1.6, many counties believe the current statute is too vague opening them up to legal challenges -- I am assuming they are referring to
>> [indiscernible] they are afraid to take action over 101 a because 101 b is sitting out there like a -- like a thief in the night.
>> what's the purpose and intent of the meeting tomorrow?
what are they actually charged with doing did?
>> my sense is that they are trying to build a framework which they can -- they can either provide comments to the current session of the legislative session or a future session so -- so this is not geared just to the current session, but they are trying to build a consensus among -- among the counties in the region on county land use authority.
and this is the -- this is the first position that I think that they have taken on that.
so they are -- they are -- they are basically trying to build up what their position would be with regard to county authority.
>> just appears to me that it would be good if they could maybe -- maybe dove tail it and -- we -- in the direction we are trying to go and -- and sharing that information right now I'm not really too comfortable with the last minute staging as far as trying to -- to get things accomplished for something as critical as land use authority.
all of this is critical.
all of these subject matters are critical.
but this is something that's very delicate.
since it is delicate I just think that we need to -- to work in the same regard as I stated earlier.
on the same page.
>> [one moment please for change in captioners]
>> what if we tell them we received the information and we appreciate them sharing it with us.
monday was a holiday and that in court today we basically pretty much determined that we would like an opportunity to further review what they sent us as well as our position and we'll get them something in writing after next Tuesday's meeting.
that way if the work group has to take final action before then, we won't waste our time and theirs either.
but if we have enough time, that will give us -- you an opportunity to put together sort of a draft for us to review and then we spend a little time in court next week putting that in final shape and giving it to them as the official Travis County position assuming a majority of us supports it.
and we can also find the answer to that other question if you believe that there is authority that is not used specifically what authority are you talking about and I guess try to find out if they have some sort of legal opinion on that.
hays county at one point have been researching that and trying to figure out what to do.
i think that would be a better use of our time than, you know, sort of wondering through a discussion today.
>> yeah.
>> don't you?
>> uh-huh.
>> and if they are going to the legislature and they are taking a position with which we disagree strongly, then we need to go ahead and put something together anyway.
but if we thousand stickly support -- enthusiastically support all or part of their position we need to try to identify that part and advocate for it.
at some point I would think that delegation members who receive it will want to know our take on it, what we'll probably ask for.
>> I agree.
>> I don't know that we can do more than that today.
>> yeah, I agree with that.
>> and my guess is if they learn we're really interested in providing formal input, if they can allow additional time, I think they will do it.
joe, when you get quiet like that, are you agreeing with everything time saying?
>> think the discussion is among you and I'll certainly provide you my comments on this draft and then develop whatever you would like to do for next Tuesday.
>> perhaps looking at the last page where it talks about their short term and long term steps, it sounds like this group may be working -- I don't want to put words in their mouth, working towards the March 6th capacol county land use workshop.
if this is just are they working on basic targets, I don't know.
maybe we can get clarified from them tomorrow where their direction is going.
>> I think so too and also looking at what their next steps are, it seems to me since they are talking about not taking a specific position on any bills in this letting session but providing input, it leads me to believe that this document is about their short term and long-term goals and therefore just because it goes beyond what we as a county are pushing for in this legislative session does not make us at odds with their broader statement of goals to work on in subsequent years.
>> well, it's entitled the strong man version so that should be --
>> I agree this in vision state of Texas and I don't see a -- central Texas but I don't see anything related to capcog.
>> we hammered on it a little bit and a lot of stuff was basically regional to that degree.
and you know, of course being regional and then being directly relating to what Travis County's land use is, I mean, you know, they represent everybody, the whole region, per se, but we have specifics we want to do in Travis County.
but I can understand their point of view, but I just want to make sure Travis County is not left out of the loop and that's basically --
>> well, if there's an early March conference, we would want to participate in that anyway, wouldn't we?
and I think that rather than -- if whoever goes there, rather than giving his or her opinion, he would have to be able to say a court looked at this and landed on -- I think.
>> we should know where we stand.
>> and if we think that more than two may attend the workshop, we need to post it anyway.
can we get specifics on the workshop?
move that we express our deep appreciation to them for sending us this information, that we indicate our keen interest and desire in providing a formal response and that we indicate our intention to review this matter further and approve a formal document setting forth our position next Tuesday, February 24th, 2009.
>> second.
>> that we further find out as much as we can about the early March cap 'cog conference.
seconded by Commissioner Davis.
or a better substitute?
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
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 17, 2009 2:10 PM