This is the official website of Travis County, Texas.

Commissioners Court

Previous Years' Agendas

Intergovernmental Relations Office

Administrative Ops

Health & Human Svcs

Criminal_Justice

Planning & Budget

Transportation & Natural Resources
 

Travis County Commissioners Court

February 24, 2009,
Item 11

View captioned video.

>> no.
11 is to 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.

>> morning judge and commission ergs.
i'm steve neil from public works.
i'm going to draft anna bowl ento help me with this discussion.
in your backup should be a draft copy of a position statement from the division central Texas and they have asked us, the county, to comment on it.
in that draft that you have is a compilation of comments that joe put together and he received from members of the court, and we'd like to go ahead and open up this discussion about any additional changes you'd like to see or any questions that you may have about the comments you see in there.
and hopefully wrap this up today.

>> I thought it was fine.
the only thing I saw on 8.3.3 was perhaps they could plan for reducing, reusing or, you know -- the waste stream.
kind of plan for that.
because we always seem to get surprised by that at the end, and by the time we address it it's like too huge a problem.

>> okay.
thank you.

>> I think the suggested changes are very good.
i think that it seems like the -- the suggested language in a way that is -- is good.

>> okay.

>> did we ask them -- on page 2, no.
5, we recommend that they delete it.
did we ask them what they had in mind there?

>> as far as the recommendations to delete that?

>> no.
they said the current statute gives counties the authority to take a more active role in managing growth and some counties have utilized.

>> right.

>> we don't think it's good for them to say that so we recommended they delete it.

>> right.

>> so what did they have in mind when they said it?

>> I don't know, judge.

>> I think it would be good to ask them.

>> okay.
maybe we've heard it before, maybe not.
but it's hard to determine that without -- without knowing.

>> without knowing.

>> okay.

>> last time that came up we muddled with our lawyers -- huddled with our lawyers, and the opinion that I recall was basically to the effect that I think senate bill 873 in subsection a gave counties, you know, broader authority to do certain things, but we concluded that in subsection b they took it back.
right?
so if that's what they have in mind, I think we ought to let them know what our interpretation of that is, and if they have some authority they can cite to support their position and not ours, it might be good to have it.

>> okay.

>> another point of view, that that may be expressed in 5, which we should just get clarification from them.
since this is -- I'm assuming their intention is for this to be a county land use statement in regard to central Texas region, and the statement about current statutes giving counties authority that they don't use is really more apt to rural counties, municipal -- densely populated urban counties are often looking for expanded authorities beyond which -- beyond what currently exist because they've maxed out.
we've hit the ceiling, done everything we can without undue risk of litigation, whereas many, many other counties in Texas don't care to utilize some of these tools because they don't have the same issues.

>> uh-huh.

>> joe was listed as a speaker in one of the county land use authority workshops.

>> yes, sir.

>> has that taken place already?

>> it's under way right now.
i think that's where we might be right now.

>> oh, it's today?

>> I believe so.

>> okay.
because I think it would be helpful for us to get a summary of important points that are made there.
they seem to have several individuals who in the past have proven to be knowledgeable in this area.

>> uh-huh.

>> so --

>> okay.
sure.

>> I feel a whole lot better now.
i just thought joe was tired of --

>> no, sir.

>> declining to participate today.

>> I think you've done a good job.
the differences you've done now, highlighting them to where we could go right to those bullets, which show the difference in what -- what was proposed and what we actually have an input to.
i think that's very helpful.
it looks good.

>> thank you.
i'd like to let anna -- she has a few comments she came up with.
run those past you.

>> we welcome her comments.

>> thank you.
on -- on the arguments against this county land use, on item 6.2.1, I would just want to -- I particularly like that because I want to be sure that everyone knows that if we do this there is an additional cost of service that would need to be passed on to our constituents, and I think that that's something that's important to consider and weigh on both sides of the argument.
and then the only other comment that I have is on section 8.2, where we speak of what the legislature should do, should make additional authority available, there would be two conditions.
i would propose that there should be three conditions, with the third being that we would need to have met the requirements of house bill 1445 with each of the jurisdictions before we can utilize any kind of land use in that etj.
it's kind of un -- to me it's like unfinished business that we have, and this is a good tool to help motivate, you know, everyone involved to get those interlocals done.

>> can you -- the requirements --

>> of house bill 1445.

>> where could that be -- well, I guess for those suggestions that you have brought up, could you maybe, I guess when it's coming back again, I guess what the judge has requested and other requests that have been made here today, could you make sure that that is a part of what comes back?

>> yes, sir.
we'll do it.

>> sure.

>> and that we will be able to look at that.

>> anything further?

>> no, sir.

>> what would you like us to do today?

>> we'd like to receive any additional comments from you.
we'll go back, ask for additional comments you have and I guess bring you a final draft, which -- how you communicate that to central Texas, I'm not sure how you want to do that.

>> I think we ought to approve that draft in a nicely -- and a nicely worded cover letter, approve it next Tuesday and send it to them.

>> okay.

>> they wanted input, here it is.

>> all right.
we'll draft up that letter for you.

>> thank you.

>> thank you all.

>> okay.
we'll have you back on next week.
next week is March 3, right?

>> uh-huh.

>> I believe we have come to lunch in the executive session first thing this afternoon.
with that I move that we recess until 1:30.
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: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 4:26 PM