Travis County Commissioners Court
February 16, 2010,
Item 18
Number 18 is to consider and take appropriate action on a request to participate with the city of Austin in developing a strategic mobility plan by identifying potential cost share projects for possible inclusion in future city and county road bond referendum.
>> good afternoon, joe gieselman with transportation and natural resources department.
as you may know, the city of Austin is soliciting further comment toward its strategic mobility plan which would include projects they hope to offer to the voters in November of this year.
we have been in discussions with the city stapstaff transportation department about projects of mute chal interest that may be partially inside the city, partially inside the county.
since this bond election will literally commit the city for the next five years with regards to its debt.
so they have a large menu of transportation projects that they are looking at.
and before we, county staff, gave our comments, we thought it would be a good idea to have the county Commissioners court weigh in on this.
we thought perhaps we ought to agendaize this, bring it to court and take a look at projects in all precincts, bring it back to the court and formally transmit to the city.
we expect to do that with your approval in the next two to three weeks.
>> questions?
>> enthusiastic motion in favor.
>> second?
Commissioner Davis.
>> yes, I just wanted to make sure that each particular Commissioner, including the judge, we are not going to leave the judge out on this, will receive additional information that will really just kind of break this down a little bit more than just generally laid out today, especially the things the next steps on those kind of projects that have some connectivity or gap, where the county has its portion, of course then the city of Austin has its portion.
really want the community to understand that they have the connect situation that we are talking about.
where that is will connect, this is what we are going to be looking at.
of course that may entail hike and bike trails.
it may entail roads.
i'm not too sure about the transportation aspects.
but I want to make sure that everyone understands that the role that the county, which we are the county, what we are actually playing at this point, so I want to be sure this is kind of hammered down.
of course, at some stage within the neck two weeks, I expect to have all of those kind of things.
if it's hike and bike trails, that portion where the county has and what the city is actually looking into.
and of course the roads.
then anything else that we may be missing out on as far as subject matter.
then again, I guess it would be good to know at some stage of the game, I guess, who will be responsible for, an example, if there's a nexus point that the county is responsible for as far as we looking at that particular portion of the county's project, then of course who will be the responsible for ling the --letting the public know about the county's portion.
on the other hand, the public should be notified on who is responsible for the city's portion of this gap that we are trying to connect together here in this particular effort.
right now, I'm hearing you but I guess as we work through this process, somewhere along the line there has to be sufficient public input to have enough of that for decisions to be made.
that was my concern, to make sure that happens as we go through this process.
>> a couple points I'd like the make there.
first of all, they are soliciting broadly input across the city any number of different forums.
as a matter of fact one this mortgage came out--mortgage came --mourning came out, online services with regard to city's strategic mobility plan.
i would suggest probably there will be a lot of more hearings the city will conduct before the November bond election on whatever package they ultimately come up with.
we are merely making recommendations.
the city may decide, I'm sure they will have to at some point, they have sized their bond to their debt capacity.
so not all that is being recommended will ultimately be selected but at least it will give us the opportunity to coordinate.
finally, this is somewhat of a precursor for us in that we expect to have a bond election as early as next year, 20111.
whatever we suggest to the city that it includes in its bond election, that also is incumbent on us to come through to match that, to make sure that we have a whole project and not just a piece here and there.
>> right.
>> like you say, it's not just roadways, it's multimodal.
when you think about the investment that we are fixing to make in downtown Austin, we would be certainly interested in what the transportation plan has to say about our campus.
so I look forward to it being across the board.
>> normally we have gone through past bond initiatives, Travis County bond initiatives, we have methodically I think went through public input process where we were able to come back with recommendations that were made by the public to have hopefully with the Commissioners court approval, of course, have those particular items placed on a bond ballot for bopped --bondwill election.
i want to be sure the opportunities we is had in the past are still available.
that is to have enough supportive evident as far as input is concerned, public input to go forward with certain suggestions.
that is basically why I'm posing things as I'm doing this afternoon.
thank you.
>> just for clarification, so we're saying the city of Austin will look at a bond election in 2010, November.
>> that.
>> and --
>> that is correct.
>> and the county will in 201 1.
>> it has been likely said they are looking at doing a November 2010 election.
i think they still have a ways to go before they finally pull that trigger.
of course ours is also in the air.
just been very generally talk about bond election next year.
nothing concrete.
>> okay.
>> we will have a chance to see that list before you send it over.
>> absolutely.
that is the whole purpose to bring this back in two or three weeks.
>> yeah.
>> any more discussion?
all in favor.
thotethotthat 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 16, 2010 2:15 PM
