Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, July 6, 2010,
Item 11
Item no. 11. Review and take appropriate action regarding proposed fiscal year 2011 abbreviated budget hearings and mark-up schedule and related memo to appointed and elected officials.
>> good morning, judge, commissioners, when we spoke a week or two ago regarding the budget and specifically i believe the revenue discussion of -- of the budget process, you had asked for us to bring back to the court for consideration a -- a memo, which you have in your backup. With recommendations regarding the budget hearing and markup process as it relates to the resource constraints that we're currently facing. What you have before you is -- is a recommendation from planning and budget. We'll be happy to put this under the commissioners court letterhead if you would like. But basically, it is asking to have an abbreviated budget hearing schedule. That being for the afternoon of august the 12th. And an abbreviated budget markup schedule, the -- the afternoon of september the 8th. We -- we would like to ask that if departments do have a request to address the court, during the abbreviated budget hearing schedule, that they submit that request with the appropriate backup, no later than thursday, july the 15th. And then we will bring that before the court on the -- on the 27th of july, the day after we drop the preliminary budget -- draft the preliminary budget with the list for the court to consider. Then we will have the appropriate time slots at that point. You might also note in the memo we have included some information regarding the goals for the preliminary budget. And a request for -- for departments to continue to work with us to hold the line through the rest of this fiscal year and with many thanks to the departments for their efforts as we have worked through the fiscal '11 budget. With that we have -- we are available to answer any questions that you might have.
>> i have five recommendations.
>> i didn't say.
>> first is that i do think this memo should come from the commissioners court.
>> yes, sir.
>> in this memo you are saying we will ask the court. I think they should know that the court has considered the matter and made certain determinations, really most of them are set forth in this letter here. That's good. I would have it coming from the court.
>> yes, sir.
>> because i think that gives it a bit more finality than you are requesting the court and the court may or may not agree, you see what i'm saying. In fact you presented it to us, we said bring us a memo so we can share with it the appear pointed elected officials. Two, i would say that we directed p.b.o. To 2.5% pay increase in the preliminary budget, that's true, right.
>> that's correct.
>> we will work hard to retain it. I would put that there because although we don't know of any circumstance at this point that may cause us to modify that, we don't control the future and so there could be a turn for the worst between new england when we actually make the final. But i would say that. The other thing that i think is important is on the insurance they need to no that there will an slight increase. And it is -- i would indicate in what category. Or in what plan. I'm -- yesterday i recall that the hrmd mentioned that to us when we had them to give that introduction at the employee public hearing.
>> uh-huh.
>> so i would go ahead and mention that because it's a fact.
>> okay.
>> the other thing, though, is somewhere in there i would indicate that -- that again no layoffs. Right? But you have language saying we have asked departments to work with us, they have done so in the past, we need them to keep doing it in the future. That language is good. So we do have small reductions in certain expenditure line items, which are necessary to balance the budget. Is that true?
>> uh-huh.
>> that i mean -- i don't know that we -- when i looked at the letter i'm not sure that we say that. But i think coming from the commissioners court, should give it a bit more finality than p.b.o. Recommending to the court. Because first question would be -- would be we don't want the department heads to be encouraged to contact us to get us to vote against your memo, right?
>> right.
>> and i think that's -- if we are there, like i think we are, then i think the memo should say that.
>> okay.
>> yeah, as i reflected on it over the weekend as well, judge, i got to thinking that that probably would be -- at least for me, it would have more teeth to it. So to speak.
>> we're talking about 60 to 70 people receiving this, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> okay.
>> i would go ahead and say it, if it's true, i think it is. So we are kind of -- kind of farther down the road than us receiving a request from p.b.o. And wondering whether to accept it. We have pretty much agreed to accept it. I think this memo should reflect that. That was my thinking.
>> all right.
>> yesterday.
>> i agree 100%. And i would perhaps this is redundant, but in putting in more detail about the insurance increase, i -- it probably goes without saying tbow detail both the increase to the employee and to travis county to show that we are sharing the burden.
>> we had put together kind of a little chart that showed an example employee, maybe that would be good to insert as well. We will look at that again.
>> makes sense to me. Because i think -- you know, that -- that's the truth.
>> right.
>> i think employees may well know and appreciate it.
>> okay.
>> anything else? Otherwise, excel length letter.
>> excellent letter.
>> thank you, judge.
>> if you do that, i would do that and have the three of us sign it.
>> okay.
>> would it be most expeditious from the county attorney's standpoint for the motion to include authority for you to sign it alone in order to get it out, most quickly? Or is there an issue with waiting for a week.
>> we can have these revisions made and in the judge's office this afternoon.
>> i would go ahead and get them out. Either way it fine with me. If we do the three of us we have to put absent for the other two.
>> i think you should do it.
>> let's empower the county judge to sign on behalf of the commissioners court.
>> second. Discussion in all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. As best we can, capture those in a revised memo. Thank you.
>> thank y'all.
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, July 6, 2010 2:35 PM
