Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, September 21, 2010,
Item 17
Item number 17, consider and take appropriate action on the following, a, travis county health care district, d/b/a central health's 2010 tax rate. And b, travis county health care district d/b/a central health's fiscal year 2011 budget.
>> good morning, judge.
>> good morning.
>> commissioners. I'm john seemans, chief financial officer for central health. We are here to speak briefly to item 17 on the court's agenda and to request that the court consider and take action on central health's 2011 budget and tax rate. We have had a series of public meetings on our proposed budget dating back to our unusual presentation to the board on may 13th and including two presentations to the commissioners court here, one on july 20th and the other one on august 24th. We also had a public hearing in september and received public comment on it. There were a number of speakers who were opposed to central health's funding of abortions provided through our women's services line item, but there were also speakers in favor of that line item in the budget, which we still have in the budget.
>> there are no other speakers other than those who opposed the women services line item specifically. Our 2011 budget is proposed at the effective tax rate of 7.19 cents per 100 collars dollars of value ration and it continues to address the health care needs of travis county residents who do not have private health insurance through collaborative arrangements with our safety net providers and other providers here in travis county. This budget continues to fund the primary care, specialty care and mental health initiatives we already have in place and in addition provides 6.6 million for service expansions not currently included in the base budget. We appreciate what the court has done to help us achieve our objectives. You've provided valuable staff resources to us and other timely assistance. And we look forward to your continuing cooperation and we respectfully request your approval of our 2011 budget and our tax rate.
>> so for the record now the tax rate is -- proposed tax rate is 7.19 cents.
>> yes, sir.
>> per $100 of assessed valuation.
>> yes, sir. And that is the effective tax rate.
>> anything else from the district?
>> i think that you have -- this is trish young, president and ceo. I think you have all of the backup and a summary of the comments that we received in our public hearing, so everything should be included that has been made valuable to us so far. -- available to us so far. We do have our board chair here with us, who has also been presiding over all the budget meetings.
>> okay. Any questions or comments from the court. I know residents have come down to give comments on this item. If we could have one of you stay there just in case there are questions that we need to put to you. Mr. Stevens may be -- and you don't need to sign in to give testimony on an item on the agenda, so please come forward at this time. Mr. Reeferseed, we will need you to remove that sign from the seat or put it against the wall or on the floor so residents will be able to sit there. While you're coming up, i should point out that by law the commissioners court can approve the entire budget or we can reject the entire budget, but we do not have the authority to pull specific line items and disapprove them. (indiscernible) comirk. And i got that legal opinion confirmed yesterday. Either we approve the full budget or we reject the bull -- the full budget. The court does not have the authority to pull specific line items from the budget and disallow or reject them. So it's kind of an all or proposition for us. With that, let's start at this end and work to the right. If after you finish giving comments you would vacate your chair, the next speaker can please come forward and that way we can move efficiently. Your name, please?
>> good morning. My name is marie seal and i am the director of the office of pro life activities and chaste living for the cath like diocese of austin and as such i'm representing bitch shop joe vasquez and the 225 tax paying catholics of travis county. We support greatly the life affirming work of central health. We as catholics were actively involved in supporting the creation of the health district in travis county. However, we will not sit idly by while tax dollars are used for abortion. Travis county still remains the lone political subdivision in the state that uses public funds for abortion. The federal government prevents it, state law prevents it, travis county stands out because we use public funds for the taking of human life. This is nothing to be proud of. A statement has been made that funding of abortion is part of health care for the poor or indigent women. In terms of medical standards, abortions are not listed as primary care. The catholic church has a history of service and care for the poor. Here in straict the diocese of austin supports many of the poor in austin. We see and assist poort on a daily basis, which is supported by the free donation of catholics' time and dollars. As the gabriel project life center in austin we serve 150 to 160 women every month who have unplanned pregnancies. We offer to them free of charge pregnancy tests, pregnancy and parenting classes, mentoring and material assistance. We co-locate with catholic charities and so together we have a strong sense of what the poor need and what they request. A recent assessment by catholic charities highlighted these needs requested by indigent families. Affordable and accessible health care, affordable housing, emergency shelter, immigration services, job opportunities, legal assistance, affordable quality child care and family strengthening services. Our clients are looking for support, even choosing adoption to have stronger families. They're looking for ways to strengthen their family, not wound the family through abortion. Abortion is not what they were requesting. Bishop vasquez has already said abortion is intrinsically evil. Nothing good can ever come from abortion. Nothing. Failing to allocate these funds carries more wait for the commissioners court and at the same time has implications for all those who pay taxes. I urge you to vote against this budget to allocate 4 fist thousand dollars -- $450,000 of our property tax dollars to selective abortions. Thank you.
>> thank you, ms. Seal. Mr. Reeferseed?
>> thank you. I totally agree with everything she sandy my question for her before she left is we are the lone public funding entity in texas or is it the whole country? I don't know. But anyway, strengthening the family is what we have to do and killing babies is not a wise strategy. Unfortunately like i said earlier when i spoke about our present administration, his science czar wrote books about this. This is what they plan to do, they plan to kill people. They're trying to reduce the population of poorer people who don't give them money. So we've got to get ahold of this and this is -- i'm really ashamed as a public citizen and just someone around this kind of death oriented psychosis that is practiced by this particular death killing operation. But again, i want to remind black individuals that this year more black babies were killed than were allowed to be born. Hello, black babies were killed, more are of them, than were allowed to be born! Can you hear me? What's going on here. Can't you understand this!!?? It's genocide going on right now thanks to the public funding of boorgses by us wise liberals. We're so on top of things we kill all the blackies. Isn't that what we do. Isn't that what margaret sanger said, she wanted to kill pests, the blacks are pests to those people who finance this and promote it and make sure that everybody has access that is killing their babies! So i'm greatly ashamed by that and i hope that we can come together and see the light. That's one great thing about our current administration. That's a shocking truth that once people realize that more black babies were killed in the womb than were allowed to be born in the first year of his regime, they're going to start to figure this out. I think a lot of black people already. I know, i speak to them all the time. I talked to two people on the bus, one person -- i asked him, i told him about that particular fact and she said, well, some black -- some -- she said some babies are not innocent. Obviously totally deluded. All babies are inherently innocent. And another person says, well, it's in god ago will. -- god's will. Hog wash, people. This is something we can do. We can just not fund killing babies. We can do that. It's not hard. Come on, think about it. Okay. Thanks.
>> > my name is deana mayor with texas alliance for life. We are statewide nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting innocent human life from conception through natural death. We represent about 20,000 pro life households in travis county. Thank you for your time and your consideration of our perspective on the 2011 proposed central health budget. I ask that you would reject the budget and send it back with instructions to remove the 4 fist thousand dollars -- $450,000 slated for women's services. These women's services -- the women's services line item funds contracts for pregnancy terminations and that is specifically abortions. That's almost half a million dollars slated specifically for abortions. That represents about a thousand babies each year. The mission of central health is a noble one. It is to create access to health care for those who need it most. Yet these funds are going for elective abortions. That means these women are healthy women, they have healthy babies. They need no medical referral. They're not hurting. And taking the life of an innocent baby is not health care. Travis county is the only political subdivision in texas that funds abortions with tax dollars. In fact, there are court cases that specifically say that you don't have to do this. Many people in the economy are struggling right now and we tighten our belts to pay our bills, yet central health is raising our tax rate and they're using -- wasting money on a procedure that sent many fine re-- that many find reprehensible. Many of the public are opposing using tax dollars to fund boorgses. This is a national political hot topic. Are you willing to take a stand on such a controversial issue right now when these funds can be used for so many better ways. Some people may argue that these women don't have any access to any other health care. That's just not true. Pregnancy resource centers are available in travis county and around travis county to help these women. They offer their services at little to no cost. They offer a variety of services and they're willing to help these women. Again, please reject the central health proposed budget until abortions are no longer funded. Thank you for your consideration.
>> thank you. Mr. Priest?
>> thank you, judge, commissioners. Morris priest speaking on my own behalf. I did want to make a part of the formal record that i'm going to ask the ceo, ms. Young, and dr. Coopwood to resign from the health care district board and her as ceo. I have talked to the travis county attorney regarding this item and one of the issues that i have is because of the posting that was in our courthouse stamped by dana debeauvoir with our seal. This is a county court commissioners meeting that we're having here, and so really we don't have to have citizens communications. We're not bound. The judge is not bound to have citizens communications, but we have these differences that people don't understand in the public between a hearing and an actual meeting. And so what we're having in our society, as i talked about earlier in citizens communications, we have this situation where these people are appointed by the city of austin and we've seen with doctors bill spelman who passed the city ordinance against clinics that were providing a service to place a sign on their doors saying that they don't perform abortions. And so this is a clearly political-driven agenda by members on this board appointed by stint. They meet in our commissioners meeting here in this room as they did wednesday the 15th. They post their meeting in the courthouse. And then their noticed to the public it says under their consent agenda persons in the audience can ask items to be removed from their agenda. To have discussion. And so what we basically have is they come here, they're fed, the food is brought in, it's paid for. This will be approved in the budget. I think that what's being characterized as people having taken an issue with the budget or the tax rate, only the abortion issues, is simply not true. And i did want to state that when i went to this meeting on september 15th i was denied to speak on the citizens comments because citizens comments wasn't even on the agenda. I was also denied to speak on the consent or regular agenda. And i think that a lot of times people in the public are not aware of how this actually happens, how it comes about, who appoints these members and how these things are discussed. But i don't know. It's pretty hot in here. I don't know if we spent all our money on formula one or abortion. I would like somebody to turn up the ac in here. But it's -- this issue, i dobl that this court is going to face more creative ways to deal with our elected officials, whether it's citizens mailing in their entire tax payment on an itemized check with the health care district not on. And i think there's going to be some serious legal challenges that this county is going to face and our tax appraisal district is going to face when people mail in their property tax checks with the itemized statement and leave the health care district off. I'm demanding of this court that they can bring a plan a, plan b budget, one with a line item option so you bring two budgets, two tax rates, which the tax rate may not even be affected. And then you as commissioners can vote. So when they're bringing the budget in the manner that they are bringing it, yes, it is true that you can only vote it up or down. But what i'm asking you is to demand that these people take this back and also the way they've done citizens communication in the past is they've allowed elected officials or people running for office or past elected officials to come speak before the public. There's an equality issue with this board when members come and speak before this board. Last year when they did this meeting, raul alvarez, other members of the community came nand spoke before the public and then -- and most of those were for abortion. And then we had two separate groups speaking for and against. When we have a meeting here no matter how many people come, they're going to all get to speak. Due to these people afraid of not having a quorum and these people having to leave, our citizens input is very, very extremely limited when we go before this health district board unlike the commissioners court, city of austin, other type jurisdictions, aisd, you see these long meetings where everybody gets their input, even at the capitol over toll roads. But this health care district does not allow it the way it's set up and this court to have the ample input given by the public. The public is extremely limited on being able to discuss this matter because when we have women that are healthy that abort healthy, unborn children, that -- it increases a lot of health care risks and health care costs because they're -- it's statistically proven that these women suffer more from breast cancer, astro no, ma'am click higher than the other indicators, whether hereditary or other matters that may be a health risk to have cancer. So there's a number of issues that haven't been able to be fully debated simply by fact of how this process is set up. So i would request that you reject this and until the hog district carries out a formal hearing where conversation can be not limited and have a fair way of doing -- of communication. Thank you.
>> [ applause ]
>> yes, sir.
>> is this on?
>> it should be.
>> my name is david buttress and i'm running for county commissioner precinct 2. I want to thank you for your many years of service to travis county. But i believe it's hard to argue that a taxpayer funded abortion is in the best interest of an unborn child. Texas alliance for life asked me to come here and speak on their behalf. As a taxpayer and someone who pays over a million dollars a year in property taxes i central texas, i'm against taxpayer funded abortions. So i'm asking you guys to reject the proposed budget and take under consideration for new budget that it does not have taxpayer abortions in there. That's about it. Thank you very much.
>> thank you. Yes, sir?
>> my name is alan parker, i'm the president of the justice foundation and i represent thousands of women across the nation and hundreds here in texas who have been hurt by abortion. We have had the honor of representing several thousand women before the eighth circuit court of appeals in up holding south dakota's law that told women if they have abortions they can have a greater risk of suicide, suicidal thoughts, depression and other severe psychological trauma. That law also supported -- was supported by the eighth circuit court of appeals, which said that women had to be told beforehand that abortion is the taking of the life of a separate, unique, living human being. And this is often what causes the women trauma after they come to know that. They're not usually told that in planned parenthood facilities. In fact, planned parenthood fought the law. Also in another case that is the last time the u.s. Supreme court has considered abortion. If you read that opinion it says that it is unacceptable to conclude that some people come to regret aborting the infant life they once created and sustained and severe depression and loss of esteem can follow. And they cited our brief on behalf of sandra kano and other women who had an abortion. Sandra was the doe of doe v bolton and both of the women who were the landmark plaintiffs in rowe and doe that brought abortion to america now have reversed their position and believe that abortion is not the answer for women. I urge the health department to give greater financial resources to poor i am will so that they don't feel trapped into having abortion. Often women who are poor feel like i have no choice other than to have this abortion. We need to rectify that situation for them. We also need to consider the cost of adoption, helping families adopt that out also. Lastly, i would urge you to include a conscientious objection clause so that you would avoid the litigation that could come before you for forcing people to participate in what they believe is murder against their religious objections. Justice kennedy in writing for the majority said that abortion is a difficult and painful moral decision. When it's a moral decision that means that people's religious feelings come into play over that. And if those people believe that it is murder, then they would be violating their consciouses to participate in abortion, but even to pay for abortions. And the supreme court has said there's no government right to fund abortion. You may be able to do this, but you're not required to do it. There's no right on the part of the citizens of this city or county to get this funding from you. And when it violates the rights of conscience, then the question becomes is there a compelling governmental interest which would allow you to overcome the rights of religious liberty of those who believe that abortion is murder. And i can think of no compelling governmental interest that would require you to do this or require you to force people to pay for it. People are forced to pay for abortion who believe that abortion is murder. This is an issue because of that and the deep moral objections involved in it that will never go away. I believe the supreme court was wrong in 1973 when it said the child in the womb is not a person. Just as it was wrong in dread scott when it said african-americans are not persons under the constitution. Just as the supreme court was wrong in 1896 when even after we passed the 13th and 14th and 15th amendments to eliminate the vestiges of valvery and racism they said separate but equal is equal when it wasn't. So the supreme court has helped to create this problem. The supreme court is in the process of reevaluating the whole issue. Justice kennedy has said that while he recognizes that many women are hurt by abortion, he said there was not reliable data at this time to measure the phenomenon, meaning there is some difficulty and conflict among the scientists and others about how many women are hurt by abortion. Part of that difficulty in finding the evidence is many people won't speak about abortion until 20 or 30 years later. The guilt of taking the life of their own child is something that they stuff and deny and rationalize and then sometimes if they do speak about it in our society, the frentds or others who took them and said you had to do it, this is the right thing, don't feel this way, then process further psychological trauma when that grief is not allowed expression. That grief that a mother feels for her child and the natural protective instincts that come in when a woman is pregnant. She's a mother at the moment of conception, whether she wants to be or not, she is a mother. And those protective instincts come in and often it's very, very difficult for women, as women across the political spectrum have admitted. I believe as hillary clinton said, it was a tragic and difficult choice for many women in the year 2005. So we need to look at this as an issue that needs a more nuanced response than the one you had. I would urge you to strike down this budget and then send it back and fix this issue. I would recommend no funding for abortions because i believe in the end it does hurt every woman. We know it kills a child who should be a person under the united states constitution, even if the women is not able to care for that child, we do have the baby moses laws in texas. She can make that decision up to i think it's 60 days after birth to give the state -- to give the child to the state. Not have to go through adoption or anything else. She can just leave that child at a fire station or at the hospital district and the state will take care of that child until a loving home is found for it. I urge you to think about these things. We're dealing with the shedding of innocent blood. I believe as government officials you are ministers of god for good. It is your intent to try to do what's best for the citizens and it has never been in the interest of any society to kill the most vulnerable members of its society. And we are doing a better job of protecting the mentally disabled and others in our society, but right now we're doing a terribly poor job of protecting children in the womb. And i urge you to consider rejecting this budget and working on a better solution.
>> thank you. And we will need those two chairs. Yes, sir?
>> my name is david featherstone. My wife here is sonya and here here taxpayers in travis county. And a trust you received a fax i sent to each of you yesterday on this topic. We were shocked to find out that the board of central health unanimously voted last week to approve this budget with $450,000 to fund elective abortions in their 2007 budget. And we did not want -- in their 2011 budget. We did not want our property taxes to go towards paying for abortions. Our family has a little personal testimony and we wanted to share it with you. Our adopted son was very -- was born very premature, at 1 pound, 9 ounces. He was like the size of the palm of your hand. I get a little emotional talking about it sometimes. His mother, birth mom, was 21 weeks in jesse station. And her water broke and she went to the hospital as an emergency. But that could have easily been an abortion. I've got a happy, smart, 10-year-old boy who is thankful to be alive and he's over there. Grant, do you want to say high.
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> he is very glad to be here.
>> [ applause ] he loves his little younger brother there, sitting by him. And he loves to do many things. Very active boy. If his mother would have chosen to abort him, he obviously would have been robbed of his wonderful life. A child in the womb needs to also be protected from bad decisions such as a child out of the womb has protection under the law. A mother should not kill her own child and our taxes should certainly not pay for such a deed. So we urge you, honorable judge biscoe and commissioners, to oppose the central health budget due to the fact that it has abortion funding in it. And also -- i also want to give an opportunity for those who are not speaking that want to stand that are in support of what i'm saying, opposed to the abortion funding. Anybody in the audience want to stand for that? Okay. These are the ones here today that may not speak, but they are in favor of asking you guys to not -- to obviously not approve this budget as is. Okay? Thank you very much. Thank you.
>> [ applause ]
>> yes?
>> dear judge biscoe and commissioners' court, my name is sonya featherston and i'm a travis county taxpayer. I believe everyone should have the right to be born, a right that each of us should appreciate as we have each had that opportunity. The taxes collected in our great state of texas should not be used to terminate the life of an -- of any unborn person. Personally i'm aghast and distraught that our property tax dollars, of which my family diligently saves for and pays for every year, goes towards paying for abortions. It is my understanding that the travis county health -- central health is the only political body to fund elective abortions in our dear state of texas. I do not understand why the board wants to fund it. It is a very controversial item that is so catastrophic and horrific to many residents in travis county. And it is certainly not a part of envisioning central texas as a model health community, which is the motto on the travis county central health website. In fact, quite the opposite is envisioned with this line item. I oppose and object to any tax money going towards abortions. I implore this commission with a passionate plea to reject this budget until one is presented that does not include abortion funding. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> [ applause ]
>> my name is paul (indiscernible). Honorable judge biscoe and county commissioners, i want to thank you for the opportunity to address you this morning. I live and work and own real property in travis county and i ask you to please reject the travis health, central health budget because it does include funding for elective abortions. Despite more than 10,000 travis county citizens signing petitions to oppose the property tax -- their property tax dollars being spent on paying elective abortions last fall, the managers on the board of central health unanimously have voted to spend $450,000 of our tax dollars to kill babies in their mothers' wooms. They don't answer to the voters. They only answer to you on this issue. In this lifetime. Now the issue is before you. Where the proverbial buck stops on this issue at this moment in time. No other government entity in the state of texas spends its constituents' money to fund elective abortions. The federal government doesn't and the state doesn't use any tax money to fund elective abortions. Travis county and the city of austin use taxpayers' dollars to kill approximately 1,000 babies a year. In one of the public hearings last -- a couple of weeks ago, planned parenthood tried to tell us that if they didn't provide these abortions then these women would have to resort to finding illegal abortions. And this is just blatantly false. If that were true, then there would be thousands of women who are harmed and killed by illegal abortions throughout the rest of the state of texas where tax dollars are not used to pay to kill babies. And i've never heard of it and i doubt you've ever heard of a woman being injured or killed from having an illegal abortion in another city or county in texas. It is unconscionable and it is morally wrong for you to authorize our tax dollars to be used to kill little boys and little girls. You may try to rational lies it by saying roe vs. Wade made killing these babies legal. You can rational lies it, but you know deep down in your hearts that it's very, very wrong. We will hold you accountable at the next election. We will support candidates who will not fund this atrocity. But that's just in this life. The very short time span when you and i inhabit this planet earth. And if you don't believe in god, then maybe that is enough for you to reject this budget because it does fund abortions, and spend that money on something productive like health care instead of the taking of human life. If you do believe in god there's a much more serious matter for you to consider. If you believe in god, then most likely you believe in eternal life, in either heaven or hell. And you must ask yourself, the most important question, how will i answer to god the all mighty father and his son, jesus christ, when my time here is up and my life on this earth is reviewed and they're about to make a decision as to whether i will spend eternity, eternity, in heaven or hell? You will be held responsible for the murder of thousands of babies who have been killed with the money that you have authorized to pay for these abortions with our tax dollars. I don't know if that concerns you. If it does, then i would think that you would reject this budget. And repent for the decisions you've made in the past that have resulted in the deaths of thousands of unborn children. And if it doesn't concern you, i think it's appropriate -- if you think it is appropriate for you to use your authority to end the lives of thousands of young children in the womb, then i will pray for your conversion and i will pray that god may show mercy. And i will work relentlessly for your defeat in the next elections. Thank you.
>> so what would your position be if the health care district were to take the money necessary to fund these contracts from the tobacco settlement, tobacco litigation settlement, which is $1.4 million? You know what that is, right? Years and years ago big lawsuit against the cigarette companies and annually there are payments from cigarette companies basically that's called tobacco settlement, and the federal governmental indicates that money to health care -- health facilities nationwide, and the local health care district will get $1.4 million next year.
>> okay.
>> so what if they were to figure out a way to fund these contracts, which are in the 400,000-dollar range, from that settlement?
>> what would your position be? Would it be the same?
>> it would be the same. It would be the same. It would actually be the same.
>> it wouldn't be property tax dollars then. It would just be revenue from the tobacco settlement fund. It wouldn't matter?
>> you're still killing babies.
>> okay.
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>> ... Mostly to eliminate little girl babies. Here in travis county, we're going to fund abortions that will largely be applied to children of minorities. Those that are whether they are minorities or not, they are likely to apply to liberal democrat babies but we don't worry about that too much. I think the argument is from consequences. We learn in rhetoric that arguments from consequences are essentially immoral or nonmoral, if something is wrong, it's wrong regardless of the consequences and if it's right regardless of the consequences but when we're spending money you have to consider consequences, and we are if we spend the money in this way contributing to a kind of genocide on our minority population. On that grounds alone, you might want to reconsider this budget. Even if you were not moved by any moral arguments. I don't make any moral arguments although i have some because we don't have any more shared tradition in this society. But i might want to consider the -- the consequences of your actions in the society today. And it's true that you have to approve or disapprove the whole budget. I see that as strictly a logistical concern and you can disapprove it and recall it later without the funding that you are currently providing to kill off largely minority babies. Thank you so much for the opportunity to let me speak.
>> thank you.
>> [applause]
>> a logistic question of you because you say that if we were to remove this line item from the budget, it would only have -- as far as consequence goes, it would only have the effect of making reproductive health not available for low-income folks. Of course --
>> this is not reproductive health.
>> let me finish the question. But those same services, including -- including pregnancy termination or abortion would be available to women who don't have to utilize the clinic system.
>> i believe that if you were concerned very much about providing abortion services to poor women, that these funds could be raised privately.
>> okay. Thank you.
>> yes.
>> good morning.
>> good morning.
>> my name is jeanine flores and i'm the executive director and founder of breath of life maternity ministries. And you have listened to a plethora of pleas this morning of which i agree with. I have been working in maternity homework for over 20 years now. I'm currently the coordinator for the texas maternity home association and so i'm well aware of how many homes there are, how many beds that represents and the statistics that accompany that. In 2000, when i moved here, there were 268 beds open in the state of texas for girls or women who found themselves pregnant with nowhere to go. And who did not want to choose abortion for their child. In the last 10 years, we've lost almost 35% of those beds due to funding issues. In fact, we lost six more just yesterday. With that increase of -- or rather deterioration of that program being offered, and maybe you don't know what a maternity home does or is. Maternity home is the next step after people such have spoken this morning say, you know what, this life is really important, and the woman says i can't go home because my dad will kick me out or my boyfriend who beats me has left me and i have nowhere left to go, or i can't be pregnant and live at a dorm at u.t. Or st. Edwards. We're the next step of people who take the woman in, offer her shelter and food and education and a loving environment. And we work in tandem with these brave souls who stand on the line on daily basis. We're behind the scenes in trenches. We have lost mary wood, sara's house maternity home, and bet are due to funding issues. We no longer have any maternity home program in this county. The closest one is anuns iation home in williamson county, however, they focus mainly on teens and have a limited number of beds that can only suffice for so many women. They focus on teens while the average client that our maternity home, part of breath of life, sara's house, our average age of client was 25. Our oldest client was 39 because her husband drank every night and beat her every night and hurt her every night and she needed somewhere safe to go and she found us. We received over 300 calls at breath of life. That's not a phenominal amount for 2009, but it was because the women couldn't find us. I put is going to in the yellow pages under abortion alternatives and every one of those girls that called said i had no idea there was something like this. That resonated with me because 24 years ago i found myself as a preacher's kid whose father who had been very staunch in his beliefs for life for 40 years of ministry finally decided that if it was his daughter pregnant, abortion was absolutely the right answer. The problem is he had raised me for 24 years at that point and so i took all of his articles supporting that baby's life, left them on his desk and left home with nowhere to go. I met that daughter three years ago and she is studying to be a doctor. I moved on into a marriage that adopted our oldest son who stood with me or rather sat with me last year at the senate chambers committee and said i'm a 15-year-old student at mcneil high school and i need to know why we're not letting more birth mothers know that these services are here and that they do have a choice. And i think that if someone hadn't helped my birth mom, i know i wouldn't be there. Then i was supposed to speak following that. That was my biggest challenge of 2009. I'm watching $450,000 be allocated to this and you are asking me to pay for that and i'm turning to my assistant saying do we have $30 that we can -- do we have enough? I'm watching employees who are credentialed and decreed and amoistingly gifted taking a third of what they would in the corporate world because they believe so strongly that loving these women and offering them a choice is what we need to do as a community and as people who need to support our fellow texans. Texas has decreased in maternity homes where other states are innerved. Iowa has reported almost a 15% increase. I'm curious to find out why and i'm headed there in october to ask those questions because i want to know what the difference is. I think that because the abortion facilities that we're sending these women to that they don't mention that the other services are there and they have become such a political debate at the pregnancy resource centers who offer such loving care and let those women know we are there but the abortion facilities do not know we are there. We are seeing clients right now who absolutely don't know they have a true choice. I had a woman come into my office a few weeks ago who said i need help because i had an abortion and when i sleep, i still hear that baby crying and i wake up to find him and he's not there. It's not rhetoric by this side, it's people that we're dealing with daily and loving on daily and saying there is a group of people here that want to help you and want to find a way. But right now the only way i'm able to help someone is on my couch. And i'll do it, man, i'll do it, but with a 14 and 6-year-old boy in the house, i just want to leave you with this thought. I topped off my marathon cross country boy this morning on his way to practice and school. He said he couldn't come this morning because he didn't want to miss physics. I don't know what's wrong with him. He said mom, can you just ask them why is it such a huge imbalance? Why can't part of that budget item be a true choice where if you believe abortion has to be offered, which so many vehemently oppose and i cringe at the thought of my daughters going there, i can't even go there, but why can't we include a different item that actually is a true choice and offers these women help, offers them a place to go and gives them the opportunity to whether they parent or place. 30% of our women choose adoption that we work with, 70% single parents. We don't care which way they decide, but we give them resources for either opportunity. The average woman in america that finds out she is pregnant that places for adoption is less than 2% because no one sits down to talk with her and say let's look at the big picture. What do you want for this child. How do you give that child that option. There's a huge group of people waiting for this commission to allow this budget not to pass and to include a line item that might, even it was a third of this 450, so we could have a maternity home in travis county and truly offer both sides fairly and justly because at this point we are not. I'm looking for ink to print out pamphlet and planned parenthood has assets of 951 million. Something is not right and you have the ability to change it. Thank you.
>> [applause]
>> thank you. Anybody else here on this item who would like to address the court? If so, last opportunity. Then i have two questions for the health care district. My first question is do we know whether the agencies that provide these services discuss options or alternatives to abortion with the clients?
>> yes, sir, they are required by law and are required to provide state issued materials to women who are seeking -- seeking information about these services.
>> okay. And we do -- i did look at the revenue sources in the budget.
>> yes, sir.
>> and i did see the $1.4 million from the tobacco settlement, and there has been an annual amount, i guess, for the last 8 to 10 years.
>> i guess we're in our 6th year, so yes, there are tobacco funds and there are other nontaxpayer funds in this budget.
>> is there any way for us to try to fund these contracts from that source?
>> well, our funds are -- our funds are -- i think to your point, there are nontaxpayer revenues in this budge that's can be attributed to certain payments, yes. Only two-thirds of our budget comes from local taxpayer dollars.
>> okay. Questions, comments?
>> just one question with regard to the specific line item, it is for m.a.p. Contracts for reproductive services across the board, correct?
>> there -- we offer reproductive services across the board to all patients. Not every provider -- well, i should take that back. There are contracts -- the contracts that we have for womens services for pregnancy termination are specific to that service. There are other contracts that are specific to other types of womens services such as family planning and regular womens health. But the providers that do provide pregnancy termination also are providers that provide other womens health services such as family planning and other womens health issues.
>> okay.
>> any more questions or comments?
>> i move approval of the budget.
>> and the proposed tax rate?
>> yes, sir.
>> second? Discussion on the motion? All in favor? Show commissioners eckhardt, huber and yours truly voting in favor. Commissioner davis abstaining. Thank you all very much. And thank you residents for coming down and providing input.
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, September 21, 2010 7:57 PM
