Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, October 26, 2010,
Travis County Housing Finance Corporation
Travis County Health Facilities Development Corporation
>> > good afternoon.
let's call to order the Travis County housing finance and the Travis County health facilities corporation, one item common to both, consider and take appropriate action on request to lift moratorium on considering funding requests from nonprofit organizations.
>> good afternoon, harvey Davis, manager of the corporation.
and as you know, you placed a moratorium on considering requests from nonprofits several years ago.
we have received several requests recently and so this -- this agenda item is to see if you want to reconsider whether to lift the moratorium or not.
I will say that as far as the housing finance corporation, that I don't -- there are not any funds available for considering helping a nonprofit organization.
for the health facilities development corporation, the -- I said in my memo that -- that I felt that there was one-time funds of $500,000 that would -- that you could use to assist one or more nonprofits.
I知 going to amend that amount to be $400,000.
I kind of looked at our budget and the budget for the year end -- for this year end we have as being about $600,000, and we have a commitment in fy 12 for paying Travis County 29,000, and I would guess you want want to continue assisting the wellness program and leaving -- you know, we've traditionally left as a reserve about $100,000.
so I知 really looking at their being about 400,000 instead of $500,000 that is uncommitted funds in the health corporation.
>> now, in your memo you described the housing authority of Travis County money as ongoing so that's an annual commitment of 126?
>> no.
that is one time too.
>> okay.
okay.
I just wanted to --
>> and actually that commitment is out of the house being finance corporation.
>> okay.
>> one of the reasons why it does not have funds for assisting a nonprofit.
>> do you know how many nonprofits they actually looked at the possible for financial assistance one time for this remaining $400,000 that you are referring to under the
>> [indiscernible].
>> well, I have heard from two.
>> from two?
>> right.
>> we had four or five requests before when we imposed the moratorium which is why I thought it made sense.
I think we promised those groups that at the time the moratorium was lifted, we would put them on notice.
we also hinted that we might put in place some evaluation selection criteria.
historicry we really just try to evaluate projects on a case-by-case basis determining what -- which ones had significant impact, positive impact and which ones, you know, had less impact and tried to make the decision that way.
but when you have a group of them at one time, it's a little different.
if they come in one by one, you can do that.
>> right.
>> my guess is that if we keep our word on that, we would have six, seven or eight before us.
the other thing is that we put the moratorium in place because of economic circumstances and I don't know that those circumstances have gotten a lot better.
hopefully they've improved.
the economists that I choose to believe say they've improved.
the ones I don't say hey, the situation is still pretty dire.
>> but my opinion is it's improved a little bit, but not much.
>> but this one-time money, I mean in terms of categories that this one-time money would be appropriate for, it, I知 assuming, capital improvement projects?
>> that's what historicry the corporation's funds to nonprofits have been capital improvements because that's something that Travis County cannot assist.
of course, assistance out of the health corporation is much more restrictive than out of the housing finance corporation because it does have to be health related.
by state law.
>> should we -- should we consider crafting parameters above and beyond what the health corporation requires?
>> I think that's the law he's talking about.
>> right, but I mean our own preference above and beyond what the health corporation law requires.
>> you mean more restrictive than state law?
>> just to say what our preferences are for the utilization of the cash?
if we want to lift the moratorium.
>> state law is pretty strict.
idon't don't know if we want toe more strict than that.
more strict than that is what we're doing today, leaving it's in the bank account.
it's not growing, but at least it's there.
I think it would be more creative for us to try to figure out ways to generate savings in the contracts with nonprofit agencies and put -- if there are surpluses or left over money, put that money to a good use.
that way it doesn't necessarily have to be a capital investment, it could be operational too.
we've had sort of emergency operating things and that's why we chose to help the housing authority of Travis County.
it was a serious situation, in my view.
the other thing is that -- the health and wellness deal, it's good for county employees.
and we also funded the smoking cessation that way too.
right?
but we believe that the long-term benefits may make it more than worthwhile.
now, I don't know that sometimes we don't have any surplus or left over unused revenue from those contract agencies, but we have been surprised from time to time, right, ms. Fleming?
>> yes, sir.
>> I知 not trying to put you on the spot, but --
>> sherri fleming, executive manager for health and human services and veterans services.
I would have the board to consider that the landscape of social services investments in our community not due to any of your actions but the actions of your colleagues will be shifting over the next six to 12 months.
and that it could be wise to keep that in mind as you consider this decision.
because there may be things that you would like to do as a result of that landscape shifting that you would want to reserve this decision to accommodate.
>> I知 seeking you are assuminge referring to the request for services from the city of Austin?
>> and also the process underway with united way.
and so two significant partners in investing in social services and their significant funding decisions that will be made during your budget process in 2011.
>> but this is one-time money so it would only be stop gap if we do utilize it as a reaction to what city of Austin may or may not do.
>> very true, and it may not be appropriate to use those funds at this time because it's one-time money, also you have tend to do look at capital questions.
but, you know, I feel it responsible to call to your attention that we certainly expect the landscape to look differently in about a year from now.
>> it seems to me if we are thinking about lifting the moratorium and the money is only in the health facilities development corporation, we ought to have a clear understanding of legal requirements there and try to match those requirements to whatever projects we are looking at.
as I recall the projects that are on the that list, not all -- most of them were not directly health related.
most of them were really more youth development sort of job framing, you know, dropout prevention that is correct kind of family enrichment, that kind of stuff more than directly health.
but I don't know how direct that health component really needs to be, whether indirect health is good enough, you know.
we got that briefing one time but it was years ago, wasn't it?
>> it's been, yes, a pretty good while back.
my impression was that the legal interpretation that has been given to us by cliff is fairly -- fairly broad.
>> it's easier to make a decision about a certain request when you have the -- a good description of the
>> [inaudible] before you and that legal explanation.
so if we're thinking about lifting the moratorium, I think we ought to view that way.
my often view is leave that $400,000 exactly where it is and that way if some unexpected emergency that we really feel duty bound to help address comes up, we'll be in a better position to do it.
>> and you -- you also have the option, of course, of transferring the money to Travis County.
and because Travis County spends a lot more money in health-related activities out of the general fund, then the money that would be transferred from the health corporation to Travis County could really be spent for a wider range of services.
>> it wouldn't violate the law, it would simply circumvent it.
I agree with you, mr. Davis.
mr. Davis?
>> what -- have we ever transferred in the past, have we ever made a police officer from the health corporation's money to the general funds?
>> yes, we have, many times.
significant amounts.
>> I think I recall one or two, but I just wanted to make sure I was correct in my assessment.
>> this corporation used to earn lots of money through fees, but that's not the case anymore, and the future prospects are not good.
>> have we transferred money to the general fund from the health facilities development corporation for the express purpose of funding a request -- an external request?
my recollection --
>> no, I don't believe so.
>> we've just transferred it to the general fund.
>> yes.
>> and then we spent that money consistent with whatever spending policies we had in place for the Travis County general fund.
there's a difference.
>> right.
>> I mean not that we -- but if you are going on precedent, the precedent that's set is transfers to the general fund are used for county general fund purposes, not to fund an immediate external request.
>> right.
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> usually the transfer was done during the budget process.
that's when it was done.
>> that's true.
>> I would say to the board that you would have access to the same quality staff analysis as the Travis County Commissioners court on any investment that you were considering in the health or social services field.
so we would have to -- be happy to provide any analysis that you would need on an investment that you were considering.
>> that makes us feel a whole lot better.
>> I knew it would.
>> anything else?
unless there's a motion, I think if there's a specific project that we're thinking about, we get a written description of it and try to figure out a way to fit under the health facilities thing.
>> do we have --
>> [inaudible] has a specific project.
>> I致e been contacted by mr. Moreau and family elder care.
>> I should bring my list to these kind of postings, folks.
>> there was another list and we might go back and look at that, but the family elder care is something that we usually fend through the general fund because it's one of our mandates.
>> no a construction project.
>> yeah, there's --
>> construction?
>> yeah, they are trying to build a new facility.
>> I thought we got that commitment rescinded or returned.
>> it was because --
>> it is.
well, we had a contract, but the period to -- for them to access the fund has run out.
>> but I thought the abandoned the project.
>> they abandoned the project, but they are trying to do a new -- new scaled down project.
>> because the partnership between elder care and meals on wheels wasn't -- didn't gel, right?
>> that's correct.
>> well, the contract was for building a facility at mueller airport and that didn't gel, and then they pursued the partnership with meals on wheels.
>> now, mr. Moreau, is your project health facilities or housing?
I致e always viewed you at our community housing guru.
now you may branching out into health.
>> we're primarily a housing organization, but we also do on site educational programs for residents and financial programs and take a wheel holistic approach to helping families so it's not just about shelter and housing, but our new project, m station, really incorporates classroom space for health and fitness programs. It's a very walkable site, connections to bike trains by the new train station.
so there's a real health component to that project.
I think do you have a difficult choice because you have a limited amount of money, but it is for capital and that's a one time kind of thing and would respect if you opened up to moratorium and invited groups that have projects in the works and you could sort out priorities among those.
we've got a funding gap on m station.
we need to figure out how to get that met in the next six months while we're under construction whether we decide we can go ahead with some of the amenities, the child care features and other things that -- you know.
>> okay.
>> so should we leave the moratorium in place or should we consider under what parameters we would open it back up and when?
>> I think we need to leave it as is for the time being.
>> that's my position.
the day may come when we don't -- we don't foresee another emergency on the horizon.
>> it still would be good to still see who is in competition and list of persons that have asked I guess in the past and then the ones that are asking now, that particular list, and I guess all of us may have a list also, each one of us.
>> I can think of two or three that are pretty immediate.
>> it would still be good to see what the ramifications are and if there are actually -- and I don't really know how to quantify bona fide health, I heard mr. Moreau say something, but is that really the health component that we're looking for or is it something else?
how do we define exactly what that is when it comes to elt issues?
-- health issues?
I don't know how to measure that.
that's what I知 having trouble doing because I致e heard others say about similar things that mr. Moreau had just brought up, training, this, maybe just a niche of health-related stuff where somebody else may have overwhelming health component.
how do you measure that particular part of health that's mentioned?
50%?
60%?
30%?
how is it really measured?
I don't know.
but I still would like to know who would be in competition for this.
I really -- there's been a lot of pull on this particular money.
a lot of folks want it.
and, of course, I would like to know those that are actually in competition for this particular money.
it would be good to know that, and who have we actually dealt with in the past when we've transferred this money from the health finance corporation, development corporation to, the general fund, who received and what did that money go or who did it go to under the -- in the budget process in health-related stuff.
>> it went to the general fund and co-mingled.
>> I still want to know how it was spent.
that's my point.
>> there's no way to determine that because we put it in the general fund in the budget process, so we added a few hundred thousand dollars to four or five million and then we turn around and budget it to -- did I say million?
four or five hundred million.
what you do do the budget process, you lose the ability to trace it.
you just commingle it with out county revenue.
but during that time --
>> without being specific then --
>> we used that for county expenses.
>> right.
>> that's what we did during the budget process county expenses.
>> was for a specific purpose for the county was buying the helicopter and that was many, many years ago.
>> the only specific situation that came across with that for the helicopter?
>> yes.
>> can, well --
>> otherwise the other transfers have been to the general fund, but not -- but not designated for a specific project.
that's my recollection.
>> I was looking for some specific things.
the helicopter is what you can recall.
those are the kind of answers I知 looking for.
even though it was commingled, as long as it's specific.
I知 trying to get an answer by being more specific than general.
>> sounds like we've got some work to do.
>> move adjournment.
>> second.
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
thank you all very much.
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, October 26, 2010 2:00 PM
