Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, July 12, 2011 (Agenda)
Item 14
and 14 is consider and take appropriate action on the following items related to the urban county renewal process for the community development block grant available through the u.s.
department of housing and urban development: a, update on interested municipalities joining the urban county for program years 2012 through 2014; 2.
request to move b, request to move forward with executing the cooperation agreement with village of webberville; and c, authorize submission to the u.s.
department of housing and urban development, san antonio field office, region vi
>> good afternoon, christie moffat, Travis County health and human services.
well, today is the last step of the urban county renewal process for program years 2012 through 2014.
we've come to you on several occasions to discuss this matter.
we sent letters to the 21 municipalities in the county on may 13th notifying them of the opportunity to participate in the urban county, which essentially means that they would join with Travis County and get a share of our funds or could compete for a share of the cdbg funds that we receive annually.
so during that process, we received two jurisdictions who had interest, the city of Pflugerville and the village of webberville.
then on June 7th we came back to the court and y'all asked us to ask again to make sure that people had proper time to look at their options.
and we had three additional jurisdictions who indicated that they might be interested.
those being city of Jonestown, village of West Lake Hills and the city of elgin.
the jurisdictions had until June 30th to complete a cooperation agreement that was completed by the county attorney's office.
and we had one municipality village of webberville who was interested.
and should the court decide to execute that, a cooperation agreement today, it would increase the population of the urban counties in terms of cdbg by 392 people, which we anticipate would not really change much of the allocation amounts.
what it does do is it allows us to work with webberville around housing issues, infrastructure and to talk with them over the next few years, actually build up some infrastructure so that the next time we go through urban county renewal we might have some experience in getting some of the other jurisdictions to participate.
so today we're asking that you approve the cooperation agreement and then also approve, you have a packet in your backup, that's the submission to h.u.d.
so that we can finish this and turn this in on time by the end of this week.
it includes a letter from our executive manager indicating the county's intention to renew their urban county, also to include the executed cooperation agreement with the village of webberville and then also provide all of the communications that we had provided the municipalities during this time.
>> I would like to move approval.
>> second.
>> of this.
and I really -- do you know if there will be other opportunities in the future for the municipalities to participate?
is this the last effort or will there be -- I don't know why things happen the way they do.
there's reasons for things that happen.
you sent outreach and for whatever reason sometimes things fall through the cracks.
but my question is will there be other opportunities made available in the future?
>> this happens every three years.
>> all right.
every three years.
>> so we will jurisdictions again.
and I'll have to go back and look.
I think that there might be an option annually for a jurisdiction to notify us that they are interested in participating.
I would have to go back and read that language.
>> okay.
>> but for sure in three years.
absolutely.
>> all right.
>> then what that does is it commits that jurisdiction to staying in our urban county for three years.
so they couldn't go and couldn't decide to not be a part of the urban county.
they would have to stay with us for this three-year time period.
>> okay, okay.
>> I think it would be staff's recommendation that you have that time period tied to your consolidated planning period.
so each time you approve a new consolidated plan, you would know which jurisdictions that you might be potentially working with over the next three years.
so we would likely recommend unless there were some outstanding circumstance that we would then bring back to the court that that be a process that takes place during our consolidated planning year.
>> okay.
thank you.
>> the other three cities that indicated an interest simply didn't get with us before the deadline, just kind of came and went?
>> no, we talked with them.
for various reasons, just depending upon the jurisdiction, they determined it wasn't a good choice at this time.
>> okay.
>> the motion to approve b and c.
adding webberville and communicating that to the h.u.d.
office.
>> yeah.
yes, judge.
>> second?
>> uh-huh.
>> is there a second already?
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Gomez?
okay.
discussion on the motion?
>> yes, judge.
I just wanted to say Pflugerville did look at it very carefully.
I wanted to commend the village of webberville for participating because it is unchartered territory for these smaller municipalities and the dance steps that cdbg are rather complicated.
so I just wanted to say thank you to the village of webberville for bravely stepping up to be the pilot essentially, to learn this complicated dance moves.
and then we can see if the other municipalities would like to participate
>> [multiple voices]
>> may come on board later.
never can tell.
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
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.
