Travis County Commissioners Court
January 17, 2012 (Agenda)
Item 21
Miss porter, does that bring us to executive session?
21, consider and take appropriate action on request from the capital area quarter horse association for reduced fees to use the Travis County show barn on January 21, June 23, August 11, and October 6, all in the year 2012.
good afternoon.
>> judge, Commissioners, roger el khoury.
this request for the horse show, a very small horse show and it's about 20 horse.
this is one of the reasons why we have -- we are with recommending a discount and it's a nonprofit organization within with the proceeds goes to scholarships.
and the Commissioners court since 2007 has been granting the -- this organization a
>> [inaudible] discount on the rental facility.
and also the 50% discount on the rental of the stall which is 20 stalls, which is about $15 per stall and -- so the 50% is 150.
and the rental of the show barn is $900, and the 50% which is 450.
so the total discount for the -- this horse show would be $600, and per event.
as you know, there's four events.
so it would be -- and the facility rental fee would be $1,800 for the horse shows and $600 for the rental of stall and facilities recommends approval of that request from this group.
now, the
>> [indiscernible] and I have been working on a policy -- by the way, the horse show, this is the only horse show out of the horse shows we have at expo center gets a discount.
the rest of them pay full price because it's the only one that's small and it's nonprofit.
so just for reminding the court.
15 shows per year.
>> we've done this in the past.
>> yes, we've done it in the past on a yearly basis.
>> [indiscernible] and I were working on the policy for the expo center regarding the discount and the I think we answered all the questions has something say.
>> this is just a reminder way back in 2002 the court approved a discount policy for expo center events.
it's pretty narrow in scope.
that's how the court wanted it and that's how it was drafted.
and I understand that that discount is granted to entities under the existing policies that are eligible.
as I say, it's pretty narrow in scope.
they have to receive some or all of their funding from Travis County and the second eligibility criterion is the agency or department, the requesting entity, is managed or directed by appointees of the Commissioners court or by a board, speaking of boards, composed of one or more members appointed by the Commissioners court.
so whenever there is a entity that requests the discount and they are not automatically eligible, the expo center director has no authority to grant that discount.
that's why they come repeatedly to you and ask for your authority to grant that discount.
roger and I have been working on a policy that would address both discounts as the current policy does as well as refunds, which we understand the court has on several occasions asked that every single refund not be brought to court so they have to approve a request for refund.
so I just forwarded to Commissioner Eckhardt this morning the -- that draft policy.
it needs some working and some fine tuning but it's there and the intent would be that this policy would address both refunds and requests for discounts and anything else the court might want to include, horse shows, no horse shows.
all horse shows, whatever the court wanted.
it just needs, as I said, some fine tuning.
and it would replace the existing policy.
but right now you have the existing policy that's very narrow in scope.
>> that was 2002, right?
>> correct.
>> chapter 45
>> [indiscernible].
>> so on the others the
>> [indiscernible] would we at one time grant multiple -- grant discounts for multiple events?
>> yes, if they have a -- if they -- the policy is if they have a multi event that can go multi year, they can get about with 10%, you know, per event because they have to pay the deposit or all those events.
so the others are playing by the rules.
I mean by the policy, I should say.
and just to let you know on just a reminder to the court that any horse shows functions, the water connection, you know, that $30, does not plan into it because part of the show barn and some of the table and the chairs which in the office they don't get charged for it because it -- it's inherited in the show barn rental.
>> so when will that draft policy be brought to court?
>> well, as I say, I forwarded it to Commissioner Eckhardt and I can forward it to the entire -- she asked about a policy.
I can forward it to the entire court.
I think it would be helpful if roger and I had a little additional guidance as to, again, expanding the scope, if that was the wish, or -- and as to the fine tuning.
so I think it would-maybe a meeting would be helpful with anyone who would be interested in sitting down with us and saying what do you want in here, what don't you want in here.
that's what I would request and we could bring back the policy for the entire court for consideration.
>> because if we with change that policy, I think that triggers the public hearing that we usually have.
I mean, so we with should allow for that.
>> right.
>> well, I mean this first one with is January 21st.
>> yes.
>> right around the corner.
>> seems to me if nothing else we should go ahead and approve that one of the and if we think that we with need to review the possible changes before acting on the June 23rd one we give our sells some time.
>> judge, I second the motion.
>> I think that would be fair.
>> I think so because what my concern now is I'm beginning to wonder how many requests may be in the pipeline in between there because we end up
>> [indiscernible] there may be some that request that are come and may fall upon the existing policy we established back in 2002.
then again the public hearing being a tool that we can use to at least let folks have input into the process.
but again, I guess roger, let me ask this question, between now we set the public hearing and all these other kind of things going on, have there been any other requests, especially the nonprofits, the situation that we with run into rita now -- I'm sorry.
go ahead.
>> yeah, to answer your question, there's would you one comingup in the pipeline.
we have a lot of communication back and forth.
it's the national diabetes association that is requesting to have 50% of the rental fee.
this way the cost would be less.
but on this one with we'll come back later and talk about the 50%, the they will use it as we are sonserring them, as a sponsor for their event for that 50% discount is nonprofit and all.
to answer your question, there's one coming up.
>> okay.
thank you.
>> I do move that we grant this first one for January 23rd -- January 21st.
and those of us with an interest and I would just like to see it, I don't really want to have changes to recommend or not, but that will give us an opportunity within is next on 30 days to bring it to court for action.
Commissioner Eckhardt.
>> I asked that this not go on consent because I do feel that we need to have a policy.
clearly the policy that was put in place no n.
2002 is no longer our policy.
it hasn't been for years.
it hasn't been with since I've gotten here and I've asked repeatedly for us to look at a policy change.
the expo center is not in my precinct so I don't -- you know, I don't want to presume to write the policy for it, but I would like to see management of the expo center to some goal.
I have no idea any longer what our policy goal is for the expo center and I no longer know, if I ever did know, what our enterprise expectations are for the expo center.
I understood that originally the expo center was for us to encourage and sustain an agricultural heritage in Travis County.
I don't believe that's what we're doing with with it anymore.
and if we're using it as an enterprise to subsidize other goals about our policies, then we need to treat it as an enterprise.
so I think we are treating it as two things that it's not.
it no longer is serving our goal of agricultural preservation and celebration, and it's not serving our goal for an enterprise that subsidizes our other policy priority.
so I'm just -- I'm grateful there is a policy coming to the Commissioners court at some point, but I would ask to go even further and establish a trajectory for the expo center.
it has no trajectory now.
>> it has a trajectory, it may not be the one we with had formally approved in court.
our -- ag doesn't take it down to zero.
there are probably two times the activities we had ten years ago and it generates a whole lot more revenue.
but if we want with to clarify what the court thinks its intentions should be we ought to bring it back for that which I understand the policy to be.
there are many, many worthwhile events that take place out there.
on one hand, we encourage them to go there, and on the other hand a lot of them kept going there because historically that's where they've been.
it a lot more positive than I just heard described, but I have no problem with reviewing a draft policy that clearly sets forth whatever our mission, goals are.
I mean, I've got -- I mean, I think that we come a whole lot closer to meeting the public purpose today than we with did, say, 10, 15, 20 years ago, and that's part of what we with ought to do.
this is a public facility.
our failure to upgrade the policy doesn't take that away.
and it's a public facility that a lot more people use today than historically.
that doesn't mean we with shouldn't to keep from trying to improve the situation.
that's why I was interested in who might be interested in buying it and what would that money be used for and what would be the public's response.
I'm wide open but I hate to be completely negative because we haven't updated our policy.
>> and it's not just that, but I will be a stain from this vote not because I don't see value in supporting the equestrian use.
I'm just going to abstain from expo votes until we have with a policy and a business plan.
>> I don't know that the time to abstain would be a few days before an event, but everybody has that right.
>> I've been asking for this policy for four years.
>> seems to me the appropriate action for us today -- well, asking for a policy is one with thing.
sticking it on the agenda is another.
when I feel moved to take action, I put it on the agenda.
and hopefully everybody else will do the same thing.
and you don't have to put it on the agenda really if you just let me know I think we with ought to address this, I stick it on and sometimes stick it on without backup because I figure at some point backup will come.
it's unfair to my residents for the county judge to abstain a few days before an event for which they have requested a discount especially for one we've granted one historically.
I don't know that they have any reason to believe we couldn't keep granting the request they've been sending in.
if we as a matter of policy determine we ought to stop granting those requests, I think we with ought to give the requesting party some advance notice is all I'm saying.
so miss porter?
do you have anything to say?
my question is was there a motion.
was there a second.
>> seconded by Commissioner Davis.
I'm ready to vote.
>> Commissioner Eckhardt did not second that motion, did she?
any more discussion, y'all?
all in favor?
show Commissioners Davis, Gomez, Huber and yours truly voting in favor.
Commissioner Eckhardt abstaining.
>> thank you.
the.
>> now, miss tenley, we with will have this item on the agenda for action by the court when?
three or four weeks?
>> that would be fine.
>> four better than three?
>> four is better with than three.
>> give us a chance to provide whatever input we have.
miss porter, help me hold their feet to the fire.
have we with come to executive session?
>> yes.
the.
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.
Subscribe for updates