Travis County Commissioners Court

April 24, 2012 - Item 30
Agenda

View captioned video.

Now let's take up item 30, consider and take appropriate action on a report by Ernst & Young regarding a new civil and family court house, including but not limited to: a, acceptance of the report of feasibility analysis of delivery option and value-for-money; b, appointment of a courthouse recommendation committee; c, appointment of an internal project manager and external support; d, method of project delivery; and e other related issues.
good afternoon.

>> good afternoon, I'm roger jeffreys, county executive for justice and public safety and belinda powell, planning manager with p.b.o.
I was a -- a project executive and belinda was a project administrator for this project and last week we came to you with the ernst & young folks and they -- they reported out on their findings on the feasibility study.
and they made some recommendations for next steps and that's why we're here.
one of the things that they encouraged the county not to do is let this information get stale and to lose momentum in building the -- or in selecting a procurement method for the courthouse.
so we have these discussion items for you today to maybe hopefully land on at least a plan to go forward.

>> any reason why we should not accept the report, which is a?

>> not in my opinion.

>> they've done all of the work they committed to do.

>> I second the month goes to accept the report.
-- I second the motion to accept the report.

>> okay.

>> any discussion of the judge's motion?
and Commissioner Eckhardt's second?

>> I'm just going to say that I wholeheartedly am in favor of a new civil courthouse.
I will be voting against accepting the report because I believe the process has been flawed from the get-go.
no reflection on our staff that has worked so hard on this project.

>> any more discussion?
all in favor?
show Commissioners Davis, Eckhardt and yours truly voting in favor.
voting against Commissioner Gomez and Commissioner Huber.

>> well, the next thing they asked or they recommended that you all do is begin to get this moving is to either go forward with the information that you've been given, discuss it, and take a vote as you see appropriate or one of the options is they recommended just to form a small select committee from the community of experts in real estate and finance and the law around this particular area to take the report, review it and come back to you for a recommendation, with a recommendation that you can -- you can then choose to

>> [indiscernible]

>> so -- so your understanding is that we're supposed to target residents with specific skills.

>> yes, sir.

>> related to a -- to a real estate project?

>> yes, sir.

>> for them plus prominent citizens.

>> I think they had in mind a -- to keep it manageable, a smaller group with expertise that are residents that would agree to do this.
like a blue ribbon panel type of thing.
again, taking the report, reviewing it and coming back with a specific recommendation for you all to act on.

>> in terms of delivery?

>> yes, sir.

>> one of the procurement options in the report.

>> what kind of time frame would we anticipate for that?
I am mindful there was an article last week in the business section of the Austin american-statesman with regard to high rise class a office buildings in the vicinity.
it was basically saying the first one out of the chute is in great shape, the second one not so much, the third one is toast.
I would say we need to move rather quickly.
so what are we thinking about in terms of bringing on a -- a group with expertise to help us make this decision between design build and design -- design build financing

>> [indiscernible]

>> well, I think that would be up to you all.
but just from my perspective, you might weigh in, it might take a week or two to actually select a committee, probably another at least week or two for them to review the report and come back with a recommendation.
so -- so three to four weeks I think would be -- would be an optimistic target time for something like that.

>> well, when I took my shot at it, I ended up with three district judges, representatives from the Austin bar, one or two representatives from the downtown neighborhood associations, one of them or two?

>> um ...
two?

>> then I got three chambers.
well, four.
greater Austin, hispanic, african-american, asian.
I mean, so these numbers kind of add up.
then I have the city of Austin.
then I guess county staff and the question would be whether they are really just support staff or bona fide committee members.
and then I was going to ask the -- the judges and others who we should add to this list, but -- but when we get through adding this, we'll be 20, 25 people if we go in this direction.
what I had -- I had in mind sort of permanent citizens plus expertise in -- keen interest in this kind of project.

>> there may be some overlanguage qualifications, if you will, as well.
I mean, there are certainly members of the bar that are on the chamber, things like if you are amenable to maybe fill more than one of the categories, having a smaller group list many times is easier for them to get together and meet.

>> my guess was that it would take a broad section of folk unless we wanted to end up with two committees.
I do think at some point there should be opportunities for sort of prominent citizens who don't necessarily, you know, focus on courthouse projects, but who focus on public projects.
and who would be -- willing and able to commit the time necessary to assist.

>> okay.

>> judge dietz, judges, any input on this?
now, I didn't -- if we want to end up with a small committee, then it seems to me that we should focus on two.
we can get as small as we can, but it's hard for me to get out to a number with eight, nine, 10 with the kind of representation that I think that we need at this stage.
judge?

>> well, I believe it is what the court feels comfortable with.
I mean, obviously during this preparation process, ernst & young held several public forums. If the court believes that it would gain additional I guess validity to have another blue ribbon panel look at it, that's really a call that y'all need to make.
but at the same time, in order not to delay this untoward, it seems to me that we need to set a deadline of at least at the end of may, getting back and having it all wrapped up by the end of may, which is pretty much you would have to distribute the report, which is quite lengthy, probably have an information session and then another session.
obviously, the smaller you make the -- the smaller you make the panel, it seems to me, the more efficient that you make it, the larger and the more unwieldy.
but it's, respectfully, seems to be more y'all's call if you feel like that there's need for additional public input and that upon receiving that input, y'all would be ready to act.
and that's a decision that y'all need, it seems to me, to make.
that -- that if y'all get this input, and it is favorable to act, then y'all are ready to act.
and -- and --

>> well, boil the methods down to two, basically.
I looked at the appendix a that has stakeholder meetings and the names of participants.
so I kind of looked at that list thinking that these groups have been represented anyway.
so why don't we make sure they're on the list.
then the question is what should we add to that list and various -- two of those four chambers were listed but not the other two.
I think it's important to have the other two there.
so if you maybe the question is whether we would like to engage and interact with two rather small committees or just one that may be one and a half times a small committee.
any -- Commissioner?

>> I actually am in favor of this.

>> [ applause ]

>> [laughter] this is what I thought we should have started out with a year and a half ago.
so if this helps us get going in the right direction, I certainly at this stage will be supportive of it.
I have two thoughts to share on that.
first of all the downtown Austin alliance I think should be on your list.
secondly, the, you know, size of committee is important as it relates to what the actual function of that committee is.
so what is really going to be the role of the blue ribbon committee?
is it going to be someone to bounce things off of, in that case a majority vote -- it doesn't matter to me seems like how many are there.
if they are actually going to be actually hands on involved in more details of the decision making then smaller is better.
seems to me like that perhaps one of the functions that should be considered at this point is approximate what exactly is their role going to be.

>> is the role to assist us in making a selection on design build, design bid build and design build finance manage operate.

>> that was the intent.

>> so that is the only function of this committee?
because I -- you know, the -- the long beach had a blue ribbon committee that worked with them all out there through the entirety of this project.

>> there was actually two.
a smaller group that would help facilitate you all making a decision on which procurement method that you wanted to go with.
so that was the idea behind having a small group with expertise that could really understand the pieces of this report and come back to you with their professional expertise and make a recommendation, this is the best bang for your buck type of thing for Travis County.
there is in the governance structure an advisory board of citizens or residents, again with expertise or prominent citizens that is envisioned that would be there throughout the life of the project.
so there's really two --

>> so we're talking about creating

>> [indiscernible] for this that may or may not serve on another board that's created -- during the life of the project?

>> that was what was envisioned in their recommendation.

>> my concern, though, is -- I'm hearing -- I like to expeditiously move forward, the quicker the better for me.
however we need to go through these particular hurdles.
but a real, legitimate concern of mine is that the information we have, the report itself, is data that we have, being shared with everyone in a timely manner whereby we can act in the time line that we have set forth.
if it's a month from today, six weeks from today, it needs to be exhaustive enough to where we can just move forward.
now, my question then comes to whatever we end up doing, to disseminate the information accurately and timely, so these things that we are -- that we are aspiring to actually happens.
so that would be my concern.
so whenever we get back the reports, we need to hear exactly what it is and, you know, we -- we deal with it, dbf, db, whatever.
the bottom line is we need to hear something.
of course looking at these experts, having all of these persons on board, that has knowledge of a lot of these things, coming back to the court and we make a decision.
I just want to make sure that what we're doing, the components of what we're doing is available to those folks out there that need to hear it and get back with us in a timely manner.
that basically is getting the information to them.
so that's -- that's my concern.

>> you are referring to the report itself, getting that to --

>> yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

>> will with, I think if -- well, I think that if we want direct input regarding the method of delivery, in addition to making those two documents available and -- there's that big document and there's an executive summary on top of that.
I think what we need to do is get staff to do a two or three pager, pros and cons of the two that they narrowed it down to and hand that to a committee, let them look at that, then if they want to see the full documentation it's available, too.
but -- but I mean from what I'm hearing, maybe we need two committees, maybe we need one just to help us make a decision about the delivery.
then another one that we hope will serve us more long term and broader.
if we do that, then on the small committee, to help with the delivery method issue, seems to me that we would be able to get that done in two weeks, wouldn't we?
you're really talking about categories of people.
these categories really have been sort of involved anyway.

>> yeah.

>> but I think at some point we need a cross-section of the community to engage on this and work with us.
long term.

>> I agree.
I also think we need a cross-section of the community to help us make our choice.

>> okay.
that's fine with me.
it's getting to be a little larger.
but if we have three judges, if we have the Austin bar association, one or two or three, and actually I have the downtown Austin alliance, but I also had downtown neighborhood association, those are separate in those chambers, I would -- and those chambers, I would have one from each.
we could request somebody with the sort of financial, business, real estate sort of background, we can target those, get them represented.
the city of Austin, I would ask for the person with the downtown expertise and whose daily job involves downtown issues.
because I do think we really ought to plan to partner with them to the extent that we can.
and county staff, not necessarily a member, but available.
and we can decide in what capacity staff will serve, if that's all right.
what are we leaving out?
let's say that this is the method of delivery committee.
and this will still ends up being probably in the 12 or so number.
which is not a large committee, but it's not necessarily small, either.

>> it was -- judge, was it your suggestion that with respect to the cross-section of the community, that each Commissioner and the judge would get an appointment or two or three?

>> well, I hadn't really thought a whole lot about that.
I think when we appoint the bond advisory committee, that's what we normally do.
we end up with 15 that way.
but if there are two or three or four others that we want to appoint to that committee, I would have no problem adding them.
I do think that it's important to have community input from the community and not just downtown people.

>> I'm asking this respectfully, but how much different is this in the work that your bond committee is now doing?

>> well, in my view quite different.
the bond committee may be mad at the county judge about public access.
or part of it.
but I have in mind serving in kind of the same capacity.

>> and as long as I'm on this roll, I'm wondering if -- if it wouldn't be -- to address Commissioner Davis' concern and just in terms of helping whoever serves on this committee, that the staff could do a presentation with respect to how we got to here and what this report is and then sort of the highlights of the report, because sometimes being able to see it visually and hear about it, you know, in a couple of hours would facilitate them then taking the report and trying to digest it.

>> that's what we did before.
and it worked then.
so it should work again.

>> judge, are you suggesting we utilize our currently sitting bond committee to -- to come back to us on the design build, design bid build?

>> the only reason I said bond was not so much the bond expertise, but seemed like I saw everybody's head shaking with respect to wanting to get a cross-section of the community to review the project and to receive their feedback about this project and I was just wondering if rather than reinventing the wheel if you just couldn't make dual purpose.
but if there's no economy, if there's no economy there, then you can easily appoint another committee.

>> my vote would be to appoint another committee.

>> yeah.

>> one possibility, I -- I really like the idea of the cross-section of folks.
but I do want to have a methodology that we can deploy right away.
at least the methodology that we used to develop the bond committee might be the one that we utilize.
say these are the categories that we want to hit and then each Commissioner, each member of the Commissioners court has to appoint them.

>> thatathathathathjg]m=i if we start out thinking there -- this is a very broad charge, get people to buy into it, sort of commit to long term, I think that we will have done ourselves a big favor in the community, too.
on the other one after we choose the method of delivery, we may well decide that committee can help with something else.
so I'm hoping that the committee that will help us with the method of delivery, will have a bit more expertise and keener interest in downtown and courthouses than say the broader community.
I'm confused!

>> which committee are you talking about being the first committee to help us choose the --

>> I'm thinking that's a small committee made up of judges, downtown neighborhood association, downtown Austin alliance, attorneys, chambers, city of Austin, that's the -- that's the one that I look to for method of delivery.

>> is that a committee of 10 or 15.

>> that will end up being about 12.

>> how are we going to map that committee?
one appointee from each Commissioner, then there are two appointees from each Commissioner with -- with four appointees from the judge or how do we get to 12?

>> the beauty of this one I think is that on the downtown Austin alliance, rather than us appointing somebody, we tell them what we want and ask them to send somebody.
greater Austin chamber of commerce, we tell them what we need and ask them to send a representative.
the city of Austin, we ask for the staff working on downtown issues who is interested in collaborating with us on our civil and family law courthouse and ask the city of Austin to send us that person.
on that I think the speed with which we can act turns on that responsibility and we ought to give them a deadline.
in my thinking, we should be able to appoint that committee in say a couple of weeks.
the other one I would start off with us getting three apiece.
when we look at that list, if we think that categories are absent or missing, then we just plug the hole.
I wouldn't care on that one whether we ended up with 15 or 20, my thinking, though, is that it would be larger than the first one.

>> okay.

>> does that make sense?

>> are you -- are you talking about sort of working on the first one to get together very quickly, but also simultaneously beginning to work on that second one?

>> yeah, I had in mind us telling staff exactly who we wanted staff to contact and having staff do that for us.
then in the meantime each of us would work on his or her list.
at some point we would share that.
if we saw holes there, we would simply rather than take somebody's recommendation, we would just supplement the list.

>> may I respectfully ask, are you all going to set a time kind of a time certain that this -- these two committees report back to the court?

>> I think we should.
the bigger one you have a lot of things for them to cover, so you almost have to point out what parts of the charge you would want to address first.
and then give them a rough schedule.
and unfortunately, a lot of these folks will have full-time jobs, so you want them to buy into the schedule that we recommend.
so -- but on the second one, I'm thinking that we have a bit more time to get it up and running.
and I do think that it will be important for us to reduce the charge to writing, too.

>> so on the recommendation committee, would you like for staff to -- to -- my understanding is that's the committee where you would ask for someone to submit from the various chambers, a representative from the daa, a representative, would you like to craft a draft letter or a charge or something from the representation committee for us to send out?

>> that's what I had in mind.
if the court approves this direction, I would have somebody make a phone call to the powers that be, let them know what's coming, let them know to start thinking about it and deliver to them a charge and maybe schedule, maybe pertinent parts of the ernst & young report as soon as we can get it to them, plus an indication that we really prefer to go ahead and populate this committee in about two weeks, which would be may 8th, right?
so if we miss may 8th then, you know, the next date is the 15th.

>> okay.

>> Commissioner?

>> I think we're on the right track here.
I would just like to add, though, that on the second committee with maybe three appointments each, that I do think that it's important over the long haul that we have the representation categorically that we've outlined in the first committee simply because those are players in the downtown area.
and I know that you mentioned something about filling in the holes later, but I just wanted to be on the record of saying that I really think that we need these players because they are interfacers with -- in one way or another with this building over the long haul.
so I think that we need to be thinking about how we get those bases covered, if our appointments cover some of that, fine.
but I would like to know that we would revisit it categorically as well.

>> I have no problem with asking those committee members if they would want to serve on a second committee or asking the whole committee to work with the second committee.
see what I'm saying?
this may be the kind of project where these individuals get so interested in it that they don't have any problem with a multi--year commitment and seeing the project through to the end.

>> why don't we make this a date, just have this be the base committee and add on to it?

>> that will work for me.
do you sing in the church choir?

>> [laughter] singing right on key that time.

>> I would just suggest that -- that the court consider putting a financial person that understands the effective tax rate.
when I sign the certification on the ey contract, that it was within budgeted -- it was feasibility, that was based upon the statement that ey gave me, that it would cost at least 16 million a year for the payment to a p 3, that will require this court of increasing the tax rate, if you -- if you start late to roll back.
we only have $12 million in this year's tax rate to roll back.
long beach courthouse, when they did it, they took the debt financing and pulled it out separately.
their annual payment is $54 million.
and I'll tell ya, that will take four years at rollback: so I encourage you to put somebody on the team, the voting team, that has knowledge of the effective tax rate in order to put it in the context of the financial parameters.
I mean, if this court is willing to go to rollback two or three years, then you can take any recommendation from that committee at face value because you are willing to hit the tax rate to make the payment.
if you are not willing to go to rollback in any year, you start limiting your choices of the delivery method, in my opinion.

>> absolutely.

>> that's why I --

>> this was very clear in the internal committee meetings with ey.

>> I think the financial person is really important and so is the real estate person because I think we need to come up with a recommendation or an evaluation that -- that keeps the taxpayers in mind.
otherwise, we may not wind up there.

>> although I think that it's highly probable we get the finance and real estate experience in the three bar associations as well as the downtown Austin association.
I think we can find the expertise, again, I think that we can find people who wear both hats so that we don't explode this initial committee to a size that makes it difficult to convene and come to a decision.
or a recommendation.

>> I understand the size.
at the same time I really think that I actually would ask leroy to come up with some suggestions of people he might know that really had a good grip on this.
because it is critical and we need to be sure that we've got that addressed.
and we don't -- we may have some financial expertise to come in, in these other areas, but I'm not sure that they will have the public finance understanding that leroy is talking about.

>> yeah.

>> I would say that the city of Austin would have people, obviously dusty knight is an expert in the effective tax rate type of things.
but I just wanted to mention that because if in fact the court does not have the will to raise the funds, then your delivery options become more limited and I might say that the governor has said in writing that he is coming after revenue caps this year.
and he's using 5%.
and I can tell you if he puts a 5% revenue cap in -- and the legislature approves it, you do for the have any room in -- you do not have any room in your current tax rate to increase the tax rate to fund the required annual payment.
and that's the reason that I mention it.
hopefully he won't be successful in revenue caps.

>> okay.
we will make sure we cover it.

>> not only that, but I think somebody that maybe leroy would be part of the internal team to kind of keep that on the front burner for us.
just a constant reminder.

>> I think we certainly need staff to be working with this committee, but I just am sorry to keep harping on this, but I don't want to reinvent what we've already done.
we've already had internal staff working with ernst & young.
I think the point of ernst & young's recommendation is to get outside folks to come in and look and take a fresh look at what's been done.

>> but it's crucial, though, that our internal staff, who is very much aware.

>> I agree.

>> of what's going on at the legislature.
and then also the ability of Travis County being able to have -- having to roll back and how many times and all of that, that's essential information that any -- any group of people on a committee need to know.
and then that's -- that decision, though, still comes back to us.

>> sure.

>> you know, we can appoint all of the committees we want to evaluate, but that decision is going to come back to this Commissioners court to -- to --

>> we will eventually have to make that decision, yes.

>> to have to be accountable for whatever decision is made.

>> some might say that I would be involved very heavily with the staff support for the committee that you report and I would anticipate that the planning and budget staff would give a presentation as we did to the bond citizens bond advisory committee, so that they had the financial parameters by which they are making their recommendation.
and they were very aware of what the tax impact of the bond, their bond recommendations were.
so I think that we can -- we can accommodate my comments by staffing underneath the committee.
I just wanted to make -- be sure that people understand that when e and y reported to you on the report, that I had certified that it was financially possible to implement any of those options, delivery options, that it very likely could require you going to rollback tax rate in the year -- couple of years preceding the completion of the project.

>> uh-huh.

>> all right.

>> we will make sure that's covered.
okay.
do we need to see the draft charge?
before you send it out?

>>

>> [indiscernible]

>> we could have it to you by next week.

>> yeah.

>> okay.
can we go ahead and start making -- we have listed several groups here.
do we want them to go ahead and make the phone calls between now and the next Tuesday, see what kind of responses you are getting and to have them -- that will give them more time to start trying to identify suitable representatives.

>> okay.

>> yeah, we can do that.

>> how would you describe this particular situation to -- I know we had -- I remember the bond committee that we had we end up choosing individuals and persons, a lot of competition, a lot of folks wanting to serve on that committee, thank goodness for all of their participation.
but we had some basic criterion I know that we went by.
I'm just trying to -- if someone said well Commissioner Davis, I heard what you all are talking about today, goodness gracious, I'm interested in that, living in precinct 1, I would be very, very interested in serving on this committee that you are going to appoint.
what would be the intent and purpose of what we're doing and what would be -- qualifications would I have to have or what are you looking for me to serve?
on this committee?
and of course I like to see if there's going to be a summary I guess provided for the overall view of hearing this, whereas they will have a better understanding of what they're being asked.
I think that it's very important, in my mind.
I hear what you are saying about this particular letter that you are coming up for the other type of situation.
but what type of -- of information will we need to provide that particular person that just maybe hearing it today and saying well I would like to be a part of that.

>> well --

>> I'm asking the question.

>> yeah, I don't know that the report got much more detailed than someone with financial, legal or real estate experience.
but if you would like, we could flesh that out as well as part of the charge.

>> if a person -- if a person is out in the community because I don't know what type of response we're going to get.
especially if we have to appoint three persons apiece from this particular court.
I just don't know at this point.
but I'm quite sure there are some interested parties.

>>

>> [indiscernible]

>> as a start.
I think that you have some general schedule information, thing that you provide to those that you are asking for you to serve on the bond committee as well, so we could start there and search for how you have looked for advisory groups in the past for the larger groups.
we can work on that as well.

>> on a smaller committee, I have judges here, three.
bar association.
downtown Austin alliance.
downtown neighborhood association.
the chambers.
city of Austin.
financial, real estate, one or two?
one financial and maybe one real estate or one person to cover both.

>> I think we need to have each category separately, judge.
financial --

>> all right, real estate and public finance.

>> okay.

>> all right.
financial -- public -- yeah.

>> two separate ones.

>> yeah.

>> and that will get us up to the -- that will get us up to 12 or 13, right?

>> that's about --

>> [indiscernible] one for each category, that's three judges.

>> [indiscernible] 13.

>> small enough, isn't it, judge dietz?

>> if you say so, judge.
we'll work with whoever shows up.

>> why don't we try to get those phone calls out between now and next Tuesday, we'll review and approve the charge.
and in the meantime, can each of us start thinking about three citizens we would appoint?

>> for somebody who has public finance or financial or real estate.
because I think those are just absolutely essential.

>> what precinct is leroy in?

>> I don't know.
but I always appoint people from throughout the county.
anything else on the committees?
move that we approve that.

>> second.
follow-up

>> [laughter] any more discussion?
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
what about this internal project manager and external support?

>> so again in the recommendations in the report, strongly recommend that you select an internal project manager, that is defined as a single point of contact,

>> [indiscernible] point of contact for the Commissioners court for the overall delivery of the project.
really it's almost a separate thing from the external support.
we put them together, but -- probably the method of project delivery will have to be determined before you can determine your external support because it depends on which model that you use, but it is critical that -- that at some point at least the report is recommending that you select an internal project manager.

>> we should be able to do the internal project manager next week, right?
external would require some sort of a competitive process?

>> yes, sir.

>> qualifications.

>> it would also depend on which method of delivery that you choose.
for example, the design bid and the design, bid, build, call for what they call a client's representative.
for the more I guess complicated db mfo, they call it a risk, financial risk manager, which is a slightly different role.

>> okay.

>> so it would depend on which way you go.

>> so we need to hold off on the external?

>> yes, sir.

>> source.
but next week, we can I guess think a bit more about the internal person?
who we would like to see fill that position and whether that person, he or she, has the time to spend on it basically.

>> yes, sir.

>> it will -- may well give some thought to how much time we thought it will take.

>> yes, sir.
well, it would be over the life of the project, which was estimated 18 months.

>>

>> [laughter]

>> we -- too ambitious.
42 months, I'm sorry.

>> do we think that it's a full-time position.

>> most of the time.

>> not all of the time.

>> most of the time.
it depends on again -- again it depends on the delivery method and how much external support you're contracting for.
it should be the person managing all of those contracts to some extent through your regular processes.

>> okay.
because if it's close --

>> belinda, what about you?

>> aren't you going to talk about it next week?

>> yeah

>> [laughter]

>> because if it's close to a full-time person, we may be looking at a new hire.
let's give some thought and bring that back next week.
how's that?
any other related issues today?
I'm thinking this method of project delivery, we're thinking that we need help of the committee to in that determination.

>> that's right.

>> we would come back to you after that committee had done their work with the recommendation.
and then the -- the only other related issue is if there's any direction that you want to give the internal team between now and I guess next week since we're coming back.
but we can work with them to get this -- this first committee together and come back to you with the charge and hopefully maybe even some names by next week.

>> being on.
let's plan to do that.

>> judge.
let me tell you the thing that I'm really, I feel like I need to have.
absolutely.
when is the decision going to be made or reached as to what the -- what the availability of the payment is going to be?
because I think that's going to determine a lot for me.

>> the availability payment for -- if you don't choose to do a p 3 option, you won't have an availability payment --

>>

>> [multiple voices]

>> that direction.

>> what we have today in your ernst & young report, there's a cash flow and I can make sure and highlight that and send that to you, that shows over the life of the project what -- what an anticipated delivery payment would be for the scale of project.

>> [one moment please for change in captioners]

>> and what that means to our budget each year.
I think it's important to have that kind of information out for citizens to look at.
and -- and certainly committee members.

>> it sounds like, again, based on your point and what leroy mentioned is that what you are recommending a financial person be on that committees that analyzing these different options and that information will be to them before they come to you and make a decision or make a recommendation, sorry.

>> and as leroy mentioned earlier, we typically do have a debt presentation that talks about how debt is calculated for the county.
we have some general background presentations that are given and we can expand that to include and here's the anticipated cash flow and the fact of this project even in that -- even in our debt service payment, we could actually plug in the real numbers associated with what the estimates are today and, again, they are the estimates today but that is generally how you approach it with your bond committees as well and I think that will be helpful.

>> so it will be part of the presentation made to the committee.

>> made to the committee, right.

>> so I think we ought to list that separately in next week's agenda so if we need to discuss it further, we can.
okay.
anything else on this item today?
okay.
so we will move on those, all right.

>> thank you.

>> thank you very much.
I appreciate it.

>> thanks, 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.