Travis County Commissioners Court

June 12, 2012 - Item 9
Agenda

View captioned video.

>> Number 9, consider and take appropriate action regarding Lone Star Rail Project.
This is the item we had the work session on.

>> Yes, on may 17th.

>> Okay.

>> This item comes from the

>> [inaudible] and a pretty comprehensive report on where they are at in terms of planning for their rail project.
At that point when we concluded that work session, the Commissioners court indicated that the lone star rail group could come back and seek direction about working with staff moving forward on exploring the possibility for a tax increment financing zone.
I think it's called a t.i.z.
We had some fun with that acronym.
That's where they are at today coming back to find out if we can move forward and talk with them on an agreement.
From a staff standpoint, the main concern that we have is we're right in the middle of the budget so we're not sure how that fits in with you all's time line, but we would like a little bit of breathing room there.

>> So what direction are you hoping for today?

>> We're really requesting that the court direct staff to begin discussions with the lone star rail district with the idea we would bring back a draft interlocal agreement for your consideration in 60, 90 days, and that will allow us to go forward and also -- we're also getting ready to approach the city formally and the community college district formally and try to bring back an agreement that would be something we would work through with all three entities, your staffs and their staffs as well for your consideration.

>> What are you going to --

>> [inaudible].

>> I'm sorry?

>> When will you make your presence before the city of Austin?
You said you are going to contact the city of Austin.
I want to know where they are on certain positions as far as rail.
I understand that there is some parts of rail discussion that may not be on this November ballot.
I don't really know exactly where they are on a lot of rail and I really would -- I'm really kind of concerned about what position the city of Austin is taking at this point.
So that's why I posed the question.
I know you are going to visit with them.
And I'd like to I guess ask when are you going to visit the city of Austin overall to see what -- if there is going to be an impact on some of that determination as far as

>> [inaudible] going.
I'm kind of concerned about that.

>> Sure.
We've had some conversation with them informally.
Yesterday I met with the director of transportation for the city and he's requested a formal meeting with the assistant city manager and our staff to begin that conversation.
We're hoping that in the next 30 or 60 days as they work through their public presentation period that we'll be able to schedule a presentation similar to what we gave you just a few weeks ago.
And they have been monitoring the process we were engaged in with your staff previously so the transportation staff and the budget staff are very much aware of the proposals of the provisions that we've drafted to this point.
We feel pretty good about their level of involvement at this point, but we'll be asking them the same question we're asking you today which is move into a formal dialogue.

>> Isn't it the case that the presentation you made to us is substantially the same as the presentations that have been made in the project connect overall plan which is actually being funded by the city of Austin?

>> That's correct.
That is correct.
Lone star rail, the city of Austin and capital metro have been engaged for quite a number of months jointly of staffing the transit working group, campo, and subcommittee for all the work they are doing in terms of developing a longer range plan for the region.
I don't think the dialogue with the city indicates they are backing away from the urban rail project.
I think it's a timing issue and when they think they would go to the voters.
This fall they've talked informally about having a very small item in order to continue the funding for urban rail so they can continue the planning and come back in 12 or 24 months with the actual funding of construction.

>> Do you know at this point what the city will be going with or have they made a decision as far as what they will be putting before the voters in November?
Do we know exactly what's going to be on the able at this time as far as rail is concerned?
As far as the funding of the project?

>> Well, obviously they won't make the actual determination on what goes before the voters until about August of next year or the following year.
In terms of setting that actual bond length.
What staff has recommended at this point is that they would need $275 million for some debt financing in order to attract the matching federal money in order to construct that project.

>> Joe, I had one question with regard to that.
You are asking us to direct staff to enter into negotiations on the t.i.z., but that does not necessarily mean with regard to the project connect discussions that that will be -- that we will have exactly the same kind of financial arrangement or combination of projects with the city of Austin or any of our other municipalities.
I want to temper expectations with regard to having a mirror image kind of pact with the city of Austin with regard to the funding of lone star rail.
Because city of Austin is likely to be heavily engaged with the funding of their downtown circulator, which may take precedence for them, whereas lone star rail being a more regional project may take precedence with us.
I'm not saying that will be the case, I'm saying I want to manage expectations in that regard.
I don't want us to be in a position where we say we will only do what the city is doing.

>> That's correct, the lone star project is really a stand-alone project in that its rationale, its reason for existence and proposal is separate from what the urban rail project is about.
It's much more of a commuter inter regional mobility issue for the lone star rail providing transportation for all the way from georgia town to san antonio.
So it's rationale and the reasoning for it is different from what the urban rail project would be and I would expect the financial consideration you might have in the future would be very different.

>> The city and county are very much aligned, but I would say about 80 to 90% aligned.
So I just wanted to --

>> Well, I'd like to hear the city of Austin

>> [inaudible] and I hear what you guys are saying, but I haven't heard from the city of Austin yet on some of these things.
And that's why I posed the question that I'm posing.
I want to make sure that when we go into the future as far as what we're doing, we're all on the same page.
The tax implication.
I think one of the things that's being considered reason why some of the things may have been taken off the ballot was because of the fact the taxing implication that would have been put on the residents.
So again, I think that needs to be reviewed.
I don't know why that was pulled off and that's one of the reasons I heard and that was basically the media.
I haven't had a chance to investigate to find out a lot of things, but I really would like to hear from the city of Austin, I would, what anybody else does is their business, but I just don't vote what I hear from this dei can't say.
I like to hear from the person's mouth, the city's mouth as far as a lot of these things are concerned.
Otherwise then it's just hearsay.
So, again, I'm very concerned about this, but I'm also concerned about what the overy'all taxable situation would be, if the city is supporting things, I would like to hear from the city of Austin in that regard.
So that's where I'm basically coming from.
But I respect what we're talking about as far as what we're doing.

>> So from a staff perspective, I guess a good question is how is your workload looking today and I know we have a budget that we have to get done between now and the end of the fiscal year as well as a civil courthouse project that we're working on and other matters.
What's the answer to that?

>> Well, just in terms of workload, July, August and September, they are all going to be pretty intent.
So I don't know how that fits with y'all's schedule, but we're going to be really deep into budget development during that period.
And so I'd kind of like to not get involved in a lot of intense meetings and negotiations on this during that period.
But I don't know what your time frame is or your deadline.

>> Well, I think we can work around your work schedule to make it -- accommodate the time that you need.
I think -- I'm sure there will be some legal and some other planning issues that we'll need to work through.
Support work for issues you will be raising.
So I think we would like to proceed as quickly as possible.
Our real deadline is to try to establish this before the end of the year and I think if we work through September and hit it hard in, say, October we'll be able to come back before the end of the year to establish the districts.
So we can get the districts created by the end of the year.
I think we're going to have to figure out how to work around your calendar.
I'm sure when we come back, you'll want time to work through it as well.
I think if we delay very much in at least getting started we're going to be behind the curve getting into the fall and making it happen.

>> Joe, correct me if I am wrong, but sitting on the lone star rail board along with some representatives from the city of Austin, isn't it the intent to try to work a sort of parallel process with all the stakeholders on this?
It seems to me that that's an important parallel effort, and I'm sensitive to that as we look at how we will move down this path with the rest of the stakeholders that you are talking about in this process.
Is that correct?

>> That's correct.
We will have to coordinate with the city as well with the community college district.
So it's a process that if we don't start it soon or at least get it structurally put in place, we will miss what our target has been to get it established this year.
So we have a lot of coordination work on our side and I'm sure that will give you time to work through your issues and at the right time we'll be able to plug into your availability and make it work.
But we do need to approach the city, the community college district, coordinate with them and that process will take some time.
It will be helpful to say the court is ready to start the proes is.
We need to get you on board so we can come back with everything simultaneously.

>> Sounds like standing on the edge in barton springs and jumping first.
You jump, you jump.

>> We need someone to go first so we can act as a catalyst for the entire process and it will take time to organize.

>> But everybody does want to get in the pool.

>> Absolutely.
If you recall the last meeting the city was here with us because they have supported the process.
And in the transit working group, the lone star line is a very important part of the vision for rail and transit in the region.
As a matter of fact, if you look at the final vision, it becomes the primary commuter link from the north taken south.
Portions of the red line are expected to convert to urban stale rile this is a different market.
So over time the lone star project becomes a vital link for the region getting commuters through the congestion and into the downtown and maintaining our economic base in central city.

>> And joe, again, I aplayed what you are doing and -- applaud what you are doing and make sure I have all the information to feel comfortable.
Everybody has their own perspective on how they feel as far as what to vote on, you know, for or against something.
And I'm not at that comfort level at this point until I'm able to gather more information.
There's a lot that we have on our plate right now before the Commissioners court this year, this budget cycle year.
There's going to be a lost demands.
I think the judge mentioned something about family court, but

>> [indiscernible] family courthouse for an example, that's going to be a real big ticket item.
What kind of impact that's going to have on a lot of things.
It's going to have significant impact along with a lot of things we still need to maintain current effort on this court.
Ongoing projects, future bond issues, how are they going to relate to issuing future debt on a whole bunch of stuff.
The connectivity I think the great.

>> [indiscernible] is a very I think very positive way to go, but I think we theodosia neo align ourselves on a track whereby we'll be able to make a unilateral decision if all the parts and pieces of the pez he will are in puzzle.i would like to get to kw a little more on where the other persons are in this role before I commit one way or the other.
And there's till a lot of missing parts for me to make a decision at this point.

>> There will be plenty of coordination and we won't push into that pool.

>> I appreciate that.
People do what they want to do, but I'm saying as far as I'm concerned.

>> Yes, sir.

>> So where are the

>> [inaudible] in san antonio and bexar county?

>> We are going through the same process.
It's taken longer because they have a more complicated political system, judge, but we've started the discussions down there.
We have a big meeting with the city staff, the mayor mayor.
So far people down there have been very supportive.
The mayor in san antonio said if they have to get the money out of general fund, they would do that.
They seem to be pretty committed.

>> So at the appropriate time, how will you evidence joining the partnership?
What would Travis County be expected to do?

>> In the end -- you are already part of the next system.
We'll be going in sequence to each of the jurisdictions to talk -- have the same conversation.
And we're basically using the same provisions that we developed with your staff with hays county, as a matter of fact.
We've met with hays county and all the municipalities involved in this process.

>> There would be a written early local agreement.

>> Yes, to stab funds and our obligation to you.

>> So I hear staff saying that they are suffering from work overload at this time.
That that may change between now and October 1.
Why wouldn't a more reasonable approach for us be get as much progress with the other entities as you can and come back shortly after October 1.

>> Well, at this point the question we're asking is just to authorize the start of the process.
As you were saying early, everyoneis -- you've been meetig with Travis County.
You know, so we have been using the process here as the model for the others.
Our request is really to signal that this process is alive, that we will work around the calendars of your staff in order to make it work with them.
But we are looking to proceed in the other jurisdictions for a signal from Travis County that yes, okay, we are as far along as they've been voicing to you and are ready to be this that discussion and we will be asking them to do the same things.
Later this month we'll be meeting with a series of elected officials in hays county to ask the same question of them and take it back to each of their courts a and city councils and they are going to ask the same question, where is Travis County on this.
Because in the end Travis County and the city of Austin are the heart of this system on the north end.
And from their standpoint, they are looking for your domino to fall to it to make sense to them.

>> As far as dominoes go, on page 16, the.com know you the ds 8.5 million over the years span to go 2026?
Spanning to 2026?
I'm thinking of this in the same way we look at economic proposals.

>> I'm not sure what you are looking at.
Whether you are looking at the power point presentation or --

>> Item 16 where you outline t.i.f.
Revenues expected in acc, Travis County and city of Austin to full service buildout in 2026.

>> I believe the numbers there are the indication what we believe the participation with the creating of the districts to help fund the program over time.

>> I don't know that I ever felt that Travis County would be the lead entity, one.
Two is that I have only participated in that work session discussion that we had.
And the concern I raised then is where are the other entities, the other partners.
The other them thing I'm hearing from staff, we have given them a long list of things to work on and we've prioritized them.
I'm hearing today in order for them to work this and proceed with further discussions, we would have to take some of that off the plate.
You can't take the budget off.
The civil courthouse is picking upstream, financial incentives.
The other thing is we've got leroy and ms. Brouder with a list of stuff to work on that involves everything from consultants and the i.t.s.
Area to trying to hire a permanent county executive for that and putting out other fires and trying to keep the peace among top managers as well as work for five supervisors we call the Commissioners court.
So I guess I'm sitting her thinking they find themselves with a shortage of time to work on another major project.
From a personal perspective, I really have to see the other partners sign on for me to support it.
And my recommendation would be work with them between now and October and come back and see us first week in October.
And we can decide at that point where to go, what to do, et cetera.
This is a substantial financial commit and I don't coi don't know I like the idea of others coming because Travis County taking the lead.
Commissioners court should spend its time on -- I have a hard time placing this at the top.
Not that this is important buckets this is new and a lot of other stuff has been around for years.
A lot of the other stuff, some really is mandated, others not.
Other we kind of prioritize ourselves.
So you know, I have to view this request against the background of all the other things.
And I'm having a hard time personally we ought to direct staff to go ahead and negotiate a formal agreement at this time because I think that gets us way down the road toward a commitment to do this.
Now, nobody at the city has ever mentioned this to me and I chat with them all periodically including last night at campo.
Not that they don't think this is important, but clearly they thought the other project was more important.
That's what they spent their time on and the mayor concluded that the timing wasn't right for them to put that on the ballot and nobody from the council has indicated otherwise, so I guess that's the city's position on that rail project.
The other thing is that I've heard about three rail projects and we've got one that's implemented that is doing I guess better is what I'm told day one, but still not doing as better as a community I think we expect.
I don't know, this is a major step that I really don't think we ought to take at this time.
That's not to say I'm closing the door.
But it is to say that I think that we ought to proceed cautiously and I guess the commitment I make today is for me let's talk again early October and let's see how much progress we've made.

>> Judge?
Judge?

>> Commissioner Davis, then Commissioner Huber.

>> Thank you.
And I think I'll hit on some of the things the judge has said, hit on some of those parts also.
This is really a comfort level as far as I'm concerned.
I know that the city of Austin also

>> [inaudible] the plan, the Commissioners court, we have a few things that we're dealing with, but part of our master plan as far as that north campus was concerned was an area where by the city was looking at something called the airport, upper airport initiative.
And this particular upper airport boulevard initiative we're basically looking at a rail project, commuter type situations all the way to the airport and, of course, they are going to invest a lot of money into that project.
Something that I think the community is kind of supporting.
I really don't know where the city is on that particular issue, but it was basically with an urban rail type situation, but for that particular stretch of rail which kind of interfaced with our north campus which the tax office, the sheriff's office, everybody's complex, county clerk and many of our other departments are located up there on airport.
But also with the involvement of neighborhood associations.
Which they seem to have embraced.
When I say "they" I'm talking about the city of Austin, they seem to embrace readily aseem to aggressively moving forward.
At least what's indicated to me the last time they came before this Commissioners court with their presentation.
So I'm still -- and, of course, some of the things that was also brought up was the rail from elgin's manor to Austin.
I know the situation we look at as far as multimodal.
I'm not closing the door, but I'm not at the comfort level that I need to be, not today.
Maybe later after hearing more from the city of Austin as they come here and say, well, we're going to embrace this and do this and do that.
I haven't heard that yet.
That's why I stated earlier that I think before I move forward, I want to make sure that these other entities, even the ones in san antonio are all on board.
We move in the same direction, make sure we're doing the same thing and that is to the betterment of multimodal and moving persons in this community, but I'm not there yet.
So I just want to understand where I'm coming from.
And anyway I appreciate it your input to this and bringing this issue before the court.
Thank you.

>> Commissioner Huber.

>> It's become apparent to me in this dialogue that what we have here is we've got two members of the dais on the dais that are members of the lone star rail district board, and we're sort of -- we're constraint by open meetings act from sharing what we know with the rest of the court.
And so I'm hearing the rest of the court is not fully up to speed on how long this has been in process, how the moving parts are working together with all the particular rail and transportation projects.
And the sooner we can begin to look at something like this piece of the pez he will the better off we are.
But that doesn't help us today because we've got three members of the court here that don't have that foundation.
So I do think that we need to help share more of the data because Commissioner Eckhardt and I can't because of the open meetings.

>> We do need to find a better mechanism and perhaps in the intervening months up into October we can figure better conduits to get the information to full court and staff.
Because I am convinced by the data we've seen that lone star rail is a vital component to addressing our serious lack of capacity in our transportation infrastructure.
We cannot build the lane miles necessary to address our current traffic problems much less our future.
Rail must be included.
And lone star rail is a vital part of that.
I do think we can get to a comfort level where Travis County can lead on this initiative and we'll work on that.

>> Judge.

>> Commissioner Gomez.

>> I just needed to add just a little bit.
I think the -- you know, the open meetings act kind of gets in the way, however, I met with these folks every time that they've called, I've met with them and I've seen the material.
And, of course, I think that rail is an exciting thing to look forward to.
On the other hand, having served on capital metro, I mean, I know how difficult it is to get a rail system in.
And not only that but to get people out of their cars to ride that system.
And as much as I would love to see everybody on the rail, it just doesn't happen.
And -- and adding more lanes simply I think indicates to people that, oh, we can go buy another car and there's more room.
And so if you look at our highways, you can kind of get the feeling that congestion is a sport.
You know, and the more cars and the more traffic we can create, the more fun we seem to have.
I don't know.
It's just kind of weird.
We haven't been able to to put in, like, for instance, the schedules, work schedules in place.
We've talked about them a long time to have people come in at I have did friend times of the day and leave at different times of the day to alleviate the traffic.
And we haven't been able to do that.
So I mean it's extremely difficult to get people out of their cars.
And especially when they seem to be being built better these days and they are kind of exciting and they have all kinds of little things on them that are enjoyable and people enjoy being in cars.
And so -- and although I would love to see everybody on rail, I think it's going to be a little while before that happens.
And I'm just saying that from experience.
Having looked at the red line trying to get people out of their cars.
But on top of that, though, I think that we do have -- I think the judge said it and I won't belabor the point.
But I think that we have some really, really tough decisions to make at the county.
We've got some high ticket things that we have to get done and because we're obligated to do those things and it's my duty to work on those things.
And lone star rail would be a very nice thing to do, no doubt, except that when it comes to priorities, I have to kind of look at what my duties are.
And so -- and then the other thing is we've been talking about the -- the high cost of living here in Austin.
Lots of families, lots of families are having a real hard time.
And it seems like there are things going on in Austin that are wonderful, but they have the economic system has a real weird way of really doing some wonderful things for a lot of people, but doing some terrible things to another portion of our community and that's our mandate to take care of.
And so I would like to have more information as to what the -- the cost is going to be, the impact on our tax -- on our constituents.
That has to be, that has to be my concern.
And it always has been my concern and I continue to address that because it's my duty to do so.
So maybe we can see later in October or November.

>> Mr. Reeferseed.

>> Yes, sir, I wanted to applaud ms. Gomez on the caution she is expressing and the costs are -- it's key info and that was the first question I wrote down was if you all could please supply some estimate of cost analysis about the actual cost per mile for the citizens as opposed to --

>> Contained in trance it working group public documents that you can go back and look on the project connect website and there is ample financial analysis that goes to transit mile, transit feet.
There is much, much financial analysis in almost I increment you can imagine, mr. Reeferseed.

>> Well, I'm sure you've got some product out there but the --

>> One thing I would like to point out in support of what she has said that's not really clear it sounds like from the dialogue today, this goes on the existing u.p.
Line.
This is not one to be built.

>> It's not cost free.
It's a boondoggle.
It's an incredible, huge -- you all just keep in mind the fact, we don't have the population density --

>> [multiple voices]

>> Mr. Reeferseed.

>> Mr. Reeferseed is allowed to make a statement.
Let him finish.

>> We don't have the population density to justify having trains here.
We're not in new york city, we're not san francisco.
It doesn't make sense that people move out.
We love cars, like you were saying.
That's something that's real basic, and you can't force people out of your cars no matter how much you wish everybody was on the train.
It's not going to happen.
We don't have the money for it.
What I'm saying to the public, please make note, this admittedly premeditated scheming and you all talk about it, like oh, it doesn't matter, we're just -- like we're not hearing you.
But it's like, you are going to have to do this, that and the other to fool the public to go along with this.
It's a boondoggle.
We can't afford it.
And if we could just get a real estimate, not just some -- I'm sure it's already the figure somewhere else, but if we had a real hard data cost analysis of what traveling by a bus, for example, not

>> [inaudible], but flexible, reusable, less pollution caution way, way down on -- just the cost for public transportation buses.
They are flexible.
When a school changes or a factory moves around, we can easily adjust that.
You can't dig up a train system.
It's a huge boondoggle and just a bunch of scams and a bunch of special deals all up and down this thing.
And you say people want it.
To quote you, ms. Eckhardt, and I'm saying no, we don't all want this hog wash.
I mean you say everybody wants this.
Well, it sounds great.
And ms. Huber, you were talking about the secrecy.
Why do we want to keep these things secret.

>> I did not say anything about the secrecy.

>> That's my word, you are right.
Just the way that you kind of were encouraging us to not have all the facts and figures right in a row and we would take it a little bit here and a little bit there.
I don't know, it just seems to -- I'm not a spokesman for him, very unofficial spokesperson for the mayor, but the mayor himself says he is now for delaying this ponzi scheme as I call it.
He didn't call it a ponzi scheme.
That's his idea that the public, they just haven't done a good enough job so far to fool the public yet so they are going to have to put it off and -- until they can figure out they've got the polling data they can fool enough people to yet another boondoggle.
We can't afford -- -- we're not rich taxpayers.
We can't keep funneling untold gazillions out.
You keep saying fiddling with it for years trying to get it lined up, enough people special deals.
It's nothing but bad news for the taxpayer.
That's why I'm here.
I'm trying to say, I'm sorry the open meetings act gets in the way like you were saying.
So people like me can come in and say it's not going to serve our interests.
We've got buses that are more flexible and can better serve the will of the people.

>> Thank you, mr. Reeferseed.
We appreciate your input.

>> People like you can get the information.
So that you or anyone else can get the information.
I would suggest that you go to connect central Texas.com.

>> Connect central Texas.com.

>> Yes.
And click on the transit working group ad.
And at that tab you will see more than -- gosh, there's easily more than 30 documents --

>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]

>> And the information that's been provided and is available nationally on how these systems work.
Contrary to the point of view that we just heard, this -- these systems tend to actually -- our commuter systems, they're not -- with us circulators, they're developed to cut through the congestion and provide an alternative way to get past the congestion that the cities have with the automobile.
And Commissioner Gomez, many of the issues that you raise I think are issues we can address and show you how they work, that the automobile actually creates a problem where property values go up and living expenses go higher and the only way for individuals to cut through that higher property value issue is to have transit systems that really function the way we're talking about, and dedicated right-of-ways that can get through the congestion.
We're answer your questions when we come back in October, try to do a better job and provider a larger context of how the system works and what it does for central Texas in preserving the economic basis.
30% of our business -- our employment is in downtown, and if we don't solve the congestion problem we'll see what's happening to the communities and erosion moving to the suburbs.
That's a battle we lose.
So this is part of the effort to resolve that problem and I think we can demonstrate that to you and explain it to you so you'll be much more comfortable and we will come back with some other entities that we've working with in order to show you the regional support we have for this project.

>> The other thing, joe, that needs to be looked at is the cost.
It's okay to use preexisting rail, but as we found out, when that rail hasn't -- wasn't used for a specific reason, such as carrying more people between cities, that I think there are federal standards that have to be met in terms of the condition of those rails.

>> Absolutely.

>> And so there's a cost to that.

>> Absolutely.
We've looked at that entirely and we're prepared to explain, and we've been doing it jointly with us as capital metro and the city, to make sure we can resolve those issues.

>> The good news is that union pacific runs big heavy trains on that line so they do a very good job of maintaining it because they have to.
So it's probably not in the same condition that the capital metro line was in.
Actually we just finished an inspection trip this past week with up officials, an inspection trim, and up has done a really good job of maintaining their railroad.
But we have capital costs estimates that were delivered from our consultant a few days ago so we'll be able to get that all to you.

>> Okay.
Thanks.

>> Could I just say two tiny things?
One of them is a compliment for you, judge.
I wanted to point out your common sense ideas about a precaution, an overview about it, your attitude about it.

>> I'm in trouble, mr. Reeferseed.

>> [laughter]

>> It may be rare.
But I was a little -- I just wanted to point out that ms. Huber that the parallel process you talk about is not good.
We need to be more wide open and -- so the public can be on top of these facts and figures, because like you're saying, they're huge.
That's all I want to say.

>> Thank you all very much.

>> Thank you.

>> See you soon.

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.