September event info coming soon!

My salary for the last four years is as follows (the amount in parenthesis is what was budgeted):

FY 08 $83,716 ($87,484)

FY 09 $86,646 ($90,109)

FY 10 $86,646 ($90,109)

FY 11 $88,812 ($92,362)

Certainly one can argue, as you do in the August 2 editorial, that county commissioners are paid too much.  As illustrated above, I agree the budgeted salary is too high for me and I therefore take less.  But the basis for your argument contains some factual inaccuracies.  First, you state that the “county commissioners jurisdiction has been slowly eroded by city annexations.”  Actually, the Commissioners Court’s geographic jurisdiction (all of Travis County) and the subject matter jurisdiction (roughly speaking – jails, courts, transportation and social services) remains the same, irrespective of annexation.  Unlike municipal government, county government is an arm of the State and so we must address whatever the State requires of us.  With increased population and urbanization, these duties become more complicated and interrelated.  We welcome participation by municipalities in many of our duties.  But, county government stands alone as the entity to knit together regional efforts to provide consistency of government services and quality of life for all residents, whether living inside or outside the boundaries of our 19 municipalities.

Second, you point out that there are other elected officials in Travis County with substantial responsibility for providing county governmental services.  While it is true the other 43 elected positions within the County are responsible for the direct provision of services, these officials and their organizations are akin to state agencies while the Commissioners Court functions as both the Legislature and Chief Executive of county governance.  The Commissioners Court alone has the authority and responsibility to establish countywide policies, enter into contracts (other elected officials may not bind the county contractually), bring or defend against legal actions on behalf of the county (the DA and CA bring criminal actions on behalf of the state, the CA brings civil actions only at the behest of the Commissioners Court), issue debt and, as you acknowledge, set the county budget and tax rate.  One might also describe us as functioning like a combined City Manager and City Council.

Third, you state we have a county administrator.  While I feel a county administrator position would be a positive development, we do not have any such position.  We have five excellent executive managers who function similarly to assistant city managers with designated areas of expertise and responsibilities.  All five executive managers report to and are supervised by the full Commissioners Court.  These managers have substantial authority, but the Commissioners Court bears ultimate responsibility for their success or failure.  One such failure was the Perez/Smith debacle.  However, I do not have the space to enumerate the myriad successes of our remaining executive managers (preserving jobs, benefits and county services during an economic downturn; defending and restoring Hamilton Pool after it was polluted by developers; facilitating unprecedented collaboration among the 13 emergency services districts; developing cutting edge metrics to evaluate civil and criminal justice programs; managing early childhood intervention, workforce training, emergency assistance programs, and the list goes on).  I concede that we commissioners do indeed stand on the shoulders of giants.

I hope my efforts on the Court as both legislator and executive adequately empower my fellow 43 elected County officials, our talented managers and my colleagues among the municipalities to provide quality governance at a reasonable price for all residents of the County.

-SE

In contrast to other TxDOT and CTRMA toll road projects in or planned for our region, the MoPac Managed Lane will:

• Not be owned in any way by a foreign entity;
• Be in an existing transportation corridor;
• Preserve all of the existing non-tolled capacity;
• Go through existing high population areas;
• Be designed to directly address a high-priority congestion area;
• Include free passage for bus rapid transit and registered vanpools;
• Preserve access to the MoPac rail line for future commuter rail service;
• Include long-awaited sound walls as well as improved sound-absorbent pavement and other amenities that raise the bar on the interface between highway and neighborhoods; and
• Provide free access at reliable travel speeds to public safety vehicles, improving emergency response times through the corridor.

The one characteristic that the MoPac Managed Lane does not possess is a commitment by the CTRMA to lock down any excess revenue generated by the managed lane to the improvement of existing and the implementation of future transit options for its users, such as Lone Star Rail.

While not perfect, this is a major step forward. The MoPac Managed Lane meets the spirit and the letter of the amended CAMPO Toll Road Covenants that I have worked hard to preserve.

The debate over whether or not we will have toll roads has passed. The debate over where, how and for what purpose we will have toll roads is very much alive. Managed lanes that include bus rapid transit and other high occupancy vehicles move more people on less pavement with predictable travel times. This is an improvement over what we currently have on MoPac and it represents a better model than the flat rate, transit-excluding toll road projects we currently have, or are planning, for our region.

For those policy wonks out there interested in reading more about managed lanes, I suggest this page on the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) website:

I also recommend this study commissioned by the FHWA which looks more closely at congestion pricing and managed lanes.

Traffic volume on Gattis School Road doubled between 1997 and 2002 as the area, which straddles the line between northern Travis and southern Williamson counties, grew exponentially.

Travis County Commissioner Sarah Eckhardt and Williamson County Commissioner Ron Morrison cut the ribbon to dedicate the project, even though the roadway was open to traffic earlier this month.

“Not only did we improve traffic flow, we included bike lanes, sidewalks, pedestrian crosswalks, additional traffic signals and better sightlines between the road and the neighborhoods along it,” said Commissioner Eckhardt.  “This project was the happy result of coordinated efforts between citizens, Travis and Williamson counties, the City of Round Rock and CapMetro.  Through these types of collaboration we achieve the highest quality and efficiency in governance.  I am proud to have played a role.”

“I grew up in the area so I remember driving Gattis School Road when it was gravel, you could see more cows than cars,” said Commissioner Morrison.  “It took the cooperation of several entities to bring this project to fruition and I am excited about finally getting four-lane connectivity from IH 35 to l30.  The project will be friendly to all forms of transportation — auto, bicycle and pedestrian.”

The ribbon-cutting was held at the intersection of Gattis School Road and Winterfield Road.

700 Lavaca is well-positioned to become the new county seat.  Strategically located at 7^th and Lavaca, the building’s current vacant space is the largest contiguous block available in the Central Business District.  It re-confirms the county’s intent to keep certain critical county services in the heart of downtown Austin near other seats of government.  It is within walking distance of current county operations, and is co-located in a district occupied by city, state and federal government courts and offices.  It is conveniently located along two public transit corridors served by Capital Metro bus routes, and provides easy access for the public to conduct business with the county and participate in its public meetings.

Travis County initially will be sharing space in the 315,000 square-foot office building.  Approximately one third of the building is occupied by private and public sector tenants.  Those leases and contracts in the adjacent parking garage will remain in place until leases expire, providing cash flow for the county to offset ongoing operational expenses.  County Judge Samuel T. Biscoe called this an example of “just in time occupation of space,” adding, “This will allow the county to further accommodate growth needs in the downtown business and courts operations and will provide phased-in occupation of office space as needed over the next decade and beyond.”

The Commissioners Court last week approved a contract with Sentinal Lavaca Management Corporation to handle property management services, to ensure a seamless transition of ownership and handling of maintenance issues.  County staff will next begin to execute renovation contracts for the building to accommodate public meeting spaces, the relocation of Commissioners Courtroom as well as general office space in anticipation of relocating county offices in early 2011.

Travis County took advantage of still record-low interest rates for long-term financing and its long-held and highest ranked Triple-A bond rating.  The approximate $195 per square foot cost to purchase the office tower for county occupancy is significantly below buying land and current new construction costs in Travis County, especially in the downtown area.

The negotiated final purchase price for the 315,000 square foot building and 675-vehicle parking garage is $61,250,000 plus closing costs and fees.  The seller is Travis Realty Corporation.  UGL Equis Corporation, represented by Keith Zimmerman, was selected through a competitive process as the exclusive broker for Travis County’s downtown central campus.

Travis County is one of the largest public employers in Austin with over 4,700 employees working in the civil, criminal and juvenile justice systems including the county jails, transportation and mobility infrastructure, parks, public safety, EMS and health and human services and general government functions.  It is one of the 5 largest urban counties in Texas, with an estimated population over 1-million.  Many of the mandated services provided by county government systematically have been de-centralized to place services closer to residents being served.  But other core mandated services remain centralized within the downtown Central Business District.  County government structure is spelled out in the Texas Constitution, which makes counties functional agents of the state.

More information about the Travis County Central Campus study is available on the County website at: http://www.co.travis.tx.us/facilities/central_campus_study/default.asp

Media Contacts:

Travis County Judge Samuel T. Biscoe  (512-854-9555)

County Commissioner, Pct 1, Ron Davis (512-854-9111)

County Commissioner, Pct 2, Sarah Eckhardt (512-854-9222)

County Commissioner, Pct 3, Karen L. Huber (512-854-9333)

County Commissioner, Pct 4, Margaret J. Gomez (512-854-9444)