[AusTxDevelopment]

Originally Posted by paul78701

This is all due to politics. They could be developing this site more densly with a public-private partnership. This could be done without a public vote. In fact, from what I've previously read, this is what a consultant recommended. However, the officials in charge are probably afraid that they won't get re-elected if they anger the public with such a decision. There would be a chorus of people decrying the misspending of public money and their taxes be raised.

I have no idea if doing a PPP would involve any extra taxes, but reactionary types aren't exactly known for researching such things before they complain about them. So it's being put it up for a vote. They're pushing responsiblity to the public instead of taking what was recommended and making a decision based on that. Typical politicians playing the re-election game.

You are correct. They said as much in July when they unanimously rejected two consultants reports that recommended doing a public-private partnership.

Austin American-Statesman
Travis County commissioners approve building method for new courthouse
http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news...3381287.735508

Snips:

Travis County commissioners decided Tuesday to take a more familiar route for building a $300 million courthouse downtown, rejecting the advice of judges and consultants who lobbied for a private-financed model that could have been a tough sell to voters.

A $490,000 consultant’s report had outlined other options, including a public-private partnership, called a “P3,” in which the county pairs with a developer that builds and essentially owns the building for 30 years. A separate $50,000 report by consultant URS Corp. recommended that approach, which would transfer much of the risk and up-front expense to a private developer, who would then receive millions of dollars a year in rent from the county.

“We didn’t know any kind of specifics with the P3,” Commissioner Margaret Gómez said. “Design-build is a known. P3 is an unknown.”

Commissioners said it would be difficult to explain the public-private concept to voters.

“That would result in an inability on our part to explain to voters what we’re doing and why,” said County Judge Sam Biscoe, chairman of the commissioners.