Travis County Commssioners Court
October 8, 2002
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.
Executive Session Items
I believe that gets us down to executive session.
>> 21.
>> do you want to look at 8 now, judge? I know I have some
questions --
>> actually I had planned to call it up in executive session.
We need to ask tom a couple questions. 8 is consider invoices for consulting
services relating to the formation of a regional mobility authority and take
appropriate action. Under the consultation with attorney exception to the
open meetings act, hi a few legal -- I had a few legal questions. 551.071.
Item 23 is to accept, reject or counter owner's offer to sell easement rights
for the perkins/mozelle drainage project. The real property exception to the
open meetings act. 551.072 of the government code and notated. And a 1, receive
-- a 1 on page -- bottom of page 6, discuss certain personnel issues regarding
starflight staff, receive legal advice and take appropriate action. This is
personnel matters and consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings
act. We will discuss these three items in executive session and return to
open court before taking any action. .
>> > we've just returned from executive session are we discussed
the three items that we announced. Imf we do that, let's clarify for the record,
melissa? Is that on number 19 a and b? Just a. We were not approving those
because we approved those back in August. We were simply confirming them.
>> okay. Just for the record. We did discuss item number
8. In my view, no action required today. We'll have it back on the commissioners
court agenda next time. Just in case we are ready for it. And maybe clarify
that language a little bit. 23 involving perkins/mozell drainage --
>> judge, it gives me great pleasure to say they are moving
forward on this one project in precinct 4, and I’m trying to locate it on
my agenda. 23? And I really appreciate staff's efforts in getting this through.
I move we except the offer of $7,150 for property need to do complete that
project.
>> I second that.
>> any more discussion? All in favor?
>> along with a thank-you note.
>> that passes by unanimous vote. A 1, involving certain
starflight staff, I move that we follow staff's recommendation and implement
option 2 of the memo, that we communicate this option to mr. Hanley immediately
and implement it tomorrow morning. That we authorize human resources and appropriate
county personnel to conduct a top-to-bottom safety inspection of appropriate
starlight facilities and report back to the commissioners court hopefully
in 60 days or less or as close thereto as possible. And that these actions
be communicated to appropriate other county personnel.
>> second.
>> judge, I just wanted to clarify so we're sure, did you
want to leave the implementation date a little open so there will be some
room there or did you want to implement it tomorrow morning?
>> tomorrow morning or as soon thereafter as possible or
practicable, as your lawyer would like to see. How is that?
>> do we need some clarification that if there is any other
procedural paperwork that may need to be adjusted that that be appropriately
handled if there is indeed anything that needs to be adjusted? For purposes
of paperwork and recording keep.e" -- record keeping. Is that friendly?
>> that's friendly to me. And everything else necessary to
get this done. Any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous
vote. There being no further business today --
>> move adjourn.
>> second.
>> all in favor? That carries unanimously too. Thank you
all very much.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 2, 2003 10:25 AM