Travis County Commssioners Court
October 29, 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.
Item 3
3. Consider options for Travis County to appoint board members to a regional
mobility authority, and take appropriate action. Those who have business with
Travis County, moving along speedily. I guess we will reach the other items
real soon. Including comfortable [inaudible] and our consultants about the
-- about the refunding issues.
>> judge, we did get a back a word from constable vance's
office. They will be here shortly.
>> Friday you should have received the copy of the application,
the draft of the time line. The draft of the qualifications packet and then
-- then Monday, I think, you got the affidavit, a copy of an affidavit. You
see that the time line is very aggressive, based on the conversation that
we received from you all earlier. It overlaps thanksgiving and -- but hopefully
you will have appointments somewhere right in the middle of December. What
I need now is your comments, corrections. Have you read the packet? We have
added all of the requirements, all of the inhe will jibilitys that we have
-- ineligibilities that we have before. It allows the individual to state
yea or nay as far as the truth in what they require, what the [inaudible]
are required.
>> I have a couple of questions. They are not numbered. So
I'm on page 2.
>> I'm sorry.
>> just a couple of questions, reca, real estate council
of Austin, we are very happy that their representative is here with us today.
I was wondering if that was just a start list of who it is that we would be
--
>> just a start list. I picked that up from the last meeting,
three or four meetings ago. I tried write as fast as possible. If you want
to add --
>> the one that's come to my mind, when we say greater Austin
chamber of commerce, we also include all of the other area chambers in terms
of the capital chambers, hispanic chambers, to be all includive in our chambers,
then related to the city of Austin I think we also had an intent to send a
letter to all of the cities within Travis County to make them aware of what
was going on about this process as well. My other question next was really
having to do with -- with the time lines because a lot of this is dependent
on when we get -- if and when we get a minute order. I'm not sure if anyone
has an update as to whether we anticipate action by the transportation commission
this Thursday. Is it reasonable to think that this court would act the following
Tuesday? I think not. In terms of -- of us signing off on the minute order.
I'm just wondering out loud here related to -- to -- because if we don't even
get their minute order signed Thursday --
>> remember, what we talked about last week was advertising
and disseminating information before we even have the minute order, but not
accepting applications until we have the minute order. So -- so --
>> so that was --
>> this Thursday -- I'm sorry.
>> 31st.
>> 31st. So, yes, I would not think that we would act on
-- on November 5th.
>> I think that would be --
>> going to be busy that day. Perhaps -- [multiple voices]
by the 12th. It seems like we needed an interim step there that basically
talks about the acceptance, the anticipated acceptance of the minute order
from the transportation commission, officially open the mailbox over in judge
bus on psycho's -- over in the judge's office from whatever that is, that
we are accepting official nominations from folks. Then my question is if we
don't act until the 12th, three days is not really very much in terms of an
official time period for people to -- to get an application in. Move applications
to the -- to the 22nd.
>> 8 is a more reasonable time frame.
>> this is a Friday. That was my thought is that the applications
would be due into judge Biscoe by the 22nd. But we still do not need to --
to really lose much time here. Thits probably one of the most important --
this is probably of the most important things that this court will do is to
name these five individuals on here. My thought in terms of how do we get
to a short list is that I don't know how many -- how many of these we are
going to get in. But quite frankly, I think all five of us should take that
packet along with t.n.r. And each of us come up with -- with a couple of names
that we would like to be included in there. If each of us does two, there's
a short list of 10 people that we then call in for interviews.
>> maybe the same.
>> that's what I was thinking, if you find out that somebody
has already got candidate x in there, well, then get somebody else into the
pot so we have 10 names to choose from. But I think all of us ought to be
involved in reviewing and scoring the applications and producing the short
list. All of us be involved in the interview of whoever is on -- on the short
list.
>> reviews for application forks the short list, 10 people,
two from each member of the court, t.n.r. And the court.
>> well, we have a short week the next week because it's
--
>> thanksgiving.
>> thanksgiving thing. If we -- if everybody gets everything
back by Monday, December 2nd --
>> I guess --
>> we are going to have to do that.
>> I'm sorry.
>> I think we are going to have to do our short list faster
than December 2nd. Because it's going to be hard to set up --
>> I mean I will make the chiment to have it done by Wednesday
the 27th.
>> I will, too. Because that's -- that's five days.
>> I want to make sure, do we have a qualifications list
as far as what we are looking at as far as the board member, r.m.a. Board
member being able to meet certain qualifications, qualification needs. Give
an example of some of the things on -- we put together, commissioner Moore
and commissioner Sonleitner has worked hard to bring the court a list of --
of components within the arena of certain skills and qualifications, whereby
a person -- several on this board. I think they should know up front what
-- what we are expecting from them. I think that you can weed in and weed
out a more -- more appropriately the type of person that you would like to
have to -- that we would like to interview with that particular -- particular
qualifications enlisted as far as this particular job description and what
we expect from those persons. We also had an opportunity to -- commissioner
Moore and commissioner Sonleitner and myself to -- to attend I think a very
important meeting, down in san antonio. About the authority, the does and
don'ts aspects. There are a lot of does and don'ts that I think we need to
continue to -- to look at in order for this project to be successful. And
-- and the board members are at the beginning steps of -- of this process.
All of us are going to need to look very closely at the skills and also proponents
within these job description, what we expect, financial background, a whole
bunch of things. What we expect the board persons to actually have and what
I did hear, though, you have to really weed things out, whether you have a
real good, good board and also an executive director of the board, just [inaudible]
water worker [inaudible], wearing many hats, we are talking about the cream
of the crop. In order for -- for them to avoid pitfalls that maybe other toll
authorities had experienced. Weed in, weed out process, cream of the crop
for the r.m.a. Board members to be those persons that we feel would be --
we be a vital asset to the transportation criteria -- congestion relief for
this central Texas area. So I feel pretty comfortable as far as some of these
-- these time lines are concerned. However, the bottom line is that -- is
that if we even takes maybe an extra week in this thing, I don't want to close
an opportunity -- a person that we may want to have on there, may not have
an opportunity to be there because of whatever reason. Because if we have
good persons out there, we want to make sure we include them in the process,
get them on board if they are willing to do it. I think that we are headed
in the right direction. Again as far as the media, involvement, state like
that, how do we do that -- can you explain that media concept as far as getting
the word out and stuff of that nature?
>> what I had envisioned, commissioner, was to -- to fax
the information out to everyone in addition to mailouts based on the packet
that you have. Assuming that you all approve the packet that you have received.
Which lests the qualification, the job application, and affidavit. And that's
what I had envisioned. In addition to the -- to these people and then the
few that commissioner Sonleitner gave me this morning, which is the additional
area chamber of commerce as well as the other cities within the area.
>> oakie doke. I wanted to know if we advertised properly
--
>> what I don't have is a date when to start that. Right
now it said the 30th, I guess we will figure out -- do I have to wait until
you get the minute order to send these packets out or send them out as soon
as -- [multiple voices] [multiple voices] we need to let folks know in the
community that we are interested in appointing a board member to the r.m.a.
I think -- you know, it's a situation where I think we need to move pretty
fast as far as getting persons that we feel are interested in this to apply.
So I -- I wouldn't have any objection for it getting out as soon as possible.
>> the one thing I guess what we can't add in is the specific
date that applications begin to be received because that -- that will probably
be the same day that we accept the manuscript order.
>> likely the 12th.
>> the minute order.
>> likely the 12th.
>> I suppose we could put 11, 12th.
>> court anticipates acting on minutes order and opening
applications.
>> right. Beginning to accept.
>> okay, 11, 12 versus 12 --
>> right here you have 11-12 develop interview questions.
I think that you could add as a task to that date, anticipating the adoption
of minute order of the court, begin accepting applications. I will put it
in the backup, as might have seen, deadline for applications, what I will
change that to read is acceptance of applications begin 11-12 and end 11-22.
>> or whoever, when the minute order is adopted.
>> okay.
>> > now, I will just finish. My suggestion would be then
that the 11-15 number slip to 11-22.
>> right, I have that.
>> that the 11-18 be changed to 11-27. And that the -- where
you have t.n.r. Staff and subcommittee of that task change it to commissioners
court. I further would suggest that 11-20 be changed to 11-27. I think that
you could set up interviews any time after we have short listed with you.
Then on the last task, instead of take recommendations of subcommittee, I
would put consideration of appointments by the full court.
>> uh-huh.
>> I have another thought about how we could do this in terms
of how do we get and score these applications and get down to a short list.
And it could be that we handle it the same way that you do when you are scoring
an r.f.p. When you have the individual folks, individual perspectives from
purchasing, from t.n.r., Blah blah blah. Is it -- is that each of us takes
our packet, we score these applications working on our own, score the applications,
then we turn in our work product to joe and his staff for them to add up and
rank what this individual work product is and to invite the top eight scoring
folks in for consideration for the five -- I'm sorry, we are down to three,
aren't we? I had to rethink that, I apologize. I would go with the top five
or do we want to go to six? Six to get it down to three?
>> I think -- [multiple voices]
>> five or six, I mean -- [multiple voices] to get down to
three. I'm sorry, you all, I was thinking five there for a moment is what
we had to do. Which would make it easy, one for each. We score, hand off to
t.n.r. To do all of the official scoring and the top five or six would be
invited in for short list personal interview was the full court. And it seems
to me that the staff work with the full court to -- to work on the interview
questions, which I think are going to be pretty easy to -- to help, we will
look to t.n.r. To help us with that.
>> we have so much trouble coming up with questions. [ laughter
]
>> oh, yeah.
>> we have lots of questions.
>> > so that assumes that the interviews would be conducted
between -- between November 27th and December 10th?
>> well, let's be realistic. It's not going to happen on
Thursday, Friday thanksgiving. So the reality is that the interviews will
occur between Monday December 2nd, and --
>> I'm just -- the task was to set up the interviews, I figure
the interviewed themselves would take place later than that.
>> uh-huh.
>> because the other -- the other thing that has to be fact
tored in is a trip to new york city. Factored in is a trip to new york city.
Because of the economy, lad believes that we really ought to physically appear
before the bond rating firms and explain this year. Last year we thought we
didn't have to do that and we didn't.
>> well, it was also post 9-11, there wasn't any travel up
to new york last year.
>> typically, that's around 13, 14, 15th, right? [inaudible]
>> the flights out are on Wednesday, the 11th and the actual
physical meetings are on Thursday the 12th and Friday the 13th of December.
>> of December.
>> so we probably want to try to get this done the 10th of
December.
>> if you could get it done before we leave if we can.
>> talk about that up in new york, that's correct.
>> well, you have got some time in there to work with.
>> I guess --
>> seven months.
>> basically between the 2nd and the 10th --
>> do you all expect the to have the interviews here in court
as a full body, how do you plan to --
>> do we want to set aside a time on December 3rd, judge,
that's a Tuesday. We don't have to then -- then wrangle with everybody's schedules
because we are already here on Tuesday the 3rd. [one moment please for change
in captioners]
>> I guess the changes to the particular document, it would
be good if we could get that delivered to us as soon as possible so we could
at least start working our schedules around what we're doing here this morning.
>> i'll correct it this afternoon.
>> right. And get that back to us. And only one other question
that I may want to pose, and that's not to say that the applicants really
have to know up front about some things, but we've basically got three plans
that we're looking at as far as transportation. One is the campo plan itself.
And then you have two Texas state plans. And since the campo plan probably
will get some of the attention -- and I understand that there are a couple
of projects that are already in here, in the rma project, 183-a and also sh
45 southeast, but there are still things I think within the campo plan itself
that members on the board should be exposed to so we can look at the overall
renal national -- regional approach to some of our transportation congestion
problems shared by this region. I think it would be kind of important for
the board members in some stage of this process to get very involved with
the campo plan. So it's not in here as such, but I just think to alert those
folks that that probably is something that he really need to get some kind
of summary.
>> I think you raise an excellent point. I think we should
be preparing an information packet for each applicant that contains the petition
--
>> briefing materials. Good suggestion.
>> what's that other plan, Texas -- what is it, Texas --
>> well, there's the state transportation plan.
>> and then something else.
>> in terms of what rma projects, according to txdot rules,
have to be stint with the campo plan and the state transportation plan.
>> so it would be important if we could let them know that
kind of stuff.
>> and you want them to get this before they apply?
>> no, when they apply they would get a packet of backup
that would help them --
>> with their briefing and knowing that this is a job they
really want. [ laughter ]
>> yeah, yeah.
>> so we want to put aside that third in the afternoon 1:00
to 5:00 o'clock for interviews and then on the -- [everyone talking at once].
>> I think that would be good.
>> if we don't need it, then we don't need it. But if we
do, it's already out there.
>> make sure we get the backup. I will look at my schedule
and I don't think mo one else knows their schedule that far in advance. We
can see if we can work -- the details of these deadlines and time lines consistent
with our ongoing schedule.
>> when do you expect the applications to be filed?
>> at your office. [ laughter ]
>> where do we expect the applications to be picked up, my
office too? The application packet and the information packet?
>> I can get that there.
>> I think it's a lot easier to find.
>> so when do we expect the packet of information to be available?
>> well, you're anticipating -- before November 12th.
>> November the 12th. So as soon as we can get all this stuff
copied and assuming you're in agreement with all the packet information, I
will make as many copies as the mailroom can make.
>> well, I commend you for work well done here.
>> and I only had one other -- more of a technical question
about the application, because I think it's in a very good format, but is
somebody going to have to fill this out by hand or will they be able to electronically
fill this in?
>> I was wondering --
>> can we work with its about fet g.t.e.king this form turned
into an electronic form because it neighbors maikz no sense that somebody
would have to fill this in by hand. I would think that most of the people
that would be interested in this would want to do it electronically.
>> yes, and then it's in a word document and it needs to
be reformatted -- rather than having little blocks, it needs to be formatted
so somebody can be filled out as a word document and cut and pasted.
>> we actually took it off the net. [ laughter ]
>> but we need it in electronic form.
>> yes.
>> and then the other thing is e-mail addresses like this
big and cell phone number is this big. Usually you need more space for the
e-mail address.
>> you're so picky.
>> I know. I hear from them people that do have cell phones.
>> also, there was the supplemental backup with the affidavit
and I think that's an important addition.
>> it is. It really is.
>> it's consistent with what the governor had attached to
theirs.
>> in addition to the application.
>> can we visit about how we get it so that -- no one has
a typewriter any more. We have to figure out how to do this so that people
can turn this in.
>> i'll stop over here and at joe's and see if he can assign
someone to help us out over here.
>> they did a great job with the online reupping on all of
our insurance. That was all done with prompters and it just made it very easy
for people to fill in the blanks. So I'm sure joe could help.
>> we're still planning for the -- to commence tomorrow?
October 30th?
>> right.
>> which means it's going to be a few -- maybe a little bit
late to get the information from joe up on the internet or however so that
they can pull it down and fill it in. We'll have hard copies in your office
and then we'll work on how to get the electronic copies.
>> get it on the website.
>> yes.
>> we have a number of people -- there have been some people
who have approached me and said how do we apply, so at least we'll be able
to give them the information.
>> joe had a suggestion. We could say contract tnr because
it's already in adobe format and we could just e-mail it then to them and
then they can fill in the blanks.
>> so send the application to tnr?
>> no. What I'm saying is for an electronic copy, we put
in the packet, for an electronic copy of the application, contact tnr and
then we will e-mail it to them and then they can fill in the blank and that
way they don't have to go through going to the web or anything like that because
it's already an electronic copy.
>> fill in the blank and e-mail it to me or to tnr?
>> e-mail it back to you.
>> okay. Because you're the accepter of the applications.
>> you're like the purchasing agent. [ laughter ]
>> you're the official.
>> you can add that to --
>> I'm going to add it that to the packet. That way I don't
have to --
>> just one electronic, go to tnr, they will send it, but
the actual response will go to judge Biscoe, just like the hard copy ones:
it all goes to judge Biscoe.
>> I'm only talking about the plirks. Because the affidavit
they have to sign, have to have a signature.
>> judge, I would like to move approval with all the indicated
changes that was made here by the individual court members, and we respond
accordingly to these particular changes that were suggested this morning and
that we move forward as quickly as possible with those time lines and other
modifications that we're reflected here during the discussions this morning
on this particular item.
>> i'll second that. And just as a discussion item, Williamson
county, I think, according to mr. Weaver, was interested in our final packet
so that they could enter it in their procedures.
>> when will they have this placed on their agenda for Williamson
county? Do you know?
>> I really don't know. I think what they want to do is do
it as close to our procedure as possible, so I guess they'll do it next week.
>> we might want to share with them quickly through mr. Weaver
the time line that we're looking at so they can narrow it. Because I think
they're thinking if we can come up with a process that works for Travis County,
it works just fine for Williamson in terms of time line and criteria, form,
substance, etcetera.
>> can I suggest one more change?
>> yes.
>> to close the loop between the affidavit, we just add in
the application packet, where it says the following individuals are ineligible
to serve as a board member in y'all's packet, can you just reflect that and
tell them they've got to sign the affidavit that's included?
>> altogether or just add --
>> I think you ought to replace this and tell them there's
an affidavit included, you're required to sign it. Otherwise it's just in
the packet and conceivably someone won't know what to do with it. Tell them
in the packet out right, the affidavit is there, it sets out all the qualifications,
you've got to sign it.
>> i'll accept that as part of the motion.
>> I think that's a good suggestion.
>> so the motion includes the changes that we discussed.
If you were to summarize them, it would be that a packet of information shall
be prepared before November 12th, the date that we plan to start accepting
applications. Applications are due to the judge's office by close of business
and that date is changed to November 22nd. The next day the review of applications
is changed to November 27th. Set up interviews with the short list of candidates
November 27th. And now we plan to conduct the -- the commissioner's court
will conduct interviews of the short list of individuals, five or six, right
now on December third in the afternoon, with a backup date of that Thursday,
December fifth, if needed.
>> yes, sir.
>> the other change was to clarify that the affidavit must
be signed.
>> must be signed. And failure to sign the affidavit will
result in disqualification?
>> result in a telephone call back saying you've got to sign
the affidavit. [ laughter ]
>> and for melissa, tom does have a backup memo dated November
28 its, which is a supplemental of this one, which is a much more detailed
affidavit.
>> any more discussion of the motion? All in favor? That
passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank y'all very, very much.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 2, 2003 10:25 AM