Travis County Commssioners Court
January 21, 2003
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 6
Number 6 is to discuss commissioners court interaction with and recommendations to Travis County members of the regional mobility authority board appeared take appropriate k.
>> show mr. Davis on that last vote, the last item.
>> carol?
>> on item 6 you've received a draft memo to be written giving general guidance to the three board members that you appointed a few weeks ago, and it basically spells out five issues that they should be alerted to. And I'm not sure how much of this you would like me to go into and how much of it --
>> I think you need to walk us through the five points. I would appreciate that, a quick walk.
>> okay. [ laughter ]
>> it basically says that we expect them to operate open government, to hold open forums and to recognize that they are representatives of Travis County and therefore they should conduct themselves accordingly. To have the judiciary responsibility and to recognize that they are going to be managing major dollars associated with Travis County as well as Williamson county and to make sure they pay attention to -- that they will be receiving limited operating funds to cover the county's share of overhead costs. And we require them to at least adopt the principles of Travis County purchasing, policy and procedures are and that will at least ensure fiduciary responsibility in terms of their management of those funds to operate with good management practices that are a standard and we expect that they should enforce those through the staff that they hire hopefully in the very near future. And also to -- that the projects are -- that are feasible are market driven. Make sure that they support projects that will be feasible in terms of total revenues and not just go out and do a project that's not necessarily going to bring in the revenues. And, of course, to have a code of ethics and to operate with the highest standards that's possible.
>> I think that covered it.
>> carol, when will this letter be distributed to the newly appointed rma board members?
>> this is on you. If you approve it as is, change it, we'll make whatever necessary changes, and we will put whatever signatory that you would prefer. All five of your signatures whatever. So hopefully soon.
>> well, I just wanted to make sure that there's a lot of things that have been discussed, and most of them have been captured within this particular documentation. And I want to be sure that the persons here receive in an appropriate manner. There's a lot going on and it's supposed to be a very fast downhill motion on this as far as the rma board members, as far as their activity in which they'll be involved. So I'm looking at the teaming mechanism based on what the legislature is doing and this particular letter here. And there are other things that we have -- this is in memo format, what I'm looking at here. And I really didn't see any problems with this. I don't know -- I'm trying to share information as soon as I receive it to the court members and the things that have been coming down from Williamson county. And I really didn't see a problem with what I'm looking at here now. And I don't know if there's any other court members that see anything that we may not have been able to capture within this particular language that may be something that we need to highlight. And it may be one thing that we may need to include, and that is maybe send up some type of schedule, maybe a work session of some sort with the rma board members in the future. I think we need to meet and kind of be closely knitted through this process. So that wasn't addressed here. I just think maybe there need to be a work session or something to discuss things that we think are important as far as what they'll be doing and working with the relationship with Travis County. So I didn't see that addressed in here and I don't know if the court would want to go in that direction as far as a work session is concerned. But I didn't see that direction here and I thought it would be something that would be very necessary. There may not be a need for it later on after everybody gets their feet wet.
>> I do have a couple.
>> okay.
>> it wouldn't be a memo without my he had edits. On item number 2 on page 1, we encourage you to adopt the principles of the policies and procedures. It seems like we ought to say as you expend these Travis County funds because I suspect that Williamson county is also going to have a contribution, and I don't know if there's a difference between their purchasing policies and procedures versus ours, but I think a lot bit of clarity there would be helpful.
>> what are you adding there?
>> I'm saying Travis County funds to make it very clear it's our funds.
>> this is a quasi state agency. Legally why wouldn't they be forced to follow the state purchasing act rather than Travis County's purchasing? There's a little difference there because we augmented the law with Travis County policies that we think -- [ inaudible ] I think they would be duty bound to follow state purchasing guidelines.
>> under the statute, I can't remember, they may be required to follow the county purchasing act. There's a reference --
>> which county?
>> the state statute that counties have to operate under when they purchase.
>> so why don't we say that that way the name of the county doesn't matter, but I'm thinking that when the executive director comes in, it would seem to me that he would be duly bound to follow state died lines more than Williamson county, Travis County or both.
>> I think the one big difference is our ethics policies, the disclosure related to bids, etcetera. We have what's called the key persons' list and I'm not sure -- I'm reasonable sure that goes above and beyond what is required in terms of what we decide to put on the key purchasing --
>> language like we encourage the board to consider --
>> adoption of?
>> adoption of guidelines beyond the purchasing act, such as --
>> such as. Really what's important is that they have very clearly defined rules and procedures. And there ought to be whatever they think it ought to be, but we ought to know about that stuff ahead of time.
>> the key person's list is a very big deal.
>> that's a suggestion. On item number 4, which is on page #-, it says supported by user toll revenues and not public tax dollars. I think the specificity there ought to be, and not local property tax dollars, because it is quite possible that the state of Texas may be asked to use tax dollars from a variety of sources to be a contributor on this, and that is -- that's a good thing and not something that we would discourage. So I think local property tax dollars is a better specificity.
>> okay.
>> in the first line why wouldn't we add, to a commitment to serve as Travis County representatives on the board of directors? Board of directors of the rma. Are y'all getting all that? I'm not writing fast enough.
>> the other thing is on I don't know whether we want to put it in or not, but we don't seem to say anything related to the interaction with the court. It's obvious, but the court speaks as a whole. If we're giving specific instructions, it is the five of us, but I don't know if there's anything necessary that says y'all are the representatives of this court, the five of us or the majority when we're asked to give a specific opinion about it. It's not any one person, it is the five members of the commissioners court.
>> that's what I was alluding to when I brought up that as far as the work session is concerned, what our relationship is going to be.
>> they were hired by the court.
>> that needs to be specified somewhere in here.
>> and then lacking that, there just needs to be a little closing paragraph, even if it's just a thank you again for your service I don't know. Is there any kind of a staff person or contact with the county that did you have any further questions, please -- we've got to give them some kind of a contact person if they've got any other questions related to this that they could contact, other our offices or somebody over in tnr as the point person.
>> and let me ask this. There was a letter from judge dur fliewr. Have we had any response to that letter? Has any response come from that yet?
>> no.
>> but the letter has been sent off?
>> no, it's sent off today because of the holiday.
>> okay.
>> put this together, carol.
>> I think that it's just nice that we could put dowp a page and a half of four or five things that we want to make sure that we get done, but rma language is pretty specific. I mean, with what we're going to get hand down to us with regards to how to comply with the whole -- you know, it fright enz me a little bit. I mean, I don't know everything I feel like that we need to know about the rma. I don't know that -- do we have the governor's appointment yet. Do we know who that person is?
>> it's supposed to be in a board meeting later this month.
>> because I thought we were under sort of a magnifying glass when we had to do ours so quickly from the governor's office telling us to get behind this thing. So I look forward to you looking -- once all the board members are there, I would like to think that we would have some sort of input on the executive director because the executive director is going to be emen'sly important -- immensely important in this rma setup. I guess you all are going to give us one of these war and piece kind of documents here pretty soon, so if the rma deal is here, as a matter of fact, in the next day and a half, let us know what you think about it.
>> you've got the briefing? Not quite war peace.
>> I did get that. [ laughter ]
>> this organization has been formed. It takes on a life of its own with or without any guidance from this court. I don't think the board expects to come back on their hiring of an executive director to get approval by the commissioners court unless you tell them that's your expectation at this point. This was intended to fill out how much guidance, how much string you want to create on this board and how much independence, because I think lack of direction they will be quite independent.
>> joe, I realize that representative krusee has had a whole lot to do with this rma and i've always found it a little interesting that everything that I seem to get always comes from Williamson county and always seems to come from mike weaver. And it's kind of like, okay, we've done this thing, we're going to send this stuff to you. And I guess what I'm saying is will we ever have a time to really sit down as Travis County since we've appointed three of them, and -- at least a number of these projects are going to be within Travis County. I guess that's my point. I mean, I can read all the backup information and the legislation and everything and get as comfortable as I can get with it, but at some point in time I would like to think that we honestly have as much say-so about what's going on with the rma. And maybe I'm just out of the loop. Maybe I get this stuff whenever it -- whenever it finally trickles in. And commissioner Davis is real good about getting me in there and making sure I know the things. But it just sort of makes me uncomfortable and a little nervous. It's almost like that this is a Williamson county rma, and we're just sort of participating because we're probably going to have some of these things done in Travis County. So not being overly edge ji about that, but I would be remiss in not saying that I do find it a little odd that it seems like that we're not on the starting edge of things, passing things the other way as well. And maybe that's -- maybe that just hasn't been set up that way because of representative krusee being the real energy behind this thing or the initial initiation of it. I'll wait because I'm sure y'all bring it to our attention when we need.
>> [everyone talking at once]
>> you do raise a valid concern, and judge, you and I have talked about this, about whether we need to put language in here that says, while the first project is the 183-a within Williamson county, it is the expectation of Travis County that project number 2 is going to be a Travis County project, be it 45 southeast or some other project that is a campo approved master plan 2025.
>> there was a letter that was sent to txdot, I think, with some of that same language that commissioner Sonleitner brought up as far as prioritizing and making sure that Travis County projects are given the same merit. Using 45 southeast as an example. I don't think there would be anything wrong with repeating that same language that went to txdot, I guess mike burns, that should have continued that effort. And I guess, also, joe, in addition to this, I think this thing is growing as we go. This document. I think it's real important that the commissioners court, the Travis County commissioners court be involved with the -- in looking at who we deem should be selected for the executive director because I think that that is the hub and nuts and bolts of the operation. That person really has to on owe according to other sources and everything else, work of the authorities and you really have to be on top of everything and have the wherewithal to make things happen. So I think it's critically important that we get the right person in there. I think we do have a very vital role to play in that to make sure that these persons are -- need to be taken under consideration or considered. So that may need to be part of this also although it does mention executive director although it doesn't go into the role of what Travis County is going to be playing in this, the commissioners court.
>> but the way I read the memo, it's a recommendation of certain management practices, but it also gives me the feeling, though, that we don't have anything to do with that. That we created it and now they're going to deal with the issue. But that also tells me that they're not going to be coming back to us for additional money in order to hire staff, correct?
>> that's not correct.
>> so we'll be coming back for more money?
>> the court authorized $250,000 to match the $250,000 from Williamson county for a total of 500,000. Part of that has been spent in the creation of the rma. I have not received any invoices to date, so we can't tell you what remains of that 500,000, but it would be the idea that any money left over would be provided to the rma for overhead cost. I do not think that that will be sufficient to cover the overhead cost during the start-up phase of the rma. To remind you, txdot will not pay for the overhead cost to -- [ inaudible ] so if it takes two years to get the rma up for the issue of bonds, someone has to pay for the operation overhead for that two-year period. I can't tell you that what's left right now of our quarter of a million will be sufficient to pay for our fair share. So in fact we may end up having to appropriate additional money to operate the rma.
>> and that means additional money from the partners, which is Williamson county and Travis County.
>> right.
>> and if that's so -- that's good to know that we're going to have to include in our budget process this year or at least for two years, but that also tells me that then we have an interest in the money that we're investing in the rma and that we need to make sure that they know that we want to protect investments that we make so that --
>> that's exactly what this memo is about. Do you want to advise the board, do you want to condition the use of county money? That's what this is supposed to signal, how much role do you want in the affairs of the rma?
>> I think that as long as we're investing money, we understood to protect our fiduciary responsibilities.
>> I think there's a difference between protecting our fiduciary responsibilities and micromanaging.
>> I don't want to micromanage, but I think I want a tax fiduciary responsibility.
>> I'm with you there, but these folks were hired by us to make those kinds of decisions. So me they hawt to be making the decisions about the executive director. They can ask me my opinion about what do you think about this particular person or whatever, I'm happy to give them my opinion --
>> but I don't want to just hand over county money and say, you know, do as you please.
>> no. And I think there's a difference -- again, there's the fine line between what is your fiduciary responsibility and to micromanage and tell them how to do their business. And I thought the rma -- [everyone talking at once]
>> I don't want to micromanage.
>> let me ask you this question. The toll road -- the state toll road is like $7 million I think is being applied for it now. I think in this memo there needs to be maybe an indication that the money that's there, the $7 million, should be given to the county instead of to the rma directly? I think that needs to be put in there.
>> are you talking about the $10 million --
>> the $10 million that I think it was 7 million.
>> I don't think you could say that one way or the other.
>> it seems to me that we ought to have a paragraph that really says -- that really addresses the $250,000, less what we owe right now. Tell them what the balance is. That our understanding is that that amount would be contributed to meet the administrative costs of the rma, along with the Williamson county contribution. And we ought to it kate that we have applied for monies from the tta to cover administrative costs, but as of to date we have not heard from them, but that we would expect them to keep us posted on how that money is spent. So the focus would be basically on how they spend our money and alerting us a the need of other money in the future. I think that would be appropriate, as well as advising them that we have made the application. We don't know the status of that or whether we'll get it or not. But certainly we have applied for it. I have three more issues I would like to mention. Do we want to meet with them before the meeting with the Williamson county consultant? That meeting is the 28th, right.
>> 29th.
>> which is next Wednesday. Do we wanted to get a meeting with the Travis County rma representatives?
>> do you think that they met independently without the serchth board member.
>> I think the first meeting is the 29th.
>> so they haven't even collectively gotten together the sixth of them.
>> I agreed that we would meet with them. I don't know that we said when. Wasn't that the implication when we told them that during interviews. In my view it wouldn't hurt to have an hour meeting with them.
>> when do you suggest that meeting, judge in.
>> I would suggest late Monday. That would give them notice if we can do it early Monday or late.
>> this coming Monday?
>> do we have to post it? I think we need to reach the three of them by telephone and ascertain whether, say, 9:00 o'clock on Monday is convenient or four. I would do it early in the day or later, thinking if they could start the day or end the day with like an hour meeting with the whole court, it would be good. Monday may be the earliest in order for us to find out whether they're available. Let's just think about that.
>> is another possibility to meet -- since the meeting is next Wednesday at 9:00 o'clock, is it too outrageous to think that we could meet with them the hour before that meeting since they're already going to be there anyway?
>> I can't imagine that they're going to have anything to say to us if they haven't met collectively other than saying we're looking forward to the meeting like y'all are.
>> I think some people may have some questions, though.
>> [everyone talking at once].
>> when we call them, let's ask them.
>> I'm trying to think of something that's easy. If we are, we will have to meet in a certain place, certain, at 9:00 o'clock on the 29th. 45 minutes before that. And then they just move on --
>> there's something we need to tell them whether they have questions or not. It seems to me. The second letter to Williamson county addressing the Travis County expectation, as to the order of projects, I think we ought to get both of those letters on our three representatives. The other thing is I think somewhere in there we need to say that because Travis County has to comply with the Texas open meetings act, it can become difficult to communicate with the court; therefore, we request that efforts to communicate with the court be directed through the transportation and natural resources department. Appropriate language of that nature. If with he do that letter, rather than getting it to us, they could send it to tnr. If they say make it available to court, we need this agenda item, and if they're talking about budget stuff, it's easier for them to contact one person whose familiar with our procedures and processes to get it done. I think that will happen. Those are the four things i've got.
>> judge? A couple of things that i'd like to make sure we get straight, number one, I wasn't talking about micromanaging them, but -- and you're right, I think the fact that we're going to have a meeting with them is that we've got some things to say to them about we hope that this happens that y'all are thinking about this. The other thing that I want is I would love to have a compilation of what has been spent out of the $500,000, who that has been paid to. I'd just like to see an accounting of the $500,000 to date.
>> [everyone talking at once]
>> that request has been made, but I don't know what has been paid.
>> but i'd like to see the bills.
>> [everyone talking at once]
>> we have the first two that you got, one for the lawyer and one for mike weaver. Those were the first two. Those are the ones you're referring to. [everyone talking at once]
>> we haven't received anything since those two, and those were never clarified.
>> it's not right that we have our $250,000 --
>> we haven't paid anything.
>> [ laughter ] [everyonetalking at once]
>> what are the invoices that we are owed?
>> and we have not received any invoices since before the rma was formed, which is the first two tom brought to you. And we haven't received any since then.
>> we know the work has been done and there's the expectation that somebody --
>> that's right. And that's the one letter that's going on today.
>> now, the good thing about that is that it seems to me that when it board is up and running, then the invoices for whatever services are provided to the board go to the board. And they should be paid for administrative costs. So we got out of the loop on that hopefully. We ought to be out of the loop, right? Because there would be no reason for us to do it when the board is duly constituted hopefully with an executive director or chair and functioning as anticipated.
>> I think we're going to need a separate contract with the rma board to be able to transfer our fund renewal funds to the board.
>> shouldn't we indicate that in this letter to them?
>> it's in here. In item 2, we'll contract with the ctrma to provide the limited operating funds.
>> I will also need for purposes of the interlocal with Travis County and capital metro for them to notify us when they have completely expended that $250,000 because I have to send a separate letter to cap metro saying we have duly spent down those monies that you have authorized for that specific purpose and I need to close out that account and donna williams will kill us if we don't close it out. I do need to have clarity on that so we can close out that specific interlocal.
>> do we think we have enough to say to the board to justify a meeting?
>> yes.
>> even if the board has no@@ questions. On some of this I really think in addition to delivering the letter, it's probably a little better to kind of sit there and cover the same points. We're asking for substantial commitment from them, and we did promise to kind of sit and chat with them.
>> I think Karen's idea of the hour before, maybe -- I think that would be great. You can get them real fresh and you can go right into the meeting.
>> it's already a posted meeting.
>> their meeting is in Round Rock, so you've got to provide --
>> Round Rock is just a barely over the Travis County line, just two minutes past the Travis County line.
>> I'm just saying it will take 30 minutes.
>> actually, it is, 25. [ laughter ]
>> not kennedy ridge.
>> north ridge acres. Swing on by. [ laughter ]
>> [everyone talking at once].
>> I wouldn't make the meeting too formal. If we meet with them and we've got 30 minutes, what's the purpose? And i'd just send a congratulatory letter or of appreciation, and I think if we have a meeting, set aside an hour with the understanding that if they got two hours' worth of questions, we will sit there two hours and try to answer them.
>> how about Monday afternoon?
>> I will do it Monday morning or Monday afternoon, whichever.
>> Monday afternoon sound good.
>> you never know where the meeting will go.
>> Monday morning, I have to be at a state highway workshop in Pflugerville.
>> 9:00 o'clock Monday morning?
>> the appropriate language, the suggested changes, mofications to this particular memo, I guess -- i'd like to move approval of this particular letter; however I would like to convey those changes and when can we basically get this back with those changes? Can we work over the lurchl and bring it bab to us? What's your time line look like, joe?
>> whatever you want it to be.
>> we could work over lunch.
>> it if you want it this afternoon I can get it back this afternoon.
>> with the changes?
>> yeah.
>> let's do that so we can actually look and see if everybody's ideas are incorporated.
>> any other recommendations?
>> and then we're aiming to see about a nine a.m. Meeting related to the rma?
>> yes.
>> not a problem.
>> i'll call the members over lurchl.
>> the citizens work will not stop over lump. Anything further on number 6? We'll call it up again this afternoon. Thank y'all.
>> thank you very much.
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 2, 2003 10:25 AM