Travis County Commssioners Court
April 15, 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 29
Number 29 is to consider scope of work for jail operations analysis proposed to be conducted jointly by an independent consulting jail expert and county staff and take appropriate action. Can we get this done in five minutes? [ laughter ]
>> yeah, I think so.
>> I’m here to answer questions that the court had last time. > we put two a two-page additional backup and you should have your original if there's any question on the scope of work that's contemplated. The statement of objective for this analysis obviously is to try to determine if there are efficiencies or cost savings that could be -- further cost savings that could be gained in our system. In the statement of rules and responsibilities, it's a summary of what we propose as attachment a to the scope of work. It basically says that the county staff would be responsible for pulling together a whole list of information here, standard operating procedures, budget document, staffing standards, all the base data elements that someone would need to look and and if there's something that's missing, we would be responsible for going in and collecting what they may be missing to do. And the consultant with work with the staff to review the information and work collaboratively with the county staff to develop the most appropriate format for the collection of any outstanding information and do staff interviews and develop recommendations for further efficiencies in the system. There is a statement of qualification that we put together. This would be something if you do decide you want to look at hiring a consultant and you want purchasing to prepare, that we would provide this to them for incorporation into a more formalized document of some sort. If there are any questions about what we have listed under those statement qualifications. We also would like to suggest that in addition to the reference requirements that are typically used to be added in this particular case, we would like to see with the references that are listed from anyone who responds a statement of what savings and efficiencies they were able to achieve that are outcomes of the study that they're citing as a reference so that we can have that as an additional piece of information then had when we're verifying references. So I think that with everything that you've asked for is follow-up, pending the discussion of whether we out source or stay in-house, unless there are any -- I have not made the change to the scope of work that discusses looking at our procurement for other items other than food services. I can make that correction before it goes to purchasing if that's what you would like for me to do.
>> judge? Are we to look at this and is a decision to be made today as far as the outsourcing and consultanting is concerned or are we going to look at the scope of the work and the analysis that we are to -- owe what are we going to do?
>> we're going to look at the plan and the scope of work and everything that's recommended. If there's any question, it won't bother me to postpone it another week.
>> I think there was some discussion last time we had this on the agenda, and, of course, the amount of money as far as hiring outside consultant, I think the discussion being brought that they've made tremendous strides with what we have in-house now as opposed to having to spend money is something that I think still needs to be considered.
>> [ inaudible ].
>> the actually cost to the consultant.
>> yes. At the same time, what I see is what you think is best to get outside help, outside assistance on, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> and the bulk of this grunt work, we call it, we think we can do in-house and we will do it in-house. Some of it needs further expert analysis and our practice is maybe to augment and recommend, and so we're hoping to get outside assistance on. So the issue is whether you think we should go outside or not and whether the time would help that. It does seem to me that the task for us that the sheriffs and others have worked on this and have concluded that it won't cost us anything and it's worth a reasonable investment. As to what that is, it would be reflected in the proposal that we get. And at that time we can see what's being proposed in providing us and what the cost is, and determine whether we think it's appropriate.
>> and I want to once again applaud the sheriff because this is a very brave place for her and her staff to be because she's not required to ask for this assistance, and I think it is very good and speaks very highly of the fact that they don't mind having somebody come in and say where can we do better? And the point that I want positive make is that this has nothing to do with whether we think we have the best correctional and lawvment officers -- law enforcement officers and staff in the state of Texas, because they are. Yeah. This has to do with management issues. And they're asking for help. And I know that when this Commissioners court, Margaret was on that court at that time and judge Biscoe, when we asked for outside assistance from the comptroller's office of please help us, take a look on the our organization, give us some good suggestions about effective efficiencies, john sharp's staff gave us some great recommendations that we took to heart. And it made this place a better organization. I’m hoping we get the same kind of low hanging fruit. And certainly when you have a budget that during the eight years that i've been on this court has gone to about 52 million to about 85, 86 million, we want to make sure that each and every dollar is properly invested and we've taken advantage of every opportunity. They are running the equivalency of a small city, several cities actually, here in Travis County, and I again think it is wonderful that they have been working cooperatively with the Commissioners court and planning and budget and the end result here is that they too want to validate what they're doing is the way to do it and if there are good suggestions, they embrace those because they want to see those daughters go that much further as well. This has nothing to do with do we think we've got fine officers who in a cabillion of years of experience in law enforcement, of course they do, but this is all about management and again, sheriff, I thank you for what you're doing here.
>> you're welcome.
>> the question -- and I think Commissioner Daugherty brought up some points last week on this also, about the number of persons involved in this picture. Of course, if a proposal is going to come back, and I think we have put aside 450 million. If we're going to come back, what other kind of thing is -- again, I think you are doing a great job, not only in your department, but all the departments that's been involved that's been involved in this whole jail overcrowding situation. And I think management to -- the point of all of this and the -- there may be an added value to this, but right now I don't know what that is nor what an expert will bring back and the scope of work is something that we're bringing back as far as the analysis is concerned, however, it will be tied to a concern or a proposal to bring about management decisions to make -- (indiscernible) and I haven't seen that yet.
>> Commissioner, I would be somewhat surprised if the consultant would come in and come in with an additional -- with the jail population. I think the excellent work that's been done and they would come in and say keep doing what you're doing and don't stop because if you stop -- it's part of this huge maze we had going in the criminal justice is it system. Anybody stops any part it tend to mess up the rest of the work. But I think the question is whether or not someone coming in as far as looking at staffing issues, scheduling issues, perhaps looking at -- helping us look at -- right now we had some buildings closed and we looked at what's the most efficient way to do that? How do we maximize our staff? And looking to make sure that there isn't something that we have forgotten. I think we're quite capable of doing this analysis, but I think it's going to need somebody coming in and looking at the papers. Two reasons. One thing is there are sometimes things that you don't see, and oart thing too is I’m very comfortable in having somebody come in on so the court can have confidence that we're oe owe and the taxpayers have confidence that we're not spending all the money that we're getting.
>> judge, when you look at the memo, I think it's on your letterhead, it addresses the issues that I think we're interested in.
>> it does.
>> so I think we're ready to take the next step, I’m ready.
>> I am too.
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> any more discussion?
>> the only discussion I have, scwuj, on this, is -- judge, is the dollar amounts that would come back as far as the proposal. Do you know when they would come back to us as far as money is concerned that would be required for this?
>> within 30 days.
>> the purchasing agent that answers all the questions -- [overlapping speakers].
>> we need to know the cost of the proposal.
>> I need direction on what sort of process you want. Do you want a form at process or do you want an informal process? That will -- if we have a formal process, it would be probably at least 45 days before we get proposaling back in and evaluate it. If we go informally, we could probably do that in four weeks. So it depends on which way y'all want to go, formal or informal.
>> the earlier in the budge process we could have the results, the better, I would think.
>> but there's $250,000 earmarked for it. And is there a thought that it won't be $250,000?
>> yes, sir, definitely. Because, Commissioner Daugherty, the main way that occurs is if you bring in a consultant, you know, to do some of this stuff myself, so if somebody brings me in and they say you've got to collect the data and find everything, that's one cost. If it is instead what I ask for I get and then I then do just the analysis it's a far less expensive proposition.
>> and we're talking many times that this is just for the correctional side of our house, that we always wanted to allocate certain space and live in that budget, which is not not to exceed budget for the law enforcement side of the house, which is down the road.
>> yes, ma'am.
>> so you would solicit many proposals?
>> at least.
>> I make part of the motion the informal process.
>> that's what I was saying, judge, that what we're voting on today is to allow them to go out and get the proposal and bring them back so we have a chance again to say we don't like the amounts, we don't like the dollars.
>> if it's half a million, you would say no way, forget it.
>> this is specifically what I have to be paid. We want to get what -- let's indicate our intention to appoint the two court members next week. Any more discussion of the motion? All in favor? Unanimous. Thank you very much.
>> that's a four and a half vote. [ laughter ]
Last Modified: Wednesday, April 9, 2003 3:52 PM