Travis County Commssioners Court
August 5, 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 42
42, consider and take appropriate action on recommended goals for the task force on fines and fees in the integration of the community supervision and corrections department's case management financial services systems with the Travis County integrate justice system. How are you all doing?
>> good. A number of us got together and worked over a mission statement, barbara and mike and myself, brian, and I think the court has a copy of the mission statement and the goals. I think mike has a couple of comments he would like to make on that and then we'll obviously receive any comments that members of the court have.
>> okay.
>> I just apologize, but I read this again and I saw a couple of real minor things that I think we probably need to change just to make it a little clearer, and i'll throw them out there and if they are all right we'll amend the document. On the first page for goal 3, we just need to say there must go one account receivable ledger instead of just account receivable. Making it clear that there has to be like an accounting ledger for the accounts receivable and we want there to just be one that has everything in it. I think it would be helpful to say ledger there.
>> okay. The word ledger.
>> yes. And for goal 4 objective 1, I think everything that's there is fine. It just dawned on me we probably want to say the -bts receivable ledger must be updated within the same time frame. We're saying in there they need to notify the person collecting that the money condition has happened, but we also want the the ledger updated for that action.
>> within the same time frame as realtime or --
>> well, within 24 hours. Realtime is probably not going to be very likely for that particular part. But I think within 24 hours is reasonable.
>> okay.
>> and the last thing is in goal 5 objective 1, I think that's a good goal to have right there, but I was thinking about what the law actually says, and we may want to say what the law is it needs to meet at least that. And what the law is is by the end of the next month from the end of each quarter that the fines and fees were collected in, that's when we can collect the 10%.
>> within the legally specified time.
>> that sounds good.
>> to enable, blah, blah, blah.
>> right. It all of this is really good. I just noticed a couple things.
>> legally prescribed?
>> yes.
>> is that more lawyer-like?
>> I'm not a lawyer, but yeah, that sounds good. I think it makes sense to say within that time period. Faster is fine. But for us to -- anything collected in one quarter, if from the following month from that kwupb quarter we get to keep 10%.
>> I think I was taoelg tough.
>> I like your 10-day thing, but just in case that's not possible at least not within that time frame, we'll get the 10%.
>> that forces us to let the department know what the legally prescribed timetable is and time line.
>> and we could just change the language to write what the legally prescribed time frame s I think if we said instead of 10 days, we could say by the end of the next month from the end of each quarter that the fines were collected in, that does cover what's --
>> that's the same standard on all of them?
>> it is for the money that we pay to the state that we get to keep 10%, yes.
>> okay. You all have that language?
>> I just wrote it and i'll give it to them.
>> alicia says she needs a copy of the modified backup, right?
>> I can do that.
>> okay. Any other changes?
>> judge, there's one addition. I talked to claire dawson brown from the county district attorney's office and she has also agreed to serve on this task force. I think she and deborah hail are going to help us very specifically at amended conditions. That's one of the specific objectives and so I think we're adding the districts attorney's office to this task force. We would suggest that.
>> okay. We're not quite posted for that, but unless there is objection, I think you can go ahead and do it.
>> I think the thing reads real well. I guess the question about my gosh, I mean, why hasn't this kind of thing been going on for a long time. I mean it's pretty amazing that all of a sudden you come up with this set of -- especially when you start talking about if you get the money and this time you get 10% moneys and all this, I don't know, maybe it's I guess because of all the writing in the last 18 months in the paper about these kind of issues, is this what spawned this sort of endeavor?
>> I don't think that most of these [inaudible] happening right now. It's just we learned from when real world went in two years ago what can go wrong and if you are going to develop a new process and this is somewhat of a new process to really help central collections. It's kind of like okay, let's not make the same mistakes that we've already made but also already corrected. Let's not repeat that again.
>> it's appropriately named when it says the real world.
>> yeah, we're -- except we're not in the real world anymore. The real world is gone. We've got c.s.c. Instead.
>>
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>>
>>
Last Modified: Wednesday, August 6, 2003 4:52 PM