Travis County Commssioners Court
March 16, 2004
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
We have been asked to postpone item number 49 for one week, so 49 will be back on next week. And that does bring us to our executive session items. 41 is to receive briefing from county attorney regarding claim received from industrial systems incorporated for payment of water heater and boiler for the Travis County correctional complex and take appropriate action. That's under the that's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act 42 is receive briefing from county attorney and Travis County et al versus guadalupe and rebecca r.leibas, marbella corporation retail deed and take appropriate action. That's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. 43, receive briefing from the county attorney in Travis County et al versus tony d. Hearnz, alfred e. And concha valley marrero retail deed and take appropriate action. That's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. 44, receive briefing from the county attorney in del valle isd versus kelly w. Holcomb, oscar solis resill deed and take appropriate action. That's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. 45, receive briefing from the county attorney in Travis County et al versus eloised. Thomas, david hopkins resale deed and take appropriate action. That's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. 46, receive briefing from the can county attorney in Travis County et al versus manfred putnam, john and lori haggerty revokable living trust resale deed and take appropriate action. That's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. 47, accept, reject or counter settlement demand and/or authorize commencement of condemnation proceedings regarding project number 01 b 01-12-3-ca, hudson bend road reassignment project, parcel number 9, blake r. Robinson and robert d. Mclaren, and parcel number 10, garden ridge quality closeouts incorporated, that's the that's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. 48, authorize commencement of condemnation proceedings regarding project number b 1 -- I'm sorry, project number 01 been o is-16-2 ca wells branch parkway extension, parcells number 1-a, 1-b and 1-e as in edward, ruth massey, norman lisso, paul b.knebel, junior, burr well knebel, la knell knebel and jan sellman. Charles dwayne sellman and take appropriate action. That's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. And the last item we'll discuss will be number 50, receive legal advice on recent Texas attorney general opinion on weather a Commissioners court may delegate its authority to amend a department's budget by transferring amounts between budgeted items. That's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. We'll discuss those matters in executive session, but will return to open court before taking any action.
>> we have just returned from executive session, where we discussed the following items. Number 41, involving the claim from industrial systems incorporated. I move that we authorize statement of 50,090-point $90 to ndc financial services incorporated to is settle this claim. That we ask the county attorney and authorize the judge to sign any and all appropriate papers necessary to get the county a full release. And any appropriate assignments and any legal matters and further that we authorize the filing of a lawsuit against the contractor in this case for reimbursement of all monies owed Travis County, plus costs, attorney's fees and any other relief to which we might be entitle the.
>> econd.
>> any or discussion?
>> I think the initials are nco.
>> okay.
>> I thought it was ncd.
>> nco.
>> not to have any relationship to the military nco. [ laughter ] all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Number 42 involved the marvella corporation resale deed. I authorize the county judge to sign on behalf of the Commissioners court by deeding this property to the marbella corporation rngs which has paid to Travis County $8,008.12. Any discussion? That passes by unanimous vote. Item number 43 involving another resale deed. This time to alfred marrero, and I move that we authorize the county judge to sign this resale deed to the two of them because they have paid to Travis County the sum of $9,596.37.
>> second.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. On number 44, I move that we authorize the county judge to sign the prepared resale deed to oscar solis who has paid to Travis County the sum of $206.52.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Number 45, move that we authorize the county judge to sign the prepared tax resale deed to david hopkins, who has paid to Travis County the sum of $6,788 in cash.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. And on number 46 I move that we authorize the county judge to sign the prepared tax resale deed to john and laurie hag gerty, we vocable living trust -- revokable living trust, which has paid to Travis County the sum of $4,920.65 in cash.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. On item number 47, I move that we authorize the commencement of condemnation proceedings against these -- the named persons in the hudson bend road realignment project. Do I need to name the persons in the motion? Okay. They are listed. In detail in number 47.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Number 48, move that we authorize the commencement of condemnation proceedings against the named individuals in the wells branch parkway extension project.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. We previously announced the resetting of 49 until next week. We did not discuss number 50. We probably need a full compliment of the court present. We will have that back on the court's agenda on March 23rd for discussion.
>> move for adjourn.
>> there being no business fo today, all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Thank y'all very much.
Last Modified: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 7:22 AM