Travis County Commissioners Court
December 14, 2004
Item 3
Number 3 is consider and take appropriate action on interlocal agreement
with the Travis County hospital district regarding services.
>> judge, I just want to make sure that I understand and
that everybody understands with this interlocal agreement that we -- there
are still a number of things that are just assumed that we are going to --
that Travis County is taking care of. I mean and that's everything from cash
management to, you know, the executive search, you know, for the executive
director. I mean auditing is doing, you know, a ton of things. H.h.s. And
we all know we're trying to get -- help get the health district kick started.
But I don't think that the interlocal necessarily spells out after this first
year, you know, did we have -- do we have some measures put in place that
we know exactly how many dollars we are spending because Travis County is
spending a lot of dollars on this. I think the thing is we are because we
know that we're paying for is the legal, you know, expertise. But beyond those
things that we have in this interlocal agreement, is it just assumed that
what we will do on year 2 is come back and say, okay, well, these things are
still things that we're going to take care of or are we assuming that with
this interlocal agreement after this first year that we may go to the district
and say, okay, if we're still going to be involved in the degree that we are
in, obviously we're probably not going to be -- unless there is a new executive
director that needs to be rehired, but between auditing and the things we
are doing out of h.h.s., Our cash management folks, barry mays, folks like
that, do you think, john, that this interlocal agreement addresses any of
that or is this sort of this is what we're going to get right now and we'll
look at the interlocal -- next year's interlocal agreement and see where we
feel like that if we need to put some other measures in there?
>> in some respects it is for year 2 an agreement to agree
because we're on the ground level. We're just figuring out what kind of services
we need to provide. I've tried to describe the services as best I could in
coordination with each one of the departments that are providing services.
Not one thing to correct, the auditor already has her own agreement with the
hospital district. That's not part of this agreement. But just about everybody
else is that is going to be providing services. And there is some language
that allows the hospital district to request of the county a description of
what the costs might look like whenever we get a little bit closer to year
2, what they would be expected to pay for all of these services. And p.b.o.
And christian, i've chatted with him, he's similar to you, a little uncomfortable
right now to be able to describe what that might be. But hopefully as we get
closer into the summer, we'll have a better idea of what those services would
cost and he can be able to provide that kind of a description to the hospital
district.
>> well, I realize that we can't just come up with a figure
until we let them operate and have at least a year's history. And I知 fine
with that. We need to get this thing moving and I think that the county is
-- and that the city has stepped up to the table to get this thing moving
and going. But I do want us to bear in mind that come next year I would at
least like to have the opportunity to make sure that we are going to be compensated
-- I moon if there is -- I mean within, you know, some reasonability. So I
just -- you know, more than anything wanted to voice that. And I know that
the judge and Commissioner Sonleitner have worked extensively, you know, with
the district and, you know, from my office -r we're sort of sitting, you know,
and listening. But, you know, the district can get you a little nervous I
mean when you start talking about mental health. There are a lot of things
that are being thrown out there and knowing that this thing is going to be
a little bit strapped to make ends meet, you know, given, you know, what they
-- what we told the citizenry with regards to forming the district. I think
we need to be real careful and make sure that if we are going to be, you know,
at the table, and I think we're going to be at the table because it is the
Travis County health district, that is an expectation that is not -- it's
not a concern for some, but I mean from the Commissioners court and for me,
I am a little concerned with that. But I知 certainly willing to move forward,
you know, on the interlocal agreement and I think we can always come back
and review the plate and say these are things we have concerns over so let's
move forward with it.
>> what's the thinking on the blank attachments?
>> it's good that you brought that up, judge. Here is the
exhibit c, which is all of the transferred contracts. It's one of the -- there's
about five major changes from whenever you've seen it last time. The exhibited
c is the -- exhibit c is the exhibit I got from the purchasing office and
I talked with the attorneys in our office and this is the best we could figure
what's going to be transferred over. There's some dentists, there's some doctors.
There's the -- the seton agreement. There is the people's community clinic
on there. And cancer organization. So there are specifically listed contracts
that are going over to the district and with expectations that they will take
over from here. The other major changes -- well, let me just say there's documentation
that would probably be expected with the purchasing office -- that the purchasing
office would follow up with. Assignment document for all of these contracts.
So you'll see more follow-up after this. This just says we're identifying
them, does the hospital district agree with them, then we'll transfer them
over if they agree. Second major change was all of the service payment language
that i've been so concerned about trying to figure out, well, what is it.
It doesn't apply to this agreement. It was something that was in the city
of Austin hospital district interlocal and it just doesn't make sense so I
took all those references and all those exhibits out. That's why you don't
see those anymore. The third major change was -- well, it's kind of a minor
change actually. The original language had i.t.s. Providing some additional
services as to data line and hardware. They looked at all the material, the
hardware and the data lines that are in the clinics. They didn't provide all
that material. City of Austin did. So we're going to look with expectation
that the city of Austin will provide i.t.s. Services for throughout the clinics.
We'll still provide software support if they need some help and other things
that we could have the expertise to provide, but since we didn't buy that
hardware for them, joe doesn't know how to work on it. The fourth change was
the tobacco settlement language. I worked with p.b.o. To clarify what we're
actually -- what moneys we're actually getting back and when and what documentation
we'll need to provide the district -fpblgt that's the new section 8.
>> you are answering the question I should have asked or
the question I asked?
>> I知 giving you more. And I have one more and then i'll
be done.
>> I go back to my original question after --
>> sure. But I really feel like I have an obligation to get
this out.
>> okay.
>> the last change was just I was called out just a moment
ago from cash investment management folks, did notment the language requiring
them to maintain the records. Just to let you know there's a section in section
3-a on page 5 that says that they will maintain the -- according to state
standards. They won't be doing that and i've talked with steve rowburg and
he's fine with. That we'll transfer those records over to the hospital district
and let them manage those records on their own.
>> so we're taking 6 out. That's the part about keeping accurate
records, correct?
>> yes.
>> that will change the numbing for the rest of them.
>> well, the -- on page 5, the one I知 talking about is on
page 5. It's section 3-a, little roman numeral 3, big roman numeral 12. It's
at the bottom of the page. Where it says maintain records according to state
standards.
>> okay.
>> now, records management will still provide records retrieval,
services for the administrative office, but whenever cash investment management
transfers information over, their expectation is that the hospital district
will follow up and maintain records. As to cash investment management.
>> okay. On page 12 there is an exhibit blank. Transfers
-- transfer of real property, leases and personal property. That blank will
be filled in sometime or -- sometime in the future or taken out altogether?
>> I知 wondering which version -- is that in section 5, 5-a?
>> right.
>> I changed that so it now only reads there are no real
property tracts to be transferred. Everything from what roger corey tells
me are all mixed use facilities. So there are no real property tracts to be
transferred over to the hospital district.
>> I don't know, is there a date on the latest --
>> December 10th was what I translated to y'all by e-mail
on Friday. So you and Commissioner Sonleitner and I gave a clean copy to the
other three Commissioners yesterday.
>> okay.
>> and I gave to barbara in Commissioner Daugherty's office
that same copy on Friday.
>> instead of giving me the preferential treatment, may I
be treated the same as the other members in the future? [laughter]
>> I just assumed you wanted to have the copy that showed
all the changes, judge.
>> that blank has been eliminated and the attachments that
were referenced either are attached or not.
>> there was no need for that attachment any longer. It would
show real property that would be transferred. It's been taken off. There's
only four exhibits now.
>> okay. Did you get your question answered? Move approval.
>> second. Discussion? This is through September 30th of
'04.
>> '05.
>> yeah, calendar '05.
>> right.
>> so at that time either we can renew this for another year,
make any changes we see necessary, or just abandon it altogether.
>> correct.
>> okay. And from Travis County it will go to the board of
managers for their --
>> on Thursday.
>> -- consideration and action. They have looked at what
we are considering today.
>> I can't commit to that. They were looking with expectation
that we would offer them all this language knowing that it was very similar
to what the city agreement had and will likely approve it. It is on their
agenda for Thursday.
>> they have seen this document but not the most recent late
changes?
>> they have not seen the changes as of Friday.
>> okay. All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Thank
you.
>> thank you.
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.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, October 26, 2005 2:39 PM