Travis County Commssioners Court
December 28, 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.
Item 36
36. Consider and take appropriate action on appointment of three residents to a committee to negotiate the provision of services after the annexation of the cambridge heights/heatherwilde area with the city of Pflugerville as required by section 43.0562 of the local government code.
>> I sent you all an e-mail, but in case you did not read it this morning, I apologize for not sending it before then. My assistant got us a little remembrance memo for us in terms of why are we doing this. Basically the last example of this was back in July of 2003 in response to the city of Austin's annexation of several subdivisions along walnut creek. These committees are now required by state law, the code was -- was cited there, the responsibility is to negotiate the service plans for their neighborhoods with the annexing municipality. This was one of the annexation reforms enacted several sessions ago, partly in response to neighborhood complaints that they did not have any kind of input on what kinds of of services were important to them and when they could expect them. So this is one that criss-crosses over between travis and Williamson county, so the ones we need to put three folks on and Commissioner limmer in Williamson county will have similar responsibilities. The names that -- I would move approval of this if there aren't any questions, with the names c.w. Anderson, mann -- maen hourani and the third person is chuck dudley. These are folks who have agreed to serve on this committee.
>> all right.
>> so does the law provide that the commission appoints these or the Commissioners court?
>> it's the Commissioners court, that's why this item is on here.
>> don't we need to see resumes or something about these individuals.
>> it's not really a matter of resumes. They are kind of a self selected kind of thing of people who have agreed who live in these neighborhoods to be a part of this. They have been trying for two months to find people to serve on this committee and these are the names -- the areas have brought forward that they want to represent them on the committee.
>> well, I don't have any problems with these people because I don't know them. But I think if the court appoints them, we ought to get more information.
>> I just saw it late last night.
>> this is how we did it the last time and the time before that. In terms it's a self selection of the people to be on this committee, they are the ones that the neighborhood says are the one that's they want on the committee, it's less a matter of what we want, it's a matter of what they want. But the law says we are the one that's have to put them on.
>> the law says that we have to appoint them, it's a matter what was we want. I said it -- specific individuals because I don't know -- if the neighborhood association recommends different people, then I think the president of the association ought to send a letter that says at the meeting of blah blah the association selected so and so. The problem is this is how the court gets involved in a whole lot of stuff later on. These might be just the best three individuals in the world. But I think county-wide and every precinct ought to do this. We ought to get some information about the individuals, resumes stuff like that. If we are reappointing people, the sums is that the first -- the assumption is that the first time we made the appointment we saw it, so I don't think that's necessary. But I feel a little uneasy appointing people without a resume or getting some indication.
>> we did get an official letter from the city of Pflugerville who is doing the annexing, and the city of Pflugerville was responsible for coming up with these folks and gave us the -- the names that they were suggesting as the ones to be put on here. So they assisted in terms of -- of they are doing the annexing, the they contacted the neighborhoods, they found folks that wanted to serve and the neighborhoods wanted them to serve. So we do have a backup memo from the city of Pflugerville laying out the government code and laying out the work that basically they were required to do. But I --
>> legal -- I believe the law puts the responsibility for making the appointments on the Commissioners court because it expects the Commissioners court to do some sort of due diligence before making appointments. And if our position is that the due diligence is we want the neighborhood association and the cities to make the appointments, I think the law give them that responsibility or we ought to ask the associations and the cities to give us some information about the individuals.
>> I do not --
>> yeah, I don't disagree with you. We were just going by how we have done these before in the past of -- since it is a neighborhood negotiating with the annexing city, that they pick who they want to best represent them because the Commissioners court really is not a part of it because we're not doing the annexing. We are not the annexer, we are not the annexee.
>> I don't have to reminds you of how these neighborhoods fight among themselves. We don't know whether the vote was 39 to 38 or 58 to 0.
>> I will tell you owe.
>> I’m going along with this time. But I think in the future we ought to have backup information.
>> they had a tough time --
>> is there a motion and a second? All in favor that passes by unanimous vote.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, December 28, 2004 3:19 PM