Travis County Commissioners Court
March 29, 2005
Executive Session
That brings us to executive session. We have two items posted. They are, 32, and there's a letter for that one. Discuss and take appropriate action on contract award for real estate services with investors alliance. Consultation with attorney. And 33, receive legal advice and take appropriate action on stein and construction of arterial a, including right-of-way acquisition, impact on waste management inc.'s permit capacity and related type 1 landfill issues. Consultation with attorney and real property exceptions to the open meetings act. We'll discuss these two items and we'll adjourn return -- we'll return to open court before taking any action.
we have returned from executive session where we discussed two items. Number 32, involving a contract award for real estate services with investors alliance and the request is for a --
>> dual.
>> technically the request was pursuant to that contract to -- to consent to the dual agency. So the motion, your action would be whether to consent or not.
>> judge, I was going to say, I would move that we communicate to investors alliance that our preference is to keep Travis County as the sole and exclusive client in this particular deal.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. We also discussed item no. 33 involving arterial a.
>> judge?
>> yes, sir?
>> I was going to basically move that we continue to have a -- arterial a within the campo plan itself, however, under the status quo situation, however we also direct staff to look at other possible alignment other than the original the original alignment that we have existing now. West of the boundaries of the landfill.
>> okay.
>> that letter from the waste management representative, did they ask us to respond to options that they set forth or did they just call those to our attention?
>> they just called it to their attention. Our attention.
>> second Commissioner Davis's motion.
>> basically asked if we are willing -- if we want to keep talking, we need to get back with them.
>> okay.
>> that means --
>> move that we also thor the county judge to draft a letter, run that by joe regalado and tom nuckols informing the waste management representative of the county's sentiment at this point. And leaving the door open for further negotiations. For further discussions. Okay?
>> is that friendly? Commissioner Davis?
>> yes, it is.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. And a final item, this afternoon we had a full discussion of item no. 30. And a couple of our very, very dedicated county managers, one elected, one appointed, went off to put in final shape the changes we made to the draft rfi and we have been provided that document. And cyd, do you want to walk us through it briskly.
>> yes, sir. On introduction, you asked us to take out the word to pay and add contract with. We did that. I tried to show you down towards the bottom of that first paragraph we added the statement that you wanted us to add about alternative -- alternately that we may award a contract, then the whole next three paragraphs was language that you asked us to add. So if you want to take a second to read that, make sure that that was --
>> is there a difference between alternative and alternately.
>> that might just be a typo.
>> county judge would -- which was said and would say alternatively.
>> okay. We'll change it I thought the same thing.
>> we'll fix that.
>> we don't want a firm to turn you the down because we didn't have the right word there. The next three paragraphs are new?
>> those are new. That was some of the stuff that the judge and david were talking about, about -- about it gives you the right --
>> the notice was basically preserve your ultimately your right. You can exempt this contract and move on and award it to a contract and move on award it. So that paragraph preserves, it's a pretty standard paragraph we use to preserve that right no matter what happens. The next two -- two really are related to -- to what you were trying to arrive at, judge. And if a firm finds it, some reason why they either can't or don't want to provide some information, what it does is allows, sets us a process where they don't submit it, they give a detail statement-wide, it puts in the Commissioners court's hands, their sole discretion to decide whether it's proper or improper reason. If you choose improper, you can disqualify that proposal. But it in your hands.
>> it's your discretion.
>> okay.
>> and then I added a -- the word sealed, that we want the responses sealed.
>> all right. Bottom of page 1.
>> on the next page, I tried to show what we added, we had the discussion about -- about, you know, we wanted these to be the contents to be kept secret during the processes of -- of analyzing it and negotiating it if we do. So we just sort of added our language there. We added about trade secrets and confidential information. To -- to also with proprietary information.
>> okay.
>> and the new deadline information.
>> the new deadline information. The go to page 3 b is the key criteria that christian proposed and read to you.
>> okay.
>> and then we added all of the questions that you all agreed to from Commissioner Sonleitner. Added them all starting at 28 on. Then we added our ethics affidavit and the key list.
>> when did jerry rash leave, I’m look appearing the former employees and going when did jerry leave.
>> about two weeks ago.
>> oh, my god, he didn't say goodbye.
>> we will correct that on the key list. That is -- that needs to be corrected.
>> he's in a former employee shot.
>> we did change it?
>> I’m going when did he become a former employee.
>> > when he looked at it earlier -- I want to thank my staff, I have very dedicated staff that stayed after this afternoon to help me. I appreciate that.
>> we want to join in thanking them. Questions, concerns? Comments? Move approval.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? Show Commissioners Davis, Gomez, doherty, yours truly voting in favor. Voting against Commissioner Sonleitner. There being no further business before the court today.
>> move adjournment.
>> all in favor? That passes unanimously. David, cyd, thank you all very much.
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, March 30, 2005 12:50 PM