Travis County Commissioners Court
May 24, 2005
Item 29
29. Consider and take appropriate action on the reappointment of henry gilmore, johanna zmud and lowell lebermann as Travis County representatives on the central Texas regional mobility authority board. Actually, prior to this item, we had gotten backup, not only from the central Texas regional mobility authority executive director, and a report that they made, but also we read the comptroller's report on that and as I indicated in my backup memo, Commissioner Sonleitner and I on last Friday met with dr. Zmud. We had gotten letters from the other members appointed by Travis County, the other two. As well as dr. Zmud, indicating a willingness to continue serving on the board and this item basically is for their reappointment. We thought we ought to do a little bit more than necessary because of the comptroller's report. And when we looked at it, we agreed with the general counsel for the Texas department of transportation and the attorney for the really mobility authority who looked at the request from dr. Zmud to do subcontract work prior to the execution of the contract and she was advised that as a primary contractor there may well be a cob lict. But as a subcontractor probably not. That was made by those two entities before she entered into the subcontract, as my opinion she did do appropriate due diligence before doing that. In my view. If the law or the state policy were to change on that, then maybe the result would be different. But in my view this is no reason -- there is no reason for us not to reappoint her. I think our representatives have done an outstanding job. This has been kind of tough work, also sort of original territory also. So in my view, we should reappoint the three of them.
>> judge, I will add my comments as well. You are correct in terms of original territory. I think we said at the time that we were interviewing folks for these positions, there is no instruction manual on how to create a regional mobility authority. It's the first of its kind in the state of Texas. Many others have follow and quite frankly are taking large cues from Williamson county and Travis County in terms of how to set these things up, in terms of not only questions that were asked of potential board members, but just in terms of how they chose to organize themselves. After it's been about two years, two years now, that they have been up and running, they have already had the ground breaking on their first project, which is the highway 183 a project and it will be ready in spring of 2007. I know, I have squeezed myself with the idea that on an 11-mile stretch of highway, that we normally think in terms of decades, will be finished in approximately two years from the time of the churning of the dirt. That's pretty amazing. It will be catching up, be opening up simultaneously with the same network of other toll roads that have been approved, state highway 130, mopac extension, loop 1 extension and state highway 45 north. When I say other approved toll roads, I move ones that went through a voter process and were announced up front would be toll roads as was 183 a. I join the judge in saying that we have three excellent board members, I try to go to as many of their meetings as possible. They have done yoman's work. I think we should be very proud that they are serving on behalf of Travis County.
>> the other thing we did check with each of them during the interviews before we made the appointments and we knew of their background and actually thought that would be a plus for her to serve on the board. I think it's worked out that way. We did caution the candidates that we thought this would be a very time consuming effort and in my view it probably has taken three or four times the time I thought it would take. We did ask dr. Zmud to come down today, she is here in the event that there are questions from the court.
>> I have a question.
>> Commissioner Davis?
>> and dr. Zmud if you don't mind coming up I would like to pose a question. The state that was brought up as far as the subcontracting situation that you were in with txdot, was that before the appointment to the ctrma board or after the appointment to the board.
>> well, the subcontracting situation didn't exist when I was appointed to the rma board. However the knowledge of what my company and what I do for a living which was transportation research certainly was brought up to the board prior to my appointment. The subcontracting situation came up subsequent to my appointment and the first thing that I did was check with -- with our legal counsel who then checked with the legal counsel of txdot to see if there was a conflict of interest by that. I wouldn't have entered into the agreement if there was a conflict of interest. I think -- because of the way I conduct my business, I wouldn't do anything that I considered unethical. I checked it out beforehand it was only after I had gotten a letter confirming there was no conflict of interest that I then entered into the subcontracting agreement. Those agreements, there was actually two cited, which are the two that we had. They are with companies that we have partnered with, they are both public relations, advertising companies for which we have long standing agreements to do research for them. And so that was part of our normal business to -- to do that type of subcontracting work for them. And I tried to distance myself from that work because we have a -- we have a fairly large company with people that could do that work. It didn't really rely on my expertise to do that particular work. It was more the expertise of the firm that I built.
>> and I guess I知 having a little problem and it's just that the appearance of -- of what it is going on and -- in that the board that you do sit on, the ctrma board that you do sit on do have business and have a relationship with txdot.
>> right.
>> of course so it's -- even as subcontractor, the work is still, you know, it's just appears that there is still that relationship. It's kind of --
>> I realize that.
>> kind of tough for me to support your reappointment because of that.
>> uh-huh. Well, I realize that there could have been the -- it -- the reason why I checked prior to entering into the subcontract was because I wanted to make sure that I didn't do anything that would be considered a conflict of interest. It came down to me that there was no conflict of interest after the legislation was checked and so for that reason I did enter into the subcontracting agreement. While I do volunteer my time to the ctrma, I also have a business to run. And the -- if -- even with that business to run, if it had been told to me that there was a conflict of interest to have entered into that, but there was told to me that there was no conflict of interest.
>> in the cleanup measure on the rma legislation. If the legislature had intended for subcontractors to be covered, they would have put that in there. But they clearly did not and txdot in the ruling, I think that was the appropriate thing, this was not a ruling after the fact. Dr. Zmud sought the opinion before it was ever entered into. It was a letter that was sent to her but also delivered to senator barrientos, all of under the circumstances who sit on the campo board that makes it very clear that txdot says this is not a conflict of interest. This was never intended to be picked up as something that would be against the rules. Now, the wisdom of the state legislature, they could decide at some future point they think it is. They could make a lot of changes, but at this point they have clearly said subcontractors were not intended to be covered by this.
>> judge?
>> Commissioner Davis, are you finished?
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Daugherty?
>> you know, I liken this to a favorite expression that I like to use, I think that grouchomarx made this favorite. I would never belong to a club that would have me as a member. The fact that you put your name up for this thing almost disqualifies you as far as I知 concerned [laughter] I say that a little tongue in cheek y'all because y'all have taken some massive body blows on this board. I知 sorry that you all and a number of people in this community have taken a disparjing kind of comments about what has happened in this whole r.m.a. Project. I知 sincerely appreciative of the words that you all have done because it has been enormous. It is really fortunate for a community to have folks, you know, that are willing to come up and do things like that knowing that -- I don't think anybody knew that this subject matter was going to be as controversial as it has been. In the 37 years that I have been in Austin, Texas I have never seen a more gut-wrenching subject matter than what toll roads that done to this community. The reason that I want you all to understand that while I知 very supportive of the reappointment of our three board members, I think that you all would agree that there continues to be a tremendous amount of work to be done -- I mean this thing is not behind us. I mean even though we have altered the plan, it has made all of our lives a little easier, I知 -- I知 -- I really want you all to recognize that unfortunately, perception is reality. Johanna I didn't think that you were in jeopardy of crossing the line. But, you know, we have still got people in this community that don't understand what tolling an existing road is. I mean, that ought to be the simplest definition that we can give someone. And there is work, the point that I知 making is, there continues to be work that you all as the r.m.a. Board you have got to do I think a better job of doing some of those kind of things. Because, I mean, I can't -- I can't get out on the street and defend r.m.a. I mean, I think that I can try to correct people when I think that they are going down the wrong road with the definition. And I know that you all are spending time and money on trying to go out into the public and make sure that people understand these things, more than they do. I知 amazed that there continues to be so much controversy with regards to where we are really headed with this thing. It doesn't help that now all of a sudden gasoline tax, you know, was an option or maybe it was going to be considered an option, now it not an option. I mean that was never on the table with regards to what we as the campo board were trying to vote on. I know it put you all in a bad spot because you all were basically told the same thing that we were, that is here are your parameters. My only point is that good gosh, if you want to do this again, I mean, y'all might be the only three people that we can find in Travis County to do it. So I知 willing to give you a thumbs up on it. But I sure hope that there continues to be the soul searching from the board's viewpoint and the recognition that there are still a lot of issue was this toll plan and that we will have to, until we really get it off the ground -- I知 not talking about the things getting off the ground in Williamson county because they have a little bit different situation in Williamson county than we too in Travis County. And I just hope that we keep our eye on the ball, that we make sure that those are the kind of things that we continue to work on because if we don't, I think that all of us are going to tip to be called things that we don't want to be called, our families, innuendos about, you know, are we really, you know, getting paid under the table, are these things happening to usment and I don't think that that is the case with anybody. I think that the honor on that board is exactly what we felt like your honor was when we put you on the board and i'll defend you each and every one of you you know to my dying breath. But we all do know that -- you know work that's got to be done. As long as we are willing to do that, I知 willing to sign up for you for four terms, is it four years.
>> that's what I wanted to bring up. Related to the term, I had a conversation with bryan cassidy, these folks were originally pointed in terms of the creation language for two year items. House bill 3588 in the last session, we all know because we tried to change it, gave these folks six year terms. However, that is the piece that was the subject of some litigation and it is a point of fact that is still under discussion with some judges related to whether it truly is six or not. There is cleanup language still over at the state legislature as we speak in representative krusee and senator staples' bill to try to clarify what is the term but it may require a constitutional amendment. The safest place for us to be is that these folks get reappointed for two years and we should get guidance from the state of Texas, the legislature, and the courts within the next six to nine months if indeed this legislation passes, it goes to a constitutional amendment and it either passes or it doesn't. So it either is going to get cleaned up to be a six or it's going to stay the way it is, which is two. But the safest place to keep these folks is it's two, we will revisit this when we get guidance that it is some number other than that. But this was a point of the litigation related to the issuance of their bonds that the six caused problems and it's a fact question for the courts that they did not rule on. So I was going to -- as part of the motion that it be a two-year reappointment with us revisiting when we get guidance and clarification from the legislature, the voters, and/or the courts. On the issue of the language.
>> it's been held over for several months now.
>> mr. Imil more is here -- gilmore is here, also, any more questions for him.
>> thank you, henry, thank you, johanna as well.
>> I知 happy to make the motion and include about it it's a two year term with it written into the record of why we are doing two years.
>> second.
>> any more discussion?
>> I would like to separate the vote if possible.
>> okay.
>> do them one at a time.
>> okay. Then let's vote on mr. Gilmore first. [indiscernible]
>> I apologize, this went quicker than I anticipated.
>> motion to reappointment mr. Gilmore? All in favor? That passes unanimously. Congratulations. Now let's vote on dr. Zmud. All in favor? Show Commissioners Sonleitner, Gomez, yours truly voting in favor.
>> show me in opposition.
>> voting against Commissioner Davis. By the way, mr. Lieberman did indicate to us that he had a long standing commitment to be out of town today, so he is not here. We issued the invitation to all three members. For mr. Lieberman, all in favor? Show unanimous court. Thank you all very, very much.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
>> I wish that I could say that your future is brighter and lighter. But we look forward to working with you some more.
>> thank you.
>> likewise.
>> r.m.a. Meeting tomorrow, it's nice to finally go back in there with --
>> thank you very much, it's an honor to serve.
>> thank you for your confidence, I appreciate that very much.
>> 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, May 25, 2005 7:48 AM