Travis County Commissioners Court
November 1, 2005
Consent Items
C-1 and 3-6 are posted as consent, and I show all of those to be ready, and we have been asked to consider adding the following items to the consent motion. If you would like for us to consider any of these items separately, please say so as we all out the number of the item. Number 7, number 8. Also number 8 is to not only receive notice, through bu to release the fiscal. Number 9 we postponed. 10, the two public hearings items 11 and 12, 13, 14, 16 a and b. 17. Any issues on 18?
>> no.
>> 19. , 21, 22, 24, 26.
>> I have a question on 26.
>> 26 will not be part of the consent motion. 27, 28, 31. Do we need to leave 30 out? It's multipart, pretty simple, 100% voluntary for employees. Any issues on that? At the employee's election and the employee pays 100% of the cost. Then let's put all of 30 on consent, 30-a through 30-d. 31, 33. Any issues on 36?
>> no, there's a typo on that. There's a revised version.
>> I talked with joe yesterday. That should be November fourth in the order and not November eighth. So we'll make sure that's the case before we sign the order. 37 is based on current expenditures --
>> with the new rate for the car...
>> that's the Commissioner Sonleitner confirmation. 38, 39.
>> judge? Could I get a clarification on 39. Is that vehicle eligible for replacement or not as far as the fleet?
>> I would say no.
>> in the past we've done federal surplus property typically is not eligible, so when we saw that, we wanted to get a clarification from the court that it was or was not.
>> we're picking up a 23-year-old vehicle. The last thing I want is for us to pick up a vehicle and a year from now they say oh, we get a new fan. An.
>> I would say that issue has not been raised. If we wanted to delay action on this, we could consider it next week. It seemed so straightforward that it was consent eligible.
>> I don't mean it delay it either. It was just a question we it and I thought we would get some clarification.
>> the request was not that it be replacement eligible, so I would say--
>> I’m happy to put it on there, but not specifically eligible.
>> the item is basically for us to accept it. We're not opining one way or the other on whether or not it's replacement eligible. I think we ought to accept it and it doesn't come with any assurances or promises other than that. It's an old vehicle, looks like we can use it, comes at no cost, and I don't know that there's any implication there that we'll replace it when it comes out. It's 1982. 24 years old. I don't know that our action today accepting it means that we agree to incur responsibility for replacing it when it runs out. I would think that its life is limited, isn't it?
>>
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>>
>> I think they would expect a vigorous discussion if they try to say they are entitled to it, based on our action today.
>> if they are watching this, I don't think they will have the nerve to come -- [laughter] let's include 39 with those comments. And can we go -- is there any issues on a 2? That's a long list of presiding judge appointments, alternate presiding judges and other actions to pull off the election. Any --
>> consents.
>> a 2 to the consent motion.
>> judge, believe it or not, I don't have issues with item no. 23. Normally I would ask for a separate vote on that one.
>> it's quantum merit.
>> believe it or not I’m actually going to vote for it.
>> not yet.
>> anything else on the consent motion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
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, November 1, 2005 8:22 AM