Travis County Commissioners Court
December 6, 2005
Executive Session Items
We did announce our attention to call up part of number 5 in executive session. Specifically we need to discuss the facilities items, 5 d and 5 d 6, 5 d 16, and to the extent that specific projects might be discussed, 5 d 17, and they will be discussed under the real estate exception to the open meetings act. Understood we will discuss the items posted for executive session discussion. Number 24. Receive briefing and take appropriate action regarding settlement offer in Travis County medical examiner's facility case; subrogation. That's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. This morning we did pull item no. 25. 26. Receive briefing from county attorney and take appropriate action regarding settlement demand in the case of starflight employee, slot 6. That's the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act and personnel matters exceptions to the open meetings act. 27. Receive briefing from county attorney and take appropriate action regarding settlement demand in the case of james thornton v. Sheriff's office. Consultation with attorney and personnel matters exceptions to the open meetings act. 28. Consider and take appropriate action regarding lease/purchase agreement for the jp/constable pct. 2 offices at 10409 burnet road. Road. Now Commissioners Gomez and Sonleitner will not be with us this after noon unless they come back very, very quickly. The question I guess is do we want to discuss the burnet road option or wait until next week.
>> I think we ought to just push it.
>> okay. Then we will not discuss item no. 28, we really may as well get the other members of the court here. For that discussion. So 28 we will simply postpone until December 12th.
>> 13th.
>> 13th, which is next Tuesday. And 29, that relates to 6, right? We may as well postpone is one week, too. 29 we will have back on for a full discussion next week with a full complement of the court here. 30. Receive legal briefing and take appropriate action on tax rebate agreement with samsung Austin semiconductor llc. Consultation with attorney. 31, just a few remaining minority items. Receive legal briefing and take appropriate action on tax abatement agreement with home depot u.s.a, inc. Consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. 32. Receive legal briefing and take appropriate action on settlement demand in dameon kleinpeter v. Travis County ces, twccrd no. 1a50364-s, eeoc no. 31ca500909. Consultation with attorney and personnel matters exceptions to the open meetings act. 33. Receive legal briefing and take appropriate action on request for information from project dual regarding financial incentives under county financial incentives program policy. Consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act, also. We will discuss these matters in executive session but will return to open court before taking any action.
we have returned from executive session. Where we discussed the following items: parts of number 5, specifically those parts dealing with facilities. We were informed and in my view no action necessary today. We'll have these matters back on the agenda next week with the wording slightly changed to facilitate consideration and action. Number 24, which involves the medical examiner's facility case. Move that we agree -- approve the proposed settlement agreement and the bottom line is that Travis County will end up receiving $104,190 after all is said and done.
>> second.
>> and that is based on a rather intricate formula that I’m sure was well explained. [ laughter ] , but not so well understood. But we'll take our money and go and get this matter over. Discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> do we need to authorize you to sign the settlement agreement?
>> do we have one?
>> move that we authorize the county judge to sign the proposed settlement agreement as long as it's consistent with the first part of this motion. Discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. We did not discuss item number 25 as that matter was pulled. And it will be put back on when it's ready or should we have it on next week. That involves lizbeth hernandez subrogation.
>> if we need it, we'll reset it for you.
>> okay. 26 involves the starflight employee slot number 6. I move that we authorize the county judge to sign on behalf of the Commissioners court the proposed settlement agreement.
>> separation agreement?
>> yep, separation agreement. And we have all of the specific terms and conditions as well as the appropriate release.
>> second.
>> discussion? That passes by unanimous vote. Number 27, the matter involving james thornton and the sheriff's office, I move that we approve the recommendation set forth in the letter from the sheriff dated December 5th, 2005, which reinstates mr. Thornton to a security coordinator position, and the recommendation is that he be placed in the -- at the maximum salary.
>> second.
>> in the senior security coordinator position that's vacant.
>> no, security coordinator position.
>> what did I say?
>> senior.
>> just security.
>> that we authorize refer to the sheriff's excellent judgment as long as the sheriff's department budget can cover it. Discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Number -- we did not discuss 28 or 29. Those will be back on the court's agenda next week. I suggest that Commissioner Sonleitner chat with ms. Ford if there's maybe something we can do to ease her concerns. I thought we gave directions last time. Let's get roger to check with ms. Ford then and see if there's anything we need to do informally consistent with the action we've already taken. But both of those items will be back on the court's agenda next week. Number 30 is the matter involving the proposed tax rebate agreement with samsung Austin subcommittee llc. And I move that we approve the proposed agreement that legal counsel and counsel for samsung have been working on, including the following specific language. A requirement -- the required documentation as to compliance as follows certified by the chief financial officer provide at Austin-Travis County location in a format easily reviewed by the county. And this is home depot.
>> they're both --
>> they're both the same thing. I can read it once, right.
>> that's right.
>> okay. Provide the Austin location in a format easily reviewed by the court, tapes are not acceptable. Any and all documentation utilized by the chief financial officer and making the certification as to the number of employees, the average salary and the amount of investment and provide additional information as needed to document these items as requested by county subject to withholding of employee of the agreements, benefits notice. And the importance of this is that we need it to document the number of jobs, salary set forth in the contract.
>> yes. These are the main compliance requirements and we'll get that information every year to determine the report that they give us. They'll report the information and then provide the backup documentation that we can check.
>> okay. And I think that as to the other recommended language, it's all pretty much acceptable.
>> yeah.
>> discussion? Now, do we need hear to authorize the county judge to sign the agreement if this change is is acceptable to samsung representatives? And I think they have seen a draft that pretty much incorporates all of the other changes that we've kind of negotiated over the last few days.
>> I’ve given their attorney a copy on samsung. I’ve discuss it had with both attorneys. That's why I gave you an entire list. And that's what the court has approved and that you would authorize the judge to sign what discussed in executive session, and to do cleanup wording things that go along with that, with the understanding that it only be brought back to court if there are suntan active changes requested by either party, otherwise the judge would be authorized to sign. It would probably take a day or two for us to get everything pulled together.
>> so the proposed draft agreement -- and I guess any minor changes -- would be okay, the judge should sign on behalf of the Commissioners court. If there are significant changes, though, the Commissioners court should have an opportunity to address those.
>> yes.
>> and we will know for sure whether the changes are acceptable by this time tomorrow?
>> yes.
>> okay. And if that is so and the judge signs the agreement, we will let the Commissioners court now. Is that all right? All of that's in the motion.
>> second.
>> discussion? Any comments from samsung representatives? [ laughter ] that's good enough. All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Now, the next item is the proposed tax abatement agreement with home depot u.s.a., incorporated. We did last week approve the agreement before us that we thought was acceptable, but we're still sort of going back and forth over the language. And so the court's position is that the language we offered last week should be acceptable, and that's the same language that I read a minute ago. And just for the on record, let me just quickly summarize it, and that is that we need the the chief financial officer to certify the number of jobs and average salary.
>> and investment.
>> and investment under the agreement. And we need the supporting documentation provided to the county at home depot's Austin-Travis County location, which is already here. In a form that's easily understandable. We have a problem with just receiving the magnetic tapes because we're not sure we can get the information we need from it. So we want to see the same information that the chief financial officer basis his certification on. And this is what the court said last week, and we stand firmly behind it unless they offer something easier and better. We've been asking for that several weeks already. That's the motion.
>> judge, is that something that we assume that pbo will sign off on? I mean, what is --
>> for the county, right. : that's who will look at the supporting documentation for us.
>> second.
>> that can be real easy, but it also can be not so easy if you don't get the right information.
>> that's the point. Because the -- easily understandable. I mean, lawyers love that kind of terminology. That's a little ambiguous --
>> we put the phrase in there that if it's not to our satisfaction we can request additional information and we can withhold our approval of the notice until it's done the way that we need it done. So I think it will prohibit any problems from cropping up.
>> I think that any way for us to factually reach the same conclusion as to number of jobs, average salary as a company will suffice for us. And in my view, I thought we were trying to come up with the easiest way, plus if the chief financial officer certifies this anyway, it's just a matter of us receiving a certification and receiving the backup support. That's the thrust of what we're looking for. It's easy to me. Any more discussion? Anybody here from home depot? All in favor?
>> we will be authorizing you to sign subject to the same...
>> but only one time. They authorized me once last week. Only one time. All right. All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Thank you very much. We give marietta not a pay increase, but a big round of applause for her work on these contracts and we'll make sure she gets her paycheck on time. [ applause ]
>> (indiscernible). [ laughter ]
>> on 32 we were given good news that the counteroffer that we made last week is acceptable. No action required today. And was the county judge authorized to sign the settlement agreement along the same lines as we discussed last week? If not, I move that I be authorized to sign on behalf of the Commissioners court if there are significant changes we'll put it back on the court's agenda.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? All in favor? Show Commissioner Davis, Gomez, Daugherty and yours truly voting in favor. Commissioner Sonleitner voting against again.
>> yes. It's consistent with what I did last week.
>> a model of consistency.
>> try to be.
>> 33, we did discuss this matter with legal counsel, and there's one little issue that needs to be researched before we take any action. And based on legal advice that ms. Gearhart gives me, I will then communicate with the project to accompany the court's position as to one or two contracts and the amount that we would be inclined to consider if they decide to move to Austin-Travis County. Okay? And that's just -- we'll have this matter back on the court's agenda next week just in case. Okay?
>> judge, I think we have -- we have to go back to number 12. That was the one we were kind of waiting on them to let us know what's going on.
>> my last e-mail from continually indicated that we had asked them to sign a release of liability while there are issues on their own county property. We're waiting on them to execute that.
>> I have not received it. Water is going to communicate to them and we're going to do this next week whenever we get the document.
>> thank you very much. Then on number 12 we will have it back on. Next week. Now, anything else today?
>> move adjourn.
>> second.
>> 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, December 7, 2005 7:31 AM