This is the official website of Travis County, Texas.

On This Site

Commissioners Court

Previous Years' Agendas

Intergovernmental Relations Office

Administrative Ops

Health & Human Svcs

Criminal_Justice

Planning & Budget

Transportation & Natural Resources
 

On Other Sites

Travis County Commissioners Court

February 21, 2006
Item 12

View captioned video.

12. Consider and take appropriate action regarding the following liability claim recommendations:
a. Allstate indemnity co. – settle;
b. Progressive county mutual ins. Co. – settle;
c. David perry – settle; and
d. Roger valencia – settle.

the first one is for all state indemnity and tiffany ross, the owner of the vehicle. The other driver was christine la blank. Our county driver deputy herrera failed to control his speed in heavy traffic. He remember ended his la blanc, who was then pushed into another vehicle. The claimant's vehicle sustained extensive damage to hoar 2004 ford mustang and she's also alleging injuries and is represented by an attorney for her bodily injuries. That portion will be settled at a later time. Risk management is requesting approval for $9,584.73. It is quite apparent that there will be supplemental damages and we also haven't paid for the rental vehicle. So we're also asking for approval to pay any supplemental damage not to exceed $5,000 that will come in so we don't have to come back before the court.

>> questions?

>> can you briefly just tell us what -- because I have -- in the backup I could see where the actions that were taken with the employees praing from everything -- range from everything from defensive driving to not being able to take county vehicle, having to use an alternative vehicle versus I guess one of the newer vehicles. Is that sort of -- that's pretty standard to get those kind of things?

>> constable 2, that's I believe his practice. If there's an accident, then he takes those actions, so with regard to constable 2 accidents, that's true.

>> okay.

>> number b is progressive county mutual, jane jones, which was the vehicle in front. The same description as before. She was the vehicle in front that was rear-ended by ms. La blanc, who was pushed in by the county driver. Her total damages to date are 97727, which also does not include a rental vehicle and it hasn't even gone to the shop. So supplemental damages is probably conclusive. And we're asking for that amount to be transferred from the risk fund to pay to progressive county mutual and any supplemental damage up to $2,000 be approved.

>> and she does have bodily injuries, so she'll be -- we'll be bringing that back to court just coincidentally, I’m sure it's a coincidence, both of those parties are represented by the same lawyer.

>> and I understand that there were reports at the time that there didn't -- one of the people did -- and I think it was b that did have an issue at the time of the incident, but the preceding one, a, it was stated that -- or they denied going to the hospital, saying that they had no issues, no problems, but then later came back and said, well, after I’ve thought about this, I have been sore. Is that kind of how it's happened?

>> that's how it happened.

>> third claimant involves tnr vehicle, owner david perry and third-party driver henry etta perry. It was on foster ranch road. Our supervisor advised that the county driver, mr. Wright, was eastbound on southwest parkway, transporting four trustee inmates back to del valle. They believe that mr. Wright may have to dozed off for a few seconds on approach of the intersection, and when he came back he was too late and ran into the back of another third-party driver, ms. Broussard, veered to the left and struck the claimant's nissan maxima. This vehicle is repairable. Ms. Perry's grandson was in the vehicle. Neither are claiming any injuries at this time. Just a note, ms. Broussard's vehicle, that claim will be brought to court next Tuesday. She has an attorney rep now for her injuries and her vehicle was determined to be totaled. So because two of the inmates were transported from the scene, this employee was assessed immediate five points from vehicle safety policy. Any additional corrective action will be brought back after further evaluation from the department. We are recommending $3,016.19 to the claimant and also asking for any supplemental damage up to $2,000, which is also probable. These are all first initial estimates.

>> it should be tso, right? Isn't it the sheriff's office.

>> no. Tnr, transportation and natural resources.

>> so we have a county driver transporting inmates?

>> trustees worp working with tnr parks.

>> okay.

>> they were being transported back to del valle.

>> so our transportation department people pick up the inmates from del valle? For some reason or another, I thought they were dropped off by corrections people. But the parks people go to del valle, pick up trustees and then take them out to the park where they help out?

>> that's what occurred in this instance.

>> okay.

>> and two claimed injuries then were taken for exam to I think brackenridge emergency room.

>> so the footnote here is that if I’m going to drive my own card and there's a county vehicle on the way, I’d better be careful, I better pull off the road, I better yield right-of-way. [ laughter ] okay. Next --

>> last one is constable precinct 2 employee, third party claimant, roger valen valencia. Our county driver of attempting to change lanes, looked over his shoulder to the blind spot and when he looked back traffic in front of him had come to a stop. He ran into the back of the claimant's 1983 ford van and pushed it into another third party. Due to the age of this vehicle, it was considered a total loss just because it was 23 years old. The third party that he also hit was enterprise, we've not heard from them yet. I’m sure it willing forthcoming once repairs are done and that will be coming. Mr. Valencia is not claiming any injuries, so as of now. We're asking for approval of $5,900 to be paid to mr. Valencia from the risk fund.

>> my comments are for a, b, c and d because I certainly don't want the sheriff's office to think that I don't spread the love around when there are others who are involved in what were completely avoidable accidents. And I’m not happy. And it is one of those things especially in terms of these chain reaction kinds of things. We have traffic and congestion on our streets, and the idea that you can not pay attention and all of a sudden, oops, there it is. Well, it's there. And this seems to be the next category of things that we seem to be finding. It used to be the deer and now it's these chain reaction collisions of not paying attention that all of a sudden something is stopping in front of you and you do not leave yourself enough time to react to the circumstances in front of you. I think there are some more serious issues going on in c, and I am hopeful that tnr will get to the bottom of those in terms of that. I’ll leave it at that. These are all avoidable. I am not going to vote for any one of them. I am not happy, but I am also one to say that it's not just one office that is responsible here, there are other offices that have the same kind of problems and I want to make sure that I am equal in making a public statement about that these were all avoidable and we're spending big bucks on things that could have been completely avoided if people paid attention to what the job was at hand, and that was driving.

>> one thing to add, I spoke with constable van about these two collisions, and he pointed out that up to about six or eight months ago, he did have the ability to train on vehicle simulators through san antonio police department, but that's been terminated because of their use of it for their staff. The sheriff's office is purchasing a simulator, and it may be within the next several months that they'll be allowed to have constables be able to train. In the meantime we've talked to the association of counties, which has a mobile simulator and we may be able to work something out in the interim for that. I know constable van is actively looking for another source of training for vehicle simulators.

>> well, for sure from a defensive driving needs object -- [inaudible - no mic]. In order to avoid these costly wrecks.

>> so I guess maybe I need to ask Commissioner Sonleitner. What do you do when you say, do you know what, I’m not going to cover these? So does that start the litigation? Is that what happens when you --

>> no. There are three adults on the Commissioners court today that will vote for this and then it moves on. I will not be one of them. [ laughter ]

>> well, here's the deal. We understand -- I’ve asked this before. If we have an inordinate amount of accidents that are our fault as Travis County, then there is an issue. It is in the course of doing business. And do you know what, you can put people in simulators all day long, but it's -- you you know, you don't need to be in a simulator to determine whether or not somebody hasn't had enough sleep. If they're dosing off, if they're doing something like this that's not -- you would like for everybody to pay as close attention as they can and if somebody has a record, there's some sort of a pattern about you have more than these, what we need to do as a county is say under no circumstances do you need to drive a car. I mean, not that it is on our duty. Now, I guess you all are the ones that can tell us do we have a higher number of folks. I mean, it is unnerving to have to have to pay these things. Do you know what? In the course of doing business, I mean, driving vehicles -- I mean, people -- I mean, we are human beings and you just make mistakes.

>> the problem here too is that the people -- the folks who have been injured apparently didn't cause the accident and they don't work for the county. They're just people using public roads, I fear, that our employees hit while on duty. And so I guess I feel a stronger sense of responsibility to make those innocent third parties whole and to make sure that our drivers, our employees, that we do what we can to help them drive better in the future. These multiple car collisions that we cause, though, are not good.

>> and I will say -- I’m not excusing my any means, but these three accidents happened in less than 30 days, and I have to say in all the years -- I’ve not seen one like this that's this close together. Normally you see these, but you see them so spread out. This is just kind of a freaky month, I guess.

>> and Gerald, of course these bills need to be paid, but I think there is also a message that when you do something on a five-0 vote or in this case today a 4-0 vote, it basically says okay, just go ahead and pay them. I remember when I first came on this Commissioners court there was something that I didn't like and I remember valerie turn to go me and going, you don't have to vote for this. There are people here who can do this and you can send a message by not vote fog something. I’m just telling you I’m staking it out, I’m not going to be voting for this to send a message that I’m not happy about this and I’m hopeful that there are three people on this Commissioners court who will vote for this and take care of our business, but I’m staking out no.

>> but I don't know that we ought to send a tough message to the innocent residents who were there at the traffic light waiting on it to change. I’m trying to get -- I’m arguing to the other two, not to you. [ laughter ]

>> I vote in favor of the citizens. I feel for them, but they're also paying for this. They're also paying for these wrecks.

>> but they're paying -- they're paying right along with 850,000 plus, barring the young ones. But I guess the -- the message we should send to these residents is if the accident is our fault, then part of our job is to make you whole, one. But two, to try to get our drivers to do better, so we ought to try to do that. And sending the word to the departments should be basically employees who have county property in their possession must be more careful and avoid these accidents because damages -- those funds come from the public treasury.

>> I don't know how practical it is to say that when it comes to performance review, if you had a car accident at fault and awarded points that that may affect your ability to get a salary increase.

>> we can do that with our own departments, but we can't do that with independent elected officials. And if you're on a pops sale scale, you get a raise whether you've had an accident or not.

>> we can tell them what we think, though.

>> or you just don't let them drive. I mean, that's what you do. They may be a great employee. Say, do you know what, you're too lax, you don't get to drive a county vehicle or we're not going to put you in a driving situation at work.

>> I suspect you've got three votes, judge.

>> stop talking?

>> yes, sir.

>> move approval.

>> second.

>> reluctantly.

>> I’m an adult again. [ laughter ]

>> all in favor? Show Commissioners Gomez, Daugherty, yours truly voting in favor.

>> abstaining.

>> abstaining, Commissioner Sonleitner for the reasons stated.

>> thank you.

>> they will pay on down the road.

>> thank you, Margaret for being the adult.

>> move that we recess until 1:30. 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, February 22, 2006 10:26 AM