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

August 1, 2006
Item 26

View captioned video.

Number 26, is to consider and take appropriate k on the following matters related to the Travis County health care district board of managers, a, report from Commissioners court subcommittee on the process to fill vacancy left by ebbing term of manager testimony young. 26-b, subcommittee recommendations on short listed candidates for I want view. 26-c, interview questions for and cats. 26-d, schedule for interviews with Commissioners court. And 26-e, other related issues in case there are some.

>> yuj, Commissioners, -- judge, Commissioners, you several weeks ago identified a subcommittee of the court and asked that I work with that subcommittee to review the eight applications that were submitted. That committee met on July 19th. On attachment a of your backup, it includes the short resumes of all of the applications that were submitted. The committee reviewed those applications and the committee recommends approval of the following applicants for interview, and that would be dr. Eduardo sanchez, ms. Kathy rider and mr. Jason earl.

>> a couple of points here. In addition to looking at the qualifications of the various applicant, and all of them did possess outstanding qualifications, we tried to look at it from the perspective of what does the board need. And given the various skill sets of the different applicants, what contribution we thought they would make to the board and whether we thought we already had that particular back background or profession represented on the board and ought to try to be a lot bit more diverse. So it was difficult trying to consider all those factors at one time. The other thing is if historically a member of the court wanted to interview somebody who had not been short listed, we pretty much have defd -- deferred to that. If somebody wants one of the five not short listed interviewed, I have have 2 problem with it.

>> I wish we had the luxury of having phi slots like the last time when we went through this, but unfortunately we only have one shrt, and so I think we've got a stout group of folk. And again I'm the same with the judge of being respectful, if anybody else says there's somebody else they would like to see on there, but we're really looking at not doubling up. And I think for my part too it was -- I was looking for a certain cied of skill set for what a start-up corporation. And so I was leaning very heavily on certain business expertise. To me this next level, and I think the discussion we just went through says it, it me it's all about the vision thing. Now that we have the health care district, where are we going? So I was also looking for a blend of folks that could bring potential expertise to the table in terms of services -- again, it's the vision thing, where are we going. So I think we've got a great list.

>> questions or issues about these three? Any desire to interview anybody else? Move approval of these three that we interview them. Discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. And in c, we looked at last time's ibt view 's interview questions. Did we change them?

>> we changed the order and we added a question 8, which would allow the candidates to give some cling comments to the court or ask questions that they might have of the court members once interview process is complete. So the questions are in a different order than you originally saw them, both last time and a few weeks ago in the backup. And then we added that kind of closing comment question, number 8, any questions for the Commissioners court.

>> so really we did a reworking of number 3. Number 3 when we first got started on that one was really do you understand what a hospital district is and kind of like it was more a mechanical kind of question. This one we really wanted to get more into the mission, challenges and opportunities so that people could be forecasting out as opposed to it being mr of a start-up kind of a question as to -- I remember last it time we got more, I read the legislation and the legislation says. This is to get that vision thing and looking ahead in terms of the chal lekz of the health care district as opposed to what is a health care district.

>> that's absolutely correct.

>> these are brief questions, buttic last time ibt views lasted about 40, 45 minutes apiece.

>> at least.

>> any additional questions come to miebd?

>> move approval of the questions.

>> second. : discussion?all in favor. That passes by unanimous vote.

>> the final point the committee considered was your potential opportunities to conduct the interviews. And we started with the budget hearing schedule as it had just been released when we met. And it there were some open dates listed. We are forging into the budget process now, so there may be some other dates that the court would like us to consider, but included in your backup in attachment b was the proposed -- at the time proposed planning and budget schedule for budget work sessions identifying open dates. And that takes us through Monday, August 14th. I do have a calendar here if we want to look at some other dates if none of these seem to work.

>> I know for Gerald and me we have taken our hearing time on the seventh and turned that into a bcp meaght. During that same time period.

>> I guess probably -- I don't really know exactly what I have on my schedule either. I don't have it in frnt of me.

>> the lacialger question might be in that pbo has just reported that the budget process will -- the work session process at least will end after the 14th. Would it be the court's pleasure to consider dates after the 14th at this point in.

>> I'm thinking the second week after we get through bucket hearings because we only had a x amount of time between that and markup. So I strategically have taken my dates back.

>> I will take that suggestion off the table.

>> we finish on the 14th and I leave on the 16th, but I will be back the following Monday.

>> it's important I think for us to lock in a date so we can let the applicant necessity and they can be available. So we're looking at the week of -- that starts on the 23rd or 24th.

>> I'm back that Monday. Maybe the 23rd or 24th.

>> what if we look at Thursday -- have we scheduled a work session Thursday afternoon? Let's look at Wednesday afternoon if we did.

>> I don't show anything for that Thursday, the 24th.

>> your calendars have all been checked and you're all available I believe on August 24th along with dates in September. And judge, you have a gentle reminder from me regarding whether you're interested in scheduling work sessions after the 14th, and there are three dates in August and September which are available should the court wish to schedule them.

>> does the 24th have something on it?

>> in. No.

>> that would be a good day.

>> let's do August the 24th.

>> I would advise the court that I will be in san antonio at a cdbg meeting on that date, but I can ensure that the court has sufficient staff support to conduct the ibt views in my -- interviews in my absence if that is okay.

>> you will be sorely missed. August 24th is what we're working with.

>> at 1:00 o'clock?

>> 1:30. We want everybody to be on time. Let's see if Commissioner Davis is okay with that date too. Any related issues come to miebd?

>> in related issues. We will -- health and human services, in coordination with the judge's office, will make appropriate notice it the candidates of the dates. And I'm making the assumption that we are scheduling maybe an hour apart, which 45 minutes will give you 10 or 15 minutes between each one, so 30 to five should take care of it.

>> I'd aim for 45 min.

>> okay.

>> that way if we take an hour, the applicant would only sit there 15 minute. Good selection time. 24th okay?

>> yeah.

>> okay. August 24th at 1:30. Firks judge, do we need ms. Fleming's sis teps in terms of getting out an appropriate letter it the folks who did not make the list of timists to basically thank them for their application, but they were in the chosen? Some nice letter.

>> that sound fine to me. Indicate that the county judge had in part in their rejection. [ laughter ]

>> yeah, with full vote of the court.

>> and is the court authorizing the county jublg to sign the -- judge to sign the letters or the executive manager of health and human services.

>> that's a good one. Why did you do that, judge.

>> I'll let the judge sign it.

>> it would be my pleasure.

>> any objection? Those are the directions from the court. Anything else to report on 26? Thank you very much. That can our out tanding subcommittee of the court. Thank our outstanding committee of the court.


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: Tuesday, August 1, 2006 7:14 PM