Travis County Commissioners Court
March 20, 2007
Item 11
Due to technical difficulties some caption files may be incomplete.
This is phase 2 of the we were here in jon, and--in jon, and the court with the recommendation from precinct 3 recommended a two month extension of the pilot project until she had more information, having just taken office in January, January 1. Di anna ramirez, myself, rusty wright, have met with the judge and visited to look at the procedures that they are working with on those older cases. The judge is in agreement with the temporary extext of phase two until we get overall county third party r rfp before you all and to get it out on the street. We do have some statistics that they are collecting on those cases. It's difficult to exactly how much of the effort is coming out of msb and how much is coming out of the jp and the constable, but we are convinced that it would be advantageous to leave those case that we have there until we get a third party countiwide vendor. We are working on that rfp and the city of Austin has just recently gone out and have responses back on their third party vendor. We have requested a copy of that rfp, which we'll see if we can do some modifications for ours. But the recommendation is to get some additional information from this phase two pilot, and that as quick as we can get a rfp to the court to look at those, the rfp for the countiwide, but this phase two would stay in place until we award a countiwide third party collection.
>> our rfp does not have to be perfect, right ?
>> nos.
>> no, sir.
>> the bes the rtp were the interfaces that we would need with the jp offices. And you're aware that we're in the process of getting a new system underneath the jp jp'srs exhausting all internal avenues, correct ?
>> that's correct.
>> we're defining it currently as central collections will work the cases for 90 days, and if after 90 days no success, it goes to central collections or goes to the third party ?
>> that's right.
>> and my concern with that, will 90 days really be adequate to show the effects of omni or alin on property inside Travis County to collect the debt or our big biggest hacker tools--hammer tools, really.
>> dusty, do you want to talk about 90 days?
>> basically the phase two plan is going to be old case which happened before January 1 of this year, after whatever status they were. The new case after January 1 of this year, what the judge has put together and we're discussing is that we will be, putting it into omni immediately, turning them over to the constable's office to be worked, and constable will be working the cases for 90 to 120 days days. At the time that their office feels they have done all they can, they will be turning them over to our office. We will continue to do skip tracing or whatever we can see that we can do above and beyond what the condition stable and jp's office has already done. At that point when we feel like we have done everything that we possibly could, that's the point at which it would be turned over to the third party vendor. So it will be the jp's doing their portion, constables doing thirg portion, deciding, and this is on the new cases. Old cases it wasn't necessarily that way. It was a hodgepodge. The new way, we should be able to have plenty of time for the letters to go out, plenty of time for the constables to do their thing then it would get to us. We will see what we can find find. If it gets down to where all three of us have not come up with the person and it's appropriate, we will then be turning that over to the third party.
>> so in actuality, the time frame probably will be longer than 90 days because you will include the jp--
>> much longer.
>> you will include the constable period before you hit the 90 day period for central collection.
>> yes, ma'am.
>> as far as the data we're trying to collect from the third party, my an understanding is they have expressed no problem as far as providing stats on the turncooperative in the requests that ve have made.
>> I would suggest that in crafting the rfp we be very clear about the types of stats that we want because I do foresee some other vendor or even perhaps msb in the future, saying, making an argument that this is proprietary, you know, trade secret type stuff. But I think that it's important for us to be able to define low hanging fruit through the use of that data so that we really are, we have a wonderful collections team, and it's constantly looking for ways to get better this would be a tremendous tool in figuring out not only how to do collections better but also how to handle the case before trial at jp.
>> uh-huh.
>> with the kind of demographics data that we could be handling the cases from beginning to end better not just from midend to total end.
>> sure.
>> this is some of the information that we did want to get, to be able to have in the rfp so that could you determine what is expected from a third party vendor. So this is, msb so far has been more than willing to work with us with whatever they have available.
>> that's good news.
>> I posed a couple of questions at that time making sure that everybody ended up being on the same page in reference to the type of software. I think you guys used, what kind of software is that you all have for some of this stuff ?
>> we're on, it's the same vendor that we have for our tax and our voter registration, it's easy justice by hammer enterprises.
>> okay.
>> we're using that for tracking the jp cases.
>> okay. So I guess if this was look at across the board, of course we would bring in all the other collection initiatives in place as far as participants of this process,, how do you envision everyone being on the same page to make sure that it's something that uniform would have some common technology to the point that we'll be doing the same as far as looking at some of this stuff ?
>> currently, we're getting the information passed to us that is in the current czs system that we we are using the same information there. We have look at being able to, once the constable three has talked to us a bunch about being part of their collections group. We are looking at the ability to get some information from tiburon, all of this loaded into the system that we are using so that we would have the same information. Just an upload download situation from the various other computer systems. If that answers your question.
>> yeah. What I'm just trying to prevent from whapping is we get cross wired with our technology where we are looking at--
>> at this point in time, the way we are doing it today with the cjs system, they are passing me the data and they are passing me the data. I am now responsible for the gas by 34, the account accountability and what not. Once it's passed to me it's my data. They are not so much worried about it. Hopefully we will be able to transfer the data into facts or whatever else. I.t. And the rest of them are working towards this. At this point in time it's mine and I'm accountable for it. I'm having to do the gasby and all that type of stuff.
>> I want to make sure, and that's why I pose the question now and I posed it then. Somewhere along the line on the technical end I want to be sure all the proper interfaces are in lace where it can be a real smooth transition on the technical end of what we are doing. I see what we are doing right now as far as, thank you, as far as the collection process and everybody in agreement. I see the recommendations being made. But I don't see the gut approach, I guess, to make sure that there is something that's telling me that we are going to go in that direction I'm suggesting. I'm trying to be proactive in my mind to be sure all these things are in place and laid out on the ten end.
>> I'm with you. I'm dealing with the trees and activity and county are dealing with the forest.
>> the tree is a part of forest.
>> yes, sir.
>> I'm not going to let you get away.
>> yes, sir.
>> I want to be sure its and everybody else had a is interfacing with this thing, are--
>> yes, sir.
>> okay. That's what I'm doing, lay laying the ground work. Okay ?
>> yes, sir.
>> okay to 90 days beyond when the thing was due. Why is it that you need this thing for 90 days ?
>> 90 days is a number that was placed there. I'm more into looking at what all has transpired. Obviously, as you say, it could be six months later by the time I got it. If omn I has had time to do whatever, if the constables has time do whatever, we work real well with stacy. If this is the last ditch effort, I would like to take one thing. I don't think, personally, it should take 930 days. I think that should--90 days days. I think there should be a call on each and every case. If we get feedback, we should continue. If we get partial pay, we should like to have 90 days to deetdeal with the partial pay and get it in here. If it's a dead end, it's not my requirement that we keep it just because there's a 90 day thing. If it's a dead end and we have done everything we can, get back with the con stall and the jp and we all agree, let's ship to the third party. Just a number to me, sir. It was a time frame. So if I do get a partial pay I can get it collected in the 90 days. It could be sherter than that.
>> I can see why if you get it and set up a partial pay, because I think that it's better with us doing the partial pay not to say, I think we have even gotten it work out with msb so that even the partial pay, they are sending the money over to us at this stage.
>> correct.
>> when we gave you more people last year, what workload does this put on your camp ?
>> currently the workload that I'm mainly dealing with today is it hb? The house bill 1863, the partial pays from the j p. We are not spending a drastic amount of time at this point for these failure failures to appear. We are sending out letters and doing some skip tracing. The majority of the staff time right now is people that have promised, have pled guilty, promised to come pay, they show up and then they skip we have phone numbers, we have found with us the telephone calls and calling people at work gets those partial pay people in. We have not spent a lot of time with the failure to appears, which is what this mainly is, nor have we spent the money that you gavous that yet. We have got money sitting there, if we get this ramped you like we want to, we will be able to gear this up better. . Again, I want to take a business approach and see what we can do, what's cost effective, and come back to talk to everybody, this is what I'm doing, should we turn over quicker, do something different. 90 days is just a time frame frame. What we are doing now is going to be something new with new cases versus old cases. The owed cases, some of them didn't have omni, some of them didn't have warrants. It's in a turmoil with the 8 000 that msb currently has. The new thing is a different approach to look at. If this guy is in canada and we can't find him, constable is not going to go there to get him of let's do something different. They are not going to respond to me if they are not going to pick him up on a warrant. Let's do something different different. If you do get a hold of them we would like 90 days to collect all that before turning it over to a third party.
>> stacy, why don't you come up. I want to ask you a question please. In your opinion, if you can't collect it as a constable, what do you think cuss ty's cuss--dusty's ability, why would he be able to collect something that you haven't been able to collect in your 120 days that you had it? In your opinion, what would be the reason ?
>> we're going to trait more on cases where we can find them and they are in the ten county area within our reach reach. If someone is in dallas or houston or out of state, they know we are not going to driver up there and try to execute that warrant. The only shot that we really have with that is working with other agencies there statewide warrant roundups and trying to work to those points of collaborating with other agencies during that time period.
>> I guess the reason that I'm having a little difficulty here on giving, putting something in another 90 day queue, if somebody owes Travis County some money for a citation, I would think that they are much more inclined to come in, appear, work something out, when law enforcement has called them, and especially when law enforcement says, not only law enforcement, but if we have to pass this thing along to a third party, guess what, the third party is going to tag with you an additional 30 percent.
>> right.
>> if that is not enough, you know, fire power to get somebody's attention, I'm not so sure that we are not chasing this thing a little bit by giving it to dusty and saying, hey, why don't you make a stab at it. Now, some people may think, I don't want their 30 percent more on something because they can't pay the original thing already. You know what, we have given them every opportunity in in the world. They are already probably six, seven, eight, nine months beyond. What you have is something without a lot of incentive to come in and pay the deal. And I don't want to see us get into this thing where, first of all, I don't think that we can compete with the private mhad this regard very well.
>> well, there's something interesting about this coming up. We're kind of in transition right now. I really don't have all the answers. For example, judge digg has just raised her bond fee to $500 a case from 200. We have had situations where like with the constable's office, our partial payment agreement is you pay one warrant every pay day. That doesn't give two too big after window. Three or four warrants. You see, they get paid every two weeks. And we have had a deal, a situation where people having paying bonds to basically defer things off to go to partial payment. Now, with that 500 deal we're going to have some people that really want to make partial payments and they can't do 500 per offense, and they can't really pay a warrant off every pay day and still pay the rent at the first. So this gives us an opportunity to go into a collections cycle with Travis County collections and try that. We still have the deal, if you don't fulfill your obligation, you know, can you still be arrested, have your driver's license denied and have 30 ff.
>> some.
>> some. We are going to see more.
>> but--
>> the judge switched the bond on March 1 from 200 to 500. And we have seen, you know, a drop down in the number of bonds filed.
>> this is essentially a sifting mechanism. The constable's office gets all of them, --sifts out those who haven't paid, that goes to collections, collections grabs those in partial pay and gets those who haven't paid a dime and moves it to the thirds party.
>> they are not going to go to collections unless there is a play. At that time if they don't fall out it will go to the third party and fall out.
>> uh-huh.
>> the point here, this thing is going to potentially be very old before it gets to dusty.
>> well--
>> I mean if they have been working with you on trying to pay a little bit. Quite honestly, the 120 days doesn't hold true to you guys. If there is some activity going on. Because you all keep them longer than 120 days. Do you not? If there's some activity? If you feel, hey, we are working with the person.
>> if we still get money out of them. What we can do is as soon as we determine that they are determine outside the 10- 10-county area, and not coming back any time soon, we can come back quicker. We have been doing the 120 days because it's been simple to do it that way.
>> what I don't want to say happen in all this, the third party just go, we don't want to deal with you all. You all just go and do your stuff. Then we are really in trouble. Msb has collected $700,000 to date.
>> from the low hanging fruit.
>> some--
>> they are getting the whitman sampler.
>> some has been low hanging fruit, no question.
>> I guess what you really want to see is, who really can collect more money. Just let a private, let our collections people say who is in the best to collect.
>> I do in the want to see that. I do not want to see a profit motive injected into the enforcement of our criminal action.
>> I don't either. But I also want to you pay what you owe us. And whatever tool that it takes us to have, I want us to have that. I don't want to, you know, mess around with someone that quite honestly is, yeah some people just can't pay. What if you can't pay, then don't get in trouble. But let's not set a situation up here where you eventually have third parties that just, we don't want to do business that way way. I mean, maybe they don't. Maybe this will work. And I'm willing to give it a shot. Msb has said, may, we can live with this. But I certainly want the flag raised at some point in time when somebody says, you know this isn't working very well for us. And the third party, quite frankly, is getting, you know, less inclined, you know, to want to do business with, whoever the third party is.
>> one quick point though, with omni, unless they have left the state or died, eventually they are going to need a drives license to cash a check or be able to conduct bus bus--conduct business in the state. So it's like, a cash receiv receivable, what we are trying to do is get paid sooner rather than later.
>> this is really a sooner rather than later issue because omni is very effective over time.
>> yes.
>> this is a status report today.
>> it is.
>> the action will be, and sb.
>> okay.
>> yeah.
>> now, when should we expect to see the wer that, let's be mindful that we have been, it's been two years or three.
>> since we have--
>> a long time since we talked about it. So, if we do, next week, let us know exactly when the rfp will be on the agenda. Make the county judge happy.
>> I must admit, we do not have the specifications for an automatic feed from central collections into out of the jp's and into central selections yet. The hesitancy that I have on getting a rfp out without the technical specifications is that we do not want to get out there with manual feeds to a third party vendor zoo I think the court needs a status report on that so I won't be looking for this item every week on the draft agenda.
>> I understand.
>> I can live with whatever date we decide on but this sort of uncertain si seems to me we can do better than that.
>> okay. We will make our best estimate of when we will be able to the bring you a draft rready.
>> okay.
>> that comes through its, I take it.
>> that's correct.
>> let's make sure we have somebody from its in the courtroom when we have the discussion. I'm sure they are listening right now. Basically we will take action based on that.
>> okay looking at the recommendations that have been before us, which makes sense to me. But anyway, we will just bring it back as the judge c?d--judge requested. I want to be sure.
>> let me just mention. One of the things of moving these to central collections has to do with being able to get the daily remitance from a third party vendor. Unless you move them into central collect , it's not technologially available on the current system. The only exception is constables can work off one warrant at a time 100 percent, where dusty's group can do a partial payment agreement of any amount that's reasonable. Jp 3's office will need to go in and code each of these accounts, these 8,000 accounts that are at msb, to show that they have moved to central collections. That may take a little bit of temporary hourly help or overtime. Diana is going to be looking at the judge's budget to see we need to use a little additional funds. Msb, once we get this phase two approved, will be promptly remitting what partial payments they have collected over the past since October of '04 and aren't 100 percent. We are optimistic that that is the best recommendation in the interim, and we'll work really hard to get you a status report of when we think that rfp might be able to come back to the court in a draft stage for . The current system, Commissioner, the unisjs system, we are probably the only organization of our size on that system. I know that joe harlo told me yesterday that he is concerned that we may loose the system sometime and not be able to recapture the it.
>> ah!
>> it is critical. I think the time frame
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, March 21, 2007 8:00 AM