Travis County Commissioners Court
August 28, 2007
Item 39
>> do we discuss 39 before executive session? That's my way of asking are we ready for it? 39 is to discuss and take appropriate action on feasibility of creating position to perform public information, intergovernmental relations and legislative duties at Travis County.
>> in the backup I believe you all received, there's a little bit of history on this because I had to educate myself, being new here, pulled some old information that pbo has put together from 2006 and 2005 as well as a description of tarrant county's external affairs department. Two possible ways to -- there's two possible ways to skin this cat, having looked at it. And Commissioner Gomez has also looked at, would be either to do one employee under the county judge or to do a position that answers directly to the Commissioners court as a whole with a poart support staff of one and designated -- assistant county attorney to aid during the legislative session. Those are the two scenarios with that seem most feasible to us at this point. The thing that jumped out at having looked at some of the county
>> [ inaudible ]. Is the different skill sets, apparently distinct skill sets between an intergovernmental affairs person who deals a lot with the legislature and the administrative agency versus an ipo person who does press and pr for the county.
>>
>> [ inaudible ]. On the other hand, we don't have anybody that has the pr. I know it's a great idea and stuff like that, but we have to make sure that they -- whatever criterion you end up using, especially when it comes to the pr, is very critical. That is a big bite in the apple I think as far as I'd like to see because it's definitely something that needs to project what this Commissioner court and individuals of this Commissioners court are really trying to get across to the community. So I'm just -- I'm not saying that this is not going to happen that way, I'm just saying that there's a lot of strong consideration that I'd like to have is the pr aspect. And of course dealing with the legislature is another big arm of this, but pr is very important, very important is how we end up doing that.
>> one example that springs to mind is publicizing some of our park initiatives, to reinvent the wheel department by department.
>> [inaudible - no mic]. We could have a machine that's really great at getting public information out there and generating community input that we desire. Or not that we desire specific community input. Not to
>> [inaudible - no mic]. And then the intergovernmental affairs aspect of it, I would really advocate for that.
>> that's the biggest need that I see. If we can get that down just right, to me it's like we need to move it slow and take that one which is much more substantive to me that we do the legislative and then the cuc, the hospital district, all of those things that a intergovernmental relations person would fake care of as well as other issue with the city of Austin. They keep coming before us and we need to deal with those.
>> and there are many smanses that -- as soon ass that we don't know what the city of Austin is doing because we don't have eyeballs on the city of Austin. Not that they're failing to inform us as much as we don't have someone eyeballing what's happening.
>> lack of coordination and clab ration with with them.
>> in terms of scenario one or scenario two in the second page of the backup, one possible way to do it is to earmark 160,000 for the possibility that we work out the details to put somebody into it either through scenario 1 or scenario 2 either as an fte under the judge or an executive manager for the staff. This would not replace our lobbiest, would not replace the people department to department, it would coordinate their efforts and
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> I'm really concerned about adding another executive manager to the structure. The whole idea to -- no. My thought is if we're not careful, we're going to wind up with 18 executive manager reporting to the court again like there were department heads. And so --
>> if we were doing a job description, what will we put in it? Why don't we craft a job description n the budget process I do think we ought to set an amount aside that we plan to fund this position.
>> on the first stage of backup there's the beginning of the job description and the summary and the qualifications too. But it could be a jumping off point for --
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> well, on these, if we focus on those three areas, they are big areas. And I don't know how reasonable we are to expect one person to cover them. But I don't know -- if I had to prioritize these three, I am not sure today of what order I would put them in. But I think that really owt to drive -- ought to drive our decision, what we want that person to do. And then the question is what kind of background do we want the person to have. And I think that's how you determine what amount we need to set aside also. Our goal ought to be to have that done by next Tuesday. I would draft a job description because to be realistic, 160,000 sounds like a whole lot of money, but you want to fund at the level to get the person that you want. And I think the person ought to start out answering to the Commissioners court.
>> the job descriptions in the bexar county folder kind of lays out what she does. And I guess we could kind of -- as a starting place to see how fast we want to get there to do the job that she basically does. And she represents bexar county at cuc, at pac. That's a lot of collaboration with a lot of different entities. And so I'll be be glad to go back there and look at that and see, lay those out. And then we can mark off what we're not getting yet and maybe those that we want to start out doing.
>> if it's the mind of the court that this should be -- one idea I was thinking of is that it should be an intergovernmental affairs position and at least in the interim the ipo aspect that would crop up through this job could be handled ad hoc either in-house or through a consistent if, for instance, we with needed a facilitator to deal with this particular public comment that we needed on an item, that could be done ad hoc, either by someone in-house or through someone contracted out.
>> I think bexar county does that, I think the third thing they do, the public information aspect of it. But certainly a lot of collaboration, communication and coordination occurs.
>> don't we all feel that the lobby group that we have will still be be involved? It would certainly make sense to me to try to do this thing in more after work session kind after thing where you got them in and you really bounced this kind of stuff and helped them do some guidance. It's obvious as long as we've been talking about this that we all have kind of different ideas about what really this person needs to be doing. And it would be one thing if this person were going to replace that contract that we had, but since it's not -- I don't want to feel overly pressured -- that's probably not the right way to put it since we've been talk being it for six or eight months. The more we do discuss it and try to get downtown wire on this thing, I do think that we need some help and I think we need some help with our lobby folk that's going to say here's what is really going to benefit us and help us. I don't think you can do that with the court. I think you need to do it in a work session.
>> it seem to me that we ought to take a shot at listing specific duties and responsibilities. And if you say intergovernmental relations, intergovernmental affairs to me, certain duties and responsibilities come to mind. I'm willing to bet, though, that a lot of stuff comes to mind that won't come to mind for the other four. And some things don't come to mind that will come to mind for others. Do you see what I'm saying? So if we put those on paper, I think we will have done a lot. And I don't know why we wouldn't try to do that by next week, even under each one of them. Legislative, public information, intergovernmental affairs. Is there a fourth one? Will that pick up the major ones?
>> I think that's guide dwooided into ipo or intergovernmental affairs, but is there more of a defined position?
>> the legislative really is a little different. And if we are a lot more proactive than we have been historically, especially in preparation for the next session, then I think it needs to be there. Now, to be honest, I don't think of hundreds of issues, but I can certainly think of four or five big ones right quick with land use authority being at the top. And under that really is a more concerted effort to try to get the other Texas counties on board during the slow time like the interim. It amazes me how certain counties or certain individuals, they kind of -- it's flowing toward an affirmative vote and next thing you know it kind of --
>> it's dead.
>> that's the reason you have to work on the stuff a year and a half out because those folks have got to go and work with -- our delegation is the last given the fact that we think they're going to be supportive. It's going to the committee chairman and it's like our folks continue to ask us monthly, what are your deals that you want us to be thinking about?
>> and this would not replace the need for outside lobbyists, but it certainly would make them far more effective.
>> well, it would help us sort of get our department heads and executive manager a bit more engaged during the interim. It's hard to have a whole lot of stuff on your work plan and then to sort of step back start working on something that you need a year and a half later. But really to get this done it seems to me that we need to start working a lot earlier. It's kind of like the Texas youth commission. It's a state thing, but it's impacting us monetarily in a real big way.
>> absolutely.
>> and there are so many question mark about it that we really need to work with the other urban counties and make sure that we may have to take some steps during the interim to communicate with the state administrators. I don't know. You've got a lot more impact if you do it with the other counties and not alone, but it's us giving speeches in here on Tuesday is one thing, but actually being out there and working and trying to get the other sort of similar manager and other urban areas doing the same thing --
>> there's not enough hours in the day.
>> I agree. So what if we shoot for that? Maybe we can pull from the other postings, duties and responsibilities and try to get in these three categories, legislative, public information, intergovernmental affairs. And if you think of a fourth one, stick it on there.
>> it would be a heck of a challenge just to deal with those three.
>> let's do that. Ms. Ramos will give us a reminder e-mail on Thursday. Monday is a holiday, so if we get these out by Friday afternoon, it would help.
>> we can get them out by Thursday.
>> okay.
>> why don't we shoot for that. Notice out deliberate we are, mr. White. We don't rush into anything, do we? Take our time, work out way through it, systematically.
>> okay.
>> we'll have this one back on. And hopefully I think we ought to try to get a little bit better idea so during the budget process we can earmark an amount that we think will cover this whenever it happens. All right?
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, August 29, 2007, 18:30 AM