Travis County Commissioners Court
October 30, 2007
Executive Session
I think this gets us to executive session. We did announce this morning our intention to call up the b.f.i. Item in executive session. That is 32. And we've taken action on a, so b and c, consider and take appropriate action on the following, b is response from executive director at the Texas commission on environmental quality, tceq, to proposed amendment to tceq municipal solid waste msw permit number 1447 b.f.i. Sunset farms landfill, and 32-c is other related issues. That will be under consultation with attorney. 36, receive briefing from county attorney and take appropriate action regarding tract code chapter 10, administrative leave with pay policy, consultation with attorney exception. 37-a, receive briefing on security review at the 1213 sabine street work location of the Travis County medical examiner's office. That's the security matters exception. And 37-b, consider and take appropriate action on parking space contracts for the Travis County medical examiner's office. Consultation with attorney and real property exceptions to the open meetings act. 38, receive briefing from county attorney on the potential impact of the new proposed regulations under internal revenue code section 125 cafeteria plans and take appropriate action. Consultation with attorney. 39, receive briefing from county attorney and take appropriate action regarding proposed takeover agreement between Travis County and insure ors indemnity company as performance bond surety on contract between Travis County and dssi corporation for control panel upgrade at Travis County correctional complex buildings 2 and 3. Consultation with attorney. 40, receive briefing from county attorney, authorize hiring of local counsel in kansas, and take appropriate action regarding michael lbuesgens versus hauser, et al. Consultation with attorney. 41, receive briefing from county attorney, authorize county attorney to accept, reject or counter settlement demand and/or take appropriate action regarding jessica tristan, eeoc charge number 31 c-2007-01225 c. Consultation with owner. 42, receive briefing from county attorney, authorize county attorney to accept, reject or counter settlement demand and/or take appropriate action regarding john jones. Consultation with attorney. 43, consider and take appropriate action in Travis County, et al. Versus center hill joint venture, frank yi resale deed. Consultation with attorney exception. 44, receive briefing from county attorney and take appropriate action on the following: a, construction related erosion event in hays county, associated water quality and environmental impacts on hamilton pool and other natural resources in Travis County. And 44-b, settlement agreement proposed by Texas commission on environmental quality. A and b are under consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act. And today our final item for executive session discuss will be number 45, consider and take appropriate action on request from project diamond back for financial incentives. Consultation with attorney exception. We'll discuss these matters in executive session under the appropriate exceptions, but will return to open court before taking any action.
>> good evening. We have returned from execstive session where we discussed the following items. Item 36, we street get a briefing from the county attorney's office and county judge will draft a letter and proceed as we discussed with legal's help. No action required today. Unless somebody can think of some. 37, matter involving medical examiner's office, both issues will be back on next week. Hopefully we'll be prepared to take action as well as receive an update about alternative parking strategy that we can make available to the employees and medical examiner's office if the they wish to do so. Number 38 is a matter involving the cafeteria plans by the internal revenue code new requirements. Comments are due on this new proposed regulations on Monday. We can deliver those comments electronically but in order for the court to provide input, we need to do so this week. The county judge volunteered to serve as a subcommittee of the court. Is another member I want --interested? We'll work with ms. Wilson and try to achieve satisfactory comments. We authorize ms. Wilson to submit those comments on behalf of the Travis County Commissioners court.
>> whatever comments, sorry, whatever comments that result from that subcommittee. The really delegated in the subcommittee to approve the comment.
>> with ms. Wilson approve the comments and submit them. We know one or two impact us. Whether there are other provisions of which we should be concerned we'll decide between now and then. That's legal, right? If you don't want to authorize the county judge to work with legal to do it that is the motion. County judge and another person. Is there another person? I'll do it.
>> I think it's better if it's one person.
>> that one person is the county judge then. Any discussion? Second? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. 39 is a matter involving the insurers indemnity company. Move that we authority accept the offer, the agreement with insurer's indemnity to settle this matter, including the $12,400 of liquidated damages.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Number 40 is a matter involving the legal matter in kent and the state of kansas. Move that we authorize the hiring of local counsel in the state of kansas at a rate not to exceed $175 an hour. Authorize the county judge to sign the agreement, and hopefully we can partner with the city of Austin and retain the same counsel because they remember sued in the same matter. Seconded by Commissioner Davis. Discussion? All in favor. That passes by unanimous vote. 41, the matter involving just ca tristan who filed an e e oc charge against Travis County, move that we accept the settlement offer.
>> second.
>> discussion in all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. 42 is a settlement demand from one john jones. I move that we reject the deman.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. On number 43, the frank yi resale deed that's proposed, is there a motion?
>> my motion would be to deny or however we would do that, to not accept the offer. Reject the offer.
>> I'd like to make a subsequent motion.
>> hold on. Is there a second to that one? It dice for lack--dies for lack of a second.
>> another motion?
>> I move that we accept the offer made by frank yi.
>> I'll second that since we had assurances that he realizes that the property is in the floodplain.
>> that amount is for $42,000, what legal told us.
>> yeah.
>> discussion? Commissioner.
>> I will probably end up voting for this thing because it's not right what's happened. This has been a colossal mess-up on the county's part. One person thought that he won the thing. Yes, he probably didn't do the next step that he needed to do properly. But I am convinced that the gentleman still wants to be involved, is not, probably should have taken the next step, and it would have made it a lot easier for me, I mean, had I thought that the other, that the gentleman had thought he won it the first time. By the way, mr. Yi congratulated him, thinking that he won the thing. But that being said and done, I'd just like to go on record with the notion that this is a fanux paw s on the county's part. I think both of them need to know what we are going to on do.
>> for the record, it was confusing initially. We threw out both bids and put in place a new policy. You said the new policy mr. Yi submitted a bid and the other gentleman did not. I hate to see it end up this way but this gentleman did comply with the revised policy that I think is clearer. If we follow it, the procedures is lot better, a lot more definite. Before our practice is really to get as much money as possible so we kind of kept it open, probably too long. This time there will be sealed bids opened at a certain time and highest bidder gets it at that point. If there is only one and we think it's enough we take it, basically. But we share your concern for the second bidder, at least I d.
>> yes.
>> all in favor of the motion. That passes by unanimous vote. 44 is a matter involving the erosion event in in hays county that impacted Travis County. We did receive a briefing from legal. Lawsuit was filed this morning. We have joined the Texas commission on environmental quality any other action required today? Okay. 45 we did discuss today and we've discussed it several times before. I move that we indicate our inclination to offer a tax abatement to project diamond back for the amount of 40 percent, that we indicate our intention to conduct an effectiveness feasibility analysis over the next month or sompt if we find the abatements are not effective, then we withdraw the offer for this project is there a second? Then that motion dies for lack of a second. The only matter left today is the one involving bfi, number 32. There was a motion this morning by Commissioner Gomez under a.
>> and I do want to follow an agenda strictly. And so, my motion, I would like to make it. Do I withdraw the other one and make a new one?
>> request to clarify the motio.
>> okay.
>> follow that up with a vote.
>> my clarification is that I am sticking to the language on the agenda, and that would be to vote no on a.
>> no on the draft agenda.
>> right.
>> with the bfi waste systems of north america.
>> yes.
>> okay.
>> I want to make sure everybody understands that we are voting no against the agreement with bfi.
>> following the language on the agenda.
>> discussion? All in favor of that motion. Show Commissioner Gomez and Commissioner eckhardt.
>> I'm voting for that. In other words, your motion is the same as it was this morning.
>> to clarify that I'm addressing the agenda item a, 32 a.
>> opposing--
>> opposing the draft agreement.
>> the draft agreement. Okay. That's what I wanted to hear. I didn't hear that portion. The draft agreement portion. That is what I was listening for. Bfi draft agreement. I'm still okay.
>> you support--
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Davis also--
>> right.
>> those against? Commissioner Daugherty. Show judge Biscoe abstaining. We did discuss in executive session b and c. Any additional motions under either?
>> I would move that we request that tceq conduct a hearing before the state office of administrative hearingsi --
>> I second that motion.
>> I have a substitute that we vote to be an interested party.
>> interested party alone and not be the movant.
>> right.
>> well (inaudible)
>> we have a motion. Is there a second for the substitute?
>> there was for the original motion.
>> seconded by Commissioner eckhardt.
>> second for the contested. Okay. Commissioner Gomez has a substitute motion which basically is to substitute as an interested party. Is there a second for Commissioner Gomez's motion? The substitute dies for lack of a second. We are back to the original motion which is to request a contested motion. Anymore discussion? All mfavor, show Commissioner Davis and Commissioner eckhardt voting in favor. Those against? Vow Commissioner Daugherty and judge Biscoe.
>> abstaining.
>> Commissioner Gomez abstaining. Any further action on item number 32?
>> let me ask this question. What does that place us with the way the court voted today?
>> pardon?
>> what position does that put us in on the way the vote came out on the motion for contested case hearing being not upheld as far as the motion is concerned, not having the votes, and also, where did that put us?
>> the results of today.
>> yes, today.
>> if nothing further happens, that there is no agreement that is going to be executed between bfi and Travis County pertaining to the landfill. And that is all that the court has taken action on. There is opportunity for other motions still available today under this item and then you are posted for Friday, which motions as well can be taken.
>> okay. But as far as Travis County entering into this in had a contested case hearing, that also failed.
>> that has not been authorized at this point.
>> okay. As far as today's action.
>> today's action.
>> okay. I want to be sure the public and everyone understands exactly what is going on here.
>> move adjournment.
>> 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, October 31, 2007, 18:30 AM