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

November 13, 2007
Item 11

View captioned video.

11 is consider and take appropriate action on the calling of a special term of Commissioners court for a work session at the Texas association of counties building, 1210 san antonio street, Austin, Texas, on November 29, 2007.

>> the group that's working on the civil courthouse and downtown redevelopment had scheduled that work session. The reason they thought to have it at the Texas association of counties, which I think is a really great idea, many of the things they did with that building is what we would be looking at with the civil courthouse. The fact is that it's not a keep Austin building, but it sits nicely into the surrounding area. They built it for cans it in the future -- for capacity in the future. They are leasing out some of the things. So I think one of the reasons to have it there was that it's also just a pleasant building, you can just walk on down, and I think lunch is on you by judge dietz.

>> I guess my point was we discussed that this -- that subject matter

>> [inaudible]. I want to make sure that the public still has access especially in this courthouse, in this courtroom where the seat of government actually houses itself. And folks walk in off the street to possibly ask questions. When we normally discuss that courthouse, wefz have the persons that have come from the community be stressing the capital view corridor and they are walk in off the street or anything else. Now, I don't mind doing what you are suggesting, but I think -- I don't see why we can continue to have our work sessions here whereby anybody going to walk off the sidewalk that knows this is where the seat of government is, county government is, walk through those doors and come in and participate in any type of work session.

>> I see your point. Anyone can walk in there. That is obviously an open meeting. And it is a very general framework. I think what you are going to hear there so the public can hear that is I think there will be a suggestion not to disturb the view court or if at all conceivably possible.

>> it's a lot of buildings that we have been considering for -- to do just that, but there are still possibilities that someone still may want to discuss other views or other buildings or other type of situations that may end up obstructing the view of the capitol. And I just don't feel comfortable -- the rest of the court can do what they want to do, but I do not feel comfortable with that type of work session and the public -- this is why I知 concerned and, of course, I didn't feel comfortable.

>> this is a work session. No votes would be taken.

>> I understand.

>> I think the judges just wanted to do a nice thing for you all.

>> and those are my specific concerns. And I just don't feel comfortable with a work session outside of the hall of government when it comes to city -- with the county government, and this is a seat of county government.

>> it sure is.

>> so I just don't feel comfortable.

>> wasn't another reason that there's more room to kind of lay out some general --

>> I think --

>> general information for everybody?

>> certainly it wasn't to hide anything or --

>> that will give us an opportunity to look at everything that everybody has been talking a 'ut.

>> it's not a make or break deal. I think they just thought it was a nice opportunity.

>> I think that the -- having sat on the subcommittee, I think the intention that the judge is wanting to put forth is to have a nice off-campus discussion. And it was raised in the subcommittee concerns about public access, concerns about making sure that the word goes out that the work session is occurring, and also concerns that this is part of a greater discussion which we're actually having earlier on the agenda as well, item 6, as far as the capitol facilities strategic plan. So we are mindful that this off-campus work session totally public, anyone can come, shouldn't be viewed as setting the courthouse apart or in another category from the overall strategic plan for our downtown campus, our airport campus or any of our other satellite facilities.

>> that's what my point is. I think all of that subject matter warrants participation right here where we are and so I have a problem with it. But anyway, whatever the court is willing to do, I値l try to abide by it, but I just don't feel comfortable about doing it like that. I mean these off-site campuses that we're talking about, they are neighborhoods that are involved in close proximity. It's just a lot that I think needs to be looked at. And again, my point is that this is the seat of government. This is where Travis County takes care of its business on subject matter. This is a broad subject matter. It's a broad type of input that may be coming from the public, you know, as far as this item, again, as I stated earlier, I just think needs to be dealt here.

>> move approval.

>> second.

>> that would be two items. One is the civil courts building, the other is workforce development. Because we indicated during the budget process we would do workforce development in October. We missed that. So we really ought to try to have it on November 29th. But there would be specific language posting those two items and indicating the location and the public is invited, not to lunch, unless judge dietz wants to provide for all there. But certainly when the work session starts, it will be open just like this courtroom would be and we'll have the address and everything down there.

>> recording the video, the cameras, all this other kind of stuff? Will that be also done? The media? I知 really concerned about a lot of this publicly and I think -- legitimate point whether nobody agrees with me or not. Will media be there? Will they be able to record the discussion? Otherwise we should

>> [inaudible] executive session. I知 not comfortable, you all. I知 just not comfortable. I mean the media won't be there. And these are major, significant purchases that we're looking at dealing with the capitol of county government. That's what we're talking about here. And the media won't be there for replay, record, all this other kind of stuff. This is where it happens and I can't understand why we're leaving here to go somewhere else to deal with this. If I can --

>> well, if we want to record it, we can do that.

>> [multiple voices]

>> channel 17 would be there.

>> like when we have retreats, don't we record them?

>> I know you have retreats.

>> I think we record them.

>> I think you do.

>> we would follow whatever the procedures are that we normally follow when we leave this building. And historically we have left for retreats. The missing part where it's televised.

>> judge, I think we could ask channel 17. They go to other events and they record them, and I imagine that puts it on video and then we can play it to the public on channel 17. We can just ask them to be there. Have they been asked to be there?

>> I don't think so.

>> we just need to ask them. They go to other events.

>> when we have retreats, having a television on you creates a different environment. And one reason you have the retreat is so you will have a free exchange of ideas. But if we want to record it, that's fine with me.

>> we could record it on video and play it on channel 17.

>> channel 17.

>> hello.

>> how are you doing?

>> fine, thank you. Just to clarify, any time that we've had off-site meetings, we can record but not go live.

>> we won't be live.

>> it's a little bit more problematic.

>> but see, that wasn't included in this package at all. None of these things that we're talking about here this morning have not been flushed out thoroughly enough so I didn't feel comfortable. That's why I知 posing the questions as I知 posing them.

>> I understand.

>> I don't mind if that's the case, that means we'll have a video and media and stuff like that, I can go along with that.

>> just wanted to make sure you understood.

>> I can go along with it.

>> there's one other issue. Generally with off-site sessions, we'll just take one camera. We can take two, but mixing is a little problematic. Generally you are just going to get one shot.

>> I can support that with that type of thing.

>> thank you.

>> well, this item is a date and time. We may want to post another item if we want to do a lot more specifics.

>> we can do that, judge. And I will tell you, everyone -- I wasn't involved in setting this up, but the whole intent was to make a really nice presentation and use that building. Having the work session there is not a deal breaker. It's just not. If you aren't comfortable -- I mean I know you do retreats, and this would be run like a retreat. This is the very first conceptual discussion of a very long process where you will be putting many specific things on the agenda and voting on them. This is kind of a an idea, sharing of ideas, kind of like you do on a retreat. That is it. But we can get you more specific things for the posting on the 29th if you need it.

>> probably a good idea.

>> we will --

>> what I had in mind was posting lunch from 12:00 to 1:00. Then maybe 1:00 to 2:00 -- I mean 1:00 to 3:00 the civil courts discussion. And then workforce development after 3:00. Any additional comments? So what this does is for the type building, November 29, 2007, at 12 noon. And maybe next week we will look at a more specific posting with more specifics.

>> yes, sir.

>> I値l have to hold back my support until I see exactly what that language says.

>> okay.

>> on the 29th. Because if it doesn't come back in the mode or the interest I知 looking for or what I知 trying to achieve here, it's hard for me to deal with it until I see it. The language.

>> your backup has more specific language too.

>> all in favor? Show Commissioners --

>> actually are we --

>> November 29, at the t.a.c. Building. We'll come out with more specifics next week. All in favor? Show Commissioners eckhardt, Gomez, Daugherty and yours truly voting in favor. Commissioner Davis abstaining. Thank you all very much.


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, November 14, 2007, 18:30 AM