Travis County Commissioners Court
December 18, 2007
Item 32
32 is consider and take appropriate action to establish Commissioners court committees for our comprehensive capital improvement program for the redevelopment of the Travis County downtown campus including, a, executive level policy and strategy committee, b, working level staff committee, c, citizens advisory committee, and d, public input process. Hold it just second. I just read all of item 32, we'll call it up, but item 28 may be faster...
now, county people, thank you all for being patient. For those of you who wanted to be on the Commissioners court, today is no exception. It has been a typical Tuesday for us. Now, let's see if we can go down the list and get some stuff done. A -- is that okay? A is executive level policy and strategic committee. A committee has been in place, and it really has been the executive committee. And the question is should we add some people or should we modify the committee. I have had a conversation with Commissioner Daugherty and one with Commissioner eckhardt. And the result of that conversation, those conversations was that maybe the county judge ought to be on the executive committee. Both of them volunteered to step up. To show that they were serious.
>> [laughter] I turned both of them down.
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> you didn't call it first.
>> I知 willing to do that.
>> that's a great idea. Sara, didn't you think that you wanted to stay on?
>> I will do my part.
>> is that okay?
>> you bet.
>> we'll be the two members from the Commissioners court, judge Biscoe, Commissioner eckhardt, unless there is objection from Commissioner Gomez or Commissioner Davis here. It's really substituting me for Commissioner Daugherty. Judges deetsz and shepherd have been on there. Last week we were visited by representatives from the criminal court system including our d.a. That was before the d.a. -- I assume the d.a. Issued a statement. I致e not seen it, but that was before he decided to step down, but I知 assuming -- is he still interested in serving on this committee?
>> you know, I don't know, judge. I have not spoken to him. I would be surprised if he was. He might be. He will still be in for 2008, at any rate, so I guess he might serve during that time, but I have not talked to him about this particular subject. I know they want somebody on that executive committee.
>> let me ask you this, then. In terms of criminal court participation, in view of the fact that we have two civil judges, do we have to district judge, criminal judges or --
>>
>> [inaudible] was talking about having one criminal district judge on there and one criminal county court at law judge on there which I think would be a good idea. I was speaking with judge flowers about that and judge flowers is on our expert on all building matters since he was on the committee that oversaw the building of the c.j.c. And so we were going to suggest judge flowers, if we're only going to have one criminal district judge that it would judge flowers. And if there are times he's not able to go to a meeting he would call me and I would fill in for him. And then judge crane, who is the presiding judge of the county court at law judge oh, that judge crane has agreed to serve as the representative I guess of the criminal county court at law judges.
>> okay. That's six people on the executive committee. Who else has been on there? Yes, sir.
>> I知 wondering if in your discretion you want to do it this way, but we still have two clerks, a district clerk and a county clerk, j.p., probate and constable 5 who would, I think, argue -- I知 just suggesting this, but they would argue that their position as elected officials, that they would want some type of say in a stakeholder group which it looks like the suggestion is is to expand out the executive committee into a -- essentially a stakeholder group. And I don't -- I知 just mentioning that. If that's the court's will that you might want to consider those other elected offices.
>> on the executive committee? My goal was not to expand it that much. 10, 11 people, that's a whole lot, isn't it? Because we still have that working group. That working group has workers, and --
>> this may to be time to bring this up, but I don't think that the working group, that there's necessarily a unified idea about this, but it seems to me that at least there's the possibility of a working group trying to serve all of this between all of the campus in the c.b.d. Or the group could have -- the working group could have sort of a flexible membership depending on -- I知 not sure that I知 so interested in what -- precisely what judge perkins wants in terms of additional criminal facilities. I wish him well. And I think he shares the same deal that he's not necessarily looking for three years or judge flowers I know him better, of course, that he's not looking for three years of committee meetings discussing the civil courthouse. I think that's something that affects sort of the working -- that there's not necessarily a good alternative to that, but I think it's reality.
>> judge, are you suggesting working groups for civil justice, criminal justice and administrative? Three separate working groups?
>> yes. I知 not sure necessarily that's the best idea, but I -- you know, conceivably you have -- you have two groups who would not be interested necessarily or have input in what the third group would want. But I just -- I知 suggesting that and let you all think about it.
>> why wouldn't we have one big working group divided into three subgroups based on specialty or special interest?
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> may I --
>> they could meet en masse as necessary, and if the meeting is just about civil court matters, then maybe those working on civil court matters would be most interested. You see what I知 saying? But periodically I think you would have to have all three subgroups in one meeting to make sure that everything is being coordinated. Because in terms of working bees, you are talking about the same people, aren't you?
>> that's part of the dilemma. It's an advantage and disadvantage. It means that depending on what work is done in-house as opposed to contracted resources, the work slows down when you have projects of this complexity. The advantage is that if you do actually have your executive board and I think following along what judge dietz is saying, have you working groups more related to your stakeholders or subcommittees related to those stakeholders, you have a lot of cross-pollination.
>> why don't we hedge? Why don't we figure out the people who would be on the working group and then at a meeting real soon we decide whether this is one big working group, divided into, like, subgroups, or whether it is three distinct groups. Can we do that? That way at least we land on the people. My recommendation is about to be that we have the executive committee and we have the working group, just those two. Before we kind of had a steering committee and a working group, right? Was there a lot of difference in those or --
>> the steering and executive were about the same.
>> the steering was the executive branch.
>> I guess my suggestion would be executive committee and the working group. Because the other thing I think we should do between now and the first of the year is right down the questions and issues that we think need to be addressed, put them in different categories and deal with them. On the citizens advisory committee, I think what we ought to do today is give directions that we figure out what groups ought to be represented. Like if the league of women voters should be represented, then we basically ask them to appoint a person, right? Downtown alliance should be represented, we ask them to appoint a person. If we have neighborhood associations down here represented, then we try to get a representative from them. And if just john q. Taxpayer should be represented, maybe two or three, then we try to figure out what backgrounds would we prefer them to have. And when you go to residents and ask them about service on a committee, normally the first question to me is what time commitment are you looking for.
>> how many times will you all meet.
>> right. Am I making sense? I知 trying -- there's a whole lot of work to be done and I知 suggested we won't get it all done today, but if we can get the major pieces in place, think about this between now and, say, January 8th and come back with recommendations, we would have advanced the ball quite a distance.
>> you were talking about the executive committee and the other various groups that might be considered for it. Did you mention the county attorney? Because the county attorney representation on the steering committee right now so if the steering committee goes away and you are putting district attorney on the executive committee, you would want to consider county attorney on that committee also.
>> I致e got an asterisk by d.a. And county attorney.
>> although it does per happens create a slippery slope in that we're putting prosecutors on but not the bar.
>> well, the problem is that -- you know, you are having to provide offices for county attorneys.
>> right. They wear two hats so the administrative space and --
>> another category is citizen advisory committee.
>> if you have a "r" in your name, you can be on a committee. Just pick --
>> [laughter]
>> let's put d.a. And county attorney. That brings the executive committee to eight. Now, are we going to put district clerk, civil court, that's ten.
>> are the interests of the district clerk and civil --
>> district and county.
>> I mean sorry, district clerk and county clerk, are their interests aligned with the judges?
>> I guess you could sort of say that, but I wouldn't feel comfortable saying let's not put them on there. I think that -- I think we should include them and if they don't want to be on it or don't care, I guess --
>> I think it was the mind, but correct me if I知 wrong, that we were thinking, subject to the court's discretion, that the executive committee would want to meet three, maybe four times a year, and that underneath the working groups would be generating the work. But sometimes if you have -- there's a goldie locks solution, if you have too many meetings, then the people who are doing the actual work and preparation never really have the time to collect the data, to think it through and to get it done. But I don't know, judge, if that's what you were thinking. And, of course, we're subject to you all's direction. But -- so, I mean, once we expand it out of four, my humble suggestion is to make sure that -- that everybody who is a potential stakeholder feels like they got a say in the direction we're going. If it -- if it's the difference between 8 and 12, I don't think that's critical mass in terms of balling up the executive committee, and essentially the executive committee's idea was to give their input before the work done by the working groups was brought to the court, and then to have at least two members of the executive committee be court members so that they could report and have the trust and communication with other members of the Commissioners court.
>> well, if the executive committee meets once a month or once every other month, you know, 10, 11, 12 are all right. But you all have been meeting a whole lot more than that, right?
>> the working group -- the working group has been meeting pretty much on a weekly basis since may, June, July, somewhere in there. And the working group has been meeting every week because it's -- we -- what tasks need to be done, it's mostly belinda and leslie who are the real worker bees, but what tasks need to be done, what are you all going to be doing, what do we need to do, how do we get ready for this and then meet again about what progress, what's new, what's old, that type of thing. But the working group pretty much on a weekly basis, but the executive committee has been every -- we tried every other month, I believe, and I think that's been pretty much the schedule.
>> then 10 or 11 would be okay. I致e got 10 here, and judge flowers, judge crane, Biscoe, eckhardt, judge dietz, judge shepherd, d.a., county attorney, district clerk, county clerk. That's 10. How is that? So the working group has been belinda and leslie. Who else?
>> the purchasing agent, county auditor, Ron yer curry, facilities management, and alicia perez, executive manager, administrative operations. And --
>> judge shepherd and myself.
>> marvin bryce.
>> greenberg.
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> she's steering.
>> if we eliminate the steering committee, do we need to move some of them to the working group?
>> anne greenberg, she represents the Austin bar association. So if you plan to appoint them to the citizens advisory committee and expand the steering committee for civil courts, then we just need to let them know.
>> is the civil defense bar the same as the Travis County bar association? They are different, aren't they?
>> it's the Austin bar association, and they represent all members both criminal, civil and administrative. So they are more far reaching than just the criminal bar or the litigation bar, the family bar.
>> so that's been anne greenberg?
>> yes, sir.
>> so on the working committee then, we would be also working judge flowers and judge crane on to that; is that right? Are you all going to stay on there?
>> well, I think the suggestion was let's work out the details of the executive committee and then see when we meet about how --
>> January 8th? Is that when we're going to decide that?
>> the court is hopefully.
>> and then decide how -- decide how we want to constitute the working groups as to whether they be one, two, three or something along that line.
>> I would think the criminal judges would want to be there when the criminal court matters are being discussed.
>> right.
>> well, I just noticed when we were talking about the working groups, you were talking about the ones that had existed up until now, that we had two judges from the civil side. I guess if we use that same formulation.
>> they are the ones that brought the criminal judges in.
>> have you all been meeting every Friday, Friday afternoons?
>> Friday morning in my jury room.
>> is that a good time for judges crane and flowers?
>> I知 sorry?
>> judges crane and flowers will be able to meet on Friday morning a couple hours?
>> I think it will be difficult on Friday mornings just because -- on Friday mornings, so many people are trying to get their clients out of jail for the weekend, you know, that docket calls go pretty long in the morning.
>> that's another reason you might find yourself having more stakeholder groups. We were waiting to hear about what you wanted to say about what you want to formulate.
>> belinda, leslie, cyd, roger, judges dietz and shepherd, anne greenberg, judges flowers and crane. This is working group. Who else am I missing?
>> anne greenberg is not on the working group, judge. Roger corey.
>> anne greenberg is on the citizen advisory committee representing the Austin bar. So when I think Austin bar, I should think civil and criminal?
>> susan.
>> so belinda, leslie, cyd, roger, alicia, susan. Who am I missing?
>> the judges.
>> the judges.
>> shepherd, dietz, flowers, crane.
>> and that working group, I think it's important to note that the working group may change if you are looking at criminal we would probably be working with deborah hale. We work very closely with civil with
>> [inaudible].
>> can we invest the -- as needed for the tasks at hand?
>> sure.
>> sounds fine to me. So the citizens advisory committee, do we want to give some thought to that about the next meeting or put the categories down right now?
>> I think this is a very good list.
>> Austin bar, downtown alliance, league of women voters?
>> yeah, you've got a list that we -- just a preliminary list we prepared for you that took into consideration some of the stakeholders and people who showed interest.
>> and then the other, judge, I think that we need people on there who will then take the information out and share it with people in the hinterlands away from downtown. We need to get the information out about this sooner or later. So we might as well do it a little at a time so we don't leave anybody out.
>> okay.
>> does the old west Austin neighborhood association differ from the downtown Austin association?
>> yes.
>> it's contiguous to but it's on the other side of lamar. It might be -- and that occurred to me as well. It might be wise and perhaps broadening the way you
>> [inaudible] Commissioner Gomez if we leave -- of the neighborhood councils that we leave it as dana, but also ask the participation from the -- from the a.m.c. Maybe.
>> I think it's important to get the information out to everybody.
>> and I think we cover hyde park.
>> that's true.
>> but a and c is not the same as --
>> it's the umbrella Austin neighborhoods council and it's the umbrella organization for all of the neighborhood organizations.
>> so we have three neighborhood associations?
>> I think the suggestion was perhaps removing the -- taking the downtown Austin neighborhood association since they are the most directly affected and then substituting the umbrella organization for any other neighborhood organization.
>> basically taking the one off and adding a.n.c. For broader scope.
>> heritage society?
>> uh-huh.
>> one, two, three, four, five. That's six. So we ought to give some thought to who else should be on there. We need some regular folk.
>> one of the recommended groups is the american institute of architects, Austin chapter. If you have the Austin bar association as professionals who have a strong interest in the building, I think the local professional architectural community does this well and would make a good contribution to the group.
>> judge, if I may humbly suggest perhaps what the court wants to do is to take this list, which I think is a very good start, and then maybe wait a week while you all, as you say, come up with additional regular people. Not that these are irregular, but --
>> [laughter]
>> I think --
>> like at large positions and then we need some regular folks from -- I don't know, maybe the precincts? The whole idea is to try to get the information out to everybody.
>> okay. That's eight people there. Should I go to try to get around 15?
>> I would think so.
>> let's get
>> [inaudible].
>> if each of you appointed one, judge, that would take it up to 13, I think. Which was one of the options. If each of the court members appointed one person to the committee along with the individuals that were listed, representatives from that.
>> well, it is always good to know who is sent to represent the different groups and to take a good look at these eight. And there may well be some gaps for us to try to fill to get a full compliment of members. If these eight all end up being african-american, I would talk to my colleagues about getting hispanics and anglos on there. But if we see the lack of certain participation, then our goal ought to try to be some of that on there. Because part of this not only community buy-in, but making sure we construct to community needs, but also try to get support for whatever the project is. In the end, I mean it helps to have 15 to 30 individuals in addition to the court who have been involved in the process sort of from the beginning, sort of explaining not only the process but the result and why it makes sense.
>> judge,
>> [inaudible] adapt.
>> because they are a pretty active group and they are going to have some opinions about some of the things that need to be thought about.
>> why don't we give this a little more thought, next time we meet try to flesh it out. Shall we go ahead and try to contact these groups and get a representative? Representative and a resume?
>> we can certainly do that.
>> it would help us, I think. If we could have those in hand by the 8th, a little before the 8th and maybe give it a little thought and maybe come in on the 8th and finish this step. How is that? We've done a whole lot today. Anything else? Thank you. We'll have it back on on the 8th. Everybody feel pretty good about this?
>> uh-huh.
>> so we get it all together in a backup, what we'll do is go ahead and bless it formally. This way we can change it any way we see fit between now and then. I知 thinking more in terms of the working group. Maybe give some thought as to how we see them working, who we would like to either have as a permanent member or on standby just in case we need them, so put them on notices of that.
>> if you don't mind, perhaps what we could do is set a tentative date for a meeting of the executive committee and then between now and then develop some options as to how to constitute the working groups. And then let that -- let that be an item on that agenda about -- and let the executive committee --
>> try and do that before the 8th? Or do you think we ought to move it to the 15th? January 2nd and about the 12th or 13th to meet. I hear you judges are kind of hard to get to a meeting, judge dietz.
>> not true, judge. We're, both of us are mr. And mr. Meeting. Every week.
>> examine expectation is to have the committee -- the executive committee have discussion about the working group. Logistically probably would have to come back the 15th instead of the 8th.
>> that's fine. Is that okay? We'll make that happen. We'll have this back on January 15th. Anything else today?
>> thank you all.
>> thank you all very much. Thank you for your patience, too.
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, December 19, 2007, 18:30 AM