Travis County Commissioners Court
March 4, 2008
Item 23
That's just for the court, right, 23?
>> uh-huh. 23. Consider and take appropriate action on the establishment or sunsetting of committees on which Commissioners and the county judge serve. Commissioner eckhardt.
>> we sent out a list of all of the committees for -- for the Commissioners and the judge to go through and -- for meetings that we could have a discussion of any of those that have not met within the last two years could or should be sunsetted.
>> well, then -- but the one that the capital metro local government approval committee, I know that we have to have that in place in case there are fair increases. And it will not meet until they have to. So we really can't do away with it.
>> okay. That makes all of the sense in the world. Looking at the top of the list the audit committee, I知 unaware, it hasn't met since I致e been here, but I致e only been here a year.
>> I知 not aware of what the conditions are or the terms of it.
>> I would touch base with the auditor. Maybe it doesn't make sense to have it.
>> we will leave that as a question mark and get with the auditor regarding its charge and whether that charge has been accomplished or not.
>> it really boils down to whether the internal audits are being complied with by the departments and when I was on that committee years and years ago, most of the departments had reasons for -- for failing to comply. And some of the audit exceptions were really -- and deficiencies were really pretty significant. Some involved state money, just a matter of time before the state auditor discovered the problem in which case they had a demanding payment in getting it. Sometimes we fought with them about the amount that they would do. But clearly we were not doing a good job in some of those cases. The other thing is some of the departments took the position that they didn't have the resources necessary to comply, but they haven't been brought to the court's attention. Once we understood the situation we could work with the department as to get that done. I think in turns on whether the auditor believes this committee will help and we were meeting periodically, then we were called the department heads in and see if the department's, help --
>> [indiscernible] with the Commissioners court and auditor helping them comply with another county judge was here.
>> I thought it worked very well in that regard, just as you portrayed it in the early years where the -- where the departments that were audited came in, not every audit, that, you know, were significant findings, the members of the committee and really did get to discuss what the issues were, what they thought was important, which ones really they needed resources. It was a forum to get some of that resolved. Without that kind of forum, often those issues do not get resolved. We spend a good bit of money auditing to get no -- no real result in the -- in the end. So I -- I agree with you, judge. At that -- at that -- the tricky thing about the audit committee by statute the auditor has to do certain things. I知 not a great team player in a lot of respects because the law says this is the things the auditor needs to do, so the committee can't put itself where it determines what we audit. We got into that later and I just didn't meet with the committee again because I thought it was inappropriate with regard to the law. I do think that it's useful for whoever is on that committee to see how we pick the audits, how we do the risk assessments. I think you all could add some things in there because when we do a risk assessment you know we decide what risks are out there. You may see risks that we don't. We would certainly welcome that kind of input. So I agree with you, judge, when it was working the way it was when you were here, I thought it was really a good use of county resources and we got to focus on those things that really needed to be corrected. Some of those are departments that report to you all as well.
>> and ones headed by elected officials, not that we want to tell them how to run their departments. But if they are a significant finding, it is not being fixed that really could cause problems for all of us later.
>> sometimes those involved multiple offices, it is useful to sit there and discuss or at least understand those issues. So I -- I would agree with that if there are two members of the court that -- that are interested in that, then I think that we should make an effort to revive it. There were three district judges that sat on it. I -- some of them are gone, too, but we could revive that if you think that it's valuable.
>> has the charge been accomplished. Are there issues that need to be looked at or merely informational at this point?
>> it's ongoing, Commissioner. In other words, you know, what really it is, we go in and we audit bylaw, we write a report, we send it to you all, send it to the audit division. Often nothing ever happens from then o. The outside auditors will get that, they look at what we have looked at and are these issues being resolved. But I think that it's an ongoing charge because the offices are ongoing, issues are or you get newly elected officials. I don't think there's a charge that's been accomplished and you don't need it anymore.
>> well, a department is audited every two years, every three years or --
>> it depends on the risk assessment. The law requires a certain amount of auditing every year, we do that. What we do is we do an analytical risk assessment so for instance the task office would be no surprise because of the volume of money coming in. We always look at the tax office every year. Some offices that are small, and really don't -- you know, don't come real high on the scale, we audit less often. But if something would happen in those we go out there. So it -- it really is a risk assessment and utilization of the resources that we have. The people that we have, we try to use it in the most effective way. But we try to reach everyone at least every two years, judge. You are exactly right. You know, unless something would happen. We've had some -- some major financial issues where I have really piled auditors on and then some of the smaller ones we didn't get to that year because it was just my judgment that was a better use of their time. But if there are two members of the court that are interested in that committee, I will be glad to -- to talk to the district judges and meet.
>> plus the -- plus most of those audits on the department head elected or appointed plus has made some effort to respond to the finding. Not necessarily fix the problem but to explain --
>> that's exactly right.
>> gives you a pretty good take on what the disagreement is if there's disagreement. Plus what the committee could discuss if any audience with the department head.
>> that's exactly right. They were controversial -- they weren't controversial, controversial -- it wasn't like they said this, they said that. The committee had to sort of negotiate between. Exactly as you portrayed it, judge. The audit finding were laid out, department head and financial people were there. One thing since we're on camera to remind the public is that the authority of the county auditor in county government is for financial audits, not operational audits. In many organizations those are performance audits. But there is no statute that allows that in the county.
>> and --
>> do we have performance audits in Travis County. Not performed by my office because there is no law that allows that. That was my the auditor's office many moons ago and did not pass.
>> has the audit committee only looked at financial auditing or has the charge included performance auditing as well.
>> the charge looked at -- I think where the performance auditing can fit in the law under the counties is in the budget process because you make decisions on where you're going to appropriate money and, you know, the audit may be too strong of a word, but you have every right to say, for us to make a decision, we want performance standards and we want some assurance that those are made. So I think that -- that really the place in county government at least right now for that would be in the budget process rather than in the auditor's office, which has no authority to do that.
>> perhaps the audit committee's charge could be expanded to include performance audit --
>> you could do that then you would want your budget people there all the time. I have absolutely no problem with that. None whatsoever.
>> but you have to look at who is on the audit committee, also, three district judges on there, also.
>> right.
>> two members of the court.
>> uh-huh.
>> and who else?
>> that's basically it in terms of appear pointed officials. Of course I go -- appointed officials. Of course I go and right now the head of auditing is mike
>> [indiscernible] whom you know. I also would have the auditors that worked on the audit and then the elected official would usually come and bring their people, their financial people in the -- and the discussion would take place, you know, in some regard it a good time the more I think about it to revive it as we are looking into a new financial system, there may well be issues that would be useful to be looked at at that time as we are analyzing what we're doing.
>> I -- I知 thinking if you want a performance audit committee I don't know that you have the right people on there.
>> [multiple voices]
>> we are statutorily not --
>> thinking about the district judges more than -- I don't know that they would be interested plus the financial audits really started taking some time when we were meeting --
>> they are complex, that's right. I would agree with that. And -- I would agree with that, judge.
>> so just put this on hold, that one.
>> sounds like that one needs to remain sounds like. The next one on the list would be community justice council, but I see that's mandated bylaw so I would assume that's a keeper.
>> yeah, they have been -- I know they meet some because I went to a meeting. By special invitation I think. Cscd was making a special thing about probation, dr.
>> [indiscernible], dr. Nagy, ronnie earle. Really probably 30, 40 people present. But I think that is supposed to meet quarterly as necessary. And with a change coming up in the d.a.'s office, I guess it probably will meet once or twice more this year. I would be surprised if we met more than that. But on page 2 the clear air force, Commissioner Davis' name is mentioned. I was elected chair for two years, we met every month. For two years. A meeting next week. As past chair I think I知 still on the board and the executive committee. That's real active. Community what I知 talking about, third one from the bottom on page 1, clean air force. That's a yes. Plus our contribution to them is -- was 20,000 a year, down to 10.
>> yeah.
>> which they have complained about a couple of times.
>> there's also the e government committee but it's been formed in the last year. Although Commissioner and I have not declared formal meetings, we have met in the hall on numerous occasions and swapped information.
>> I think it met as needed as well. The egov committee was meeting as needed.
>>
>> [indiscernible] we met every month.
>> that's right. I知 sorry. I was -- I was confusing that with the e agenda.
>> uh-huh.
>> yeah.
>> originally the objective of e government committee was to identify and implement electronic government solutions. I think there were -- we did surveys, there were about eight applications identified and those have been implemented. I think that there was some hope that there -- it would be a directional committee for technology. But -- but I think that it's on an as-needed basis now.
>> okay.
>> and we had the juvenile agency coordinating committee. The community justice council.
>> I don't know anything about that.
>> that's just a part of the community justice council, judge. They have certain groups studying different issues, I think that's what that was. Does it still exist?
>> we would have to check with the community justice council. I知 sure that they react to whatever the issue is, that's going on. And more work needs to be done. So they appoint subcommittees.
>> I bet carol coleburn or kimberly pierce would know.
>> uh-huh.
>> then with had the oversight committee of administrative operations.
>> that one is -- I know are individual meetings. I think we both get briefings by staff.
>> is the committee necessary.
>> I think that we need to keep the administrative operations up there because one of our executive managers is in charge of that whole operation. Then she meets with us individually to brief us on whatever issues, you know, are going on. I think we don't need to let administrative operations fall through the cracks because there are going to be some issues that come up obviously since we have an executive manager for that operation.
>> which I suppose calls -- calls into question, I just don't know the -- the institutional history on it, the oversight committees for each one of the executive manager positions.
>> uh-huh.
>> it's because they have to give us briefings and they don't want to do it in obviously when they -- with a -- what am I trying to say. A quorum. But I think the -- the need is obvious that they need to keep at least two by two informed as to what's going on. And that simply is to save time. If we want to get a briefing two by two, if not then those briefings occur individually.
>> then is this really a matter of a committee or just avoiding quorum? It's both probably. It does both.
>> it's part of the Commissioners court strategy to make county government more efficient, more effective. Obviously once you put the committees in place whether or not they -- they are productive depends on the members.
>> uh-huh.
>> okay. Then we have the space planning committee.
>> that one met -- on an ongoing basis until we came up with a -- until we came one a report that was brought to the Commissioners court and adopted by the Commissioners court. My assumption is that that space committee continues so that it can meet as needed whenever those space issues come forward permission of the court to work out issues, of course recommendations will be brought to the Commissioners court for adoption or changes.
>> the last time they meet was 1905.
>> way before my time.
>> supposed to be 2005.
>> 1905
>> [laughter] I would say we need to mark that one off. Before the war.
>> several of them.
>> does it need to be reconstituted or is it -- is it good as it is?
>> I think that it needs to stay in place. So that staff will know who to go to in case an issue comes up that needs attention. Otherwise it would be scrambling to the court, that issue, who is going to meet on it. Should this be related to various proposals regarding the central business district. Seems to be that -- that it seems to be we might have duplication of effort here. And arising of potential conflicts and quorum shopping, as it were, on questions of space planning.
>> I would think that the committee would look at that issue overall. But then it will come to the court if it needs to have a conflict settled. That's where they all lined up for -- for settling conflicts.
>> I promise that have that on the agenda either March 11th or 18th. I would be happy to add this as a part of it.
>> that might be useful.
>> there is space and there are bags of issues related to the civil court's building downtown redevelopment, a whole lot of other things that indirectly I guess would be county space, but the other -- this redevelopment thing is really much -- much larger. With a whole lot more issues than space.
>> than just space planning.
>> but it's -- so if --
>> it's an issue that belongs before the court and not before the committee. You know? So --
>> space planning again readily is an issue that belongs before the court or the central --
>> general space planning I think belongs with the committee. But I think when you have an issue that needs the court, the whole court's attention immediately so staff will know what to do next I think it needs to come to the court agenda.
>> my four or five page outline, there will be seven or eight main issues. It may well be that we believe one or more of those issues should be punted to the space management committee. I not have that in mind when I put the outline together.
>> it will be on next Tuesday unless there are a lot of other controversial issues. This discussion will take a while. The 11th or 18th.
>> it appears there is no desire for sunsetting, perhaps we should take no action.
>> well, you have forced us to -- to at least think about some of these committees.
>> why they exist.
>> that exist.
>> no action on sunsetting, but apparently there is action -- there is a desire for action in the -- reconstituting some of these, reinvigorating our efforts. I知 not saying that this was a wasted effort. It's actually been productive.
>> maybe stress that a little bit -- stretching it a little bit but --
>> [laughter]
>> I知 glad we did it, too. Let's keep thinking about it.
>> we took it, put it on the back burner, simmer a while and see if we need to brit it back to the front.
>> good.
>> so that's our discussion of number 23.
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 5, 2008 8:09 PM