Travis County Commissioners Court
May 13, 2008
Item 13
13, discuss and take appropriate action for request for services rfs solicitation for legislative services and authorize purchasing agent to issue rfs.>> good morning or good afternoon, judge, Commissioners.
cyd grimes, purchasing agent.
y'all had this a week, hopefully you've had time to look at it and make any comments.
I did get a couple of comments from Commissioner eckhardt and there's some things that she thought about and she was going to --
>> if they are significant, let's hear them.
if they are minor, don't worry about it.
>> I didn't bring down my e-mail, but roughly speaking what I suggested is in the -- let me rifle through my papers here.
in the body of the request for services to also require disclosure of any -- any client relationships that could present the appearance or the reality of a conflict of interest with a legislative goal of the county.
and then also memorialize that requirement in the contract itself.
that along with filling out the ethics form, one would also disclose to the Commissioners court any contractual relationship they had as a lobbyist that might present the appearance of the reality of a conflict with our goals.
and to update us as warranted if such a relationship arose after they had already signed the contract and done their ethics form.
>> and mr. Hilly is working on language to that effect to include in the documents.
>> all right.
here's my thinking.
on page 4 under knowledge, skills and abilities, we say extensive working knowledge of Travis County government and its legislative program.
when I read that, my first thought was as county judge I'm not sure I know what Travis County's legislative program is.
and I think that's asking a bit much.
I think language like and general familiarity with county issues such as revenue caps, land use authority, et cetera.
because I think that if you've been here the last few years and reading the newspaper, you probably know of those initiatives at the legislature and cities and counties statewide really having to try to defeat the legislation.
so and its legislative program, I don't know that we really -- that we will have a program -- last year I think our program was put together during the first month of the legislature.
we ought to try to do it sooner.
but if our goal is to act on this by the time of the expiration of the current contract, we won't have our legislative program together, I don't think.
that's what we mean anyway, right?
we want you to be familiar with issues that matter to Travis County and other counties, and if you know the ones that have been of importance historically, that's helpful.
>> okay.
>> I mean, is there any problem with that?
otherwise the only other thought I had was I'd be real surprised if we don't try to interview a short list of two to three.
do we say that here?
>> no, we don't say that.
>> I think I would say that because during that interview we normally put together a few pointed questions that hopefully would enable us to not only determine familiarity with county issues but also help us determine whether you are a good match for us and let you determine whether we are a good match for you.
I don't see us making a decision without interviewing, do you?
maybe a short list of proposing firms or individuals.
>> that's normally our process even though we don't state that, but I can be more specific in how we will do that.
we'll short list them and invite interviews with those top firms.
>> the last time we interviewed at least three or four.
>> my memory is starting to go.
I can't remember, but it's been a long time since we did this.
we normally do when there is a personal or professional service and we have to have a close working relationship, we usually do interviews with the firms.
>> and the language in blue?
is language that's added to the last r.f.p., right?
>> I don't have the blue copy.
there's stuff in blue highlighted?
>> blue or red?
or am I seeing things?
>> you got a special copy.
>> you got my copy.
>> I have some blue here.
>> was it added?
>> yeah, I don't know that -- seems like real technical stuff.
maybe changes, new dates.
>> okay.
>> new r.f.s.
number, new heading.
the part that I just referenced on page 4 in my draft is in blue.
>> you have a special copy.
>> I feel honored.
>> judge, would you have any inkling that if this thing gets to the point where we can't identify someone to do this for a price, I mean I could see where somebody would pick this thing up and start reading through it and good, well, I can take that thing on, but this is going to be a big number.
and I think that was one of the issues that we had earlier.
might this drive us back to relooking at having somebody just go to work for us?
I mean, you know, with this kind of position here?
because I think we could head there pretty quickly when we see somebody's price tag on this.
>> I would think it's not an either/or circumstance, though.
I mean I have long felt that we need somebody on staff working on policy and legislative initiatives, but I don't think that would -- I don't think that obviates a need tore a lobbying firm.
>> let's just see --
>> that's the way we handle it last time, remember, we gave them some additional money so that they could put talia on to work for Travis County, and that was kind of when we were talking about that other county position.
but instead of doing that, we gave them some additional money to pay talia to simply work on Travis County issues.
and then they were working on the rest of the stuff.
>> we'll see soon enough once this thing gets out.
>> the sooner we issue it --
>> if we issue it -- our time if we issue it this week, we would open it on June 9th.
we usually have them out at least 21 days on the street.
so we'll issue it -- if you approve it today, we'll issue it sometime this week, hopefully tomorrow, and open on June 9th.
>> so maybe interviews late June or early July?
>> uh-huh.
July.
>> that would give us three or four weeks.
so the deadline is June 9th for submitting the proposals.
>> right, then we'll need a month to go through the process.
so you would come back with a contract at the end of August.
>> why wouldn't we put on the street for 30 days?
>> my standard is just 21 days.
>> because it is the 13th.
and if we get it out --
>> the 15th.
>> the 15th or 16th.
>> so middle of July looking at interviews.
>> I'm assuming if you may be the best lobbyist in the world but never have worked for counties and you may have to beef up on that so 30 days will allow you that opportunity.
and that will still give us a good chance to review what we get and decide whether we think we are -- do we ask for the fee here?
>> yes.
>> the last time it amazed me how dramatically different they were.
>> the range.
>> good job.
move approval with those revisions.
>> second.
>> thank you all.
>> any more discussion in all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
with Commissioner Davis temporarily off the dias.
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, May 14, 2008 8:51 PM