Travis County Commissioners Court
May 13, 2008
Items A1 & A2
Item a-1 is to consider and take appropriate action on request from the civil district judges to submit a grant application to the supreme court of Texas task force on foster care to establish the office of parental representation, a public defender's office to have child protective service cases, and we may as well call up a-2.it's slightly different.
it is to consider and take appropriate action on request from civil district judges to grant an application on the task force on foster care to establish the office of child representation, for child protective service cases.
we did have a work session discussion, there may be other questions, plus others could provide different input.
I guess we may as well discuss the schedule and why timing is of the essence.
good morning, judge.
good morning, Commissioners.
>> good morning.
>> as we mentioned in the work session, I am on the permanent commercial commission for children, youth and families that used to be a task force and as of January 18 of this year become a commission.
on an annual basis, the commission has access to it, federal funds, and in the basic funding source of those dollars, one of the tasks that the commission is to look for is the viability or the potential to better provide service for parental representation in cases which require statutorily parental representation in child abuse and neglect cases, the dependency docket.
the commission approached me a month or so ago about this possible grant of $150,000 if Travis County would pursue the possibility of a public defender office for parental representation.
they are also making a potentially available to us, $160,000 for the children also as a public defender model.
we discussed this pretty much at length in the work session.
the urgency, time is of the essence part of this, is it is a first come, first served grant pot of money.
there is approximately $800,000 that could be issued out of this grant all across the state of Texas for court improvement project programs across the state.
the next voting session of the commission to accept grants is June 27.
the committee that would approve grants meets either June 5 or June 6, so therefore, if we want to be at that voting session, we must have this grant approval, at least pursue the grant, coming pretty expeditiously right in front of us.
the next voting session is not until October of this year.
my concern is, there are other counties that, as we mentioned in the work session, webb county, has expressed an interest.
harris county has expressed an interest.
but we're the first one that has filed an intent to request grant funds for both the child and the parent office and we're hoping for $150,000 for each one of those offices, as well as historically the task force has allowed those grant funds to be issued again in the same amount for the second about third year, if those amounts are sought by the entity seeking the grants.
so that is the --
>> October is what we're looking at.
>> yes, sir, if we don't do it in June we don't get on the agenda until October.
>> October, I'm assuming other counties will have been alerted and know put it in the hopper.
>> I would think so, yes, sir.
the commission's meetings are open and at the last meeting discussions were in the room about webb county and harris county being a viable option.
>>
>> go ahead, judge, I cut into your conversation, go ahead.
>> if I were a local lawyer doing court appointments in this area, I guess I would wonder what percent of the cases would the public defender office handle and roughly what percent might court appointments still be necessary.
>> as we said at the work session, the judge in the 98th district court, this is for a particular section of it.
we decided it had to be called a primary parent which you may have parents that are together and you may have parents that are not together and both fighting but those cannot have same council so you are always going to have what we call conflict consul for those cases so the primary parent in general terms has been the mother, so you would have this office set up for the primary parent and all other parents who are parties to these suits would be by the appointment list.
this is true in the child cases, we have of course conflicts there, several children, so the con flick cases would still go to the pry -- conflict cases would still go to the private bar.
for every parent, for every case, there are at least, generally speaking, two parents.
unless one of them is dead, you have two parents.
in some cases you have five parents because you have the situation.
so you will only have the office set up to represent one parent which would be the primary parent, then the child.
so that is the concept that you would be doing.
>> and judge, with regard to percentage, I think at best that would be and he can anecdotal as point.
I'm not sure I would have the numbers for the actual percentage.
we have a similar model with the juvenile justice public defender office.
there is a list of conflict con sill and there is a list on that as well if there is a conflict with the public defender's office.
there is no way to do these public defenders without utilizing the private bar.
>> during the work session, there were a lot of good questions asked.
of course, we got a lot of good answers from you, but I guess the folks that didn't get an opportunity to witness the work session that we had and they're just tuning in to what we're trying to do here this morning, there was a model that is already in existence, a good example of how this particular concept works in other counties in the state of Texas.
I think dallas county is one of them and a couple others, I can't remember the others, but in other words, this is nothing new, per se, and it is nothing new we're venturing into with blinders on, it is something that has been proven, and it appears it has a good track record in other counties utilizing this concept now.
tell me what counties are doing it now and the success they're having, dealing with the child public defender and also parents of the public defender concept.
>> Commissioner, I visited on the phone with the public defender in dallas county.
in dallas county, as I mentioned, they have in essence consolidated the public defender mod we will 90 attorneys in that public defender's office.
there is a division of that office that only represents parents in child abuse and neglect cases on the civil side of the docket, and there is a division of that office that only represents the child it has been very successful for their county.
it's been very efficient.
it has been very much at least from their statements to me on the phone, it has been a savings of cost and efficiencies for their county.
I understand that el paso county, I've not spoken with a public defender in el paso county Commissioner, but I'm happy to do that because obviously this is just the first threshold meeting.
we're way far away from getting this approved in the county.
this is just about the grant in pursuing that but I would be happy to visit with el paso county.
also, washington state is doing it all across the state right now.
in addition, we've visited with the american bar association and they are also endorsing and requesting that other jurisdictions pursue this model because of the equal qualitative difference.
>> my other question is the definition who have would qualify for the services, parent, child, how would they qualify as far as income is concerned?
>> typically, every child is apointed an attorney immediately and that is instantaneous now.
with regard to the parent, we have affidavits in english and spanish that are filled out after that parent is first served and appears for the first time, typically at the first hearing.
I look at those affidavits and I have the national poverty level of guidance for parents of those one through 15 and I typically at 150% of the poverty level, if they are no that area, I appoint them council.
and Commissioner, I would say, and again this is anecdotal, sir, I would say 90 to 95% of the parents that show up fall within that, within those financial parameters.
yes, sir.
>> thank you.
>> I guess I asked the question, how many children will the average family have and the answer was three.
>> yes, sir.
>> so if there are three kids there, I guess the kid's interest may be align but they may not.
>> that's true.
>> so is that how we determine whether to appoint each child a lawyer.
>> you always appoint one to begin with and for the group, but it may become apparent that there is a conflict.
you may have one of the children who was abused by the other child and so you may have an issue right there.
if you know it up front, each of those children would get an attorney.
I know judge burn was telling me of a case recently I think five children and each one had their own attorney because of various and sundry conflicts that went on.
you start with no conflict and go from there.
>> the public defenderring office would be seen as one four.
>> yes.
>> so if there were four lawyers there in that case would not represent four of them.
>> only one.
>> okay.
while you are coming forth, Commissioner eckhardt has a question.
>> I apologize for not being here for the work session.
I was looking at water law.
>> so sorry.
>> actually three was pretty interesting.
something good to know.
I was looking at the state bar letter regarding staffing levels.
how many attorneys are replanning on initially, five?
is it five?
>> I believe is five or four.
>> four attorneys.
>> four attorneys for the parent office, three for the child office.
>> I think actually we're going to change that to four for the child as well and that is how it is going to start.
>> Commissioner, with the child which also have the clinic at ut that will continue to be utilized when ut is in session.
so in some respects, you have the ut children's rights clinic that represents children and that would continue.
>> will that staffing be adequate for all of the primary parents and the children that we expect to need to cover?
>> I can't make that guarantee, Commissioner.
I can tell you that anecdotally and by comparing other departments that go to a public defender that we are believing it can.
while there are many, many cases, at any given time there is between 300 and 350 active cases, and cases come and they go, and so while in a given year you may have more than that, there are only certain times they are all active so you're looking at that.
the american bar association standards is a case load between 50 and 100 per lawyer so that is kind of what we're going on and looking at that.
you can also look at that time from the fact that the Travis County district attorney's office has five lawyers assigned to these cases.
they of course are required to prosecute all of these cases and they have the burp, so burden oo five lawyers handle those cases as well so we're looking at it that way.
it is all an educated guess in hoping we can do it this way and move forward.
to the extent there would be any need for further -- like the case loads are so high you shouldn't and couldn't effectively handle them, we will come back to the court and look at asking for another lawyer and once those are too full, but it back to the private sector again.
you're looking at it this as a project and it is going to have a learning curve.
>> and the grant is only for start-ups looking maximum at $600,000 over two years for both of the offices in start up.
>> $900,000 over 3 years.
>> 900,000 over three years.
>> yes, Commissioner.
>> okay.
I was reviewing the back up, have we done a preliminary budget, a line-item budget.
>> yes, ma'am.
>> they've been presented to pbo.
>> so we're looking at and an wall cost of running the office of what?
>> if you will bear with me just a minute.
I believe each someone right around 700,000.
>> okay.
>> off the top of my head, I didn't bring all thousand documents with me around I apologize.
>> and I have them, I'm just trying to figure out, itooked like since it was start-up costs --
>> it was 770-something for the first year and drops down to 690, it seems to me there is something like that when we did the projections.
there we go, the number seen in we have budget requests for these two offices, and the office of point of representation, budget request includes 600,000 on going personnel costs, plus two -- let's see here.
it is actually a negative number on the operating because we are ataking the funding from the indigent attorney's fees budget so the start-up costs as I understand it be 227,000 for the first year with the remaining costs going to be transferred over from the indigent attorney's fees.
the personnel is 600,000 and I don't have my calculator with me to do the operating.
>> two quick questions.
one is the grant am situation just that, an application -- the grant application is just that, an application.
you may get it, you may not.
>> yes, sir.
>> and you mate implement these projects without the grant funding.
>> the reason it was speeded up was the possibility of the grant.
>> what we hope to do is take funds we currently expend more the same services and use those for different manner.
if we spend the current budget more efficiently, more cost effectively, then I think we've achieved major goals for the public.
>> one of the outcomes is efficiency of the program.
>> I don't know that we do this to save $100,000, because you can't guarantee, it and there are other goals that we must achieve in this area.
efficiency, effectiveness.
>> quality of council.
>> yeah, and the other thing, I guess, some of these cases are fairly routine, you do a certain number of them, you become better.
>> yes, sir.
with anything do you, the more you do it, the better you get at it, you hope.
>> but we would still have the need for outside council.
>> always.
>> and presumably, there will be lawyers still interested in filling that role.
>> we would hope so, yes, sir.
>> the other thing we talked about was currently the fee paid them is $60 an hour which has been in place 15 or 20 years, and there is a recommendation we consider increasing that to at least 75.
>> yes, sir.
>> the way I understand that.
>> we did ask for that in the new budget for the civil courts to increase the payment of an hourly rate for the private practitioners in these cases because do we realize they've not had an increase in I think it is almost 20 years.
>> wow.
20 years.
>> your name, please.
>> eckles, I'm one of the private attorneys that takes court-apointed cases.
I've got, I think it is part of your material that I photo copied one of the spread sheets and circled particular items. I allowed to distribute those amongst the Commissioners?
>> yes, sir.
>> thank you.
>> if you will give all of them to Commissioner Davis, he will pass them down.
>> do you have a a copy for the clerk?
>> yes.
>> a total of six.
>> a total of six of them.
>> Commissioner.
>> thank you very much.
>> I have a whopping three years experience in these cases which means I have to give great deafrance to the judges who I have a tremendous respect for.
I was not at work session so I apologize for that.
>> did you state your name?
>> hodson ecrles.
I was not at the work session.
I have to give great defferance so the judge who run circles around my experience in these things.
I want to speak strictly in the four corners of what I just handed you.
I think, judge bisco, you hit on it saying we could get $100,000, we will not necessarily get it and I'm not sure we are coming out ahead.
the spread sheet I handed out to you, Commissioner Daugherty, I guess you are a policy person, late yesterday afternoon and just quickly draw attention to a couple of things.
if you look at that first row, September '09, you drop down the cost of attorney's fees without the office, without this new proposed office, it's $49,917 per month.
that is pretty consistent.
again, I'm looking at this over the past 24 hours.
in October '09 it sums up to $53,000 and I'm not sure why that jumped but it is there in the spread sheet.
if you look in the lower right corner of that same row, the cost of attorney's fees with the office is $54,000, so you're not saving money.
and in that same row, if you go back to December of '08, the total cost, you see that figure, 71,585, the next month to the right, January '09, 63,000, 59,000 and so on, there is an on going cost to implement this program, so if you subtract the total, the status quo of $49,000 from each month, at the end of this, the time period presented, you are in the hole arguably, you know which numbers you're working with, $281,000 or $265,000.
again, -- I'm new that the, I'm just looking that the for the first time and I was not at the work session.
>> the figure we heard is if the projections hold true that would be a savings of 100,000 some of what is the explanation to his --
>> as we talked before, judge, one of the problems you were going to have to have is run these offices simultaneous for the first year and you are going to have an additional cost the first year.
this is kind of working it out.
you cannot bring this office on board immediately.
all the cases that currently exist and have appointed council all the way up to December of this year, I will think, you are still looking at having independent council this office will stay.
this office will gradually be started up, hire the managing attorney and support staff and they will start taking cases.
that is not going to be cost efficient until the time that office goes full fledged and these case goes down, vul an overlapping cost and that is what we did on the charts for you to though you the 2009, you will have a spike in the cost of attorney's fees in order for this to work.
it's just the way it is going to be, you have to maintain both systems for at least that period of time so there will be an overlap and overlay and added expense for fiscal year 2009, at least.
do we believe, and if you look at this, by the time you get down at the end of 2009 fiscal year, you will start seeing a cost savings.
you will see even a bigger savings, of course, if the court approves what we're hoping you approve which is to pay the court appointed lawyers money who are appointed.
if do you raise their fees, you are also going to see a commensurate savings by opening the office as well.
it is an interesting dynamic, but you cannot open these offices without having some additional cost in the first year.
>> also, judge, the sheet that you have in front of you does not take into account if the grant is awarded to us and we, and if this commission allows us to accept the grant of $150,000, these numbers do not reflect that we got grant money.
this is on county money.
>> this is without the grant.
>> yes, sir.
>> with and without grant money.
>> right.
>> as far as the numbers are concerned.
>> right, the numbers are all without the grant.
>> grantmoney.
>> exactly.
>> we did have a representative from the state on Thursday who indicated we thought we stood a good chance of having a grant application approved if we were to get it in earlly.
>> yes, sir.
>> what I have read about public defender's offices is that the average cost per case for routine cases I guess is what you're looking at, and that goes down sorts of dramatically.
>> yes, sir.
>> but there are other dynamics at work.
the number of cases in an urban setting of this nature, unfortunately, tend to increase.
>> yes, sir.
>> and there are complicated cases that will cost you more than they do today and they will in the future, and a lot turns on how many lawyers you in fact, need in a particular case and that turns on the number of parents and number of kids, as you mentioned, and I guess at some point, how long the case goes on.
>> yes, sir.
>> or there are cases that I guess are fairly simple, routine, and you turn them over in a few months?
>> yes, sir.
some of these cases start and finish within, you know, 30, 60 days, possibly, because the parents relinquish their rights that why thank you very much number that is never a stagnant number.
>> so I guess we should, we should be cautious about assuming there will be significant monetary savings here.
>> if you work there out through the years, the answer is yes, sir.
I mean, these graphs took us out through '09 mainly because we were trying to give the court a realistic idea 6 the overrun for '09.
if we don't get the extra grant money, that would be an expensive situation.
but if you played it out until 2013, which I do have some charts and would be glad to work with the court and other parties on, it will show a significant savings over as you play this out over the years.
>> when you really -- I'm sorry, judge.
>> go ahead.
>> okay.
we really look at it, there are many situations that we get involved with as far as trying to bring about some perspective but at a cost conscious, in a cost-conscious manner, and we require that things that we've gotten involved in, we come back and value them later to see where you are so we will have some sort of measure after a certain period of time, and that's just something we have tried to be prudent too as far as possible as investing in programs. But if I understood the person from the state of Texas that is, made himself available to us as far as applying for this particular grant money, if I understood correctly, that would and three-year grant allocation in the amount of how much?
>> we're going to, we've been asked to request 150,000 per year.
>> per year.
>> and per office.
>> and per office, exactly.
so that's, I think, a big plus as far as to offset some of this.
and I guess after a period of time, we'll be able to see exactly where we are because we'll have some kind of traffic record with the -- track record with the amount of activity that has taken place in this particular project.
so I'm excited about it, I think it is a good deal.
of course, a lot of things have been said here, but I think efficiency, quality, the funding sources that is made available, and the time frame we need do it in is in an urgent state of being, as far as I'm concerned, a one-time commitment we're looking at with the county and may be continuing commitments later on in the future to get this thing going.
and if I remember correctly, and if you can correct me in if I'm wrong, during the work session the state representative that this particular application will go through for that particular funding said that by June, I think, that we would have an answer on this and of course, we could -- it was at our discretion as far as when we actually start using the grant money if received during the course of the year.
and if I'm wrong in that --
>> that's correct that was my understanding what have he said.
>> okay.
since that's the case, I think it is a win/win situation for a lot of indigent persons out there that need the service, children, parents, and I'm all in support of it, so thank you.
>> I have a couple of questions.
>> welcome again.
we caught your first point.
is there another one?
>> a ticky-tacky questions suchs that does not include benefits, travel, you have to visit these kids, a float of cars, travel vouchers, cost of gas, cell phones, things like that.
just trying to get a real sense --
>> gasoline is not ticky-tacky
>> [laughter]
>> indeed.
and I feel compelled to add, I grew up in the houston area and consequently was a fan of the great coach of the houston oilers in the mid 70s there was a professional football player's strike and his take on that was we're not talking about coal minors here, I'm a licensed attorney, you know, I can make a living.
yeah, I'm here because this is this effects how I currently make my living but I and the rest of my colleague will be able to go on and make our living with our without this office, so understand there is not a whole lot of need to worry about that.
it's just I saw this and saw that it did not add up to me, and as to, you know, grants, grants are good things, but still pack taxpayer money so I felt compelled to speak.
I mean absolutely no disrespect to the judges.
>> you all aren't going to hold it against him that he is here.
>> never
>> [laughter]
>> he is one 67 our very talented attorneys that is also bilingual which is a rare treat to have.
I asooned him cases, he was in front of me several times yesterday and his gift of the language of spanish certainly assists us in the court as well as his good professionalism.
>> I appreciate him.
>> that brings me to, I suppose the nut of the issue for me.
what measures of effectiveness do we expect to impact positively through the implementation of public defender's office, as opposed to the level of service that indigent individuals are currently getting.
>> we are actually developing what you call the performance measures.
and you know, this has been very fast and so we've started anecdotally putting them down.
if you're talking about your financial aspect of it, which is your cost analysis, benefit.
when weather you can more quickly resolve cases and how that works.
the training of having the attorneys because of the repetition of the type of cases.
the turn over in consistency and quality in all those matters.
we did talk to the gentleman.
what was his name?
>> brian wilson.
>> mr. Wilson says because he started so many of these offices, he would work with us to develop protocols an and anae this office.
>> will we measure against the private attorneys as we will nobody good competition, healthy competition with private attorneys who are representing the conflicted out cases?
>> you know, I don't know, I hasn't thought about whether or not you would be in healthy competition for it but we can create that scenario so the cases, you would have the analysis going on both ways.
those cases that have private council and those cases that have the public defender's office.
however what you would expect is that since the public defender's office would be on all of them, those cases would somewhat have the same, you know, history, so to speak.
if you're talking about the quality of representative, we have good lawyers in Austin, so I don't know how you would want us to try to say whether the public defender's office have a better lawyer than the private sector, but I don't think that works, but I would see the cases, what we're looking at really is seeing if the cases themselves have better outcomes.
reunification occurs quickly, termination occurs quicker, resolution of the case, return of the children, the measure of how services get implemented.
can you get, because of systemic approach to this, are you going to be able to put pressure on the external service providers in order to get these services s in quicker.
what type of benefits would these all be.
we don't know yet but we would be working on that before we present this further to the court.
>> in the time frame on getting the application in on the grant?
>> now.
what he told us was yesterday.
>> what he told us was yesterday?
>> well, I have to have the grant to the committee that approves at their committee meeting, which I believe is June 5 or June 6.
because that committee will recommend whether they're going to recommend to the whole commission who votes on June 27.
>> so it has to be to the committee June 6?
>> that is my understanding of the committee's meeting, yes, ma'am.
>> the only reason why I ask is it does seem that the bar who handles these types of cases apparently feels a little surprised.
I correct in that assessment?
>> I am personally.
I can't speak for my colleagues, but it's spooky that nobody else here --
>> would you like to come up, ma'am.
welcome.
we would need to get you on the microphone and get your name, then we will be happy to get your comments.
>> I only bring it up because it seems like with further information, this may be a no-brainer for all involved.
and we actually, I don't know if it went out yet but I know we've talked to the board member, the chairman of the board who is supposed to be sending out a notice that judge burn and I will make ourselveses aavailable for a meeting with all the attorneys next Monday.
it is next Monday at noon.
in the 98th district court courtroom so we can discuss this.
today, of course, the urgency today is we're asking the court only to approve us, saying we want to apply.
and then the next step, of course, will be to apply.
but this is the first step in the process so we're actually trying to schedule and hopefully have scheduled a meeting.
>> you can change your mind up to accepting the money and using it.
>> yes, sir.
>> so if things change over the next two or three weeks, you could address those changes.
>> I would envision we would have a committee meeting or commission meeting after June 27 to determine whether the commission is still on board with regard to accepting the grant funds.
>> can I add quickly from the planning and budget office that these office requests are submitted by the budgement process and also discussed most like flee August at budget hearings so this will and process that will be moving through over the next several months.
>> and jessica, it also will be the issue about raising the fees --
>> that has also been submitted to planning and budget and will be reviewed simultaneously with recommendations made.
>> okay.
>> your name, please.
>> my name is katherine hiney.
I've been doing these cases for nine years.
I'm somewhat a quiet person, I've never done this before.
>> this is the Commissioners court, you can get comfortable
>> [laughter]
>> I just 4th of July out there this so with all -- I just found out about this, so with the money issue, the time I've been sitting here I haven't heard about how this is going to affect the quality and as having represented both parents and children I know it does take a lot of time.
and I'm not sure, as I said, I sort of feel a little blind-sided here.
there seems to be that they want to have just a couple of attorneys who then represent a whole lot of kids, and then the parents and then the fathers, I guess, get farmed out because there is going to be conflict of interest.
I don't know how many children an attorney can adequately represent.
just for one small example, I represent five children right now and to go and visit them, they are in four different placements, I'm going to be spending up to 10 hours if not nor driving around, visiting these children.
if you have maybe four or five attorneys in this clinic, and they get like maybe 50 or 60 or 70 children, that is an awful lot of children you're trying to represent and doing a really good job.
I also spend a lot of time, particularly with mothers, and I just don't know how that would work because it is not only the legal aspect of these cases, there is a lot of social work involved.
if anybody says differently, that is just not true.
we end up doing a lot of that.
and I end up not billing for a lot of that stuff, either.
so I'm wondering where the quality really comes in here.
>> in terms of measuring the quality, you mentioned two things that made my ears prick up, one would be the number of home visits to children, and you had also mentioned the overall amount of time with mother clients.
are there any other indicators that you would suggest we look at in terms of determining whether the quality is up to snuff?
>> I would probably have to, you know --
>> think about it and if it comes to you, let us know.
>> that is a huge concern.
and I do think that, I'm not speaking for myself, did talk to other attorneys that have the very same concerns, how this is going to affect the quality.
>> why don't we invite lawyers to the meeting.
>> yes, sir.
>> and we have had a juvenile public defender office in place 25 years.
>> yes, sir.
>> so this is not like this is the first thing for us.
>> the protective order division I imagine has similarities.
>> so I guess, I don't know what the case slowed there but I don't -- last time I was out there for one of those docket calls for juveniles with offenses, I thought that was the worse situation a human being could go through, not to mention a county judge from tyler Texas.
so, I mean, we should be able to learn from those experiences.
>> there are, the public defenders office has seven lawyers and they handle 3,641 or 461 cases last year and they have stringent requirements on visiting their clients in timely fashions as well than is no doubt in my mind these cases are sensitive.
I have believed in these cases and the importance of these cases my career, I've dedicated my entire career to children and families.
she is correct, it takes a lot of work and a lot of dedication.
I would not be suggesting that we ever compromise the quality of recommendation for these children or these families, and the hope is that what we would be doing would be actually enhancing it and at the same time paying for people like miss haney who would be providing other parents and other parties to these action as decent wage for the work they do instead of having them do it free.
but we will look at those matters as well.
we have found that the juvenile public defender's office represents their clients very well.
yet there is a private sector that also takes those cases and you one of the interesting things is they are always having to get used to the fact that juvenile cases have to move fast.
we do not allow those cases to languish and their not -- sometimes they're not trained well enough to understand the juvenile system doesn't operate like the adult system so as people come on that list they have to learn.
there is a learning curve but we work with that.
and in the defender as office, because they are all there and we have a set of attorneys, your learning curve, you've got them on board so you are able to have them know and stay.
as in the da's office, who actually pros prosecuted these s there was a problem because das come and go and they used it as a rotation for das to come into these hearings and go and that has proved to be ineffective because the learning curve and the cases were difficult so all of that glass together.
for these people that stay on the list and do these case as lot in the private sector, they're great.
we have some great lawyers.
and it is a list and it rotates and changes all the time.
we will be having a juvenile board meeting tomorrow for the juvenile list, we will add attorneys to it and others come off so it is a living document and we will continue to have that living document for cps cases as well.
>> the meeting is Monday at noon.
>> at noon.
the 98th.
>> what is the best way for us to get out news of that?
>> well, this organization, cofa, Travis County bar association section, and my understanding is that there stub or is going to be a notice sent to them.
so in was one that was sent to them.
>> we'll see how it goes then.
>> judge --
>> I think we ought to move to proceed on this because it takes some time to put it together, then if after the meeting we change our mind, leapt us know --
>> I will second your motion judge, whenever you make it.
>> I made it just then that we proceed.
>> let me ask one thing, is there an Austin bar association.
>> yes.
>> then, I mean, we've got the american bar association letter that clearly states why they're supportive of it, and it certainly addresses the integrity of the system.
which she was asking, is there consideration given and the quality of the centralized office they list about 10 reasons why it is a good idea.
is there a reason why we don't have an Austin bar association letter that would be in, I mean that would mirror this?
or would we this that the american bar association would have a different opinion from the Austin bar association?
>> Commissioner, I suppose since the Austin area doesn't have such an office, they don't have necessarily any idea opposed to the american bar association that is looking at it nationwide and has seen the model work in other just dictions, but who have you in front of you, these two good counsels, are actually a subset of the Austin bar association, an organization, the section is called the court appointed family advocates and that is a subset r we'll be me on Monday so it really does this work.
the entire Austin bar is so diverse that they may or may not have a voice on this issue.
>> and Commissioner, if I could add, I'm not officially representative of cofa but I would expect that we're behind the curve on this, there is not an organized response just yet.
>> motion is to approve a-1 and a-2.
discussion of the motion?
let us know if we need to revisit this.
>> thank you.
>> we will see the application itself before submitted to the state, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> all those in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
appreciate you all.
>> thank you.
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