Travis County Commissioners Court
July 8, 2008
Item 26
26. Consider and take appropriate action on the creation of an intergovernmental relations coordinator position, including: a, give direction to planning and budget office regarding placement in the budget hearing process; b, direct human resources management department to create appropriate slot(s) for the position(s); and (Commissioner eckhardt) c, other actions related thereto.
>> this has been before us a couple of times. The new portion of the backup is -- is from human resources, this is a job description draft for our review. Human resources came back and suggested that the pay grade actually be set at a pay grade 26 based on their -- on their review of the market. And internal equity considerations. Rather than the originally proposed grade 24. Of course that is a range. And the grade 26 range includes a portion of the grade 24 range, so I don't think it's a -- it's a large difference. The job description encompasses what we have discussed previously. There is in the distinguishing characteristics it says the job classification is in the public information series of job classifications, but I want to clarify this isn't a public information officer position. It's just in the same series, in the same category. Therefore was used as comparison. It goes on to say it serves a a primary liaison between the county and other governmental organizations in -- then goes on to describe examples of the word performed. I think that -- that it's my opinion that this position is distinct from any kind of legislative consulting position that we are putting an r.f.p. Out for because this position would have loyalties exclusively with Travis County, would develop an expertise specific to Travis County and then be able to work with whatever consulting experts that we chose to hire, whether the consulting experts, the consultants to the legislature were on specific issues or whether they were more broadly dispatched on county issues. This position would be able to tell them who was the appropriate person to testify, how to approach the issue in terms of other issues, other irons that may be in the fire by the county, the greater level of expertise to understand what the left arm is doing while the right arm is -- is going to speak with the legislature. I think it would make a much more sophisticated effort on our part in terms of both state and federal presentations. And would -- would free us to a certain degree to be more effective in our choice of advocates and advocacy at the state and the federal level. And allow us to grow our -- our ability to advocate in the region as sort of a scaffold upon which all of the other municipalities hang so that we can function more cooperatively with the other 27 municipalities inside Travis County as well as more cooperatively with the adjoining counties and the capcog region as a whole.
>> I have a question Commissioner when you -- when you finish.
>> uh-huh.
>> okay. Thank you.
>> my 15 second elevator speech which was a little longer than 15 second.
>> if the court decides to move forward with this item, secret the new positions, capital and all of the other things that involve, staffing, when -- when would it be anticipated that due to the responsibilities and all of these other kind of things would come into play since -- since of course you know the legislative session is right at our doorstep, right now in fact. The things going on. When would it be anticipated that
>> [indiscernible] selected to this would be able to get started, get started effectively. I know there's a few other things that may be con contingent on that beginning time, I'm looking at capital, all of the other little things that have to go with this, staffing requirements stuff like that. When is it anticipated, all of those things hold it up --
>> it's anticipated -- we have brought this back a few times over so that we could fully vet it. Given the time frame, it's anticipated that probably the best case scenario, since we do have a job description before us. If we did approve this job description, then we could put it out on the street and get somebody in place best case scenario I would say is October.
>> October?
>> which is cutting it close as far as getting ramped up for the legislative session. But I'm -- I'm given to understand that in terms of hiring a legislative consultant we are also looking at September. So while this legislative session, this time frame is very, very tight. I think we have to look in terms of a much broader horizon. This legislative session and beyond sooner the better.
>> I'm looking at a lot of things that we have been discussing from this dais that is legislative worthy. I think for further discussion, somebody, someone, whomever selected could pick the ball up and be ready to run with it. Just right at our doorsteps. An example of the land use survey that's being conducted. We will be getting an overview on that here shortly. As far as the data on the public opinion survey that -- that would have to be I guess formatted to some degree where -- where it will be able to go before the legislature. With the concerns that -- that the Travis County residents of -- of the results of the -- of the public opinion survey will be predicated on. So I'm just kind of concerned that everything that we are doing is being accommodated properly in the time frame that's necessary to -- to make sure that whatever we are doing happens effectively. That's why I posed the question the way I posed it.
>> it would be great if -- if we were to say that we wanted this position, it would be great if we had it early. There's no time like the present. No sense in looking backward. In terms of the way the position would function, my intent and I wanted to explore this with the court, but the intention behind the way the job description was written as well as the previous backup was that this position would work for the entire Commissioners court but be -- be within the -- within the -- would be directly accountable to the judge. But of course for this position to truly work it has to be an individual who is responsive to the entire court and just as we have always done, from a procedural standpoint, there would be no initiative that would go forward to the legislature or to the -- or to the u.s. House unless it was on a -- on a super majority vote to the Commissioners court.
>> okay.
>> those are my questions.
>> my thing though is that we have talked about this a long time. If we're going to do it I think we ought to do it immediately, post it, I think that you have got to give yourself 30 to 60 days to fill it anyway. If we have the ability to fill it this year I would fill it and the money would come from allocated reserve. My preference would be for us to go ahead and approve it, post it, and I'm thinking that we may need a little help coming up with that last posting that we had really was more than a -- than a description and a regular posting. It was kind of posting plus. But it did a pretty good job of describing exactly what we were looking for. We may well need that kind of approach here if we can get it. Take a little time to put that together. Then post it, then give ourselves 30, 45 days to receive applications and, you know, our interviewing in the selection process normally takes two or three weeks, right? So we are at two, two and a half months then. And I think the sooner we get the person in if we're going to do this and have this person work on some of these issues the better.
>> one caveat that I wanted to amend my statement about October. If by some chance, hopefully this chance is -- is within the realm of possibility, if we could hire them before October, t.n.r. Is very again -- has very generously made some of their temporary salary savings available for this fiscal year to fund that position to get the person on early.
>> that would be great if some of the other departments can --
>> that also in discussion.
>> throw in -- in other words we may not have to hit the allocated reserve, judge --
>> [multiple voices]
>> I hear some of the others are looking for an opportunity to work with us.
>> I'm given to understand that it is wanted that much there is discussion about other ways to fund it prior to -- in this fiscal year.
>> well, those other departments that rely upon legislative participation as we go through this every year, I think that Commissioner eckhardt has just thrown outs the red carpet. Listen, we don't want to hit our allocated reserve if not -- if other funding sources are available.
>> Commissioner Daugherty should we ask elected to forego half a percent on their salary, on their cola?
>> [laughter]
>> Commissioner.
>> I think there's no doubt that we need the position because we have heard I think in the past that we may be the only county that doesn't have this kind of position to work with our legislative, you know, what do you call them, legislative team in order to -- to make sure that we coordinate all of the needs of the county departments. So I mean from that perspective, I think yeah it's a necessary position. And then they work very closely with the legislative team. To improve the communications, to improve the -- the contacts that they have with all of the different departments and their needs. And then -- but I think that it's also important to help this individual to not just run crazy sending this person all over the place, but I think that if we want an issue worked on, that I think that it's worked well in the past for us, and that is that -- that the issue has to be approved by at least a four to one vote. Otherwise, you know, they may be running down rabbit trails, which won't lead to anything useful. And I don't think we want to waste this person's time.
>> I agree.
>> and energy.
>> I agree that our -- that our policy, our long standing policy of a super majority should stand.
>> otherwise we will have them running all over the place and not doing effective work for us. So I think those are the things that concern me. But I think if we're going to do it we need to get moving so we can get into the interview process because that takes time as well.
>> I second whoever wants to make the motion. I will second it.
>> my motion is to approve the position and the budget as outlined, which is approving the job description, but I would request that we come one a creative -- come up with a creative way to advertise the position as we have done in two or three instances in the past so we would take a week or two to try to work that. Since we paid for the one that I have in mind, I guess if we fudge a little bit and might -- after that one it's probably all right, isn't it?
>> Commissioner eckhardt since you worked so closely, I will withdraw my second and let you make it.
>> that's nice, but that's okay. It can be your second. I'm good with that. I think it shows a come he'siveness on the -- cohesiveness on the court. I'm happy with that.
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic]
>> space planning
>> [indiscernible] rusk building, since the position works for the court, you would want it close to the court like on the fifth floor?
>> my thinking is that we would have to work on that as well as a source of founding. I'm assuming that we will have anywhere from four to six weeks at least to get that done. But I agree, hadn't forgotten about that, as well as getting some of this equipment in. It doesn't help a whole lot to bring this person in unless you have computers, telephone, office space. If we're right, gets to go take a couple of months at least, it will give us an opportunity for work through those. Approving the job description gets us in place as soon as possible. We have other issues associated that we have to resolve.
>> proximity to start working on the development.
>> uh-huh.
>> yeah. That's a preference.
>> judge, I'm going to withdraw my second. If you -- to recognize and alloy Commissioner eckhardt.
>> you should keep it.
>> okay. Well, she insists.
>> I'm ready to vote.
>> I want to say something.
>> okay.
>> Commissioner.
>> this is clearly a position that we need. But we have missed the window of opportunity in my opinion for this spot to be effective for this next legislative cycle. In a time when we don't need to be spending $125,000 plus with all of the other things that we're going to add, we have been told since the first of the year you need to craft, you need to identify what you want legislative-wise done. We don't have a chance of creating something as late as October or November with these legislators coming into town in January. And we are -- I mean I think that next year would be the perfect time to get it ready for 2011 because I do honestly think that we will really benefit from this position. But I just think that we're jumping the gun. We've missed, we've waited too long. All of us have talked about this thing for a long time. I think all of us have known from the get-go that we need it. I think that we are going to spend $125,000, this person is going to come along, really our legislative, new legislative folks are quite frankly going to be doing the same thing our past team has done, which is to try to sit down with us as -- as a court, department heads or this and that and really not having any idea what are the really important things that we need, which is the reason we need this position. Because that person it's the one that can take that. I think we are spending $125,000 for nothing because I don't think we're going to get that much out of it. So I'm -- I realize we have a first and a second, probably as far as it's going to get. I would be real cautious about spending the 125 plus thousand dollars now.
>> Commissioner, I have thought about that similar to what you have been saying, but I also thought this as we have gone through this calendar year, the number of times that you and Commissioner Gomez and Commissioner eckhardt and the judge and I have listened to a lot of testimony here in this court, examples we like at title 30, chapter 82,
>> [indiscernible], we listen to the land use situations where we have been overwhelmed with persons that -- that have talked to us about simple things as far as notification. There are some things, though, if we feel that we decided in an earlier time frame, which an example public opinion survey on land use for Travis County. We started that process early on in the year. In fact last -- last year. I recall. Trying to -- trying to figure out a way to -- to put together some type of -- some type of analysis to deal with land use situations. So it came in the format of a public opinion survey which has been basically completed. There will be a work session on that tomorrow. This is something that a lot of groundwork has been already done. I mean, it's there. The results of that will be discussed in the work session tomorrow. I mean Thursday. It will be good for whoever is selected in this process to have all of this particular information the result to take the legislature, that in itself there are other things but that in itself is one of the -- is a hot button issue all over Travis County. Land use authority and you have heard it, I have heard it, all of us have heard it. We have heard people coming in here all the time about situations that we deal with within the divisions and processes as -- subdivisions and process as things come about. I think modifying chapter, title 30 doing a good example, trying to figure out notification and going through tax bills, utility bills, a lot of things that we try to do improvise as much as possible, this in my opinion is -- is a -- is a situation where we can take ready-made, ready-made results to whomever selected and take to the legislature. There's a lot of other things like I said. I'm not going to go through them. That's a major league issue.
>> Commissioner this is -- I'm -- I might not disagree on some of the things that you have just said. My point is this person coming in in September or October, it's not going to make any difference what the survey shows. I'm just saying the effectiveness that this person is going to be able to have in this next legislative cycle in my opinion is going to be very, very small.
>> may I --
>> our lobbyist on the other hand, because the reason that you have lobbyists is because they have relationships. That's the reason that you pay those people. They are the ones that are able to get the doors open. We have a elective person in this spot that so what? I mean that this person knows something in October. My only point is that I think that that pepper could be very effective, probably in 2011 versus 2009 and we are going to pick up an additional $125,000 of expense right now and Commissioner I mean I'm as anxious to hear day after tomorrow as you are. But you know what? There are going to be no surprises. We know what we are going to find most likely. It going to be that there is a very energized group of people that want county authority. No question. The issue will be is wanting it and getting it over there because about 90% of the stuff over there doesn't make it down the pipeline. Gets in, gets stalled, pushed, pulled, whatever, which is the reason that I continue to say if we really are serious about land use authorities then we as a court need to find a way to collectively get together and to say: I agree with you, sarah, I agree with you Commissioner Davis. I don't agree with that. That in itself is enough to send a message over there that, you know, what you don't have unanimity on the court. I understand I think what you want. You want land compatibility issues and I understand why you do. Because you have fought valiantly, you know, for landfills, for sludge farms for tank farms for all of the things that you have done in your life. I respect that. I think that that is something that Commissioner that I can get right on the same page with you just like that. Say I know Commissioner Davis needs that, quite frankly there's not a rock quarry in western Travis County, if there were I mean there would be people hammering on me like your people hammer on you for a landfill. That land compatibility thing with setbacks, you know, with buffers, with all of the kind of things, but we're getting into a different subject now. I have said what I wanted which is I just in my opinion don't think that we are going to get $125,000 out of value spending it this next year.
>> what I have done is I have -- I have had conversations with folks over at the legislature as as well as and I'm told that we just need to defend what we have. We may not get anything more. That the state is in financial crisis as well. And more than likely they are going to send us a lot of unfunded mandates. That they -- that are clearly county responsibility but we're going to have to find the money to deal with those issues because they affect our people, our constituencies. And so I think this would be a valiant try, but I -- this may not be the time, you know.
>> I can hear -- both side.
>> by both agreeing with Gerald Daugherty and not talking about land use. This position is -- the job description here while yes a large part of it would be in -- in aiding our lobbying efforts at the Texas legislature, this is an intergovernmental relations person who would work year round irrespective of whether it was a Texas legislative year on coordinated efforts between us and the 27 municipalities in this region as well as coordinating our efforts with the surrounding counties in the capcog as well as coordinating our efforts with the other major met pom tan counties a-- metropolitan counties across the state. In addition, the u.s. Congress does not meet every other year. And -- and the -- the department both at the state and at the federal level are 365 day affairs. This individual would not be somebody who only works during the Texas legislature. This is -- the idea behind this is that this position would be working constantly for collaborative effort like situated counties whether it's Texas or whether it's minnesota as well as collaborating in the efforts of the 27 municipalities so when the Texas legislature does come around we already have an agenda that's formulated. We have heard time and time again from our state lobbyists that we need this. But I would posit that if -- that we have also heard time and time again from other municipalities, other counties and other states, frankly, that we could use this kind of internal coordination so that we would better be able to -- to strike while the iron is hot when an issue presents itself. That we would have somebody who was equipped right off the bat who would be a account to say I've got a super majority mandate from the county to go to, say, the city of Austin and the -- and el paso who have a like issue on immigration for instance. And be able to craft something that would be important to take to --
>> for congress, right?
>> or to a state agency in regard to aid. I think that this position irrespective -- even if you take the benefits and our efforts at the Texas legislature out of the picture, I think this position pays for itself.
>> well, there are numerous intergovernmental gaps that exist whether the legislature is in town or not.
>> not just land use.
>> no.
>> that was just an example.
>> okay. Hold on.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? Show Commissioners Davis, eckhardt and yours truly voting in favor.
>> I'm going to abstain for further information.
>> okay. And Commissioner Daugherty.
>> I never have abstained. I'm not going to start
>> [laughter]
>> okay.
>> then I think in -- in a future agenda item we really ought to address the ad we're posting, space, source of funding, equipment, and related items. But the intention is for us to go ahead and move on this one. Okay?
>> okay. Any more discussion of this item? You understand what we just did?
>> uh-huh.
>> okay.
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:
Tuesday, July 8, 2008 1:51 PM