Travis County Commissioners Court
September 30, 2008
Item 66
66, consider and take appropriate action on county policy regarding use of toll roads and city parking meters by county employees using county vehicles, including payment of fines and fees. And this issue surfaced as cyd graham is wondering what to do with the bills that we were getting, right, from the city of Austin and the state of Texas. And john did send to us -- or joe geiselman, some indication of what the state law is. Apparently the emergency services vehicles are exempted. Let's hear you, dan.
>> judge, Commissioners, the issue is on paying tolls for use of the toll roads, and in the draft policy or draft language, it indicates that an employee who drives a county vehicle is responsible for payment of all tolls for using a toll road. What it doesn't say is that employees are prohibited from using toll roads in their driving on official county business. If that's the intent, then that should be included in the policy language. If the intent is that they will be responsible for paying this and the decision to use toll roads is strictly up to the employee, that should be explicitly stated in this policy otherwise enforce thement may be more difficult.
>> do we have an issue about make a distinction about whether the toll was initiated outside the -- the toll was initiated outside Travis County? Because in that case it would be -- it could not be an emergency vehicle engaged in county business.
>> it may be an emergency vehicle --
>> well, probably not.
>> if it's from one of the fire districts loaning their equipment or --
>> good point.
>> it doesn't have to be. The way the law reads, all it has to be is a vehicle that meets the definition no matter whether it's in county or out of county, it's basically exempt. And the way both agency that collect tolls have a list from Travis County right now, that list actually lists multiple, are being provided by the individual departments, and if they say it qualifies, then the agency takes it on face value that it is qualified and will not charge a toll. So they will match the license plate against the list and they won't charge for the toll. But if it is an authorized vehicle and it's not on the list, the county will still receive a bill for a toll unpaid. And that's part of the problem is getting the toll agencies the correct list so they don't bill us for them. Then everything else, any other county vehicle that's on the toll road is going to get billed. And we are getting invoices for those and, of course, the county right now has an implicit policy, we didn't really adopt a policy, that said basically the employee would be responsible for paying the -- not only the toll but any subsequent fine or penalty, court cost that may result because of an unpaid toll. So I think what today we were trying to formalize a policy of the court so that everyone understands what the county policy is and goes accordingly.
>> so right now, joe, you mean to tell me that folks that own toll roads, Travis County employees in a department vehicle or whatever, the logo with Travis County on it, they are going on the toll roads and not realizing that there may be a fee assessed with the use of the toll? What am I hearing?
>> yes.
>> does that basically --
>> there's employees using county vehicles on a toll road and they are not paying the tolls themselves; therefore the toll agency sends the county the bill because they search the violence you're sense plate and sure enough Travis County is the title holder and while we have the toll is not being paid. And none of these departments have budgets or authorization to pay tolls. And the only vehicle that would otherwise be exempt are the emergency vehicles as defined by law to be a fire truck, it could be an ambulance, a sheriff vehicle with lights -- light bars. So the law specifies what qualifies for the exemption. And if they are given a list by Travis County saying that's an authorized emergency vehicle, they won't send us the bill. But there are a lot of other county fleet that could be using the toll roads knowingly or unknowingly and having -- setting up this invoicing process with the county.
>> I guess my question though, even if you update policy, my question at this point is educating the employees to what's going on here.
>> absolute. Right.
>> every department that has a county vehicle, how do we educate Travis County employees not to -- if they do this, it's on their dime?
>> well, that's why we're here today. First to get the policy adopted and then to communicate that to the workforce.
>> and we knew this -- I mean I guess before this even came up, we had to have knowledge of what's appearing here now. And it's kind of hard for me to not see why it hasn't been implemented before, just departments know, hey, this is the deal. If you are on a toll road, you have to pay the bill. It's kind of after the fact, but, well, anyway.
>> there is no policy to enforce. And I think the toll issue, the toll road fee issue is part of the larger problem that we have. We have it with parking at parking meters.
>> yeah, that too.
>> can turn into fines. We have it parking in commercial areas longer than is allowed. So it's a broad picture about what county vehicles -- employees driving county vehicles can do and not do and who is responsible for the fines, the tolls, the fees, the penalties. And we're working on a more broad policy that would apply -- would appear in the vehicle safety policy as well as hopefully in the budget rules. If we can work --
>> what's the dollar amount we're talking about that's outstanding? I mean, toll roads and parking and all of this mess?
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> the parking -- the parking is much larger than that.
>> the parker much larger than that?
>> yes.
>> all right.
>> and this policy, the draft policy that we have would apply also to traffic violations. We have three pages of unpaid fines from the city of Austin. Some are just expired meters, but others are parking in handicapped zones, parking in loading zones, clearly illegal parking going on with county vehicles. We're told by the city that if we can basically identify the employee who is driving that vehicle, they will merely transfer the ticket to that employee by name and they will prosecute the employee and the county will not be the violator. But I think it's important that employees be notified that from this point forward, both tolls and parking fines and anything else will be on their nickel.
>> and there is an administrative expense to doing this because you have to complete an affidavit for each one of these violations that occur. Who was driving, who parked the vehicle. I believe the affidavit is submitted to either the toll authority or the city of Austin or whichever city. So there's an administrative function involved there.
>> either we do that or we pay the fines and fees.
>> well, that's the other choice.
>> if there are several pagees of them, I guess we prefer not to do that. It sends the wrong signal, in my view. And if you park downtown at one of those meters, many a time when I thought I was at a 30 minute meeting and put an hour's worth of time on there and the meeting lasted an hour and a half. But I knew the bill was coming to me so I paid the fine. So I paid the fine because if you are not careful, the penalty doubles or trip else that fine in, what, 10 to 15 days.
>> and judge, that's what happened. People are either parking illegally, going through these tolls and they are not paying them and then there's the fine.
>> have we been unable to identify the employees who are responsible? Is that what the issue is?
>> we're working on that. City of Austin provided us with a list of violations and we're working on tracking down who was driving which vehicle when. But this goes back I think three years, three or four years.
>> because it's my understanding, and maybe I'm wrong about this, but under the traffic code it's not that the city of Austin is doing us a favor so much as if you identify who the driver is, it's a presumption that the owner is the driver that's rebuttable by saying no. It wasn't this is who you should be going after, right?
>> we would complete a sworn affidavit.
>> but it's a form affidavit.
>> yes.
>> it's a fill in the blank affidavit. Two things to me. One, we ought to separate tolls from traffic violations, parking tickets, et cetera. And each should start off with basically a prohibition against using those methods to perform county jobs. You may need to use it as an emergency matter, but the emergency vehicle is exempted. Otherwise we expect you to use free roads the same way you've used them historically. That's your point, right? That there needs to be a prohibition against using tolls on county business. Then if you use tolls to carry out your job, you are responsible for paying the toll or any resulting fines, penalties, et cetera. I mean, I would do that on tolls and I would do that on traffic violations, parking and whatever else.
>> judge?
>> yes, sir.
>> I think those are great suggestions that you are bringing up, but I want to go back to what Commissioner eckhardt was also suggesting. Is how do we identify those persons that are doing these violations. You can separate all these things, but the person that's going to be responsible for this -- for these actions, how do we identify them?
>> we know who the vehicle is assigned to.
>> as to how of this thing.
>> some of the fleet is assigned, some of its pool. We have a check outsystem so you can get fairly close who who was driving the vehicle at the time of the off Februarys. We also know who is gassing the vehicle because they have to put in the employee number when they gas up. I mean, there are ways to find out who was driving the vehicle at the time.
>> are the fines still being accrued?
>> well, we're spending more money ongoing back here trying to figure out who did it, I mean just like he said, that's ridiculous. It would be nice to know, but the message needs to be clearly sent by today that if you are in -- whatever kind of vehicle you are in, whether you are in a Travis County vehicle or your own vehicle, like the judge said, I go park around city hall and I get a ticket and I pay it. I don't expect anybody else to be responsible for that. The message needs to be sent. What's the amount that we're talking? What's the fines?
>> I'm not sure where we are right now.
>> but it's thousands, isn't it?
>> yes.
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> no.
>> not toll. It's more than that.
>> you are talking about parking and all the other violations.
>> can we get a number on that and can we see if there is a way that we can go to the city and say, okay, can we cut some sort of a deal?
>> we can. We are in the process of doing that. We are killing through the list to whittle -- culling through the list to whittle it down to this is what we have to pay. The county will pay from this point back for all these things we boil down and absolutely it's this amount of money, write a check to the city to clean off the deck after they say from October 1 forward this is going to be an employee payment, not a Travis County payment.
>> that's the way to do it, joe. Just let everybody know that starting October 1, you are responsible for whatever -- I mean from a toll to a parking to whatever, I mean, especially if you are parking in a handicapped. I mean, you know, somebody is just not using their head there. I mean because you are going to get a ticket for that. All of us are going to get a ticket regardless of what kind of vehicle you are in.
>> and we should get a ticket.
>> and we should get a ticket.
>> we'll sick bruce on them.
>> when you are in a county vehicle, this does not authorize you to break the law. And if you do, you are responsible for that, not the county. If you take it upon yourself to drive on a toll road, unless you have something that tells you that the county is going to pay for that, then you know you are going to have to pay for that. I mean, if I -- it's like travel. If I go to a motel on county business and rent a bunch of movies, the county doesn't pay for that is correct I pay for that.
>> but we have to have a rebust mechanism for being able to identify who is driving the car at the time because for toll roads specifically there won't be a way for an individual to pay a specific trip toll.
>> they need to be, I think -- lisa's got the numbers. I think that needs to be engrained in people's heads that it's not okay to do these things. We have a lot of take-home vehicles so people are driving county vehicles that are not on county vehicles. Those vehicles they need to act like they are their own and obey the law. The rub comes because they all come to us to be paid, first of all, is it something the court authorized to pay, and secondly, there's an issue with penalties. Whether taxpayer dollars pays for penalties. That's an issue.
>> I had heard the question, I was in my office about how much we owe. We owe the city of Austin on parking fines approximately $10,000.
>> how much?
>> 10,000.
>> 10,000.
>> 10,000. And these range from all the way back to '02 and they cover parking in handicapped space, expired meter to parking in tow away zones. And so that's what we've been working on is trying to find out who the driver was, one, and if they no longer work with the county, then the city said that we could make some arrangements and they would tie the fine to the individual.
>> so what was the $10,000 amount eight months ago? Was it 8,000? I mean, at some point in time we need to go and do this today, this afternoon and find out, city, what would you be willing to clean our slate for if we could write a check this afternoon and get it behind us. And then -- because otherwise trying to find the individuals, if you are identify the individuals, fine, but I mean even then you are probably going to have a lot of kicking and screaming over that deal. We need to pay our fines, we need to send the message clearly that starting -- maybe the 1st, day after tomorrow.
>> tomorrow.
>> I mean I don't mind going in that direction, but I still feel that those persons that know that they were parking in handicapped slots, they know they were violating the law and parking areas, even in tolls, I still think they ought to be responsible for the debt. Sure, of course, and I guess if we end up doing what we're suggesting here, coming from general fund revenue, allocated reserve, we look for the source of funding, at the end of the day that is still taxpayers' money. And so I just think if that's the case, in the meantime, research to find out, if possible, who these persons that have violated not just -- we don't even have a policy, but have violated the encroachment of parking in a handicapped zone. That's critical to me. And they should be responsible for paying that. In other words, reimburse the county on the tax dollars that we're spending. That makes sense to me.
>> judge, can we make a motion right now that if we can identify who it is that owes money, then we go to them and say here's the fine that you are responsible for, but we can't wait to not go and take care of this thing from the county's standpoint because all it does is it accrues. We don't need that to happen. We might not be able to identify but 80% of the $10,000.
>> but are the individual parking fines continuing to increase or have they topped out? Yes, they increased up to a point, but at some point they top out. So we probably don't have an issue with the individual parking tickets increasing in fines at this point. But if they are, I would think that the city of Austin would say --
>> I don't think they go away.
>> they are adding interest on to them. There's interest accruing.
>> and eventually I think they put that deal on your tire so you can't move.
>> the boot. And we have been booted.
>> that's how this issue first came up because of that particular incident that we did have a van booted. Understand the policy that we're proposing now or the notice will be not only for the parking, but also for toll, and red light. Now there is a red light policy if you are driving a car -- or if you own -- the person who owns a car is ticketed, not necessarily the driver, if you are caught on camera.
>> it seems we need to identify as many of the individual who were driving at the time of the infraction and go ahead and have the city of Austin transfer the cases over to their names. And those for whom we can't identify strike a deal with the city for closure on those cases. Is that -- is that what we're --
>> yes, that's what we're in the process of doing. We have a list and how we did it was just identify the last person that gassed up. And then start from there. Then we have to go to the departments and look at the logs for that individual at that particular time.
>> and are we establishing a system so that we can do that on a continual basis so we don't get this the situation again where we have $10,000 of backlogged tickets? So we're continually looking at this issue and continually holding our employees to the standard that we should be holding them -- all of us to?
>> I think it has to be part of the process when we identify those drivers and we know more precisely what departments they are coming from, we can put into effect a system where those that are reported to us go through a process and are immediately identified.
>> because it seems this is also an issue regarding employee management communication. I mean, this is something that should certainly go into -- if someone is chronically parking in a handicapped zone, I think it should probably go into their file.
>> how long would it take to complete the work of identifying employees who were driving these vehicles at the time of the fines or violations?
>> I don't know. Are you guys doing it?
>> and that's the question. You are right, Commissioner Daugherty, the time and -- that is spent, if we clock that in, I don't know how efficient it would be, but I think it probably is something that we need to do. We need to work out the staffing of this.
>> do some of those stand out as being multiple violators because of the number of violations or citations?
>> I think so. I think there's some that are driven -- some of the vehicles are driven by temporary workers during particular season like elections. So we kind of have not isolated, but we're working on that part. I would say if I'm able to give two weeks from now I delegate this to a staff member, we should be able to have the majority of these identified. It would be two weeks of full-time work.
>> I think we ought to do three or four times. One, do as much as we can in two weeks. Try to come back with multiple violators where we can identify the employee. Two is that I think we ought to divide this policy into the tolls, then other parking, handicapped zones, you know, that --
>> parking and then the red light.
>> tolls and all the rest of the stuff. And I would have a prohibition against using the tolls, prohibition against parking without paying the fees or parking illegally, whatever it is. Then I would have language to put on the employee responsibility for paying, kind of like the language we have in this paragraph.
>> and judge, I agree with that type of movement within a two-week time frame. I think that's adequate enough time. But also if you don't mind adding this to what you suggested, and that is from this day forward, whatever aggressive steps we can take from this court to let our county employees know that this is not acceptable behavior as far as, you know, when you park -- you know, parking in a handicapped zone, that is something just drives me up the wall. Knowingly you do it and yet you are asking the county to bail -- I won't say bail you out, but -- but that's almost in essence what we're doing. Bailing out our employees for bad behavior. And if we can add something there to let folks know from today that's not acceptable behavior for my employees by doing such and taking such action. How do we do that? I don't know. But I would like to see that portion within the next two weeks to let folks know it's not acceptable.
>> the third part of the motion is for us to ask supervisors and managers to begin immediately to share this information with employees. Nothing magical about this wording. But we'll have a formal policy.
>> and I second that, judge.
>> we'll have a formal policy ready for adoption on two weeks from today. Hopefully it will be effective October 15th, but we may as well go ahead and start getting word out to those driving vehicles. The fourth is for the city of Austin, we may as well negotiate with them and find out what they will take on the $10,000 invoice. Rather than hassling with a whole lot of county employees, they may be willing to accept a whole lot of money less and then in two weeks we can figure out how to pursue the city employees, whether we turn them over to the city or say you owe $1,000 and the county may be able to negotiate that down to 500, if we do, we expect you to pay what's it is.
>> I second that, judge.
>> I think your fourth point is great because the infraction is on Travis County. We have a problem with employees because they are the ones that have done and performed the infractions, but the reason we're getting the bill is because they are vehicles that are registered to Travis County. So we have the responsibility to take care of this and then we deal with our folks. It ought to be really easy to let the department heads, I mean let the executive managers, everybody that reports to you, you make a phone call at noon and say guess what, don't get out there and do something. The only thing I would ask is why differentiate between a toll infraction, a parking infraction, whatever, you are responsible for whatever you do in a county vehicle that is unlawful. I mean, period. I mean, as opposed to is there a reason why you are trying to differentiate tolls from parking?
>> I think for the employee it will be more understandable. I'm sitting there guessing we have more employees probably with parking violations and parking the handicapped zones than using tolls, right?
>> right now.
>> newness may have something to do wit. That's the only reason. When I read this paragraph, to me it would be simpler to divide the two. And the beauty is that you can take that sheet alicia is looking at where the violations have been cited and make sure that they are covered in the second part or first part of the policy. I would separate tolls out because they are new and different.
>> I have a question. I am perceiving there might be confusion about who is tasked with developing the procedure for identifying individuals who are driving a vehicle when the county gets notice of an infraction. Who is responsible for identifying the employee who is driving?
>> how about the department head.
>> they won't get the notice. The notice -- let me just kind of follow the rabbit trail here. Who gets the notice from the city when a vehicle has -- or from txdot or from the r.m.a. When a vehicle has been cited for a violation or having used a toll road? Who gets it?
>> we get some of them.
>> some of them? Where's the rest of them?
>> I don't know. They are all over the place.
>> alicia, do you know where the notices went for all those $10,000 worth of infractions?
>> my understanding purchasing and the auditor are the two departments that I know that --
>> I just identified a huge problem.
>> because cyd is like a title holder. She owns the vehicles.
>> so we need to identify the point person to whom if you are a manager and you get one of these notices, it is policy to send it to this person.
>> well, and our fleet manager and my inventory person are the ones that are trying to sort through who that vehicle is, you know, deployed to, like the sheriff's office or constable. They are sending it over to those guys to do something with and I'm not sure --
>> it sound to me, and tell me if I'm wrong about this, but it sounds to me like we ended up with this large list because we've been shuffling the notice from place to place without having -- and the court, I'm not saying it's management's fault, it's probably our fault, for not identifying clearly who is responsible for identifying who was driving the car and then getting the information to the enforcement agency to switch.
>> we are at the point we identify the problem about six months ago. We have been -- we have met with the city several times. The toe issue kind of has come up and when we met with the city, we were given a heads up on red lights. So we've been collecting data, been working with joe and brought risk empty in last week because of what you are talking about, we identified the problem, but not the responsibility of fixing it and addressing it.
>> so not only do we need to land on a policy, which is fairly easy, sounds like we have already landed on a policy because we've had at least and you stated policy for a while and it's no brainer if you break the law. But now along with landing on the verbiage to go into our employee manual, as it were, it seems we also need to land on a procedure so that as a manager if you do get notice of a fleet vehicle that's within your purview having one of these violations, you know who to send it to and that person who receives it knows what to do with it. Yes? Can we come up with that as well in this time frame that the judge has laid out? The two weeks?
>> is that what the time frame is?
>> yes, and what about including the notice, since we're going to have employees be responsible, also responsible to report a ticket to their immediate supervisor, and that eventually will reach or should reach, needs to reach the executive managers. To have those cars -- who have access to those cars. And that information can help cyd also identify who those drivers are. I think it's going to have to take several people working together to get this communication down so that nothing falls through the cracks. And jose, I think you had something --
>> no, I just heard who was getting the bills and I heard the tickets with the auditor's. We're not getting any of the tickets. We're getting the toll roads. And we have taken them to cyd and then she handles that. But none of the parking tickets. We have not seen any of those.
>> we need to identify how the information is coming in. And once it gets in, what happens to it. So that we can identify a process for an ongoing cleansing of these issues.
>> absolutely.
>> so Commissioner Gomez, what you are suggesting, another good point, in other words, put the burden of responsibility on the employee who actually violates whether it's parking, tolls, all these other kind of things, put the responsibility on them to make sure that they report whatever, if they received a ticket in a handicapped slot. What you are suggesting is that that employee is totally responsible for reporting that they received a ticket in a handicapped slot, which would make it much easier on everybody to try to find out who is doing what and what violation has been committed. So that's another good point. In other words, it could be part of the policy or part of what we're doing as far as some of the recommendations. I just think those all --
>> absolutely. It's part of the training for employees.
>> but that's -- but those are also good points. And I think they should be considered. Because, again, get that out to the folk that -- and if they are not -- and I'll have to ask legal later on, if they do not adhere to these things, what is the penalty for the employee not reporting.
>> the first thing, it does seem we should know at all times who is driving a county vehicle. It starts there. And that is who is driving a county vehicle. It seems that somewhere we should know --
>> there's logs.
>> we ought to know who is driving. And seems to me if you drive a county vehicle, perhaps a little statement should be handed to you saying, you know, you are taking out a county vehicle. These are the things that you are responsible for, don't do this. So then there is no confusion with the employee as to what they can do while -- I mean it starts there. So then we should know who in fact violated the law, which we don't condone.
>> after our discussion the last time on this, I went back and I e-mailed all of my staff and told them that you cannot use the toll roads unless you again to pay for them and if you get parking tickets or speeding tickets it's your responsibility. Susan is right, it needs to start with the managers informing their own staff and then a policy and then perhaps, like susan said, when you are given a car key, you are given this policy so they can't deny that they knew they couldn't do it. And then the other thing that folks need to remember is joe was saying is if it is a law enforcement vehicle, it has to be on the list. So the sheriff and all the law enforcement folks need to be sure that their vehicles are on joe's list that they send to the toll road authorities. And someone could put out an e-mail today saying, you know, because we have the e-mail that this is this policy effective tomorrow. If you get a speeding ticket or any kind of a toll road ticket, it's your responsibility, not the county's.
>> send that information out today and presumably that should be something that's understood. The problem, though, is we can put the information out, but if we don't have a procedure in-house for handling the notice, then the real message is you can't do it, but if you do there won't be any way we can get you to pay for it.
>> law enforcement vehicles exempted from the parking? Rules?
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> beg pardon?
>> we've got sheriff's department vehicles on a tollway and several of the other violations.
>> law enforcement vehicles do get ticketed.
>> they ticket law enforcement vehicles?
>> illegally parked.
>> just in parking situations or tolls?
>> turn on the sirens.
>> we have a committee of four already sitting before us. Let's add to that committee. We need somebody from the auditor's office?
>>
>> [inaudible]
>> [laughter]
>> do we need one or two court members?
>> no, judge. I think we can work out that policy and procedures. I won't be here in the next two weeks so my --
>> I need to figure out where the bills are going to. I guess once you don't pay the ticket, after so long it's a fine and then it comes as an invoice. I don't know. I don't know where the tickets --
>> that's what I want to ask. Are we saying that other than a toll, which we understand is a toll infractions are coming to the auditor's office. Is there not one place that the city of Austin sends everything to -- does it not go to one place? Then somebody needs to go to the city of Austin that issues this and says, okay, anything that goes to Travis County goes to -- that's where it goes. So we know who is getting the things. And we can direct that. Then from there you can start building this thing.
>> the other thing I wish the committee would keep in mind, if we really want to shift responsibility to employees, we should put it in the policy that the employees should give a copy of the citation to his supervisor. Because if you get a ticket, first thing they do is put the original on yours or -- on your window so you November you have gotten a ticket. The policy really ought to put on the employee responsibility for giving that to the supervisor and the supervisor should make sure that it gets to whoever in the department deals with tickets. You know, the policy may as well go ahead and kind of set forth the procedure that we plan to use to stay on top of this. But I still think the end result is let's identify multiple violators, then get with the city of Austin and say, okay, you know, let's do something fair. Let's try to get this behind us because we think we'll do a better job of monitoring the situation in the future and staying on top of it. But the $10,000, will you take 2500? Whatever amount we can arrive at. On multiple violators I would go to them and try to get part reimbursed or pay up front what we give to the city. I don't think we ought to spend $10,000 trying to run down $100 violators. At some point it's not cost effective for us to pursue a whole lot of individuals and try to get them to pay up.
>> judge, what would be the funding source for the negotiated amount with the city of Austin?
>> let's worry about that later. Your idea is we should not use the risk fund, I take it?
>> that would be my idea.
>> I'm hoping the amount will be so reasonable that we'll have multiple possible sources.
>> I tend to agree with Commissioner Davis, it ought to be the bailout account.
>> judge, that portion you are adding to your original motion?
>> those are really recommendation.
>> include what Commissioner eckhardt and Commissioner Daugherty and Commissioner Gomez were basically talking about.
>> it has several parts. And when you write it out, it all makes sense together. But I think we have all kind of voiced ideas and opinions that we would like to see incorporated.
>> so joe is in charge.
>> who is in charge of this? The next two weeks, who is in charge? Just nor the next two weeks?
>> [laughter]
>> put your hands on him.
>> we'll work together.
>> I've got somebody in my office that I would feel very comfortable putting on this committee and all this is is a real practical, sensible thing to do and get the word out. Now, I mean obviously none of the four of you all are going to do this. You are going to be gone.
>> I will take care of this. I'll be back in two weeks. Thanks.
>> you just got another member. Martin? Thank you all.
>> judge, do we want to vote on that? You made a motion eye think it was just direction.
>> direction is fine.
>> it's fine with me. You made the motion so I seconded it so I can withdraw my second.
>> two weeks.
>> October 14th.
>> that motion evolved into something I'm not sure I would recognize.
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, September 30, 2008 3:05 AM