Travis County Commissioners Court
March 24, 2009,
Item 23
>> and are you here on no.
23?
>> yes.
>> 23 is to consider and take appropriate action regarding interviews of applicants for Travis County healthcare district board of managers.
>> good morning, judge, Commissioners.
sherry flemming, executive manager for health and human services and veterans service.
as you recall, last week you set your interviews for the applicants to the board of managers for this coming Thursday between 1:00 and 5:00, and so just to update you on that, we have scheduled the short-listed applicants, six applicants that are listed on this week's agenda for a time period between 1:00 p.m.
and I think it will take you till about 5:20 to get in 40-minute interviews with all of the six.
so depending on the number of questions you settle on and our ability to sort of keep it moving, we predict that we will finish up with the applicants about 5:20.
so I wanted to make sure you had that information.
we tried to schedule you as tightly as we could but allow you enough time to sufficiently spend with the applicants.
so we hope that is -- that meets your needs on Thursday.
so any questions about that schedule, that fairly tight schedule?
>> will the -- is it the intention of the court to do these interviews in open court?
>> open court but not tell advised live.
>> okay.
the reason for my question is prior to my knowledge of this -- prior to scheduling this I had put down a large sum of money on continuing legal education for that day, so I wanted to explore the possibility with the court, is it all right for the court if I do some independent phone interviews, because I won't be able to attend that day?
i'm fine to not do that and just review the tape.
>> fine with me.
i guess I -- doesn't bother me at all.
what we tried to do was get a work session day.
otherwise it would have been a Tuesday, in which case we would have had to schedule the rest of the business for half a day.
we're not good at that unless there's just no work.
>> right.
and I didn't want to slow this process down by making the kind of request to move it.
>> that's fine with me.
should we be able to vote that way, john, if she does that?
>> right.
it's okay.
>> okay.
all right.
lawyer says it's okay.
>> the only difficulty is she doesn't have the opportunity to interact and get the feel of how that relationship goes.
she's just watching it on tv or via telephone call.
it may not give her the full flavor of the candidates, but it is perfectly legal for her to not see any of that and still vote.
>> if we have the voting the next Tuesday.
>> correct.
>> so let's just do that, then.
do we post a voting session?
did we?
>> I believe you did, and I think that there was some indication that you wanted to be able to have some discussion and if you felt comfortable with indicating your intent to vote, even though it's posted as a voting session, if you recall, we discussed that you would indicate your intent to appoint because we do have the financial disclosure forms that would have to be completed prior to your official vote.
>> well, let's just move the intent to appoint to that Tuesday.
>> I would appreciate that, but again, I don't want to slow the process down.
>> and we appreciate that.
we're becoming a more efficient government, john.
>> judge, if I may, we received a question from the subcommittee of the council requesting information on the number of recommended candidates that you might be sending back to them, and we did not discuss that issue the last time, and you may not choose to discuss it today, but we did receive a question indicating how many acceptable candidates you will be returning to them for the --
>> one.
>> appointment.
>> one.
we asked them to send those three, which they did.
>> yes.
>> of the -- what number did they have?
>> they had, I think, six or seven.
>> yeah.
we said reduce that down to 3, all of which are acceptable to you, and we will choose one.
so these are three of the 6 that we plan to interview.
>> that's correct, judge.
>> so in my view we choose the county one and we choose the joint one from the three that the city sent over.
so I -- you know, the process that we used last time that worked real well, but it was in reverse order, we sent three to the city, and they chose one of them.
>> yes.
>> so I thought our intention was just to reverse that, send us three, we'll choose one, and that basically completes the process for us.
>> I will deliver that message.
>> yeah, we -- our goal is to be thorough but not to take forever.
and this vacancy -- these vacancies have existed since the end of December, right?
>> at least, and in some regards the unexpired term, there was some lag time before we actually received the resignation.
>> yeah.
>> so it could be a little longer than that.
>> so in my view the answer is from the three that you send over we will choose one.
and based on the process that I thought we had jointly approved, that one would be the joint appointee, and then the county from remaining five would choose a county representative.
>> I will deliver that message.
>> and our goal is to get this done next Tuesday, posted and done next Tuesday, okay?
>> yes, sir.
>> if there is a problem with that, I guess we can discuss it on Tuesday, but I don't know how there could be a problem unless -- if there's a problem that's bad news.
now, we went back and dug up the nine questions we used last time and it amazed me how thorough we were.
mr.
esquivel, who has been providing input, he and ms.
nunca, said there is one question that in his view, I guess in their view was real important, and yesterday, or Friday, I tried to send that one question to the court and that question is, what role -- well -- I should read that question out, I guess.
>> I would move --
>> I would move inclusion of the question.
>> I told him that I would recommend that the court include it, and that we include it after no.
4, between 4 and 5.
so it's a quick question.
makes sense to me.
any problem with that?
>> no.
>> move approval.
discussion?
all in favor?
-- all in favor, show Commissioners Eckhardt, Gomez, Huber
>> [indiscernible] in favor and Commissioner Davis finally coming around and joining court.
what else?
>> well, my question is, does this action you just took approve the full list, so it's your intention to ask ten questions?
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> what I was going to offer to you is, if you feel ten questions in 40 minutes, that we can handle that, then I will sensor my comments but.
>> I believe we ought to ask them.
>> every single one.
>> yeah.
we did indicate up front we have x number of minutes for the interview.
>> yes.
>> and he also have x number of questions, and we would like to leave you an opportunity to ask us any questions you might have.
but in fairness to all of the applicants, if we enforce that as to the first one, we really have to do it across the board.
>> that's correct.
>> so four to five minutes, ten years, that's ten minutes apiece, even a county judge can limit his questions to that, four to five minutes.
>> all right.
that works for me.
>> if we drag -- if we drag through the first one, I just think we're assuming we'll drag through the others and stop right there.
so if we get through nine questions on the first one, or eight questions, then it seems to me, unless it's clearly the applicant's fault.
>> well, with your permission I would reorder the questions so that question 8 would be your final question.
>> you don't like no.
9?
>> no, I'm just suggesting that no.
8 would be the last question, so -- because it asks for any questions or comments of the court.
so I would ask that we include that question as the last question.
>> okay.
so you'd move -- 9 would be moved up.
>> 9 would be moved up.
and you've added a question so actually no.
8 would go to no.
10.
>> 9 gives the applicant an opportunity to expound philosophically, which is real important to some people, ms.
flemming.
>> yes, sir.
>> what else?
>> your first applicant will be here promptly at 1:00.
>> this court is being asked to cut lunch a little short ar to start a little early, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> 1:00 it will be.
so will we provide the tape to you or --
>> I can get the tape from -- I think I can just get the tape from them.
that should be fine.
>> are you going to make a copy as we go along and make this easier.
>> oh, maybe so.
>> do you see what I mean?
>> just using the tape recorder?
>> I can check with me mimi but it may be easier for them to do a cd or tape after we complete the process but we can give them the heads up that we have your request to receive the tape.
>> and if I do follow up, telephone interviews just to get a feel of the applicants, I won't do them until after the Thursday work session so that I don't tip hands to questions and what not.
>> okay.
and if there's any support you need, Commissioner, from staff, let us know.
i think your office has all the paperwork, but if there's anything we can provide to you, please let me know.
>> I have a very attractive
>> [indiscernible] full of it.
>> and I will need the question you-all added -- I don't have it so can I get that from your office?
>> actually, you can get it from me right now if you want to.
>> and what I will do is then reorder the questions and send them out to you on email, if that's appropriate -- or if that's acceptable to the court.
okay?
>> highlighted in yellow.
it's impossible to miss.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
anything else on this item?
okay.
>> are we going to vote on the motion?
you made a motion to include the ten questions.
>> do I get a second?
>> second.
>> I do get a second?
all in favor, that passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you very much.
>> thank you for being on your toes, ms.
porter.
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, March 24, 2009 2:12 PM