Travis County Commissioners Court
April 14, 2009,
Item 8
8.
consider and take appropriate action on the following: a, proposed modification to Travis County code chapter 1.019, county vehicle usage policy; and b, request to approve payment of outstanding toll amounts.
>> months ago we brought before the court a policy on parking.
and payment of tolls.
at the time we had some outstanding -- outstanding traffic citations from the city of Austin and we dealt with those.
and I think -- I think truly corrected the situation.
i know of just a handful of tickets that have been issued since then and they have been paid by the employees.
so I think the policy at least in that case has worked.
and so we are moving on.
we have -- we have between the time that the toll roads opened and we're not talking about just one tolling authority.
we are talking about three separate entities.
two in Travis County and one in harris county.
that we owe money to.
one is the Texas toll authority, which is a state organization.
you have the central Texas r.m.a., which is the local tolling authority, then you have the harris county tolling authority.
and we owe money to all three of those entities.
unfortunately, unlike most of those, most of that outstanding amount, was incurred by non-emergency vehicles before the court adopted its formal policy.
so -- so even though we had -- there was some discussions at the court about whether or not to use it, generally inclined not to use it if it was non-emergency.
i think you recall the confusion about what vehicles qualified as emergency vehicles, what didn't.
we finally got that altogether.
we went back to the tolling authorities with all of the outstanding toll information.
they called out what was legitimately an emergency vehicle and agreed not to charge us for that.
so what we have now boiled this down to are only those tolls and fines that were incurred by -- by non-emergency vehicles on these toll roads throughout the state.
unlike the city of Austin where you could actually transfer that liability to the employee, in this case the law says the county, because it owns the vehicle, is responsible for the tolls and fines and the fees, so they don't have a mechanism like the city to be able to transfer from the automobile to the operator.
so that's problem -- significant problem.
but besides that, for failure to pay the toll, we have accumulated fines an invoiced penalties.
that by and large is the bulk of what we owe of these.
$6,240, a good 4,000 of that are -- are penalties, for failure to pay.
because they ramp up very quickly.
so what we are here today is to request that we dispose of outstanding balance one way or the other.
pay for it.
i think the policy is in place -- a better way to handle it.
per spect actively.
except for -- perspectively except for the ability to transfer to the employee.
we still do not have a mechanism that if someone -- inadvertently uses a toll road, what mechanisms does the court use to assign that toll and any subsequent fine or fee to the employee.
i think that you are probably going to need some help from your county attorney's office to navigate that.
>> joe, I don't understand why our other policy doesn't scarily apply.
number one and he and he squarely apply.
>> number one, you do not take a toll in the county vehicle.
if you do you pay the fine.
>> if it happens you have a problem.
the toll road says we don't care what you do with your employees.
>> the toll road people are not involved yet.
it's between us and the employee.
you -- owe one you don't take the county vehicle on a toll road.
two, if you do, pay the toll.
>> all right.
>> three, if you don't, it's your responsibility plus you have to notify your supervisor that you used the toll and the amount.
then if you don't pay it, this is just between the county and the employee, we take disciplinary action up to and including taking the car or termination.
that way it's real clean.
>> your policy does deal with number one.
it does not deal with 2, 3, 4.
>> I just articulated a new policy then.
>> [laughter] I mean, it's -- it's too easy to say the employee will use the toll anyway.
well, if you feel that way you ought to not be driving a county vehicle.
you ought to drive your own.
that way it ain't our business whether you use a free ride or a toll.
has hundred employees, if you check the emergency vehicles out, 4500 employees, that leaves a lot of vehicles really.
that seems to me that -- that the responsibility for accountability for getting a parking ticket, traffic ticket, et cetera, should be the same for -- for toll road providers.
>> it's not the same in what we set up in our practice, in our procedures, is we can actually send an affidavit to the city of Austin and saying this is the operator that accrued that ticket.
from then on it's a private affair between the city of Austin and that employee.
they will pursue him under the limits of the law to collect on that fine.
you can't do that with the toll.
there's -- the law doesn't provide for that.
>> I understand.
>> so we have to do that internally and I don't know if you have right now the mechanism to garner wages or effect disciplinary action without some change in the current procedures.
>> I agree that -- is something that we need to look into from a legal perspective.
and I also agree with the judge.
collaborating on that statute regarding the collection of tolls was written to be extremely efficient for the collection of tolls for txdot and the rma's around the state.
but that I agree with the judge shouldn't affect our policy decision as to whether or not a specific employee is authorized to use tolls or not.
i'm concerned about this requested modification it seems to be the exemption that swallows the rule.
>> if your propensity to use the toll road, even if the owner of the county vehicle tells you not to, either you ought not to be authorized to use a county vehicle or you ought to find another place of employment.
i'm applying the same follow judge Sam Biscoe.
>> we just feed to revise our person -- need to revise other personnel policy to do that.
>> now this $6,200, is that the whole amount due or that the discounted amount?
>> that is pretty much what it's been boiled down to.
>> that is for non-emergency vehicles that use the toll roads priority to the policy being put into place?
>> just to give you some sense, the tolls themselves were about 500.
the late penalties, $5,300.
>> oh, gosh.
>> so part of the issue --
>> that makes a very efficient statute for reflection.
>> part of why we were suggesting a little more wiggle room in the policy itself is just to avoid the late penalties if nothing else, get the things paid and then you don't ramp up all of these late penalties.
but I understand what the court wants and we will effect that.
>> we want employees to take responsibility for not using the toll or pay the toll ifs they use them.
>> and the penalties and everything downstream from that.
i think there is going to be have -- have to be some further changes in the internal procedures.
>> I will articulate this right now, though.
for those who have used tolls under the existing policy, not the 6,200 some odd dollars worth of tolls, but the ones who use them in non-emergency vehicles under this policy, I will not vote to cover those expenses.
i will -- you know, that would not make me happy at all.
i will be interested to see what the next pop is.
>> well, they were saying our policy now doesn't cover toll roads, right?
>> well, our current policy does.
only emergency vehicle, period.
>>
>> [multiple voices]
>> the message has gone out.
you are on the toll road, you pay your parking tickets.
>> it's not that --
>> [multiple voices]
>> the bills don't go to the employees.
the bills come to the county.
>> the bills ought not to be coming, period.
>> period.
>> and then I need a way to be able to say, you know, what we're going to pass this on legally, internally to all of our internal procedures.
>> it's problematic for instance on 183 a there is no person to collect the toll if you choose to use it.
and you are not authorized to.
>> [multiple voices]
>> [inaudible - no mic]
>> sometimes you get on their accidentally.
>> but if you that you got on there accidentally, under this policy you are to notify your supervisor and pay for it.
that's clear in the policy.
>> do we know who the 500 folks, the person, the $500 amount that -- that was there before the penalties and interest and all of this other stuff was put on top of that, do we know who those folks are, have we identified them?
>> we know the department.
>> we know the department?
well, you know, it just like the other policies that we have before about folks parking in handicapped slots for example.
knowing that they do those kind of things and yet don't say anything to anybody about it.
i mean, I can't see --
>> I would have to say, from what I know of these, the employee was not at fault.
>> on these tolls?
>> yes.
>> the operator had a higher authorization to use the toll road.
as a cost saving measure.
so it's a --
>> non-emergency use?
>> yeah.
>> these were prior to the policy.
>> doesn't matter.
the point is, though, if he -- if they use the toll and knowing they use the toll and then know that there is a fee assessed for using the toll, it doesn't matter.
the point is why should we have to pay for those discretions and things of that nature.
i mean, that was something that they chose to do regardless of who it come from.
somebody is going to still have to pay it.
>> I think in the bulk of these probably the department should pay because it was not the operator, the operator was just following orders.
and so --
>> prepolicy.
prepolicy.
>> prepolicy.
>> prepolicy.
we're talking about this 6,000.
the bulk of this semi authorized by management to do it.
so it's not the operator's fault.
to pass this on to the employees would be a mistake.
i think subsequent to the adoption of the policy you're right.
any employee that now gets in a county vehicle non-emergency vehicle that is, uses a toll road, should be charged with the fine and the toll and whatever else downstream.
>> true.
if an employee uses a toll road, chooses not to
>> [indiscernible] how difficult is it to track down who the person is?
is that time consuming in.
>> really depends on the department.
i mean,.
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic]
>> some are assigned to individuals.
some are
>> [indiscernible] and if you don't keep proper logs and sign out sheets you wouldn't know who particularly used it at that hour.
you could tell the time of day from the ticket, but you don't know specifically unless the department has -- have in place rules and regulations as to how they sign in and sign out.
>> didn't we discuss this in establishing the policy initially that the department failed to keep adequate records, then we would make the manager responsible for the toll.
that was my understanding -- that was what I recall from the prior discussion.
>> me, too.
>> but this is all pre-policy.
>> no, I believe that in the -- you are correct.
this $6,200 amount is pre-policy.
but in record to Commissioner Huber's question about how difficult is it to track for the future.
we had this discussion prior to her arriving on the court.
if the manager fails to keep adequate record should it could be tracked it would be the manager's responsibility.
>> what is the turn around time of paying the toll without incurring a penalty.
>> 30 days.
>> you get an invoice -- the toll fee charge was 50 cents, you get an invoice fee of a dollar, the bill comes in $1.50, 30 days later they add $25, then it goes up.
>> so we sort of need to stay current on paying those and deal with the problem internally.
>> 30 days is a long time.
>> we had a similar issue with parking ticket and parking in handicapped spots.
>> I got more e-mails and phone calls about paying those fines than I have about anything else in recent history at the county.
taxpayers were real upset.
basically.
let me ask you this: so $500 worth of fines owed three entities, one of which is ctrma.
>> right.
>> we have asked them to waive the penalty.
>> we did.
>> in the name of freedom, justice, equality and other democratic values I take it
>> [laughter] they said no.
>> yes.
we asked.
when we were doing the research, yes, we did ask.
and they said no.
>> but the ctrma only represents $794 worth.
>> did we ask higher ups, though?
somebody clearly with the authority to either waive the penalty or cut it substantially?
>> that was as high as we could go.
>> sounds like a job for our new Commissioner to me
>> [laughter] ctrma normally is a little bit more understanding.
but this is a collection bureau for them.
enlighten us on this.
>> I don't have a lot of enlightening things to say, judge.
other than obviously when these come to our office, we have to have something behind them to make sure that they did conform to your policies, people are not getting tolls on their take home vehicles or that.
so we have drafted.
we're going to look at them again, but two certification forms and for us to pay any tolls or penalties we will want a signed affidavit by the department head and that should follow what you were thinking that is they're going to have to take responsibility for the asset, the car, anything that's incurred.
the law allows us to get an affidavit signed.
if there's not something else back there that we can audit.
there's no way our office can tell whether those people should have been using the toll road or they used it personally.
we simply cannot audit that.
but we will require certification from the department head when we pay those where they are certifying that the court's policy was enforced.
if they cannot do that, this often happens, they call up and say I can't do that, they need to make that happen.
they need to change their management policy that they are comfortable saying these were legally incurred according to the court's policy and therefore we are disbursing the money.
we can't disburse the money without that.
if anyone -- these are more complicated than I would have thought.
going to simplify them.
if any of you want to see those, we would be glad to distribute to those.
we need to look at them again.
last time you talked our people got together and tried to put -- it does -- it does tie the responsibility down to the department head or the executive manager or -- like anything else that you are expending taxpayer money.
that's just our way of handling it.
all of these things are expensive.
i mean, handling them and making sure that they are right and people aren't -- of the --
>> if you have a county vehicle you not only are assigned it by and large, but we pick up fuel, maintenance, everything.
>> insurance.
>> so getting these toll fees on top of that is a little bit more than I think the average taxpayer wants to stand.
i think that we need a court member to contact as high up as we can go in those three agencies.
i wouldn't deal with the collection entity.
i would deal with the agency because when taxpayers ask did you try to get that waived or reduced, I think we ought to tell the truth.
and if -- if -- you know, we can't make the ctrma reduce the penalty.
but we can certainly ask them.
and we can go as high up as we possibly can.
i can live with the answer.
i'm thinking if we can get one court member to contact each of them on behalf of the Commissioners court and make the request, apologize for getting this ticket, then for not timely paying it, but we have a policy in replace right now that addresses, we would like relief from the penalty which is many, many times the actual amount sold.
if the relationship is 500 to a little bit more than $4,500, seems to me that there is plenty of give there.
if they, one, can legally do it and, two, are of a mind to do it.
anything illegal about that ms.
wilson?
are you just looking at me kind of funny?
>> no I was looking for something that I'm not finding as fast as I had hoped to.
>> in regard to the breakout txdot versus rma versus harris county, is the txdot number at 5286 a reflection that most of this toll use is on the 130 corridor or is that just a higher number because of the higher fines.
>> that was actually one incident, it was a job, hauling material from one end of the county to the other.
that's on 130.
that's what tallied that one up.
nothing to do with overall usage of that versus some other facility and a different toll.
that facility enabled a quick delivery of materials up and down eastern Travis County on a project.
>> so did the project manager take into consideration that there was an additional $5,000 cost for that?
>> no, no.
i think the -- the project manager thought that basically he would pay the toll, but was unaware that failure to pay it would rack up as much penalty as it did.
>> let me just say that was bad judgment as far as I'm concerned.
you authorize somebody -- some -- to get on the toll and use it and don't expect to pay it and that doesn't make no sense to me.
it doesn't add up.
i opposed this thing before when it came to the parking thing as far as the county having to pay.
i don't think I'm going to support this either because it just appears to me that we are responsible persons here that work with Travis County and we know when we get parking tickets, when we use it is toll, I don't think that we have to remind management of their responsibilities to make sure these things are taken care of.
so it's just -- just like another bail out.
so I don't think that we're in the business of that.
>> we need to make these contacts as soon as possible.
unfortunately I'm leaving the state next week.
otherwise I would volunteer.
>> [laughter] can we do that later?
>> yeah.
>> joe, we will work with the court to figure out who will contact what entity, right?
and we have phone numbers available.
and you all are welcome to deal with this in my absence next week or we can take two weeks.
>> I'll make a phone call.
>> I will, too.
>> as soon as I get --
>> have it back on next week?
>> yeah.
>> then we are going to want to pay as soon as possible.
not to rack up more.
>> yeah.
>> I just wanted to relay a personal experience that I had on the toll way.
i got on the toll way, paid the fee, didn't get back on it going back and they sent me a ticket.
i called them up and said y'all made a mistake.
i paid the toll going on but I didn't use it going back and they waived it.
so maybe you can say that there have been incidences where we're not sure that we were properly ticketed.
that is a real --
>> we'll have to have a procedure for tracking it and having people take responsibility for it.
otherwise we'll never know --
>> I agree.
>> people being charged when they didn't actually use it.
>> we already have that policy.
but they had problems with those machines in the beginning when some of these tickets were being sent out.
so that might just be something to add when judge Biscoe --
>> let's add cyd's name to that list.
>> [laughter]
>> to call.
>> that's what I'm talking about.
very persuasive.
next week?
>> you all waited all that time for that.
>> [laughter]
>> thanks for bringing us such an exciting topic.
>> whoever is going to do calls could I talk with you so that I can brief you on the law so you know what your strength is on that?
>> sure.
>> okay.
we'll get it done.
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, April 14, 2009 2:20 PM