Travis County Commissioners Court
May 19, 2009,
Item 26
Now -- now let's call back to order the voting session of the Travis County Commissioners court.
we will take the two items involving the medical examiner's office, then we'll go to the compensation item and hopefully we'll have our compensation people down here by then.
number 26.
consider and take appropriate action on the need, scope and site search for the new Travis County medical examiner's office and related issues.
>> thank you, I'm danny hobby, the executive manager for emergency services, deborah is here with us today as well from the medical examiner's office, chief administrative officer.
last week we are here to discuss the need, scope, search for a new Travis County medical examiner's office.
we began to give you a summary of what had happened in the past in regards to our discussions with you.
and so we were in the process of trying to get the recommendations that we had for you today.
and y'all will actually see that on other item on the agenda which is from purchasing an rfq, to go out and conduct a study that would be before we would actually ask you to make any recommendations regarding actual funding for a new facility.
but I would first like to start off, if I could, in saying that --
>> do we need to call up number 33?
>> um it would probably be good to -- to call it up, judge.
after our discussion here.
because I think there's some things that you wanted to have discussed today before we actually would get to that.
but I would like to start off with last week, y'all got to see a little bit of passion from me, I just would like to say to Commissioner Davis that -- that certain segments of that presentation, my passion exceeded my respect and so Commissioner Davis I apologize to you if in any way I was disrespectful to you in regards to my passion regarding this particular project.
and I will try to not let that happen again because --
>> danny, we all get emotional from time to time.
this is a --
>> well, it's important that I say that.
>> this is an arena of emotions sometimes, I have even shed a tear.
you get a shade of emotion.
i accept your apology, but you didn't have to do that.
but I definitely accept your apology.
>> I appreciate that.
>> sorry.
>> but having that been said.
i think where we were right now, we would like to have direction if we could from the court in regards to what do we do about -- we think that we have justified to you the need as to -- as to why we need to go forward and look for a new facility.
and if you need more explanation on that, we would be more than happy to do that today but we also would like to get some direction in regard to the sites, as there were sites that we did look at.
we kind of discussed that last week in regards to how important it was that we make sure that the first step be to talk with those particular residents that were involved in any site location.
and that interest -- my understanding was before you would ever want to make a decision on a site that we would want to first of all address the people that it affected and the residents that would be around that site.
>> that's similar to something that -- roger el khoury I think has done an outstanding job in meeting with several neighborhood groups throughout the community.
and things kind of worked out whichever way.
but at least the neighborhoods did have input into the process, whether, yea, nay, indifferent.
but the point is when I looked at the backup and I saw that there was 13 sites that had been looked at or at least brought to our attention and 13 -- 8 of these 13 sites were in -- are in precinct 1, that kind of -- I said wait a minute we have to at least talk to the folks about if we want to put a medical examiner's office or what do they have to say about a medical examiner's office in their neighborhoods.
that's 62% of the sites that you are talking about here.
so I just thought it was in fairness before I take any action on any of this, I want to make sure that those neighborhoods in fact included and have a chance to hear what you have to say about the medical examiner's office, of course, it serves 42 counties.
of course not only the ones in Travis County, but 42 other counties.
and the folks may have some concerns about that.
now, I don't know what those concerns are because meetings have not been held.
but I just think in fair and deference to the communities as a whole, I think neighborhood input, in my opinion, is first.
and you know without that, I -- it's hard for me to -- to go along with what's going on here.
so that's -- that's my position hasn't changed since last week and it probably never has changed.
i have always been pretty consistent on neighborhood input.
>> I understand, Commissioner.
i think where we were last week on that was that y'all were going to discuss with us as to whether or not it was appropriate for us to go ahead and take the priority list that we had and begin talking with those neighborhood associations and groups that were important for these particular sites.
the next item that we discussed, that's one recommendation.
the next recommendation that we asked you to consider was the study itself and this is where we have gotten into a little bit, leslie I know is here now.
as far as the r.f.q.
itself.
that was to -- to go out and try to get folks to come in and give us their skills and abilities in regards to coming in and doing an assessment and study in looking at all aspects of this particular project, from the financing of this to how we're going to deal with our service area to how we are actually looking at growth and the projections that we would have in regards to number of doctors, in regards to square footage and in regards to the facility, but to do a complete scope of work so that it would give you the best information as well as residents as to what would be the best decision and direction to take this new facility.
i hope that we have given you enough information to let you know that we need to go ahead and look at a new facility because the current facility will not -- will not, I think that we justify that by the information that we have given you.
it will not serve our purposes for the future.
and so for us to be able to handle tomorrow's work, regardless whether it's Travis County only or regardless of whether it's those 42 counties, that we need to be preparing to -- to match the need in the future.
so that -- that second part had to do with the fact that we needed to go forward and -- and release the r.f.q.
and allow that process to take place knowing that it's going to take, I think according to leslie, three to four months as far as that process and then of course that gets into the money, which is the third element, and that's where we would be asking for you to provide the funding to that particular study, I think that it amounted to $150,000.
and of course in regards to that, it was stated last week that -- that might not need the money.
>> we need to.
>> yes.
>> my question a few minutes ago is whether we need to call both of them up.
the only item called up now is item 26.
>> okay.
>> Commissioner Davis recommends a public meeting, public input process.
okay.
so do we want to put together a list of steps that we would take to get public input?
>> yes, sir.
>> it's in your backup.
>> I saw it was in the backup, but I think we need to refine that.
okay?
so I second his motion to do that.
and let's have an outline to the court next Tuesday.
on number 26.
okay?
>> okay.
>> with details.
so -- so there's a good beginning here.
let's augment with additional details so we know exactly what we are doing.
have the court sign-off on that, we will just do that step.
that's 26.
>> okay.
>> any more discussion of that one?
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
my second -- my motion, also, is in addition to the criteria, that we have been looking at, that we add another one, which is public -- public support/-- maybe that will do.
public support.
that's what this public hearing is -- stuff gets to, right if?
>> right.
>> we would add that criterion to the list of criteria that we have used to identify the sites that we short listed from.
even without the motion, I think that we would end up doing it anyway.
i think we may as well go ahead and formalize it is what the motion does.
>> second.
>> any discussion of that?
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
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, May 19, 2009 2:00 PM