Travis County Commissioners Court
November 24, 2009,
Item 12
>> now we see joe geiselman and his people there.
12, consider and take appropriate action regarding appointment of Commissioners court members to serve as comprehensive plan subcommittee.
we discussed this one in brief last week.
and am I -- am I correct that we're unanimous in our view that 3 is really unwieldy and not good?
i don't think it's good because with three you have to really perform like a Commissioners court.
you've got to post your meetings, you've got to -- typically you have them that had to be courtroom, don't you?
should provide backup in advance.
open meetings.
so if there is a need to meet fairly quickly, the need to post with 72 hours' notice cuts into that.
and then I think that if the planning session goes as I think it should, we would I wanter act with the city of Austin planning -- comprehensive planning process too, wouldn't we?
especially in the e.t.j.
and not only the -- that committee, which I guess we're trying to work through, but also city councilmembers.
>> the likelihood you would.
not just Austin but you've got 22 other municipalities out there.
so --
>> any other comments?
>> judge, I've got several.
and I guess it's just like anything else.
i know recently we dealt with -- in fact, we really haven't approved it yet, but the economic development subcommittee that was put together, and, of course, we had to post that and didn't seem to be a problem posting that because we had three members of the Commissioners court.
>> the big problem is we haven't gotten the work done.
>> the point is it's coming.
in other words, it hasn't been approved because we delayed it and we're supposed to act on it I guess at the end of -- end of -- the beginning of January is the way I can understand, the last motion that was made on it to stay up under the old economic development policy until we're able to bring it back and hopefully move approval of the new version by then.
and, of course, we look at all of the other deals that we get involved in, whether it's
>> [indiscernible] notice that really haven't appeared to happen anything.
i look at campo, for example, and other organizations that you have three or more members of the court, and it's posted.
so I really don't see a problem in posting.
i just feel very strongly that, in my opinion -- in my opinion, since this is a comprehensive plan that affects the entire county outside of the jurisdiction of municipalities, per se, the example city of Austin who have their own thing going, just appears that we could have more than one person on, especially when you look at the square mileage of the unincorporated area, I mean it's significant.
if you really go down to each precinct, for example, and look at the square mileage each one of us has and it's significant.
we all have more than 100 of unincorporated area that we have to deal with with the exception of precinct 2, who does not have that less than 100 square miles of unincorporated area.
so that is a lot, that is significant.
it just appears to me that east of i-35 and west of i-35 we need to have the representatives from those particular court members that represent the area.
so that means to me that all of us should, in my opinion, serve on this.
nothing wrong with posting.
and cumbersome or not, the bottom line is to have an elected official that represents that area, that knows the area probably better than anybody on the court as far as who they represent and what they want in that area and to be there in support of the things as far as trying to come up with the comprehensive plan.
i see no problem with posting it at all and members of the court who are willing and want to participate and serve.
i mean three, four, whatever.
just appears to me that is adequate representation across the entire county.
so that's -- that's my position.
i basically said the same thing last week.
and I just want to make sure that we get the proper representation.
>> joe, do you have any questions about your ability, your and your staff's ability to work with a subcommittee of the court and deal with the county issues county-wide?
before you answer, can I -- may I remind you as part of your charge your duties and responsibilities to work for the whole court.
>> I understand that.
direction on any policy issues the court, a majority of this court gives direction.
i understand that.
the subcommittee was really more facilitating kind of day to day discussions and they have elected officials kind of alert staff when there are issues and opportunities out there.
it's always important to have that element of separation, but when it comes down to presenting any type of findings or draft policy or anything like that that all comes before the court, the only way the staff can get direction.
so I'm open to whatever structure the court wants to set up for this.
>> remind me of the proposed schedule that we adopted.
>> we're trying to get underway by December -- I mean January 1.
right now I'm getting things organized.
finishing up the scope, hiring staff and hope to get under full steam by first of the year.
and then by may, June, in that time frame, have some preliminary studies done where we start getting into discussion of draft policy.
so I don't foresee us really getting into the significant and complex issues until probably -- probably after budget next year.
october sometime.
and that's about the time when we'll also, in my opinion, start having significant dialogue with the city and how their policies are emerging, city of Austin I'm referring to, in their comprehensive planning process.
that's kind of approximately the timetable.
>> may I speak to the issue of a previous experience with a committee of three, although I think we soldiered on animated it work through the economic subcommittee.
i think in unnests there were difficulties with scheduling and a need -- totally understandable need for a hyper vigilance with regard to the open meetings act.
and while I think that we did succeed in making it work and clearly I feel that we stayed within the bounds of the law, it was -- it was difficult from the scheduling perspective.
and I think for this project, this project is different from that one in that it requires a great degree of communication with other -- another very large governmental entity, and I think that we would need a level of flexibility and the staff would need a level of flexibility.
of course, everything would have to come back to the Commissioners court for any kind of direction.
and hence all precincts would be represented in any kind of decision made.
so I agree that three would be difficult.
>> I do too, just from the nature of the material that we would be working with.
and there's so many municipalities, the need to -- just in the exchange of information be able to move quickly may be problematic with a group of three.
>> but if you can remember last week when we started discussing this, you two were the ones that were basically being recommended from a motion to serve, Commissioner Eckhardt and Commissioner Huber.
of course -- again, you look at campos, three members of this court that serve on campo board.
and when we have events, you see a quorum may be -- we have to post it because a quorum may be able to be there.
just the economic development deal was just an example, but I didn't want it to just pinpoint to that.
you two want to be represented and goodness gracious, I have a
>> [indiscernible] unincorporated area in precinct 1.
and you heard what happened this morning.
t.x.i.
and everything else.
i don't think that either within of you can represent precinct 1 as well as I can when it comes to issues.
i just don't believe.
that as I told you before, I don't have any confidence in that you can.
so I'm concerned about them.
then I look at all the other unincorporated areas that in the precinct, I look at precinct 2, a little more than 30 square miles of unincorporated area.
Commissioner Gomez has more than 100.
hold on, hold on.
hold on.
>> would represent the whole county.
>> I understand that, but the point is east of ih-35, as you heard those people say this morning, continues to get dumped on.
i want to make sure that east of ih-35 does not continue to get dumped on.
that's my whole key and right now no one has showed me that's not going to continue.
i want to make sure I'm there, Commissioner Gomez, she is kind of quiet today, but she's east of ih-35 and she also has a lot of problems with things that other people don't want in this community, but they stick it on east of i-35.
so I just think that just from a quorum standpoint of view, if Commissioner Gomez would like to come in and say wait a minute, I don't like this from a quorum point of view, then she could make comments about what's going on about anything that's going on in the precinct that's not acceptable to residents in the area.
i do not want it to be looked at in this overall comprehensive plan where we don't have the representation of the county that's being dumped on the most.
>> I just would like to say that regardless of who -- what two may be on the subcommittee, this is only a subcommittee that is functional from a standpoint of assimilating the information and working with staff.
everything that -- any decision that would be made would be made with all the court.
and you know, we can -- if we act as a full court or a committee of three where we have to post it for everything, we as Commissioners just don't have the time to spread out all over the place like that.
so to me, this is a facilitating type group.
it's not one that makes decisions on batch of the behale court.
>> and if we did it would be clear violation of the law.
>> and the kind of voting session that we're having our meetings in, it's not a voting session, it's just a posting to allow any person that represents that area from this body, elected body to participate.
we're not voting on anything in these subcommittee meetings.
what we are doing, though, is having exchange, and I just think that change that is input can be given by those persons that have duly elected to represent that area.
>> if you three people and you post it, john, you can't vote, can you?
and I hate to be sitting in my office and three members of my court voting different issues I don't like.
enlighten us, mr.
priest.
what's your perspective?
>> my perspective is the city and county operate their business in entirely completing different manners.
the city has zoning and platting and different boards and commissions as they bring these staff recommendations to the city.
what I'm hearing mr.
davis saying is that yes -- and what I hear the other Commissioners saying yes, when we bring this back and then we lay this out before the public, that each individual precinct Commissioners as well as you, judge, will be able to vote.
but what I hear mr.
davis saying and what I agree with him 100%, Commissioner Davis, is that if we have this posted just like we do these other meetings that we have like campo, housing authority, cdbg or whatever it's called, if there's three members on the board, then the public is going to be able to -- these meetings are going to be posted, the public is going to be able to participate and it's kind of like down at the legislature when we hear about how we don't know how a member voted, there was a lot of -- you know, they want to know how people voted, but a lot of times we don't know what they did, how they watered down a bill prior to when they voted.
so what I'm saying is this brings it into the public view where input could be given to the public instead of how things are done at campo, we find out what's been ironed out and decided and then the only option we get is to speak and it being voted on.
but what I'm saying is I think that if that's what I'm understanding, but if it can be posted without a quorum, but that's my understanding.
is that right?
unless there is three of you.
>> two people can meet any time.
>> but I'm saying as far --
>> three you have to post it.
>> so it will be posted so people could be aware of what's going on prior to it's sent to the court.
>> but 90% of our work that you see on Tuesday has been done before we get here.
we really are just as a formal group making decisions.
but somebody else or we have done a whole lot of work in small groups or with staff before the Tuesday meeting.
otherwise we -- otherwise we would have two or three items on the agenda every Tuesday instead of 60 or 70.
>> just like with the technical advisory committee for campo, they have these meetings and I'm saying if there were three members of the Commissioners court, we would have these meetings and be able to come to them.
whether or not we would be able to give input, we would get far more advance notices of what's actually going on and have ways to participate.
>> one of the things you may not be aware of is throughout the process for a comprehensive plan, there would be some periodic public hearings and public meetings for the solicitation of input in the different areas on different subjects.
and also for dialogue.
so that's -- that's a function that's going to be out there anyway.
>> what would be your objection to having it posted?
>> there's a 72-hour advance notice.
supposed to have backup that you distribute.
if anybody wants to see the backup, you got to send it to them.
but a whole lost that backup is in draft.
the backup we have in here on Tuesday normally there have been multiple iterations before that.
it's kind of like the letter that came -- a simple request to congress to fund planning.
the draft came in from somebody else and I said okay, let's have two staff people at the county come up with a county draft because we all got to sign it.
it's from the Commissioners court.
plus, it becomes a permanent part of not only county records, but once we send to it congress, congressional records.
it's out there forever so you want your best foot forward.
you want a letter that represents Travis County so if it's looked at 15 years from now, it will look like we have some knowledge about what we were doing.
>> this letter, in fact, I have a coach it, the letter you are referring to is where why I'm in favor of three Commissioners because I would have brought it during that 72-hour period before the three members of the court melt to let them know that they needed to do it so they would have that done before they came to court.
>> the letter didn't come from us.
it came from outside Travis County.
>> taking it out of the campo context, a hypothetical would be if staff wanted some input on the draft scope of an r.f.p.
for a consultant that we wanted to use for modeling of some sort, under the scenario laid out with a subcommittee three, we would have to set a meeting three days in advance and come to Commissioners court and turn on the cameras to say to staff what do you think about the draft r.f.p.
before we take it to court?
we wouldn't get that much more done.
>> I think it's more transparent.
>> we wouldn't ever get it done.
>> I agree it would be transparent.
>> I agree and when we have a bond election before we place anything to ballot, we have hearings and it's posted.
what we're asking for is input from the community to ask us how and what direction we need to do as far as go to our bond.
joe, you have been a part of that several times.
it's kind of surprising to me that -- and I guess you just follow the direction of the court, out, you know, it surprises me you aren't really rallying behind input from the public especially when we need to have the public involved in such a critical state of affairs here as far as when we start talking about this comprehensive plan which involves so many things, land use, open space, drainage.
just so many avenues that may be available to us.
and, of course, I still say this, that each Commissioner on this Commissioners court should have a say in this process during the process of having input.
so the only way I can do that is for it to be posted for me to do that.
because I definitely would like to make sure that precinct 1, you know, gets its fair representation.
i can't speak for Commissioner Gomez down there, but just continues to look at the situations as far as what's going on and how is this particular area, we have some of the largest unincorporated area in the county.
with the exception of precinct 3, which has the largest chunk of square miles that's unincorporated in Travis County.
and it just appears to me that we ought to have a say and it needs to be posted.
>> you are absolutely right.
you are absolutely right.
and that's why it would come back to the full Commissioners court for any decision making.
>> we're going to do that anyway.
the stuff we discuss at campo --
>> a modest role.
>> I think we're making a mountain out of a mole hill.
it's not an issue -- it's not an issue of transparency.
there is going to be all kinds of communication going on for every precinct representative, everybody who wants to
>> [indiscernible] there is going to be public hearings.
there is not going to be anybody that's cut out of the process.
>> Commissioner, it hasn't been.
look at the record.
look at the history of what's been going on east of ih-35.
and if you can tell me and sit there today and tell me that things have been so hungy doory on the east -- quality of life issues east of ih-35, no I can't say what you just said because I've witnessed it there and we don't have proper input is part of the problem.
>> well, I think the sheer testimony this morning was an example of the fact that the precinct issues county-wide need to be county-wide issues and I think that's the way the comprehensive plan will be looking at it and we certainly would get every input we could from everybody.
and you have the final say so on it.
>> I think Commissioner Davis, Commissioner Gomez and I are here to protect what's east of 35 as well as what's west of it.
but seems to me we ought to pull together and work in what's best for Travis County realizing the issues and the fats will differ from time to time.
>> last week I had suggested that someone from the eastern part and someone from the western part serve on the subcommittee.
i mean that would cover -- that would cover all four precincts.
and still have two members and you don't have to post the meetings.
>> but if I thought the east side would not be represented, I guess I would agree.
but there are three of us here.
nothing gets done without a formal posting on the court's agenda and a vote.
if you took looking at race, you got two blacks and one hispanic on the court.
nothing becomes adopted by the Commissioners court without us for natural mally posting it and voting out.
it seems to me that, you know, east and west are important and so what are important too though would be the time commitment would be the ability, I think, to represent all of Travis County as well as the ability to interact with the city planning process and also city council folk.
not everybody can do that.
right now I'm not in a good position to do that.
>> right.
>> and I don't know what's in the e.t.j.
and the city with the authority to annex what's in unincorporated areas, I mean I think the better our working relationship with them the better off we are.
at least we cannot spend a whole lot of county resources on areas targeted for immediate annex.
-- annexation.
one thing that peeves me is county working on different projects, city can annex them to expand its tax basements luckily in terms of real property, taxes, we stem cell get them because, you know, they are in Travis County, not with standing being in the city of Austin.
but some of the other things I think cuts us the wrong way, but that's the reality that we've had to deal with here.
so I don't know, based on my three, my motion is same as it was last week to, appoint Commissioners Huber and Eckhardt to represent the Commissioners court on this.
and I have no problem with looking at it a year from now if this passes and seeing if we ought to change the composition of it.
>> second.
>> any more discussion?
>> yes, I would just like to say one thing.
i don't know how the vote is going to go out, but I want to let the folks in precinct 1 realize that by me being absent from these meetings, I don't and I think a posting is appropriate in this matter, it's not going to hurt anything, it have never hurt anything, I just think that, again, east of i-35 is going to get the short end of the stick because the city of Austin, in my opinion, hasn't done a great job either in protecting the quality of life and interests in precinct 1.
and east of ih-35.
and I just think a posting is appropriate.
i don't know what's coming down the pike, but I don't have any confidence in what you're doing here.
and especially when you disallow persons that know -- know the area, represent the area and know what is going on in the area.
and have -- and not to be a part of the process on the input phase, input phase, not the output phase.
and, of course, that is very troubling to me and I hope it's troubling to the constituents and the persons I represent in precinct 1 because I think you've heard my yell and my call in this particular regard, east of ih-35, I still feel has been the dumping ground and it appears to be designed that way.
and, of course, the persons if they are selected, of course then east of ih-35 will not get the representation and a posting would correct that.
and so that's my -- so I'm not going to support the motion.
>> historically I think it was designed that way.
we were not here.
this is our opportunity to fix it.
and if east of 35 is shorted, Commissioners Gomez, Davis and I have let them down.
i'm going to do all I can to avoid that.
any other discussion?
>> I haven't.
>> all in favor?
show Commissioners Eckhardt, hereby, yours truly voting in favor.
voting against, Commissioner Gomez and Commissioner Davis.
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, November 24, 2009 1:40 PM
