Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, March 15, 2011,
Item 18
What if we go to 18, consider and take appropriate action on policy governing court appointments and reappointments to various boards and committees.
>> good afternoon, judge and Commissioners.
sherri fleming, county executive for health and human services.
staff has filed a considerable amount of backup on this item, but I think I can summarize it in three or four points, if that's okay.
what we have tried to do is to look at the various processes that you all have by your actions and previous appointment processes indicated a preference for.
and then indicated with a timeline what a uniform process might look like.
so part of -- one of your backup items is a process that appointment and reappointment process for the most part and taikdz you all the way through the actual appointment process.
we also have provided you a memo that suggests that there might be very specific boards that you wish to include in this uniform process.
so you may not want to use this process for every single appointment that you have, but for those that you have historically put in more time and attention to and that memo was provided to you under separate cover and the boards that we recommended that you might want to discuss and consider included the Travis County health care district board of managers, the central Texas regional mobility authority, the Austin-Travis County integral care board of directors.
the capital metro board of directors, the Austin early childhood council and the animal advisory commission.
now, those last two are singular appointments by the Commissioners' court to a city of Austin commission.
so we added those for your consideration.
they may or may not be -- fit the criteria that you might want to develop to determine a uniform process for.
we've also made some recommendations regarding potential criteria you might want to consider.
the fiscal impact of the decisions made by the board or committee, the length of operation or service of that board or committee, the impact of the board or committee's decisions on services to county residents and then does that selection process require an interview and review by the full Commissioners' court?
so those were staff recommendations.
you may have some criteria of your own you want to apply, but we thought this might get the conversation started.
I can tell you we have worked with the information technology department, so it is possible for us to add an application of your choosing to the Travis County website, which was one of the issues staff was asked to look at.
the interest there was to have an opportunity for residents to apply for certain boards and committees at any time.
with that application being up they would be able to fill it out and submit it and we can keep it on file until there are potential vacancies on certain boards or commissions, but they would also be able to print it out and submit to us by regular mail if that's possible.
so we do have that capability.
we included in your backup the application that you most commonly have seen with the help of the Travis County board of managers we did make some alterations to it to make it more generic, but that application has been reviewed by i.t.
and it is possible to put it online.
this is also possible to determine several different mailboxes for that application to go to once a person would hit submit.
so those capabilities exist right now and i.t.
tells us pretty quickly that can be up and available.
and so then the final point I would make before your discussion is that what we have not done is actually made any changes to your current policy just yet.
I was hopeful that you would indicate some preference for those changes that you would like to make and then we would work with legal to bring the policy back to you to incorporate those things that you would like to to see changed.
so hopefully that is a summary of what you have.
what you had in your backup were the items that I referenced, but also a couple of policies from other public entities, including bexar county to give you a flavor for the kinds of policies that other entities like you have around their boards and committees.
I'll stop there.
>> I had one question.
when did the mhmr board reduce the number of appointees back to three?
I don't think I knew about that.
>> that process was going on last year, and there was a resolution that the court passed and it may have happened while you were away, Commissioner.
there was a resolution that the --
>> it was mid summer.
>> it was mid summer and I'm hesitating around the language of resolution because I'm not sure.
>> what happened is the health care district historically did not have an appointment.
but given -- they're giving the mhmr quite a bit of funding.
so really mhmr decided that they really should appoint board members.
aisd only had one.
the city had four and we had four.
aisd gave up its only one.
the city gave up one of its four.
we gave up one of our four.
so now the health care district has three, aisd zero, and the city and the county three apiece.
that's how we got there, though.
our little problem is that you and Commissioner Huber have vacancies I think at the same time, but we only have one slot left.
approximate that's the problem with that.
so that's that.
the other thing is on five and six, the Austin early childhood council, the animal advisory commission, we've only had one appointment each?
>> one single appointment for the Commissioners' court.
>> okay.
what if we on those two let staff go through the process, make a recommendation to us and have us respond to the recommendation?
that's what we've been doing anyway, right?
>> basically, yes, sir.
both of these just happen to rest in health and human services.
that's what we've been doing.
>> not those are unimportant, but that process has been working out all right and I think that like on the early childhood council, normally if you are staff and you work in that, you really know -- you have a long list of interested fork that we really ought to get engaged with that organization anyway.
>> yes.
and your last appointment we actually appointed a staff person to hold that seat this time.
that was the first time that we had recommended a staff person --
>> you see how good y'all are?
>> yes, sir.
and just for clarification, we previously had a city staff person, Ron hubbard, who really provided staff support for that council as well.
so we felt sort of like it was really our turn to be helpful.
so the combination of having staff with that expertise, but also being able to provide a little bit of staff support.
>> my suggestion to the court would be that we delegate to staff on five and six.
have staff go through that process of inviting applications, interviewing and recommending one or two to us, I think ranked in order of preference, and have us respond to it.
but I also think that the Travis County housing authority and the Travis County central appraisal district should be two of the bodies that we interview board members for.
and I base that on the importance of those two.
>> the housing authority?
>> the housing authority and the Travis County central appraisal district.
because we've been getting those from time to time, we really get a lot of inquiries anyway.
and I think we made good appointments to them, but I just think that if you interview the whole -- with the whole court and the court makes the appointment, I think that adds to the importance of it for the person selected as well as for us.
and then we can make sure that our appointees compliment one another or each other.
we have two on -- we've got the whole housing authority.
that's five.
and we have -- we have two only the appraisal district, two or three.
I believe is it three?
we have a joint appointment of one and four, a joint appointment of -- actually, -- I know we have a joint appointment of one and four, a joint appointment of two and three.
we have the non-voting member in nelda wells spears, the tax assessor collector sits on the board.
and then judge, do you have an appointment?
>> nope.
so we have two.
>> so we have three.
well, two --
>> nelda sits on by law, right?
>> right.
>> so we have two.
>> I don't know that they're broken, but I think it would be a better approach for us to interview them.
I think those interviews have worked out well with the health care district board of managers.
and I think it at least has given a whole lot of people who typically may not surface an opportunity to put an application in.
the other thing is in my view we tiewt have a provision that says that if we go through the process and something happens where another vacancy is created within a two-year period, we reserve the discretionary authority to appoint one of the ones that we recently interviewed.
so if you interview six like we did, we could only appoint one.
let's say there's another vacancy in six months for some reason, then we have the authority if we choose to appoint one of the five that we couldn't appoint of the six.
do you see what I'm saying?
what that does more than anything else is give us an opportunity to expedite is if we can.
I think we can word that in such a way that it's legal and not totally subjective.
what it would force us to do is try to rank the six that we interview or at least rank the top two or three.
but if we don't rank them, we could always pull our notes out, look at them, ascertain their level of interest at that point and then discuss them and appoint them.
now, legal has told us that we do not have the right to have these discussions in executive session.
so we'll be interviewing for these boards and appoint -- john, we have to discuss them in open court, right?
>> purely advisory board you could take into executive session, but the ones you've been listing off to me are all independent bodies.
>> yeah.
they actually govern these agencies.
>> so no, you could not.
>> like on both of them director really works for the board.
and once the board is put in place, they really are supposed to run the agency.
so your legal opinion is still we can't do it in executive session?
>> I would love to help you change that law, give you that opportunity, but I can't get you in there at this point.
>> so we need the law changed, not the opinion?
>> [ laughter ]
>> so that would be an example of something that we would be working with legal to get incorporated into your current policy.
>> if the court agrees.
>> if the court dpreaz with that, yes.
-- agrees with that, yes.
>> now, any objection to five and six, early childhood council, animal advisory commission?
we have one there.
we basically allow staff to do -- issue the invitation, screen, interview and then come to us with a recommendation of one or two.
so we're still involved in the process, but we have staff doing the bulk of the work.
but we end up doing six entities if we add these two and approve the four others.
and I think we already do those others like that anyway, don't we?
>> I believe that you do.
I know that the ctrma was -- the process was looked at by the igr's office and sort of patterned what we do with the board of managers anyway.
so he's been following a similar process, I believe.
>> and capital metro we did the same thing this last time.
dishow that sound, -- how does that sound, board?
, court members?
>> sounds good.
I had a couple of questions about the suggestions in the backup.
there was -- I'm looking for it.
there was a suggestion in the backup that on the chart, I believe the second or third page, there's a chart that says proposed appointment, reappointment process and timeline.
>> yes, ma'am.
>> the second box says determine if reappointment is appropriate.
I would put out to the court just for discussion purposes that we go ahead and do the process even if we think reappointment is appropriate so that if we have gotten interest that has come in, that we -- that we make ourselves aware of these additional individuals who are interested in this issue area.
>> and if I may offer just a little bit of help there, generally what staff does is exact your appointees when their terms are if we're not contacted by the entity themselves and encourage them to contact you individually, if it's an individual appointment.
or to send notice to the court if they are wishing to be reappointed.
so that -- that is how that process would be initiated.
then determining whether or not the reappointment is appropriate would be an activity of the court.
>> okay.
I have followed a process of even if I absolutely adore my appointment and they're willing to keep serving, that I would go ahead and on the -- of course, this is just what I do for my own office appointments, but it has worked out really well because people surface and make themselves known that I didn't know before.
and even though I might be reappointing my current appointee, it's nice to know that that person is available if that individual no longer wants to serve or if there's something similar that comes up.
the other thing I was noticing is the draft -- the draft application, in comparison to, say, el paso's application, for instance, is long.
and I'm wondering if there is interest by staff in perhaps collapsing some of it to -- because I am mindful that these people, you ask them to apply and then they look on the website and it's a several page document that might scare them away that maybe is just for marketing purposes we could short earn the draft and perhaps take the notary public -- the notary requirement off of it so that it would ease -- it would make it easier to apply.
>> we will be happy to do that.
again, we submitted what you all had expressed a preference for in previous processes, so we thought it would be helpful to start with those things that you were familiar with.
but yes, we're happy to -- happy to shorten it.
>> yes.
that's what I figured, so I thought I would put it out there.
then I noticed something interesting in I think it was bexar county.
while bexar county has a pretty long document that is a ple am bell to their -- preamble to their application, one thing that I note that had I thought we might consider incorporating is in the bexar county document they have -- the things in the bexar county document I wouldn't take it verbatim, but there are several things that jumped out at me.
first of all, they have a reporting requirement that the applicant shall work with the chair and the board and the relevant staff to facilitate the process of providing written or oral reports to the Commissioners' court on an annual basis, which I thought was a nice thing.
a second thing is it had an attendance requirement.
the third was that it required open meetings and open records, understanding and compliance.
and the fourth was that it had a term limit.
no, not a term limit.
it said maximum of two boards or commissions at the same time.
and then -- I don't know if we want to have expectations and maintenance of membership requirements laid out such as reporting, attendance, open meetings and open records.
it seems like it would be good to lay out our expectations of these board members in advance so they won't get --
>> I think that's fine.
>> yes.
there is sort of an online course in open meetings, I believe it is.
>> on the attorney general's website.
>> on the attorney general's website that actually generates a little certificate.
that's one option.
another option is such as with the sustainable food policy board where we have the joint committee with the city, they actually sent to their inaugural meeting a city attorney who actually provided the training to the board.
so in terms of your newer boards or committees that you form, that would be an option to have county attorney staff provide training or use the online resource.
so staff could with the approval of the court work with legal to incorporate some of that language into a revision of the policy for your review.
>> and on the front page of the memorandum where we talk about the criteria, one of the things that I think we can keep in mind is on number 3 the impact of the board or committee's decisions on services to county residents, especially those hard to reach communities.
I get calls from folks who say we need somebody who will understand this community because we need to reach them.
and so I can find the appropriate person to do that.
but I would that I on a county-wide basis we would also think about balancing our committees in that manner.
otherwise we'll just be preaching to the choir I'm afraid.
and we really need to reach people who need these services, especially children.
we still have the children's partnership, correct, running?
>> yes.
>> and I think that's a really good one to have working.
and so are they still working pretty closely with mhmr?
>> yes, absolutely.
absolutely.
I think that by having the application available online all the time, certainly would make it possible for folks who might be interested to access that application even if you don't have a vacancy currently.
those applications will be corrected -- collected and then those persons can be contacted in the future.
often times people search for those opportunities at strange hours of the day and night.
and so they may go ahead and put forth their name for that opportunity for the future and so I think it may -- you may see it will create some visibility for your boards and committees prior to the tile that you would announce or issue a call for nominations.
and we would also include as you see in your backup a little bit of general information about the types of expertise that might be somewhat generic for the kinds of people you're looking for to serve on boards and committees.
>> I had one other question.
on the second version of the Travis County application, there was a box for are you a u.s.
citizen?
and I'm wondering if there's any requirement that that box be there?
>> that would be a question I would have to ask legal.
>> I would express a preference for it not to be there if it is not a legal requirement.
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> I would ask it be struck.
>> okay.
on the demographic document?
>> yeah.
name, date of birth, driver's license, ethnicity, and then a certification of the applicant.
>> I would suggest that that probably was patterned after an employment application of some sort because that's the demographic documentation.
so we could remove that page altogether if you like.
>> just that one question, not the page.
I would ask are you a Travis County resident.
I think we ought to require that you be a resident of Travis County, though.
>> definitely.
>> I would agree with that.
it should be replaced with are you a Travis County resident?
>> kind of like citizens communication.
I always try to say resident or person because you don't have to be a citizen to come and give comments, you just have to really be a person.
I prefer you to be a resident, but --
>> that can be done.
>> miss fleming, did you e-mail that to us or give us a hard copy of it?
>> it was e-mailed and included in the -- the application?
it was a part of your backup.
I know we rolled this item from last week and I think that --
>> I had part of it, but not all of it.
>> I can make that application available to you, judge.
>> if I need to find last week's backup, I guess I got the old and the new.
>> in term of your direction today, I don't know if it requires action.
does it require action.
>> I think we ought to have exactly what we approve when we look at it.
if there are no objections to these two changes, then I would indicate how we plan to make the appointments in five and six and the question is whether there are others that we use that same process for now that we want to carry forward.
five and six, Austin early chood council and the animal advisory commission.
how do we do the Travis County historical commission?
>> I'm not familiar with that one.
it seems that those appointments appear on the agenda annually.
>> judge, my understanding is that all of the members of the court have a certain number, but the number is rather elastic.
>> why don't we do this then.
maybe there's a third category that staff will not appoint.
the court in mass will not interview and select, but we will use the old system.
the esd's would fall in that category too.
the problem is the -- no problem, but they're sort of a distinctive characteristic is that there are so many of them.
it's like 13.
and if you're looking at a board of even seven, that's a big number.
and most of those are Commissioner Huber's anyway.
>> the vast majority of nem are Commissioner Huber.
perhaps we could raise that issue when the draft comes back.
she may have something to say about that because it is rather burdensome, my understanding, from the esd, from the emergency services subcommittee a great deal of work goes into those esd's and she may actually want us all to take more of a role in it.
she may not.
>> I think we ought to take a role in describing the qualifications.
we have shifted responsibility to those boards and looks like every time we got a bad example of something, it's a relative or close friend of one of the board members.
so I mean, we don't want to knock friendship, but if you can be too close, I mean -- and I think we ought to use this opportunity to try to promote more objectivity and qualifications there if we need to.
and if we need to share all those appointments, then we can do that.
so that's like a third category that we'll need to try to address.
and we may as well go ahead and do it now.
>> I think it's possible.
I think that the policy remains relatively the same, but the exception is the new pieces that we add to the policies.
so I would never presuppose the language that legal would include.
I can tell you based on your comment just now, judge Biscoe, some of your colleagues in other communities have anticipated an issue relative to persons who are related to each other serving on boards.
and we did find, although we didn't give you all the examples of the research we did, we did find in some of those policies references to relationships between past and current board members, those kinds of things.
so I think there is precedent out with your colleagues and other communities where that has been addressed.
>> do we want a questionnaire for the applicants for service on the esd boards also?
you could easily ask that question.
>> I believe we also need to run it by danny hobby and let him look at that also because he kind of has a hand's on with a lot of these esd's.
he may have -- he may have something that he may can reveal to -- that may be of assistance to us.
so I think danny hobby should be included in that when you start calling on what you need to do with that, sherri.
>> yes.
he shall be advising me.
we've -- he has been advising me.
we've been providing him with backup you have and all the research.
he's very much aware.
but I agree with you.
so we will work on proposing some revisions to the -- your current policy and work with legal on that.
in terms of the process timeline, any other concerns about that?
do you think it's too much?
or do you want to see us go ahead and incorporate that timeline?
>> I'd like to see us come back with a draft that we can act on.
and after we take action, we know exactly what we have.
>> okay.
>> that's from the questionnaire to the process, procedural steps.
I think we're talking about three cat dpoars of appointments, maybe -- categories of appointments, maybe with what the description the staff does for us and listing the groups that the staff short lists down to one or two and the court basically approves it.
then where the court actually does interviewing and the selection.
and then the one that we kind of leave as is right now, but I do think we need to know what questionnaire is in place and see if we need to adopt some standards.
>> we can do that and get it prepared for your review.
>> I think the advantage in doing this work is that we will be able to also put all of this information on your website.
so it will be there and transparent for persons who are interested, persons who might want to know what your process is, but also what boards and committees you appoint on a regular bays.
basis, so that gives us a good basis for transparency in government.
>> I really appreciate all this work, sherri, and the research on the other counties was really eye opening.
>> can we get this modest amount of work done between now and next Tuesday?
>> well, we are working on another policy that is quite critical, so I would ask for at least two weeks if that's okay.
>> > any objection from the board?
>> no, sir.
>> don't make us take this -- Commissioner Eckhardt's comment about hard working back.
>> [ laughter ]
>> I have it now, judge, so I'm going to keep it.
>> March 29th?
>> March 29th.
>> all right.
do we want to kind of sit on 20 for a week or so?
>> we can.
>> do we have an unexpired term on this -- on the integral care board?
>> there's one for a person that has stepped down.
what's her name, who was chair last time?
she stepped down.
so that created the vacancy.
>> he moved out of the country.
>> I guess I was thinking about the one that stepped down changed their mind.
because that would be two vacancies.
>> if you like, staff can follow up with david evans.
>> he has an unexpired term as well.
we'll probably -- why don't we take a look at that as far as what our various options are which we might want to look at how we -- how we implement the -- I don't think mhmr or integral care, I think they were amenable us figuring out how we could phase in the fact of three rather than four.
and we should probably take a look at that.
>> we will contact them and get the board's status and have that for you next week.
>> I think two of our appointments are the chair and vice-chair currently.
>> david evans updated me as recently as Friday at the c.a.n.
meeting that we have one vacancy.
but he does like mr. Torres.
I just told him we'd work our way through it and pretty soon make the decision for him.
let bring both back in two weeks.
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, 2011 2:19 PM
