Travis County Commissioners Court
January 17, 2012 (Agenda)
Item 26
Deece, why don't we with take up 26, receive update and take appropriate action on Travis County appointment to the central Texas regional mobility authority.
>> good afternoon, judge, members of the court, deece eckstein.
really just here to give an update on the status of the court's hunt for a ctrma member.
as everyone knows the central Texas regional mobility authority is a joint project between Travis County and Williamson county to try to figure out ways to expedite mobility in our community.
Travis County has three appointments to that board and we have one vacancy coming up actually effective February 1, 2012.
at the court's direction, we have put out a call for applications for that.
the deadline for those applications was last Friday, the 13th.
and we have received seven completed applications.
the next step in the process is for the court members individually to look through those seven applications and decide who they would like to have do an actual interview with.
it may be that the court all agrees on one candidate and you just want to make a decision next week, but we have designed the process so you would have the opportunity to interview as many canned as you want to do.
we've asked all the canned to be available on the afternoon of Thursday, January 26th so that if the court asks them to come in for an interview, they can do that.
so where we stand right now is there's no particular action item we want the court to do today, judge, but we do want all the members of the court to look at those applications and come back next week prepared to suggest who they would like to do interviews with.
the.
>> what would the court like to do?
you said there's seven here?
>> seven completed application.
>> we can do all or try to get a smaller number.
>> get a smaller number.
>> we can get to five easily by having each of us choose one.
>> that's if you all didn't agree on who you were choosing.
>> yeah, if each of us were to choose one, there may be duplications.
>> judge, what if we all selected three and then with duplication we would probably have four or five.
the.
>> that's fine with me, but with --
>> do we want five?
>> I think we want at least three.
I would do three.
>> I would go for three.
maybe we each give our top three.
>> that would be the other possibility is if members of the court individually gave me the three they would like to do, it may be that that in a sense creates the list itself.
that there would at least be broad agreement among the members of the court.
>> how about three and we rank them in order of preference, just based on the application.
of course, our ranking may change after an interview.
>> yeah, I would do that, and then the ones with with the lowest numbers are the ones we would interview.
so we would assign a one to the top priority --
>> actually, judge -- I'm sorry.
it may be better to do it the other way around.
if somebody doesn't get any votes, they would have the lowest number.
if none of you recommend interviewing a certain person, they would have the lowest number.
why don't we do it with with the person you like the most you would give a three to, then a two, then a one.
>> and we authorized you to impose that on our rankings if we've messed it up.
>> I'm thinking if you had a zero, then you knew --
>> if you had a zero, exactly.
>> either way is fine with me.
deadline for that is Friday, 5:00.
how is that?
and let's plan to do it next Tuesday.
so next Tuesday you have already gotten Thursday the 26th set aside?
>> that's correct.
we communicate with all the members of the court back in I think either late November or early December and everybody indicated their schedules were doable for a work session next Thursday, the 26th.
>> if their date is no longer good, the sooner we know the better.
that's why I didn't remember if we did it back in November.
>> yes, sir.
the.
>> but with if I set aside that date, it's fine with me.
so can we -- let's say we'll do the interviews on the 26th, but if that date is not good at our agenda setting meeting tomorrow we'll discuss that.
>> we can negotiate another time, yes.
>> anything else on item 26?
so we will not only have the interviews on the 26th, it will be back to court's agenda'a on the 24th.
>> also I would appropriate on the 24th the court be ready to discuss and maybe adopt a series of questions they would like to ask of all the interviewees.
>> and we attached the questions we had last time to the backup.
okay.
that will work with with me.
>> thank you very much.
>> thank you.
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.
Subscribe for updates