Laserfiche WebLink
Honorable Gary Safarik <br /> Honorable Virginia Isbell <br /> <br /> March 28, 2005 <br /> <br /> Page 2 <br /> There is no duplication. In the absence of a comprehensive risk <br /> management program and division within our County, our attorneys <br /> have, by default, assumed the responsibility of overseeing risk <br /> management activities within their client departments. This is <br /> inefficient, and not conducive with the County's long-term goal of <br /> developing a comprehensive risk management program. This is <br /> exactly why we need a division within the Department of Finance, <br /> dedicated to this function. <br /> With the advent of a centralized risk management program as a <br /> division of the Department of Finance, our attorneys would continue to <br /> provide legal support to our client departments, without having to <br /> shoulder the entire responsibility of developing or maintaining a <br /> comprehensive risk management program for the department, which <br /> may admittedly be outside the scope of their expertise. <br /> When aCounty-wide risk management program is finally implemented, <br /> this program objective will be deleted as a primary responsibility of our <br /> attorneys. <br /> 3. Why did the program objective of fhe collection of delinquent child <br /> support payments decrease from $400K in FY05 to $350K in FY06? <br /> Do we have problems collecting from county employees? <br /> At the time the Family Support Division's program objectives for Fiscal <br /> Year 2006-2007 were being formulated, the Division was faced with a <br /> low collection total of $320,090.00 for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 (the <br /> collection goal had been set at $400,000.00 for Fiscal Year 2003- <br /> 2004). This was partially the result of collection case referrals from the <br /> State of Flawai'i being extremely low. Instead of setting a collection <br /> goal that ,appeared to be unattainable, the decision was made to set a <br /> collection goal for Fiscal Year 2005-2006 that was more realistic. <br /> Hence, the figure of $350,000 for Fiscal Year 2005-2006 was selected. <br /> With respect to collections from County employees, this is not a <br /> problem. Wages from these employees may be assigned towards <br /> child support payments. Further, upon retirement, County employees <br /> who still have child support obligations have their retirement income <br /> subject to income assignment. <br /> <br />