2011-01-14 Cost of Government Commission Minutes

Home

MS. O’HARA: Well, it’s infrastructure fees. MS. NICHOLSON: And we can either carry this forward or we can refer it back to Ken and Patricia’s committee because it’s part of revenue enhancement and they can see how it might fit in with their committee. Should we do that rather than carry that one forward? MS. PROVALENKO: Yeah. MS. O’HARA: Yeah. Remand it to the subcommittee. MS. NICHOLSON: And the last one that I noted down we might also want to hand to the subcommittee unless we’re going to carry it. 9.Do a top to bottom review of the property tax base. MS. PROVALENKO: I don’t think that’s within our jurisdiction to be able to pull that together. MS. O’HARA: That’s a recommendation. MS. PROVALENKO: I mean, you’re sending it down to the subcommittee, but I think overall that’s a good recommendation but not in subcommittee level, being that it needs to stay as part of the recommendations. Especially if it’s got an audit. You got an auditing agency, why not use them. Like he said, it’s not being used. MS. NICHOLSON: Okay, so we’ll carry it out on the report. So one of these nine we will refer back to a subcommittee, and the other eight are going forward as recommendations in our draft. Now, anyone else has something they believe that MS. WONG: I think he spoke about consolidation of functions. MS. O’HARA: Oh yes. MR. ARMOUR: Yeah, different departments. MS. NICHOLSON: And how would you like to phrase that? MS. WONG: Consolidation of functions. MR. ARMOUR: A review of like consolidation of functions from different departments . MS. O’HARA: Could that be put with your subcommittee? Consolidation was your committee. MS. NICHOLSON: Or would you rather just carry it forward as is now? MS. WONG: Seems simple. 27