Laserfiche WebLink
The Chair asked whether they still wanted to send a letter to the mayor. They had <br />previously thought to inform him about issues they felt were more pressing because the county <br />was in the budget process. <br />Ms. O'Hara felt they should take a more long -range approach. Their report may not go in <br />until June and would not impact the budget process until the following year. They had been <br />concerned initially about videoconferencing and Laserfiche, but are waiting for a report from <br />Data Systems. The county has the capabilities and equipment, but more employee training is <br />needed. She did not want to recommend anything while they were still gathering information. <br />They need to be clear in their recommendations—define barriers and what needs to happen, such <br />as training programs for employees or software programs. <br />Mr. Matsuda liked Ms. Garson's suggestion. It would allow them to receive responses <br />early enough that they could follow -up and have good information for their final report. <br />Ms. Wong said that from the first meeting with Bill Takaba, he had said that the COGC <br />should identify the essential county functions. She would like to touch bases with Mr. Takaba on <br />this. She would prefer sending a letter out without making recommendations at this point, but <br />just asking for input. She felt they should still send a letter to the mayor, just to give him an <br />update. <br />Motion and vote: Ms. O'Hara moved, in order to settle the matter, to send a letter to the <br />mayor by the end of the year with questions from subcommittees. Mr. Matsuda seconded the <br />motion. Ms. Wong voted aye, and the other commissioners present voted nay. <br />Motion: Ms. O'Hara moved to set a goal to develop a draft report by the first meeting of <br />March and to have it disseminated to the department heads and other relevant staff so that they <br />could review the COGC's proposed recommendations and provide feedback before the report is <br />finalized. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion. <br />Ms. Wong said she had heard Ms. Garson, after the last meeting, suggest that a draft be <br />started. Ms. Garson explained that she had instructed the COGC's secretary to keep a Word <br />document where she could insert all of the suggestions and recommendations as she typed the <br />minutes so she wouldn't have to go back later and look for them. It was basically a list of all the <br />things that they had already discussed and wanted carried forward. <br />The Chair said she would like to see that list for the next meeting, so they could start <br />organizing for their draft. <br />Ms. Garson said the next agenda could include "summary of proposed recommendations <br />for the draft." <br />The Chair asked if there was any further discussion on the motion on the floor, and Ms. <br />O'Hara said that Ms. Wong had wanted the public to be more involved in the process of drafting <br />the report. She asked if the draft could be made available to the public so they could receive <br />more comment. <br />27 <br />