My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2010-09-10 Cost of Government Commission Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Office of the Mayor
>
Cost of Government Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010
>
2010-09-10 Cost of Government Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/21/2011 1:09:39 PM
Creation date
6/21/2011 1:09:33 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MS. GARSON: <br /> No. Just make it clear who is in charge of what. But two is no problem. <br />You can have a committee of less than a quorum and that still wouldn’t be a problem. <br />MS. NICHOLSON: <br /> Because we’re not reaching any conclusions, we’re just making <br />recommendations. <br />MS. GARSON: <br /> Yes, two is fine without having a noticed meeting, yes. <br />MS. WONG: <br /> Based on what you’ve heard us saying over the last 15 minutes or so, do <br />you have any comments or suggestions? <br />MS. GARSON: <br /> No. Actually on the communications that were sent to you, one thing <br />that I would like you to do is to forward them to the department that those suggestions <br />kind of had to do with for comment. For example, I don’t know if it was in this batch, but <br />a comment came in from someone who is probably from the police department cause <br />his suggestions all had to do with police functions. I think you should send that to the <br />Police Chief and have him maybe have someone call him back. Or if there is a <br />technology suggestion, at some point you should either invite or maybe send that to <br />Data Systems to see what comment they would have about like, great idea. They <br />haven’t seen these so that would just be my suggestion, at some point maybe before <br />you have them come in or somehow forward those to the department. <br />MS. O’HARA: <br /> Just responding to that, I would be a little bit concerned if they came in <br />as an anonymous comment to sending that. The writing might be recognizable. <br />MS. GARSON: <br /> Or again a summary. Just somehow, just remember to get input back <br />from the department. <br />MS. O’HARA: <br /> A summary would be good. <br />MS. PROVALENKO: <br /> I agree with the summary. <br />MS. NICHOLSON: <br /> Okay, I’m trying to get my mind on how we would do this. If we <br />divide into groups and you all say I’m interested in delving further in this, I’m interested <br />in delving further in this, that’s one action. But it looks like we’re actually, we want to <br />also be focusing on the big picture, be looking at the comments we’re getting back from <br />the departments, but we’re not necessarily going to be going department to department <br />to department. We’re looking at a more interdisciplinary approach. Is that set? <br />MS. WONG: <br /> I think the thing is yet. We may still go to a department <br />MS. NICHOLSON: <br /> Because I don’t want to loose sight of our task of maybe looking at <br />programs or activities that the county may be doing that we may want to suggest be <br />eliminated, transferred, or whatever. <br />MS. O’HARA: <br /> Modified. <br />17 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.