My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006-12-19 Cost of Government Commission Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Office of the Mayor
>
Cost of Government Commission
>
Minutes
>
2006-2007
>
2006-12-19 Cost of Government Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/29/2011 4:19:20 PM
Creation date
6/21/2011 1:11:32 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
review every program. He would rather see an independent auditor do the audit, not the County <br />Council, although the four -year cycle is all right. <br />Ms. Nicholson said they should tighten up the recommendation to clarify what type of <br />audit they feel is needed. It says "management and program audit," which is not clear. <br />Motion: Ms. Nicholson proposed rewording the recommendation to say: "Every four <br />years, contract with an independent source to conduct a management and program audit which <br />would include evaluating the management structure, the program needs, and impacts of all <br />County departments to identify new practices or procedures which should be in place for <br />efficiency and cost savings." <br />Discussion: Mr. Joseph asked Ms. Noda if they could add, or whether it was necessary, <br />that the audit will be made available to the Council and to the public for review. Ms. Noda said <br />that if that was their intention, it would not hurt to specify that. Ms. Nicholson said that would <br />be a good addition to the motion. Ms. Noda suggested the wording "and the report forwarded to <br />the County Council and made available for public review." <br />The Chair called for a vote on the recommendation as amended. <br />Vote: All commissioners present voted aye on the motion as amended. <br />All boards and commissions: Recommend scheduling meetings in both West <br />Hawaii and East Hawaii based on representation. <br />Mr. Joseph said he is in favor of this recommendation but wanted a short discussion. He <br />said that after he had thought about it, he realized that it could be costly to have meetings in West <br />Hawaii due to the need to send the assigned secretary, attorney, and possibly speakers, to those <br />meetings as well. However, in the interest of fairness, they should look at having more meetings <br />in West Hawaii. <br />Ms. Nicholson said that it may be more appropriate for certain boards and commissions <br />to travel to the west, if they will be discussing issues related to West Hawaii. However, for <br />some issues it would not make much difference where the meeting is held. So where a meeting <br />is held should also depend on the content or topics on the agenda. <br />Ms. Provalenko said having more meetings in West Hawaii would provide more options <br />for members, as they would not always have to travel two and a half hours to get to Hilo. <br />Ms. Nicholson suggested adding "based on representation and need" to the <br />recommendation. However, if there is a need to have a hearing in West Hawaii, it would be <br />there anyway. <br />Ms. Provalenko agreed and said that "need" is not the right word. <br />Motion: Ms. Nicholson said "topic" is the needed word and moved to adopt the <br />recommendation with the addition of the words "and topic" at the end of the sentence. Ms. <br />Provalenko seconded the motion. <br />31 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.