My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006-08-03 Cost of Government Commission Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Office of the Mayor
>
Cost of Government Commission
>
Minutes
>
2006-2007
>
2006-08-03 Cost of Government Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/29/2011 4:17:59 PM
Creation date
6/21/2011 1:12:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
about how County facilities are designed, and how they need to be more secure, accessible, <br />energy efficient, and easier to maintain. It is not clear who to talk to about this— perhaps the <br />Finance Department. <br />Mr. Sakaguchi asked if they should subsume that issue, as he feels the bigger issue is <br />whether the County should continue to build, or instead lease. <br />Mr. Sakaguchi said he wanted to comment. He was impressed by Deputy Chief Kubojiri <br />because he brought up how difficult things are with the County departments having different <br />computer systems. The County should spend money right now on expediting its computerization, <br />and should also put some aside for staff development. <br />The Chair said that if there was nothing further on the Police Department, they would <br />move on to the next agenda item. <br />6. DISCUSSION /ACTION ON OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL <br />RESPONSE TO THE COMMISSION'S LETTER DATED APRIL 10, 2006 <br />Motion and Vote: Mr. Joseph moved to accept and file the response, and Mr. Sakaguchi <br />seconded the motion. There being no discussion, all members voted aye. <br />7. DISCUSSION /ACTION ON TRANSIT AGENCY RESPONSE TO THE <br />COMMISSION'S LETTER DATED APRIL 10, 2006 <br />Motion and Vote: Mr. Joseph moved to accept and file the response, and Ms. <br />Provalenko seconded the Motion. There being no discussion, all members voted aye. <br />Ms. Garson asked, when it was time to write the report, how they would refer to the <br />letters that were just accepted and filed. It was agreed to say that the COGC sent a request, <br />received a response, and have no recommendation for these departments. If there is a <br />recommendation or issue on a department's response, a motion will be made and it will be <br />discussed at this present meeting. <br />8. DISCUSSION /ACTION ON DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR CONTROL <br />RESPONSE TO THE COMMISSION'S LETTER DATED APRIL 10, 2006 <br />Motion: Ms. Nicholson moved to file the response, and Mr. Sakaguchi seconded the <br />motion. <br />Discussion: Mr. Sakaguchi asked why this Department was needed, and it was explained <br />that it is a regulatory agency and regulates the laws about alcohol consumption, as well as doing <br />permitting and enforcement. Mr. Sakaguchi questioned whether a department was necessary to <br />regulate liquor consumption. He said they seem to side with the owners all the time. He felt the <br />Police Department should handle violations. Mr. Joseph said he did not agree with burdening <br />the Police with such a large thing as liquor control. <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.