2006-04-06 Cost of Government Commission Minutes

Home

Ms. Garson said she would draft a notice to go with the letter to departments and add a sentence at the end, saying that enclosed is a notice to be posted for employees. The notice will have the same contents as the letter plus would need a response date. Mr. Joseph preferred to leave the response date open for three to five months, or until October, to give the employees sufficient leeway. He said the COGC could go into executive session to read the letters so there would not be repercussions. Ms. Cushnie asked if the letters could be sent to the Corporation Counsel, who could redact the names and other identities so as not to libel anyone. She did not want to get into problems with disgruntled employees or whistleblowers. She asked if the others agreed with this, to protect everyone. Mr. Joseph said if an employee had a complaint, he could lodge it with the Board of Ethics. Ms. Garson said if a response comes in as a communication, it is a public record. She said redactions could be made based on privacy interests, but questioned where the redactions would stop. She said she could read the responses that come to her office and, based on the Sunshine Law, redact whatever invades someone else's privacy. However, some people may be willing to go on record. She wanted the commissioners to understand that she would not redact all names. Ms. Cushnie reiterated that she feels it is a necessity to carefully scrutinize references to others. Ms. Garson said she would only scrutinize them for violations that are outlined in the law as requiring that protection. She said it would not be discretionary on her part. The Chair asked if a response date could be agreed upon. He felt October was too late, as he wanted enough time to discuss responses before doing the report. Ms. Garson suggested the wording that responses could be submitted "up to" a date the Commission set. September was agreed upon as the deadline to receive responses from employees Ms. Nicholson had a suggestion on the draft letter. In the beginning where it says "as you are aware," she wanted it worded to show that it is required by law. She felt that would make it stronger. She felt answering the six questions in two pages would be difficult and questioned whether it couldn't be rephrased to ask, "Do you have any ideas about what your department can do to save money while not compromising essential services ?" She suggested that be question No. 1. Ms. Nicholson said that Act 253 also authorizes the use of experimental modernization projects, in lieu of privatizing the functions of the public agencies. She would like to add a question about experimental modernization projects, to stimulate creative thinking. 20