Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> Mr. Mitchell asked if they could discuss the formatting of the report at the meeting <br />today. Ms. Garson said yes. <br /> <br /> Ms. Kierkiewicz asked how the last commission did the writing of the report. <br />Ms. Garson replied they pieced it out, one person did the introduction, different people <br />did different sections and when it came to the recommendations, they did it the same – <br />the recommendations were agendized. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mitchell stated he noticed a fundamental difference between the report from <br />the prior Commission and what is current being discussed. He personally feels as <br />though he’s missing something because this Commission is very focused on the <br />departments, but he didn’t see that was the prior Commission’s concern or at least that <br />wasn’t their big issue. The prior Commission’s viewpoint was more County-wide which <br />they devoted 3 ½ plus pages to with a large amount of work on revenue, whereas the <br />current Commission is department specific. He wants to make sure that they are not <br />missing anything. <br /> <br />Ms. Garson said this Commission is not missing anything. She explained that <br />the prior Commission had common, County-wide recommendations and the formatting <br />ended up breaking down the way it did versus a specific recommendation. They <br />focused on revenue because of the situation the County was in at that time. <br /> <br />Ms. Maddox stated each commission is a function of who the commissioners are <br />and the state of the County government or the economy in general. She doesn’t believe <br />there is a right or wrong way to proceed in terms of a report. Ms. Maddox stated this <br />commission can include the research and recommendations from department heads in <br />their responses related to revenue in the current report if the commissioners concur. <br /> <br />Mr. Mitchell again compared the prior Commission’s report to what the current <br />Commission is doing. He likes what the current Commission is doing because it’s more <br />specific and less about trying to involve the State and collective bargaining issues. <br /> <br />Ms. Garson suggested the Commissioners look at the County Charter to see <br />what should be included in the report. She said the Charter does not state that <br />recommendations on generating revenues need to be included in the report. She <br />reiterated that the prior Commission included revenues in their report because of the <br />situation the County was in at the time the report was done. She stated this Commission <br />is not missing anything if they do not include a section on generating revenues. <br /> <br />Ms. Maddox stated the responses received from the department heads can be <br />included in the appendices of the report. These are the letters that were sent out to the <br />department heads with the recommendations given by the prior commission and shared <br />what has been implemented or the progress on the recommendations and any <br />suggestions. <br /> <br />Ms. Garson stated the format of the report is up to the Commission as long <br />as it answers the fundamental questions that are in the County Charter. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br /> <br />