MIN CHC PH 2000-04-01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

caused a lot of confusion among the public. But the kind of input we're getting from the public is we'd like to see more auditing going on. Why are you eliminating this? Why • don't you go the other direction and create an Auditing Department, or whatever? So it wouldn't change the way things function now. It would just more directly address how this office works. So, there again, I would characterize this as, kind of, being up in the air as far as whether we pursue it or not, so we'll have to see how everybody feels about it. Number 8, the Holdover of Members of Boards and Commissions, is basically just increasing the holdover period from the existing 30 days to 90 days. This was suggested by a number of the Boards and Commissions, just to give more time to get folks in place. So that's what the holdover's about. The Safety Coordinator. There again, this is cleaning up the reality of how things work in the County. The majority of the functions spelled out in the Charter, to be dealt with by a Safety Coordinator, are dealt with internally, and we think quite well, by the separate departments. So, basically the way it's portrayed in the Charter now is not the way it works, so the suggestion is rather than having a separate section here dealing with this, in the Charter, to move the position to the Civil Service Department, and deal with that function under the Civil Service Department, but not have a separate Safety Coordinator position which would be mandated to deal with these functions, which the departments are individually and separating dealing with now. Qualification of Heads of Departments of Public Works and Water Supply. This was based on a discussion which took place last year in regard to the need for the head of these departments being a registered engineer. Our feeling, in discussing this, is that these jobs are more administrative than engineering in nature, and why not remove this barrier so that it would allow a non -registered engineer to be head of these departments. We had an occasion where our Chief Engineer retired and the Deputy Chief Engineer, who most people felt was able and qualified to step in in that position was precluded from doing that. He is an engineer. He has an engineering degree, but is not a registered engineer, and so under the Charter, he wouldn't be allowed to do this. There again, this has come under a lot of flack from public testimony. It seems to be confusing the public that, on one hand we want to raise standards of Departments Heads, and we seem to be going in the other direction in regard to this. So, I'd say this one is up for grabs whether we proceed with this or not. It's not, I don't think, really a big deal one way or the other. But we've received a lot of testimony either in opposition or in concern with how this one goes, so we very well may pull this. Qualifications of Department Heads. We're just trying to raise the standard -- reviewing the whole Charter and raise the standards. And we're going to try to come up with a little more uniform language in terms of the standards for these different Department Heads. But they are very different, and a concern we've had is that, especially in terms of salaries, they've been treated, in the past, pretty much the same, 7