Laserfiche WebLink
MR.. SCHUTTE : Then the mechanics are employed <br /> by the county? ,. With your own base yard and the. whole thing. <br /> MR. MENOR: That ' s right. <br /> • MR. SCHUTTE: Mr. Chairman, I have no further <br /> questions. <br /> CHAIRMAN SAKATA: Thank you, Mr. Menor. <br /> PLANNING The Chair called upon Mr. Sidney Fuke, Director <br /> DEPARTMENT: of the Planning Department. . <br /> MR. FUKE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, <br /> again, for giving me this opportunity to appear before this <br /> commission. <br /> I 'd like to note that my comments today are not <br /> based upon personalities, past or present. Rather they reflect . <br /> my objective assessment of the basic structure of government. <br /> A planning director, like any other cabinet <br /> officer provides technical and professional advices and imple- <br /> ments policies. As such, it generally should not matter whether <br /> the position is "subject to council confirmation. Part of the <br /> practical difficulty_, however, comes in articulating a position, <br /> such as to the State Legislature, which does note"have a consensus. <br /> between the !Mayor and council . Under those circumstances , who <br /> does the Planning ,Director represent? <br /> Additionally, the executive branch under the <br /> present charter is largely responsible for implementing policies. <br /> To achievemaximum efficiency and effectiveness in policy <br /> implementation, coordination of all departments and implemen- <br /> tation direction must be set by only one branch, and that is the <br /> executive. <br /> Conceptually, council confirmation of various <br /> cabinet officerssuggests a marriage of public policy-making <br /> with implementing functions. Such a blend, however, may dilute <br /> the effectiveness of policy implementation. <br /> As such, for administrative purposes as well <br /> as to assure an environment for implementing,:;✓-policies efficiently, <br /> I would respectfully submit that the council confirmation re- <br /> quirement be deleted. This position is predicated upon the <br /> present charter ' s basic thrust of separation of powers. Where <br /> there is an integration of two branches , such as under the <br /> former Board of Supervisors or the Chairman approach or the <br /> British Parliamentary form of government, confirmation would be <br /> appropriate. . <br /> The concept of separation of powers impl( es <br /> that each branch would have the ability to provide "reasonable <br /> checks" on each other. Accordingly, to make this concept mean- <br /> ingful ,. the legislative branch should have its own staff support. <br /> Care, however, should be exercised to avert a direct duplication <br /> of functions relegated 'to the executive branch. <br /> - 5 - <br />