Laserfiche WebLink
comply, and it usually comes down to finances. Many of the department’s processes are not <br />change-friendly. <br /> <br />Vice Chair Olson pointed out that procedurally, someone should make a motion, <br />have it seconded, and then they could discuss the issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Kamelamela asked to address the EMC to clarify meeting procedures. Whatever <br />the commission plans to talk about needs to be on the agenda. Prior to discussing an <br />agenda item, someone other than the chair needs to make a motion, it needs to be <br />seconded, and then they can discuss the item. There should have been a motion and <br />second to discuss the current agenda item. The commission meets to conduct business, not <br />talk story. Also, he said he objected to language in the table of motions where it said that <br />Corporation Counsel “threatened” the commission (about sending a letter to Dr. Pressler). <br /> <br />Vice Chair Olson said that in the past, whenever someone was appointed to a board <br />or commission, they received training in Robert’s Rules and procedure. He is not aware <br />whether that is still being done. <br /> <br />Chair Bennett asked if anyone would move to discuss the current agenda item. <br /> <br />Motion and second: Commissioner Pequeño moved that future motions requiring a <br />response state a desired deadline for the response. Vice Chair Olson seconded the motion. <br /> <br /> Vice Chair Olson asked Director Kucharski how cumbersome it would be to <br />administratively follow up on the various motions and recommendations that were made. <br />Director Kucharski said the department is more than willing to respond, but he needs <br />clarification on the method. Some of the EMC’s recommendations require some thought on <br />the response, and there are many things the department would like to do but cannot <br />because it would take away funding from something else. He feels he has responded at <br />meetings to the EMC’s recommendations. If there is a way they want him to respond, let <br />him know so he can satisfy the requirement. Many issues are more complex than they <br />appear, but explaining the complexity and issues faced is something he is happy to delve <br />into. If the EMC wants a response on something, the EMC needs to indicate that a written <br />response is required and be clear on what is expected. <br /> <br /> Vice Chair Olson said that when the EMC requests a response on something, they <br />need to insert a timeline, to be clear. It would be on the EMC to determine what the <br />timeline is going to be. Director Kucharski said he would be appreciate that, so he can be <br />sure he is doing what they expect. <br /> <br /> Commissioner Fulton said it is a matter of communication and expectations. The <br />director is in the best position to be able to provide an estimate of the time needed. As far <br />as how the EMC administrates following up, perhaps they could have it under Unfinished <br />Business at each meeting, using a calendar to keep track of when the director is to respond, <br />so they can ask him for an update. <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />