Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-01-09 Cost of Government Commission MinutesCOST OF GOVERNMENT COMMISSION County of Hawaii MTN11TFC January 9, 2007 — 10:00 a.m. Department of Liquor Control - Conference Room 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 230 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Commissioners Myles Y. Miyasato, Chair present: Wayne T. Joseph, Vice Chair Marilyn L. Nicholson, Commissioner Patricia Provalenko, Commissioner Barbara R. Stremski, Commissioner Also present: Lincoln S. T. Ashida, Corporation Counsel Diane A. Noda, Deputy Corporation Counsel Mary E. Crosson, Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER The Chair called the meeting to order at 10:03 a.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 19, 2006, MEETING Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to approve the minutes of December 19, 2006. Ms. Stremski seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. 3. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC No members of the public were present. 4. APPROVAL OF ADDENDUM AND /OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA There was no addendum or supplemental agenda. 5. CLARIFICATION BY DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL DIANE A. NODA REGARDING THE RECOMMENDATION THAT "CORPORATION COUNSEL IS TO PROVIDE /COORDINATE THE LEGAL, CONTRACTUAL, AND PROCUREMENT TRAINING TO ALL NEW MANAGERS /SUPERVISORS, NOTE: These minutes are unapproved, as no further meetings of this Commis- - sion are scheduled. SPECIFIC TO THEIR DEPARTMENTS, WITHIN THREE MONTHS OF HIRE DATE" Ms. Noda explained that in reviewing the December 19, 2006, minutes and discussing the meeting with Katherine Garson, she realized that she answered the question regarding whether new departmental managers receive training on legal, contractual, and procurement issues specific to their departments cold, without knowing what Barbara Bell had said about the issue. However, after reviewing Ms. Bell's input, she realized what Ms. Bell was asking for and wanted to clarify the Office of the Corporation Counsel's policy and procedure for the Counseling and Drafting unit and the Litigation unit. The Office of the Corporation Counsel does have goals and mandates, and the attorneys provide training constantly, whether through a one -on -one session, by telephone on a specific issue, or more formally. The training is constant and ongoing. Ms. Bell had felt that when a new director, deputy director, or administrator came on board, there was no comprehensive program to train them. When she discussed the issue with Ms. Garson, they came up with a suggestion for the recommendation, which is in Rough Draft 2 of the final report. Ms. Bell seemed to want training on specific needs and concerns, such as how to get a design consultant. The Corporation Counsel does not provide training on all issues, but could coordinate with the appropriate parties to provide the needed training. Since Mr. Joseph had stated at the last meeting that he wanted a department to be in charge of the training, she was suggesting that the recommendation be worded so that Corporation Counsel would be primarily responsible to assist a department in training, but would not necessarily be the agency to do the training, depending on what the needs were. There being no comments or questions from the commissioners, the Chair moved to agenda item 6. 6. DISCUSSION /ACTION BASED UPON DRAFT 2 OF FINAL REPORT AND ALL RECOMMENDATIONS THEREIN AND REVISIONS THEREOF The commissioners had no comments on the Table of Contents and continued to page 1. Mr. Joseph said he was not trying to offend anyone, but asked why Dixie Kaetsu's name was on the list of members /staff, as she never attended any of the meetings. Ms. Noda explained that there is a requirement that the County's managing director be an ex officio member, which means Ms. Kaetsu is a required member of the Commission but does not have voting rights. Mr. Joseph said he would suggest her name be eliminated, as she briefly attended only the first meeting. The Chair asked what Ms. Kaetsu's function was. Ms. Noda said it was to provide input and information. Ms. Noda said that Section 5 -2.2 of the Charter states that the managing director shall be an ex officio member of the Commission. In having Ms. Kaetsu's name there, it shows that the Commission has fulfilled the Charter requirement for membership. This could prevent someone questioning whether the Commission's body was properly constituted. 2 = NOTE: These minutes are unapproved, as no further meetings of this Commis- - sion are scheduled. Ms. Nicholson said the report may have more clout with Ms. Kaetsu's name there, even though she did not participate. (Corporation Counsel Lincoln S. T. Ashida entered the room) Ms. Stremski said she had no problem with Ms. Kaetsu's name in the report. Motion: Mr. Joseph moved to eliminate Dixie Kaetsu's name from page 1 of the final report. There was no second to the motion. The Chair asked Mr. Ashida if he wanted to speak. Mr. Ashida said he wanted to personally thank all the commissioners for their service to the County. They were asked to take on a responsibility within an eleven -month term, per the Charter. Because they were time - driven, they really had to work hard. This is only the second Cost of Government Commission, which was created in 2000, to be empaneled. Mr. Ashida said the prior Commission was concerned about whether any of its recommendations would be implemented by the County. He said he wanted to share that Mayor Kim takes the Commission seriously. He wanted to personally assure the commissioners that their report was not going to find its way to the back of somebody's filing cabinet. He said that Mayor Kim charged him with assuring the commissioners that the recommendations would be looked at seriously. Mr. Ashida said part of his job is recruiting members for all the County boards and commissions. He said if any of them were interested in serving on other boards or commissions, to let him know. He thanked the commissioners again. (Mr. Ashida left the meeting at 10:15 a.m.) The Chair directed the commissioners to page 2 of Draft 2 of the final report. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept the suggested change for Recommendation IA. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. Motion: Ms. Nicholson moved to reword the background /explanation for Recommendation IA, where it said "there is no comprehensive program to train new department heads to run their actual departments." She moved to reword it to say that "there is no comprehensive program to train new department heads on regulations relevant to their departments." Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion. There being no further discussion, all commissioners present voted aye. Ms. Nicholson pointed out that grammatically, the wording on page 2, for Recommendation IB, under the background /explanation, should say "Though many departments budget for" rather than "Though many departments are budgeted for." Mr. Joseph said that was recommended and approved at the last meeting. 3 = NOTE: These minutes are unapproved, as no further meetings of this Commis- - sion are scheduled. The commissioners continued to page 3 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to clarify the wording for the background/ explanation for Recommendation ID, by adding the word "departmental" to the last sentence so that it read: "However, an independent auditor could provide a more substantive and in -depth review of the County's departmental efficiency." Mr. Joseph seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept Recommendations II, III, and IV of Draft 2, with the suggestion as presented for Recommendation IV. Mr. Joseph seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 4 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept page 4 as presented. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 5 of Draft 2. Motion: Ms. Nicholson moved to delete the first sentence of the background /explanation for Recommendation VI(F), as it did not seem relevant. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Joseph said that the wording for this was reviewed and passed in Draft 1 and questioned whether they were allowed to revisit things that were already passed. Ms. Nicholson said that was the purpose of having a draft. Mr. Joseph asked whether everything was open for change. The Chair said he believed changes could only be for typos and regarding the new suggested changes. Ms. Nicholson asked if they could change things that were passed before, and Ms. Noda said they could if they moved to reopen it. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to reopen the background /explanation for Recommendation VI(F), to delete the first sentence for not being terribly relevant. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion. Ms. Nicholson, Ms. Provalenko, Ms. Stremski, and the Chair voted aye. Mr. Joseph abstained. The motion passed. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt the rest of page 5 of Draft 2 as presented, and with the change just passed on Recommendation VI(F). Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion. Ms. Nicholson, Ms. Provalenko, Ms. Stremski, and the Chair voted aye. Mr. Joseph abstained. The motion passed. The commissioners continued to page 6 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to reopen the background /explanation for Recommendation VII(A)(1), to replace the word "organization" with "entity," since the subject 4 = NOTE: These minutes are unapproved, as no further meetings of this Commis- - sion are scheduled. could be an individual or a business. Ms. Stremski seconded the motion. Ms. Nicholson, Ms. Stremski, Ms. Provalenko, and the Chair voted aye. Mr. Joseph abstained. The motion passed. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt the balance of page 6, with the change as just voted upon for the background /explanation for Recommendation VII(A)(1). Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion. Ms. Nicholson, Ms. Provalenko, Ms. Stremski, and the Chair voted aye. Mr. Joseph abstained. The motion passed. The commissioners continued to page 7 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt all of page 7 as presented. Mr. Joseph seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 8 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt all of page 8 as presented. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 9 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt all of page 9 as presented. Mr. Joseph seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 10 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt all of page 10 as presented. Mr. Joseph seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 11 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt all of page 11 as presented. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 12 of Draft 2. Mr. Joseph asked for clarification on what the two options were about. Ms. Noda said that if a recommendation was explained earlier in the report, Option 2 was a reference back to that previous explanation. Motion and Vote: Ms. Stremski moved to adopt Option 2 on page 12 of Draft 2. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept page 12, using Option 2 for the background /explanation for Recommendation XVII(C), as just voted upon. Ms. Stremski seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 13 of Draft 2. 5 = NOTE: These minutes are unapproved, as no further meetings of this Commis- - sion are scheduled. Motion: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept page 13 as presented. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Joseph asked whether Recommendation XIX(A)(1) was reviewed previously, and Ms. Nicholson said they had reworded it at the last meeting. Vote: All commissioners present voted aye on the motion. The commissioners continued to page 14 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Mr. Joseph moved to accept Option 2 on page 14, and Ms. Stremski seconded the motion. All commissioners present voted aye. Motion: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept the balance of page 14 as presented, using Option 2 for the explanation of Recommendation XIX(B). Ms. Noda asked to interject and pointed out that grammatically, for Recommendation XX, they may wish to delete the semi -colon and change it to a period, and delete the word "and." Motion: Ms. Nicholson moved to change the wording of Recommendation XX to reflect a period after "2006," to delete the word "and," to capitalize the "a" in "after," and to use Option 2 for the explanation of Recommendation XIX(B). Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Joseph said that the wording regarding Jane Testa only stated that she was present at the meeting, when it should include that she provided information at the meeting. The others agreed. He suggested that instead of saying that Jane Testa was present, it should say that she "provided information on Research and Development," and "was present for the meeting" should be taken out. Motion withdrawn: Ms. Nicholson moved to withdraw her original motion. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved, for page 14 of Draft 2, as follows: - to accept Recommendation XIX(B) as worded and use Option 2 for the explanation, with the correct page number inserted. - under Research and Development, to word it that "Jane Testa, the department's director, provided information on the Research and Development Department on December 7, 2006. After reviewing and discussing the responses from Ms. Testa, no recommendations were made." - to accept the rest of the page as presented. Mr. Joseph seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 15 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept page 15, using Option 2 for both explanations and with the correct page number inserted. Ms. Stremski seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. 6 = NOTE: These minutes are unapproved, as no further meetings of this Commis- - sion are scheduled. The commissioners continued to page 16 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt page 16 as presented. Mr. Joseph seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 17 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt page 17 as presented. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 18 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt page 18 as presented. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The commissioners continued to page 19 of Draft 2. Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept page 19 as presented, utilizing Option 2 for both explanations and with the correct page number inserted. Mr. Joseph seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The review of Draft 2 of the final report being completed, the secretary brought up the draft cover letter to the Mayor, which the commissioners had been sent. She said that Ms. Garson had suggested changing the wording in the second paragraph to "Pursuant to Mayor Kim's suggestion," rather than Mayor Kim's "request." Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adopt the cover letter with the change in paragraph 2, so that it read: "Pursuant to Mayor Kim's suggestion at the first meeting." Mr. Joseph seconded the motion, and all commissioners present voted aye. The Chair called for a recess. A recess was taken from 10:55 a.m. to 11:03 a.m., at which time the Chair called the meeting back to order. 7. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC No members of the public were present. 8. CHAIR'S STATEMENT Chair Myles Miyasato wished everyone a happy new year and thanked them for attending the meetings. He stated his appreciation for their efforts at attending so they could have quorums. 7 = NOTE: These minutes are unapproved, as no further meetings of this Commis- - sion are scheduled.