Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09231997 - C64 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 5E L Contra FROM: / Costa INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE County DATE: September 23, 1997sra«�K- SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESPONSE TO REPORT NO. 9712 OF THE 1996-1997 GRAND JURY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECQMMENDATMQNS�, 1 . Adopt this report of our Committee as the Board of Supervisors ' response to 1996-1997 Grand Jury Report No. 9712 : "Important Issues for the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors . " 2 . Remove this item as a referral to our Committee. BACKGROUND:_ The 1996-1997 Grand Jury filed the above report, which was reviewed by the Board of Supervisors and subsequently referred to the Internal Operations Committee. On September 16, 1997 our Committee met to discuss the recommendations and review proposed responses . At the conclusion of those discussions, we prepared this report which clearly specifies : A. Whether the recommendation is accepted or adopted; B. If the recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will be responsible for implementation and a definite target date; C. A delineation of the constraints if a recommendation is accepted but cannot be implemented within the calendar year; and D. The reason for not adopting a recommendation. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITT APPROVE OTHER (, J�[M ROGERS DONN GE BER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON a3 4-197 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Dean Lucas 335-1077 ATTESTED Contact: Internal Operations Committee PHIL BATCIJELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF cc: County Administrator SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Superior Court Presiding Judge Grand Jury Foreperson County Counsel BY DEPUTY "IMPORTANT ISSUES FOR THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS" REPORT NO. 9712 The 1996-97 Contra Costa County Grand Jury recommends that: RECOMMENDATION NO. 1: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors work for greater accountability at all levels. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is accepted. B. The Board's process for evaluating department heads was amended in July, 1997 to more effectively establish expectations, monitor operations, and measure performance. RECOMMENDATION NO.2: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors regain management rights previously surrendered or abdicated. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is accepted. B. We agree that the strengthening and retention of basic management rights is a top priority. As a part of our basic function,the Board of Supervisors must assess alternatives and options in order to make a determination of what solution best serves the needs of the County. These assessments involve a consideration of not only management rights, but fiscal responsibilities, service levels, employee concerns, County impact, and others. We will, of course, continue to be cognizant of management rights, but in the broader context, acknowledging that we are expected to weigh and balance all of the alternatives and select those that will overall strengthen the County. RECOMMENDATION NO. 3: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors remember that all government money is taxpayer money. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is accepted. RECOMMENDATION NO. 4: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors strive to instill the concept of a unified entity in County employees. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is accepted. B. The first fundamental belief in the Contra Costa County Statement of Values adopted by the Board and distributed to all departments is"To understand that the County exists to serve the public." RECOMMENDATION NO. 5: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors review the Inter-departmental "fee for service" budgeting policy. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is accepted. B. A mechanism is required to account for the costs of federal and state mandates which fund certain programs, such as in the Social Service Department. However, since not all County programs receive federal or state funds, a fair, uniform fee system is necessary so that we do not treat departments receiving outside revenues differently from those which do not. We agree that we should have a system which is as simple and streamlined as possible. RECOMMENDATION NO. 6: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors focus on a Supervisor's basic responsibility. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is accepted. B. The Board submitted to the voters, who approved the recommendation, the creation of a Charter Committee to recommend changes to County government operations. RECEIVED r JW 2 01997 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. A REPORT BY THE 1996-97.CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY 1020 ward Street Martinez,California 94553 (510) 646-2345 Report No.9712 IMPORTANT ISSUES FOR THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVED BY THE GRAND JURY: DATE: ad lq9� C�J2/G� r O AROSE G Y FOREMAN ACCEPTED FOR FELING: DATE:�Q JOHN F VAN DE POEL JUDG OF THE SUPERIOR COURT SECTI�N 9 3 (C) OF THE CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE §933. Comments and Reports t on Grand Jury Recommendations (c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elective county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant ; to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All such comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years. Leg.H. 1961 ch. 1284, 1963 ch..674, 1974 chs. 393, 1396, 1977 chs. 107, 187, 1980 ch. 543, 191 ch. 203, 1982 ch. 1408 §5, 1985 ch. 221 §1, effective July 12, 1985, 1987 ch. 690 §1, 1988 ch. 1297. Cross-References Admissible evidence. Penal Code §936.6 "Grand Jury" defined. Penal Code §888. Grand Jury report to be based only on own investigation. Penal Code §939.9. Grand Jury Report#9712 Important Issues for the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors As the five members of the current Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors you share an unusual distinction--membership on a Board that is made up of first-term supervisors. Among other things,this means that as individuals and as a group you are in a position to look at county government with fresh eyes and that you are not emotionally or politically tied to current policies,practices or procedures since you did not institute them. You are strategically situated to make changes that logic,prudence and circumstances require. Hence this departure from the Grand Jury's usual practice of dealing with single issues in detailed `:f and specific terms in each of its public communications. This report offers a few recommendations that can affect government performance in virtually all areas. Issue I Accountability Findings Since the general law under which our County Government is formed divides authority among elected supervisors,elected and appointed department heads and elected judges, accountability on a day-to-day,program-by-program basis is difficult to attain. The Board of Supervisors,however,has the"power of the purse"and thus is in a position to insist on performance standards being met. This must start with the individual in charge of each department being held responsible for each and every below-par performance in that department,with the penalties being prompt enough and stringent enough to stimulate the department head to achieve effective responsibility from all subordinates. We have encountered a disturbing number of cases in which unacceptable performance has not been detected promptly,has not been addressed consistently or has not been rectified. Conclusion Such cases result in the public being penalized by either poor services or increased cost or both. Recommendation 1. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors work for greater accountability at all levels. Issue II Management Rights Finding For reasons best known to themselves,previous supervisors have surrendered or failed to assert basic management rights,such as the right to restructure or reorganize,determine the source of needed services and establish job standards.Management has also abdicated many of its perogatives to unions. This has resulted in such things as prison inmates being forbidden to provide repair and landscaping services at prisons, the requirement that County departments purchase in-house services and supplies that may be obtained more efficiently and economically from outside sources,the inability to change job requirements for jailers and bailiffs, and similar situations that cost the County money and affront the public. Conclusion Regaining basic management rights should be a top priority Recommendation 2. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors regain management rights previously surrendered or abdicated. Issue III Taxpayer Dollars Fi_ndi'nes A common refrain among County employees is "Oh, that's federal money,"or "we're just spending state dollars,"with the implication that such`outside"funds do not need to be as carefully and responsibly utilized as County-produced revenues. The general public does not share this view. The practice of seeking one time or short-term grants from the State or the Federal government--or even the private sector—has increased as traditional revenues have faltered. Conclusions Taxpayer money is taxpayer money,wherever collected and should be treated as such. Considerable good has come from the"tin cup"method of financing,but certain dangers are implicit in it. Abandoning a good program after a grunt runs out or downsizing a non-related program to keep a grant-initiated program in existence can cause hardship,inefficiency and overall impairment of mission Recommendation 3. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors remember that all government money is taxpayer money. Issue IV County Unity Finding There is great diversity in the occupations of the County's nearly 7,000 employees. Work is performed at many different geographic locations. An operating unit may be as small as a handful of people or as large as a company. The natural tendency is for individuals to identify with their units or occupations and see their missions in those terms. The overall concept that they are a part of one organization—the County goverment—and engaged in a single mission—providing needed services to the residents of Contra Costa County—is not widely recognized. The result is a tendency for County employees to assume ownership of their jobs or their functions,to assume a right to undisturbed and unquestioned continuance of such functions and to assume their units always should prevail. Conclusion: In rapidly changing times and circumstances such proprietary attitudes can lead to a rigidity that undermines efforts to modernize,to improve and to evaluate. Recommendation 4. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors strive to instill the concept of a unified entity in County employees. Issue V "Fees for Service" Findin One practice that discourages the unified entity concept is the practice of charging one department for services provided to it by another department,or the so-called"fee for service"practice. Conclusion i This practice is admittedly a fairly effective tool for promoting budgetary responsibility and for preventing unnecessary consumption of services. However, it is also a practice that discourages the use of services when they are truly needed,that pits one department against another when cooperative efforts are needed, and that often requires costly and unproductive bookkeeping activity. Recommendation S. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors review the Inter-departmental`fee for service"budgeting policy. Issue VI Focus Findin s The Contra Costa County Government has nearly 7,000 employees,engages in a score or more of separate activities and handles almost a billion dollars annually. Five basically part- time Supervisors have the responsibility to control this large enterprise. If they are to do their job well, they must concentrate on essentials and not squander their time on ' distractions. The primary duty of the Board of Supervisors isto establish public policy in all needed areas under their jurisdiction The next most important duty is to oversee the execution of their policies by County employees. Oversight is not operational management; it is the evaluation of results and the holding accountable of top level managers for those results. We have noted far too many instances where Supervisors have allowed themselves to be distracted from policy making and effective oversight by constituency pressures,political considerations and personal agendas. Even though the law generally prohibits the Supervisors from delegating its discretionary authority to an administrator or executive, they are not precluded from delegating responsibility and holding the designee accountable. We have observed a number of instances in which Board orders to departments have not been carried out, indicating that effective accountability procedures are either not in place or are not being currently utilized by the Board. Conclusion Consistent use of procedures designed to ensure accountability would protect Supervisors (and everybody else)from micro-managing on an ad hoc basis and would enable them to move swiftly and decisively when things go wrong. Recommendation 6. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors focus on a Supervisor's basic responsibility. Summary of Recommendations: The 1996-97 Contra Costa County Grand Jury recommends that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors: 1. Work for greater accountability at all levels: 2. Work to regain management rights previously surrendered or abdicated. 3. Remember that all government money is taxpayer money. a. Strive to instill the concept of a unified entity in County employees. 5. Review the inter-departmental"fee for service"budgeting policy. 6. Focus on a Supervisor's basic responsibility. Comment As Supervisors,you have sought and won responsibility for a large number of matters of vital importance to the citizens of Contra Costa County. You have not been given responsibility for or authority in many other matters which are the responsibility of other levels of government or the private sector or individuals. Concentrate on the job you were elected to do; there is much to be improved.