Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11051985 - IO.3 2�3 T BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Coontra November 4, 1985 C,)sta DATE*. COU* SUBJECT: Appropriate Organizational Placement of the Real Property Division and Communications Division SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION- 1. Create a Communications Division as outlined in the Arthur Young report, including the personnel and tasks of both the Public Works Telecommunications Division and the Sheriff ' s Technical Services Unit, and transfer the newly formed Division to the General Services Department on a date to be determined by the County Administrator following recruitment and hiring of a Telecommunications Manager, with the under- standing that the Office of the Sheriff-Coroner and Emergency Medical Services needs in the telecommunications area would have first priority for services from the Telecommunications Division. 2. In regard to the recommendation of the County Administrator to leave the Real Property Division in the Public Works Department while transferring the Lease Management and Architectural Divisions to the General Services Department, this recommendation is to be reexamined by the County Administrator, with an additional report to be made to our Committee by not later than December 9, 1985. 3 . Remove as a referral to our Committee the issue of the Communications Division; leaving on referral the appropriate placement of the Real Property Division. BACKGROUND: On October 15, 1985, the Board of Supervisors referred to our Committee issues raised regarding the appropriate organizational placement of the Real Property Division and the proposed formation of a Communications Division and its transfer to the General Services Department. Our Committee met on November 4, 1985 with staff from Public Works, General Services Department, Sheriff-Coroner' s Office, and the County Administrator, as well as Henry Clarke from Local No. 1 . CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _ YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF�,OUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 'R'�COMM/`END ION OF BOARD COMMITTEE X APPROVE / O ER f� SIGNATURE s : Tom Torlakson helm PovVe ACTION OFBOARD ON ovem er APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _ OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE _X-- 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. County Administrator cc: Public Works Director ATTESTED General Services Dept. PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Sheri ff-Coroner SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Employees Local No. 1 / M382/7-83 BY �aJ .�6-0�.�—(/ ,DEPUTY t Page 2 In regard to the proposed ' formation *of 'the 'Communications . Division, the County Administrator noted his recommendation that such a Communications Division be formed and be transferred to the General Services Department after a technically qualified Division Chief has been hired. The rationale .for this recommendation is that the services of the proposed Communications Division are available to all County departments having telecommunications equipment and that such a function fits in logically with the role of the General Services Department, which is to serve as a resource to other County departments rather than providing service to the general public. The Sheriff-Coroner' s Office presented an extensive report, identifying a number of issues which he feels must be addressed. Henry Clarke noted that with one exception all of the communications technicians agree that they should be transferred to the General Services Department. Our Committee agrees with the recommendation of the County Administrator, with the understanding that the Sheriff ' s Emergency Communications and Emergency Medical Services planning are to have priority in the newly formed Communications Division. Since we believe a technically qualified Chief should be in place before the Division is actually formed and transferred to the General Services Department, we are leaving the actual implementation date to the discretion of the County Administrator contingent upon the hiring of a Division Chief. The location of the Real Property Division is less clear cut and there appears to be less consensus as to the appropriate action. The Lease Management Division works closely with the Architectural Division and there appears to be agreement that those two divisions should stay in the same department. It also seems clear from the figures presented by the Flood Control District that the majority of work done by the Real Property Division is done for the Flood Control District, for Public Works road maintenance, and for the Redevelopment Agency which, of course, is located in the Community Development Department. The County Administrator has recommended that the Real Property Division stay in the Public Works Department because the majority of their work is for that department. The Director of General Services believes that there is sufficient interaction between Real Property and Lease Management that an argument can be made to transfer Real Property to the General Services Department. Henry Clarke identified several points, including whether opportunities for promotion will be lessened if the Divisions are in separate departments, whether reimbursement for real property services is affected by which department the Division is in, whether employees ' morale is affected by which department they are in, what the general preference of the individual employee is, and the extent to which this is a Meet and Confer issue, and whether the affected employee organizations have been appropriately conferred with on this issue. We believe that the County Administrator should review these issues and report his findings back to our Copmmittee before we make a firm recommendation to the full Board.