|
|
|
LandWatch Recommends That the Board of Supervisors Adopt a New "Written Correspondence" Procedure |
|
|
It is important for the Board to have a system in place to ensure that written correspondence is acknowledged and tracked, so that members of the public know the disposition of their suggestions, comments and the like. It is also important that all members of the public have an ability to know about correspondence from other persons. Finally, it is extremely important that all members of the Board of Supervisors know about correspondence addressed to the Board as a whole, and what disposition the Chair makes of this correspondence, acting on behalf of the Board. This letter recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt such a system. August 10, 1999 Sally Reed, County
Administrative Officer RE: Written Correspondence Procedures Dear Sally Reed: I am writing to suggest that you consider recommending the adoption of a new set of "Written Correspondence" procedures to the Board of Supervisors, to improve the handling of correspondence that the Board receives. I know that you and the Board are making a determined effort to upgrade and improve county government efficiency, and I believe that a change in the way that the Board handles its correspondence would improve the Board's relationship with the public. My suggestion is prompted by my personal experience. I am not certain what written correspondence procedures the Board may currently have in place, or how members of the public who write the Board are treated generally, but I know that I have written a couple of letters to the Board that have never been answered, so that I am unclear what, if any, disposition was made of them. For instance, I wrote a letter to the Board asking it to take action with respect to the proposed Coyote Valley development in the City of San Jose. I never received any answer, and therefore assumed that my suggestion was simply ignored. In fact, in a personal meeting with the Board Chair, I was told that my letter had been referred to you, and that you were "looking into it." I think it is important for the Board to have a system in place to ensure that written correspondence is acknowledged and tracked, so that members of the public know the disposition of their suggestions, comments and the like. It is also important that all members of the public have an ability to know about correspondence from other persons. Finally, it is extremely important that all members of the Board of Supervisors know about correspondence addressed to the Board as a whole, and what disposition the Chair makes of this correspondence, acting on behalf of the Board. The system I am suggesting&emdash;essentially the system currently in place in Santa Cruz County&emdash;directly addresses each of these matters. I recommend that you and the Board consider a system that operates as follows: 1. Written correspondence addressed directly to an individual Board member is not part of the system, but will be handled individually by the Board member to whom it is addressed. (A Board member may choose, however, to add any item to the "Written Correspondence Agenda" maintained by the Board, and explained below). The system I am suggesting, in other words, is aimed only at handling correspondence addressed either to the Board as a whole, or to the Chair of the Board, when the correspondence comes to the Chair in her or his capacity as Chair, and not as an individual Supervisor. 2. All written correspondence received by the Board (or by the Chair when the Chair is acting on behalf of the Board) becomes part of a "Written Correspondence Agenda," which is printed, published, and filed (usually weekly) as part of the Board's regularly scheduled meeting agendas. (A copy of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Agenda is enclosed, showing how the "Written Correspondence Agenda" appears). 3. A decision about what to do about a particular item of correspondence is made by the Chair of the Board. The item may simply be filed; it may be answered; it may be referred to a County Department Head, or to another Supervisor, or it may generate an agenda item&emdash;all as the Chair determines (and through whatever process may be in place to make such a determination about the most appropriate handling of the correspondence). In my experience, decisions about what to do about a particular item of written correspondence are usually left to the Chair, and this is one of the significant prerogatives of being the Chair, but whatever system is used to decide what sort of action or response should be made&emdash;and there could be a system in which most or all correspondence goes through the CAO&emdash;the key to the system is that once a determination is made about a particular item of correspondence, the item is included in the "Written Correspondence Agenda." 4. The "Written Correspondence Agenda" includes a listing and brief description of each item of written correspondence received, plus a brief description of what disposition was made of the item. The materials filed with the Clerk include a copy of the listing, plus a copy of the item of correspondence, plus a copy of any response made. 5. This system has the following effects: … Anybody who writes the Board can ascertain that his or her correspondence was received, and what disposition was made of it, by reading the Board's "Written Correspondence Agenda." … All members of the public can see who is writing the Board, and about what, and what the disposition of the correspondence has been. … It is very easy for interested persons to get a copy of any correspondence sent to the Board, and any response, because the correspondence is filed in a "Written Correspondence Agenda" that is maintained by the Clerk of the Board with other agenda materials, and the listing is distributed as part of the Board's Agenda, so it is widely available. … Finally, each member of the Board of Supervisors will know exactly what the Board Chair has done on behalf of the Board, allowing each Board member to be better able to follow matters related to correspondence that the Board receives. I would very much appreciate it if you would consider recommending the above system, or something similar, as you work to make County Government more efficient and responsive to the public. I feel certain that Susan Mauriello, the Santa Cruz County CAO, would be able to give you a good idea of the administrative efforts needed to make such a system a reality. Very truly yours,
|
Home | About LandWatch | Issues & Actions | LandWatch News
Citzen Resources | Membership | Publications | Calendar
Archives | Search | Links | Contact Us
Site Design and Management by Jeffrey Reynolds
all materials ©1999 Landwatch