1. Authorize Agreement, Information Technology (Integrated Systems) – Mrs. Brown moved adoption; seconded by Mrs. Tytler. Mr. Schrader explained that we currently have a phone line between this building and the Highway Department for computer communications. What is being proposed is an inexpensive way to provide better band width between the two buildings. The other alternative is to get a T-1 line or a microwave and both options are expensive. This will provide faster access to MUNIS and will allow more employees to access MUNIS. Mr. Schrader indicated that this is to buy the equipment. Mrs. Tytler asked if we are using this type of technology anyplace else. Mr. Schrader responded we are not. Mrs. Tytler indicated that she is familiar with this type of service at her private employment and they were very dissatisfied and the company terminated the service. Mrs. Tytler believes that we should have a warranty period during which we can return the equipment; her experience with this equipment has been very bad. Mr. McKee asked if the service could be demonstrated for us prior to purchase. Mr. Schrader indicated that perhaps they could. Mr. Williams asked how often this would be used. Mr. Schrader responded that it would be used every day by the support staff to access MUNIS and do payroll processing. Chairman Steve indicated that we have had conversations with Time Warner about installing fiber optics; could this be a part of that. Mr. Schrader indicated possibly. Mrs. Brown moved to table to the motion; seconded by Mrs. Tytler. Mr. Schrader indicated that this means we have our own equipment for a one-time purchase price and will not incur a monthly fee. By general consent the committee tabled the motion until the next committee meeting.

2. Authorize Agreement, Information Technology (Systems East) – Mr. Elston moved adoption; seconded by Mrs. Brown. Mrs. Breed indicated that this is the agreement we have used in the past in RPTS. Mrs. Breed asked if this was for the GIS system. Mr. Schrader indicated it is for the real property tax documentation. Mrs. Breed asked about the progress on the Treasurer’s Office getting files from the local municipal clerks to input in to the tax system. Mr. Schrader indicated that he has spoken to the Treasurer and the Director of Data Processing. The Treasurer’s Office has moved to the new software for delinquent taxes; we have received disks from towns and are testing directly putting that information in to the software instead of manually inputting the data. Mrs. Tytler asked why if it expired in December, why are we looking at it now? There was not a definitive answer. Mrs. Breed is concerned that we really haven’t developed a system to ensure that contracts are renewed on a timely basis. All members voting in favor; none opposed; resolution adopted.

3. Authorize Agreement, Information Technology (Postage Machine) – Mr. Dafoe moved adoption; seconded by Mr. Elston. Mrs. Breed asked if we got any other quotes? Mr. Schrader indicated that he could not answer that question; he would have to check. Mrs. Breed would like more information and she would like to see other quotes. Mrs. Tytler moved to table until the next meeting; seconded by Mr. McKee. By general consent, the resolution was tabled until the next meeting.

4. Introduce Local Law # 1 for the Year 2005: A Local Law Amending Local Law No. 7 of 2002, as Amended, Naming the County Administrator the Clerk of the Legislature and Conveying all Powers, Duties and Authorities of the Clerk of the Legislature, as Provided by Law, to The County Administrator – Mr. Elston moved adoption; seconded by Mr. McKee. Mrs. Breed indicated that we have a proposal for a new local law; the description of the duties of the Clerk of the Legislative Board; and a copy of County Law Section 475. Mr. Schrader indicated that due to staffing changes on the third floor, this Legislature and varies committees have been addressing operational efficiency issues. This is one of those things that based upon the changes in staffing that has the potential of fixing some inefficiencies on the third floor. It is in vision of that, in order to accomplish those things, this is the best mechanism to do that. Additionally, there is the issue of the lack of continuity and the loss of institutional knowledge with regards to the Clerk’s position. This would address those continuity and institutional knowledge issues by allowing that position to be stable by designating the County Administrator as the Legislative Clerk, and allowing that person to hire Deputy Clerk. Mr. Whitt and Chairman Steve have identified issues with contracts, support staff for the County Attorney’s Office, support staff for the Clerk, and support staff for the County Administrator’s Office. It is envisioned that a clerical suite would be created to allow for support and the combination of the files. The County Attorney’s office and the departments themselves maintain contracts. If another office (County Administrator/County Auditor) need to access contracts, it would be helpful to have it centrally located so all staff have access to it. It is desirable to create a suite of staff, so there is cross training and coverage. If there is a transfer of staff, this would also provide continuity in staffing. Mrs. Breed indicated that she agrees with this concept. She is concerned about contracts expiring and then the renewal not being processed for several months. She knows that Mr. Whitt has been looking at contracts, and they need to be reviewed for payment and for content other than legal content. She believes the continuity is extremely important. For someone to be put in to this type of position, with the requirements of things to be done on a timely basis, it is important for someone to be knowledgeable. She believes the centralization is a good idea; she would like to see a pool of people who are knowledgeable, able to cover, and able to access information when required. Mrs. Breed would like to see things as controlled as possible for the future. Mr. Schrader indicated that in the past, there have been some things that have fallen through the cracks (e.g. laws not being filed, proceedings not being up to date, etc.). There are efficiencies that can be gained on the third floor that can assist with better management County wide. We have the opportunity to create those efficiencies. Mrs. Brown is all in favor a clerical suite; that is important. As far as the Clerk of the Legislature, she does not feel it should be political. However, she does not feel that the County Administrator should be the Clerk of the Legislature; she would like to see other options. This is a big move, and she is not comfortable moving forward with this after discussion in one committee. Mrs. Tytler doesn’t feel she understands all the ins and outs of this to be able to make a decision on this. She would like to have more information/conversations. Mr. Williams agrees with the previous two speakers. To him, it looks like we are going to do away with the Clerk as we know it and create something different. Before I move forward, I would like to see what the plan is to actually move forward; give him the model of where functions are going to go. How does all of this work? How does the clerical suite work? He needs more information before he is willing to change the system as we know it. Mr. Elston indicated if we need more clerical staff, let’s look in to it. I am not in favor of eliminating the Clerk of the Legislature who is not appointed and responsible to the Legislature. We lose that allegiance. If we want to create a clerical suite, let’s do that. We don’t have to change the Clerk of the Legislature to do that. I don’t have a problem with the Clerk being political. Mrs. Brown indicated that it is difficult to bring in a new Clerk just because the majority political party has changed. In the past, many things have not been completed because there is a learning curve. I don’t believe the position should be political, but I don’t believe it should be the County Administrator. Mrs. Breed asked Mrs. Brown if she feels the Clerk should be a "position." Mrs. Brown feels it should be a position on its own, so the allegiance is to the County Legislature. Mrs. Breed asked what the legalities are of making the Clerk a position in itself. Mr. Whitt indicated that this position cannot be changed from the current appointed system because of statutes. Mr. Whitt indicated that over the years there have been a variety of Clerks because of political appointments. Over the years, the Clerks have not met their statutory requirements because Clerks have not been informed and trained. You cannot change this from a position appointed by the Legislature. Mr. Whitt indicated that the Deputy Clerk can have Civil Service status. If you put a professional in that position, you are moving to fixing something that is broken. The first big issue is the financial information. The next issue that needs to be fixed is the Clerk of the Legislature. Mr. Whitt indicated that he does not believe that Legislative Journals as they are currently published meet the needs and requirements. Indexing in a governmental sense means the information is at your fingertips. You need a professional in the position. Finding contracts is not effective. It is frustrating to find some information. The Chairman spends more time trying to chase down things; the information should be at his fingertips. Mr. Whitt indicated that this should be viewed as a professional position, and not as a secretarial role. Mr. Williams indicated that he would like clarification. Are you proposing that the Deputy is a Civil Service position that would report to the County Administrator and is the County Administrator a Civil Service position? Mr. Schrader responded that he is appointed for a term. Mr. Williams then asked how that provides any continuity if the Deputy will serve with the Administrator. Mr. Schrader indicated that his position has a term not to exceed four years, which was an attempt to take the politics out of the appointment. Mr. Schrader indicated that Civil Service Law will protect the Deputy Clerk so that person cannot be hired and fired at will and so that it will not be a political appointment. Mr. Schrader indicated that he has worked with two different Clerks. The philosophy has been a night and day difference. The relationship between the Clerk and the Administrator have to be one. They cannot be separate and distinct. He has had a great working relationship with the current Clerk, and we need to protect that. This can work and is the most efficient way to provide for a consistent and efficient way to manage the County’s departments. Mrs. Tytler feels like she must say this. She is disappointed with the process that has occurred her. She feels like a handful of people have looked at a situation and decided a path for the County, then presenting a resolution, with no details, no job descriptions. She is very disappointed; she felt we had come a long way, but now she feels that is not the case. She is disappointed that it is coming to us as a resolution for a local law and coming to us for the first time in this format. Chairman Steve indicated that there are many things that need to be cleaned up. The entire Legislature is not here day in and day out to see what is happening. If you need information as a Legislator, you should be able to pick up the phone and call somebody and not worry about that. If someone calls for a Legislator, that individual should get his/her question/concern addressed. Chairman Steve believes this is a ministerial act. The Administrator was hired because of the bureaucracy and the mandates, a full-time position was needed to handle these issues. We have 28 years of bad habits that have been created. Some of the Clerk’s responsibilities overlap with the Administrator’s. The Legislative Journals don’t have the Local Laws printed in them, so we don’t know the intent. With the vacancy forthcoming on the third floor, staff sat down and identified what is needed. There are local laws that have not been filed that have to be fixed. There are more things that have to be fixed. This is an attempt to ensure that those issues never happen again. There are limited options to what can be done with the position of Clerk of the Legislature. All of these issues fall under the purview of a professional administrative team for the Legislature. Mrs. Brown stated that she doesn’t disagree with the concept that there needs to be continuity; however, she disagrees with the fact that the County Administrator be the Clerk of the Legislature and the fact that other options and more information has not been presented. Mr. Williams asked if we have explored the option of depoliticizing the Clerk’s position as we have done with the Administrator’s position. Mr. Whitt doesn’t feel that anyone should be offended because they are getting it in raw form, that is how a conversation starts. This has been submitted as an idea. However, you cannot take the responsibilities away from the Legislature. Under the 1972 law that created the Legislature, you cannot eliminate the Clerk of the Legislature. Mr. Whitt indicated that this is an option to fix what is currently broken. This has been considered by the folks who discussed it that this is quicker way of fixing things. Mr. Elston indicated that this discussion has been political despite the conversation that we want to depoliticize the position. Mr. Elston has no problem with the way that the information has been presented. Chairman Steve indicated that he did discuss this with both the Majority Leader and Minority Leader ahead of time. Mr. Elston still isn’t certain that he favors the way the Clerk is selected; we may need to create an additional position. What duties does the Administrator or does the Auditor assign to the current Clerk? Mr. Schrader indicated that if the Administrator and the Auditor are assigning duties to the Clerk, it is not correct. The Clerk should be assigning duties to other people. Chairman Steve indicated that if something needs to be done, the person should go to the Clerk/Deputy Clerk and the work should be assigned. There should be on contact person who is professionally responsible to ensure that things are done in the manner they need to be done. However, if you have a Clerk who does not have the competency level to do that, you have a problem. Mr. Schrader stated that the Clerk basically works without supervision, because the position is supervised by the Legislature, and the Legislature is not present to supervise the position. Mr. Elston stated that the problem is then not the Clerk but the Legislature. Perhaps the Clerk of the Legislature should be at this meeting and reporting on her duties. It appears the Clerk is reporting to the Administrator and that is not the way it should be. Perhaps the Clerk should be at every meeting reporting on her duties. You then need support staff to perform the clerical duties. The Clerk’s position should be more of a supervisory position that ensures that this work it done; an administrative position should report to the Clerk who does the physical work. Mrs. Tytler indicated that we should have formal procedures adopted for carrying out the work of the office. Mrs. Tytler indicated that there needs to be checks and balances to ensure work is carried out (e.g. are laws filed). Much of this is purely procedural and communication. Mr. Williams feels he needs some education and he needs to see what Mr. Schrader’s thoughts are on how this would work. He would like to see it in writing before the next meeting. He would also like to see someone explore how the Clerk operates now. He doesn’t know exactly how the Clerk functions; is it clerical; should it be? Mrs. Breed asked Mr. Schrader if more information could be provided that would help clarify this; does anyone have any alternative suggestions or have an avenue they want to pursue so that discussion can be held. Mrs. Brown indicated that it is difficult to have an opinion on alternatives since we have just seen this today. Mrs. Tytler said what she would like to see is: an outline of job descriptions; how restructuring of positions is envisioned; what are the critical issues; who does what now; what is being proposed for a future model; what do we have as checks and balances. Mr. Elston would like to see a report from the Clerk. Chairman Steve indicated that we are talking about a plan; if you need more information to understand what everyone up here does, that’s fine. Mrs. Brown feels that we should also review the County Administrator’s job duties from his point of view and what he sees in this wider picture. Chairman Steve indicated that we need to address re-appointment of the County Administrator as well. Mrs. Breed feels that Mrs. Brown’s point is well taken; the Administrator has been on board nearly two years. Mr. Williams moved to tabled the resolution until the next meeting; seconded by Mrs. Breed. All members voting in favor; none opposed; resolution tabled until the next meeting.