COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

County Manager’s Office

 

DATE:

June 28, 2010

BOARD MEETING DATE:

July 13, 2010

SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:

None

VOTE REQUIRED:

Majority

 

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

David S. Boesch, County Manager

SUBJECT:

2009-10 Grand Jury Response to Report Recommending Creation of the Appointed Office of Chief Financial Officer

 

RECOMMENDATION:

Accept the report containing the County’s responses to the 2009-2010 Grand Jury report: Charter Amendment Changing the San Mateo County Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector elected offices to an appointed Chief Financial Officer

 

BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION:

The current San Mateo County Charter provides for elected officers including the members of the Board of Supervisors and the positions of Sheriff, Coroner, District Attorney, Controller, Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder, and Treasurer-Tax Collector. Under the California Constitution not all of these positions are required to be elected. The Charter could be amended to change the elected positions of Controller and the Treasurer-Tax Collector to appointed positions.

 

On April 20, 2010, the 2009-2010 Grand Jury issued a report entitled “Charter Amendment Changing the San Mateo County Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector Elected Offices to an Appointed Chief Financial Officer.” The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors direct the San Mateo County Charter Review Committee to consider a charter amendment that would (1) establish a Chief Financial Officer appointed by the County Manager, with ratification by the Board of Supervisors, who would report directly to the County Manager, and (2) delete the elected offices of the Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector.

 

The Board of Supervisors is mandated to respond to the Grand Jury within 90 days from the date that reports are filed. A recommended response is attached for the Board’s consideration and approval.

 

Acceptance of the response to the Grand Jury contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by ensuring that all Grand Jury findings and recommendations are thoroughly reviewed by the appropriate County departments and that, when appropriate, process improvements are made to improve the quality and efficiency of services provided to the public and other agencies.

 

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no Net County Cost associated with approving the responses to the 2009-2010 Grand Jury.

 

San Mateo County Board of Supervisors’ Response to the 2009-2010 Grand Jury Report “Charter Amendment Changing the San Mateo County Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector Elected Offices to an Appointed Chief Financial Officer”

 

Findings:

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 1. Any change in combining the elected positions of the Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector and/or making them appointed requires a charter amendment.

 

Agree.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 2. Since 1982, governmental elections in fifteen California counties authorized the transition from elected Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector positions to an appointed finance position reporting to the County Manager, resulting in improved efficiencies.

 

This finding is a statement of fact and opinion, and is not directed at the County. However, the County is aware that some counties have transitioned from an elected Controller and Treasurer to an appointed finance position, which would be verifiable by reference to records of the particular county. The County has no direct information regarding whether or not the change resulted in improved efficiencies in the case of any particular county.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 3. There are conflicting views regarding a potential charter amendment making the Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector into an appointed Chief Financial Officer position.

 

This finding is not directed at the County, but the Board does agree that there are conflicting views regarding a potential charter amendment creating an appointed Chief Financial Officer position, which views have been expressed in proceedings before the Charter Review Committee.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 4. Restructuring the Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector Departments would likely result in annual cost savings, however further analysis is required.

 

This finding is not directed at the County. The Board does acknowledge the information contained in the Grand Jury report, which provides some support for the finding that restructuring the Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector departments might result in annual costs savings, and agrees that further analysis would be required to reach a conclusion.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 5. Witnesses suggested that appointed positions allow for greater professional, technical and managerial expertise.

 

This finding is not directed at the County. The Board acknowledges that the process of appointment allows an in-depth consideration and evaluation of qualifications that may not be possible in an election scenario, but also notes that an election process might result in election of a candidate with greater professional, technical and management expertise in a given situation.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 6. Witnesses suggested that appointed positions allow for the potential of greater accountability to the Board of Supervisors through the County Manager.

 

This finding is not directed at the County. The Board acknowledges that an officer appointed by the County Manager will be directly accountable to the County Manager while an elected official will not.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 7. While the elected positions are accountable to the public there is no concrete mechanism for the electorate to effectively evaluate the professional, technical and managerial expertise of the elected officials.

 

This finding is not directed at the County. The Board notes that the voters effectively evaluate the qualifications of elected officials, including whether they have the desired professional, technical and managerial experience, when they vote at the polls, but also acknowledges, as noted above, that the process of appointment allows an in-depth consideration and evaluation of qualifications that may not be possible in an election scenario.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 8. Detailed professional qualifications are specified in the Government Code for the Controller position.

 

Agree.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 9. Current qualifications for the office of Treasurer-Tax Collector are minimal. The Board of Supervisors recently adopted the more stringent qualifications set forth in the Government code, which will be effective for the term commencing in 2015.

 

Agree.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 10. The current recruiting process for other senior appointed managerial positions in the county includes a thorough analysis of the requirements and professional skills needed for the position, a broad search process for the most qualified candidates and a through vetting of the candidates’ background, experience and suitability for the position.

 

Agree.

 

Grand Jury Finding Number 11. Although the elected Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector provide annual goals and objectives in the budget that are in concert with the broader goals and objectives of the County, they are not held accountable to the professional performance standards mandated of other department heads.

 

Disagree. All County officials, whether appointed or elected, are subject to the supervision of their official conduct by the Board of Supervisors under provisions of the Government Code, including professional performance standards where related to their official conduct.

 

Recommendations.

 

The 2009-10 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors:

 

1.

In furtherance of the Board of Supervisors’ charge to the Charter Review Committee to consider consolidation and reorganization of the County departments and other organization improvements, direct the San Mateo County Charter Review Committee to consider a charter amendment that would (1) establish a Chief Financial Officer appointed by the County Manager, with ratification by the Board of Supervisors, who would report directly to the County Manager, and (2) delete the elected offices of the Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector.

 

Response

This recommendation has already been implemented. The 2010 Charter Review Committee specifically took up the questions of whether the two positions should be folded into a single Chief Financial Officer position and whether the positions should be appointed rather than elected. The Committee received invited testimony on this proposed charter amendment from Tom Huening, Auditor-Controller; Lee Buffington, Treasurer-Tax Collector; John Guthrie, the appointed Chief Financial Officer of Santa Clara County; David Boesch, County Manager; and John Maltbie, former County Manager. The Committee also heard from a number of public speakers on the subject. The Committee then approved a recommendation for a charter amendment that would keep the offices of Auditor-Controller and Treasurer-Tax Collector separate, but would provide that the offices would be appointed offices, appointed by the County Manager, with the change from elected to appointed status becoming effective at the conclusion of the term that ends in January 2015.