Title
Chief Administrative Officer recommending the Board rescind Policy A-10, Information Technology Steering Committee.
Body
DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION:
Chief Administrative Officer recommending the Board rescind Policy A-10, Information Technologies Steering Committee (ITSC).
DISCUSSION/BACKGROUND:
At the September 19, 1989 Board of Supervisors meeting, the Board approved Policy A-10, establishing an Information Technologies Steering Committee (ITSC). The Policy was revised on November 2, 1999 and again on October 21, 2005.
At this time, staff is recommending that the Board rescind the policy. The existing Policy A-10 specifies that the ITSC includes the CAO, IT Director, Surveyor, and two department head representatives from the General Government, Law & Justice, Land Use and Development Services, and Health and Human Services functional groups. The discussion IT infrastructure, IT budget priorities, and services to departments is a recurring topic among all department heads, as these matters affect all county functions. Although it is not the intent of this action to abandon this topic of discussion, it is the belief of the CAO and Department Heads a more effective approach is to discuss these matters at regular Department Head meetings.
The current Policy A-10 digresses into detailed business practices rather than broader policy-related directives. As such, the policy must come before the Board for any small changes, such as how often and when the meetings are to be held or which staff should attend. During Department Head meetings, IT can update all department heads on budget priorities, development and implementation of the strategic plan, and service levels. Departments would discuss whether the services provided to the departments by IT are sufficient, and if not, identify process improvements or ways to provide additional resources to IT.
In regards to IT infrastructure acquisitions by individual departments, processes are already in place to ensure appropriate review and approval by the Director of Information Technology and the Procurement and Contracts Division.
Relatedly, County Counsel has advised that the ITSC, in its current form, is a Brown Act committee because it is appointed through the policy by the Board, and serves in an advisory capacity to the Board. As discussions among departments are often preliminary, it would be more appropriate and efficient to first discuss IT processes and services, identify potential solutions, and then bring these matters to the Board for discussion at the legislative body level. Rescinding the policy is not expected to result in any lapse or reduction of the discussion of important matters related to Countywide IT infrastructure or services. Rescinding the policy will allow for more efficient use of Department Head and IT staff time.
ALTERNATIVES:
The Board may choose not to rescind the policy. The Board could also direct staff to revise the Policy, for instance, to require a quarterly update from the IT Director on recent discussion of service levels and inter-departmental process improvements. However, continuation of the ITSC as a Board-created committee with a meeting schedule created by the Board would be subject to Brown Act requirements.
OTHER DEPARTMENT/AGENCY INVOLVEMENT:
Not applicable.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no direct impact to net County costs associated with this request.
CLERK OF THE BOARD FOLLOW UP ACTIONS:
Clerk of the Board will remove the Policy A-10 from the Board of Supervisors Policy Manual webpage.
STRATEGIC PLAN COMPONENT:
Good Governance, Objective 2.2: Review and update policies relates to inter-office services and public services. Establish a mechanism for timely updates, review for relevance to ensure a balance between appropriate level of internal control and efficient workflow.
CONTACT:
Don Ashton, Chief Administrative Officer