Chris Thompson · County Reform Commission to Meet Aug. 5

August 1st, 2008

The Commission on Cuyahoga County Government Reform will meet at 3 p.m. Tuesday, Aug. 5, at Trinity Commons, 2230 Euclid Ave. The Trinity Commons parking lot entrance is on Prospect Avenue at East 22nd Street.

This is the first meeting of the commission since the FBI and IRS investigation into the operations of county business went public.

The primary topic of this commission meeting will be an overview of the current structure of Cuyahoga County government.

This is what the commission is charged with: The Commission on Cuyahoga County Government Reform shall develop recommendations by which Cuyahoga County may, with a vote of the people, restructure, reform, or otherwise reorganize the county government to implement a more effective, efficient, and financially and economically viable county government structure to better serve the people of Cuyahoga County.

It is to make a recommendation to the Legislature by Nov. 7.

Last 5 posts by Chris Thompson

You might also like:

Category: Uncategorized
10 Comments »

10 Responses to “County Reform Commission to Meet Aug. 5”

  1. Brian Kelsey Says:
    August 1st, 2008 at 6:24 pm

    Thank you for the time you guys are spending covering government reform there. Rest assured that there are many of us in other states watching and taking notes, so your efforts are appreciated.

  2. George Nemeth Says:
    August 1st, 2008 at 6:38 pm

    3PM on a Tuesday? Guess anyone with a full-time job won’t be there. Will there be a live-blog? How about video? A twitter feed we can follow? Can we use this process to make access to the workings of govt more widely available.

  3. Ed Morrison Says:
    August 1st, 2008 at 8:07 pm

    Perhaps the Fund for Our Economic Future can step up and invest in a little technology to share these sessions. (Come to think of it, it does not require much money.)

    Over at Midtown Brews, regular meetings are captured using Mogulus. You’d need someone with a video recorder.

    But, hey, a $100 digital recorder would work. Just upload the MP3.

    Alternatively, the Fund could pay a student $15 an hour to Cover It Live: http://www.coveritlive.com/

  4. Anastasia Pantsios Says:
    August 2nd, 2008 at 1:47 am

    I’m unemployed! I can go.

  5. Chris Thompson Says:
    August 2nd, 2008 at 3:02 pm

    Ed, Thanks for the ideas. But the Fund is not involved in the commission. I added the notice of the meeting as a public service … not in my role with the Fund. Since I work with Dave on the Fund, I will pass along your suggestions. This is the group’s second meeting and I don’t know what their public schedule will be, bt I have high hopes that it will be extensive.

  6. J Murray Says:
    August 2nd, 2008 at 6:27 pm

    I think we all know where this is going: an abolition of the three commissioners structure, replaced with a Chief Executive. The important component of such a restructuring will be to build accountability into the oversight of that person.

  7. Ed Morrison Says:
    August 3rd, 2008 at 9:45 pm

    Chris:

    Thanks, Chirs. So the question that comes to me is this: Why in the world isn’t the Fund supporting the work of the Commission?

    As I read the Fund’s “action plan”, this is exactly what you have outlined that you will do…

    From the Advance NEO “action plan”:

    GOVERNMENT COLLABORATION AND EFFICIENCY

    * Implement regional policies that support economically sustainable growth and support planned development
    * Improve government efficiency and effectiveness

    And adding some Internet technology to the Commission’s work would seem to be exactly how the Fund could deliver on the promises of Voices and Choices.

    Forgive me, but I’m confused with what the Fund is doing.

  8. Chris Thompson Says:
    August 4th, 2008 at 12:51 pm

    Ed, You are correct that the Fund does support efforts to increase government collaboration and efficiency, in general. However, the specific projects it “supports” through grantmaking, research and civic engagement (the three things the Fund does) are limited and are determined by a vote of the members of the Fund. In this case, the Fund hasn’t met since the Commission was formed so technically, it cannot support the Commission’s work because our members have never discussed the Commission’s work. I’m also not sure what role the Fund could play in supporting the commission –but perhaps one will emerge from its work.

    For now, the Fund’s research on the cost of government in the region is being used to inform the Commission’s examination of county government.

    So when I said the Fund isn’t “involved” I meant that we don’t have an active role in the Commission’s work. Not that we didn’t phiosophically support the idea of improving the efficiency of government.

  9. Ed Morrison Says:
    August 4th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

    Chris:

    You might suggest that the staff have some discretion here. (Up to, say $5,000) to support initiatives that are aligned with your action plan.

    My guess is that George is right. The Commission will not likely be broadcasting or recording its meeting this week. My suggestion was simply that the FFEF provide some small amount of money to get a student to set up a Mogulus stream of the proceedings.

    This is not hard to do, and it certainly should not take a full vote of the Fund to do it.

    Also, this Commission, appointed by the governor, would seem a natural partner for the FFEF. A telephone call could set up the relationship, it would seem to me — Dave Abbott calling, well, Dave Abbott.

  10. Ed Morrison Says:
    August 4th, 2008 at 5:04 pm

    Chris:

    Some additional thoughts. I did not want you to take the impression that I do not appreciate your efforts with the Fund. You are, though, drifting into bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo, and you should be aware of the danger that spells to you and your reputation. (After all, we are only talking about a web cast.)

    At the same time, you (and Laura Steinbrink) are moving into some strong headwinds, and I think these are the deeper forces at work.

    I have encountered the ignorance of technology and aversion to transparency before. It represents strong themes of the “Old Cleveland” narrative.

    (If you want a good example of the ignorance of technology, check out the feeble Cleveland+ airport kiosks the next time you fly. On transparency, you need only look at the secrecy surrounding Med Mart.)

    The instinct to privatize the public’s business runs deep in the Cleveland business and foundation community.