My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1990-08-06
Charlottesville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1990
>
1990-08-06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/6/2001 4:32:51 PM
Creation date
12/6/2001 2:39:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
8/6/1990
Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
11 <br /> <br />program evaluation which can be used for City departments and <br />outside agencies. Mr. Hendrix emphasized the importance of <br />training and of taking a non-threatening approach toward <br />evaluating a program. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix suggested that the Council may want to have <br />a random sample survey conducted regarding citizen <br />satisfaction with City services. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters suggested the possibility of scrutinizing any <br />new program after it has operated for three to five years. <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughter recommended that consideration also be <br />given to using an outside, independent evaluator. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix recommended that the budget document be used <br />primarily for decision makers and that the "Budget in Brief" <br />be improved to be used to better inform the public. <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughter recommended separating the arts from <br />education within the budget document and adding items to the <br />index. <br /> <br /> Ms. Peacock explained that some decisions regarding <br />categorizing programs are driven by State reporting <br />requirements. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters recommended listing the services offered by <br />the City in the "Budget in Brief." <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano suggested including comparative data on <br />taxes in various cities throughout Virginia and some means <br />to show where funding comes from, such as inter-city <br />transfers, in the "Budget in Brief." Mr. Toscano questioned <br />whether employees are adequately protected if they criticize <br />program operations. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix replied that many layers of protection exist <br />for employees and added that consideration is being given to <br />having a system where employees could notify the City Manager <br />of suggestions or complaints regarding City operations. <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughter recommended that Council and staff explore <br />the possibility of a program review application for City <br />departments and outside agencies for self-evaluation <br />purposes. <br /> <br /> The idea of having a public hearing early in the budget <br />process was discussed and Council agreed to hold a public <br />hearing in early October to allow time for neighborhood <br />associations to meet prior to the hearing. <br /> <br /> Mr. Vandever stated that he feared that the existing <br />"watchdog" mechanisms within the City are not independent <br />enough, noting that the Director of Finance does not report <br />directly to Council. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters stated that she felt the independent audit of <br />the City serves the "watchdog" function. <br /> <br /> Mr. Vandever stated that he would be interested in <br />receiving more information on the advisability of the Finance <br />Director being more independent of the City Manager. <br /> <br /> /~/1The m~g wa~ adjourned. <br /> <br />President <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.