Good morning Committee Members, im dr. Derek kerr, a whistleblower. An audit of the program is a good idea but it should not be a peer review audit. That would just buy into the biases and weaknesses that all Whistleblower Programs have. It would be important to get to an whistleblower advocacy organization, such as the Government Accountability project in washington d. C. One of the consultants could advise to the standards that a Whistleblower Program should have to meet the needs of the whistleblowers in the public. It needs to be an independent audit and not by the same folks. We heard a lot about the rising quantity of complaints, but i want to talk about the quality or value of those complaints. Since the inception, the Whistleblower Program has been plagued by minor complaints. The 20102011 civil grand jury found that 36 were true whistleblower complaints alleging fraud, waste, and abuse. Then the Whistleblower Program developed a Risk Assessment policy that was designed to tria
Since the inception, the Whistleblower Program has been plagued by minor complaints. The 20102011 civil grand jury found that 36 were true whistleblower complaints alleging fraud, waste, and abuse. Then the Whistleblower Program developed a Risk Assessment policy that was designed to triage the complaints and sort them out into low, medium, or high risk complaints. For example, the medium risk cases involved potential losses of 10,000 to 50,000 or they implicate a mid level manager. The medium and high risk cases are not represented in the whistleblower reports. Instead, we get a preponder remembers of cases of low level employees who use Work Computers for personal business, who leave work early, or show up late, who gamble or sleep on the job, or who smoke in city cars and park them inappropriately. Preventing these abuses is worthwhile, but wheres the beef . We dont hear about the big money violations or mid to high level official misconduct. Why not . If the Whistleblower Program d
At the criteria i dont see anything that ponies to maritime. Points to maritime. So all evaluation criteria will get points. The reality is they may impute it. But it is not a requirement from the pointing perspective. On page 12 of the staff report, we outline the scoring criteria with more detail than we saw on the slides. And if you look at 1b and 1e under quality of Design Development submittal, 1b talks about Performance Trust objectives which includes maritime and 1e calls out this balance that commissioner makras is pointing out. I agree it doesnt talk about how they are weighted but maritime is called out. So how many people are going to be on the panel. At least four. And its in the waterfront plan or include just a moment. I saw that. But is four a good number . Dont you usually need an odd number . Well theres scoring so i mean if there was a tie i guess having a fifth would be good. And we left it open. But at a minimum it has development expert, port advisory member and pe
Item number 2, opportunity for the public to comment on any matter within the committees jurisdiction that is not on the agenda. Seeing none, were going to move on to item number 3, approval with possible modifications of the minutes of the august 26th, 2019, meeting. Minutes, any objections . I dont have objections, but i did note a lot of typos in there. I marked several of them up, and i can give them to you. I can go ahead and take them. Reporter they missed a bunch. Maybe you want to take a look in addition to what i wrote down. Okay. But its nothing too major. There are a couple that may have confused the meaning a little bit of the sentence. For the most part, you can figure what it is and theyre bad for the agreement, and some of the tenses werent right. This doesnt preclude us from approving minutes, does it . Other than that, sure. With the correction of the typos, but no material changes. Yes. Public comment . Seeing none, well move on oh, sorry. Ill move to approve the minu
I can give them to you. I can go ahead and take them. Reporter they missed a bunch. Maybe you want to take a look in addition to what i wrote down. Okay. But its nothing too major. There are a couple that may have confused the meaning a little bit of the sentence. For the most part, you can figure what it is and theyre bad for the agreement, and some of the tenses werent right. This doesnt preclude us from approving minutes, does it . Other than that, sure. With the correction of the typos, but no material changes. Yes. Public comment . Seeing none, well move on oh, sorry. Ill move to approve the minutes with the corrections that brian has recommended. Second. Any other objections . Any objection . Seeing none. Moving on to item number 4, presentation from various departments regarding the 2000, 2008, and 2012 park bonds and actions by the committee in response to such presentation. Good morning committee members. My name is im the director of Capital Planning for recreation and Parks