Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-12-10 Policy & Services Committee Summary MinutesPOLICY & SERVICES COMMITTEE SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 15 Regular Meeting December 10, 2024 The Policy & Services Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in Council Chambers and by virtual teleconference at 7:01 P.M. Present In-Person: Kou (Chair), Lythcott-Haims Councilmember Tanka arrived at 7:04 p.m. Absent: None Call to Order Chair Kou called the meeting to order. The clerk took roll and declared two were present. Public Comments There were no speakers. Agenda Items 1. 2025 City Council Priority Setting Process Discussion and Recommendations Assistant to the City Manager Lupita Alamos commented that the 2025 priority setting process discussion would inform the 2025 priorities. She displayed slides and provided an overview of the process. Council would set priorities at the retreat scheduled for January 25. She defined the term priority. The handbook addressed having no more than three to four priorities a year with a three-year time limit. P&S would make the recommendations tonight on process to Council, which would be reflected on the January 13 agenda. This process would also inform Council values, which were adopted a couple years ago, and would help Council guide decision- making, which included revenues and expenses, integrating equity into decisions, etc. The 2024 Council priorities were climate change and natural environment protection and adaptation; community health, safety, wellness, and belonging; economic development and transition; and housing for social and economic balance. Part of the engagement included surveying Council on priority recommendations. Recommendations received this year were included in Attachment A and in a supplemental report. They also received an email from Council Member Elect George Lu and supplemental feedback from Council Member Burt. She noted that there had been no SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 comments from Mayor Stone or Council Member Tanaka. She explained why staff recommended foregoing a large review of the City Council Procedures and Protocols Handbook. She outlined the elements staff was recommending Council address at the retreat. To enable the staff recommendations, staff included a recommendation that the 2025 Mayor not make Council member appointments beyond the standing committees prior to the annual retreat. Public Comments There were no requests to speak. Council Member Lythcott-Haims expressed that the language of the Handbook did not match the priorities or the present reality. She provided an example that the priorities were to be particular, unusual, and warrant significant attention, and she voiced that housing, economic development, etc., were not unusual but were overarching grand focuses of the City. She thought priorities should set policy guidance for the regular work of the City. As for priorities being limited to three years, she asked what would be better priorities than housing, climate, economic development, etc., in three years. She wanted to know if that language could be revised to fit with the actual practice. She would delete the notion that priorities would be encouraged to expire after three years and delete the word unusual as a priority description. Council Member Tanaka thought the priorities set in the last eight years had zero impact on the city. He did not think the way it was written had any effect on the City and felt it was a waste of time. The believed that the Handbook was incredibly bureaucratic and that it should be one- quarter to one-half the size. He thought there should be priorities, but he felt the process was pointless and did not change the work of Council or staff. Council Member Lythcott-Haims agreed to some extent that they were not seeing the through- line from the Council priorities to what staff was actually doing. She saw the through-line with the four priorities and the staff work plan for the year, which she found to be well organized, but the Handbook did not seem to match what was actually happening, and it was confusing how the work plan related to the priorities and objectives. She thought the handbook could reflect the relatedness. City Manager Ed Shikada thought thinking about what had changed over the last few years would be helpful, and he thought it had only been in the last 2 years that there were 70+ objectives falling under Council priorities. Staff filled in the objectives for the priorities set by Council, and Council would provide feedback. The goals were developed to reflect would could be accomplished during a calendar year. While there was a recommendation to not do a major handbook review, the Committee could recommend to Council there be changes to the language, and staff would edit the handbook based on the direction. Council Member Lythcott-Haims thought there was an absence of information in the handbook about the objectives under the priorities forming the staff work plan. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 City Manager Shikada discussed what had been done the first year this occurred, and he thought that in each successive year staff was able to better anticipate and tailor objectives to fit what staff was hearing from Council. The first step of identifying the topline goals/priorities was important in doing the follow-up. Council Member Lythcott-Haims asked if the recommendation would go to Council on January 13. City Manager Shikada answered that it would go to Council on January 13 or 21. If there were major recommendations, staff would want to get it to Council ASAP, in advance of the retreat. Chair Kou added that it could eliminate the handbook being reviewed at the priority setting. She inquired if the placemat could be provided with the packet as an 11x18 sheet for Council to discuss objectives to the priorities. She supported Council Member Veenker’s suggestion to use the words action and adaptation in the climate sustainability piece. She asked if the retreat would start at 9:00. She agreed with staff’s recommendation for the structure of the ad hoc committees. She suggested funneling some of the ad hoc committees to standing committees. In certain instances with the ad hocs, she had concerns about the discussion not including the public, and she thought it going back into standing committees would provide transparency. She queried if the 2025 Mayor not making appointments to standing committees related to City standing committees and/or regional committees. City Manager Shikada acknowledged that the placemat could be provided with the packet. For the purpose of the one-day retreat, staff found it difficult to address the priorities and review the objectives, but staff could start the second phase of the discussion on the day and staff would need to return for more detail. A specific time for the retreat had not been set, but it had generally been about 9:00, which may be a decision of Council. It was not intended that the 2025 Mayor not making appointments to standing committees would affect the timeline for regional standing committees, and he suggested the Committee recommend that the regional appointments proceed, and maybe Item C should be specific to the City’s committees. MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved to recommend the City Council: Amend the City Council Procedures and Protocol Handbook Section 7(b) titled “Priorities Background and Definition” as follows: Sec 7(b) Annual Council Priorities Priorities Background and Definition The Council adopted its first Council priorities in 1986. Each year the Council reviews its priorities at its Annual Council Retreat. On October 1, 2012 the Council formally adopted the definition of a Council priority, and the Council’s process and guidelines for selection of priorities. On January 13, 2025, the Council further amended the definition, process, and guidelines for selecting priorities. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 There is a goal of no more than three to four priorities per year and priorities generally have a two to three year time limit. Council can identify two to three specific objectives within a priority. A Council priority is defined as a topic that is strategically significant and warrants substantial attention, effort, and resources from staff, Council, stakeholders, and the community. Under each Council priority is a set of objectives which in the aggregate constitute the staff work plan for the year. As such Council aims to identify no more than three to four priorities per year by balancing an awareness of the prior year’s focus with an appreciation for important emerging concerns. Council may identify a few additional objectives within a priority to be added to the staff work plan, mindful of past progress on existing objectives, as well as resource availability in the year to come. Council priorities differ from Council values which are defined as enduring goals and intentions to guide the work of the Council. The values (shared above) allow the Council to maintain these enduring intentions while also selecting annual priorities that direct the work of the city. Chair Kou hoped the current language would be included to show the differences. Deputy City Manager Chantal Cotton-Gaines remarked that whenever displaying changes to the handbook it was always done in redline. City Manager Shikada added, regarding the red paragraph, that the staff work plan contained more than what was on the placemat, and he did not want to give the impression that everything staff did was encompassed in the objectives. If the Committee recommended moving forward, he suggested alternative language be addressed after the meeting. Regarding the language of the ability to address emerging concerns, the current handbook language did not intend for the priorities to be exclusive of other things the Council would work on over the year. The intent was that Council would pay specific attention to the four topic areas over the year. Council Member Lythcott-Haims appreciated that the third paragraph was complex and warranted further exploration. MOTION WITHDRAWN BY COUNCILMEMBER LYTHCOTT-HAIMS MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved, seconded by Councilmember Kou, to recommend the City Council A. Amend the City Council Procedures and Protocol Handbook Procedures Section 7(b) titled “Priorities Background and Definition” as follows: • Remove language limiting priorities to three years SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 • Remove “unusual” from the definition of priorities B. Recommend that the Council forgo substantive review of the City Council Procedures and Protocols Handbook, given that significant edits were made in 2024 C. Recommend the Council Retreat include the following elements: a. Councilmember visioning for 2025 b. Discussion and Approval of 2025 Priorities c. Key Community engagement needed to advance the Council Priorities, including Ad Hoc Committees d. Refer to Policy and Services Committee Consideration of Performance Measures Associated with Priorities e. Resources needed to support D. To enable the discussion above, recommend the 2025 Mayor not make Councilmember appointments to City Ad Hoc Committees prior to the Annual Retreat Council Member Tanaka’s main issue with the priorities was that there was no consequence or measurement, and he did not think it would have the hoped-for impact. Council Member Lythcott-Haims did not think tonight was the time to address consequences and measurements. Chair Kou suggested that Council refer performance measures to a standing committee in the new year. Council Member Tanaka thought that was a good idea. Discussion ensured regarding the language of the motion. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 2. Referral: Discussion and Recommendation to Council Regarding Potential New Procedure for Councilmembers to Make Referrals to Staff Deputy City Manager Chantal Cotton-Gaines stated this was a referral from Council for the Committee to consider establishing a mechanism for Council members to make simple referrals to staff in lieu of Colleagues’ Memos. The language was included in the Procedures and Protocols Handbook around the Colleagues’ Memo process as well as a little background on the item. If the Committee wanted to recommend it to Council, a proposed process should be outlined. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 Public Comments There were no requests to speak. Council Member Lythcott-Haims requested that the Council summary minutes of May 20 be displayed. Chair Kou asked what the timeline was for staff referrals to be placed on the agenda and what a simpler request might be. City Manager Ed Shikada replied there was not a prescribed timeline. In the formal Colleagues’ Memo process, staff would typically review it and evaluate the resource impact, then meet with the authors of the Colleagues’ Memo, and then it would be put on the Council agenda. There was a simplified version for allocation of certain funds and there was a very informal (which was not a Colleagues’ Memo) in which there could be a discussion at the Council meeting and, by acknowledgement, the City Manager would typically return to the Council. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines answered, regarding a simpler request, that Council Member Burt was looking for something simpler than the Colleagues’ Memo process. Council Member Lythcott-Haims inquired if the City Manager had researched options or mechanisms used by other agencies. City Manager Shikada was not aware of processes used by other agencies, but they had not researched it. Council Member Lythcott-Haims voiced that there was insufficient background information as no P&S members’ comments were reflected in the minutes of the May 20 Council meeting. She recommended the item be tabled and more information be sought from colleagues who supported it. Council Member Tanaka discussed why he agreed with this item. He stated it was difficult to get items on the agenda, and he felt there should be a lighter weight process. He suggested it be simple, such as allowing it if one Council member and the Mayor agreed or if two Council members agreed. Chair Kou explained why she had not submitted many Colleagues’ Memos. She remarked that only the author and another person were needed to bring it to Council and that involving a third person related to the Brown Act. She appreciated the referral, but she saw it turning into something unruly and overburdening and potentially delaying something on the priority list and staff having to change their work to address a nonpriority item. She had frustrations with the current process, but she believed folks should be conscious of staff’s workload and legalities. She wanted to use caution as she recognized there might be unintended consequences arising from this. She supported doing more research to better understand what other cities were SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 doing. She did not think she had enough information to move forward at this meeting. She asked if it would be continued or tabled. City Manager Shikada answered that they could investigate the process of Mountain View and perhaps a couple other cities to give next year’s P&S the opportunity consider the findings. Chair Kou thought due diligence should be done to allow review by the new P&S Committee before responding to Council. MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved, seconded by Councilmember Kou, to continue to a date uncertain, and direct staff to research mechanisms used by other agencies. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 3. Recommend City Council Approval of Various Task Orders with Baker Tilly for Internal Audit Services to 1) Execute FY 2025 Task 1: Citywide Risk Assessment, Task 2: Preparation of Annual Audit Plan, Task 3: Selection of External Financial Auditor and Annual Audit Coordination; 2) Amend the FY 2025 budget for Task Orders; and 3) Amend the FY 2024 budget for FY 2024 Task 4: Execute the Annual Audit Plan City Auditor Kate Murdock presented slides and recommended Council approve three actions related to task orders, which would have no fiscal impact on the City Auditor Budget or the Baker Tilly contract. They wanted to execute three task orders for the remaining FY2025 tasks, which she detailed, and realign the budgets for two FY2025 tasks, which she outlined. They recommended Council amend several task orders falling under FY2024 tasks, which she elaborated on. There had been budget remaining after completion of the ADA compliance audit, which they wanted to use to cover shortfalls in other audits, which she listed. Public Comments There were no requests to speak. Council Member Lythcott-Haims commented that there was a typo on Packet Page 18, Item 2 at end of the first paragraph, which should reflect 2025, not 2026. City Auditor Murdock apologized and confirmed that it should read 2025. Council Member Tanaka queried if the plan included anything related to a performance audit, such as for procurement or performance on certain tasks. City Auditor Murdock remarked that the last presentation of the evening would include the FY2025 audit plan, and the work would begin in January. Five audits and follow-up audit activity would be proposed. MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved, seconded by Councilmember Tanaka, to recommend the City Council approve of the following: SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 1. Execution of the following FY2025 Task Orders with activities to be carried out from January 2025 through June 2025: a. FY2025: Task 1: Citywide Risk Assessment with amendment b. FY2025: Task 2: Preparation of Annual Audit Plan c. FY2025: Task 3: Selection of External Financial Auditor and Annual Audit Coordination 2. Amend FY 2025 Task Orders to realign the authorized budget with a net zero impact overall: a. FY 2025: Task 1: Citywide Risk Assessment reduced by $40,000 b. FY 2025: Task 5: Preparation of Quarterly Reports, Annual Status Reports, Provision of City Hotline and Other Ongoing Office Administrative Functions increased by $40,000 3. Amend the FY2024 Task 4: Execute the Annual Audit Plan to realign the authorized budget with a net zero impact overall: a. Task 4.22: ADA Compliance Audit reduced by $11,000 b. Task 4.23: Recruitment & Succession Planning Audit increased by $3,500 c. Task 4.25: Emergency Preparedness/Wildfire Audit increased by $2,000 d. Task 4.26: Utility Billing increased by $3,000 e. Task 4.28: Dispatch Center Assessment increased by $2,500 MOTION PASSED: 3-0 4. Office of the City Auditor Presentation of Recruitment & Succession Planning Audit Report Baker Tilly Manager Mike Chimera furnished slides and presented the result of the recruitment and succession planning audit. He listed the objectives of the audit. He detailed the audit findings and recommendations for monitoring and oversight of the recruitment strategic plan, for recruitment and hiring policies and procedures, and for formalizing succession planning program and policies and procedures. Public Comments There were no requests to speak. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 Council Member Lythcott-Haims asked if the City’s current P&P not being up to par related to the norm in the field or what the City was doing. She asked where in the process the City was in the hiring of a recruitment division manager. Manager Chimera answered, related to P&P not being up to par, maybe it was what the City would do after the initiatives of the completed recruitment study plan as well as what was currently being performed. It was not measured across other best practices. Director of Human Resources Sandra Blanch reported that they recently completed the recruitment for the division manager position, which was an internal promotion. The position had been accepted, and that person would work on the project and assessment report findings and recommendations. She spoke of having a comprehensive recruitment. Council Member Lythcott-Haims questioned how significant the hire was and if it was of partial significance what else was being done to address some of the concerns raised. She questioned who was the gold standard in municipal recruitment and succession. Director Blanch replied that the addition to the team was very significant to implement and have oversight of all the vacancies and to have improved reporting. It required oversight rather than being a recruiter role. The position gave value to being able to supervise, monitor, train, etc. The City had not had that level of oversight in the past. Assistant Director of Human Resources Nick Raisch added that Policy 2-10 was old and vague, so they had updated, altered, and implemented new practices under the restrictions that existed in that policy. The policy needed to catch up to best practices, not the City. Staff partially agreed that the policy should be updated, but he explained that agility should remain in its core. He discussed Palo Alto being the gold standard in municipal recruitment and succession to some extent. Council Member Tanaka asked what the title of the new hire was and who they would report to. He felt the City could have more individual contributors versus managers. He had concerns whenever there might be more managers than individual contributors. He understood that staff had indicated salaries needed to be higher, and he asked if that hindered recruitment. He discussed his experience in finding it easy to hire tech positions and it being in contrast with what he understood the City to be experiencing, and he hoped the auditor’s recommendations would address that. He thought the City should leverage AI technology, which could allow for more direct reports to managers, and that there should be a bigger budget for feet-on-the- ground positions and less on the managerial side. He wanted the auditor to look at what was happening in the private sector to usher in a new age of recruiting and efficiency. He felt that recruitments from the private sector could serve the City well. He inquired if staff received every other Friday off work. Assistant Director Raisch responded that the new recruitment division manager position would report to the HR Director with a dotted line to him as the Assistant Director. Two supervisors would report to the recruitment division manager. With the help of the HR Director and SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 Assistant Director, the recruitment division manager’s primary oversight would be to track towards goals, do data-driven analysis, and ensure that everything in the recruitment strategic plan was being accomplished. He noted that competitive salaries were critical but did not always mean they needed to be higher, which he explained. One of the strategies and goals was to have a target market placement with the industries the City competed in, which brought success in hiring. They had the greatest difficulty in recruiting in unique areas, such as the electric utility, fiber, etc. He added that cityofpaloalto.org/careers listed all the active jobs and at any given moment they were looking for up to 30 employees across a wide range of positions. They also engaged in advertising across all the usual job boards. He spoke of the City having three approved types of schedules for hourly employees. City Auditor Kate Murdock responded that they had looked at salaries and the City had the ability to go to higher ranges to enable making competitive offers. It was a strategy that they noted had been seemingly successful. Director Blanch voiced that the vacancy rate had reduced to 10 percent, so they were able to attract excellent candidates for positions. She added that the largest department was Utilities and that the majority of those positions were not managerial. There were a variety of employees who worked 12- and 24-hour shifts. Deputy City Manager Chantal Cotton-Gains pointed out that the employees who had every other Friday off were working 80 hours or more every 2 weeks. Chair Kou noted that City operations were varied and that there were different needs, so one size fits all did not always work. She inquired if a centralized information system would be implemented and if the budget provided for it. She queried if the City had an AI use policy. She thought the new Council should review AI use policy to place boundaries. Director Blanch answered that the information system referenced was not new, and she believed it had been in place for about 20 years. They wanted to work on integrating the information system with NEOGOV. They were potentially working on putting an item on Council budget. They would issue an RFP and seek Council approval for a new contract or for an extension with NEOGOV. Assistant Director Raisch replied that the City had not officially adopted AI policy. They were vetting and reviewing other cities and counties with such policies. IT was leading that project. It did not dissuade staff from now being able to use AI within certain parameters, such as assisting with writing and other tasks, as long as it did not replace judgment. An initial creation needed to be generated by a staff and team member. MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved, seconded by Councilmember Tanaka, to recommend the City Council approve the results of the Recruitment and Succession Planning Audit report. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 SUMMARY MINUTES Page 11 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 5. Recommend City Council Approve the Office of the City Auditor Risk Assessment and FY 2025 Audit Plan and Corresponding Task Orders City Auditor Kate Murdock presented the results of the Audit office’s citywide risk assessment and resulting audit plan for FY2025. She supplied slides and gave a brief overview of the assessment process. The risk assessment had been conducted from June to October 2024, and the resulting FY2025 audit plan work would be performed from January 2025 through June 2025, which put the schedule back on track to align the FY2026 audit plan with the budget. She discussed the three key areas considered when conducting the risk assessment – information gathering and risk types and ratings. She outlined the methodology used in the risk analysis. Details could be found in their report. They identified 28 high-risk areas, and audits had been conducted in several of the areas over the past couple years. She listed the five proposed audits for the FY2025 audit plan. In addition to the five audits, they would conduct a follow-up on prior audit recommendations and provide a status update at the end of the fiscal year. Public Comments There were no request to speak. Council Member Lythcott-Haims requested that the slide with the most risky situations be displayed. Of the six items proposed, she asked if most of them were drawn from the top area. She noted that the six items chosen were not the six most risky in terms of the total risk score and queried how the six items were chosen. She felt that the building permit and inspection process might supersede building permit and inspection fees. City Auditor Murdock confirmed that most of the six items proposed were drawn from the top area. She elaborated on how the six items were chosen, which was a balancing act of looking at the studies going on and the changes happening. This was a proposal, so they were open to suggestions. Concerning the building permit and inspection process and the fees, she pointed out that the list was of inherent risks, and there were many factors going into the score. It was a somewhat subjective process. She understood that the building and inspection process had recently undergone quite a bit of change and that it was maybe still in flux, and since they had heard potential concern about fees, they would look at fees as the main focus. Council Member Lythcott-Haims hoped the auditor would address the building and inspection process at the appropriate time. Council Member Tanaka had found that people were not happy with customer service, and he felt it needed improvement with the first step being to measure it. Regarding purchasing, he thought the biggest risk was efficiency in spending, and he asked what the plan was for the procurement process. He felt performance was the biggest risk and requested there be performance-type audits with benchmarking against other cities as it related to procurement and customer service. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 12 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 City Auditor Murdock remarked that the primary reason for not including the procurement process was due to there being a management change recently, and she understood that changes were being made – that processes were being updated and efficiencies were being considered. She thought the procurement process could be reviewed in the next year or two. As for performance audits, they sought feedback from nearly all Council members and the executive leadership team through the course of the process, and the listed themes emerged. Assistant City Manager Kiely Nose added that Council reviewed and approved an annual work plan, which was part of the role and expectations of the City Auditor, so the process was to move through P&S first with the Committee’s recommendation to the full Council. If the Committee wished to make changes, that would ultimately be done through action at this meeting with a motion. Chair Kou questioned if this plan would be an action or consent item on Council’s agenda. Assistant City Manager Nose responded that it was ultimately the Committee’s discretion. If unanimous, it would go on consent. She had seen other committees recommend an alternative but staff’s default would be to follow the Council and Committee’s policies and procedures. Council Member Tanaka asked what the audit following up on corrections entailed, what triggered the Junior Museum and Zoo (JMZ) operations, and what percentage of spending was through the Purchasing Card (PCard). He suggested substituting the PCard item for a procurement performance audit and the JMZ item to benchmark the City’s customer service, which he thought would impact the City more. He noted that he received a lot of customer service complaints largely related to the Development Center, but he also received complaints concerning Utilities and the Police Department. Regarding the procurement performance, he was not concerned with fraud, but he was concerned with there sometimes being only one bid. City Auditor Murdock answered that they would essentially review all previous audits and report on the status of recommendations and if they had been implemented, if they were in progress, or if they had not been started. She understood that the JMZ program had gone through some changes in working with the public and children, etc. They had done interviews and gathered information from the survey data from the prior year. The contract was set up to do a deeper dive every other year with more comprehensive surveys, and the information from the 2023 survey had been blended with the interviews conducted this year. She reiterated her concerns with doing a procurement process audit at this time given the change in management and the changes that were underway. She spoke of the issues with auditing a changing process. Assistant City Manager Nose would have to research what percentage of spending was through the PCard. She did not believe a PCard audit had been done in at least nine years, although that did not mean one had to be done. Doing a procurement or customer service audit would be at Council’s discretion. She voiced her concerns with auditing the purchasing process at the current time. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 13 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 Council Member Lythcott-Haims thought customer service performance audits of the front desk, 311, etc., might be fascinating. She wanted to know if an audit of five departments would consist of five audits and if it could be scoped so that it would be swappable for something on the list. She asked what would be included in the JMZ audit. City Auditor Murdock thought, regarding customer service performance audits, that to some extent it would depend on how many departments it involved and how the departments would be selected. Given budget constraints, she did not think it could include all of them. She thought it could include looking at the systems in place to respond to customers. They did a little of that work in looking at the grievance process and with ADA. They were looking at the Dispatch Center now, and customer service was a piece of that. She would need to give further thought as to how that would be approached. It would be a unique audit and not one she had done before. She had done similar audits but typically in relation to a single department. She understood that the JMZ audit would be more from an operation perspective, including safety protocols, vetting of staff, etc. Chair Kou voiced that to be accountable to the people in Palo Alto and to provide transparency and accountability there needed to be reviews and recommendations made. She moved and recommended that City Council approve the Office of the City Auditor’s Risk Assessment and FY2025 Audit Plan and corresponding task orders and that Council consider replacing any of the proposed audits for audits related to procurement performance and customer service satisfaction in the different departments and that the summary minutes be provided in the Staff Report to Council. Assistant City Manager Nose noted that the motion would effectively allow Baker Tilly to only finish existing task orders until the Council discussion and finalization of the audit plan occurred, which would put new work by Baker Tilly on hold until that conversation. An alternative could be to recommend a portion of the audit plan and execution of tasks with Auditor Murdock to return to P&S to review replacing two task orders that would not be moved forward. She recommended it return to P&S because it sounded like there needed to be discussion in terms of scoping a customer service audit. The Committee could recommend the full Council approve the risk plan task orders and audit plan excluding JMZ and the PCard Program audits with a referral to return to P&S to discuss substituting them for the procurement and customer service satisfaction audits, which would allow Baker Tilly to progress on the items that the Committee wanted to proceed with while still working toward what the Committee was looking for in terms of the totality of audits. City Auditor Murdock was concerned about it delaying the audit plan. She questioned if it needed to go to the full Council or if there was a way to settle on alternative audits in this meeting. Council Member Kou wanted to see a JMZ audit. She wanted Council to decide which audits might be replaced. She amended her motion so that the PCard Program audit would be SUMMARY MINUTES Page 14 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 replaced with either a procurement performance or a customer service satisfaction audit and that the other audits be approved. Council Member Tanaka was comfortable with that. He would leave it to the future Council to work through. City Auditor Murdock noted that they would be bringing the FY2026 Audit Plan in April and asked if the procurement process audit could be part of that audit and if the customer service audit could be put on the 2025 plan. Assistant City Manager Nose understood there were two options presented by City Auditor Murdock. P&S could move forward and approve the Work Plan for FY2025 as proposed with a referral that the 2026 Work Plan include the procurement performance and customer service audits for P&S in April 2025. The third option would be to split the two and replace one in the 2025 Work Plan and refer one to the 2026 Work Plan. MOTION: Councilmember Kou moved, seconded by Councilmember Tanaka, to recommend the City Council: 1. Approve Fiscal Year 2024 Risk Assessment Report 2. Approve the Fiscal Year 2025 Audit Plan Report and corresponding task orders 3. Refer to the City Auditor consideration of a Procurement Performance Audit and Customer Service Audit as part of the Fiscal Year 2026 Workplan, to be reviewed by the Policy & Services Committee. Council Member Lythcott-Haims acknowledged that this was the last meeting with the current Committee members, and if she should not be on the Committee in January there would be no through-line on this. When this referral comes forward to the new Committee, she thought it would be useful for the Staff Report to provide a robust explanation of how this decision was reached and to include the summary minutes as an attachment. Council Member Tanaka suggested doing the customer service audit now in place of the PCard audit and doing the procurement performance audit in 2026. He felt customer service was an issue and did not know why that audit would be delayed. He did not consider the PCard to be an issue. City Auditor Murdock was amenable to doing that if it was possible to do it today. She was concerned with the timeline to complete the audit, and she did not want to delay starting the audit. As a part of all performance audits, they did a somewhat mini risk assessment at the beginning, and they would look for some guidance at that time to determine which customer service departments would be audited. Delaying it to FY2026 would allow time to understand Council’s considerations. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 15 of 15 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/10/2024 Council Member Tanaka suggested starting with the Development Center and that it be structured so that it would be done toward the end of the year versus immediately, which would allow time for the auditor to work on it. He again stated that he had heard complaints about Utilities, the Development Center, and Police. Chair Kou wanted to proceed with the motion as it was. She complimented the auditor on her report. Emergency Preparedness was important to her. City Auditor Murdock added that the Emergency Preparedness Wildfire Audit would be presented in February. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Future Meetings and Agendas Deputy City Manager Chantal Cotton-Gaines thanked the Committee members for their service. There would not be a January meeting. They would learn the composition of the Committee, and the first meeting would be in February. The Wildfire Audit would be coming and hopefully the Dispatch Assessment Audit. The Race and Equity quarterly update would also come to the Committee. Staff would let the new Chairperson know of any other items as they come up. Chair Kou voiced that it had been a pleasure serving and she would miss everyone. Council Member Tanaka thanked his colleagues. Council Member Lythcott-Haims thanked her colleagues for their service to the City. She commented that they had been role models. She was grateful and would miss them. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m.