Committee debates constituent-services tracking; staff asked to request memo from city ombuds office

Committee member Brian presented an issue paper proposing a structured process for citizen feedback: timely acknowledgement of complaints, classification of input (general concern, specific action, policy change), designation of a responsible staff member to develop an action plan, and scheduled follow-up check-ins to close the loop.

City staff described existing mechanisms: SeeClickFix for infrastructure reports, the 311 customer service line, council office assistants who log constituent calls, the city manager’s office and the city clerk’s office. Staff said these tools function across departments but that there is not a single written, universal protocol or a centralized tracker for all constituent contacts; some offices keep their own logs and reports.

Committee members asked staff to request a memo from Monique Claude’s office (identified in the meeting as an ombuds/constituent-services function) describing its procedures for follow-up and whether there is a standard process across departments. Members discussed whether council offices have parallel tracking practices and whether recommendations from boards and commissions are formally tracked after they are submitted to the governing body.

Brian emphasized timely acknowledgement and a designated owner for each issue; committee members suggested staff could supply department-level protocols and example reports for review. The committee agreed to include any relevant responses from Monique’s office in the committee discussion and use that input to revise the draft process paper.