Council staff inventory shows 81 mandated reports; 10 department reports lack recent submissions

Maria Garnett, council policy analyst, presented the second phase of a "Report of Reports" project to the Governmental Operations Standing Committee on July 16. The review catalogs reports required of boards, commissions and city departments and assesses effort, completeness and potential utility.

Garnett told the committee the project identified roughly 81 mandated reports citywide; about 27 of those are department reports. Of the 27 department reports, staff classified 17 (63 percent) as having recent submissions and found no recent submission record for 10 (37 percent). Garnett told members that "no recent submission record" does not necessarily mean failure to report; some reports may not be applicable in a given year or may be recorded in ways that are hard to track.

The nut graf: staff and administration urged the committee to consider centralizing publication and improving tracking so council can match the level of effort required to the actual usefulness of each report, and recommended the finance committee (and other standing committees) review reports relevant to their jurisdictions to determine which requirements should be continued, modified or eliminated.

Garnett described the methodology: survey of the Clerk's Office and Deputy CAO portfolios, review of submission pathways and a high-level assessment of the level of effort (minimal, moderate, substantial) required for each report. She said city departments generally submitted reports to Council but that records were uneven; most unsubmitted or undocumented reports fell under the finance and administration portfolios. Garnett proposed round 3 of the project (utility analysis for selected finance reports) by November.

Administration policy adviser Adam Hull told the committee the administration has been a willing partner, that some unsubmitted reports had been self-identified by the administration, and that some reporting requirements date back 20-plus years and may no longer match current organization structures or council needs. Hull said the administration prefers a forward-looking dialog with council committees about which ordinance-based reporting requirements should be resumed or revised before staff are asked to reinstate them because resuming certain reports would require substantial staff effort.

Committee members asked about best practices and public access. Garnett said centralizing report publication (similar to how the Clerk's Office catalogs boards and commissions reports) would improve transparency and public access; she said round 2 did not include a deep best-practices dive but staff can follow up in round 3. Committee members also urged that the full council have opportunities to review reports of broad interest even if the report falls under a committee's jurisdiction.

Ending: Staff said they plan to deliver round 3 (a deeper utility analysis for selected finance reports) by November and recommended committee-led review of reporting requirements to balance staff effort with council utility.