Board directs county counsel to draft CAO→CEO code changes, seeks minimum bachelor’s requirement; organizational chart revisions ordered
Loading...
Summary
After a staff report on Chapter 3.01 of the county code, the board voted 5–0 to direct county counsel to prepare an amendment transitioning the county administrative officer role toward a county executive officer and to add a minimum bachelor’s degree in public/business administration (master’s preferred). The board also approved returning a red‑d
The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously on Oct. 28 to ask county counsel to draft an amendment to San Benito County Code, Chapter 3.01, to transition the county administrative officer (CAO) role toward a county executive officer (CEO) management model and to clarify duties and educational standards for the position.
County counsel Gregory Prambles told the board the current ordinance dates to 1966 and contains only a brief description of CAO duties. He recommended more detailed codified responsibilities and said the CEO model typically emphasizes stronger responsibility for budget preparation, department oversight and policy implementation. Prambles recommended the board consider requiring a bachelor’s degree in public administration or business administration and preferring a master’s degree in the same fields.
The board voted 5–0 to direct staff to draft an amendment requiring at minimum a bachelor’s degree in public administration or business administration (or a related field) and to list a master’s in public or business administration as preferred. The motion also asked counsel to draft clearer CAO/CEO ordinance language clarifying budget, personnel and administrative duties and the relationship with separately elected officials.
On the organizational chart, CAO staff presented a revised county structure showing lines among the board, CAO, elected department heads, department directors and contracted services. The board asked for several edits — clarifying probation’s judicial appointment and administrative reporting, marking child‑support services as a contracted arrangement, adjusting legend symbology for elected officers, and returning a corrected chart for final adoption. The board voted to bring the revised chart back to the Nov. 4 meeting for final action.
Why it matters: The change would codify a clearer executive function in county government and set baseline education expectations for the top administrative post. The board’s direction also aims to reduce fragmentation in how departments receive direction from supervisors and staff.
Next steps: County counsel will prepare ordinance language to return for introduction and two readings; the CAO will produce the revised organizational chart with the edits requested.
