07-12-1999 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

This report will review District activities relative to the three main areas of concern identified in the first report - District management, District communication, coordination and outreach, and District financial accountability. D istrict Management The District board has progressed in shifting their management style from a “hands-on” approach to that of being a policy and oversight body. Delegation of day-to-day management to its staff is reflected in the District’s new Rule B which allows the staff, rather than the District board, to issue erosion control permits in appropriate circumstances. This change and others like it should reduce the cost and time for negotiating the application process. It will also move the District board closer to its role as a policy making and oversight body. Additional evidence that District managers are progressing in this shift is revealed by tracking manager per diem and expenses. Per diems have deceased each of the last two reporting years fi-om $63,397.46 in 1996 to $$27,162.64 in 1998. There still is concern that the turnover rate of District staff is higher than other watershed districts in the metropolitan area. In the past year a new District supervisor was hired. Staff turnover slowed down the progress the District was making toward less direct daily management of District activties. With the new supervisor in place, the District has resumed its shift toward policy and oversight. District staff are now responsible for District activities which had previously been contracted for, primarily in the areas of communications and engineering. The result should allow District staff to efficiently and effectively carry out the administrative services and manage the programs for which the District is responsible. The District should track the cost effectiveness and efficiency of this decision. On the surface, it appears that it could eventually reduce the District costs if staff is retained for periods of at least three to four years. Service to constituents may benefit from the increased internal capabilities, though specialized expertice would still likely be necessary from outside providers. The BWSR commends the District board and staff for the work they have completed to implement positive changes in the District’s management. The BWSR recommends the District board continue to find ways to delegate to staff administrative and programmatic tasks while continuing to move toward its role as a policy making and oversight body. June 15.1999 BWSR Report to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Page 2