02-09-1998 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

types, so district consultants or managers are contacted directly. District staff have been pulled in many different directions by individual contact from managers, resulting in conflicting direction and overworked situations. Certainly the practice undermines employee morale; turnover rate of district staff has been hi eh. Two recent management studies the district commissioned corroborate this finding and point to the need for correcting micro management by the board of managers. In fact, the 1997 draft strategic plan shows six of the seven managers spoke of micro management and the problems it created. This also underscores the need for strong leadership by county boards in choosing managers that will cooperate together and work as a team. COMMUNICATION, OUTREACH, COORDINATION District communications with stakeholders, especially the member cities, needs to be improved. Communication would likely improve if the board of managers will step back and allow district staff to conduct routine communications with constituents. The district would speak with a more uniform voice, reduce the likelihood of sending mixed messages, and reduce false expectations among constituents. Nevertheless, it takes two parties openly communicating to make the situation work. Constituents, such as cities, ohentimes do not put enough effort into the process. This was very evident when the district actively solicited comments from member cities during the development of the second generation watershed management plan. Most substantial comments from cities only arose during the very final stages of plan review by the state agencies, resulting in a reactive, rather than proactive, approach. It is also evident there are some situations where cities attempt to downplay water resources management concerns such as erosion control measures or on-site water detention. This may occur in commercial projects as the result of pressure from developers or in cities’ own public works projects as they try to complete them in a timely and cost-effective manner. In those cases, the district is unfairly criticized for monitoring non-compliance and refusing to relax its standards. The Board of Water and Soil Resources has proposed using the services of a state mediator to help facilitate a dialogue among the cities and the district. This option will continue to be explored and assessed along with the adoption and implementation of these recommendations. We understand that the district administrator and a manager are in the process of meeting individually with staff of all cities in the district. While generally viewed by constituents as a step in the right direction, there is some concern about the need for, or desirability of, having a manager present. Again, city staff do not see district staff as being empowered by the board of managers to carry out their assigned duties, or what most would agree should be a staff duty. L...