LEADERSHIP TEAM MEETING
July 27, 2004
Goodson Training Room
Public Works, Delta
Present: Lisa Smith, Jim Gangle, Bill Van Vactor, Warren Wong, David Suchart, Don Hampton, Anna Morison, Tony Black, Ollie Snowden, Bobby Green, Rob Rockstroh, Serafina Clarke, Chuck Forster, Terry Wilson, Bill Dwyer and Jan Clements.† Peter Sorenson was excused.† Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer was also present.
1. Approval of Minutes:
December 16, 2004
MOTION:† to approve the minutes of December 16, 2003.
Morrison MOVED, Hampton SECONDED.
2. Leadership Team Composition, Mission, Purpose and Ground Rules
Gangle explained at the conclusion of the last yearís budget process, the department directors got together to have a debriefing.† He added at the same time they had a small group who did work with the Management Team.† He noted everything they tried to do revolved around enhancing the communication that should exist at their level of the organization.† They put together a draft. (Copy in file.)
Rockstroh indicated that this is the type of language they wanted applied to them as Department Directors.
Gangle said they had discussions around the membership and who should be active members or attendees.† He indicated there were other recommendations to identify.† He said they settled on an agreement for the ground rules.
Gangle said one of the purposes of the Management Team they discussed was communication.† He noted they shared information, discussed implications, worked on strategic planning and shared missions and values. He said they discussed major policy level issues that relate to the entire organization and making decisions on those topics.† He said this broadens what they had thought was a short-term perspective.
With regard to membership, Gangle noted they tried to strike a balance between getting everyone involved and not having a big group.† He thought the number in the group should be seven people.
Gangle believed wisdom is in each person and they thought some particular department heads should not participate at that level.† He said they decided it was better to include those people to get the different types of perspectives and include them in discussion and decision making and that is why they stuck with the members they have.† He added that additional attendees could be invited as necessary.† He noted they made a decision in their discussion about Management Team to bring in additional attendees.† He said a discussion came up about the concept of a proxy.† He said they thought it was better to send someone else to attend so there would be representation from that department
Gangle reported they wanted to have quarterly meetings rather than twice a year.† He said they should meet for a half day as a full day is too much and anything less than that would not be effective.† He said they liked the concept of meeting offsite and they had discussion around agendas and being prepared by reading the materials.† He said they recommended a neutral facilitator to conduct the meeting and to emphasize the communication aspect.† He added they wanted to keep cell phones and personal computers out of the meeting, as they really want everyoneís attention on the discussion.
Gangle indicated they were introducing polling as a team for decision-making.† He said the idea is that everyone will have an opportunity to express what they feel about a particular issue.† He stated they want to make sure that everyone benefits from this.† He said they wanted to get into other issues that are taking place in the County.† He said they thought that Leadership Team meetings should provide opportunities to work toward partnerships and focus on similarities. He reported they wanted to use small ad hoc groups to work on different types of issues that come up.† He said they wanted to have the leadership agreements posted.† He said they encouraged members to share opinions, vision and goals for the County.
With regard to agreements, Gangle said it was a way for each of them to present information.† He indicated they are there to represent Lane County, not just their own department but the focus should be on the goals of the County.† He recognized that from time to time they would have issues that they will deal with differently than the rest of the group. He said they would practice respectful communication.† He added they would attempt to reach consensus through discussion, but if consensus does not occur, decisions will be by majority rule and the use of the polling process will determine the majority.† He said in general the purpose of the agreements is to define how the team will conduct itself, how they will have meetings and how they will make decisions.† He said the group needs to be self-monitoring and to re-enforce adherence to the agreement.† He said they recognize there will be differences of opinion.† He commented the Department Managers wanted to be treated as equals.† Gangle indicated the Board would make the ultimate decision.† He said their group would present a final draft to the Board.
Dwyer said he has philosophical problems with the concepts.† He said his role is different than department head roles because he is an elected official.† He said he doesnít regard Department Managers as peers as his role is different.† He had a problem with the process going to the public because the decisions are being made out of the eye of the public.
Gangle said they were asking that they donít get into a position where they are stopping the open decision-making.
Clements commented that these are public meetings.† He said if a matter comes to the Board for policy decision, the Board could opt out and they could have polling of the rest of the Leadership Team.† With regard to peers, they are not necessarily peers, but they are colleagues.† He views everyone in the Sheriffís Office as a colleague in an effort to deliver on the Sheriffís Officeís mission.† He thought they could act collegially and still recognize that there are distinctions.
Wilson said that this provides an opportunity for the taxpayers to get an additional benefit from the money that is spent on highly paid individuals within the organization.† She commented the Board of Commissioners has to make the decisions.† She said it is impossible for any of the commissioners to know everything and if taxpayers are paying good money to have quality people as Department Directors, they owe it to the Board to make sure they have the benefit of the training and experiences they are buying.† She said they were trying to provide a comfortable forum for that communication to occur. She said they feel it is an obligation to pass that information to the Board but an obligation to hear what the Boardís perspective is.† She added if these meetings being televised are a critical component, they could figure out a way to make that happen.
Dwyer agreed they need to have good communication.† He said he wouldnít participate in polling when it is really not a vote.† He added he did not like consensus.† He said the meeting needs to be televised.
Gangle asked the Board what it would take to change the document so they could all agree on it.
Dwyer said he doesnít represent Lane County.† He said he represents people in District 2 whose views may be the same as Lane County or different.† He reserved the right to represent them in opposition to everyone in Lane County.
Green noted what they have in front of them is a draft Leadership Team agreement.† He thought they were the principles of the agreement.† He noted when they have had a Leadership Team meeting in the past, they have someone come and talk to the Board.† He agreed they are elected from their districts but he thinks the workers of Lane County are also the commissionersí constituents.† He said they need to get more colleagues as advocates for what they are doing.† He commented it was difficult for people in their position to maintain the collegial approach to people who are not elected or appointed officials.† He said under the management perception there is separation of authority. He asked if they were really getting the best out of the Management Team.
Dwyer asked what rules the Management Team had.† He asked where the rules are regulated.† He said philosophically he had differences with the Management Team.
Morrison said they need to have a discussion with the Management Team in an open discussion.† She said they donít have the benefit of everyone around the table.† She said they talk about public process but they have always had a public process.† She noted anything they do today is public record.† She said when she makes a decision, it bears on all of Lane Countyís citizens, not just the people on the west side. She added that in Lane County they have employees and they are not listening to what the employees are saying.† She liked what had been done.† She commented when they came out of the budget meeting the Board could not give direction.† She said the public sees it and questions what they do.† She said having the discussions are good and getting the opinions out opens up different avenues.† She commented that people are afraid of change and as long as they stay where they are, they will continue to stumble and they wonít accomplish anything.
Green stated he represents North Eugene, but when he leaves Lane County, he represents Lane County.† He needs the benefit of everyoneís perspective.† He commented that if he doesnít have a good relationship with his colleagues, then he is missing something.† He didnít want to be at that disadvantage.
Gangle indicated it was important that all participants not announce decisions prior to the actual discussion.† He said it is essential for everyone to speak before making a decision.† He thought they should have the polling and the discussion before decisions are made.
Black commented there were undertones of adversarial roles between the department directors and the Board.† He said that was not the case.† He noted the Board is working for the citizens of Lane County and from his perspective that is what everyone does. He said everyone is trying to do something good for the public and that is why they exist.† He said this document is about knowledge, transfer and information sharing.† He commented it wasnít meant to undermine anyoneís authority or to not share the information they are providing to the public in any way.
Green asked what else could be incorporated into the draft that would give the level of agreement to the direction of going forward with this document.
With regard to the further recommendations on page 1, Morrison didnít know why they had to meet offsite.† She didnít want to incur any expense.† She thought using the John Goodson room was offsite for most people.† She wanted to see if the cost of a facilitator would be justified with their current budget situation.
With regard to the facilitator, Suchart said if they sit there and donít accomplish anything for three hours, then they have wasted more money than that by what they are not doing.† He thought bringing in a facilitator was worth the expense.† He commented that all of them provide leadership.
Green stated that a facilitator does not have to be a high paid consultant.† He said there are people locally in Lane County that have skills that could guide groups through discussion.† He said the purpose of a facilitator is to ensure that everyone is heard.† He didnít want a facilitator that would try to guide them where they want the conversation to go.
Van Vactor noted that it is hard for the chair of the Board to run the meeting because they have to try to run the meeting and try to make comments.† He thought a facilitator would be helpful.
Hampton thought they needed a forum like this so they could express themselves.† He thought everyone should take advantage of othersí ideas.
Dwyer didnít think the Board should be part of the polling.† He said the Board needs to reserve its decision for another time.
Smith noted a key piece for her is the agenda and the information being provided in advance of the meeting.† She said for her to provide information to the group, she needs to know what she is reacting to and have discussion with others to make sure they are giving a systems perspective.
Dwyer suggested that they get the agenda out with the information at least one week in advance.
Gangle suggested taking the information they gathered today back to the small ad hoc group to go through again.† He added it should be taken to the department directors and brought back to the next Leadership Team meeting in November where it would be presented.
2. Strategic Plan Review
Heaton reported that almost all major strategies of the Strategic Plan have been touched upon if not completed.† With regard to the service improvement area, she indicated they have work being done in evaluating organizational opportunities and developing more flexible staffing.† She added they have also made progress with electronic access.† She noted some items would never be completely finished because they are continuously improving them.† She said under flexible staffing, they had done department work and organizational opportunities in continuous quality improvement.
With regard to resource planning and allocation, Heaton indicated that work hasbeen done with some plans completed.† She noted they have a Human Resources Plan, an Information Technology Plan and an inventory of land facilities.† She added they have a Communications Plan completed and updated.† She noted an area they had struggled with is allocating resources strategically.† She indicted they will review the mission, vision and guiding principles that are in the current Strategic Plan.
Heaton reviewed the property summary matrix (copy in file).
Heaton said they would be discussing whether it is time to update the Strategic Plan.
Morrison commented it might be helpful when they know the agenda packets are prepared where the tie-in is with the Strategic Plan.
Van Vactor noted they were working on an agenda to modify the memo cover and adding a section as to how the item relates to the Strategic Plan.
Green asked if the Strategic Planís vision has changed.† He asked if that is where they are as an organization.† He said if they are still a dynamic organization, they needed to enforce that.
Van Vactor commented it was hard to be innovative when they are making reductions every spring,
Forster wanted a statement of Lane Countyís work as it turns into an outcome.
Dwyer noted his vision is to have the best, healthiest population and the most effective delivery of service.
Smith commentated that the plan was generic.† She thought it needed to be more defined for Lane County.
Clements commented that if they were going to have a mission, they should memorialize the fact that they are a general purpose and limited purpose government.
Wilson thought if they altered their vision or mission, they are then obliged to review the guiding principles as to how they fit in.† She said those three have to be done together.
Clements commented that the guiding principles are value and value doesnít mean they should review them this time, but they should strive for something they think will transcend the document into the future.
Gangle stated he read through the Strategic Plan today.† He said he looked in mission, vision and guiding principals.† He didnít find anything that he recognized.† He said he couldnít find anything about leadership in the plan.† He wanted to see something discussed about leadership.† He said he would put it under guiding principles.
With regard to Lane County goals, Van Vactor stated he struggled with them because they are so broad and hard to apply.† He said they should have a discussion and sharpen their focus to come up with a shorter-term goal, but one that is more concrete.† He thought a significant goal would be the formation of a Public Safety District.† He said another could be the Public Health Building as being the number one priority.
Dwyer thought there needed to be short term and long-term goals. He thought the 2006 reorganization for the Public Safety District should be part of their goal.
Clements commented that these goals are composite bullets of what the vision is for Lane County.† He said they need to get to the point of goals and strategies that are addressing the mission and vision.† He didnít think they belong with goals.† He thought of this as a composite vision.
Rockstroh said they should have focused on work activities, not strategies.† He said they should pick and choose a project.
Snowden noted the plan stated that departments would continue to develop specific and measurable objectives.† He asked if the departments were doing that and if so, it wasnít going back up to the Leadership Team.† He thought some of those selective objectives should come back to the Leadership Team for more discussion.
Hampton viewed objectives as being more broad and goal specific activities they would do to reach the objections.† He indicated the goals could change each year.† He added the objectives should be the same but the goals should change.
Dwyer thought it was important to have goals and timeframes to see what they think could be accomplished.
Gangle commented the Strategic Plan has provided a framework and definition for goals and strategies.† He thought what is important is communication that allows them to reach a common definition. He said if they want to change what they are defining, that is what this document is about.
Clarke suggested where there are bullet points that goals could be attached to strategies.† She thought it could identify what the goals and strategies are for so they donít miss any.
Green commented that the Action Plan was missing.† He noted on page 13 that part of the action is that the County will continue to develop specific and measurable objectives.
Black indicated on page 14, they were one of the departments identified under B 1) to develop a Strategic Plan that complimented this.† He said they did that and showed an alignment that the strategy in Information Services is equal to another strategy in the Countyís Strategic Plan.† He said the work plan they worked on had actual projects identified with their strategic goal in IS, to provide alignment.† He said they had to put numbers by bullets to show alignment from departments to the County Strategic Plan. He asked if on page 14 it only identified HR, IS and facilities when on the bottom of page 13 it indicated departments as a whole would do it.
Heaton responded that all departments would develop a Strategic Plan for their department.† She noted in B 1) it discusses chief resources for the County as a whole.
Green commented that there would be recommendations and improvements coming from the agenda team about the agenda cover memo.† He said there had been work done on it.† He said that would persuade staff that when they bring documents to the Board, they would know how to reference the plan and how they reached their decision.† He thought they would get to the desired outcomes.
Van Vactor thought the Leadership Team and the Board needed to adopt about five or six things they want accomplished in the next few years.
Green stated they needed unified goals for the organization.
Dwyer commented that as an organization they have a lot to be proud of in delivering services in the constraints they have.† He stated if they have a timeline, they could then expect things to be accomplished and they could work toward that goal.
Green thought the objective would be to review what parts were still relevent for them.
Rockstroh commented that he didnít think anything needed to be changed.† He said what they have not done is a work action plan.† He said they should focus on the short term and tweaking the language doesnít help setting goals.† He recommended producing an annual supplement that updates projects they are working on.
With regard to the core strategies and service improvement, Van Vactor stated it had to be updated because they had done the exercises.† He commented the general framework was fine.
With regard to the business plan, Van Vactor thought they should be talking about developing it as a general-purpose government.† He noted with resource planning allocation, they had difficulty with success with a flow chart.† He said where they struggled with Section D 3,† they indicated the highest priority is addressing critical services related to life and health safety.† With regard to page 29, he noted the Management Team had difficulty with reductions, as they couldnít come up with the criteria based upon the goals.† He commented that the Board was reluctant to redirect the revenue.† He said instead of going through an annual exercise every year of creating that expectation, he thought they needed to have a discussion on whether it is an approach they should take.† He recommended that if they are going to have a strategy to balance the budget next year with whatever resources there are, they are going to have to live within their means.† He said the Management Team wants the Leadership Team to do strategic planning, goal setting and the broader vision, working on the positive aspects.
Clements commented the County would not have additional revenue and they will have to agree on how they make decisions.† He wanted to see an allocation criteria that states what they are going to fund as opposed to trying to maintain the status quo.
Van Vactor was supportive of what the Sheriff said but was concerned if they do allocation criteria with a zero-base government to build their budget, how they would build it.† He said it was essential that the budget be built in small enough increments that the Budget Committee and the Board have a real choice to what it chooses.
Dwyer stated if they are going to have the criteria objective, their public mission is not to promote tourism or economic development.
Smith commented when they use the reduction criteria that they donít cut other departments.
Hampton commented that he wanted to see a balance but he didnít see it anywhere.† He said they have to align what they really want with the resources they are going to allocate.
Green stated that whatever position they have, they need to make a decision on it versus vacillating over it.† He said they should be willing to withstand all of the public sentiment that goes with it.† He said they have to determine what services they really are in need of and what they can afford to buy.
Black noted they discussed prioritization of services but never came to an agreement at the department head or board level.† He asked if being a general-purpose government and prioritizing services are contradictory to each other.† He said if they are going to be a general-purpose government, they are going to fund everything.† He thought they should be discussing the level of funding instead of prioritization of one service over another.
Gangle believed in process.† He noted there are concepts but he is looking to see what they could add to give balance.† He wanted to look at the process and give definition about what the process is.† He said he would be looking for something in the Strategic Plan that gives direction to a process, and to get that information to the Board so they could make decisions.
Dwyer thought they needed reduction criteria.† He said the criteria has to be that outside monies go first.
Clements commented that tourism is a large part of the economy and contributes to the vitality of the region.
With regard to C and D, Van Vactor commented that performance management works well and he wanted to continue what they were doing.† He thought that revenue development needed to be updated.† He asked if they wanted to reconvene the original group that reviewed the Strategic Plan.
Green agreed.† He supported tourism as part of the economic driver.† He didnít know how they would get living wage jobs if they depended solely on the private sector.† He thought government should have a role.† He indicated the final direction is to reconvene the group, set one or two meetings and give an update in November.
3. Service Stabilization Task Force
Green indicated they are asking the lay group to come up with an objective viewpoint, recommendations and the implications of their choices.† He noted they do have choices.† He said they could eliminate funding outside sources.† He stated each commissioner has an appointment and the applications for four lay members have been out.
Arnold announced that once they choose the members of the committee, their first meeting would be on August 10.
4. Other Business
Green commented when they come together as the Leadership Team, he said they should broaden their topics to highlight successes and move those forward.
Van Vactor noted that at the meeting on November 9, Garnick would present the Fin Plan and there will be a report from the Service Stabilization Task Force.† He added if the deficit looks large, there might be midyear budget corrections.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 a.m.