By Monica Vaughan/Colusa County Sun-Herald -
Representatives for Colusa County employees told the Board of Supervisors this week it needs to prove that a new county administrator is needed.
They wanted to know if a county administrator would improve internal operations, and that the expense would be justified.
Tuesday's meeting was a round-table discussion with supervisors, department heads and employee representatives about the pros and cons of creating a county administrative officer position, which has not existed since 2003.
The cost of the position is unknown because the position could range from a secretary to the board to an executive with an office and a staff.
While no decisions have been made, the department heads and some supervisors said they would like to start "on the lighter side."
Treasurer Dan Charter raised concerns about the cost and said the county is doing fine without the position.
"I'd like to see the board tough it out and save the $300,000," Charter said.
Of the counties that do have a CAO, their 2009 salaries ranged from $120,000 to $454,000, according to the County Administrative Officers Association of California.
More current information was not available.
Colusa County grand jury reports in 2007 and 2008 recommended the addition of a CAO to improve efficiency and communication in county government. The board generally agreed with the need, but cited budget limitations at that time.
Supervisors are now considering adding the position, which could act as the county's top staff member responsible for day-to-day functions and would typically coordinate department heads to help manage their workloads and to address problems.
The supervisors have had to take on some of those issues in the recent past.
"We had some contentious issues come up in employment and HR (human resources). Absent a CAO, supervisors had to deal with those. Maybe we had to step over the line into micromanagers. ... We're supposed to be policymakers," Supervisor Mark Marshall said.
"I land on the light CAO side, because I like our relationship. But, man, I need relief," Supervisor Gary Evans added.
All the supervisors reflected similar concerns about their workload.
"More and more is getting piled on our lap everyday, and I want some help," Supervisor Tom Indrieri said.
All five supervisors have some kind of business interest outside their board duties, and several run their own companies.
Supervisors and departments heads alike said the meeting was productive and achieved the goal of sharing concerns and ideas.
Tim Moss of the Agriculture Department suggested that, since the county recently wrapped up the collective bargaining process, the supervisors may want to create the position at a later date.
Tim Tolbot, a lawyer who represents the employee association, said county workers will see this as "a piece of pie that will never be available to our employees."
Supervisor Kim Dolbow Vann said the board is not on a fast track to creating the new position.
Department heads said they cared about personality traits and leadership qualities of the individual hired, and would like to keep the liaison structure with the supervisors.
Additionally, they would like hiring and firing authority to stay with board, and they don't want to be micromanaged by an administrator.
Some brought up concerns about past experience with a CAO.
Davis Shoemaker held the position in the county from November 2001 to October 2003, but the position was eliminated.
Marshall said the main issue was power. "A lot of times these people consider themselves like a sixth vote on a board," Marshall said.
Colusa, Glenn and Sierra counties are the only counties of 58 in California that do not have an administrator.
No comments:
Post a Comment