HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021/06/09 - Briefing Packet BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MEETING AGENDA
411 North Fifth Street, Shelton WA 98584
1:00 p.m., Wednesday, June 9, 2021
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Discuss consultations with Prothman Executive Search Services
4. Action to Consider- Decide on Position of County Administrator or Support
Services Director
5. Adjourn
Agendas are subject to change,please contact the Commissioners'office for the most recent version.
Last printed 06/07/21 at 9:45 AM
If special accommodations are needed,contact the Commissioners'office at ext.419,Shelton#360-427-9670;Belfair#275-4467,
Elma#482-5269.
ROTHMAN
June 7, 2021
TO: Mason County Board of Commissioners
Frank Pinter, Support Services Director
FROM: Sonja Prothman, Vice President, The Prothman Company
Philip Morley, Consultant, The Prothman Company
SUBJECT: Summary of Mason County Commissioner Interviews
INTRODUCTION
This memorandum summarizes individual interviews with each of the three Mason County
Commissioners regarding the County's top administrative structure. This serves as background for a
meeting of the full Board of County Commissioners on Wednesday June 9, 2021, at 1:00 pm.
With the upcoming retirement of Support Services Director, Frank Pinter, the Mason County Board of
County Commissioners engaged The Prothman Company to help the Board in its assessment of the
pros and cons of potentially creating a County Administrator position, versus refilling the Support
Services Director position as part of Mason County's senior organizational structure that includes a
Community Services Director and Public Works Director. The decision the Board makes about the
County's management structure will determine what position the County subsequently recruits for—a
County Administrator, or a Support Services Director.
METHODOLOGY
Sonja Prothman, Vice-President of Prothman, and Philip Morley, Prothman's consultant with a
Master's Degree in Public Administration and who served as Jefferson County Administrator for 12 '/2
years, are conducting this project together for Mason County. This has included:
• Project planning and background research on Mason County's existing organizational structure,
through review of written materials and interviews with Support Services Director, Frank
Pinter;
• Individual interviews with each County Commissioner on May 26, 2021. Interviews covered
each Commissioner's views on the County's existing structure and the possibility of creating a
County Administrator position. Interviews approached the issue of organizational structure
through multiple lenses: administrative efficiency, communication & collaboration, relation to
the BoCC, and the impact on other potential organizational changes, among others.
Commissioners were asked to summarize the pros, cons and potential issues of both
alternatives: 1)retaining and recruiting for the current Support Services Director structure as a
co-equal with the other two Director positions, and 2) creating and recruiting for a County
Administrator position to whom all Directors would report. This memo summarizes the results
of those interviews.
206.368.0050 ♦ 371 NE Gilman Blvd., Ste 310 Issaquah, WA 98027 ♦ www.prothman.com
SYNOPSIS OF INTERVIEWS
Commissioner Randy Neatherlin, District 1
At the time of the interview, Commissioner Neatherlin preferred to retain and recruit a Support
Services Director to replace the retiring Director, rather than create and recruit for a County
Administrator.
Retain & Recruit a Support Services Director
PROs
• The current structure of 3 Directors forces the County Commissioners to oversee the Directors
and to be much more engaged and informed in the work of the departments. Commissioners
ask for information whenever they need it, and they get it.
• The current structure is working very well—one win after another:
o The County Commissioners have managed the Budget very well, so the General Fund
has a 25%balance above expenditures;
o After some delay, the Munis financial management system is in the process of finally
being embraced and fully implemented by all departments;
• Under the current structure, either the Commissioners or the Support Services Director can pull
together inter-departmental teams to address issues—it doesn't require a County Administrator;
• Under the current structure, the County Commissioners are able to step in directly with
Directors, managers and independent elected officials to fix personnel and administrative
problems;
CONS
• None identified.
Create & Recruit a County Administrator
PROS
• A County Administrator would be a single place to ask for information and project status, and
in that way, make it easier for the BoCC to ask for information;
CONs
• Concern that a County Administrator could become a"fourth Commissioner,"with its own
policy agenda, instead of implementing the agenda of the BoCC;
• Concern that with a County Administrator, any individual Commissioner might stop really
doing their job sometime in the future, and the role of the Board as a whole in setting direction
could be diminished;
• Concern that a County Administrator will have too much influence over individual
Commissioners, the County's independent elected officials, and over the appointed Directors
and managers.
• Concern that an individual Commissioner could exercise too much influence over the
Administrator;
• County Administrators typically have contracts with a severance clause, which could create
controversy if the Board decides to change Administrators;
ROTHMAN Page 2
• Concern for community perception and politics if Mason County creates a County
Administrator position, because of a polarized history and community animosity toward a prior
County Administrator roughly ten years ago.
NEUTRAL Consideration
• There is some siloing of the departments under the existing management structure now, but
Commissioner Neatherlin believes siloing will always be present, and would still be somewhat
of an issue under a County Administrator.
Commissioner Neatherlin recognizes that regardless of whether the Board chooses to retain the Support
Services Director position or replace it with a County Administrator, there are a number of other
structural issues in other management positions that the County will still need to address.
ROTHMAN Page 3
Commissioner Kevin Shutty, District 2
At the time of the interview, Commissioner Shutty preferred to create and recruit for a County
Administrator to replace the retiring Support Services Director, rather than to retain and recruit a new
Support Services Director.
Retain & Recruit a Support Services Director
PROs
• The current structure of a Support Services Director, co-equal with the two other Directors
gives the BoCC direct decision making and input on administrative matters
• Under the current structure, because the BoCC directly supervises the Directors, the
Commissioners have more detailed knowledge of projects and the department's work and
issues;
• Departments are very responsive to BoCC requests.
CONS
• Siloing by departments is a problem, and a County Administrator would better integrate their
work, create more of a team, and recruit an interdepartmental team when needed for a specific
project or issue;
• There sometimes are end-runs around the Support Services Department by other department
Directors, managers and independently elected officials on human resource and budget issues
because the Support Services is "just another department,"without going through proper HR
and Budget/Finance reviews before coming to the Commissioners;
• The current structure is redundant and duplicative in that Directors/managers and independent
elected officials need to inform and get support of two or three Commissioners on
administrative matters, rather than just going to one County Administrator;
Create & Recruit a County Administrator
PROs
• A County Administrator would bring additional professional knowledge and skills to Mason
County's leadership team;
• Mason County is growing and maturing as a region. A County Administrator can help the
County government evolve to better support the growing demands of the region;
• A County Administrator would allow the County Commissioners to get out of the weeds of
administration,budget management and personnel, enabling the Commissioners to focus on
setting important County priorities;
• A County Administrator would free the Commissioners to engage more with the community,
businesses, and with other governmental entities and on important regional and state matters
that impact Mason County;
• A County Administrator would better equip the Board of Commissioners to make complex
decisions, such as regarding infrastructure in Belfair, addressing Jail capacity, homeless
housing and other infrastructure and service issues, and bring stronger project management and
collaboration to those endeavors;
RpT}iMgN Page 4
• Having a more centralized, streamlined approach to implementing the personnel policy under a
County Administrator will help reduce county liability by limiting the role of Commissioners in
those processes given the increasing complexity of HR/personnel issues and regulations;
• Siloing by departments is a problem, and a County Administrator would better integrate their
work, create more of a team, and recruit an interdepartmental team when needed for a specific
project or issue;
• A County Administrator would enhance communication between and among departments and
independent elected officials;
• A County Administrator would strengthen institutional memory,predictability and stability
should membership on the Board of Commissioners change over time;
• A County Administrator would strengthen supervision of the Directors and managers, conduct
annual evaluations more regularly, and mentor Directors and managers to grow professionally;
• A County Administrator could direct departmental issues to the full Board of Commissioners
and facilitate discussions there, and reduce the temptation and opportunity for individual
Directors/managers or independent Electeds to "shop for answers"by talking to individual
Commissioners;
• Having a County Administrator that Directors report to would reduce end-runs and ensure
human resource issues and budget issues get run through proper HR and Budget/Finance
channels before coming to the Commissioners;
• A County Administrator could help develop and present for Board review and feedback an
integrated annual county work program of all departments, that eventually could also help
implement the Commissioners' Strategic Plan, if the County adopts one.
• A County Administrator could help the BoCC focus on larger policy issues;
• A County Administrator would modernize and professionalize County operations
CONS
• With a County Administrator, the Board would be giving up some direct control over the
Directors and their departments
• There is a potential for Community pushback about having a County Administrator, given the
County's prior experience roughly ten years ago.
Commissioner Shutty recognizes that regardless of whether the Board chooses to retain the Support
Services Director position or replace it with a County Administrator, there are a number of other
structural issues in other management positions that the County will still need to address.
RpT}iMgN Page 5
Commissioner Sharon Trask, District 3
At the time of the interview, Commissioner Trask preferred to create and recruit for a County
Administrator to replace the retiring Support Services Director, rather than to retain and recruit a new
Support Services Director.
Retain & Recruit a Support Services Director
PROs
• None identified.
CONS
• Too much time spent on internal County management and administrative matters hinders
Mason County's progress and the BoCC's ability to focus on bigger issues and takes away time
for working on committees and with issues on the state and federal levels;
• HR issues now come to the Commissioners, and sometimes lack input from a budget
perspective. HR issues are best handled administratively, rather at a public meeting;
• Departments don't always work together on projects,when they should;
Create & Recruit a County Administrator
PROs
• Bring uniformity in administrative matters like promotions,pay scales, etc.
• Relieve the BoCC from internal management and administrative work, and free the
Commissioners to focus on bigger picture issues that for the County and the community;
• A BoCC with an appointed County Administrator is more similar to successful corporations
that operate with a board of directors and a top manager they appoint and direct;
• Can help bring more cohesion among the departments and reduce a sense of competition
between them;
• Create more efficiency, uniformity and consistency to County procedures, operations and
internal County communications;
• Reduce end-runs and ensure human resource issues and budget issues get run through proper
HR and Budget/Finance channels before coming to the Commissioners;
• Create more cooperation by departments on mutual projects, like infrastructure;
• Bring departmental issues to the full Board of Commissioners and facilitate discussions there
where they belong, instead of departments talking to individual Commissioners;
• Brings options and solutions to the BoCC to enhance the Board's ability to make good
decisions;
CONS
• Commissioner Trask recognizes that there is a possibility of a future Commissioner relaxing
and"gliding,"but does not see a risk of that with the current Commissioners;
• If the Board of Commissioners hired a person with the wrong personality, that would be a
problem.
RpT}iMgN Page 6
Commissioner Trask recognizes that regardless of whether the Board chooses to retain the Support
Services Director position or replace it with a County Administrator, there are a number of other
structural issues in other management positions that the County will still need to address.
ROTHMAN Page 7
SUMMARY & NEXT STEPS
During the May 26 interviews the County Commissioners exhibited an excellent grasp of a wide
variety of potential pros and cons of both management alternatives: retaining and recruiting for the
current Support Services Director position that is co-equal with two other Directors, or replacing the
position with a County Administrator position that all Directors report to.
At the time of the interviews, two Commissioners strongly favored creating a County Administrator
position to unify the County's administrative structure and to better integrate information that the
BoCC relies on for decision making, and free the Board from so much administrative oversight
allowing the Board to focus on policy direction, their committee assignments, and on
intergovernmental matters that impact the County. One Commissioner strongly favored retaining and
refilling the existing Support Services Director position to work alongside as a co-equal with the other
two Directors, in order to retain the Commissioners' direct oversight of all three Directors and the
administration of those departments, and to avoid the BoCC losing some control if a County
Administrator starts to follow its own agenda, rather than the Board's.
At the Board of Commissioners' June 9 meeting, Prothman staff will review the results of the
interviews and help facilitate the Commissioners' discussion of the pros and cons of the two alternative
management structures. As the Commissioners listen to one another and consider each other's
perspectives, hopes and concerns, they can learn from one another. Each Commissioner's own
perspective may evolve as a result.
Clearly, choosing either management alternative can work. On the one hand, Mason County has been
operating for roughly the past ten years with its current structure. On the other hand, numerous
counties in Washington State operate successfully with a County Administrator, including nearby
Jefferson, Thurston and Clallam Counties, to name a few. The question for Mason County's
Commissioners is, which position do they believe will best serve Mason County's interests now and in
the future, and best enable the Board to successfully focus on and carry out the Commissioners' top
priorities to benefit the community?
In deciding to fill the Support Services Director or County Administrator position, Commissioners will
want to also thoughtfully explore how to address and mitigate whatever concerns their fellow
Commissioners may have had about that option. For example, one way to begin to address some of the
concerns about the proper role of a County Administrator would be to require the Administrator to
adhere to the ICMA Code of Ethics, which make clear the role of the elected representatives versus the
administrative and support role of the Administrator(see tenets #5 and#6 highlighted in the ICMA
Code of Ethics, included as Attachment 1).
All three Commissioners were unanimous in recognizing that regardless of whether the Board retains
the Support Services Director position or replaces it with a County Administrator, there are a number
of other structural issues in other management positions that the County will still need to address in
future meetings with the assistance of Support Services Director Pinter.
In closing, it is a pleasure to assist Mason County, and whichever management position the Board
ultimately chooses to fill, The Prothman Company stands ready to help Mason County recruit and hire
an excellent candidate.
RpT}iMgN Page 8
ATTACHMENT 1: ICMA Code of Ethics
ICMA CODE OF ETHICS
The mission of ICMA is to create excellence in local governance by developing and fostering
professional local government management worldwide. To further this mission, certain principles, as
enforced by the Rules of Procedure, shall govern the conduct of every member of ICMA, who shall:
1. We believe professional management is essential to efficient and democratic local government
by elected officials.
2. Affirm the dignity and worth of local government services and maintain a deep sense of social
responsibility as a trusted public servant.
3. Demonstrate by word and action the highest standards of ethical conduct and integrity in all
public,professional, and personal relationships in order that the member may merit the trust and
respect of the elected and appointed officials, employees, and the public.
4. Serve the best interests of the people.
5. Submit policy proposals to elected officials; provide them with facts, and technical and
professional advice about policy options; and collaborate with them in setting goals for the
community and organization.
6. Recognize that elected representatives are accountable to their community for the decisions
they make; members are responsible for implementing those decisions.
7. Refrain from all political activities which undermine public confidence in professional
administrators. Refrain from participation in the election of the members of the employing
legislative body.
8. Make it a duty continually to improve the member's professional ability and to develop the
competence of associates in the use of management techniques.
9. Keep the community informed on local government affairs; encourage communication between
the citizens and all local government officers; emphasize friendly and courteous service to the
public; and seek to improve the quality and image of public service.
10. Resist any encroachment on professional responsibilities,believing the member should be free
to carry out official policies without interference, and handle each problem without
discrimination on the basis of principle and justice.
11. Handle all matters of personnel on the basis of merit so that fairness and impartiality govern a
member's decisions pertaining to appointments, pay adjustments,promotions, and discipline.
12. Public office is a public trust. A member shall not leverage his or her position for personal gain
or benefit.
Adopted by the ICMA Executive Board in 1924,and most recently revised by the membership in June 2020.
RpT}iMgN Page 9
County Profiles in Washington State
County Population Size County Administrator?
King County 2,252,782 2,115 sq mi Elected Co. Executive
Pierce County 904,980 1806 sq mi Elected Co. Executive
Snohomish County 822,083 2,087 sq mi Elected Co. Executive
Spokane County 522,798 1,764 sq mi Yes
Clark County 4881241 629 sq mi Yes
Thurston County 290,536 722 sq mi Yes
Kitsap County 2711473 395 sq mi No
Yakima County 2501873 4,296 sq mi No
Whatcom County 229,247 2,107 sq mi Elected Co. Executive
Benton County 204,390 1,700 sq mi Yes
Skagit County 129,205 1,731 sq mi Yes
Cowlitz County 110,593 1,139 sq mi (Chief of Staff/Non-Contract)
Grant County 971733 2,680 sq mi No
Franklin County 95,222 1,242 sq mi Yes
Island County 85,141 209 sq mi No
Lewis County 80,707 2,403 sq mi Yes
Clallam County 77,331 1,738 sq mi Yes
Chelan County 77,200 2,920 sq mi Yes
Grays Harbor County 75,061 1,902 sq mi No
Mason County 66,768 959 sq mi No
Walla Walla County 60,760 1,270 sq mi No
Whitman County 50,104 2,159 sq mi No
Kittitas County 47,935 2,297 sq mi No
Stevens County 451723 2,478 sq mi No
Douglas County 43,429 1,819 sq mi Yes
Okanogan County 42,243 5,268 sq mi No
Jefferson County 321221 1,804 sq mi Yes
Asotin County 22,582 636 sq mi No
Pacific County 221471 933 sq mi Yes
Klickitat County 22,425 1,872 sq mi No
Adams County 19,983 1,925 sq mi No
San Juan County 171582 174 sq mi Yes
Pend Oreille County 13,724 1,400 sq mi No
Skamania County 12,083 1,656 sq mi No
Lincoln County 10,939 2,311 sq mi No
Ferry County 7,627 2,204 sq mi No
Wahkiakum County 4,488 264 sq mi No
Columbia County 3,985 869 sq mi No
Garfield County 2,225 710 sq mi No
4 with elected County Executives, 14 with appointed County Administrators/Managers, 21 Without
June,2021