Nevada County Grand Jury • 2004-2005

In Search of Excellence - an Inquiry Into Nevada County Government Reason for Investigation Based upon a citizen

Published: March 22, 2005 11 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 10 findings

F1
In the last few years, a large number of well qualified and highly respected employees at the department and director level have left County employment for a variety of reasons. Some simply retired. But others have left because of their job-related involvement with County projects that became politically unpopular, some because of their treatment by individual members of the Board of Supervisors, and some for better opportunities, career growth, and similar reasons. In some cases, terminations and resignations become blurred. Forced separations are usually handled as resignations by mutual agreement of both parties. Severance packages are generally contingent upon a signed Letter of Confidentiality.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The success of the enterprise of County Government depends upon the hard work of each County employee. Every effort should be made by the Board of Supervisors (BOS) to value each employee, to help them progress on their career paths, to shield them from divisive County politics, to provide meaningful and timely performance evaluations, and to continue to award them with adequate compensation in relation to their peers in surrounding counties
F2
Reacting to county budget constraints over the last two years, 82 positions were eliminated. Many employees were relocated to other departments, resulting in the lay off of only one staff member.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The BOS should develop a professional working relationship with the CEO whereby the CEO is recognized as the appropriate designated interface and buffer between the BOS and County department heads in matters of Board approved programs, policies, personnel, and organizational matters.
F3
The County has developed a succession plan in anticipation of the fact that approximately 50% of the county workforce will be eligible to retire in 2006.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The BOS should adopt and practice a policy of treating department heads and other employees with respect and dignity during public meetings.
F4
Numerous sources confirm that in recent years, members of the Board of Supervisors have publicly criticized and demeaned department heads during BOS meetings.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The BOS should adopt a policy which prevents members of the Board from exerting undue influence or otherwise encouraging the resignation of County employees who have been involved with politically unpopular programs but who are professionally competent and willing to adjust to new direction.
F5
Some employees have reported feeling vulnerable and fearful of losing their jobs whenever there is a change in the BOS majority because current and former CEOs have not always acted as a buffer between the BOS and County department heads.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
The BOS should direct the CEO to require all department heads and managers to get information from HR regarding the status, morale, and general performance of the employees in their department before conducting the periodic evaluations of supervisory employees.
F6
Neglect of crucial fiscal matters in at least one department in the past was eventually discovered through a change in leadership and corrected by Administration staff.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
As part of succession planning, the BOS should direct the CEO to ensure that all department heads encourage and facilitate broad participation by interested employees in the planned program of leadership training and hands on opportunities to exercise management and supervision skills.
F7
In recent years there were problems in some departments leadership and mentoring, resulting in the breakdown of staff morale, internal communications and cooperation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
The BOS should direct the CEO to weigh performance evaluations for supervisors, managers, and directors more heavily toward their ability to manage their subordinates, to encourage their professional growth, and to motivate them to excellence in the performance of their job.
F8
Some recent staff turnover is a direct result of a few department heads and managers who do not adequately manage, who refuse or are unable to make decisions, and who continue to pass off taking action regarding problem personnel under their supervision. This management deficiency continues to result in questionable terminations and evaluations, staff infighting, low morale, and adverse impacts on service delivery to the public.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
The BOS should direct the CEO to ask department heads to encourage their managers and supervisors to conduct the interim performance review of probationary employees in addition to the mandatory 3 and 6 month reviews where this might help retain skilled employees new to our county government culture.
F9
Some employees have felt it necessary to contact their union to express their grievances due to lack of management response.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9
Elimination of positions, transfers and department reorganizations were valid responses to tight fiscal times, but the BOS should direct the CEO to be attentive to the effect on delivery of essential services to the public as staffing decisions are made, particularly as finances improve in the future.
F10
In the last two years, performance evaluations of department heads and above are being conducted by the CEO with increasing involvement by the Director of Human Resources (HR) to help assess leadership, mentoring and department morale. CONCLUSIONS
No recommendations for this finding

Conclusions 2

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Nevada County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office