Structure Committee’s Draft Findings & Conclusions

The primary mission of the Structure Committee is to assess the County’s organization structure and determine if an alternative structure can reduce the cost of operating the County. Its secondary mission is to determine what services are required by statute and which are optional.

The second part of their mission they dispatched with ease. They checked the Oregon Revised Statutes to determine which services are required by law, and then asked the department heads which of their services are mandated, and which are “optional.” It turned out that there are no optional services performed by the County. All the services the county performs are mandated by the state. Nothing is “optional.” There’s nothing to cut. It’s all been cut already.

They flubbed their primary mission. They ignored it. Instead of developing an analysis of the structure of county government, the committee discovered that, besides money, the biggest problems the various departments face is a computer system that is not really a system at all. It’s a techie’s fever dream. It needs to be completely replaced — although the committee has not recommended that, at least not yet.

The other big problem is that department heads cannot reach the commissioners when they need them. It seems that office staff and cell phones should be able to take care of that problem. There were also problems with duplication of effort and inconsistencies in data input, but both of those go back to the really bad computer system.

The Findings spends 2 pages on computer and communication problems, and then spends the remaining 8 pages on the committee’s findings relative to the departments. The committee did a written survey and oral interviews of department heads. But there are no actual data presented, and what is said about the departments is just fluff. It even says in the Findings, “A detailed discussion of each department would make the report far too lengthly to be meaningful to its readers.”! They must mean the Commissioners.

The Structure Committee did find how many departments the county has, how many department heads are elected by the voters (although they missed one — the County Clerk is an elected position). They found out what each department does, and how many county employees work in each department. The committee mentioned problems and complaints from each department, but they all went back to the computer system, communication and duplication of effort. A couple of Departments were “marketing” themselves poorly, and all were working with employees and budgets stretched thin. But, as far as the mission to assess the County’s organization structure and determine if an alternative structure can reduce the cost of operating the County, it didn’t happen.

The Structure Committee’s Findings are all smoke, mirrors, generalities and business ideology, but the committee’s purpose has been clear all along, because from the very beginning the Commissioners have dribbled it out here and there, mostly as asides. The purpose of all this hoopla is to radically transform the system of county government.

When all of the marketing and promotion is done, the three Commissioners will appoint a County Manager Selection Committee that will recommend that the Commissioners hire a business-minded person who knows about adding up revenues and subtracting expenses, but knows nothing about what county government is, why it exists, or how it operates. But, that won’t slow down the new leader, because he or she is going to run the County like a business — top-down decision making and all about money.

None of this political coup will be accomplished by a vote of the citizens of the county, or with consultation with department heads, especially those department heads who were elected by the voters. Democracy is just too costly and inefficient.