Steering Group IV’s January 6, 2004 Minutes

 

Scheduling Future Meetings

We discussed Jan Hubbell and Marc Bierdzinski’s scheduling conflicts, the importance of their external input, and the need to keep them involved in this PIT II process.  Eva Turenchaulk will call both Jan and Marc to update them on today’s meeting, and to find out if they would both be available to meet on Wednesday, January 28 from 12-2 PM.

 

We discussed the need to use our group’s resource representatives efficiently (e.g. Bill Wayson and Kirsten Zecher for website information, technical tools, etc.; Rita Bright for training-related issues; Joe Pisano for Human Resources related issues, etc.).

 

The All-PIT meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 18 from 5-8 PM at Pea Soup Andersens.  If necessary, our group may meet in the afternoon prior to the All-PIT meeting.

 

Comments on PIT I Selected Improvements

We discussed some of the PIT I recommendations that relate to our steering group’s focus.  For ease of reference, the PIT I recommendations are included and italicized within the text of these minutes, and our group’s comments follow each recommendation.[1]

 

The following PIT I recommendations are grouped under section 5, “Providing consistent case processing and determinations – between North and South, and across planners”:

 

*Coordinate a weekly meeting between interested staff and the Director of Planning and Development.  At this meeting, front counter staff, planners and others in the Department would have the opportunity to agendize and discuss relevant issues, including policy/ordinance interpretation.  The Director, in concert with an attending member of County counsel, would formally resolve interpretation issues.  These interpretations would then be catalogued and recorded accordingly.  This will help clarify policy and ordinance application for staff, will increase predictability and credibility, and will help guide applicants in the design of their projects.

This recommendation has not been implemented.  Angela Antenore will find out its status.

 

*Another option:  Form a standing committee to study and disseminate interpretations for polices and ordinances.  Begin a staff-initiated circular where any planner can write a circular on a topic that needs clarification, citing the section, posing the question, and suggesting a clarification.  The department can issue an interpretation until the ordinance is changed by the Board of Supervisors (if needed).  Sort these circulars, by topic, and integrate them with County Counsel opinions, etc.

This recommendation has been initiated through the New Case Review (NCR) process, and Management’s input to NCR.  However, this information needs to be efficiently disseminated to staff planners.  Noah Greer to follow-up with Jackie Campbell.

 

*Partner inexperienced planners with an experienced planner on certain cases. When a planner is not experienced in the type of case he or she is assigned next, the case is assigned to a team of two planners, one experienced, and one less experienced.  The more experienced planner, normally a P II or P III, becomes the case manager.  The case manager essentially is the mentor to the other planner for that case.  As a general rule, every P1 should have the chance to work with every P II or P III.

In South County, a formal mentoring program has been started.  In North County, mentoring has been occurring informally.  Noah to follow-up with Jackie.  Tina Frank to follow-up with Steve DeCamp.

 

According to Angela, Environmental and Animal Health Services both have an “Academy” for new employees consisting of a program of what needs to be accomplished for each newly hired employee to succeed.  A recurring performance measure (RPM) for Animal Health is to bring their percentage of newly hired employees who participate in this academy up to 100% from 60-70%.  P&D could potentially use other departments’ successful programs as a model for its own.  Noah and Angela will contact both Jan Glick and Vivian Nelson for more information on Environmental and Animal Health Services’ academy.

 

Lynn Rodriguez started working on a checklist for new employees of P&D, and Rita Bright has continued to work on it. 

 

*Hold permit review within the first week for each assigned case.  Identify go/no go decision points, key issues and relevant stakeholders.

“Plan Review Meetings” are being held in both North and South County for each ministerial case with the Deputy Director, a Supervising Planner, and the Case Manager.  New cases are typically reviewed within the first 30 days of submittal.  Have other PIT II steering groups looked at this issue?  How does case sorting/distribution relate to supervision of staff?  Eva discussed how there is a link between these plan review meetings and the mentoring program, stressing that if a case manager works with a mentor and their supervising planner to determine a project’s potential issues before the meeting is held, the process would be more efficient.  Noah to follow-up with Jackie.  Tina to follow-up with Steve.

 

Simplify, standardize, and routinize as much as possible, so that planners can spend the majority of time on the key issues of each case.  Develop checklists for each type of case.

Noah uses a checklist created in 1984, and other planners in South County use it.  Question for the All-PIT meeting, “Who is going to work on this?”

 

Timely responses, objective decision-making in accordance with ordinances and Board policy direction and reasonable costs.  Even if applicants don’t get the answer they want, if they respect the fairness of the participants and the process, they are more likely to accept the answer.

Group agrees with the importance of this recommendation.

 

*Open the process; e.g., in the south, hold more meetings with applicants on the third floor, etc.

Question for All-PIT meeting: “Has Steering Group 1, ‘The Nature of the Interaction,’ looked at this recommendation?”

 

*Ensure the Director and the Board of Supervisors provide ongoing direction on our mission and goals.

Group agrees with the importance of this recommendation.

 

The following PIT I recommendations are grouped under section 7, “Upgrading management, supervisory, and personnel practices”:

 

*Enable timely and equitable sharing of information; enable people (including supervisors) to work part-time – look at job sharing; treat everyone consistently; provide explanation of personnel actions; promote team atmosphere; management needs to be approachable and accessible – make time for staff; lead by example; encourage all staff to attend New Case Review, BAR etc, when applicable to their cases.

Peter Harmer discussed the importance of recurring performance measures (RPMs).  Alice McCurdy will request the RPMs for each division of P&D from MaryLouise MorganWard, and will share this information with the rest of our group.  Noah will provide the RPMs that PIT I suggested for our group’s review.  At our next meeting, Angela will bring Mike Brown’s RPMs to the group, and provide us with a brief training.  Our group will come prepared to the next meeting having reviewed the various RPMs for the divisions and PIT I’s suggestions, and will discuss what RPMs are meaningful, and which ones need to be added or deleted.  We should ensure we have input on the RPMs from both Jan and Marc.  RPMs could also be a topic of discussion at the All-PIT meeting.

 

*Supervisors should not have to process cases.  Change the role of supervisors into problem-solvers; problem-preventers; work organizers; and coaches; etc.  Staff should be supervisors’ #1 priority.  Their primary responsibility should be to be available and to ensure that the planners to whom they are assigned are effective and productive, by fixing problems and preventing their reoccurrence, providing just-in-time training, mentoring, etc.

Our group has already focused on this recommendation.  Alice, Jan, Marc, and Joe Pisano worked on a draft revised job description for Supervisors within P&D.  This draft is being reviewed by Management.

 

*Establish a process for applicants and for planners to have a timely meeting with supervisors or some other respected party when problems arise that require a quick resolution.

Group agrees with the importance of this recommendation.

 

Train management and supervisors in:  empathy, understanding, and morale vs. production.

Question – What have we done for improved customer service and staff morale?  Noah to ask Rita regarding status, and to confirm if she can be at the next meeting (1/20/04).

 

 

*Support and expand the role of Dev Rev’s Mentoring Program.

Noah to follow-up with Jackie.  Tina to follow-up with Steve.

 

Increase availability of existing supervisors; if that is not sufficient, add more supervisor positions.

Planners’ access to their supervisors would help efficiency.  A possible RPM and/or goal could address the availability of supervisors to their staff.

 

Management needs to be a mix of homegrown and people with experience in other agencies.

Angela said that this is being addressed at the Management level.

 

An enhanced recruitment program, as well as establishing an employee retention program, is ultimately essential for the long-term success of any specific improvements we address in the short-term. PIT feels that creating a positive work environment, by recognizing quality work, and looking for ways to foster longevity are crucial to the success of P&D’s ministerial process.

This recommendation could be the outcome of the PIT’s work if it is successful.  We will focus on retention.  We will discuss how retention could be linked to RPMs at our next meeting.  Positive changes would affect both retention and morale positively, but it will take time to measure these positive outcomes.

 

The group has requested Rita to update us on the following PIT I recommendations grouped under section 8, “Improving training of staff, applicants, and agents”:

 

*Provide training sessions right away on such high-priority topics as: case/workload management; personal productivity skills; policy/ordinance interpretation (law and logic); how to train (train the trainers); and supervision/management.

*Provide at least one training session per month for each employee. Develop a reliable training schedule.

*Provide training specific to various experience levels.

*Offer all training in both North and South County, equally.

*Training sessions should consistently be cataloged and taped, handouts put in binder, and all info put in library.

*Just In Time training – Supervisors and upper-level planners should be enabled to provide brief, informal trainings to staff as needed.  For example, instead of explaining an item or issue to an individual planner, a supervisor should take a quick trip down the hall and ask if anyone else would like to attend.

*Frequent training sessions should be offered to (and by) outside departments, including County Counsel, Environmental Health Services, Public Works, Flood, BAR, agents, etc.

*Invite agents, architects, members of the community, and other experts to present trainings to staff.

*Consider applying geographic specialties for newer planners during the first 4-6 months of employment.  This will help avoid the immediate frustration many newer planners must grapple with as they try to interpret and apply different zoning ordinances, Community Plans, etc.

*Provide a list of recommended readings to newer staff.  This may include chapters on regional planning, Grand Jury reports, relevant newspaper and magazine articles, etc.

 

The following PIT I recommendations are grouped under section 9, “Re-examining and clarifying the roles of other involved agencies and the BAR/MBAR”:

 

The County benefits greatly from BAR/MBAR participation. However, several components of the BAR/MBAR process contribute towards many of the problems that plague the ministerial process. The current BAR/MBAR process often contributes towards inconsistency, less predictability of outcomes, and lengthy processing times. The role of the BAR/MBAR and the current BAR/MBAR process needs to be re-evaluated and re-defined.

This recommendation is a possible item for discussion at the All-PIT meeting.  Noah to discuss this item with PIT I.  Tina to find out who the appropriate contacts would be in Steering Group II for this item.

 

Dev Rev planners must coordinate with numerous different agencies with every case.  This can often lead to delays in case processing and frustration among all involved.  The roles of these agencies must be defined and the nature of the interaction must be coordinated and/or routinized in order to provide for earlier/timely communication and input.  Staff must be able to rely on other agencies for their expert opinions.  Staff would also like more substantive input from all Subdivision / Development Review Committee members, supported with more detailed notes.

Tina spoke with Brian Baca, SDRC Chair, who is currently making changes to the SDRC process for both discretionary and ministerial cases. 

 

For discretionary cases, the following is currently in the works:

·        Standard Informational Requests from all SDRC members will be made available to agents/applicants during the first 30 days from application submittal;

·        Standard Conditions from all SDRC members will be made available to agents/applicants.  These are the conditions that would typically be included in a staff report to the decision-maker in the form of a condition letter from the agency/department.  The goal is for the public to be aware of these standard conditions, so they can be incorporated in the project prior to submittal.

 

For ministerial cases, the following is currently in the works:

·        The existing, informal procedure for having ministerial cases reviewed by SDRC members consists of either calling Brian a couple days (or the morning of if necessary) before the regularly scheduled SDRC meeting to inform him of the case the planner would like reviewed, and he will ensure the SDRC members are available to review the case after the discretionary agenda items are reviewed; or

·        Show the case to Brian, and with his experience with projects and SDRC, he can determine which departments would need to review the project.

 

Eva asked how we handle input on projects from external agencies such as CalTrans, CDFG, USFWS, USACOE, etc.  We could discuss this item at the All-PIT meeting.  Questions to pose:  What are our options for coordinating with external agencies?  Internally, what are our recommendations?  Externally, what are our recommendations?

 

The following PIT I recommendations are grouped under section 10, “Institutionalizing our knowledge”:

 

Planners must often search for answers that another planner may have already completed. End decisions are not cataloged or disseminated to staff in a structured way and a chance for consistency is lost.

 

Designate a records management staff person, knowledgeable in library science.  This person would create and manage a library of all the scattered data sources that are currently floating around the third floor and are necessary for permit processing.  For example, he or she would consolidate the resources on habitats, butterflies, plants, archaeology, historic properties, EIRs, County Counsel opinions, etc. and manage them in a coherent and organized way.  He or she would work for the in-house experts to organize all of the data related to emerging issues and policy interpretations.  This person (the “Brain”) would work with management, supervisors, and in-house experts to create and disseminate papers on confusing/difficult subjects such as slopes, habitats, constrained lots, setbacks for odd shaped parcels, height calculations, etc.  These papers would be available for planners and the public at the counter and would be updated on the website. 

 

Combine ordinances / community plans / county counsel opinions, by topic, with masters kept in one place, by one person, and kept up to date.

 

An overriding goal of these 3 recommendations is to have centralized information that is readily accessible to all staff in order to promote both consistency and efficiency.  Eva to contact Steve Mason regarding this section.  Angela to review our group’s December 8, 2003 meeting minutes to see how it relates to this section.

 

Our “Tools Sub-group” will report back on the following PIT I recommendations grouped under section 11, “Improving the tools available for use by applicants, agents, and staff” at our meeting currently scheduled for February 3, 2004, and how it is linked to section 10, “Institutionalizing our knowledge.”:

 

*New planners should spend time at the zoning information counter teamed with an experienced planner.  (4-6 hours per week at the counter for the first 4-6 months of employment).

*Organize and maintain the North County library and the South County (third floor) library, to create centralized and valuable sources of current information.

*Upgrade the South County counter and ambience: separate seating area for people waiting; magazines; cleaner; more organized; more professional; renderings of good projects (donated by the architects), place a copier/printer at counter, create a place for planners and applicants to go and talk, with layout tables, create a map for both planners and the public to see where, exactly, the community plan areas are located.  Post this attractive map at the public counters.

Digitize / scan what is on microfiche and explore other possibilities to digitize data.  Ensure it is readable and available at all times. If possible, make it available via the intranet and the internet.  Do not purchase new microfiche machines until we have determined if we should continue to use them.  Designate a microfiche machine for staff (currently shared with public).

*Develop upgraded, standardized, up-to-date protos that are easy to access and used by everyone.  No individual prototype documents, letters, etc.  Develop upgraded, standardized, up-to-date Standard Conditions that are easy to access and used by everyone.  No individual Standard Conditions.

*Upgrade Accela (permit tracking system) to become more user-friendly: eliminate unnecessary tasks/steps, utilize electronic reminder system for necessary deadlines, etc.  Auto-create project file with intro letter to applicant, protos, etc.

*Designate an interim PPA.

*Allocate time for experienced planners to assist others; ease specialists’ (geologist, biologist, arborist, etc) workloads in order to allow for more time to assist others.

*Clarify the accounting logs (and Accela accounting log) so that they are easy to understand.  They are confusing to applicants and result in unnecessary time waste.

Create an electronic parcel registry for all parcels in the County with special challenges (constrained lots, significant slopes, creeks, historic structures, etc.).  These registries would track the submittal of permit applications and the development that occurs on constrained parcels.  Consider making available a GIS Intranet Server with applications for planners to do simple GIS queries & noticing.

*Determine if there are any tasks that are not essential to permit processing, and therefore, can be deleted from our workload.  Determine if there are any tasks that could more appropriately be done by others, including clerical staff, applicants, other agencies, etc.  

Improve the P&D work environment with improved cleaning services, better lighting and newer paint/furniture.  Obtain more layout tables and plan storage holders.  A compendium of all policy-related documents should be available to staff, able to be cut-and-pasted. Place all the GIS overlays on one Photomapper file; pursue one-foot resolution for “hot spots.”

Create a Mapping room for the North County staff.  Provide computer systems support in the North County office.

Create a buffering/noticing procedure or application that would streamline and expedite noticing/label requests.

 

Potential and Scheduled future meeting dates:

The group would like Jan, Marc, and Rita to be able to attend the next meeting.  Eva to contact them to see if they would be available to meet on Wednesday, January 28 between 12-2 PM.

 

We will meet on both January 20 and January 28 in order to prepare the documents that are due to Anne Coates by January 30, 2004.  We will consider rescheduling the February 3 & 10 meetings if there are dates/times that would work for both Jan and Marc.

 

An All-PIT meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 18 from 5-8 PM at Pea Soup Andersen’s.  Steering Group IV may choose to meet in the afternoon prior to this meeting.

 

 

 

 

 “Homework”:

ü      Review RPMs before next meeting, and bring ideas for what RPMs we think would be meaningful, and what RPMs could be dropped and/or modified.

ü      Review goals in minutes from meeting on December 8, 2003.

ü      Review ‘Retention Strategies’ table to determine the top areas to be impacted first.  Email responses to Alice, June Pujo, and/or Nicole.  Alice to e-mail retention table to Eva.  No responses were received prior to this January 6 meeting.

ü      Interagency group: contact Steering Group II

 

Agenda items (meetings 9:30-11 at Santa Barbara Bank & Trust in Solvang unless noted otherwise), and February 3 & 10 dates subject to change if we determine other dates/times that Jan and Marc are available:

 

§         January 20th

o       Training program update

o       Focus on preparing the following documents for Anne Coates by January 30th, in preparation for the All-PIT meeting on February 18^th:

§         Milestones & Accomplishments for Steering Group IV

§         Questions for other Steering Groups

§         Designate an Inter-group Coordinator, and the Lead People for Steering Group IV

o       All-PIT meeting (February 18, 2004) discussion items:

*        Tools for staff and public (w/ Groups I & II)

*        Public training (w/ Group I)

*        PIO function and press contact

*        Policy interpretations (w/ Group III)

*        Interagency coordination (w/ Group II)

o       Six types of RPMs – Angela to provide group with brief training

o       RPMs – What RPMs would be meaningful, and improve our process?

 

§         January 28th (12-2 PM at Santa Barbara Bank & Trust in Solvang):

o       Retention strategies update

 

§         February 3rd

o       Tools update

 

§         February 10th

 

 

§         February 18th – All-PIT meeting (5-8 PM at Pea Soup Andersens); Need for Group IV to meet prior to All-PIT meeting TBD.