Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout27-City Manager . ORIGINAL CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Fred Wilson Subject: Discussion on new City Charter Dept: City Manager Date: March 13, 2006 MICC Meeting Date: March 20, 2006 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: Recommended Motion: To discuss new City Charter Contact person: Fr..rI WiI..nn Phone:!;1?? Supporting data attached: Ward: FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: Source: (Acet. No.) (Ar.r.t nAc:rrirtinn) Finance: Council Notes: Agenda Item No. ~ 3/~o I ()(p , CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Staff Report Subject: Discussion of new City Charter Background: In accordance with Mayor Morris direction, a dinner workshop will be held at 5:00 p.m. on Monday, March 20 in the EDA Board Room to review the new City Charter and discuss its implications. Financial Impact: None Recommendation: To discuss new City Charter CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM <C~~)f TO: Mayor and Common Council FROM: Fred Wilson, City Manager SUBJECT: Draft Communication Guidelines DATE: March 20, 2006 COPIES: City Attorney; City Clerk In preparation for tonight's dinner workshop, the attached communication guidelines have been drafted. They are meant to generally summarize how elected officials and staff should communicate in light of the new City Charter. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. , :::It;}? 3/20/0(;, < Guidelines for Communication with City Manager and Staff Draft 3/20/2006 The purpose of these guidelines is to help foster productive communication among elected officials, the City Manager, and City staff. These are meant to summarize the more specific directives that are found in the City Charter and Municipal Code. \. General. Elected officials are welcome to have contact with any city employee, but requests for information and/or assistance should be made in accordance with these guidelines. To the extent practical, communications with City staff other than the City Manager should be limited to normal City business hours unless the circumstances warrant otherwise. 2. Routine requests for information and inquiries. Elected officials should contact all staff directly for information made readily available to the general public on a regular basis by City staff. The City Manager does not need to be advised of such contacts. 3. Routine requests for customer service. Elected officials and/or their staff should contact Department Heads directly regarding routine citizen complaints (e.g., potholes, street lights out, code enforcement complaints). The City Manager does not need to be advised of such contacts. 4. Non-routine requests. Elected officials and/or their staffs should contact the City Manager's Office with non-routine requests. Non-routine requests or inquiries may be those that: . Require staff to compile information that is not readily available . Require staff to render an opinion regarding a policy issue . Require an allocation of significant resources (staff time, equipment, or supplies) to address the request . Request a meeting with any City employee If a Department Head receives a request and believes it to be of a non-routine nature, he/she will advise the requestor and refer the request to the City Manager's Office for appropriate follow-up. When in doubt about what staff contact is appropriate, elected officials should feel free to contact the City Manager's Office. 5. Other issues. . It, is the role of elected officials to pass on concerns and complaints on behalf of their constituents. It is not, however, appropriate for an individual elected official to pressure staff to solve a problem in a particular way. . Concerns about specific City employees should be discussed only with the City Manager. . In accordance with the City Charter, elected officials and/or their staff may not provide direction to Department Heads or their employees. Staff is obligated to take guidance and direction only from his/her supervisor, Department Director, and ultimately the City Manager. t WHY WORK THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER? Six Good Reasons for Council Members and Staff Introduction I'm a lucky city manager. I work for an excellent city council. They take pride in promoting a tradition of community civility. They do their homework, serve for the right reasons, and have a sense of humor. They are supportive of staff and they trust me. I can talk to them about almost anything. In such a healthy council-staff environment, council members get to know and trust many staffers, and a smart city manager would not want to lose the feeling ofa friendly, open organization. So why is it necessary to sometimes remind our active and sincere council members to work through my office - or through department heads - when seeking information or expressing interests and concerns? And why do I feel so awkward when I do? Maybe its because no matter how diplomatically I express the desire - which is consistent with our formal Council Policies and Procedures - it can come across as a trust and control issue. And since the council members trust the staff, why shouldn't staff trust council members? After all, their motivation is typically to avoid bothering me (or department heads) with "the small stuff." What's to hide? I guess this is where I am supposed to exclaim "But it's not about trust and control!" In truth, however, it is, and here is why. Trust and Control The family jewel in a healthy local government environment is trust. With trust, we spend our time working together to solve problems and get good things done for the community. Without trust, problems multiply and the time spent solving them prevents work on more constructive things. Preserving trust in any relationship, personal or professional, requires that we exercise a prudent amount of control in how we communicate. The council-staff relationship is no exception; in fact, given the unique pressures and constraints imposed on this relationship, we probably need even more systematic guidance than most. A Lot of Rules - But Why? Fortunately, there is a lot of guidance available because nearly all cities have some formal rules in place, and virtually all such rules guide council members to work through city managers and department heads on most organizational matters. Even with all these rules, however, something significant is missing. Based on my research (admittedly not comprehensive, but I did check with leMA, the League of California Cities, various trainers, and California city managers via an emai) inquiry), I could not find a prepared explanation for why such rules are important, and how they preserve trust and benefit everyone involved in the relationship. In the absence G:\StafflHAMPIANlArticles\Working Via eAO.doc 41;),7 3_;;;J.{l-o(, of such context, the rules come across as, well, cold rules - a list of do's and don'ts designed to keep everyone in line. This "context void" seems to be widely perceived by city managers, many of whom asked me to send them anything that I might find on the subject. However, because I was unable to find anything already written, I have been forced to do a little more work (dang!). With the aide of some helpful city managers, outlined below are a half-dozen reasons why everyone's best interests are served when council members work through the city manager (and/or department heads) to gather information or address concerns. Six Reasons Why Its Best to Work Through the Manager Reason 1: Because city managers cannot be on top of things if they don't know what the "things" are. Council members correctly expect city mangers to be on top of things. However, if council members bypass the city manager in making requests of staff, or in expressing concerns to staff, then the manager cannot possibly be sufficiently aware council members interests or concerns (e.g. even the world's greatest city manager cannot assure a timely response to a council member inquiry if they are not aware of the request in the first place). Sure, staff members can inform the manager of the request, but this round-about way of communication increases the chances of miscommunication. Reason 2: Because by-passing the manager can create the impression that there is a problem in the council-manager relationship - and this perception can undermine the manager's credibility within the organization and/or the respect staff has for the council member. If a council member (or members) consistently go directly to other staff members with issues, several negative perceptions may evolve, such as: (A) the council member does not like to work with the city manager; (B) the council member does not trust the information provided by the city manager; (C) the city manager is ducking his/her responsibility and just "passing the buck"; (D) the council member is someone who does not play by the rules and seeks special treatment; (E) that it must be okay for staffto go around the manager, since council members do it. Such impressions will weaken a city manager's credibility and authority in the organization and/or reflect poorly on the council member. Reason 3: Because it is not possible for city managers to treat all council members equally if the manager is unaware of the "treatment" a council member is gelling. City managers are in the highly unusual position of having many "equal" bosses, and the expectation for equal treatment by those bosses is not only very high, but also very appropriate. Equal treatment includes providing council members with the same information, the same levels of support, and the same accessibility to the staff in general. Thus, by going through the city manager in making a request, the manager can judge if the desired information should be shared with all council members. The manager can also judge whether a request for staff work is consistent with council policy, or if the full council should direct such work. If requests are only inconsistently made through the manager, then the likelihood of inequities cropping up over time is high. This leads to the next point.... G:\Staff\HAMPIANlArticles\Working Via CAO.doc Reason 4: Because council members are perceived as having "awesome power" and therefore direct requests can lead to surprising and negative unintended consequences. A council member may contact a staff person in a department to make what they perceive to be a "simple request for information", only to find this request later perceived as an "order" to do something never intended by the council member. This is especially possible when direct contacts are made with staff below the department head level. Council members are typically surprised by such over-reactions and the complications and rumors that can result (because they know they don't have that much power). But to the staff who seldom have contact with the "higher ups", the mayor and council members are as "high up" as they come. Reason 5: Because direct council member contact with staff members below the department head level increases the likelihood of getting erroneous or incomplete information. The further a council member reaches beyond the city manager or department head, the more likely he/she will grasp someone who has significantly less familiarity with the legislative process, the deeper context of various city issues, the cross-departmental stakeholders that should be consulted, and the local rules for staff- council communication. Combine these differences with the "awesome power" phenomenon, and the margin for a mistake in responding to the council member increases substantially. On the other hand, a city manager can provide "one-stop" service, saving the council member time while producing better, more complete information. Reason 6: Because such direct council member contact can also inadvertently create awkward, embarrassing situations - or worse -for the staff members involved. Keeping #5 in mind, a staff member who later learns that he provided a council member with incorrect or incomplete information is embarrassed. A staff member who learns that she "violated" some staff-council communication rule is not only embarrassed, but worries that she might be perceived as acting "political" and undermining her bosses. A staff member who incorrectly completes excessive work at the "direction" of an individual council member may perceive themselves to be "in trouble", especially if they failed to notify their bosses or failed to complete other assigned work as a result. An Ugly Truth There is one unfortunate truth that needs to be recognized: Not everyone is sincere or competent in council-manager relationships. There are council members who deliberately try to undermine the system and there are city managers who are not responsive to council member inquiries. For such people, this article will not help, and any solution probably needs to be found in a closed session discussion (but not by short- cutting the system). Summing Up Fortunately, most council members and managers want the system and the relationships to work in the best possible way. To achieve this, is it necessary for "every little thing" G:\StafflHAMPIANlArticlesIWorking Via CAO.doc to go through the manager? No. However, what is required is an understanding between the council and manager as to what differentiates a "little thing" from a bigger thing, and this can only be achieved if the council and manager are regularly talking - and if there is a true commitment by all to play by the rules. I hope this article has better explained why such rules are worthy of our commitment and how they can help us uphold an excellent system while still preserving City Hall as an open, friendly, helpful place. -- b.lt fh/~i('U"L . CJ~ cf ,'ill WAs ObiSpo .~-.,-,.-._-_.....,.-"",,,,. EntP.red into Record 8t r.;IIr,mvOevCms Mtg: -4 la Item _ 3/~() /0 (p . q /frt.lL~YLLl ~ o)LJ _ '2.(0 ~~ 11 V /JA-1r -/ City Clerk/COC Secy City of Sail Bernardino G:IStaff\HAMPIANlArticlesIWorking Via CAO.doc