LEADERSHIP TEAM MEETING

Tuesday, April 11, 2000

9:00 a.m.

Commissioners' Conference 368

APPROVED 2/6/01

 

PRESENT:  Commissioners Peter Sorenson, Bill Dwyer, Bobby Green, Sr., Anna Morrison and Cindy Weeldreyer; Bill Van Vactor, Steve Carmichael, Jan Clements, Doug Harcleroad, Chuck Forester, Jim Gangle, Mike Gleason, John Goodson, Doug Harcleroad, Gary Ingram, Mike Moskovitz, Rob Rockstroh, Patricia Rogers, David Suchart, Paul White and Teresa Wilson.  Zoe Gilstrap, Recording Secretary.

1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA

 

None.

 

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS

 

None.

 

3. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660

 

None.

 

4. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION

 

a. Announcements

 

None.

 

b. Approval of Minutes: February 9, 2000, 2:00 p.m.

 

MOTION:  Approval of February 9, 2000 Minutes.

 

Weeldreyer MOVED, Green SECONDED.  VOTE: unanimous approval.

 

c. PRESENTATION Oregon Progress Board and County Benchmarks.

 

Van Vactor stated that these benchmarks are objective data that can provide guidance to the Board of Commissioners and Budget Committee and can be used for strategic planning.  He introduced Jeffrey Tryens.

 

Tryens gave a PowerPoint presentation explaining the concept of managing for results (see material on file).

 

Tyrens explained how benchmarks have been used at the state level and said they have been able to find common elements.  He stated that an important part of vision is a strategic plan for all of Oregon; not just state government. Tyrens stated that an important element of Oregon Shines II is that analysis is putting meat on the bones.  He stressed that without analysis, benchmarks are meaning­less.

 

Tyrens stated that Oregon is world famous for benchmarks with targets for where Oregon wants to be in the future.  He said that there are 92 measures for benchmarks.  Tyrens stated that when money is attached, everyone will want a benchmark.  He said that when benchmarks became part of building a budget, there were 292 benchmarks; everything was measured even when they didn’t have the data.  He urged them to stay at level with what is important to them as a county.  Tyrens said that they can always revisit benchmarks to make them more realistic.  He said he is constantly struggling between changing benchmarks and throwing out old measures.  Tyrens said for success, they should have a set of criteria to be looked at which could be linked into the strategic plan. He stated that an Oregon benchmark should include policy as a relevant piece to measure things that can be used for change or influence.  He said it is important for all measures to be explainable.

 

Tyrens said they have cooperative relationship with numerous counties that have progress boards.  He stressed the importance of recognizing that not all state priorities are benchmarks and not all benchmarks are state priorities.

 

Regarding juvenile crime prevention, Tyrens stated that the benchmark is the arrest rate for property and person crimes, and said there are identified risk measure categories.  Tyrens noted that agencies still have their own internal measures but all agencies are working together to report on indicators.

 

Tyrens stated that if Lane County is going to have a strategic plan, he would identify key priorities through a strategic process and then benchmark for those key priorities.  He also said that Lane County can incorporate benchmarks in its budget process.

 

Tyrens stated that agencies do not like outcome-based assessment because they give grades.  He said that he has suggested that they get away from that because it’s too personal.

 

Sorenson said the suggestion to broaden the strategic planning process to include benchmarks would mean bringing in a community vision which is a change in direction of the plan.  He stated that it is vital to move on with these measures whether or not they are used in the strategic plan.

 

Green asked that there be another meeting set to identify what will be measured and to identify parameters.  He said this should be a part of the strategic plan.  He stressed the need to ask what is best for Lane County and isolate what it is Lane County is going to do.  

 

Morrison stated that she would like to identify core and non-core services.  She said that she would like to wait until that has been determined and then reconvene the leadership team.  Morrison said to keep it simple and concise by picking three or four things to really work on and then measure that.

 

Gleason said they will end up with nothing if there are no benchmarks for strategies in the plan.  He stated that he will continue to argue against the exercise of what is core and non-core.  Gleason stressed the need for agreement by the Commissioners on the focus because the focus of commissioners telling them what they want is more beneficial than core and non-core.

 

Sorenson said the Management Team should provide written comments about specific issues they want included in the strategic plan and whether they want to include the State of Oregon Progress Board benchmarks.

 

Weeldreyer stated that the economic development pieces of the Oregon bench­marks are significant.

 

Gretchen Pierce cautioned that if the focus is not set on a strategic plan, it is difficult to know what to measure and what results they want.  She said to keep the attention focused on what direction the Lane County strategic plan is taking them.  Pierce emphasized the need to define desired results in order to determine benchmarks.

 

Van Vactor summarized that the next steps include getting Management Team prospective, finishing the budget and then having another Leadership Team meeting for more discussion on how the strategic plan will involve benchmarks.

 

There being no further business, this meeting adjourned at 11:20 a.m.

 

 

Zoe Gilstrap, Recording Secretary