County continues efforts to look at administration overhaul

Taylor County is continuing to inch its way toward having a more formalized system of internal administration, but what that will look like and will be called remains undecided.

Members of the county’s ad hoc committee to look at administrative options met February 20 with representatives from the Wisconsin County’s Association. This was the group’s second meeting. Prior to the meeting committee members had been given job descriptions from other counties that had adopted either an administrator or full-time administrative coordinator position.

At the meeting, committee members were asked to share what job duties and functions they would want either an administrator or administrative coordinator to have. Committee members shared a long list of possible job duties for the position.

There has been a push over the past year by some members of the county board and through the county’s strategic planning process for the county to adopt a more formalized and centralized approach to the day to day administrative functions of the county.

Under the current structure, the department heads primarily answer to the chairs of the various oversight committees. While human resources director Nicole Hager has the title of administrative coordinator the amount of formal authority granted to her by the county board is limited.

Proponents of having a more formalized and centralized administrative structure hope to see reduced costs due to increased efficiencies with others, including committee member Bud Suckow stating the goal of reducing the number of county committees.

State law requires counties to have either a hired county coordinator or county administrator or elected county executive. The goal of these positions is to have someone managing county operations on a big-picture level. State law spells out the duties and powers of administrators and executives to take action with hiring and firing of staff, including department head level staff, preparing the county budget, and appointing members to boards and commissions. The major difference between the two is that executive is elected and is independent from the county board.

Administrative coordinators offer a more flexible approach with each county deciding on the job duties, responsibilities and level of authority.

Last week’s meeting was facilitated by staff from the Wisconsin County’s Association and committee members were cautioned to not think about people, but rather focus on positions.

In addition to the committee members, county board member Mike Bub provided input saying that there needs to be a person in charge when there is an incident or something happens, or if there was a department not following the rules.

“That person should be the face and the voice of the county,” Bub said, noting that are times when the county has to separate facts from fiction in the public.

Committee member Chuck Zenner said a priority for him would be to have the person in the position have the ability to look into things and have the power to discipline staff if necessary.

Committee member Lorie Floyd said the county needs to have a plan and that the person needs to be consistent in handling things as well as ensuring the county is following its own rules.

Prior to the meeting, committee members were given sample job descriptions of full-time administrative coordinators from other counties. Zenner noted that Shawano County matched what he had in mind for the position. It was noted that that county and Vernon County’s job descriptions were close to being administrators without calling it by that title.

There are 17 counties in the state in the same situation as Taylor County with a number of those currently in the process of looking at their administrative structure.

Committee members said they wanted to hear from counties who have made the switch to more either administrators or full-time coordinators as well as from those who made the change back to see what worked or didn't work.

Going forward, the committee will be meeting again toward the end of March. At earliest there could be a presentation to the county board at the April meeting. However, action would not take place at that meeting, instead it would be discussed and then brought to a vote at a meeting in June.