3/18/1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

He believed there has-been some reaction due to who is heading departments and peoples personalities. The City Manager stated that as far as his office is concerned all that is not a problem. He simply felt the Agreement should be amended because it requires the Building Department to be a peer department with its Director reporting directly to the County Administrator. He pointed out that this same idea was expressed when the Building Department first moved and the City Council didn't like it, and then it came up again a year ago, but never got to this level. County Administrator Balczun had no difficulty with formally amending the agreement but he pointed out that Item 1 says "The Department shall be vested with all the rights, obligations, privileges and benefits of the existing County departments and will rank equally with its peer departments in the organizational structure." He felt that prior to two weeks ago the Building Department theoretically was in a somewhat elevated position in comparison to all other departments and had virtually division status, which was in clear contravention of the agreement, and with the change in structure, he believed we now conform to that requirement. The Administrator stressed that we have not diminished the authority of either the Chief Building Official or the Building Department, and he really did not feel what we did was material with respect to the contract. If you want to increase efficiency, you either change the organization or change the people; he chose to change the organization and give the people a chance. City Manager Little advised that after conferring with the Mayor, they feel the two attorneys should render a legal opinion that the agreement has not been violated. If it has not been violated, it doesn't need to be amended. Councilman Macht asked if the statement in Item 7 in regard to the structure of the Department being maintained until proven 'BAR 1 1987 21 ` BOOK 1 w,F. K