New Search
A) Creating a new division, organizationally, with all the related personnel, physical (location <br /> changes), and budget changes. <br /> B) Creating a new "shadow division." The organizational structure would be established for <br /> stormwater related work, and there would be an appointed Division Manager who would be <br /> the Stormwater Program Manager, with authority only over stormwater program related <br /> work. Staff would potentially have two reporting structures depending on what type of work <br /> they are doing. It would not involve physical moves nor have budget impacts other than a <br /> new Division Manager position. <br /> In addition, the following scenario can be done in conjunction with any of the other scenarios: <br /> Scenario 5. Perform an evaluation of the entire Stormwater Program. <br /> Vitals: <br /> Also look at other programs (e.g. ESA program), other communities and how their stormwater <br /> programs are structured, funded, and results. Get help from an outside agency, such as <br /> another municipality or a consultant. <br /> Evaluate Scenarios <br /> The next step in the process was to flesh out the scenarios so that the group had <br /> common understanding in order to judge the suitability of the approaches. Then, using <br /> the original issues list as criteria, and adding to that list additional important factors to <br /> consider (budget/FTE impacts, realism, desirability), a report card was created. Each <br /> team member rated each scenario according to the criteria, and a combined report card <br /> was produced, as follows: <br /> Stormwater Management Team Decision Matrix Report Card Method <br /> Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4A Scenario 4B <br /> SW Program Matrix Director & Reorganize Shadow <br /> Criteria Manager/ Manage- Div. Mgrs. — SW SW Division <br /> Coordinator ment Prioritize Division <br /> Clear Priorities 31 15 19 26 18 <br /> Vision of Where Program is Going 32 17 19 28 22 <br /> Regular Program Evaluation 31 19 15 29 24 <br /> Adaptive Management/Corrective Action 27 18 16 30 24 <br /> Clear Responsibilities 31 14 19 31 21 <br /> Central Coordinating Function 33 13 15 31 20 <br /> Consistency Between Divisions 23 15 20 23 16 <br /> Clear Responsibility for Budget 22 13 18 29 23 <br /> Budget Impacts Yes No No Yes — big Yes <br /> FTE Impacts Yes (1) No No Yes (1 +) Yes (1) <br /> Realistic? 31 20 12 9 14 <br /> Desirable? 32 12 11 18 11 <br /> TOTALS FOR COMPARISON 293 156 164 254 " 193 <br /> Ranking.,.:= 1 5 4 2 3 <br /> (Individual scores ranged from 1 to 5. 1 = Does not meet criteria, 3 = Meets criteria, 5 = Best meets criteria) <br /> 7 <br />