County Survey Discussed

“The tone at the very highest level is antagonistic.”

“The county looks at us as the enemy.”

“The attitude that we should be ‘grateful’ to have our jobs.”

“Lack of appreciation.”

“The County Board!”

“Administration threatens employees directly.”

“No respect from the public or county leaders.”

“Lack of strong and consistent leadership.”

“The top management has ruined the environment. Nothing will ever change until top management changes. Top management can’t be trusted.”

“Upper management is lost.”

Those comments are just some of the hundreds of comments Door County employees made in response to the question “What bothers you most about working for the county?” which was one of several questions asked in a Door County Workplace Climate Survey conducted between May 21 and June 7 of this year.

The survey occupied a good portion of the Nov. 18 Administration Committee meeting, with Duane Kuntz of the county’s Information Systems Dept., and Jake Erickson, of Human Services, presenting the information to the seven supervisors who sit on the Administration Committee. Kuntz and Erickson served as co-chairs of the Door County Mission Team that conducted the survey at the behest of recently departed county Administrator Maureen Murphy, who left the post as of Nov. 3, almost two years after being hired.

Kuntz told the committee that the survey was never intended to be personal, but was conducted to gauge the temperament of the workers and establish a starting point to correct problems.

“We are asking for consideration that you take our recommendations and findings to heart,” Kuntz said.

He added that despite some harsh comments in the surveys, the majority of county employees are happy and satisfied with their work, what they do and who they work with. But they’re not satisfied with communication and are concerned about the county’s direction.

“The feeling that’s out there is that these employees really want this to work. They are committed, and we know you are,” Kuntz said.

While several county board members appeared to take umbrage at all the hits the board took from employees in the survey, especially Supervisor Ken Fisher, who said he did not “have the tact” to respond to the survey, Supervisor Leo Zipperer said he thought the survey was “ill-conceived and ill-received” and that it was “an inopportune time to have that survey conducted.” The responses really point to problems with upper management, he said, “but it fell here.”

“In her absence, a whole lot of this can be corrected,” Zipperer said, obviously meaning former administrator Murphy without naming her. He added that “it was time to move on and I think that’s where we’re heading right now.”

That view seemed to be supported by Supervisor Fisher, who said, “We had a problem that existed. That problem, without saying too much, is gone now.”

Dan Austad, who serves as chair of the committee and the county board, recognized the tremendous amount of work that went into the survey and said he didn’t agree with everything in it, but asked, “How do we move forward to try to straighten some of these issues out?”

Corporation Counsel and Interim Administrator Grant Thomas said one of the things he took away from the survey is that too many top-down directives had been coming from the administrator’s office.

Mission Team co-chair Erickson suggested a first step might be educating the employee base on current policies and procedures that may be out of their purview, or holding workshops or luncheons with supervisors to learn more about how the county board works.

Supervisor Roy Englebert said he thinks it’s a great survey and suggested that the county board members consider meeting with employees from various county departments instead of just department heads.

“I don’t think we’ve ever done that in the past,” he said.

Austad asked Thomas and the two co-chairs of the Mission Team to come up with a short list of specific items the committee can consider to improve employee relations.

“It’s not going to die. It’s a work in progress,” Austad said.

The committee also discussed how to go about hiring a new county administrator.

County Human Resources Director Kelly Hendee said the board can go down either of two roads – it can weed through applicants, or it can hire a headhunting firm to find likely candidates.

She said the advantage of going with a headhunting company is that they will have a pool of candidates who are already looking for a new position on the quiet. She said last time she looked at the cost of hiring a headhunting firm several years ago, it was $10,000 to $15,000.

Supervisor John Neinas suggested the county should consider having candidates get a psychological evaluation before being hired.

Austad asked Hendee to bring current headhunting costs to the December meeting, at which time the committee will decide how to proceed, including putting a plan in place to evaluate candidates.

“Everybody said to take our time on this,” Austad said.

The committee also appointed Supervisor Susan Kohout as the county representative to the Wisconsin Counties Association County Ambassador Program, which works with the WCA’s legislative team to promote its legislative agenda before the state legislature and state agencies.