|
|
From Governing’s
Grading the Counties introductionFebruary 2002 issue
THE GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE PROJECT
Report Card:
Each area of government reflects the strategy of decentralization. When it comes to hiring, for example, the Fairfax Department of Human Resources merely certifies applicants — individual agencies are free to determine which ones they want to interview. Similarly, departments have full authority for any purchase that costs less than $5,000. “Everything would come to a standstill if it was centralized,” one manager says.
Not all of Fairfax’s experiments have gone smoothly. In accordance with its broad-based managing-for-results program, the county instituted pay-for-performance for all employees except those in the public safety field. But early data showed that managers were reluctant to impose tough grades and were rating virtually all workers as “outstanding.” That system is now being retooled.
Some of the county’s biggest obstacles are not of its own making. Virginia is a strict “Dillon Rule” state, with severe legislative restrictions on its localities, and among other burdens, it prohibits counties from structuring their own tax systems. With a median household income of more than $90,000, Fairfax’s residents are among the wealthiest in the entire United States, yet unlike its neighboring jurisdictions in Maryland, the county has no direct way to tax that income. So its revenue grew only modestly during the 1990s, even though the population grew by nearly 20 percent, adding pressure for new school construction and increasing already severe road congestion. Fairfax watched in relative helplessness as its neighbor counties on the Maryland side of the Potomac saw their bank accounts overflow with surpluses.
Fairfax’s fiscal problems are especially severe at the moment. Sales-tax receipts — comprising the second-largest pot of revenue — are down, and last year, the legislature killed a proposal to allow an extra penny on the sales tax for education and transportation. In October, Griffin ordered 5 percent budget cuts for all departments outside public safety and health.
Positives: County has followed 10-point program of sound financial management since 1975, successfully creating profitable, conservative investments and maintaining strict debt service levels; AAA bond rating from all three rating agencies; revenue task force meets monthly; rainy day fund contains 5 percent of general fund disbursements; at least 40 percent of annual carryover designated to the fund; agencies retain 40 percent of their savings; redesigned budget process; budget documents available to citizens on CD-ROM.
Negatives: Virginia’s restrictive Dillon Rule keeps county from modernizing tax system; legislature refused increase in sales tax for transportation and schools.
Positives: Eight-year capital improvement program, now being redesigned to include more maintenance projects; ongoing projects reviewed in monthly meetings; replacement funds available for vehicle fleet and technology; county kept up with major maintenance during difficult financial years in early 1990s; current backlog stands at modest $7 million.
Negatives: State controls almost all road building in the region, and state budget crisis has caused delays in its transportation plan; funding cut delayed jail expansion by two years.
Positives: Generally superior personnel policies; efficient training, discipline and termination processes; administrative support study reduced 32 job classes to six; increased salary levels approved for new hires; bonuses for superior performance; elected employee advisory council meets frequently with county executive.
Negatives: Pay-for-performance initiative not initially successful, diverted staff from other important efforts; state regulations bog down grievance process.
Positives: Performance-measurement team includes representatives from nearly every department; cooperative relationship among departments and auditors; data collected emphasizes outcomes, not outputs; analysts verify accuracy; employee feedback resulted in annual updates to performance-measurement manual and publication of quarterly newsletter.
Negatives: County lacks a cohesive managing-for-results technology system; budget office must reconcile each department’s data for annual reporting.
Positives: County leads nation in integrating IT into all management; projects funded within publicized IT priorities; annual revisions to IT strategic plan; new and replacement technology projects don’t compete for funds; board of supervisors, county executive and line agencies use same system to communicate with constituents; GIS accessible from any county PC; custom-built training program for central IT staff; solid procurement standards maintained; IT disaster-preparedness tests conducted each year, including one without warning.
Negatives: Some state-mandated systems weak, causing redundant data entry.
|
 |
anagers in Fairfax love to talk about flexibility. The word creeps into their conversations on almost any aspect of their work, whether they’re discussing the budget process, hiring or procurement. County Executive Anthony Griffin puts this ethos into a few clear words: “It’s my job,” he says, “to make sure agencies have what they need to do their jobs. I’m not prescribing how best to do it. The power of this organization is the people.” Such a system might not work everywhere, but it clearly has worked in Fairfax, making the huge suburban county, across the Potomac River from Washington, D.C., one of the best-managed jurisdictions in America. The handling of money and capital projects is outstanding, and Fairfax is a national leader in the advanced use of technology for the benefit of citizens.