Marin supervisors approve reorganization of county executive office, add senior deputies

The Marin County Board of Supervisors voted May 19 to authorize a reorganization of the Office of the County Executive to add four assistant/deputy county executives and new support staff intended to strengthen cross-department coordination on climate, digital services, housing and community initiatives.

The new structure, proposed by County Executive Derek Johnson and developed with outside consultants, groups department leadership into functional clusters overseen by deputy executives and creates new positions the county says will improve strategic capacity across public safety, health and human services, community development and operations.

Supporters said the change will provide the county executive with executive bandwidth to coordinate complex, cross‑department projects such as climate adaptation, housing and digital modernization. "We need a team‑based leadership approach to deliver on those goals," County Executive Derek Johnson told the board, describing the reorganization as designed to "improve coordination and clarify roles." Anne Edwards, a consultant who advised the county, said peer counties that moved to similar models had staff and department heads report through assistants to create more time for strategic work.

Why it matters: Supervisors and staff said the reorganization is intended to help the county respond more quickly to changing state and federal mandates and to steer long‑running priorities — including housing, wildfire preparedness and climate resilience — with a more coordinated executive team. Johnson said the change reflects the board's priorities and the need for additional management capacity as the county implements ambitious programs and major multi‑department efforts.

What the plan does: The approved structure groups departments under four assistant/deputy county executives (Operations & Resources; Health & Human Services; Justice & Welfare; and Community & Environmental Services). The resolution authorizes Johnson to implement the leadership structure and to begin hiring the positions he proposed during the budget hearings. Johnson said some additions are fixed‑term and some are intended as ongoing support for functions such as digital services, communications and housing finance coordination; a forthcoming organizational study by KPMG will further examine department structures and staffing needs.

Public comment and labor concerns: Labor representatives and county employees who spoke at the hearing praised the process of internal engagement but urged caution on timing and asked that meet‑and‑confer obligations be respected. The county's largest management and middle‑management units asked for bargaining notifications and cautioned that moving positions that are represented would require meet‑and‑confer discussions. A representative of the union said the union had not been notified in advance about some position changes and asked the supervisors to delay adoption until labor consultations were complete. County counsel confirmed the board could adopt the budgetary authorization but that the county would follow applicable labor negotiation processes for any affected represented positions.

Opponents and members of the public expressed concern about the cost and the appearance of adding highly paid management positions at a time of tight budgets; proponents said the positions are intended to reduce long‑term costs by improving coordination and performance.

The vote: Supervisor Lucan moved the motion to adopt the resolution; Supervisor Colbert seconded. The motion passed unanimously with all five supervisors voting in favor.

What happens next: Johnson said the county will begin implementation, bring forward further details for positions and timelines, and monitor results. He also said KPMG's department assessments — already under contract — will continue and that the county will report back to the board on implementation progress.

Ending note: Supporters framed the reorganization as an effort to accelerate delivery on board priorities; critics urged careful labor negotiations and transparency about costs and expected results.