Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Organizational Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Finney County accepts Raftelis organizational scan, directs staff to begin implementation
Summary
County commissioners accepted a 35‑recommendation organizational and operational scan by consulting firm Raftelis, which flagged staff capacity (48 full‑time vacancies, eight part‑time) and recommended strategic planning, updated interlocal agreements, SOPs, IT governance and hiring an assistant county administrator.
Finney County commissioners voted Oct. 20 to accept an organizational and operational scan delivered by Raftelis and directed staff to begin next steps on implementation.
The report, presented by consultants Michelle Ferguson and James Frick and summarized by the lead analyst, identified seven opportunity areas: strategic planning, strategic partnerships, budgeting and financial planning, recruitment and retention, standard operating procedures and work planning, technology and IT governance, and organizational development. The consultants said the county is experiencing significant staff capacity challenges and cited the most recent data available: 48 full‑time vacancies and eight part‑time vacancies across county departments.
“Staff capacity being one of, one of the primary challenges,” the lead presenter said, adding that the labor market will require creative solutions such as partnerships with neighboring jurisdictions, leveraging technology and a more comprehensive recruitment strategy.
Among Raftelis’s specific recommendations are adopting a formal strategic plan tied to budgeting, updating memoranda of understanding and interlocal agreements (particularly with Garden City), developing service‑level agreements between internal service departments, creating standard operating procedures to preserve institutional knowledge, and prioritizing hiring an assistant county administrator to reduce the new administrator’s span of control.
Derek, the county’s incoming administrator, told commissioners he would meet with the steering committee and department heads to prioritize the implementation action plan and integrate the recommendations with the upcoming budget process. Raftelis also provided a proposed implementation action plan with timelines and responsible parties.
Commissioners debated how best to oversee implementation: some preferred continuing a small steering committee to work closely with the administrator; others preferred full‑commission work sessions. The board voted to accept the report and directed staff to move forward, with further prioritization and organization to be addressed in coming work sessions and during the January reorganization of the commission.
The acceptance motion was made and seconded and passed by voice vote.
