HomeMy WebLinkAbout20173181RESOLUTION
RE: APPROVE WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESPONSES TO THE
PERFORMANCE AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to
Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of
administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Board proposed responses to the Performance Audit conducted by
Harvey M. Rose and dated August 14, 2017, on behalf of the Weld County Council, and
WHEREAS, after review, the Board deems it advisable to approve and accept the
responses to the audit, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County, Colorado, that the responses to the Performance Audit conducted by Harvey M. Rose,
on behalf of the Weld County Council, be and hereby is, approved.
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted
by the following vote on the 13th day of September, A.D., 2017.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLODO
ATTEST: da,c„&)
Weld County Clerk to the Board
BY: �[�c., •
uty Clerk to the Board
AP"• 'D AS
County Attorney
Steve Moreno, Pro -Tern
arbara Kirkmeyer
Date of signature: a / ' I
F=Cow) , c -re, c,),
F -ARC PR), =-rc RR)
tot tl7
2017-3181
BC0050
WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONER RESPONSES TO
THE PERFORMANCE AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDATION 1.1: The Board of County Commissioners should consider an ordinance that further defines
the Coordinator role, including actions that would be considered improper without consultation with the full
Board.
RESPONSE: Disagree, in part. The recommendation calls for an ordinance which further defines the
Coordinator role of County Commissioners. The Board of County Commissioners is of the opinion Weld
County Home Rule Charter Section 3-8 Power and Duties of the Board, and Section 4-1 Departments
Created along with the attached document Roles and Responsibilities Necessary to Govern and Manage
Weld County, which has been in place for over twenty years, adequately addresses the recommendation
without creating an ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION 1.2: The Board of County Commissioners should direct the Clerk to the Board to: (1) record
all work sessions with an audio device and make such audio recordings available upon request by the public,
and/or (2) record and publicly post minutes of all work sessions to ensure consistency with the State's Open
Meeting Law.
RESPONSE: Agree as to (1). Although not required, the Board has directed staff to research the costs
associated with recording and/or taking minutes of work sessions and will consider doing one or the
other. The Board recently upgraded its calendar system to give easier access to the public to view the
weekly schedule of work sessions.
Disagree as to (2). The Board of County Commissioners is not required, pursuant to the Colorado Open
Meetings Act, to record and/or take minutes of work sessions. Section 24-6-402(2)(d)(II), C.R.S., says:
"Minutes of any meeting of a local public body at which the adoption of any proposed policy, position,
resolution, rule, regulation, or formal action occurs or could occur shall be taken and promptly recorded,
and such records shall be open to public inspection." The only meetings of the Board of County
Commissioners of Weld County where "the adoption of any proposed policy, position, resolution, rule,
regulation, or formal action occurs or could occur" is at a regular meeting on Monday or Wednesday
morning, or a special meeting noticed to consider specific issue(s). In accordance with Home Rule Charter
Section 3-10, Minutes of regular and special meetings are taken, promptly recorded, and made available
for public inspection. HRC Section 3-10 does not allow the Board of County Commissioners to adopt "any
proposed policy, position, resolution, rule, regulation, or formal action" at work sessions. This contrasts
to statutory counties, where such actions may take place at any meeting. Section 30-11-107(1), C.R.S.
RECOMMENDATION 1.3: The Director of Human Resources should work with the Board to determine a schedule
to review and update succession plans on a regular basis such as annually or biennially to ensure that the
County is effectively managing its talent and keeps pace with director turnover.
RESPONSE: Agree, in part. The County has a succession plan or "next in line" plan for all department
heads and elected officials in the event of a temporary or permanent absence due to an emergency in the
Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP).
The County puts in place succession plans for department heads and key managers when the timing and
situation is appropriate, such as a planned retirement or anticipated departure of a key employee. This
task is the responsibility of the department head, not Human Resources. Examples of such succession
planning is the succession plan and restructuring approved by the Board in April, 2017, for Finance and
Administration for the Director of Finance and Administration and Controller positions, the creation of the
Deputy Director position in Human Services in 2016, Deputy Director of Information Services, and the
2017-3181
g-ra-aor�
Page 1 of 4
recent approval of two Deputy Director positions in Public Works. All of them were initiated and
developed by the appropriate department head, and not Human Resources.
Even when succession plans are in place there is no guarantee an incumbent in a deputy position is the
heir apparent to automatically become the Department Head's replacement. When a vacancy exists for a
department head the Board of County Commissioners at the time will most likely open the position, and
recruit the very best applicant available to fill the position, which may or may not be the department's
deputy.
Weld County, through Human Resources, offers many management and leadership training opportunities
to county employees to develop future managers in the county, and expand the county's talent pool.
RECOMMENDATION 1.4: The County Council should further study the whistle blower programs in place in
Arapahoe and Douglas Counties to determine if Weld County would benefit from the implementing those
programs.
RESPONSE: Agree. The Board of County Commissioners has reviewed the whistleblower provisions for
Douglas and Arapahoe Counties. The Board will be considering those examples and others to determine
which will work best to implement in Weld County.
RECOMMENDATION 2.1: The Director of Information and Technology should work with the Finance Director, the
Controller, the Director of Human Resources, and the Board of County Commissioners throughout the upgrade
of the County's financial system to ensure that the financial dashboard continues to improve the financial and
other data available to commissioners.
RESPONSE: Agree. As the auditors were informed, this was already planned and is a work in progress. The
financial dashboard capability is available to all elected officials, department heads, and key managers in
Weld County.
RECOMMENDATION 2.2: The Board of County Commissioners should consider and pass an ordinance defining
and requiring department documentation of significant changes in appropriations from the original proposed
budgets.
RESPONSE: Disagree. The County has in place under Significant Budget and Accounting Policies in the
annual budget the following Amendment to Budget Process (page 63 of the 2017 Final Budget), and Weld
County Home Rule Charter Section 5-5-90 clearly documents the process and requirements for amending
the budget. In addition, the Director Finance and Administration maintains a record of all recommended
changes and presents them as part of the Board's approval process of any Supplemental Appropriation
Ordinance amending the budget.
Further, each year as part of the Management Discussion and Analysis section of the Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report there is a requirement to discuss and explain all significant mid -year budget
amendments as part of full financial disclosure. One can read an example of this in the December 31,
2016, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report on page 23. Thus, the Board does not agree an additional
ordinance recommended by the auditors is necessary or warranted.
All supplemental appropriations must be done by ordinance and in a public meeting duly noticed in
accordance with Section 29-1-106, C.R.S.
Page 2 of 4
AMENDMENT TO BUDGET PROCESS:
Section 29-1-111, C. R. S., provides that, if during the fiscal year, the governing board deems it necessary,
in view of the needs of the various offices or departments, it may transfer budgeted and appropriated
monies from one or more spending agencies in the fund to one or more spending agencies in another
fund and/or transfer budgeted appropriated monies between spending agencies within a fund.
Section 29-1-111, C. R. S., provides that, if during the fiscal year, the governing body or any spending
agency received unanticipated revenue or revenues not assured at the time of the adoption of the budget
from any source other than the local government's property tax mill levy, the governing board of the local
government may authorize the expenditure of these unanticipated or unassured funds by enacting a
supplementary budget and appropriation.
Sec. 5-5-90. - Budget.
A. An annual budget and appropriation ordinance is adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
in accordance with the Colorado State Budget Act and the Home Rule Charter. The budget is
prepared on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles for all governmental,
proprietary and expendable trust funds. The accounting system is employed as a budgetary
management control device during the year to monitor the individual departments (level of
classification which expenditures may not legally exceed appropriations). All annual appropriations
lapse at year end.
B. The Director of Finance and Administration is authorized to transfer budgeted amounts within
departments of each fund. Any revisions that alter the total appropriation for each department
must be approved by the Board of County Commissioners through a supplemental appropriation
ordinance.
Supplementary budget and appropriations require a two-thirds majority vote by the Board of County
Commissioners.
RECOMMENDATION 2.3: The Board of County Commissioners should pass an ordinance amending Section 5-4-
90 of the County Code to clarify when to pursue sole source purchases. Rather than stating that purchases
"may" be sole sourced if there is only one appropriate vendor, the Code should be amended to provide
additional criteria on when Commissioners "should" undertake sole source purchasing process.
RESPONSE: Disagree. Per Weld County Home Rule Charter Section 14-9 (1) the Board of County
Commissioners shall adopt bidding procedures for county purchases which shall assure open and
competitive bidding on all county purchases. The Board and staff are of the opinion that Weld County
Home Rule Charter Section 5-4-90 adequately covers sole source purchases. Current and future Boards,
on a case -by -case basis, "may" determine when a sole source purchase is appropriate, and not be
obligated to do a sole source purchase by a "should" undertake sole source purchasing policy.
The case in point is the purchase of the election equipment discussed in the audit. The Board of County
Commissioners required a full bid process because of the threatened litigation from vendors, and the
Colorado Secretary of State's unwillingness to provide the County with a written document defending and
holding the County harmless in the event a vendor other than the Secretary of State's temporarily
certified vendor challenged the County's use of a sole source vendor.
To avoid putting the County in legal jeopardy, the Commissioners choose to go through a full competitive
bid process. The Weld County Clerk and Recorder disagreed with the decision, but she does not have the
Page 3 of 4
ultimate fiduciary responsibility of protecting the County's assets from a liability claim as do the County
Commissioners.
RECOMMENDATION 2.4: Draft and pass a resolution defining and requiring or encouraging elected officials to
publicly disclose facts related to the appearance of a conflict of interest in order to dispel a reasonable person
from concluding a conflict of interest exits when in fact the elected official does not have a conflict of interest
under the relevant state and local laws.
RESPONSE: Agree, in part. The Board of County Commissioners intends to amend the Weld County Code
to require all County Elective Officers and employees to comply with the Ethics Rules and Standards set
forth in the laws of the State of Colorado, including, but not limited to, Article XXIX "Ethics in
Government" of the Colorado Constitution. The Colorado Independent Ethics Commission (IEC)Ethics
Handbook (3rd ed., 2016) contains a section addressing the issue of appearance of impropriety. The Ethics
Handbook discusses how the IEC may be requested to review questions regarding appearance of
impropriety to determine if the IEC has jurisdiction and how to analyze a specific case. With the adoption
of the Code amendment, the issue of the appearance of impropriety will be addressed.
Additionally, the County Attorney routinely advises Commissioners, prior to consideration of quasi-judicial
or administrative matters at public meetings and hearings, to disclose facts when there may be a potential
conflict of interest present. He advises the Commissioners to say whether they will be able to consider
the matters in an impartial and unbiased manner. When an actual conflict involving a Commissioner's
pecuniary interest and a matter being considered exists, the County Attorney advises the Commissioner
that recusal would be in the best interests of all involved.
The Board does not feel the resolution recommended by the auditors will be necessary, because of the
proposed new Code amendment and the County Attorney's continuing practice of advice regarding
conflict of interest. The Board intends to amend Weld County Code Section 2-2-150 to require all Elective
Officers and employees to comply with the ethics rules, standards, and penalty provisions set forth in the
laws of the State of Colorado, including, but not limited to, Article XXIX 'Ethics in Government' of the
Colorado Constitution. Such amendment language will also require the County Attorney to provide to
all Elective Officers and employees annual updated guidance about the ethics rules, standards, and
penalty provisions and how to comply with them.
Page 4 of 4
Confidential Draft
Performance Review of the
Weld County Board of County Commissioners
Submitted to the Weld County Council by
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
HMR
HARVEY M. ROSE
ASSOC!A'ES
toe
r
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
1390 Market Street, Suite 1150
San Francisco, CA 94102
August 14, 2017
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary i
Introduction 1
1. Organizational Structure and Division Functions 5
2. Administrative and Executive Decision Making 14
3. Appendix A: Benchmarking Survey Results A-1
Executive Summary: Performance Review of the
Weld Board of County Commissioners
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC was retained by the Weld County Council to conduct a
Performance Review of the Board of County Commissioners. The County Council
requested that this performance review be conducted in conjunction with a
performance review of the Clerk and Recorders' Office. Our findings, conclusions, and
recommendations resulting from our Performance Review of the Clerk and Recorder's
Office are included in a separate report to the County Council.
The performance review, although technically not a performance audit, was conducted
in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards, 2011 Revision,
issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, U.S. Government Accountability
Office. The scope of the performance review included activities and business conducted
from January 1, 2014 to the present.
The project team submitted a draft report, with findings and recommendations, to the
County Council in order to solicit feedback from Board of County Commissioners on the
accuracy of findings and conclusions on August 14, 2017. The final report, incorporating
comments and information provided via the County Council, on DATE.
This report is structured in two sections: (1) organizational structure and division
functions and (2) administrative and executive decision making. Our findings and
recommendations are summarized below.
Section 1: Organizational Structure and Division Functions
The Weld Board of County Commissioners (Board) has a unique structure under the County's Home Rule
Charter in which commissioners are each responsible for coordinating one of the County's five major
departments. This structure carries many benefits, but also the risk that a commissioner may improperly
intrude on the administrative decision making of department heads, particularly in regards to personnel
actions. The Board typically holds two work sessions each week as a forum for discussing administrative
matters with department heads and for providing administrative direction. Although we received
generally positive feedback on the usefulness of these meetings, the work sessions could be better
documented by audio recordings and/or with formal minutes recorded by the Clerk to the Board.
Other issues pertaining to the governance role of the Board of County Commissioners include the use of
retirees as part of the County's workforce. The number of part-time retirees (who are scheduled to work
less than 40 hours per week, but consistently work at least 20 hours per week) and hourly retirees (who
are regularly scheduled to work less than 20 hours per week) declined between 2014 and 2016 from 27
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
I
Executive Summary
to 18. Although the Board approved a succession plan as recently as April 2017 following a high level
resignation, the Director of Human Resources indicated that the County generally conducts succession
planning as time permits.
There is no countywide formal whistle blower program for County staff to anonymously report
misconduct. Although such a program is not standard for large Colorado counties, two peer counties
have such programs and it is prudent government practice to provide a venue for staff to anonymously
report misconduct for further investigation.
Recommendations
The Board of County Commissioners should:
1.1. Consider an ordinance that further defines the Board of County Commissioners coordinator role,
including actions that would be considered improper intrusion in to department operations
without consultation with the full Board Second recommendation.
1.2. Direct the Clerk to the Board to: (1) record all Board of County Commissioners work sessions
with an audio device and make such audio recordings available upon request by the public and
(2) record and publicly post minutes of all work sessions to ensure consistency with the state's
Open Meetings Law.
1.3. Direct the Director of Human Resources to propose a schedule to review and update succession
plans on a regular basis with the Board such as annually or biennially to ensure that the County
is effectively managing its talent.
The County Council should:
1.4. Further study the whistle blower programs in place in Arapahoe and Douglas counties to
determine if Weld County would benefit from implementing those programs.
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
Decades of prudent budgeting that continues to the present as well as large amounts of mineral wealth
have contributed to a strong financial position for Weld County. The County has low taxes, with property
taxes 20 percent below the Big 10 County average, and does not have a sales tax. Further, the County
has no debt, its pension is 97 percent funded, and it has unrestricted reserves of nearly $92 million. A
recently developed financial dashboard system has improved commissioners' ability to access up to date
high level and detailed financial information on County finances.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
ii
Executive Summary
Areas where administrative and executive decision making could be improved include a recent
emergency operations training seminar, which has raised questions about its planning and costs. The
Whole Community Immersion Course, which took place in August 2016 in Breckenridge, cost the County
$43,083.54; about $19,000 more than originally budgeted. Of this unplanned expenditure,
approximately $12,700 was paid for from departmental training budgets, potentially precluding other
planned trainings, and approximately $6,300 was covered by the General Fund.
Despite only one vendor (Dominion) certified to provide new voting machines in the state, the Board
proceeded with a competitive purchasing process and ultimately issued a request for proposals for
voting equipment vendors in April 2017. Dominion was the only vendor to respond to the bid and the
pricing schedule for equipment and services was the same as the schedule previously negotiated with
the State. While generally a beneficial approach, competitive bidding in this case incurred unnecessary
County costs as the results were predictable based on the absence of other qualified vendors certified
by the State.
Weld County public officials' conflicts of interest are principally managed through self -reporting and
guidance provided by the County Attorney. During the course of this performance review, questions
were brought to our attention regarding whether one commissioner had a conflict of interest when she
participated in a Board of County Commissioners hearing for the consideration of a mineral resource
development facility (asphalt and concrete plants) to be operated by Martin Marietta. We found no
evidence of a conflict of interest in this case.
Recommendations
The Director of Information Technology should:
2.1. Work with the Finance Director, the Controller, the Director of Human Resources, and the Board
of County Commissioners throughout the upgrade of the County's financial system to ensure
that the financial dashboards continue to improve the financial and other data available to
commissioners.
The Board of County Commissioners should:
2.2. The Board of County Commissioners should consider and pass an ordinance defining and
requiring documentation for significant changes in appropriations from the original proposed
budget.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
iii
Executive Summary
2.3. Second pass an ordinance amending Section 5-4-90 of the County Code to clarify when to
pursue sole source purchases. Rather than stating that purchases "may" be sole sourced if there
is only one appropriate vendor, the Code should be amended to provide additional criteria on
when Commissioners should undertake sole source purchasing processes.
2.4. Draft and pass a resolution defining and requiring or encouraging elected officials to publicly
disclose facts related to the appearance of a conflict of interest in order to dispel a reasonable
person from concluding a conflict of interest exists when in fact the elected official does not
have a conflict of interest under the relevant state and local laws.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
iv
Confidential Draft
Introduction
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC was retained by the Weld County Council to conduct a
Performance Review of the Board of County Commissioners. The County Council requested that
this performance review be conducted in conjunction with a performance review of the Clerk
and Recorder. However, our findings, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from our
performance review of the Clerk and Recorder are included in a separate report to the County
Council. The Board of County Commissioners (Board) is the governing body of the County and
exercises legislative as well as executive and administrative powers and duties, which are
typically carried out by a chief operating official, such as a County Manager, County
Administrator, or County Executive.
The Board has five members, three of which are elected by districts from which they reside and
two of which are elected at -large. Article III of the County Charter outlines the structure, powers
and duties, and exercise of duties by the Board, including that certain departments are
coordinated by the Chairman of the Board or one of the other Commissioners.
Chapter 2 of the County Code includes administrative rules covering how the Board is to carry
out its responsibilities, including conducting meetings and hearings, oversight over planning and
land use, emergency management, and other administrative matters.
Scope
The basic components of the performance review, as defined by the County Council, were to:
1. Review existing organizational structure, which includes Administration, and outline
benefits and challenges of the current division of labor, span of control, chain of
command, authority, responsibility, delegation, and accountability.
2. Review division functions in terms of work flow and alignment.
3. Assess whether staffing levels are appropriate to meet workloads based on current
and future level of service agreements and provide comparisons to similar
jurisdictions.
4. Review administrative and executive decision making structures to identify
opportunities for improvement.
5. Identify strengths and weaknesses of the current organizational structure including
root causes behind current strengths or weaknesses that could influence capacity to
achieve future innovation.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
1
Confidential Draft
Introduction
6. Provide assessment and report on findings of personal and professional integrity in
complying with the County Mission Statement and Colorado Revised Statutes for
governance, conflicts of interest, legal compliance, responsible stewardship of
resources and financial oversight, openness and disclosure, and integrity in
fundraising.
7. Report on findings and make recommendations with a goal to assist the County in
becoming more operationally effective and efficient to its customer base.
8. Provide implementation plan for improvement for the immediate, short, medium,
and long term.
The scope of the performance review included activities and business conducted from January
1, 2014 to the present.
Methodology
The performance review, although technically not a performance audit, was conducted in
accordance with Government Auditing Standards, 2011 Revision, issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States, U.S. Government Accountability Office. In accordance with these
requirements and standard audit practices, we performed the following procedures:
■ Conducted an entrance conference with the Chair and Pro-Tem of the Board of
County Commissioners.
■ Conducted interviews with all members of the Board of County Commissioners.
■ Conducted interviews with several department heads and other County officials,
including the Clerk to the Board, Director of Human Resources, Clerk and Recorder,
Director of Environmental Health and General Services, Director of Finance and
Administration, Chief Information Officer, Director of Planning and Building, Director
of Human Services, Director of Public Works, and County Attorney.
■ Obtained and reviewed initial data and documentation submitted by Board's Office
Manager including strategic plans and budgets; financial data; organizational charts;
job descriptions for all positions directly under the Board's oversight; financial
statements; relevant statutes, rules and regulations; information on grievances and
other complaints filed by employees against member(s) of the Board of County
Commissioners; and a list of all outside commissions and boards that members of
the Board of County Commissioners sit on in an official capacity.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
2
Confidential Draft
Introduction
■ Obtained and reviewed additional data and documentation including monthly
revenue reports; supplemental appropriations; the County's 2016 final budget; the
capital planning budget; and a copy of the draft dashboard report template.
■ Received and considered confidential input provided by current and former County
staff.
■ Conducted a benchmarking survey to compare the Weld County Board of
Commissioners with other large Colorado counties.
■ Submitted a draft report, with findings and recommendations, to the County Council
in order to solicit feedback from members of the Board of County Commissioners on
the accuracy of findings and conclusions on August 14, 2017.
■ Submitted the final draft report, incorporating comments and information provided
via the County Council on
DATE.
Home Rule
Weld County is one of only two counties in Colorado' to adopt a home rule charter. As opposed to a
Dillon Rule county, Home Rule counties have the governing authority to make a wide range of legislative
decisions that have not been addressed by the state. County voters approved the charter in 1975,
making several changes to local governance including:
• Enlargement of the Board of County Commissioners from three to five;
• Establishment of a five -member, non-partisan, unpaid County Council;
• Abolition of the post of county surveyor;
• Consolidation of the existing 12 departments into five, each to be the responsibility of an
elected commissioner;
• Provision for a full-time county attorney and staff, rather than hiring an attorney on an hourly
basis;
• Expansion of the number of members on citizens' boards to bring better representation in the
fields of planning, health, and zoning adjustment;
• Establishment of a county personnel division to provide standards for employment
qualifications and pay;
• Provision for enactment of ordinances to establish policy and giving preference to local bidders
if price and quality are competitive.
1 Pitkin County is the only other county in Colorado to have established a home rule charter.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
3
Confidential Draft
Introduction
Acknowledgements
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC (HMR) would like to acknowledge the Board of County
Commissioner's Office Manager as well as the Director of Information Services, Director of
Finance and Administration, Clerk to the Board, County Attorney, and Director of Human
Resources. Requests for information, records and data were met promptly and thoroughly by
these individuals throughout the performance review process.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
4
Confidential Draft
1. Organizational Structure and Division Functions
The Weld Board of County Commissioners (Board) has a unique structure under the County's
Home Rule Charter in which commissioners are each responsible for coordinating one of the
County's five major departments. This structure carries many benefits, but also the risk that a
commissioner may improperly intrude on the administrative decision making of department
heads, particularly in regards to personnel actions. The Board typically holds two work
sessions each week as a forum for discussing administrative matters with department heads
and for providing administrative direction. Although we received generally positive feedback
on the usefulness of these meetings, the work sessions could be better documented by audio
recordings and/or with formal minutes recorded by the Clerk to the Board.
Other issues pertaining to the governance role of the Board of County Commissioners include
the use of retirees as part of the County's workforce. The number of part-time retirees (who
are scheduled to work less than 40 hours per week, but consistently work at least 20 hours per
week) and hourly retirees (who are regularly scheduled to work less than 20 hours per week)
declined between 2014 and 2016 from 27 to 18. Although the Board approved a succession
plan as recently as April 2017 following a high level resignation, the Director of Human
Resources indicated that the County generally conducts succession planning as time permits.
There is no countywide formal whistle blower program for County staff to anonymously
report misconduct. Although such a program is not standard for large Colorado counties, two
peer counties have such programs and it is prudent government practice to provide a venue
for staff to anonymously report misconduct for further investigation.
Organizational Structure of the Board of County Commissioners
The Weld Board of County Commissioners (Board) has a unique structure under the County's Home Rule
Charter. The commissioners are each responsible for coordinating one of the County's five major
departments: (1) Finance and Administration; (2) Public Health and Environment; (3) Public Works; (4)
Planning Services; and, (5) Human Services. Further, each commissioner is assisted in their coordination
role by another commissioner. The coordinator and assistant coordinator roles are appointed by the
Board at its first meeting in January each year.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
5
Confidential Draft
Section 1: Organizational Structure and Division Functions
Benefits and Risks of the Commissioner Coordinator Structure
We found fairly widespread satisfaction in our interviews with commissioners and County managers
with the current commissioner coordinator structure of governance. There are several benefits that are
realized by the unique coordinating role played by members of the Board. These benefits include:
(1) A more in-depth understanding (working knowledge) by coordinators, of the major
responsibilities, resources, and challenges of their assigned departments;
(2) A quick awareness of urgent matters that require the attention and/or action of the Board;
(3) A broader understanding of County functions due to the rotation of coordinator assignments
each year and the use of assistant coordinators.
Despite these benefits, the County's use of the commissioner coordinator structure also carries the risk
that a commissioner may improperly intrude on the administrative decision making of department
heads, particularly in regards to personnel actions. Although the County has several controls in place
that would limit the risk of improper intrusion, the charter doesn't provide much guidance on what the
coordinator role entails. The controls that help mitigate the risk of coordinator intrusion into
administrative matters include that:
(1) All policy decisions and all contracts must be approved by a motion, resolution, or ordinance of
the Board at a public meeting, including at work sessions;
(2) All departments are also assigned an assistant coordinator; and,
(3) Employees may file grievances through a formal process set up in Chapter Three of the Weld
County Code (Section 3-4-60), which can include a formal hearing with the Grievance Board and
an appeal of the Grievance Board decision to the Board of County Commissioners.
However, there is still a risk of improper intrusion by members of the Board, particularly regarding
personnel decisions (e.g. promotions, demotions, terminations). To help further mitigate this risk, the
Board of County Commissioners should consider an ordinance that further defines the coordinator role,
including actions that would be considered improper without consultation with the full Board.
Recommendation 1.1: The Board of County Commissioners should consider an ordinance that further
defines the coordinator role, including actions that would be considered improper without consultation
with the full Board.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
6
Confidential Draft
Section 1: Organizational Structure and Division Functions
Work Sessions Provide Important Forum for Administrative Matters, but Could be Better
Documented
In addition to two regular weekly Board meetings on Monday and Wednesday of each week, the Board
also holds work sessions so that County staff may obtain specific Board administrative direction and to
brief the Board on items which are soon to be scheduled for regular Board meetings.' Work sessions can
be held any day of the week, but are often held on Mondays and Wednesdays in the Pawnee
Conference Room after regular Board meetings.
We received generally positive feedback from commissioners and department heads on the usefulness
and efficiency of work sessions as they provide a forum for discussing administrative matters with
department heads and for providing administrative direction.
Unlike regular Board meetings, work sessions are not attended by staff from the office of the Clerk to
the Board; are not audio recorded; are not always attended by the County Attorney; and, no formal
minutes are taken or recorded with such records open to public inspection.
The Colorado Open Meetings Law (C.R.S. 24-6-402) requires that:
Minutes of any meeting of a local public body at which the adoption of any proposed
policy, position, resolution, rule, regulation, or formal action occurs or could occur shall
be taken and promptly recorded, and such records shall be open to public inspection.
Although work sessions are primarily a venue for administrative staff to receive and provide input to the
Board on administrative matters, the Board does form consensus and provide direction to staff at work
sessions. If formal action by the Board on these matters is necessary, it is taken by ordinance,
resolution, or motion at a regular meeting.
In order to improve the documentation and transparency of Board work sessions and ensure
consistency with the Open Meetings Law, the Board should direct the Clerk to the Board to: (1)
record all work sessions with an audio device and make such audio recordings available upon
request by the public and/or (2) record and publicly post minutes of all work sessions.
Recommendation 1.2: The Board of County Commissioners should direct the Clerk to the Board to: (1)
record all work sessions with an audio device and make such audio recordings available upon request by
the public and/or (2) record and publicly post minutes of all work sessions to ensure consistency with
the state's Open Meetings Law.
1 The purpose and review process for work sessions are defined in Chapter 2 of the Weld County Code (Section 2-
1-80).
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
7
Confidential Draft
Section 1: Organizational Structure and Division Functions
Support Staff Highly Regarded
The Board has only one staff member, an Office Manager, assigned to provide direct support. We
received universally positive feedback on the competence and professionalism of this staff from
commissioners.
We received universally positive feedback on the competence and professionalism of the Clerk to the
Board and her staff from commissioners. Although the Clerk to the Board is part of the Department of
Finance and Administration, the Clerk to the Board is appointed by, and serves under the direction of,
the Board. Further, the Clerk to the Board primarily provides clerk and recording services to the Board.
This work includes preparing agendas and maintaining a record of Board proceedings, inclusive of all
scheduled or special Board meetings, land use hearings, liquor hearings, and County Board of
Equalization hearings. The Clerk to the Board also records all motions, ordinances, resolutions, actions of
and votes by the Board, maintains a list of all Weld County Ordinances, publishes all required legal
notices, arranges the electronic scanning of all records of the Board and supplementation of the Weld
County Code.
Organizational Structure of the Weld County Government
The government of Weld County is staffed by approximately 1,500 full time equivalent positions across
five Board coordinated departments (Finance and Administration; Public Health and Environment; Public
Works; Planning Services; and, Human Services) as well as five elected departments (Assessor; County
Council; Board of County Commissioners; Sheriff; and, Clerk and Recorder) and the County Attorney. The
organizational structure of the County government, as depicted in the 2017 final budget, is shown below
in Exhibit 1.1.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
8
Confidential Draft
Section 1: Organizational Structure and Division Functions
Exhibit 1.1: Weld County Government Structure
WELD COUNTY HOME RULE GOVERNMENT
ASSeSSOr
I
County
Attorney
Nan
County
Council
Department of
Finance and
Administration
Commissioner
Accounting
Budget
Capital Projects
Contract Administration
Grant Administration
Finance Division
Human Resources
Printing and Supply
Housing Authority
1
County Citizens
i
oa rd
ommisof�sCountioners
Depat tment of
Public Health and
Environment
Health Administration
Environmental Health
Public Health Services
Health Communication„
Education and Planning
Board of Public Health
General Services
1
Carnal: un;cation s
Public Safety 1T
Inform ation Services
GIS and Mapping
Phone Services
R
Department of
Public Works
S
intbeet4. La Warrant,
Mime (antral, fvicMic
IfINIMMISSINCOIO
Veterans Services
Department of
Planning Services
Planning and Zoning
Building Inspection
Board of Adjustment
International Bui3ding Code
P€anning Commission.
Utility Board
FJerk and
Recorder
N.uwdittg, Motu Vest's, flattions
County Extension
Office
ed = Electe
Positions
Source: Weld County 2017 Final Budget
I
I
Department of
Human Services
Assistance Payments
Child/Adult Protection
Employment Services
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
Confidential Draft
Section 1: Organizational Structure and Division Functions
Working Retirees and Succession Planning
One of the tools that the County uses to ensure continuity of services and institutional knowledge is the
use of working retirees. Working retirees can provide a safeguard for the County for functions or
services that lack sufficient qualified staff, particularly for highly specialized work. However, overreliance
on working retirees may constrain the development and recruitment of talent that would otherwise
provide these services.
Section 3-2-100 of the Weld County Code contains the requirements and restrictions for the use of
working retirees, including a two-year cap for each working retiree and an annual cap of no more than
1,976 hours annually in a calendar year, among other requirements. Weld County Code Section 3-2-100
provides that the Board may grant waivers to this requirement for employees who are Grade 55 or
above or possess specialized skills, experience, or education. Exhibit 1.2 below summarizes the use of
working retirees from 2014 through 2016. As shown in the exhibit, the number of part-time retirees
(who are scheduled to work less than 40 hours per week, but consistently work at least 20 hours per
week) and hourly retirees (who are regularly scheduled to work less than 20 hours per week) declined
between 2014 and 2016.
Exhibit 1.2: Weld County Working Retirees
Year
Number of
Part -Time Retirees
(Up to 38
hours/week)
Number of Hourly
Retirees
(Up to 19
hours/week)
Total Number
of Working
Retirees
2014 14 13 27
2015 10 9 19
2016
9
9 18
Source: Weld County Department of Human Resources records
Amongst the nine part-time retirees, three were above Grade 75 and were director -level staff
responsible for managing a department. These three staff included: (1) the County Attorney; (2) the
Director of Finance and Administration; and, (3) the Director of Human Services. The Board approved a
succession plan as recently as April 2017 following a high level resignation, but the Director of Human
Resources indicated that the County generally conducts succession planning as time permits.
The project team conducted a benchmarking survey of nine other counties in Colorado. Of the nine
counties we surveyed, five (Arapahoe, Boulder, Douglas, Jefferson, and Mesa) provided a response to
our question: "Does your County have a formal or informal succession plan or policy for executive or
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
10
Confidential Draft
Section 1: Organizational Structure and Division Functions
director -level staff?" Of these five responses, only two responded saying they had formal succession
plans or policies. Arapahoe County responded that it has two formal programs for leadership
development, but did not note that it had a formal succession plan. In addition, Douglas County
responded that it has an Immediate Succession Policy, which requires the County Manager and the
County Attorney to have no fewer than two individuals prepared to step in to those roles. The Douglas
County response further stated that the County's succession planning for director -level positions is more
informal. Full results from our benchmarking survey may be found in Appendix A to this report.
Although developing a formal succession plan is not a standard benchmark for counties in Colorado, the
Director of Human Resources should work with the Board to determine a schedule to review and update
succession plans on a regular basis such as annually or biennially to ensure that the County is effectively
managing its talent and keeps pace with director -level turnover.
Recommendation 1.3: The Director of Human Resources should work with the Board to determine a
schedule to review and update succession plans on a regular basis such as annually or biennially to
ensure that the County is effectively managing its talent and keeps pace with director -level turnover.
Weld Lacks Formal Whistle Blower Program
Article III of Chapter three of the Weld County Code outlines the County's standards of conduct,
including expectations of proper conduct, workplace violence, harassment, conflict of interest and other
related standards. Further, Article III (Section 3-3-20) also outlines how County staff can report
misconduct and how department heads and elected officials should handle reports of misconduct.
Section 3-3-20 states that:
An employee observing misconduct should report the incident immediately to the
department head or elected official. Employees may report misconduct of a department
head or elected official to the Department of Human Resources.
Despite this policy, there is no formal whistle blower program for County staff to anonymously report
misconduct. Of the six responses that we received from our benchmarking survey, two counties
(Arapahoe and Douglas) indicated that they have formal, independent whistleblower programs in place.
Arapahoe's County Attorney's Office is responsible for administering their whistle blower program while
Douglas County's Finance and Human Resources Departments oversee its anonymous reporting hotline,
EthicsPoint, administered by an independent third party. Pueblo County indicated that it has a process
for employees to submit complaints to Human Resources, but complaints are not anonymous, which is
similar to Weld County's process for submitting complaints. Boulder, Jefferson, and Mesa counties
indicated that they do not have whistleblower programs in place. The County Council should further
study the whistle blower programs in its role as an oversight body for the County.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
11
Confidential Draft
Section 1: Organizational Structure and Division Functions
Recommendation 1.4: The County Council should further study the whistle blower programs in place in
Arapahoe and Douglas counties to determine if Weld County would benefit from implementing those
programs.
Conclusions
The Weld Board of County Commissioners (Board) has a unique structure under the County's Home Rule
Charter in which Commissioners are each responsible for coordinating one of the County's five major
departments. This structure carries many benefits, but also the risk that a commissioner may improperly
intrude on the administrative decision making of department heads, particularly in regards to personnel
actions. The Board typically holds two work sessions each week as a forum for discussing administrative
matters with department heads and for providing administrative direction. Although we received
generally positive feedback on the usefulness of these meetings, the work sessions could be better
documented by audio recordings and/or with formal minutes recorded by the Clerk to the Board.
The number of part-time retirees (who are scheduled to work less than 40 hours per week, but
consistently work at least 20 hours per week) and hourly retirees (who are regularly scheduled to work
less than 20 hours per week) declined between 2014 and 2016 from 27 to 18. Although the Board
approved a succession plan as recently as April 2017 following a high level resignation, the Director of
Human Resources indicated that the County generally conducts succession planning as time permits.
There is no formal whistle blower program for County staff to anonymously report misconduct.
Although such a program is not standard for large Colorado counties, two peer counties have such
programs and it is prudent government practice to provide a venue for staff to anonymously report
misconduct for further investigation.
Recommendations
The Board of County Commissioners should:
Consider an ordinance that further defines the Board of County Commissioners coordinator role,
including actions that would be considered improper intrusion in to department operations
without consultation with the full Board Second recommendation.
1.2. Direct the Clerk to the Board to: (1) record all Board of County Commissioners work sessions
with an audio device and make such audio recordings available upon request by the public and
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
12
Confidential Draft
Section 1: Organizational Structure and Division Functions
(2) record and publicly post minutes of all work sessions to ensure consistency with the state's
Open Meetings Law.
1.3. Direct the Director of Human Resources to propose a schedule to review and update succession
plans on a regular basis with the Board such as annually or biennially to ensure that the County
is effectively managing its talent.
The County Council should:
1.4. Further study the whistle blower programs in place in Arapahoe and Douglas counties to
determine if Weld County would benefit from implementing those programs.
Costs and Benefits
The costs for further defining the coordinator role would include minimal additional staff time to draft
and finalize a Board ordinance. Such an ordinance would help further define the roles of commissioners
and reduce the risk of future improper intrusion.
The costs for implementing the recommendation for enhanced documentation of working sessions
would include $2,500 for a portable audio kit for recording working sessions, but minimal additional
staff time would be required if the recording is limited to the audio device. If the County decides to
record working sessions with written minutes, additional staff time of an Agenda and Minutes Clerk for
approximately eight to 16 hours per week would be required. Assuming this could be accommodated
with existing staff or with the hire of a part-time clerk, the additional costs could range from
approximately $8,590 to $17,180 per year based on the County's 2017 Salary Model with pay data as of
February 15, 2016. Implementing this recommendation would ensure that the Board of County
Commissioners operates consistently with the Colorado Open Meetings Law and would improve
transparency and public trust with Board operations.
The costs for implementing the recommendation to regularly update the County's succession plans
would require minimal additional staff time for the Department of Human Resources, but would
improve the County's ability to ensure that critical positions are filled by well -qualified personnel.
The costs for implementing the recommendation to study whistle blower programs in place in Arapahoe
and Douglas counties would require a modest amount of staff time to learn more about these programs
and report back to the County Council and Board of County Commissioners as to their efficacy. However,
the County may be able to improve its current process for employee complaints by further study of the
programs in these two counties.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
13
Confidential Draft
2. Administrative and Executive Decision Making
Decades of prudent budgeting that continues to the present as well as large amounts of
mineral wealth have contributed to a strong financial position for Weld County. The County
has low taxes, with property taxes 20 percent below the Big 10 County average, and does not
have a sales tax. Further, the County has no debt, its pension is 97 percent funded, and it has
unrestricted reserves of nearly $92 million. A recently developed financial dashboard system
has improved commissioners' ability to access up to date high level and detailed financial
information on County finances.
Areas where administrative and executive decision making could be improved include a recent
emergency operations training seminar, which has raised questions about its planning and
costs. The Whole Community Immersion Course, which took place in August 2016 in
Breckenridge, cost the County $43,083.54; about $19,000 more than originally budgeted. Of
this unplanned expenditure, approximately $12,700 was paid for from departmental training
budgets, potentially precluding other planned trainings, and approximately $6,300 was
covered by the General Fund.
Despite only one vendor (Dominion) certified to provide new voting machines in the state, the
Board proceeded with a competitive purchasing process and ultimately issued a request for
proposals for voting equipment vendors in April 2017. Dominion was the only vendor to
respond to the bid and the pricing schedule for equipment and services was the same as the
schedule previously negotiated with the State. While generally a beneficial approach,
competitive bidding in this case incurred unnecessary County costs as the results were
predictable based on the absence of other qualified vendors certified by the State.
Weld County public officials' conflicts of interest are principally managed through self -
reporting and guidance provided by the County Attorney. During the course of this
performance review, questions were brought to our attention regarding whether one
commissioner had a conflict of interest when she participated in a Board of County
Commissioners hearing for the consideration of a mineral resource development facility
(asphalt and concrete plants) to be operated by Martin Marietta. We found no evidence of a
conflict of interest in this case.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
6
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
Weld has Strong Finances According to Key Indicators
Weld has Low Taxes Relative to Other Colorado Counties
The Weld Board of County Commissioners has, over the last several decades and continuing to the
present, maintained a commitment to prudent budgeting. This governing approach, in addition to large
amounts of mineral wealth, has contributed to the County's strong financial position. In 2016 Weld
County's mill levy1 was 15.80 mills, which is about 3.9 mills, or 20 percent, lower than the average mill
levy of the 10 counties that responded to the Big 10 Counties survey2 as shown in Exhibit 2.1 below.
Exhibit 2.1: 2016 Weld Mill Levy vs. Other Big 10 Counties
County Total County Mill Levy
Pueblo 30.71
Adams 26.82
Jefferson 24.21
Boulder 22.62
Larimer 21.88
Douglas 19.77
Big 10 Average 19.68
Weld 15.80
Arapahoe 14.86
Mesa 12.30
El Paso 7.87
Source: 2016 Big 10 Survey
As of 2016, Weld County was the only Big 10 county that did not have a sales and use tax. As shown in
Exhibit 2.2 below, the average sales tax rate for Big 10 counties in 2016 was 0.93 percent with Mesa
County charging the highest sales tax rate at two percent and Arapahoe charging the lowest (other than
Weld, which does not charge any sales tax) at 0.25 percent.
1 A mill levy is a tax rate that is applied to the assessed value of a property. The term is used in expressing tax rates on a per -
dollar basis. For example, a tax rate of 60 mills means that taxes are six cents per dollar of assessed valuation.
2 The Big 10 counties survey is a collection of data produced by ten large counties in Colorado including: Adams, Arapahoe,
Boulder, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer, Mesa, Pueblo, and Weld.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
7
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
Exhibit 2.2: 2016 Big 10 Sales Tax Rates
County Sales Tax Rate
Mesa 2.00%
El Paso 1.23%
Douglas 1.00%
Pueblo 1.00%
Boulder 0.99%
Big 10 Average 0.93%
Adams 0.75%
Larimer 0.65%
Jefferson 0.50%
Arapahoe 0.25%
Weld No Sales Tax
Source: 2016 Big 10 Survey
Weld has No Debt and Large Reserves
Weld County has no outstanding debt, a sign of unusually strong and frugal finances. As shown in Exhibit
2.3 below, Weld is one of four Big 10 counties that did not have any debt service payments in 2016. The
average Big 10 county annual debt service in 2016 was approximately $6.1 million. Further, as of
December 31, 2016, the County was able to fund 97 percent of its pension plan, which is an additional
sign of very strong finances.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
8
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
Exhibit 2.3: 2016 Big 10 Debt Service
County 2016 Debt Service
Jefferson $23,186,000
Arapahoe $17,610,000
Larimer $12,542,000
Big 10 Average $6,077,000
Douglas $4,574,000
Mesa $1,723,000
Pueblo $1,135,000
Adams None
Boulder None
El Paso None
Weld None
Source: 2016 Big 10 Survey
The County's operating funds are also in a strong position. As of December 31, 2016, Weld County had
approximately $91.9 million in unrestricted funds. Further, the County's General Fund had a surplus of
$18.4 million in 2016 and a fund balance of $38.9 million as of December 31, 2016.
Dashboard Reports Improve Monitoring of County Finances
In July 2017 the Board of County Commissioners began using a recently developed financial information
system, known as the "Weld County Financials Dashboard." This financial dashboard system is web -
based, provides the commissioners with highly customizable information on the County's finances, and
is refreshed every evening from the County's finance system known as "Banner." Commissioners may
explore the current year status as well as previous year historical amounts of each fund and/or
department or function within the County. Users may quickly customize their dashboard by selecting the
department(s), fund(s), and/or time frame of finances they wish to review. For example, a user may
review the budgeted vs. actual amounts for the General Fund for the previous two years as well as the
current year to date. For a more detailed review, a user may choose a specific department and review
its General Fund expenditures and, for further detail, may review payments made to specific vendors
from that department and/or within that fund.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
9
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
The financial dashboard system represents a significant improvement of access to financial information
for commissioners, as well as department heads, some of whom have also recently been provided
access to the system. Previous to the financial dashboard system, commissioners received detailed hard
copy quarterly budget status reports from the Finance Director, detailed hard copy monthly revenue
and expenditure reports, and were able to request other hard copy financial information reports on an
ad hoc basis depending on their level of interest. The Finance Director noted that the County is planning
on upgrading its financial system over the next two years from Banner to ERP, which will allow for
integration with PeopleSoft, the County's human resource management system. Throughout that
process the Director of Information Technology should work with the Finance Director, the Controller,
the Director of Human Resources, and the Board of County Commissioners to ensure that the financial
dashboards continue to improve the financial and other data provided to commissioners.
Recommendation 2.1: The Director of Information Technology should work with the Finance Director,
the Controller, the Director of Human Resources, and the Board of County Commissioners throughout
the upgrade of the County's financial system to ensure that the financial dashboards continue to
improve the financial and other data available to commissioners.
Use of County Funds
Out of County Travel for an Emergency Operations Training
The County's travel policies are defined in Charter Section 3-8 and Section 2-12-160 of the County Code.
These policies allow for County employees or members of an appointed board or commission to travel
within or outside the County and be reimbursed or receive prepayments for reasonable and necessary
travel expenses incurred in connection with approved travel on behalf of the County.
During the course of this performance evaluation, questions were brought to our attention regarding an
emergency operations training ("Whole Community Immersion Course") that occurred over four days at
Beaver Run Resort in Breckenridge in August 2016. Specifically, questions were raised as to: (1) why the
training was held at a resort outside the County; (2) why the actual cost was higher than what had been
budgeted; and, (3) how planning decisions were made. We interviewed the Director of the Office of
Emergency Management as well as the County Finance Director and obtained related documents in
order to answer these questions. The Board of County Commissioners approved all related contracts for
the training as all contracts must be approved by the full Board per Section 3-8 of the County Charter.
According to the Director of the Office of Emergency Management, the purpose of the seminar was to
provide an advanced training and exercise for Emergency Operations Center personnel to practice
simulated but realistic crisis situations within a structured learning environment. The seminar was
modeled after a training provided for County staff in 2012 at the U.S. Emergency Management Institute
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
10
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
operated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in Emmitsburg, Maryland. According
to the Office of the Emergency Management Director and the County's Finance Director, the seminar
was held outside the County in order to ensure that participants were fully immersed in the training and
exercise. The Finance Director noted that he and other County staff were familiar with the facilities
available in Breckenridge as it is home to the venues that host the annual 10 County Budget
Conferences. Further, the Finance Director stated that the County was able to secure off-season rates
for accommodations. A review of lodging costs found that the County paid approximately $110 per
room per night, which appears to be equivalent to the cost for mid -range hotels in and around Weld
County.
In December 2015, as part of the 2016 County budget process, the Board of County Commissioners
approved $15,000 to authorize the Office of Emergency Management Director to "put together a
training seminar." As shown in Exhibit 2.4 below, the actual cost to the County for the training was
$43,083.54, or $28,083.54 more than originally budgeted.' These additional costs were reduced to
$19,083.54 more than the original budget due to $9,000 in donations made by five private organizations
as detailed in Exhibit 2.4. Of this $19,083.54 in excess County costs, $12,742.79 in unplanned expenses
were paid for from departmental training budgets and the remaining $6,340.75 was covered by the
General Fund. Although the ultimate fiscal impact on the County's General Fund for holding the training
off -site was relatively minor, it is likely that these departments had to forgo some other planned
trainings or conferences in order to cover the lodging costs for their staff to attend this seminar.
It is not completely clear when and how the Board of County Commissioners approved an expanded
scope of the training from its original budget allocation of $15,000. According to the Director of the
Office of Emergency Management, there was an apparent miscommunication between the Office and
the Board of County Commissioners regarding the nature and venue of the training when the $15,000 in
funds was originally budgeted in December 2015. The Director further stated that in early February
2016, he presented a proposal for a venue that could handle 75 participants based on quotes from three
locations to his Commissioner Coordinator. The Director also stated that he and his Commissioner
Coordinator presented this proposal to the other commissioners at a working session on February Stn
Although there was no active documentation of working sessions prior to January 2017, a summary of
items listed in the BOCC calendar for February 8th shows that the emergency training, including that the
venue and dates had been confirmed, was discussed by the Board. As noted in Recommendation 1.2 in
Section 1 of this report, we recommend that the Clerk to the Board take action to ensure that such
meetings are recorded to ensure consistency with the state's Open Meetings Law. In addition, we
recommend that the Board document when significant appropriation changes are made from the
original approved budget.
3 This does not include costs incurred by other parties for attendees representing municipal agencies.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
11
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
Recommendation 2.2: The Board of County Commissioners should consider and pass an ordinance
defining and requiring department documentation for significant changes in appropriations from the
original proposed budget.
Exhibit 2.4: Breakdown of August 2016 Emergency Management Training Seminar
Costs and Donations
Amount
Additional
Details
Original
Budget
$15,000.00
Paid
for
Trainer Only
Actual
Costs
43,083.54
Costs
for
Food,
Lodging,
& AV
Rental
Amount Over Budget
$28,083.54
Sources Paying
for
Excess Costs
Amount
Donation
($1,500.00)
Tetra
Tech
Donation
(1,500.00)
PDC
Energy
Donation
(2,500.00)
Base Tactical
Donation
(1,000.00)
Felsburg
Holt
&
Ullevig
Engineering
Donation
(2,500.00)
Waste
Management
Total
Donations
($9,000.00)
Departmental
Training
Budgets
12,742.29
Paid
for
Lodging
for respective
staff
Net
Costs Covered by the
General
Fund
$6,340.75
Source: Office of Emergency Operations
According to the Director of the Office of Emergency Management, there were 75 attendees at the
seminar. Of this amount, 39 (52 percent) were County staff and the remaining 36 attendees represented
municipal staff such as police and fire departments as well as fire protection districts in Weld County.
The non -County staff costs were covered by the municipal agencies they represented. A breakdown of
the County employees who attended the seminar by department, as well as whether that department is
a primary or supporting County response agency, as defined by the County's Emergency Operations
Plan, is shown in Exhibit 2.5 below.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
12
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
Exhibit 2.5: County Employees who Attended August 2016 Emergency Training by Department
Department
Number of
Attendees
Role
as a Response
Agency
Human
Resources &
Finance
3
Supporting
Department
Buildings
and
Grounds
1
Not
Specified
Information
Technology
3
Supporting
Department
Sheriff's
Office
2
Primary
Response
Agency
Office
of
Emergency
Management
3
Primary
Response
Agency
Regional
Communications Center
3
Primary
Response
Agency
Public
Works
10
Primary
Response
Agency
Planning
Department
2
Supporting
Department
Human
Services
2
Supporting
Department
Policy
Services)
Group
(Legal,
PIO,
Admin
3
PIO:
Legal:
Primary
Supporting
Response
Department
Agency
Public
Health
3
Primary
Response
Agency
Board of
County Commissioners
4
Primary
Response
Agency
Total
39
Source: Office of Emergency Operations
Decision to Require an RFP for New Voting Equipment Does Not Appear to Follow the County's
Purchasing Code
The Colorado Secretary of State must certify all voting equipment vendors prior to use of the equipment
in elections in Colorado. In February 2016, the Colorado Secretary of State changed the state's election
rules such that only one voting system, Dominion, fulfilled the new requirements. Prior to that decision,
the Pilot Election Review Committee, an advisory body, recommended to the Secretary of State in
December 2015 that multiple voting equipment vendors be certified for use in Colorado.
In March 2016, the Clerk and Recorder sought approval from the Board of County Commissioners, as
required by Section 3-8(4)(m) of the Weld County Home Rule Charter, to purchase new voting
equipment from Dominion. The Board declined to proceed with the purchase at that time, citing
concerns with the State's purchasing process, the ability of Dominion to fulfill its contractual obligations
in Colorado in time for the presidential election in November 2016 pending litigation regarding the
legality of the Secretary of State's changes, and disagreement among the Commissioners and the Clerk
and Recorder regarding the appropriate purchasing process that the County should pursue. According to
County officials, if the Secretary of State's decision had been reversed or unilaterally changed, a sole
source purchase could have exposed the County to legal liability from other voting equipment vendors.
The Board of County Commissioners ultimately agreed that a competitive purchasing process was
necessary to allow all voting equipment vendors who were or soon could be certified by the Secretary of
State an opportunity to bid to provide voting equipment to Weld County.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
13
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
As a placeholder, the Board of County Commissioners set aside $500,000 in the Election Department's
2017 budget pending Board's approval of a purchasing process once the legal uncertainties regarding
the Secretary of State's election rulemaking were resolved. According to County officials, purchasing
staff began work on a request for proposals in January 2017. On February 28, 2017 a district court issued
an opinion confirming the validity of the Secretary of State's election rulemaking, leaving Dominion as
the only modern voting equipment provider in Colorado.4 However, in spite of the resolution of the
litigation, the Board proceeded with a competitive purchasing process and ultimately issued a request
for proposals for voting equipment vendors dated April 10, 2017. Dominion was the only vendor to
respond to the bid, which closed April 26, 2017 and the pricing schedule for equipment and services was
the same as it the schedule previously negotiated with the State. The contract with Dominion was finally
approved by the Board of County Commissioners on May 15, 2017.
The County's purchasing policy (section 5-4-90 of the County Code) states that "Purchases may be
exempt from the quote and bid process if there is only one appropriate vendor." Had the County
immediately began negotiating with Dominion after the district court opinion, rather than wait
approximately two months to issue and receive responses to a request for proposals, the voting
equipment and attendant training of Elections staff could have begun sooner. A competitive purchasing
process does not appear to have been necessary, given the district court's favorable opinion regarding
the Secretary of State's election rulemaking. Although the purchasing code's requirements for sole
source purchases were not violated, the requirements themselves are vague and would benefit from
additional definition. This would provide clearer guidance to the Commissioners on when to undertake a
sole purchase.
Recommendation 2.3: The Board of County Commissioners should pass an ordinance amending Section
5-4-90 of the County Code to clarify when to pursue sole source purchases. Rather than stating that
purchases "may" be sole sourced if there is only one appropriate vendor, the Code should be amended
to provide additional criteria on when Commissioners should undertake sole source purchasing
processes.
Conflicts of Interest
Prevailing Laws
The Colorado Revised Statutes, the County Charter, and the County Code define conflicts of interest
and/or prohibit public officials from taking part in official County business that would involve or result in
a private interest. Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) §24-18-101 and C.R.S. §24-18-201 define and
4 Per Colorado Election Rule 11.9, counties may purchase equipment from four other vendors, but only to maintain
their legacy systems. See also: The Board of County Commissioners vs. Wayne Williams, Denver District Court, Case
16 -CV -31544.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
14
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
prohibit local government officials from having an interest in any contract made by them in their official
capacity. C.R.S. §24-18-201 further prohibits former employees from contracting or being employed by
an employer who contracts with a local government involving matters with which he/she was directly
involved during his/her employment within six months following the termination of his/her
employment.
According to Section 16-9 of the Weld County Charter, "no county officer, member of an appointed
board, or employee shall have any interest in any enterprise or organization doing business with Weld
County which might interfere with the unbiased discharge of his duty to the public and the best interest
of the County." Further, sections 2-2-10 and 3-3-10 prohibit all County employees, including elected
officials, from "accepting bribes, money, property or services of value in the course of employment."
Managing Conflicts of Interest in Weld County
Weld County public officials' conflicts of interest are principally managed through self -reporting and
guidance provided by the County Attorney. The County Attorney asserted to the project team that
public officials in the County, including the Commissioners, approach the County Attorney with
questions if they believe that they have or may have a conflict of interest. Further, the County Attorney
stated that he generally advises Commissioners to disclose conflicts of interest at the start of a hearing
or meeting so that it is included in the public record and to recuse themselves from related decision
making.
Commissioners are provided instruction on avoiding conflicts of interest from the County Attorney and
from participation in Colorado Counties, Inc.' (CCI). The County Attorney asserted to the project team
that he provides instruction to all commissioners when they start their terms and sends out an updated
memo about every two years with a summary of applicable rules from the Colorado Code of Ethics and
the County's own rules for conflicts of interest. Further, the County Attorney stated that commissioners
have access to annual conflict of interest training from CCI if they attend their annual conferences.
From time to time questions may arise regarding whether public officials have appropriately disclosed
conflicts of interest or recused themselves from related decision making. During the course of this
performance review, questions were brought to our attention regarding whether one commissioner had
a conflict of interest when she participated in a Board of County Commissioners hearing for the
consideration of approving an amendment to a site specific development plan and a special use permit
for a mineral resource development facility (asphalt and concrete plants) to be operated by Martin
Marietta. These questions were also raised as part of an appeal of the Board's approval of the special
use permit.
5 Colorado Counties, Inc. is a non-profit, membership association whose purpose is to offer assistance to county commissioners,
mayors, and councilmembers and to encourage counties to work together on common issues.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
15
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
Our review of the Weld County District Court's order on the appeal of the Board's unanimous decision
to approve a special use permit for the asphalt and concrete plants to be operated by Martin Marietta
found no evidence of a conflict of interest. The District Court Judge that presided over the appeal and
issued the order found that the Commissioner did not have a conflict of interest. Specifically, he found
that the Commissioner's previous employment with Tetra Tech, the consultants who worked with
Martin Marietta on this project and represented Martin Marietta at the public hearing, does not serve
as sufficient evidence that the Commissioner benefited personally or financially from the Board's
decision to approve the special use permit. Further, the plaintiffs in the case filed an appeal in March
2017 with the Colorado Court of Appeals, but did not cite their original argument in their appeal about
an alleged conflict of interest for the commissioner.
Although we did not find evidence of a conflict of interest in this case, the Board should consider
enhancing the County processes managing conflicts of interest to include disclosure of appearance of
conflicts of interest. Many jurisdictions, including the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, require or
encourage public employees to publicly disclose facts, which might otherwise cause a reasonable person
to conclude that the public employee has a conflict of interest, but that doesn't otherwise meet the
legal definition of a conflict of interest. Such disclosures could serve to dispel any appearance of
potential conflicts of interest occasioned by the disclosed facts.
Recommendation 2.4: Draft and pass a resolution defining and requiring or encouraging elected officials
to publicly disclose facts related to the appearance of a conflict of interest in order to dispel a
reasonable person from concluding a conflict of interest exists when in fact the elected official does not
have a conflict of interest under the relevant state and local laws.
Conclusions
Decades of prudent budgeting that continues to the present as well as large amounts of mineral wealth
have contributed to a strong financial position for Weld County. The County has low taxes, with property
taxes 20 percent below the Big 10 County average, and does not have a sales tax. Further, the County
has no debt, its pension is 97 percent funded, and it has unrestricted reserves of nearly $92 million. A
recently developed financial dashboard system has improved commissioners' ability to access up to date
high level and detailed financial information on County finances.
A recent emergency operations training seminar has raised questions about its planning and costs. The
Whole Community Immersion Course, which took place in August 2016 in Breckenridge, cost the County
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
16
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
about $19,000 more than originally budgeted. Of this amount, approximately $12,700 was paid for from
departmental training budgets and approximately $6,300 was covered by the General Fund.
Despite only one vendor (Dominion) certified to provide new voting machines in the state, the Board
proceeded with a competitive purchasing process and ultimately issued a request for proposals for
voting equipment vendors in April 2017. Dominion was the only vendor to respond to the bid and the
pricing schedule for equipment and services was the same as it the schedule previously negotiated with
the State.
Weld County public officials' conflicts of interest are principally managed through self -reporting and
guidance provided by the County Attorney. During the course of this performance review, questions
were brought to our attention regarding whether one commissioner had a conflict of interest when she
participated in a Board of County Commissioners hearing for the consideration of a mineral resource
development facility (asphalt and concrete plants) to be operated by Martin Marietta. We found no
evidence of a conflict of interest in this case. However, the Board should consider enhancing the
County's conflict of interest policies to require or encourage public disclosure of facts to dispel any
appearance of potential conflicts of interest when the public officials comply with the legal definition of
conflicts of interest, but when certain facts may lead a reasonable person to otherwise conclude that a
conflict of interest exists.
Recommendations
The Director of Information Technology should:
2.1. Work with the Finance Director, the Controller, the Director of Human Resources, and the Board
of County Commissioners throughout the upgrade of the County's financial system to ensure
that the financial dashboards continue to improve the financial and other data available to
commissioners.
The Board of County Commissioners should:
2.2. The Board of County Commissioners should consider and pass an ordinance defining and
requiring documentation for significant changes in appropriations from the original proposed
budget.
2.3. Second pass an ordinance amending Section 5-4-90 of the County Code to clarify when to
pursue sole source purchases. Rather than stating that purchases "may" be sole sourced if there
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
17
Confidential Draft
Section 2: Administrative and Executive Decision Making
is only one appropriate vendor, the Code should be amended to provide additional criteria on
when Commissioners should undertake sole source purchasing processes.
2.4. Draft and pass a resolution defining and requiring or encouraging elected officials to publicly
disclose facts related to the appearance of a conflict of interest in order to dispel a reasonable
person from concluding a conflict of interest exists when in fact the elected official does not
have a conflict of interest under the relevant state and local laws.
Costs and Benefits
Implementation of these recommendations will require minimal additional staff time as the Finance
Director has indicated that the Finance Department intends to seek improvements in the financial
dashboards when the County migrates to a new financial information system. Implementation of these
recommendations would result in improved access to financial information for commissioners and
department heads and would also clarify when it would be appropriate to pursue a sole source
purchase, thereby saving the County an undetermined amount of staff time by not developing and
issuing requests for proposals in limited instances.
Harvey M. Rose Associates, LLC
18
Confidential Draft
Appendix A: Benchmarking Survey Results
Based on information collected during the initial phase of the performance review, the project team
devised a set of survey questions to request additional information from Boards of County
Commissioners in other counties in Colorado. The project team contacted nine counties: Adams,
Arapahoe, Boulder, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer, Mesa, and Pueblo Counties, which together
with Weld County and Denver City and County are the counties with the highest populations in
Colorado. Denver was not included in the survey due to its status as a City and County and its urbanity.
Of the nine counties surveyed, we received responses from Boards of County Commissioners in six
counties: Arapahoe, Boulder, Douglas, Jefferson, Mesa, and Pueblo Counties.
Appendix A: Benchmarking Survey Results
CO
0
s-
Confidentia
4-
4-
4-0
V)
a)
v
O
4-1
.CU
p
O
a)
i--+
U
X
a)
L
O
4—
L
C
ro
Q
O
a)
U
U
C
V)
E
L
0
C
L
O
Does your County have a forma
a)
c
C
O
V
O '—.
a)
.0
O 7
L >
c o
Q
0)
aD
Alunop esayy
L._
a a)
be
C
.La
vi
c0 cn
E U
cO a
4-0
O *J
C
zZ+a
4a•
C
U
c
O
t
-'
C
CO
C
ca
`i'
O Q
Q •
-0 C
r0 O
a,
b.0
5 5.4...
-
E '(,)
L ._
p
t _a
O a)
U U >
v _c
'+"'
O
Z w
AwunoD sei2noa
CO
4 —to
L_CD
a)
U '
VO
L
C a.)
a) 00
03
O)
N
U
`�
N
_
=
O
U
a)
= O
•
a)
-0C
N r
a)
L O C
O all
4-1
> b0
a)
C f— U
4-.0 V)
O Q)
CD c
4J
+a
(0
NiO
L
O c O
U —0
L CD
0
U" m
-0
_= a) C Cl.)
= 03 p i
>
V) '�
O 10 v -C
U }' Q. U O
_
.cn
C E
03 E
V1
co +>,
ca
2
= ca O v
c i 2 c 4 ."
v v O Q
a
L a)
� � 'UCDCLIUCOMO �
, C (/� La)
Vi
L � O �
O L
� N �
a)
>
O
a
G
C C h0
O
,
C!0 a -o O
c a) ;> U
.
= }, 0 0
•- =
hn -- C-
O O
0 U
�, O
_ _
O 4-J
O O O O co n3
m O .��+
aL
o
a U a. c o co
�-
a n. ca
._
._
c
O
Li
i
01
_
CO
V) a
0
a }>i
L
L
O
>.C
ft
tn a) •V)
a)
f0 L O
e
-C O
v
o L
c
(� +"d
-0
= cuO
O NJ
L
v =
t�0 O•
cp U
S.
MC
,N
0O
L Q O C ca t0
' a) C
U-
L La
v- O O H
=
E a--+ V)
C •—
V) ca
tn
O
m=
4-0 ,>
E a) v =
L C c�
Q>. Ed
"C C
8
O N
4'-'
_�
U u U a,
E
(+-
O
Ca L
V) v a)
O
o 4-
-0 O
m-0
U O 4-a
_
Arapahoe County
0cuo
+-'
C
v
+.+
=
O
O to
�
CD
C
a' . _
73 CIO
•'a..'
`I)
cOa)o
1- C C
U
L o a
0 O
U
a) U
.Lz
O `n
o c.� "
a) O 't�0 +�
C
a)
4-1
4-
L
O
O<
cc:o - L v
>
4J }' CU 00
L Cl— N
a, '�
CU
O
4-0
in
w a
Qt .CDt L
Cr U C
a, V)
E N
-Qv;
Q a) CLI0
O O J Q c-3. O
a o E i.
U
V)
=
._
ra
.�- O
C a) in
Ti))
E a) Q cu 7
a3
CU
IN- � (1-0
-0
a) v O n
V) .7J
co L
a
ra
C6
C v rn O•
_ S -
0 OV)
O
L L
Q a
_vJ
`-
._
a)
L
O X
t L .. LI.J J. N
> O
1.}... a Q
ca }' c t
Appendix A: Benchmarking Survey Results
4-
i
0
Confidentia
to
L
f0
o
m
4O
i
sp
E
_o
a)
4J
4-1
f3
E
+-a
CD
4-I
C
E
f3
co
E
L.
nz
aJ
O
C
O
V)
L.
4-4
v
a
o
a
E
CD
C
a)
-6C-15
+-•
U
Does your County have a po
N
County Commissioners (BOCC)?
A;unop oNand I Munop esayy Alunop uosaamar
CU
N
C
Q
CU
L..
O
CU
7
•>
O
Q
a
Z
ro
• N
N
v
L
a) -o
"0
ft f13
O O
4--,
a
U
O1- fj
O
u Q
Z
Arapahoe County Boulder County Douglas County
Arapahoe County No. The Board's Policy
does not have a Manual (referenced
policy for this. above) also clarifies
the Board's role vs.
the County Manager
and staff roles. Policy
2.2.3 is the first place
this is mentioned in
the Policy Manual.
U
U
00
a)
+-a
4-
O
E
a)
f0
v
O
L.
•v
C
icts of interest that may arise
Does your County have a policy to assist members of the BOCC with conf
re;
(e.g. reviewing applications for
ca
ro
L
C
E
CU
4-0
+-0
ro
4J
VI
.a
471
@
a
4-.
fO
a
-a
.L.
L.
O
0
VI
,U
i
O
O
U
L-
4-1
O
U
f0
t)D
C
O
5-
a
a
ca
L
O
vi
N
'Ii
previous or current financia
Alunop oNand I- Alunoj esayy Alunop uosaa}jar
C)
v)
c
a
v
N
5-
O
C
•
7O
>
O
L
a
O
cu
C
O
0
(o O
4-
4-1O
C O
C = C)
0>
L _0
-0.0,76
O
U
.-
_ >
L.
v
ca
N O C
L 5 o
O O
O
Q
a 0- U +a
•+�
C
CD
C)
-1
4-+ te>O f0
C
Q U
++• _a
k
O
-0
v .6
as O
i —
U
a Q (1) c
Z
Douglas County
NC
N
• U
*- —
U =
' C
c "a f13
O
Cl-
v
t/)
v
L
O
o 2
o
•N U >-
• - cam. . U
O O
E v a
U rO -C
U +.►
Arapahoe County Boulder County
The County The Commissioners in Boulder County strictly
Attorney's Office adhere to the Government Code of Ethics as
provides advice promulgated in the Colorado Revised Statutes
to the BOCC in (CRS) 24-18-101, et seq., where the basic
these areas. principle is that an official government
position is a public trust and its officers owes a
fiduciary duty to the people in Boulder to act
in their best interest, irrespective of the
private interests of the officer. In case a
Commissioner needs additional information
regarding conflict of interest, a county
attorney can provide an opinion on the
matter.
Appendix A: Benchmarking Survey Results
Confidential Draft
0
c
0
t
co
c
a)
c
a)
_o
C
+r
03
0
L
0
Co
c
0
C
v
a
a)
L
4-1
a)
i.
C
0
U
WV)•
U
a)
C
CO
4-1
z
0
U
CU
E
0
L.-
4-
-0
a)
L
CU
s. -
VI
CO
co
4-1
4-1
VI
a)
CI)
a
ta0
L
0
a)
E
0
I
co
0
U
� •,
L
0
CU
0
75
L
co
co
A3unop olgand
v
c
0
z
A4unop esaw
We currently have 1.
C
U
C
O
In
it
t
We do not have a
pension plan and
have no way to track
who is taking a
distribution from the
401a or 457 plan. We
do not offer retiree
health plans.
A4unop sel2noa
We do not have
retiree pension
and/or health
benefits, so zero.
Boulder County
124 retirees Boulder County
participate in the currently has
County medical plan. approximately ten
working retirees.
Arapahoe County
4-1
c
r
0
U
+a
r
0
co
c
.co
a
E M1.
o E
U Co
L
LO
O
>- CD
C
O +-1
C hA
Ca C
E cu
N
C
O E
+1 10
t CO
co L
4-1 O
ch 4 -
CU
4-1
C
= N
U 0
a
L N
o a,
VI
co .—
L +-1
CU •—
_C c
48 a)
Co L
L Co
O a
a -o
co .—
�
OD
O L
L 0
a
L +�
au c
cu
O ,�,
L
tU Co
a
}' v
>-
+J
co =
�0
U
co
co
c _c
O
U V)
V
L 4�
•L N
O ,0
.4t
N roo
a a
o a
D o
C
D
0
U
0
Pueblo County has a
Problem Resolution
plan that allows
employees to submit
complaints. Human
Resources assists in
the process. It is not
anonymous.
.O
C,
a
Mesa County
• ua ea boa d
aamolgaps!gm
a!JPads
e anal lou op am
C
U
C
0
in
t
O
z
Aunoj sepnod
Yes, we have an
anonymous reporting
hotline - EthicsPoint.
Our Finance and
Human Resources
Departments oversee
the EthicsPoint
program.
l3uno) aapinog
Yes, the County We don't have a
Attorney's Office is whistleblower
responsible for program.
administering this
program.
Arapahoe County
Appendix A: Benchmarking Survey Results
t
co
L
6
Confidentia
no
N
ft)
•U
4-
0
v
4-1
a)
i
O
N
i
a)
no
Cm
C6
E
4J
a)
E
Ca
CC
s
4-
O
V)
E
U
.>
a)
i
co
a)
s
+-1
E
CO
U
0
4-
t4 -
CO
4J
N
4J
C
D
0
U
s-
0
4-
a)
U
Ca
a,
c
What protections are
la
C
3
U
O
co
ca >.
O ._
O
C
0
v
>-
O
CU
Q
0 ou
CO
4., a..+ c/)
a)
:+�'
V)
C
�
�
w L
},
o v
E +� p -c 5- c=
v +-j
N
C&
.O
v +, +, O
O
+-+
a)
3
CI"
U
v aE � O E O � s C +,
O C
._
C CO
C
�
._
•3
�
a)-0
v
v N
o z CC O
n 0
Mesa County
CV
a) CD
-
a..+
,N
Co
O +-+
C
co
0
C (13U Q
- O � — CD
C Co
CO 3 = ($)
CD CD
= v
,U
v)
O
t N +.+
V) O Clip
Ca •
2 2 CC 2 n O. U
Alunop uosaa}}ar 1
in
C
'CD
C OD
et, Ca
4--+
a)
a L.
Cp O
C `;—
tin
C C
N O O
O CU
>Ct10
i 0
C C
Ln um
N
Q ._
Q) _
La >
O
O Ca a--+
O
v CD v
O L. a- a. L.
A;uno) se12noa
0
h
DI
11
)E
;e
n
:a
✓c
e
is
11
c�
h•
n
ZI
3
O
U
a)
iv
CO
Arapahoe County
Appendix A: Benchmarking Survey Results
dira
—
CD
O
as
C
a)
C
O
V
C..
S
CO
+-0
CD
s_
co
CU
C
E
U
1E
L
0
4--
ttO
C
v
a)
E
indicate the
a)
N
Co
a)
a
r
013
C
4--►
a)
a)
E
U
O
m
k_
co
OD
a)
cc
co
Pueblo County
(Statutory Meetings):
Yes
Mesa County
0
a)
.>
I
a)
Alum° uosaagar
Business Meetings
and Public Hearing
Douglas County
C)
>-
ea
All below. Yes
3
U
it
13
O
CO
Arapahoe County
C
0
.v)
a)
tuo
C
S
L.
0
.0
C
3
O
V
0
kn
a)
C)
3
0.
lesa County
0
z
Aiunon UOSJ
Regular BCC briefings
A3uno) sei2noa
Yes, high level
minutes
A4uno) aapinog
All below. It depends on the
definition of working
sessions
Arapahoe County
(10
C
.4-0
CU
CU
Other BOCC meetings (e.g. emergency or specia
.6
ills
C
3
O
V
O
a)
>-
C)
3
a
Mesa County
(Executive sessions
are audio recorded as
required by statute).
lia
3
O
U
C
O
VI
L
C)
As needed
t
C)
"..!
A uno) seignoa
C)
>-
esi
3
V
wL
W
All below. Yes
115
3
m0
Arapahoe County
Appendix A: 8enchmarking Survey Results
It
CD
L
C
Confidentia
a)
co
E
a)
L
in
tin
C
L
O
U
a)
L
O
a)
p
L
O
_O
co
U
L
O
4-
V)
(10
C
84-Z
CD
a)
E
a)
a)
to
U
CU
co
a)
a.
o
hn
.C
4J
CU
a)
E
U
U
O
[n
L
12
MO
a)
cc
co
Pueblo County
(Statutory Meetings):
Yes
Mesa County
O
CU
73
.5
CU
Aaunop uosiau}ar
Live web streaming
and archive
A4unop sel2noa
Yes (audio)
I4unop Japinoe
All below. Yes
Arapahoe County
Working Sessions
U
l unop oigand
a)
Juno) esa j
Munn) uosia}uar
C
O
z
A3unop sel2noa
All below. It depends on the No
definition of working
sessions
Boulder County
Arapahoe County
MO
C
a
a
E
.co
a)
a
L
O
C
a)
DC
L
a)
E
a)
tab
I)
on
C
az
a)
CU
E
U
U
0
m
L
C
O
U
v)
a)
0
V
0
C)
a
Mesa County
(Executive sessions
are audio recorded as
required by statute).
Jefferson County
Audio of non -legal
advice Executive
Sessions
Juno) sel2noa
Typically, anytime a
meeting is held in the
Commissioners'
Hearing Room, the
meeting is recorded
(audio).
Boulder County
All below. Yes
Arapahoe County
Hello