This is a non issue, they're still responding to any request through email 40 hours a week, have a submission portal, and the county is going to develop a combined in-person submission location for multiple departments. Not open to the public doesn't mean they're not working.
Full report here [Staff Report](https://humboldt.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=13013504&GUID=4C151A9B-C495-4B3F-B92C-12ECBB6441EF)
I wouldn't call it a non-issue. They still have in person customer traffic, and those people who are coming in person probably have technical limitations, or for some reason need to come in person. They cite reduced customer traffic as a reason for the hours reduction so that they can allow staff to refocus. But if there is reduced customer traffic, that means there's reduced distractions and there shouldn't be a problem. From a public perspective this just looks like reducing services and availability to the public.
Putting myself in the shoes of the employees, this at first might look like a relief and bit of reprieve for an overworked, under-trained, and apparently now understaffed front counter team. But those employees and their representatives should also keep in mind that by shifting away from direct in person availability and prioritization of digital communication it opens the door for staff hours reductions in the future and replacing the customer point of contact role with AI systems.
The justification in this staff report now is allowing staff to refocus on other work. Once that work is done they aren't just going to change their hours back to regular operation. With future budget issues they may very well reduce staffing, or cut the working hours to match the operating hours.
First level application review through a portal can be automated, and in fact having a portal system helps that process along. Giving people information about regulations is something an LLM will be able to do easily either through a chat interface or over the phone (that can be done with today's technology). And for people who demand to talk to a human, that work can be outsourced to the private sector. They already started doing this with permit processing and regularly pay outside consultants to write staff reports still. And they've regularly requested general fund contributions to supplement sending those projects to consultants, so it's not like it's cheaper or faster, and it's not like the permit applicant is footing the full cost.
This move only helps the department in the long run privatize its services. Seems dumb. But also seems consistent with comments made by Rex Bohn the other day where he seems to think the private sector can always do it better.
The privatization of a whole department is hardly in the scope of this change. They're down two technicians and having to deal with essentially customer service isn't a good use of time. Pushing more people to the online submission is more efficient and less distracting for the technicians. There is still open hours if you have to go in.
The department has historically functioned with four permit specialist (now called permit techs). They're just back to baseline, and really one is on leave, so they still have five after that individual returns. And customer service is part of their jobs. It's part of the jobs of everyone there since they're public servants. They were willing and gleeful about putting staff physically in front of the public during COVID, so what's changed?
Edit: It's also worth noting at the end of the staff report they note that this move is bringing Public Works Land Use operating hours in alignment with the Planning & Building Department. So seems like they are taking another small step toward the "one stop permit shop". I'm not opposed to this, but I do think that the opportunistic and sideways way they have been going about it for years speaks to their character. They should just come out and say what they're doing instead taking all these little manipulative steps.
Have they considered taking at least temporary pay cuts for. Their $100k/yr jobs? It would at least be a symbol that they're willing to share the pain with the county staff and the public who will surely suffer the most from their poor financial planning that led to this.
That department has been mismanaged since the day the new director and his deputy side kick took over. He's constantly blaming staffing for things not getting done. The Board for years has just kept giving him everything he says he needs and asks for and he just keeps failing, and everytime it's not his fault. Even just looking at this staff report, the claim is that it's a lack or loss of staffing. But they've also publicly stated there isn't enough work to maintain existing staffing levels. So which is it? Are they understaffed or do they not have enough work?
The report also mentions loss of a "core member" of the front counter team as part of their difficulties. Same thing happened with their Advanced Planning unit if I recall correctly. Seems like someone should do a deep dive and find out why that department's best people keep leaving.
Naw, they probably have a firm or handful of firms of "third party investigators" that they regularly go back to when investigations are called for. They might even have them organized by topic.
Edit: ... by might and probably, I mean this is exactly what they do.
The fact that people here find this a non-issue is sad. In local government, public front counters not only help the elderly but underserved communities that don't have reliable access to a computer and/or those having difficulties navigate government processes themselves. Helping these people, especially the elderly or if English is their second language, is a lot more efficient in person when you can directly guide them versus trying to explain complicated forms/requirements via phone or email. Sometimes, applications sent via email can take longer to process because of the constant back-and-forth of emails trying to get the customer to submit the right things. Even if in-person interactions take more time, a local government agency is supposed to be providing basic public services which includes accessible in-person hours for everyone.
The Staff Report is completely useless. How can you compare emails, phone calls, and in-person interactions and equally distribute and evaluate them? Multiple emails and phone calls can account for just one application. If County leadership wants to actually make data-driven decisions, then the report should have cross-referenced how many emails, calls, and in persons interactions are tied to a specific application. Then they can look into what specific types of applications are taking the most time for technicians to process and evaluate why.
In-person counter service isn't even the main problem in terms of providing more time for staff. More than likely the permit technicians are working on outdated and slow software systems combined with inefficient workflows and procedures when processing and routing these applications for review.
Yeah, I agree about the poor data collection. They also aren't breaking this out by department or division. How much of this is to Public Works Land Use? How much is Building? How much is to the Planner on Duty? How much is for specialty programs? Did they bother to even survey the public? The County government is using "data driven" and "efficiency" I think in the sense that they understand those concepts, which is as buzz words. The staff report probably wasn't even written by the same person and things were probably just copied and pasted together based on the randomly different font sizes. They seem to only collect data to try and support their predetermined direction, and efficiency seems to be what they declare it to be without even a logical argument to support their decision in the absence of supporting data. I don't think they understand what it means to sample, analyze, and draw conclusions.
The software they are using is software that they have sunken substantial public resources into supporting, and their process development has been riddled with egos, "too many cooks in the kitchen" leading to divergent process design philosophies (each could work on their own, but they can't work together), and vendor side failures. They switched to Accela because it's what the Director used in Monterey and because the state was using it for cannabis. As far as I can tell, that's the only reason. In doing so they moved from an established (though dated) system to something entirely new. The problem with that move is that Planning & Building interfaces with other departments that don't use Accela, so they weren't just making a decision for themselves, they made a decision for everyone else and have had to force other divisions to adopt Accela so they can all interface and work together. That meant spending more money on licenses and more staff time on system development and testing. And if the local cannabis community knew how much staff time and county resources were spent on Accela implementation during some of the most critical years of legalization, they'd probably riot (if there was even a cannabis community left). I swear it is like they have been trying to redesign the County government for the last several years behind closed doors and it's absolutely bonkers.
People who have been following the saga of the Planning & Building Department for a long time can start to see the incremental changes that have been made and can infer the direction they are trying to go. It's a department that the public really needs to demand more transparency out of. It seems like they are trying to turn it into a "pass through" that is modeled after private sector planning firms rather than an actual government agency, which is sad. And I think the institutional knowledge and pure passion for public service that has walked out the door there is far more valuable than anything that leadership brings to the table. They seem to care more about cronyism and politically securing their positions than anything else. And the really sad thing is that it seems to work and people fall for it.
Unfortunately, most organizations (public and private) fail horribly at implementing enterprise software. Still not an excuse though. Accela is absolute trash and pretty much all software systems aimed at local governments are. Like the constantly broken McDonald's ice cream machines, companies like Accela purposefully keep their software system broken. It's planned obsolescence for government software to keep local agencies reliant on hiring internal or partnered consultants to constantly "fix" issues that come up. Or to take as much consulting fee money as possible during the initial design, testing, and implementation phases prior to going live. The backend databases of these software are incredibly outdated and illogical which is why it's so difficult for governments to customize these software systems to fit their needs. Cityworks. Tyler. Infor. They all suck. Governments don't attract the talent to manage these sort of large-scale software changes and leadership always fails to understand the necessity of the right tools and resources for success.
I’m not surprised. Humboldt County has been getting run into the ground by it’s leadership and shitty business owners for decades now. Whenever anything is run by nepotism and good ol’ boy’s clubs a loss of quality services, loss of economic resilience, and loss of community always ends up happening. Humboldt is heading the way of Gary, Indiana. It will still exist, but only as a shell of it’s former self. It’s already happening. There are more abandoned buildings, more homeless, more people leaving the county, and more businesses are closing. Then job-wise, businesses are laying employees off (Sun Valley for example) while also changing full-time positions to part-time or eliminating positions altogether.
This county is dying.
This is a non issue, they're still responding to any request through email 40 hours a week, have a submission portal, and the county is going to develop a combined in-person submission location for multiple departments. Not open to the public doesn't mean they're not working. Full report here [Staff Report](https://humboldt.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=13013504&GUID=4C151A9B-C495-4B3F-B92C-12ECBB6441EF)
I wouldn't call it a non-issue. They still have in person customer traffic, and those people who are coming in person probably have technical limitations, or for some reason need to come in person. They cite reduced customer traffic as a reason for the hours reduction so that they can allow staff to refocus. But if there is reduced customer traffic, that means there's reduced distractions and there shouldn't be a problem. From a public perspective this just looks like reducing services and availability to the public. Putting myself in the shoes of the employees, this at first might look like a relief and bit of reprieve for an overworked, under-trained, and apparently now understaffed front counter team. But those employees and their representatives should also keep in mind that by shifting away from direct in person availability and prioritization of digital communication it opens the door for staff hours reductions in the future and replacing the customer point of contact role with AI systems. The justification in this staff report now is allowing staff to refocus on other work. Once that work is done they aren't just going to change their hours back to regular operation. With future budget issues they may very well reduce staffing, or cut the working hours to match the operating hours. First level application review through a portal can be automated, and in fact having a portal system helps that process along. Giving people information about regulations is something an LLM will be able to do easily either through a chat interface or over the phone (that can be done with today's technology). And for people who demand to talk to a human, that work can be outsourced to the private sector. They already started doing this with permit processing and regularly pay outside consultants to write staff reports still. And they've regularly requested general fund contributions to supplement sending those projects to consultants, so it's not like it's cheaper or faster, and it's not like the permit applicant is footing the full cost. This move only helps the department in the long run privatize its services. Seems dumb. But also seems consistent with comments made by Rex Bohn the other day where he seems to think the private sector can always do it better.
The privatization of a whole department is hardly in the scope of this change. They're down two technicians and having to deal with essentially customer service isn't a good use of time. Pushing more people to the online submission is more efficient and less distracting for the technicians. There is still open hours if you have to go in.
The department has historically functioned with four permit specialist (now called permit techs). They're just back to baseline, and really one is on leave, so they still have five after that individual returns. And customer service is part of their jobs. It's part of the jobs of everyone there since they're public servants. They were willing and gleeful about putting staff physically in front of the public during COVID, so what's changed? Edit: It's also worth noting at the end of the staff report they note that this move is bringing Public Works Land Use operating hours in alignment with the Planning & Building Department. So seems like they are taking another small step toward the "one stop permit shop". I'm not opposed to this, but I do think that the opportunistic and sideways way they have been going about it for years speaks to their character. They should just come out and say what they're doing instead taking all these little manipulative steps.
Have they considered taking at least temporary pay cuts for. Their $100k/yr jobs? It would at least be a symbol that they're willing to share the pain with the county staff and the public who will surely suffer the most from their poor financial planning that led to this.
That department has been mismanaged since the day the new director and his deputy side kick took over. He's constantly blaming staffing for things not getting done. The Board for years has just kept giving him everything he says he needs and asks for and he just keeps failing, and everytime it's not his fault. Even just looking at this staff report, the claim is that it's a lack or loss of staffing. But they've also publicly stated there isn't enough work to maintain existing staffing levels. So which is it? Are they understaffed or do they not have enough work? The report also mentions loss of a "core member" of the front counter team as part of their difficulties. Same thing happened with their Advanced Planning unit if I recall correctly. Seems like someone should do a deep dive and find out why that department's best people keep leaving.
Then they can launch an investigation into the person they pick to do the deep dive when that person comes up with answers they don't like 😂
Naw, they probably have a firm or handful of firms of "third party investigators" that they regularly go back to when investigations are called for. They might even have them organized by topic. Edit: ... by might and probably, I mean this is exactly what they do.
I've seen the blatant spending first hand. It's ridiculous.
The fact that people here find this a non-issue is sad. In local government, public front counters not only help the elderly but underserved communities that don't have reliable access to a computer and/or those having difficulties navigate government processes themselves. Helping these people, especially the elderly or if English is their second language, is a lot more efficient in person when you can directly guide them versus trying to explain complicated forms/requirements via phone or email. Sometimes, applications sent via email can take longer to process because of the constant back-and-forth of emails trying to get the customer to submit the right things. Even if in-person interactions take more time, a local government agency is supposed to be providing basic public services which includes accessible in-person hours for everyone. The Staff Report is completely useless. How can you compare emails, phone calls, and in-person interactions and equally distribute and evaluate them? Multiple emails and phone calls can account for just one application. If County leadership wants to actually make data-driven decisions, then the report should have cross-referenced how many emails, calls, and in persons interactions are tied to a specific application. Then they can look into what specific types of applications are taking the most time for technicians to process and evaluate why. In-person counter service isn't even the main problem in terms of providing more time for staff. More than likely the permit technicians are working on outdated and slow software systems combined with inefficient workflows and procedures when processing and routing these applications for review.
Yeah, I agree about the poor data collection. They also aren't breaking this out by department or division. How much of this is to Public Works Land Use? How much is Building? How much is to the Planner on Duty? How much is for specialty programs? Did they bother to even survey the public? The County government is using "data driven" and "efficiency" I think in the sense that they understand those concepts, which is as buzz words. The staff report probably wasn't even written by the same person and things were probably just copied and pasted together based on the randomly different font sizes. They seem to only collect data to try and support their predetermined direction, and efficiency seems to be what they declare it to be without even a logical argument to support their decision in the absence of supporting data. I don't think they understand what it means to sample, analyze, and draw conclusions. The software they are using is software that they have sunken substantial public resources into supporting, and their process development has been riddled with egos, "too many cooks in the kitchen" leading to divergent process design philosophies (each could work on their own, but they can't work together), and vendor side failures. They switched to Accela because it's what the Director used in Monterey and because the state was using it for cannabis. As far as I can tell, that's the only reason. In doing so they moved from an established (though dated) system to something entirely new. The problem with that move is that Planning & Building interfaces with other departments that don't use Accela, so they weren't just making a decision for themselves, they made a decision for everyone else and have had to force other divisions to adopt Accela so they can all interface and work together. That meant spending more money on licenses and more staff time on system development and testing. And if the local cannabis community knew how much staff time and county resources were spent on Accela implementation during some of the most critical years of legalization, they'd probably riot (if there was even a cannabis community left). I swear it is like they have been trying to redesign the County government for the last several years behind closed doors and it's absolutely bonkers. People who have been following the saga of the Planning & Building Department for a long time can start to see the incremental changes that have been made and can infer the direction they are trying to go. It's a department that the public really needs to demand more transparency out of. It seems like they are trying to turn it into a "pass through" that is modeled after private sector planning firms rather than an actual government agency, which is sad. And I think the institutional knowledge and pure passion for public service that has walked out the door there is far more valuable than anything that leadership brings to the table. They seem to care more about cronyism and politically securing their positions than anything else. And the really sad thing is that it seems to work and people fall for it.
Unfortunately, most organizations (public and private) fail horribly at implementing enterprise software. Still not an excuse though. Accela is absolute trash and pretty much all software systems aimed at local governments are. Like the constantly broken McDonald's ice cream machines, companies like Accela purposefully keep their software system broken. It's planned obsolescence for government software to keep local agencies reliant on hiring internal or partnered consultants to constantly "fix" issues that come up. Or to take as much consulting fee money as possible during the initial design, testing, and implementation phases prior to going live. The backend databases of these software are incredibly outdated and illogical which is why it's so difficult for governments to customize these software systems to fit their needs. Cityworks. Tyler. Infor. They all suck. Governments don't attract the talent to manage these sort of large-scale software changes and leadership always fails to understand the necessity of the right tools and resources for success.
I’m not surprised. Humboldt County has been getting run into the ground by it’s leadership and shitty business owners for decades now. Whenever anything is run by nepotism and good ol’ boy’s clubs a loss of quality services, loss of economic resilience, and loss of community always ends up happening. Humboldt is heading the way of Gary, Indiana. It will still exist, but only as a shell of it’s former self. It’s already happening. There are more abandoned buildings, more homeless, more people leaving the county, and more businesses are closing. Then job-wise, businesses are laying employees off (Sun Valley for example) while also changing full-time positions to part-time or eliminating positions altogether. This county is dying.