Overhauling county's planning, building division Overhauling county's planning, building division (June 29, 2005)

** County task force seeks more funds, more planners, better training, and a five-day work week.

By Marion Softky

Almanac Staff Writer

When Lisa Grote takes over as planning director for San Mateo County this week, she will face an enormous challenge to transform the department's troubled Planning and Building Division into one that can serve both applicants and the public in a timely and efficient manner.

On her desk will be two major reports highly critical of the county's current planning function, which processes applications for projects in the two-thirds of the county's area outside of its 20 incorporated cities. These can range from removing a tree or adding a bedroom, to new subdivisions, commercial stables and office buildings.

The Board of Supervisors on June 21 heard the final report of its Planning and Building Task Force, which blamed excessive delays in processing permit applications on understaffing, high turnover, and poor training of the staff members who review planning and building permits.

"We weren't looking to place blame; we were working to improve service to the public," said Supervisor Adrienne Tissier, who co-chaired the nine-member task force that worked since October to analyze problems and propose solutions.

A March report from the Civil Grand Jury mirrored many of the task force findings and recommendations. It noted the department was understaffed, so that each planner handled 80 or more cases; 30 is considered normal. "This created long delays for permits, frustrated customers, and frazzled employees," it stated.

The situation came to a boil last year at budget time when the supervisors raised permit fees again, so that they would cover the costs of processing applications without any extra money from county general funds. As a result, permit fees have gone up 116 percent since 2001, the task force reported.

"People complained we were raising fees at the same time service was getting worse," said board President Rich Gordon, who co-chaired the task force.
Board action

Board members basically agreed with the task force that the division needs more funds than can be raised by fees alone in order to beef up the number of planners, train them better, and give them a future in the department. "It was an eye-opener," said Supervisor Mark Church. "We also have to commit resources."

The board directed the new planning director, who starts June 30, to report back on both efficiencies in the department and the need for new money by September, when the supervisors will fine-tune the budget.

Ms. Grote, whose new title will be community development director, is coming from Palo Alto, where she has been chief planning official. She will be the first planning director the county has had since 1986, when former Planning Director David Hale left.

Since then, the department has been run by Planning Administrator Terry Burnes, who retired last fall.
Five-day work week

Another key task force recommendation was to return to a five-day work week so the public would have more access to staff working on permits.

Supervisor Gordon was receptive to the idea. He acknowledged that difficulties with the four-day week lie in "the amount of work done and access to the public."

County Manager John Maltbie warned that any change in the work week would have to be cleared through employee unions.

For several years, many county departments have been closed Fridays as an economy measure; instead staff work four 10-hour days from Monday to Thursday.

The task force made recommendations in three areas: internal improvements to the Planning and Building Division; improved service to the public; and -- finally -- a comprehensive review and update on county plans and regulations, including outdated zoning and building codes, and the general plan.

The division should return to a workload of 30 to 40 cases per planner from the current 80 and up, the task force recommended. To reduce staff turnover, it called for increasing the number of employees, better training and mentoring, and more opportunity for advancement.

The task force suggested the public would be better served if the division could provide pre-application meetings and checklists to help applicants better prepare for the permit process. It suggested numerous other ways the process could be streamlined and made more responsive.

Woodside developer and task force member Jim Irizarry commended the staff for doing a good job when some planners are juggling 140 cases. High permit fees put the process out of reach for many people, he noted; a permit for simple kitchen remodel can cost $10,000.

"Applicants shouldn't pay the whole cost," Mr. Irizarry said. "The county should support the department through the general fund. It should pay for the broad responsibility of protecting the environment and public safety."

E-mail a friend a link to this story.