MTAS, “Public Acts” (passed in 2008), August 19, 2008
This is always a valuable seminar as an MTAS representative reviews important actions by the Tennessee Legislature.
-Competitive Cable and Video Services Act: This is the new cable franchise bill, which ATT spent $38 million dollars trying to get passed. (It did pass after some major changes).
Major items to watch include:
1. Comcast (any cable supplier) can “op in” and go with the state franchise.
2. Tennessee Regulatory Commission oversees the act.
3. Franchise fee is 5%
4. 10 year franchise, transferable.
5. Can audit once per year for pas three years.
6. ATT has to provide equal PEG channels equal to that supplied by local cable provider.
OPEN RECORDS ACT
Major changes this year:
-Must set up security procedures for laptops. (MTAS is working on a policy)
-Personal info such as home telephone #, personal cell phone, residential address is confidential
-Action required within seven days after a request:
-Provide the information, deny it or provide timetable when it can be provided.
-WebSite: Has forms, use these forms!
www.comptroller.state.tn.us/openrecords/index.htm. (or google open records and comptroller and Tennessee.)
Can require a copy of drivers license.
Office of Open Records Counsel (OURC)
-Can get advisory opinion
-Offer mediation of disputes
-Will develop fee schedule
CERTIFIED MUNICIPAL FINANCE OFFICER
-Comply by 2012
-MTAS will do training
PLANNING STATUTE CHANGES
-Public Chapter 1150
-General (Comprehensive Plan) must be approved by elected body, not just Planning Commission.
(This is a change in current law, although Lakeland currently follows this procedure)
-General (Comprehensive Plan) can be amended by Governing Body-Planning Commission has 61 days to act
DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION
A Statute was passed that authorizes cities to establish a Design Review Commission. Lakeland already has a Design Review Commission.
The major concern with this is that the state law differs from the City of Lakeland Ordinance. I am checking on whether the Lakeland Ordinance must comply with the new State Law.
Major differences are that decisions by the DRC may be appealed to the Planning Commission (rather than the Board of Commissioners as provided by the Lakeland Ordinance) and the Mayor must appoint the members (rather than the BOC).
I am currently checking to see if this new law requires the Lakeland Ordinance be amended.
A list of laws affecting municipal government was also distributed.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Memphis Regional Chamber and using Technology
Memphis Regional Chamber, “Leveraging Your Business with Technology”, Tuesday, August 5, 2008
This was an interesting session on the use of new web “social networking sites” and how they could be used for business. Sites mentioned included:
-Facebook.com
-Linked-In.com (professional networking site)
-Twitter.com (variety of purposes. The City of Lakeland uses it to send short reminders on meetings etc.)
-flickr.com: photo/video sharing site.
-Youtube.com: Video sharing. The City uses this to post notices etc.
-Freindfeed.com
-ning.com: Allows “group –specific” social networks (such as the workplace etc.)
A list of other sites with a brief explanation was handed out.
The speakers presented a variety of creative ways these sites can be utilized. Generally oriented toward business but I did get ideas on how to proceed. Right now, I am concentrating on youtube.com, and twitter.com as ways of communicating with Lakeland residents, especially Lakeland residents who may not normally use traditional communication.
A book Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies by Charlene Li and Josh Bernof was recommended reading.
Local sources were presenters “Lunaweb.com” (educational on newworking sites), and EcoMemphis.com.
This was an interesting session on the use of new web “social networking sites” and how they could be used for business. Sites mentioned included:
-Facebook.com
-Linked-In.com (professional networking site)
-Twitter.com (variety of purposes. The City of Lakeland uses it to send short reminders on meetings etc.)
-flickr.com: photo/video sharing site.
-Youtube.com: Video sharing. The City uses this to post notices etc.
-Freindfeed.com
-ning.com: Allows “group –specific” social networks (such as the workplace etc.)
A list of other sites with a brief explanation was handed out.
The speakers presented a variety of creative ways these sites can be utilized. Generally oriented toward business but I did get ideas on how to proceed. Right now, I am concentrating on youtube.com, and twitter.com as ways of communicating with Lakeland residents, especially Lakeland residents who may not normally use traditional communication.
A book Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies by Charlene Li and Josh Bernof was recommended reading.
Local sources were presenters “Lunaweb.com” (educational on newworking sites), and EcoMemphis.com.
Friday, July 4, 2008
Gettysburg Foundation Leadership Conference, (ICMA) May 14-17, 2008
ICMA Gettysburg Leadership Conference May 14-16 2008
This ranks among the best educational experiences I have ever had, especially in the area of the nuts and bolts of Leadership as well as practical theory. In addition to the conference, I read The Killer Angels prior to the conference.
Some general thoughts are:
-The importance of small decisons.
-The importance of luck. You can make your luck, recognize your luck, but sometimes you are just lucky (or unlucky)
-Communication is all important-including knowing the negative. This is something I always emphasize, and after this conference I am emphasizing it with examples.
-Know what is going on-Information (Correct information is essiential.)
-Know your capabilities-know if you are sick or not feeling well and how it may affect your decisons. Perhaps as important, know the capabilities of the people providing you with information.
-Trust your subordinates. Talk/communicate with your subordinates. Take care of your subordinates. If you can't communicate with your subordinates, learn to do so of find someone who can.
-Importance of all personnel. If someone is out and isn't doing their job, it can destroy the mission. Every position and job is important to the mission.
-If you're going to "go for broke", have a backup plan.
-Importance of all personnel. If someone is out and isn't doing their job, it can destroy the mission. Every position and job is important to the mission.
-If you're going to "go for broke", have a backup plan.
-Be as specific as possible in instructions. Don't say "if practicable" unless you mean it.
-Take advantage of opportunities while you can.
-Be aware of how a change in the "Team" will affect the mission and dynamics of the organization. (Team may mean staff, elected officials, community power strucure etc.)
-Recognize the impact of the environment you are working in, try to learn to recognize.
-Know what motivates the "enemy" well as your staff.
-Leaders assumptions may be incorrect. Adjust to reality.
-Select the right "battleground" (if possible) or move the battle to the area best for you if possible.
-Keep focus on the Mission!
-Lincoln focus was on winning the war. Some of his Leadership Style traits were:
-Excellent communication. Used stories and humor.. Ability to grasp the big picture and convey it to the audience. Wrote well
-Political Acumen: Treated people with dignity and respect. Kept his ego under control. Learned from his mistakes. Open and accessable to the public.
-Sense of Timing: Master of timing.
-Patience: Demonstrated patience and empathy.
-Goodness: Cared about people. Listened. Willing to share credit and serve peopole
-Courage.
This was a learning experience that continues. It is hard to encapsulate this, as I continue to review what I learned and learn from the experience. I will update this as I have new thoughts.
A lot of the "learing" actually involved discussing the concepts from leadership behavior (and results) of the Battle of Gettysburg. I have tried to apply some of hte "leadership lessons" to my actual job and will continue to do so.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Breakthrough Ideas
“Breakthrough Ideas for 2008” (February 2008, Harvard Business Review”
This is a series of very short articles. The introduction describes it as ideas for which “Changes that appear to be sudden usually have been taking shape for years”. The articles “capture 20 transformations at single points in their development”. (I discuss only those that appear somewhat applicable to my current position.)
“Peer to Peer Networks” (Stan Stalnaker)
Summarizes the effect of recent developments:
-Ability of individuals to not only “consume” information, but also create it (blogs, etc.) This obviously has a major impact on information/misinformation on City programs and the impact of and on the City. Perhaps the lack of accountability and accuracy of informaiton is a major problem.
-The rise of payment with “personal currencies”, especially to make payments for “knowledge services”. This would have a major impact in a number of areas (money supply nationally, sales tax locally etc.).
-“Micro production” of energy. He cites one example of the possibility of a person with a hybrid car having the capacity to generate excess energy and selling it on the grid for micropayments.
All interesting, although the information angle is the only one which appears to be widespread.
“Task, not Time: Profile of a Gen Y Job” (Tamara J. Erickson)
More of the “how younger workers are different” discussion.
The author notes that younger workers (born since 1980) are “defined more by task than time.” She notes they “want to be compensated for what they produce”.
The author proceeds with a discussion (that appears to be age biased) how younger workers can work so much faster than older workers (she obviously hasn’t observed what I have observed). I don’t quite know why the author expressed this article in terms of age-it appears to apply or not apply to all ages without any qualifications.
The article is a summary of ideas I have observed in other articles, and I feel they are good observations, such as:
-The cycle of paying for “tasks” or “time” is moving from paying for “time” to paying for “tasks”, or what has been done.
-Accomplishing a task is more important than merely measuring the time it takes to do it. (of course there is the question of measurement).
-There is no relationship with accomplishing a task and the time. Many people (me included) work “anytime and anywhere”.
She notes that workgroups who have successfully adopted task based rather than time based measurement systems have more loyal employees and experience less turnover.
Some recommendations for going to a “task, not time” work model:
-Articulate the results you expect, and measure accountability by getting the job done
-Making physical attendance in the office, including at meetings, optional. (Sure, has the author every actually worked? I disagree 100% with this suggestion.)
-Guage performance on the work performed. (sounds familiar)
-Use technology to allow employees to work from anywhere
-Support changes by creating drop in centers, team spaces and open work areas.
I wonder how she would recommend the “task” of a Police Officer? When she calls for help, who would respond?
In addition to the ageism expressed by the author, many of the ideas simply won’t work in many careers. The ideas have basically been around for years and are hardly new. It is valuable to note that, for many positions, time is not a factor and the task based accountability would work, but it is hardly applicable to many jobs.
Most of the product of government is services, so this is not applicable in many positions.
A Doctor’s Rx for CEO Decision Makers (Jerome Groopman, MD)
Several thoughts I drew from this on avoiding “mistakes”:
-Anchoring error-Assuming the first information is the correct decision
-Availability error-Recalling past mistakes and applying them to the case at hand
-Attribution error-Relying on a stereotype to explain a cause
Dr. Groopman recommends that executives use of analysis to find errors similar to what Doctors use to determine the causes of errors. I agree this could be a valuable exercise.
Understanding Opposition (Michael Sheehan)
The author discusses how private business is used to “competition”, but not “opposition”, whereas government is used to “opposition”.
As an example, he cites the “Coke” and “Pepsi” marketing strategy to get their product in schools. This is competition. They did not anticipate “opposition”-the drive to totally ban such drinks as unhealthy.
Some approaches he recommends when encountering “opposition” are:
1. Step back and access the dynamics. Who is involved? Why are they involved? What is the sides ultimate goal? How can you help them meet that goal?
2. Co-opt the issue.
Adopt the goal and look at alternative ways to meet that goal.
3. Redefine the issue: Help people see the issue on your terms.
4. Deflection Strategy: Define a new cause/problem etc. and propose how to resolve that issue.
This was an interesting article to me. The general them of “competition” as a private enterprise practice and “opposition” as the environment for government makes sense, both in theory and in my experience.
“Sick Transit Gloria” (Mark Kuznicki, Eli Singer, and Jay Goldman)
This article concerns the efforts of the Toronto Transit Commission to communicate with the public through on-line sources. In an event called “Transit Camp” using a program called “Barcamp”, this was discussion through an open-source problem-solving framework.
This article provides some idea of how technology can expedite communication.
-“The Gamer Disposition” (John Seely Brown and Douglas Thomas)
The authors speculate that persons who play multiplayer games develop the following positive characteristics:
1. They are bottom line oriented. They are used to being measured by the games and expect and like evaluation.
2. They understand the power of diversity. They learn that one person can’t do it all.
3. They thrive on change.
4. They see learning as fun. Learning is rewarded.
5. They constantly need to find a better way to resolve a problem.
I’m not sure how seriously to take this. Somehow I feel it is self-serving and somewhat surface oriented.
This is a series of very short articles. The introduction describes it as ideas for which “Changes that appear to be sudden usually have been taking shape for years”. The articles “capture 20 transformations at single points in their development”. (I discuss only those that appear somewhat applicable to my current position.)
“Peer to Peer Networks” (Stan Stalnaker)
Summarizes the effect of recent developments:
-Ability of individuals to not only “consume” information, but also create it (blogs, etc.) This obviously has a major impact on information/misinformation on City programs and the impact of and on the City. Perhaps the lack of accountability and accuracy of informaiton is a major problem.
-The rise of payment with “personal currencies”, especially to make payments for “knowledge services”. This would have a major impact in a number of areas (money supply nationally, sales tax locally etc.).
-“Micro production” of energy. He cites one example of the possibility of a person with a hybrid car having the capacity to generate excess energy and selling it on the grid for micropayments.
All interesting, although the information angle is the only one which appears to be widespread.
“Task, not Time: Profile of a Gen Y Job” (Tamara J. Erickson)
More of the “how younger workers are different” discussion.
The author notes that younger workers (born since 1980) are “defined more by task than time.” She notes they “want to be compensated for what they produce”.
The author proceeds with a discussion (that appears to be age biased) how younger workers can work so much faster than older workers (she obviously hasn’t observed what I have observed). I don’t quite know why the author expressed this article in terms of age-it appears to apply or not apply to all ages without any qualifications.
The article is a summary of ideas I have observed in other articles, and I feel they are good observations, such as:
-The cycle of paying for “tasks” or “time” is moving from paying for “time” to paying for “tasks”, or what has been done.
-Accomplishing a task is more important than merely measuring the time it takes to do it. (of course there is the question of measurement).
-There is no relationship with accomplishing a task and the time. Many people (me included) work “anytime and anywhere”.
She notes that workgroups who have successfully adopted task based rather than time based measurement systems have more loyal employees and experience less turnover.
Some recommendations for going to a “task, not time” work model:
-Articulate the results you expect, and measure accountability by getting the job done
-Making physical attendance in the office, including at meetings, optional. (Sure, has the author every actually worked? I disagree 100% with this suggestion.)
-Guage performance on the work performed. (sounds familiar)
-Use technology to allow employees to work from anywhere
-Support changes by creating drop in centers, team spaces and open work areas.
I wonder how she would recommend the “task” of a Police Officer? When she calls for help, who would respond?
In addition to the ageism expressed by the author, many of the ideas simply won’t work in many careers. The ideas have basically been around for years and are hardly new. It is valuable to note that, for many positions, time is not a factor and the task based accountability would work, but it is hardly applicable to many jobs.
Most of the product of government is services, so this is not applicable in many positions.
A Doctor’s Rx for CEO Decision Makers (Jerome Groopman, MD)
Several thoughts I drew from this on avoiding “mistakes”:
-Anchoring error-Assuming the first information is the correct decision
-Availability error-Recalling past mistakes and applying them to the case at hand
-Attribution error-Relying on a stereotype to explain a cause
Dr. Groopman recommends that executives use of analysis to find errors similar to what Doctors use to determine the causes of errors. I agree this could be a valuable exercise.
Understanding Opposition (Michael Sheehan)
The author discusses how private business is used to “competition”, but not “opposition”, whereas government is used to “opposition”.
As an example, he cites the “Coke” and “Pepsi” marketing strategy to get their product in schools. This is competition. They did not anticipate “opposition”-the drive to totally ban such drinks as unhealthy.
Some approaches he recommends when encountering “opposition” are:
1. Step back and access the dynamics. Who is involved? Why are they involved? What is the sides ultimate goal? How can you help them meet that goal?
2. Co-opt the issue.
Adopt the goal and look at alternative ways to meet that goal.
3. Redefine the issue: Help people see the issue on your terms.
4. Deflection Strategy: Define a new cause/problem etc. and propose how to resolve that issue.
This was an interesting article to me. The general them of “competition” as a private enterprise practice and “opposition” as the environment for government makes sense, both in theory and in my experience.
“Sick Transit Gloria” (Mark Kuznicki, Eli Singer, and Jay Goldman)
This article concerns the efforts of the Toronto Transit Commission to communicate with the public through on-line sources. In an event called “Transit Camp” using a program called “Barcamp”, this was discussion through an open-source problem-solving framework.
This article provides some idea of how technology can expedite communication.
-“The Gamer Disposition” (John Seely Brown and Douglas Thomas)
The authors speculate that persons who play multiplayer games develop the following positive characteristics:
1. They are bottom line oriented. They are used to being measured by the games and expect and like evaluation.
2. They understand the power of diversity. They learn that one person can’t do it all.
3. They thrive on change.
4. They see learning as fun. Learning is rewarded.
5. They constantly need to find a better way to resolve a problem.
I’m not sure how seriously to take this. Somehow I feel it is self-serving and somewhat surface oriented.
Gil Schwartz, "6 people you should never hire"
Gil Schwartz “6 People You Should Never Hire” (Magazine article, in May, 2007 Mens Health)
Although usually, I wouldn’t summarize an article like this, I think it contained some interesting nuggets of information, and perhaps most of all, reminders of what happens when the “wrong” person joins a group. It can make the group stronger, or it can destroy the group, but it almost always is a negative experience.
The article discusses how to recognize the “nagging feeling of uncertainty” when you have a candidate/applicant who seems perfect, but there is something subconsciously trying to tell you this person could be a real problem. Without mentioning any names, places or positions, I know the feeling and I know the disaster when the “wrong” person is hired-qualified, but not right.
The author (Gil Schwartz) is absolutely right when he notes that “how much better not to hire the person in the first place!”.
We recently started ability/behavioral testing prior to hiring someone just to make sure we face possible problems. Obviously testing isn’t perfect, but at least we are aware of tendencies before a person starts.
I normally don’t read this magazine but the article was given to me by a person whose input I respect and so I took time to study the article.
He mentions six “types” and how to avoid hiring them. For the record, they are “the loafer”, “the weasel”, “the bridegroom”, the “psycho killer”, the “replicant” and “the future CEO”. The category descriptions are rather vague to me and don’t seem to really apply in my experience (more oriented to large private organizations), so I won’t amplify on that.
For my own record, I wanted to note recommended Interview Questions:
1. “When were you exhilarated about your work”. (This helps find a person whose passions align with job duties.)
2. “What major mistake from your past do you not regret?”. (Helps identify employees who recognize the value of learning from mistakes and avoid people who try to never make mistakes to the point of inaction.)
3. “What’s your favorite movie”. (Helps measure the clarity of though process. I’m not sure about this one!)
4. “What’s a misconception people have about you?” (Determine if the applicant has an indication of how she comes across to other people. As a follow up question ask “how do you manage your image”. Again, this appears to be a pop psychology question like # 3 that I probably wouldn’t use, but I’m likely to use some variant of it.
5. “In 5 years, how will you justify having taken this job?”. (Determine if job fits into the applicants master plan for their career. Probably more valuable as an indication if the applicant takes the job as a career move or just as a job.
Although usually, I wouldn’t summarize an article like this, I think it contained some interesting nuggets of information, and perhaps most of all, reminders of what happens when the “wrong” person joins a group. It can make the group stronger, or it can destroy the group, but it almost always is a negative experience.
The article discusses how to recognize the “nagging feeling of uncertainty” when you have a candidate/applicant who seems perfect, but there is something subconsciously trying to tell you this person could be a real problem. Without mentioning any names, places or positions, I know the feeling and I know the disaster when the “wrong” person is hired-qualified, but not right.
The author (Gil Schwartz) is absolutely right when he notes that “how much better not to hire the person in the first place!”.
We recently started ability/behavioral testing prior to hiring someone just to make sure we face possible problems. Obviously testing isn’t perfect, but at least we are aware of tendencies before a person starts.
I normally don’t read this magazine but the article was given to me by a person whose input I respect and so I took time to study the article.
He mentions six “types” and how to avoid hiring them. For the record, they are “the loafer”, “the weasel”, “the bridegroom”, the “psycho killer”, the “replicant” and “the future CEO”. The category descriptions are rather vague to me and don’t seem to really apply in my experience (more oriented to large private organizations), so I won’t amplify on that.
For my own record, I wanted to note recommended Interview Questions:
1. “When were you exhilarated about your work”. (This helps find a person whose passions align with job duties.)
2. “What major mistake from your past do you not regret?”. (Helps identify employees who recognize the value of learning from mistakes and avoid people who try to never make mistakes to the point of inaction.)
3. “What’s your favorite movie”. (Helps measure the clarity of though process. I’m not sure about this one!)
4. “What’s a misconception people have about you?” (Determine if the applicant has an indication of how she comes across to other people. As a follow up question ask “how do you manage your image”. Again, this appears to be a pop psychology question like # 3 that I probably wouldn’t use, but I’m likely to use some variant of it.
5. “In 5 years, how will you justify having taken this job?”. (Determine if job fits into the applicants master plan for their career. Probably more valuable as an indication if the applicant takes the job as a career move or just as a job.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Michael Gates Gill, How Starbucks Saved my Life:
Book concerns an older white male who got fired at age 53 by a younger women he had hired. He had worked for 30 years at the company, made good money etc. and was now considered an "old guy" by new, young management and is laid off for no reason. He mentioned he got the job through "contacts" (graduated from a prestige University etc.) and had been very successful, both career wise and financially.
He was a "consultant" after he was fired. Due ot an affair, he divorced his wife, his "consulting" business was rapidly diminshing and he was beginning to hit bottom.
Through an accidental meeting, he is (lprobably as a joke) offered a job at Starbucks by a young, female, Black Starbucks Manager. He suddenly becomes one of "them"-a minority in all ways-while with an all Black crews, priveleged in a group of poor, educated versus uneducated older (64) in a group of young, and now the "sever" rather than the "seved".
The first part really made me think about how I manage "people not like me". He mentioned how he gave lip service (and probably meant it) to diversity etc., but realizes now he hadn't really considered the other person and how their background was different. I am reviewing this myself and will continue to do so to see if I am considering the different backgrounds etc. of both customers and employees.
Another theme that is reinforced by his experience and by the Starbucks Manager is true "Respect"-not just politeness or patience, but true respect. (In one example, a street person comes in to use the bathroom he just cleaned. He tells him it is "closed" and the Manager informs him anyone who enters is a guest, whether a paying customer or not. Being a part of the "Team" (or Partners as Starbuck employees are called) is an important aspect. A large part of the success of Starbucks (and loyalty of the Partners), according to this book, is that Starbucks provided benefits that showed the company actually cared for the the Partners. I get the emphasis from the book of the importance of the health plan, how it not only made the Partners healthier, but also felt they were respected by the company.
Starbucks emphasizes that all Partners are encouraged to make suggestions and his experience indicates they do this in a successful manner. Starbucks success is partly showing respect for and taking care of the Partners.
I found it interesting at the close of the book, they are discussing how "Partners are the first priority" of Starbucks and then decide "Partners and customers are both the first priority").
It is interesting to note that after reading the book, I noted where someone was threatening to buy Starbucks and "make it efficient", probably thus destroying the culture and destroying the company and making a lot of underwriters rich.
Monday, May 5, 2008
Sustainability
Brownfields Conference, Sunday, May 4, 2008:
Tour of facility that used the following sustainability features:
-Rebuilt on existing site rather than use vacant land for new building.
-Uses wetlands to treat wastewater, than uses the “grey water” for flushing etc. (this requires an entirely separate plumbing system)
-Geothermal heating and cooling. This is a large site and previously had a separate power facility, which is not completely shut down due to the geothermal facility. Windows etc. used extensively.
While much of this isn’t necessarily practical for Lakeland, I think the concept brings home the point of “sustainability”. While much of this isn’t practical (at this time), certainly the concepts of reuse, use of existing land, avoid the waste of natural resources are important concepts.
Perhaps most of all, it emphasized that I can do more to encourage recycling, and more conservative use of our resources.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)