Training Log Archive: SpikeIn the 1 days ending Jan 17, 2017: |
| « | » |
| » now | ||||
| Tu |
Tuesday Jan 17, 2017 #
Note
Yesterday I pumped up my commuter bike tires. This morning the front tire was flat. I didn't ride my bike to work, since I had a meeting in the evening and didn't want to be stuck at work with a flat tire. But, before I left, I filled the tire with air. When I got home, it was still full of air. I'm thinking that when I pumped up the tire yesterday I did something that made the valve not work. There's probably a lesson in there.
Work tonight was mostly good but somewhat surreal....I had a recommendation about having guidelines to ensure consistent and complete agreements between the City and County. This came from looking at a bunch of agreements that weren't complete and were ambiguous. One example was a payment from the County for a fire department building. There was an incomplete agreement and it took something like 6 years to eventually get paid, largely because the agreement didn't cover anything about how the City would be paid. A lot of money was involved. If I remember right, the inflation cost alone was work about $175K.
Management disagreed with the recommendation. They explained that you can't have guidelines because each agreement is different and you can't unilaterally set what's going to be in the agreement. That's basically what they said in writing. They said the same thing in the meeting. But, the manager added that they have a consistent process that routes any agreements through the law department, where they have standards to follow. Well, hello....that's what the recommendation says. So the recommendation is implemented.
I think the City Manager's Office just is unwilling to admit that they've implemented a recommendation that comes from me, even when it is something that they decide to do. Is that just insecurity? Is it confusion?
Work tonight was mostly good but somewhat surreal....I had a recommendation about having guidelines to ensure consistent and complete agreements between the City and County. This came from looking at a bunch of agreements that weren't complete and were ambiguous. One example was a payment from the County for a fire department building. There was an incomplete agreement and it took something like 6 years to eventually get paid, largely because the agreement didn't cover anything about how the City would be paid. A lot of money was involved. If I remember right, the inflation cost alone was work about $175K.
Management disagreed with the recommendation. They explained that you can't have guidelines because each agreement is different and you can't unilaterally set what's going to be in the agreement. That's basically what they said in writing. They said the same thing in the meeting. But, the manager added that they have a consistent process that routes any agreements through the law department, where they have standards to follow. Well, hello....that's what the recommendation says. So the recommendation is implemented.
I think the City Manager's Office just is unwilling to admit that they've implemented a recommendation that comes from me, even when it is something that they decide to do. Is that just insecurity? Is it confusion?