September 9, 2007 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Chair Kingsley Murphy Vice-Chair Marty Flannes Secretary Esther Ochsman Treasurer Michael Schlatter
Members Erik Boe Elizabeth Nalen Bunce Karim Merchant Mark Nelson Beverley Robertson Jeff Tumolo Sandor Szombathy Werner Morawitz
STAFF Executive Director Craig C. Barry Program Director Dan Goldstein Education Coordinator Tessa Westbrook Office Director Wendy Crosby AmeriCorps Members Kimberly Ralphs Laura Theis Rhett Zyla Accountant Christy McPherson
MISSION To promote a more sustainable environment through community education, awareness and participation.
Printed on recycled paper, naturally.
Blaine County Commissioners Attn: Larry Schoen 219 First Avenue South, Suite 201 Hailey, Idaho 83333 Subject: Improving Partnerships in Outreach and Education
Via: E-mail
Dear Larry, Please pardon the formality of this letter. The Environmental Resource Center has enjoyed an overwhelmingly successful partnership advancing waste reduction and recycling efforts over the past 5 years with Blaine County, the Southern Idaho Solid Waste District and others. This partnership has resulted in many accomplishments, including increasing recycling rates to record levels since its inception in 2003 (average 10% increase in tonnages over 1998-2002 averages). I applaud the Commissioners’ desire to hold accountable project work that Blaine County supports and the ERC also shares these interests. The ERC’s Board of Directors genuinely desires and is interested in continuing this partnership. Yet events have unfolded over the past several months that have caused the ERC significant concern and have impeded progress on mutually held goals. The ERC’s Board of Directors would like to respectfully bring these issues to your attention, along with proposed solutions, and call upon your leadership to improve this partnership so that we may continue in our shared success. Depending on the outcome of this effort, the Board will consider whether it might be more effective in advancing responsible solid waste management by adopting an advocacy-oriented approach and stepping away from the partnership. The ERC’s central concerns focus on the need to improve communications and the planning process. Currently, the partnership is suffering from: 1. Lack of communicating critical information to partners; 2. Critical changes to jointly developed and agreed upon decisions/recommendations are not communicated to the partners; 3. Inadequate input is given to key documents requesting careful consideration or communications asking directly for clarification. 4. Poor planning process, for example: a) The scope of work was sent out after SISW solicited and received proposals; b) The scope of work outlines $40,000 in work but specifies that only $30,000 in funds is allocated for the program;
471 Washington Avenue N; Box 819 Ketchum, Idaho 83340 208.726.4333 tel 208.726.1531 fax erc@ercsv.org www.ercsv.org
The ERC’s Board of Directors needs to see substantive change in order to remain engaged. The ERC would like to make the following recommendations to improve this partnership and is, of course, open to other suggestions. Recommendations to Improve Communications a) Coordinate monthly meetings to review developments, make decisions and record the minutes of these meetings. These minutes will be shared with other involved partners. b) The ERC values input from all its partners, particularly from SISW. When SISW does not provide feedback that is requested, this impedes the efforts of the partnership, crucial dialogue and ultimately the program itself. The ERC proposes that a formal process be created to ensure adequate feedback and sustain crucial dialogue among the partners. This would help distinguish general communications (phone calls or emails) from direct request for input that affects programmatic efforts. Recommendations to Improve the Planning Process a) In the future, the process should be better defined: for example, developing a more formal bidding process that specifies the solicitation and evaluation process before asking directly for proposals would help ensure a smoother, fairer and timelier process for all. b) Reformat the current scope of work so that there is $30,000 in program work and, if that is completed satisfactorily, then an additional $10,000 in specific program work will be authorized, rather than request work be done at a discount. The ERC will address this in its proposal response. c) Develop clear and realistic evaluation measures and procedures that document the evaluation process, indicate what deliverables are required for a successful partnership and specify any corrective measures that may be called upon. The ERC will address some of these in its proposal response. In the wake of a $1.6 million investment in the recycling center and a solid waste budget allocation of over $2.5 million for 2007-08, renewing our partnership now will hopefully bear fruit for the whole community for years to come. Again, on behalf of all the ERC’s Board members, I must stress our genuine desire to forge a stronger partnership – one that is committed to working together rather than at odds. Ultimately such a partnership will be more effective in advancing waste reduction and recycling efforts throughout the county. Sincerely,
Kingsley Murphy Chairman CC: Tom Bowman, County Commissioner Mike McNees, County Manager
Sarah Michael, County Commissioner Terry Schultz, SISW Executive Director
Page 2 of 2