Study finds gorge commission at odds

The study assessed the operational capacity of the Gorge Commission and its chief conclusion was that the commission has been historically underfunded. (See story below).

But when the study was presented to the commission last week, much time was spent discussing the issue of the degree of executive director autonomy.

It was also noted the commissioners have “strong respect” for one another, despite their differences in philosophy.

The report noted the role of the executive director “is discussed in the bylaws. But the degree to which the executive director is to inform and gain the consent of the commissioners to perform certain functions is open to interpretation. …The current executive director believes the bylaws grant him considerable discretion, thus generating friction between him and those who believe the position should be subject to greater supervision.”

“The lack of alignment among the commissioners and between the commissioners and executive director generates unnecessary friction and delay in decision-making and occasionally fosters confusion among the staff as to priorities.”

Commissioner Janet Wainwright, a Washington governor appointee, said of the report, “It is not news to any commissioner that we desperately need more staff to fulfill the tasks mandated by the management plan and the act itself.

“What I appreciated most was the suggestion that we need to better define our governance structure: does the commission cede its authority to a manager or do we formally adopt a council form of governance whereby the commission as representatives of different and varied authorities work together collaboratively on a unified vision for the national scenic area.”

Meanwhile, Gorge Commissioner Rodger Nichols, representing Wasco County, takes a different tack.

He said, “I believe the role of the commission is to set policy and hire the executive director.

The executive director’s job is to execute that policy by hiring staff and organizing their efforts. Commissioners are volunteers who meet once a month; the director works every day. It does not make sense for us to armchair quarterback or micromanage. That’s a recipe for frustration and failure. We, however, do have to check from time to time to see that the policy is being followed. The best way to do that is to ensure that the director keeps us informed with regular updates. The rule should be ‘No surprises’ in both directions.”

Michael Lang, conservation director at Friends of the Columbia Gorge, said the question of the role of the executive and the commission has “never been such an issue until Darren Nichols was hired but it is an issue now.

There is a disagreement between staff and between the commission and between certain commissioners over what the roles are. Is the Gorge Commission the policy setting body or is the executive director?”

Darren Nichols could not be reached to reply to Lang’s comment.

The report also concluded that there is disagreement about the degree to which commissioners should be directing staff workloads to provide support to the commission.

“With staff already feeling overloaded, adding work for commission committees, etc., is difficult to manage while continuing to complete mandated work” the report stated.

Also at issue and described as a “fundamental disagreement” is whether it is appropriate for commissioners to contact commission staff directly to request assistance or discuss work-related items without the executive directors’ knowledge, the report said.

The report also found several areas of “strategic misalignment” in the commission. One was the priorities of the commission. “The commission lacks consensus on its primary roles regarding its regulatory, policy, planning and technical functions.”

Some commissioners, for example, say the commission needs to do more technical work, but didn’t express a need for more technical staff.