Search

Observations — Organizational Structure and MIS
Organizational Structure

The assessing department consists of two major functions which appear to operate separately
from each other; the assessors, commercial and residential and the administrative staff.

The Chief Assessor is the manager of the department responsible for all functions and the day
to day management of all assessors. The department includes two commercial assessors and
two residential assessors. The supervisor of administrative staff manages the activities of all
administrative staff including the processing of exemptions, abatements, deed transfers and
customer service.

During the review of the organizational structure the following observations were noted:

1) Lack of consistent knowledge throughout the staff of the assessing process and functions
within the department due to the separation of management between assessors and
administrative staff.

2) Limited departmental communication. Lack of departmental staff meetings, limited
knowledge of departmental goals and objectives and functions often operate independently.

3) Limited knowledge on potential improvements to the process or growth of the department.
Limited interaction with other city hall departments and divisions.

4) Job descriptions are outdated and somewhat inaccurate, indicating lack of review of the
internal functions for several years.

5) Absence of internal policies, internal training and personal growth opportunities.
Management Information Systems

During the review of the Management Information Systems the following observations were
noted:

1) Data integrity is at risk due to the use of multiple data systems to support the same
transactions.

2) Lack of efficiency due to data being entered in multiple systems.

3) Underutilization of the AssessPro system for exemptions and abatements; reliance on in-
house programmed systems.

4) Increased costs in software maintenance due to multiple data systems.

18

Observations and Opinions

1) Ineffective management of the Assessing Department

a.

b
C.
d

Lack of communications skills

No analysis of how the department operates currently
No recommendations to improve efficiency of operations
No review of, or correction to inaccurate job descriptions

2) Lack of internal policies and procedures to guide operations

a.
b.
Cc.

Little to no internal training for assessors

Too much reliance on national and state training programs/documentation
No documented internal assessor training to minimize the subjective
components of developing property assessments

. No new hire training process or Board of Assessors orientation/workshops

e. State required training focuses on changes in rules and laws

Development of polices for the use of sales information, MLS information,
Building Permits, Effective Year Built (EYB) metric, property card changes

Note: A policy committee consisting of the HR Director, Chief of Staff,

Chief Financial Officer and Deputy Counsel has begun reviewing all city policies.
Due to findings during the completion of this audit, a policy to effectively
document employee daily travel has been written and will be submitted to the
mayor for consideration.

3) Disparate software systems utilized by the department are not optimized

a.

b.

c.

Continued reliance on ADMINS software to link systems — need migration path
to eliminate the use of ADMINS

Not fully utilizing the modules in the AssessPRO CAMA system such as
Exemptions/Credits and Abatements

See the Appendix, Exhibit 3 for a software application diagram of all software
systems used by the Assessing Department

Note: Due to findings during the completion of this audit and the need for

an accurate assessment of the GIS function, the mayor’s office has retained
a consultant, CDMSmith, to evaluate applications across several

19

departments including, but not limited to, Assessing and GIS. A report is
expected in late March/early April.

4) A full measure and list of all properties within the City has not been conducted since
the early 1990's

oo oF

A full measure and list is designed to update all property records
Last full measure and list conducted in 1991
Results in more reliable and equitable information

Can be conducted on a multi-year basis before the next Revaluation which is
required every five years.

20

Conclusions and Major Recommendations

The Assessing Department Management Audit has enabled us to look beyond the operations
of the Assessing Department as several other departments are involved.

Major Recommendations:

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

7)

8)

Re-establish the Administrative Services Director position reporting to the Mayor
which will more effectively align internal serving functions within the city, including
but not limited to, Assessing, GIS and Information Technology operations under one
directorship.

Eliminate the Chief Assessor position — the Administrative Services Director will direct
the operations of the Assessing Department and working with the Chief Financial
Officer will be charged with a) observing the current operating state and b) creating
and implementing an efficiency/improvement plan.

More effectively use the AssessPro software to conduct assessing business to include
such items such as exemptions/credits and tax abatement processing. Consultation
and technical assistance by Patriot Properties may be needed.

Create and/or update internal policies and procedures to reflect the current state of
operations. Review functions within the department and update job descriptions as

appropriate.

Implement a new mileage reimbursement policy and related procedures for all
employees who use their personal vehicle for City business.

Develop integrated internal training programs for assessing and administrative staff.
Conduct orientation and informational workshops with the Board of Assessors.

Reduce reliance on the City’s legacy ADMINS software applications.
Invest in a full measure & list project over the next few years to update the property

record data. This project will be completed in time to perform the next state
mandated Revaluation.

21

9) In coordination with the full measure and list, transition from the use of the EYB to a
grade/condition based method of assessment. While the EYB is an acceptable method
used in assessing, the grade/condition provides for greater transparency and taxpayer
comprehension, An outside, experienced consultant is recommended to assist the city
with this transition.

22

Respectfully Submitted,

orf caitin Chief Firdncial Officer

Kimberly Kleinet-Chief of Staff

23

Appendix

1. Organizational Chart
2. Organizational Interview Questions

3. Software Application Diagram

24

Department-Level Organizational Chart

Division Director
John Griffin

Chief Assessor

Jon Duhamei

NSCS Aa ee Al Adminstrative Staff

Sele 4S eer lls Louise Brown

oleate ST) ella ela t ees a

Appraiser III Admin

rem Nahe Oataumaeeli ea

Commercial Dept. Coordinator

Appraiser III Booard of Asessor
Secretaty

Chel aan Ul ea iss

: : Lynn Cameron
Residential

Admin Specialist I|
Appraiser Il

Mike Mandile

Residential

Amanda Mazerolle

Admin Specialist |
Appraiser |

THE CITY OF NASHUA “The Gate City

Financial Services

Purchasing Departenent

March 31, 2016
Memo #16-127

TO: MAYOR DONCHESS
FINANCE COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: HEADWORKS UPGRADE (VALUE: $2,848,222)
DEPARTMENT: 169 WASTEWATER; FUND: SRF LOAN
ACTIVITY: HEADWORKS UPGRADE

Please see the attached communication from David Simmons, Wastewater Department Superintendent
dated March 24, 2016 for the information related to this purchase.

Pursuant to § 5-78 Major purchases (greater than $10,000) A. All supplies and contractual services,
except as otherwise provided herein, when the estimated cost thereof shall exceed $10,000 shall be
purchased by formal, written contract from the lowest responsible bidder, after due notice inviting bids.

The Wastewater Department Superintendent, Board of Public Works (March 24, 2016) and the
Purchasing Department recommend the award of this contract in the amount of $2,848,222 to T Buck

Construction of Turner, ME.

Respectfully,

Dan Kooken
Purchasing Manager

Ce: D Simmons L Fauteux

229 Main Street « Nashua, New Hampshire 03061 © Phone (603) 589-3330 « Fax (603) 589-3344

Audit Interview Questions

What is your primary function within the department?

What are your primary objectives?

How (and who) are objectives determined? Do they change (time of year)?
How were you trained on objectives?

How is progress against these objectives measured?

What processes and/or tools are in place to help you these achieve objectives?

Is there evidence of progress?

How does data trends get analyzed?

How do employees communicate their improvement ideas?

How do preventive actions/ improvements and changes in policy get recorded?

Are statistical techniques used?

How are customer perceptions captured on a proactive basis?

How are training needs determined?

What kind of orientation training is provided when you were hired?

How were you made aware of the organization’s mission, values, and measurable objectives?
How is the effectiveness of training evaluated? Was your training adequate?

What happens when training is determined to have been ineffective?

What’s the most important thing about your job?
What’s the hardest thing about your job?
What are some things you'd like to change about your job?

What resource would help you be more effective?

26