Mr. Yanko Korenchev’s visit in Fairfax County, USA

Held in the period from 14 to 28 December 2006

Authors:

1. Yanko Korenchev, Member of City Council of Varna
2. Nadezhda Stefanova, Chairwoman We, The People of Bulgaria Foundation

Chapters:

I. Structure of the visit

Purpose

Financial support

Some facts about Fairfax County, State of Virginia, USA

Starting Points of Interest:

• Public Relations Department
• Human Recourse Department
• Community & Recreational Services Department
• Urban Development Department /planning and zoning
• Department for Economic Development and Investment Policy
• Budget Department

Meetings held:

ІІ. Data for Comparative Analysis:

Public participation in the decision making process

Appointing specialists at key positions by politically related motives

Public and Recreational Activities  

Asset Management, Financial Policy.  

Long-term Planning

System for collecting and processing household waste

Purification Station for waste water: 

System for Internal Control: 

III. Conclusions:

IV. Recommendations:

Full text of report

І. Structure of the visit:

Purpose: This visit was made at the invitation of “We, the People of Bulgaria” Foundation

The proposal of the Foundation aims to create opportunities for:

• New models and practices for public management to be studied and eventually adopted
• Effective communication channels between Varna’s  local government and local governments in Europe and USA to be built  

The visit is part of the Foundation project “Varna Breeze”. The project aims to improve the public service delivered by the municipality authorities in Varna, and to encourage the participation of the citizens in the city governance.

The first step in this direction was made by the Foundation in summer ‘2006 and was meant to establish work relationships between Varna District Management and the government of the state Mecklenburg-Vorpommern in Germany.

Mr. Korenchev is the first to receive this invitation. It was his idea for developing business relations with a municipality in the USA. He suggested it during joint meeting with the Foundation Chairwoman, Mrs. Stefanova, the Foundation Councilor for relations with EU countries, Mr. von Reizenstein and the Foundation Councilor for relations with North America, Mr. Gary Gabriel.

The Foundation made a special research tended to select municipality in USA. After establishing contacts with authorities of Fairfax County, the Foundation invited Mr. Korenchev personally to meet with the Chairman of the Supervisory Body and with the Directors of Fairfax County Departments.

Members of Varna’s City Council shall estimate the results from this visit. If they conclude it would be beneficial for the citizens of Varna and the legislative bodies to improve the management practices, the Foundation will send formal invitation to the Chairman of Varna’s City Council, to a representative of the Commission for city development and to a representative of Varna media for a working visit to Fairfax County. The visit eventually will take place during this spring season. The point of the visit will be to build ground  for stronger and immediate relations between Varna’s local government and Fairfax County.

For more information regarding FairfaxCounty, please go to Some facts about Fairfax County, Virginia, USA  or visit: www.fairfaxcounty.gov

Financial support: The transport costs for this visit were covered at Mr. Korenchev’s personal expense. During his stay in the USA, he was personal guest of the family Nadezhda and Gary Gabriel. Mrs. Nadezhda Stefanova-Gabriel is the Chairman of foundation “We, the People of Bulgaria” and holds a Public Diplomacy Certificate, issued by the Institute for Experiential Learning in Washington, USA. Mr. Gary Gabriel is Foundation Councilor for relations with North America.    

Some facts about Fairfax County, Virginia, USA: 

Location: East coast of USA, traditional place for members of the American government and the governmental institutions
Population: 1,059,000
Budget for fiscal year 2007: $ 3.2 billion
Average income per household: $ 88 133
Highest average income from all counties in USA with population over 250 000 persons
Average price for real estates, 2005: $ 530 000
More than 66% of the women, living in the county are employed
Traditional leader in the development of business and technologies
Local management, based on stability, fiscal health, and outstanding public policy

Starting Points of Interest:

Public Relations Department
Volunteers – American public culture, public participation, forms of volunteering, mechanisms used for motivation, form of direct compensation.

Human Recourse Department
Special orientation for new workers, form of control, form of sanctions, work hours, compensation, criteria for professional performance, additional education and qualification.

Community Services Department
Community Centers, Senior Centers, Teens Centers, After-school Programs, Sport activities, General information about the facilities, total built area, budget, who decides for building new facilities, where the money for new facilities comes from, how the community participates in this decision-making process, programs & fees, management, advisory councils, is all this possible without volunteers’ contribution. 

Urban Development Department /planning and zoning
Balance between public interests and investors’ interest, transparence, zone of flexibility while dealing with investors in order some important improvements and infrastructure projects to be delivered from the developer as a compensation in return to the permits granted, balance between private and public interest when a private owner does not agree with a master plan being offered, public- private partnership.

Department for Economic Development and Investment Policy We are very interested in learning about the experience Fairfax County has with the Capital Attraction Program started in 1997. Fairfax County companies have received almost $4 billion in private equity funding since the FCEDA began its Capital Attraction Program in 1997 to link entrepreneurs with possible funding sources. More than 30 venture capital firms and organizations have offices in Fairfax County, the highest concentration in the Washington area

Budget Department We would appreciate the chance to learn about The Ten Principles of Sound Financial Management adopted by the Board of Supervisors on October 22, 1975, which endorsed a set of policies designed to contribute to the County’s fiscal management and maintain the County’s "triple A" bond rating. The County has maintained its superior rating in large part due to its firm adherence to these policies. The County's exceptional "triple A" bond rating gives its bonds an unusually high level of marketability and results in the County being able to borrow for needed capital improvements at low interest rates, thus realizing significant savings now and in the future for the citizens of Fairfax County.

Meetings held:

Mr. Gerald Connolly – Chairmain of Fairfax County  Board of Supervisors
Mrs. Patricia Franckewitz – Director Department Community & Recreation Services,
Mr. Chris Leonard – Deputy Director Department Community & Recreation Services,
Mr. Jim Zook – Director  Department of Planning and Zoning,
Mr. Howard Guba – Deputy Director Department Public Works & Environmental Services,
Mrs. Dorothy Keenan – Supervisor Senior Services,
Ms. Paula Giammarco – Manager of Center for senior citizens
Mrs. Barbara Emerson – Senior Budget Analyst
Mr. Christopher Pietsch –Director  Department „Internal Control”
Mrs. Joyce Doughty – Chief of Department „Household waste collection and disposal”
Mr. Amarjit Riat – Chief of Processing plant for waste and production of gas and electricity
 
 
ІІ. Data for Comparative Analysis:

Results, found from the comparison of the different practices implemented in the departments in Municipality Varna and Fairfax County mentioned above:

Public participation in the decision making process:  On the top of Fairfax County chart of organization, in a small rectangle stays one single word: CITIZENS. This field represents a complex system of Public Councils built on voluntary principle. Their members are citizens qualified in the particular management area. These Public Councils are very respected by the county administration and county policy-makers. They work together with all the appropriate management bodies. Public Councils members do not  vote at the meetings of the 10 selected members of the Supervisory Body.  However, in practice all the decisions of the supervisors have been consulted beforehand with the Public Councils. This procedure applies for documents, regulations, project approval, and negotiations with investors or decisions in relation with urban development policy. It is a practice such decisions to be discussed and approved by the Public Councils and then voted by the Board. On the territory of county of Fairfax, there are more than 100 such  Councils. They supervised the decisions related to the school system, the airport, the waste processing,  the centers for senior citizens, etc. For example, if the municipality is to make decision for signing a contract with investor for building a plant for waste processing, this process shall not be possible without the public approval, represented by the Public Council in charge for this matters. All the information, regarding the terms and conditions of negotiations between the county and investor have to be disclosed. If a bond loan is considered for a major public projects and it may affect the rate of local taxes, the municipality shall conduct a referendum as regulated by law. Public Councils members are not paid for these activities. Most of them are trained by special Association of citizens in Virginia. This education provides for effectiveness of the Public Councils so that they can act as advisory boards , rather than a huge number of bodies hampering the system operation.

Comparing with the system implemented in Varna, the 10-member Supervisory Board in Fairfax is a counterpart of the  City Council of Varna. The Directors of departments are supposed to report to the Board, respectively to the City Council in Varna.. The part, which is missing off Varna’s picture are Public Councils, which provide live connection between the citizens and the managing bodies. In Varna there are some Citizens’ Committees, which are advertised as a citizens’ participation in the decision making process but their credibility as such is strongly damaged by the fact that all of them are chaired by Varna’s mayor.

Appointing specialists at key positions by politically related motives:  The Directors of Departments we met during our visit in Fairfax County, with minor exemptions, were people with long-term work experience in the municipality, between 15 and 20 years. None of them believed they may be selected for political reasons. Each of these key highly qualified professionals was talking proudly about her/his job and obviously is living with it. They left the impression they deeply believe in their  importance for the municipality success. All of them said they feel responsible for executing their department policies on everyday basis. They told us they know that the product their departments are delivering to the public is a result of their personal professional care and attention and of course it is a result of the strong team work of the people they manage.

Every key specialist in Fairfax County fills in a declaration for economic interest, which is analyzed and supervised by the Internal Control Department. This department provides every department with memorandums aiming to focus the attention of the employees towards any attemps for frauds, misuse of work position or conflicts of interests. The violation of these regulations may lead to dismissal. 

For more details, regarding the preventative policy of the department of internal control of Fairfax County please do to: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/audit/
.
Community &  Recreational Services:    This department is in charge of managing county’s assets like: public centers, centers for senior citizens, teen centers, extracurricular programs, sport, fire stations, etc.

The huge difference between the two municipalities we compare comes from the fact that Fairfax County enjoys a great deal of voluntary work in its public projects. About 50% of the work on Fairfax County projects is donated by volunteers. For instance, the sport places in the municipality are visited by around 300 000 people. The number of the paid municipality employees dealing with the coordination of these equipments is only 6.  This is an achievement of Community & Recreational Services’ Department.

The quality of the achieved results by the employees in this department is evaluated by the number of hours donated by volunteers. This factor is very important for the estimation of the individual results of each employee. This policy reduces the municipality expenditures, as well as creates a sense of public identity. That is why the department is called “Community & Recreational Services”. Building so large support group of volunteers, this department basically works not only with the sites, owned by the municipality, but also with the people of Fairfax County.

What criteria shall be used during the recruitment process? First: technical skills, grounded on their education. Important factor is their individual tendency, i.e. individual talents and whether these talents correspond to what municipality is looking for. These skills are analyzed in a written test, followed by an interview. How the compensation compares with the average wages? It is usually around and under the average. The market approach is used to determine the salary of the employees. Therefore, the compensation is determined to be adequate to the market trends for such positions. When the employees start working, they undergo trainings (professional qualifications) . Some of them may be supported to complete a higher degree of education. The municipality covers part of the expenses. Are there employees who decide to resign after the increase their education? Is there any protection clause, so that the municipality may be able to prevent the loss of funds, invested in such employees? The municipality tries to create an attractive work environment. Also, the management is engaged to promote better workplace  culture, so that the employees will be willing to stay. When any employee increases their qualification and decides to change the working position, instead of being discouraged, she/he is assisted to find a suitable position in another organization within the municipality system.  

Who decides for building new municipality’s facilities, like recreational center, senior and teen centers? Usually the initiative for building such centers comes from the residents in the particular area. The community ( one or more Home Owners Association/s) decides that they need such a facility. The community forwards its request to the local authority representatives (a local Board of Supervisors’ member)  and ask her/ him to lobby for the implementation of the project. Special service within the municipality system, together with the public (including the appropriate Public Council) , analyzes this perspective. If approved, the project shall be introduced in the five-year Capital Program for Improvements. These projects are often built on land owned by the county. This is why instead of selling out land, the county is buying land. Usually, these projects are financed by borrowed funds. When there shall be private investors participating in the projects, there shall be negotiations conducted by Department of Planning and Zoning “ and a special “profer” is produces, which are meant to achieve additional benefits for the public interest.

For the US citizens the public sport and recreation centers, centers for activities for senior citizens, centers for teenagers an others, are sites, which are considered as an absolute necessity. Having a such a facility in the neighborhood is not an exemption or something  considered as a luxury. This is simply the American way of living. This is why these facilities are crowded on everyday basis. The form of participating is a membership ( monthly/ multiple basis). Volunteers here are the key.

For more information about this department, please visit: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/rec

Asset Management, Financial Policy: The new fiscal year for Fairfax County begins in July. The budget for the next year,  also discussed by the citizens’ Public Councils, has to be approved and accepted by the 10-member Supervisory Board at the end of April, beginning of May.

For the fiscal 2007 the budget of Fairfax County is around $3,2 billion.

60 % of the revenue in the budget is formed by the property tax income. 15% is formed by tax income on other properties. 15.2% - local taxes. The rest is based on fees, paid services, permissions, licenses and others. Only 2.6% of the budget is coming from the State of Virginia,  and 1.3% - from the national budget.  

The state of Virginial controls almost 90% of the municipal tax income from other sources, not property related. 

The municipality contributes to the budget of the State Virginia all revenue collected from personal tax income.

Only 19 cents out of  $1 sent in the state budget return to the municipality.

Around 52% of the budget, Fairfax County spends for the schools on its territory, from nurseries to 12th grade. Colleges and universities are not included.

Other two important positions in the expenditure budget are: 12.7% for security (polic, fire stations, sheriff, emergency, including first medical aid), 11% - health and welfare.

The municipality debts are not supposed to exceed 3.4% of the budget. This ratio represents one of the 10 Golden Rules in the financial policy of the municipality. These rules were approved by the Supervisory Board in 1975. They are: Planning Policy, Annual Budget Plans, Cash Balances, Debt Ratios, Cash Management, Internal Controls, Performance Measurement, Reducing Duplication, Underlying Debt, and Moral Obligations Diversified Economy.

For more details regarding the budget ofFairfaxCounty, as well as reviewing the ways for stimulating and motivating citizens to participate in the budget discussions, please visit: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/

Long-term Planning: During each meeting session we conducted, after the official greeting we were given two similar in function and different in contents packs of documents: Policy of the relevant department and long-term development strategy.  

For example, policy of Department „Urban Development, Planning and Zoning” is around 100 pages.

In difference of the practice of Municipality of Varna with its two separate departments „Architecture, Urban Development and Planning” and „Engineer Infrastructure”,  in County of Fairfax  the urbanization policy is a responsibility of one department: Department of Planning & Zoning.

The final product delivered by Varna’s Urban Development Department includes a canvas displaying the general architectural construction plan, while the final product of Fairfax Planning & Zoning Department is a very complex policy, referred to as a detailed plan. It includes the typical construction scheme for all county’s territory and additional around 100 printed pages for the detailed concept of county’s government regarding the available land, the actual status and development of the transport system, prognosis for the development of the residential system, environment protection under the planned municipality development, management of the economic growth, cultural heritage, public sites, community services, parts and recreational places.

Again, important point in this policy is, that Municipality Fairfax uses all existing funds to buy land, instead of SELLING the available one. This is the way to obtain areas for building schools, parks, public centers, etc.

Another difference is the fact, that the construction of these projects is not always subsidized by the municipality budget. The municipality attracts private investors on these lands and gives them permission to develop private projects. As result of the strict negotiations these investors have the obligation to build at their expense a number of additional places of public interest, e.g. financial support for schools, building transport communications, public buildings, etc.

The proposals made by the municipality to the investors are called „profer”. Such public interests are also taken into consideration in regards to submitted requests for changing the status of any large piece of land. It costs a lot to an investor to reach reasoning of his/ her land. The county is looking for chances any of these changes initiated by private investors to be profitable for the interest of Fairfax  County people. The have been elected to represent.

For more information regarding the detailed development plan of FairfaxCounty, please visit: www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpz/comprehensive_plan/main.htm

System for collecting and processing household waste: A very small part of the waste collection in Fairfax County is managed by the municipality. Most of the household garbage, thrown away every day is collected by private companies, which have signed separate agreements with the relevant Home Owners Associations. These associations consist of community members and similar to our “Dom-savet” (Council of the residents in the housing block). They include all the households within one neighborhood, usually around 20-30 houses or all of the apartments in a condominium. They are juridical persons and their structure is regulated by the appropriate law. Furthermore, these associations are absolutely free in their choice, in relation with the company they want to select regarding the waste collection in the neighborhood they represent. 

On the streets of Fairfax County there are no garbage cans. Every household has a wheeled trash container, portable and keeps it in the garage. When it’s condominium, there is a specific place into the site. Certain days during the week every household carries out their garbage can as well as two plastic containers with dimensions 50x 70 cm. One of these containers is for the plastic and glass and the other one for collecting the used paper. Later in the evening the empty containers are taken back to the garage. This is done twice a week.

Most of the households in the USA do not produce large amount of food waste, due to the grinder devices installed in the sinks. Thank to these devices the composition of the household waste becomes less attractive for the rodents and other animals and insects traditionally related with the garbage.  There are no homeless animals (cats or dogs) on the streets. If there are any animals, lost by their owners, they are accomodated in shelters. They stay in the shelters for thirty days. If no one has shown interest to take care of them and bring one of them home, they shall be put to sleep. The approach is implemented by the authorities in order to prevent the residents from dangerous ilnesses. Typical for this municipality is the fact that the associations of home owners do not allow dogs or any other animals to live in the outdoor area of the property. All these components of the environment prevent the appearance of any household garbage or other waste in the residetial areas.

The relevant companies collect the waste and transport it to the depot, owned and managed by the municipality. There, in a building, resembling a hall, the wastes are piled on a concrete floor. As soon as the truck leaves the premises, a bulldozer comes  and push the garbage towards the corner of the hall, where there is a large hole on the floor. Meanwhile, beneath the hole is the municipality truck and the garbage falls onto it. Once, the truck is fully loaded, it is directed towards the complex, where is situated the plant for waste processing. The waste is turned into gas and electricity.  

The complex is spreaded on area of 2000 decares, owned by the municipality. At present, there are constructed cells for waste disposal of 18 mln tons. Inside the cells there are 300 wills for the production of gas, which is used for the acquisition of electricity energy. Produced energy is sufficient for the supply of 6000 households. The municipality sells this energy (6MB) to the local electricity company. 

Part of the gas, obtained by the decomposition of the wastes is transported to the local purification station for waste water. The station has capacity to serve a region with 500 000 residents. The savings for fuel, gained in this process are around $ 1 mln per year. 

The composition of the gas is 50% of methane and 50% of carbon dioxide, produced by the decomposition of the organic material. In the past, this gas has been ventiled or burnt without being used. The present system has won many awards for innovations and design. It was implemented in 1973. Then the system was owned by the federal government. In 1982 Fairfax County takes the operational control and in 2002 becomes its owner. Many groups from all over the world come to visit this complex and to be advised by the owners.

Besides this system, there is also a factory for processing the „fresh” waste into electricity energy. The trucks mentioned above bring the waste into the factory. This equipment is owned by a private investor. The municipality is the main resource supplier. Around 3000 tons waste coming from 900 000 residents in the area are processed daily in this plant. The factory sells the produced energy to the local electricity company. It is sufficient to ensure energy supply for 75000 households. The municipality stores in its depot the waste left from this production: ashes, produced during the burning of the household waste.

For more information on the systems, related to waste collection, waste processing and educating the people how to reduce their waste, etc., please visit: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpwes/swmp/pln.htm

Purification Station for waste water:  Main equipment for purification of waste water in the almost one-million population of Fairfax County is the purification system with the following characteristics:
Serviced region: 600 sq.m, sewer pipes with dimensions from 20 cm to 1.80 m: 5120 km; sewer pump stations: 64, pumps: 280, measurement stations: 53,  measurement devices for rain water: 11, employees: 145 people, annual budget for operation and maintenance: $ 11-12 mln. 

The preventive maintenance of the facilities is one of the most important operations, performed by this division. The procedure includes physical inspections for the whole system, followed by fanning and pressure cleaing the blocked sections. Two of the main reasons for blocking the sewer systems of the households and  apprearance of leakings on the surface respectively are caused by intrusion of the tree root systems and collection of heavy oils. The result of  proactive preventive maintenance is the reduction of cloggings in the sewer system of Fairfax County. At present, the County experience the smallest number of sewer system problems.  The frequent preventive maintenance allows all procedure operations in the system to be performed with no interruptions of the working process. 

During the last few years active prevention procedures have been performed on certain sections of the sewer network, especially in the older parts with the assistance of the new protection technologies, in order to reduce the unhealthy impact for the people, the environment and the transport traffic. Circa $ 6 mln  are spent every year for annual reconditioning/replacement of the sewerage infrastructure. The designation of the sections, which need to be reconditioned/replaced/repaired is made based on the results from  the amount of the waste water’s measurement while passing through the collectors. Also, the identification of lines of higher infiltration rate of rain water, which is a sign for damaged infrastructure. Afterwards, inspection of all sewer pipes have to be made, using the TV cameras with remote control. The pipes, displaying serious deffects have to be repaired/replaced by implementing new improved technologies. This strategy allows the life expectancy of the infrastructure to be increased by 10 years. The prevention program reduces significantly the underground infiltration of the water and thus protects the capacity of the water collection system and the systems, processing the waste water.

The purification system of Fairfax County has 24-hour support and is ready to respond to all the phone calls regarding cloggings in the sewarage system. Right after the signal is received, one of the inspectors go onsite and identifies the reason. They shall remove the clogging and consult the owner to call an independent private specialist if the problem shall appear on the territory of a private property.

For more details on the work of this system, please visit:  http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpwes/wastewater/
   

 System for Internal Control:  When we met Mr. Christopher Pietsch, Director of Department “Internal Control” in Fairfax County and we shared with him our interest for learning more about their models for fighting the corruption, we were asked the following question: Do you have independent department for fighting the corruption? Then we were asked the second question: Does this department have its policy and strategy for achieving the goals?

Afterwards, Mr. Pietsch made something  that any of his colleagues would make at the point of introduction and presentation. He handed us two copies of the policy of his department.

He underlined the fact, that the number of attempts for deception and corruption in the municipality is a reflection of the quality of his work. He comes to work every day and leaves the office with the thoughts in his mind, how to improve the system and how to introduce all the new human psychology models, in order to achieve the goals of his department.

He shared with us, that the deception attempts in the municipality are sporadic. The main elements in their anti-corruption policy is raising the attention of the employees, creating opportunities for reporting deception attempts, continuous actualization of the policy and active communication with the departments.

The difficulties in achieving results and ensuring the effectiveness of any anti-corruption policy may be the following: employees do not pay enough attention, members of the managing body are not aware that such policy exists, there is no centralized department, communicating the policies to all departments, if the employees do not consider their responsibility to report violations. 

The lack of focused attention and compliance with the anti-corruption policy may result in: lack of coordination during the investigation process; lack of participation of all the system elements; lack of opportunity to detect indicators, which may invoke future investigation; preventing the departments to start their own internal investigation; missing opportunities to signalize the department of „Internal Control”; allowing indiscipline; employees are not aware, that they have to report for the observed issues and how to ensure their protection upon sending such signal; municipality facing possible situation of incompliance with the requirements for insurance and the regulations to report for possible violations at state level.  

It is important to ensure the involvment of the senior management body and the management team of the concerned departments. The responsibilities of the employees and the team leaders have to be clearly defined. It is necessary to underline the requirement that any doubt for deception has to be reported immediately to the department for internal control. It is a good concept to implement description of some clear signals serving as „red flag”, to indicate the idea of existent attempt for deception.

The ways to facilitate the reporting of deception may be the followings: introducing „hot line” for employees; creating link for deception reporting to the company intranet and the internal website of the municipality; introducing e-chat for employees; developing database for catching deception attempts; informing the department for internal control, informing the management body and the department for public relations.  

The department for internal control implements the following approach for focusing the attention towards possible frauds – providing publicity. The meetings with the senior management, organizing trainings for educating the team leaders, conferences on this topic, supporting internal web page, annual meetings for the Chiefs of all departments have proven to be very effective.

The recommended control techniques are the following: Checking accounts, Credit accounts, Deliveries, Asset Management, Cash flows, Supervising work shifts and presence at work, Information technologies.

For more information about Fairfax County system for Internal Control, please visit: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/audit/

III. Conclusions:

The budget of Fairfax County for the fiscal 2007 is around 4.8 billion BGN.
The budget of Varna Municipality for the fiscal year 2006 was around 0.125 billion BGN.
The citizens of Fairfax County are around 1.1 mln.
The citizens of Varna Municipality are around 400 000.

The analysis shows that the number of citizens in Varna Municipality is 3 times lower than that of Fairfax County, while the financial funds of Varna Municipality are 38 times less, than that of Fairfax County.

Conclusion 1. There is no place for comparison of both potentials. Any comparison, which shall not take into consideration the huge difference in the quantity of available resources, shall not be taken seriously.   

Conclusion 2. However, if the results from the comparative analysis shall be carefully reviewed, they indicate clearly that comparison in respect of management quality is possible. Therefore, this is the direction, where we can focus out time and attention.

Conclusion 3.  The main instruments, considered as appropriate for achieving positive results in the municipality we visited are:  

• Crucial role of the public in the management system, which provides for use of the full intellectual and physical potential of the community;

• Comprehensive policy for long-term planning and creating environment for catching weaknesses in the system at a very early stage, The latter contributes for effective management with no expensive material consequences as a result of bad long- term decisions.

• Sound finance policy, building additional budget revenue sources to compensate the low percentage rate of the state and federal budget, received by the municipality;

• Negotiations with the investors in order to ensure the implementation of important social programs, which cannot be supported easily with the funds of the municipal budget;

• Effective recruitment of highly qualified people (employees and citizens), which are the main participants in the system and have long-term experience in improving the structure;

• On-going processes of qualifying the available personnel;

• Introducing analysis and developing policies and strategies as main instrument for solving fundamental social problems; they have to be followed strictly and systematically and to be updated intelligently, only if there is real necessity for this.

• Implementing detailed reports, created by the work teams as an important stage of the data collection and processing, in relation with problematic issues. They may be used for taking appropriate decisions, changing regulations, voting for local legislative acts, policies, etc.

• Eliminating any political motivation for selection or tolerance of employees at all levels of the municipal administration departments.

• Active, on-going, intelligently and regularly updated internal control and discipline.

• Supporting active, decent, well-intentioned two-way communication with the public

Conclusion 4. Preconditions for achieving positive results in Fairfax County

• High sense of ethics among the public

• High motivation and readiness of the citizens to participate in the management process.

• Public respect towards the voluntary services.

• Public respect towards the education and knowledge, concentration abilities.

• Public respect towards the order and need for control.

• Exceptional alertness of the media and high degree of knowledge of journalists in order to execute properly the functions for effective public control.

• Respect, paid by the municipal employees to journalists in order to avoid negative evaluations by the media.

• High level of voting/ election culture of the local public.  Residents of Fairfax County are people who can calculate precisely the public interest. They maintain high expectations for local government’s performance. This works as a serious engine in the two – way partnership and serve as a solid ground for County’s administration motivation to produce high quality product.

 
Conclusion 5. Two of the most important reasons for achieving positive results in Fairfax County are:

• Strong motivation for the success of the participants in the system, regardless if they are employees or citizens.
• Full equivalent between  motivations of the managing bodies, the public and the media.

IV. Recommendations:

Recommendation 1.  A new Committee to the City Council of Varna to be created.  The Committee will be in charge for drafting and implementing a Long- Term  Policy for  development of Municipality ofVarna

It is recommended, that the Commission shall have the following rights and perform the following activities:

• Based on the hearings and the reports by other City Council committees, the municipal departments, citizens, employees, hired consultants and other sources of expert opinions shall define the priorities for the development of Varna.

• Preparing a draft for long- term development policy, which shall be presented for voting

• Developing strategy for implementing this policy

• Coordinating the development and implementation of the policies of the other City Council’s commissions

• Analyzing management issues and suggesting effective solutions

• Coordinating the interaction between the municipal legislative authority ( the City Council) and the municipal executive authority ( The municipality of Varna administration)

• Reviewing proposals, received by other commissions, related to setting up and implementing general policy of Municipality of Varna

• Discussing positive/ negative experience other City Council Commissions have had with the local administration, including Varna’s Mayor, while implementing the adopted policy; executing control procedures and making proposals for estimation of the achieved results; planning and making proposals for sanctions, which have to be discussed and voted.

Recommendation 2.   A new Committee to the City Council of Varna to be created. The Committee will be in charge for promoting civil rights and public participation in the management of Varna Municipality

It is recommended, that the Commitee shall have the following rights and perform the following activities:

• Based on the hearings and the reports by other commisions, municipal administrative departments, citizens, employees, hired consultants and other sources of expert opinions shall propose project for implementing a  local law, which shall legalize the status of the Public Councils

• Drafting a policy for optimizing the participation of the citizens in the management process

• Coordinating the interaction among the Public Councils, the Commissions at the City Council and the Executive Departments of the municipal administration

• Considering citizens’ requests and  signals for possible violations of this law and making proposals for changes and sanctions

• Discussing citizens’ proposals for improving the mechanism for public participation in the management and initiating discussion of these proposals and eventually making them effective

Recommendation 3.   The structure of exhisting administrative Commission for architecture, construction and urban development of City of Varna and the surrounding residential areas to be modified.

It is recommended, that the Commission shall have the following rights and perform the following activities:

• Based on the hearings and the reports by other commisions,  municipal departments, citizens, employees, hired consultants and other sources of expert opinions shall draft a policy for development of the territory of city of Varna and surrounding residential areas

• Developing strategy for the implementation of the policy mentioned above

• Introducing a draft for local regulatory act, which will authorize the appropriate City Council’s Committee to:

Study all deals with municipal assets, before they have been voted by the City Council  and shall by all means reach decisions in order to approve or reject certain deals in order to ensure better public interest protection

Study all building permits for projects of signicant public interest, ready to be issued by the administration and shall approve or reject certain building permits to ensure better public interest protection

• The regulatory act  mentioned above shall:

      
                     Give definition of the term „of significant public interest”

Regulate the procedure for issuing buildings permits in regards to such projects.

Give a ground for creating a  separate section in the municipal administration, which will conduct negotiations with investors and will prepare municipal proposals, mentioned in this report as  “proffers”

Recommendation 4 .  The name of the exhisting City Council “Corruption Committee”  to be modified as “Committee for Anti-corruption policy”.  Restructuring the work of the Committee.

It is recommended, that the Committee shall have the following rights and perform the following activities:

• Based on the hearings and the reports by other commisions, municipal departments, citizens, employees, hired consultants and other sources of expert opinions shall develop policy for figting the corruption

• Study all deals, which includes municipality’s assets and approving or rejecting approval in respect of eliminating danger for conflict of interests and corruption

• Holds hearings of members from other commissions, municipal employees, citizens and other concerned parties, if there shall be any doubts for corruption

• Conducts  investigations based on signals attempts for corruption, or realized attempts for deception

 
Recommendation 5.   Itt is recommended, that the City Council Committee for culture, religion and media assigns to a working group to perform expert research, related to the activities of the Varna media, supported by the municipal budget. The working group shall make proposals for changes, as to ensure information to wider range of the public and better communication with the citizens. The purpose of this communication shall be creation of a channel for active and actual participation of the citizens of Varna and other residential areas in the management process.     

Recommendation 6. It is recommended that the City Council Temporary Committee for Structures and Administration to discuss in details this report at one of its sessions, and review the recommendations included. Providing the document shall be considered valuable, the recommendations shall be proposed together with the statement of the Commitee to the members of the CityCouncil, the non-governmental organizations and the citizens for discussion and eventual approval.  
 

5 January 2007