5.13. SR 04-12-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~4;bri/12, 2004 having the Sewer department shift to the Utilities nor the establishment of a Ci~ Assessing deparunent. The parks and recreation director position is happening in 2004. This nexv position will impact the 2004 and 2005 budgets as the entire annual salary gets incorporated into the department operating budget. This will bring the direct reports to me down from 15 (this nurnber includes the consulting city engineer) to 13 in 2004. The communiU, director position needs to happen soon. This change would bring the direct reports to me doxvn from the new total of 13 to 11. For all of the same reasons that a parks and recreation director makes sense so does the community development director. The reasons include better direction by a supervisor to his/her employees, better communication bet~veen departments, and through this better coordination of activities, better se~wices xvill be offered to the public. An internal promotion could be absorbed into the budget ahnost in, mediately. Funding for the hiring of a director that is outside of our organization could not happen until 2005 and it is likely to be even later. Other budget request for additional personnel in 2005 that are known include; a cable TV employee, (parts of) two pohce officers, a Street department employee, a f~re inspector (partially for apartment inspections), and an employee for the Finance department. Accordingly, depending on Council priorities, if the community developrnent director is not hircd from within our organization, it is hkelv that this position will have to wait and 2006 seems too long to wait if we are intent on malting some organizational changes. My recommendation is that xve hire from xvithin. The next step in the process would be to estabhsh the pubhc works director and the City Engineering deparunent. Unfortunately, based on the above scenario, it does not look like funding will be available for this position and department until at least 2006 and it is very likely that it xvill not be available until later. While our need for additional engineering services is a high priority, I think that the expenses associated xvith the department and the director xvill be somexvhat imposing. In this regard, I think that xve need to ~vork xvith TerU, Maurer and the Howard R. Green Company in order to tU, to get more of Terry's hours available to us here at City Hall xvithout it significantly impacting our budget. If xve can xvork out an arrangement xvith Howard R. Green for more of Terry's thne, without it breaking our budget, then this could serve as a good transition step xvhilc xve plan out the necessary manpoxver, vehicle and equipment expenses; hoxv ~ve can recover some of these expenses through our improvement projects; and then finahze the thning for actually moving fo~xvard xvith the public works director and the engineering department. In the meanthne, assuming ~ve do the parks and recreation director and the community development director, xve have reduced the direct reports to me from 15 to 11. When the Public Works deparunent is estabhshed (in 2006-077) this ~vill further reduce the direct reports to me from 11 to 9 and then xve are getting to a more reasonable number. At this time, I want to %vait until the dust settles" a little bit with the parks and recreation director and communiU' development director before xve proceed ~vith the public works director/City Engineering department and with any changes in the Administration/Finance area. Over the past fe~v years rnost of these recommendations for changes have been discussed to sorne degree, so nothing in this memo should be too much of a surprise. I need feedback from the City Council on how to proceed with some of these issues outlined in this memo. S:~(~ouncil~ I~at ~ 2004~org;mizational regret, doc