HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.4 Amend Position Alloc CITY CLERK
File #
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 6, 2004
SUBJECT: Request to Amend Position Allocation Plan inFY 2003-2004 City
of Dublin Budget~./,,,
Report Prepared by: Jeri Ram, Planning Manager~
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution approving Amendment to the Position Allocation
Plan in the FY 2003-2004 City of Dublin Budget
2. Community Development Department (Planning Division)
Projects FY 2003 - 2004
RECOMMENDATION: 1. Receive Staff report
2. Adopt the Resolution approving Amendment to the Position
Allocation Plan in the FY 2003-2004 City of Dublin Budget
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Authorization of this request will not require the expenditure of
funds for staffing in FY 2003-2004. In FY 2004-2005 it is
estimated that there will be an approximate net General Fund cost of
approximately $45,200 per year for the position (see Fiscal Impact
Section below).
DESCRIPTION:
The Planning Division of the Community Development Department currently has two Senior Planners,
three Associate Planners and one Assistant Planner. Existing Senior Planners currently split their time
between two types of projects: advanced planning (usually City related and nori-reimbursable) and current
planning (usually developer related and reimbursable). In addition, the Planning Division utilizes two
consultants for processing development applications as well as seven other consultants for specialized
areas such as environmental, biology, architecture and landscape architecture.
The Senior Planners and two consultants are assigned to work on the majority of the City Council's high
priority development projects. This is necessary because of the greater complexity of development
projects involving difficult issues such as endangered species and more challenging topography.
During this last fiscal year, the amount of high priority projects assigned by the City Council has
increased, yet the number of Staff available to process the projects has stayed constant. In addition, over
the past few years high priority Goals and Objectives in the area of advanced planning have increased
(See Attachment 2), requiring Senior Planner level attention and thereby reducing the available hours of
senior level sta£f to work on development-related projects.
COPIES TO: In-House Distribution
F:L~dministration\CCSRSRPLAN4-6.doc
Staff must also process other projects assigned by the City Council during the year and non-high priority
develoPment projects that are proposed in accordance with timeframes set fOrth in State law (the Pepuit
Streamlining Act). Many of these projects are also complicated and require experienced senior level ~
Staff. At the present time, Staff is processing 17 high priority projects, 5 projects assigned by the City
Council after the Goals & Objectives plan was adopted by the City Council and 18 other complex current
planning projects (See Attachment 2). Staff is making progress on these projects; however, many projects.
cannot be completed in a timely fashion dhe to over commitment of senior level planning staff, developer
delays or environmental issues (endangered species).
Staff's analysis indicates that the slowing of project completion is due to the following factors:
· Planners are handling more projects at the same time. This effectively divides their time and
slows down all the projects they are working on. In the past, Senior Planners have been able to
handle 2 - 3 large-scale development projects at the same time. Now with the current workload,
the same senior planner works on Ikea, EDPO as well as the Historic Specific Plan, the new
Ordinance for on-site parking of RVs as well as other smaller development projects;
· More of the City Council priorities are in advanced planning, such as specific plans. These
projects require more public participation components and take longer to accomplish. In addition,
senior planners are also handling development projects at the same time. Requirements of State
law require some aspects of development projeCts to be processed within certain timeframes; and
· Development projects have become more complicated and take longer to bring to completion as
the City builds towards the east. Project processing is taking longer as planners increasingly deal
with endangered species issues, multiple property owners and neighborhood issues.
Staff anticipates that the level of complexity of projects will increase and the amount of time to process a
project will take longer as time goes on. Project complexity, increase of high priority items and an
increase in advanced planning projects have resulted in this request for an additional Senior Planner
position in the Planning Division. Another Senior Planner position will enable the Division to reassign
some of the workload in order to reduce project completion dates.
Options Evaluated:
Prior to submitting this proposal Staff looked at hiring additional consultants to further augment City
Staff. As noted above, the Planning Division currently has two consulting planners who assist Staff in
managing development applications.
Hiring a consultant may be a less expensive option for development projects, as the cost for the service is
passed on to the developer; however, there are other reasons why this option is not recommended as
follows:
· A consultant is a less expensive option for processing development projects, but not for non-
reimbursable projects. In addition, since a consultant would not be cost effective to perform non-
reimbursable work, the Division would not gain any flexibility in work assignments as the
consultant would not assist in advanced planning projects;
· A senior level planning consultant that works as adjunct City Staffand is willing to make a long-
term investment in one place is very difficult to find (so more than one person may be necessary);
and
· One or more consultants requires more supervision and training time.
Fiscal Analysis:
The fiscal impact to the City of Dublin for a new Senior Planner position is estimated to be as follows:
The yearly cost for a Senior Planner is approximately $126,015 with benefits. Based on an analysis of the
hours worked on reimbursable projects and City's billable rate, the non-reimbursable cost to the City for
hiring a Senior Planner is approximately $45,202.84.
It is estimated that it will take approximately 4-6 months to recruit for this position. If this item is
approved the recruitment will begin immediately and it may be possible to have this position filled by
July or August. If the City were to wait until after the budget is adopted to begin the recruitment, the
position would not likely be filled until late fall. This would further delay the completion of high priority
and City Council assigned projects.
Amendment to FY 2003-2004 Position Allocation Plan:
Since Staff is requesting the position be added this fiscal year, it is necessary to amend the Fiscal Year
2003-2004 Position Allocation Plan that is part of the FY 2003-2004 adopted City Budget (Exhibit A to
Attachment 1). The Plan has been modified (shown in bold italics), to show an increase from 5 to 6
Associate/Senior Planner positions in the Community Development Department.
As noted above, it is not likely that this position will be filled prior to preParing the draft budget for FY
2004-2005. Therefore, if the City Council approves this new position and as a result of preparing the FY
2004-2005 budget determines that funds need to be allocated elsewhere, the recruitment could be placed
on hold.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council receive the Staff report and adopt the Resolution approving
Amendment to the Position Allocation Plan in the FY 2003N2004 City of Dublin Budget.
RESOLUTION NO. - 04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING AMENDMENT TO THE POSITION ALLOCATION PLAN ADOPTED IN
THE FY 2003-2004 CITY OF DUBLIN BUDGET
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Dublin adopted the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Annual
Budget on June 24, 2003; and
WHEREAS, the FY 2003-2004 Annual Budget contained a Position Allocation Plan that set forth
all the Staffpositions funded in the Budget; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Division of the Community Development Department has presented a
request to add a new Senior Planner position to City Staff during the current fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, addition of new Staff requires an amendment to the FY 2003-2004 Annual Budget's
Position Allocation Plan (Exhibit A); and
WHEREAS, a Staff report was submitted outlining the issues surrounding the request; and
WHEREAS, the City Council evaluated the information provided them by staff and determined
that it was in the best interest of the City to recruit additional Staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Dublin does
hereby approve the Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Position Allocation Plan for the FY
2003-2004 City of Dublin Budget.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this 6th
day of April 2004, by the following votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
FSAdministration\CCResseniorplanner. doc ATTACHMENT 1
FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 ADOPTED POSITION ALLOCATION PLAN
2003-2004 2003-2004 Total
Allocated Allocated 20032004 Difference
City Contract Allocated Compared To
DEPARTMENT CLASSIFICATION Positions Positi0, ,ns Positions 2002-2003
City Manager City Manager 1.00 1.00 0.00
Assistant City Manager 1.00 1.00 · 0.00
City Clerk 1,00 1,00 0.00
Secretary to the CM/Deputy City Clerk 1.00 1.00 0.00
Senior Office Assistant 1.00 1.00 0.00
Office Assistant II 0.75 0, 75 0,,,25,,
Sub-Total 5.75 5,75 0.25
Central Services Assistant to the City Manager 1.00 1.00 0.00
Administrative Analyst II 0.50 0.50 0.00
Senior Office Assistant 0.~0 0,.5,0 0.00
Sub-Total 2.00 2.00 0.00
Administrative Administrative Services Director 1.00 1.00 0.00
Services Finance Manager 1:00 1.00 0.00
Information Systems Manager 1.00 1.00 0.00
(SIS Coordinator 1.00 1.00 1.00
Administrative Analyst I 1.00 1.00 0.00
Senior Finance Technician 1.00 1.00 0.00
Finance Technician 1/11 2.00 2.00 0.00
Office Assistant I/!t 2.00 2.00 0.00
Information Systems Technician 1.0~ !,.00, 0.00
Sub-Total 11.00 11.00 1.00
Bldg Mgmt Landscape Foreman 0.64 0.64 (0.05)
(MCE) Landscape Laborer I 0.73 0.73 0.05
Landscape Laborer I! 0.28, 0.,28
Sub-Total 1.65 1.65 0.05
Police Services Captain 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lieutenant 2.00 2.00 0.00
Sergeant - Administrative 1.00 1.00 0.00
Sergeant- Patrol 4.00 4.00 0.00
Sergeant - Detective 3.00 3.00 0.00
Sergeant - Traffic 1.00 1.00 0.00
Officer- Patrol 26.00 26.00 0.00
Officer- Traffic 3.00 3.00 0.00
Officer - Detective 4.00 4.00 0.00
Officer - School 1.00 1.00 0.00
Sheriffs Technician 1.00 1.00 0.00
Secretary 1.00 1.00 0.00
Administrative Analyst II 1.00 1.00 0.00
Office Assistant !111 3.00 3.00 0.00
Community Safety Assistant 2.00 2_0~1 O~OO
Sub-Total 6.00 48.00 54.00 0.00
Disaster Administrative Analyst II 0.50 0.5,0
Preparedness Sub-Total 0.50 0.50 0.00
EXHIBIT
2003-2004 2003-2004 Total
Allocated Allocated 2003-2004 Difference
City Contract Allocated Compared To
DEPARTMENT CLASSIFICATION po~,itions Positions Positions 2002-2003
Fire Services Landscape Foreman (MCE) 0.04 0.04 0.03
Landscape Laborer i (MCE) 0.18 0.18 O. 12
Landscape Laborer 11 (MCE) 0.10 0.10 0,10
Landscape Laborer !11 (MCE) 0.00 0.00 (0.02)
FireflghterlParamedic 12.00 12.00 0.00
Fire Engineer 12.00 12.00 0.00
Fire Captain 12.00 12.00 0.00
Fire Marshal O. 17 O. 17 ( O. 09)
Deputy Fire Marshal 1.00 1.00 0.00
Fire Inspector 0.40 1.00 1.40 (0.25)
Senior Office Assistant 1,00 1,~0,0, 0~.00,
Sub-Total 1.40 J ~.4~" 39.89 (0.11)
Public Works Public Works Director/City Engineer 1.00 1.00 0.00
Administration Administrative Analyst II 1.00 1.00 0.00
Secretary 2.00 2.00 0.00
Office Assistant II 1.00 1.00 0.00
Office Assistant ! (Temporary) 0.50 0.50 0.00
Maintenance Superintendent 1 .~ ,lt00 0. 00
Sub-Total 5.~0 1.00 6.50 0.00
Street Maint Landscape Foreman 0.12 0.12 (0.01)
(MCE) Landscape Laborer t 0.31 0.31 0,06
Landscape Laborer II 0.18 0.18 0.01
Landscape Laborer III 0.40 0~,40 (0~02)
Sub-Total 1.01 1.01 0.04
Street Tree Landscape Foreman 0.07 0.07 (0.01)
Maintenance Landscape Laborer I 0.20 0.20 0.05
(MCE) Landscape Laborer I1 0.11 0.11 0,01
Landscape Laborer III 0.31 0.31 0.0~,
Sub-Total 0.69 0.69 0.10
Street Landscape Landscape Foreman 0:79 0.79 (0.04)
Maintenance Landscape Laborer I 2.25 2.25 0.75
(MCE) Landscape Laborer II 1.06 1.06 0.01
Landscape Laborer I!1 .3,20 :3.20 0.~
Sub-Total 7.30 7.30 1.26
Housing Programs Housing Specialist 1~0,0 1.00 q.0,0,
Sub-Total 1.00 1.00 0.00
Library Services Landscape' Foreman 0.27 0.27 0.22
Landscape Laborer I 0.33 0.33 0.22
Landscape Laborer II 0.00 O.O0 (0.04)
Sub-Total 0.60 0.60 0.40
Cultural Activities Heritage & Cultural Arts Supervisor 0~,7,~, 0.7,5, 0~,0,0,
Sub-Total 0.75 0.75 0.00
Heritage Center Heritage & Cultural Arts Supervisor 0.25 0.25 0.00
Heritage Center Director 0.50 0.50 0.00
Landscape Foreman 0.01 0.01 0.00
Landscape Laborer !1 0.05 0.05 0.0,1
Sub-Total 0.75 0.06 0.81 0.01
Dublin Cemetery Landscape Foreman 0.02 0.02 0.00
(MCE) Landscape Laborer I 0.08 0.08 0,03
Landscape Laborer !1 0.09 0.09 0.00
Landscape Laborer III ~, !8 0.18 (0~04)
Sub-Total 0.37 0.37 (0.01)
2003-2004 2003-2004 Total
Allocated Allocated 2003-2004 Difference
City Contract Allocated Compared To
DEPARTMENT CLASSIFICATION Positions Positions Positions 2002,2003
Park Maintenance Landscape Foreman 0.94 0.94 (0.04)
(MCE) Landscape Laborer I 2.64 2.64 0.74
Landscape Laborer II 1.28 1.28 0.03
Landscape Laborer III 3.62 ~.62 (0.04)
Sub-Total 8.48 8.48 0.69
Parks & Parks & Community Svcs Director 1.00 1.00 0.00
Community Parks & Community Services Manager i.00 1.00 0.00
Services Recreation Supervisor 2.00 2.00 0.00
Recreation Coordinator 3.00 3.00 0.00
Preschool Instructor (PT) 0.75 0.75 0.00
Administrative Technician 1,00 1.00 0.00
Senior Office Assistant 1.00 1,00 0.00
Office Assistant 1/11 1.50 1.50 0.50
Recreation Technician ,1.~5 1,75 0.00
Sub-Total 13.00 13.00 0.50
Parks & Facilities Parks & Facilities Dev. Mgr. 1.00 1.00 0.00
Management Parks & FaCilities Dev. Coordinator ~,.0,0, 1..00 0.00
Sub-Total 2.00 2.00 0.00
Community Community Development Director 1.00 1.00 0.00
Development Planning Manager 1.00 1.00 0.00
Associate/Senior Planner 6.00 6.00 t. 00
Assistant Planner/Code Enforcement 2.00 ZOO 0.00
Administrative Aide 1.00 1.00 0.00
Secretary 2.00 ZOO 0.00
Office Assistant II 1.00 1.00 0,00
Office Assistant I (Temporary) 0.50 0.50 0.00
Building & Safety Building Official t.00 1.00 0.00
Plan Reviewer 1.50 1.50 0.00
Building Inspector 6.00 6.00 1.00
Senior Building Inspector 1.00 1,00 0.00
Administrative Technician 1.00 1.00 0.00
Senior Office Assistant 2;00 2.00 0.00
Sub-Total 19.50 7~50' 27.00 2.00
Engineering City Engineer 1.00 1.00 1,00
Senior Civil Engineer 2.00 2.00 0.00
GIS Coordinator (See Admin. Services) 0.00 0.00 (1.00)
Lead Public Works Inspector 0.00 0.00 (1.00)
Public Works Inspector 3.00 3.00 1.00
Assistant Civil Engineer 1.00 1.00 (1.00)
Associate Civil Engineer 2.00 ZOO 0.00
Engineering Technician 1/11 1.00 1,00 0.00
Engineer Part-time 0.55 0.55 0,55
Engineer (Contract) 1.45 1.45 (0.55)
Public Works Inspector (Contract) 1.00 1.00 0.00
Sub-Tot o.Ss 3 oo'
Economic Dev Economic Development Director ,1~00, ,1~00,, 0.~00,
Sub-Total 1.00 1.00 0.00
TOTAL 80.70 117.60 198.30 5.18
2003-2004 2003-2004 Total
Allocated Allocated 2003-2004 Difference
City Contract Allocated Compared To
DEPARTMENT CLASSIFICATION Positions, ppsitip ,n,s Posi,tion~ 2002.2003
SUM,MARY (AD, OPTED,SERVICE LEVEL) Total
2002,.20(~, 2003-2004 Difference
City Employees 78.40 80.70 2.30
Contract Employees 114.72 117.60 2.88
TOTAL 193.12 198.30 5.18
NOTE: All of the designated personnel perform duties directly from City facilities. This listing does not account for the temporary pert4irne Parks
& Community Services Department Staff which varies between 50.100 additi~3at employees. It also does not include all contract personnel who
perform work under contract to the City of Dublin at offsite Ioeations including Contract Engineering, MCE Coq3oration (Public Works); Alameda
County employees performing Police, Fire, and traffic signal maintenance services; or legal services provided by Meyers Nave Riback Silver &
Wilson.
It should also be noted that the 2003-2004 Approved Positions shown above includes those positions approved as part of the Final Fiscal Year
2002-2003 Budget and subsequent position allocations changes approved throughout the Fiscal Year.
itlGH PRIORITY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES STATUS (3/17/04)
CITY yrAR C, OAL/0mrcT v STATUS
COUNCI ASSIGNED
L
PRIORIT
Y
2. nigh 2002 Evaluate Dublin Ranch Affordable COMPLETE
Housing Project/Proposal.
3. nigh 2002 Resolve Fill BOundaries of Sports CO'MPI~TIg
Park in Eastern Dublin.
4. nigh ' 2002 Complete General Plan~ Specific Plan':' NEARLY COMPLETE;"
and Planned Development District for Second City Council hearing
Dublin Ranch Area F (Gteason Road), 416104
5.' High 2002 COmplete General Plan, Specific Plan NEARLY cOMPLETE;
and Planned Development District for Second City Council hearing
IKEA site. 4/6/04
6, High " 2002 '" Develop a poliCY and/or ordinance to NEARLY COMPLETE;
accommodate more community PoliCY complete; Revision to
facilities in the CiR. General Plan underway.
7. nigh "' Investigate options and/or develop UNDERWAY; Site plan ~
Specific Plan for San Ramon Village tentative map in progress; PC
Shopping Center (southeast comer of May 2004
San Ramon Road and Alcosta Blvd.).
8'. nigh 2003 Complete Resource Management Plan UNDERWAY; RMP to be"
(RMP) for Eastern Dublin property completed March 2004; Work
Owners Annexation and General Plan, on SPA and General Plan to
Specific Plan Amendments, follow.
9. nigh 2002 Complet~ review' of Dublin Ranch W~st' UNDERWnY;Environmenial ....
Annexation (Wallis) General Plan & issues being evaluated. Draft
Specific Plan Amendments. EIR to be completed when
issues are resolved; Planning
enfiflemeats in progress.
10, High 2001 Develop pians fOr Historical District UNDERWAY; Historic Survey
designation of Donlon Way making done; Design guidelines to be
certain Alamilla Springs and Green completed by Consultant
Store are included.
I 1J nigh 2002 "' Complete'Pak 'n'save General Plan UNDERWAY; General Plan
Amendment and Planned Development Amendment and SDR in
Rezoning progress. ,,,
12. " nigh .... 2002 Complete Recreational Vehicle (Private UNDERWAY; Orainance' '
Property) Ordinance AmendmenL changes being drafted pursuant
13. nigh' 2002 Evaluate Jtrv-enile Hall/Courthouse UNDERWAY; County working '
,,, proposal, on plan revisions. , ,
ATTACHMENT 2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (PLANNING DMSION)
I:IIGH PRIORITY CITY COUNCIL PROJECTS &
CITY COUNCIL ADDED PROJECTS IN FY 2003-2004
No. CITY 'YEAR GOAL/OBJECTIVE" STATUS
couNcn~ ASSIGNEO
PRIORITY
14~ ' High 2002 .... complete 'Scarlett Court uNDERWAY; Authorized start
Specific Plan. of S .pcc~c Plan process. . .
1'5.' High ' 2002 Develop Streetseape UNDERWAY; Final draft in
Guidelines. progress; To Council Sept 2004.
16. 'High " 2002' 'CompleteparksReserve'" UNDERWnV;InitialTraffic
Forces Training Area (Camp Study completed Oct 2003;
Parks) General Plan Working with Army to evaluate
AmendmeaC benefit of a land use charette.
'i7. ' High 2002 ~ ' Complete'commexcial " POSTPONED; Council labled
.. Linkage Fee. Study... further discuss. 'onto Ogt' 2004..
PROJECTS ASSIGNED BY CITY COUNCIL AFTER APPROVAL OF G&O
'Number , project DescriptiOn ....... Status .......
I. Temporary Auto Storage lots General Plan Amendment 'NEARLY COMPLETEi to CC ....
4/6/04
' 2.' EneaResidential General Plan Amendment ..... ' UNDERWAY; Park analysis in
progress
3. On-S~te RV'Parking General Plan Amendment UNDERWAY; 5 hearings held,
estimated another 3 - 4 hearings
4. Moiler Ranch General Plan Amendment ' No progress'
5. 'Missi°n P~ak General Plan Amendment " No progress '
PROJECTS SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL BY APPLICANTS
(OTHER THAN LLVTEZ) ABovE)*
NUmber ..... Project Desc~ip,tion ,, "Stains'
1. 'Quan'y Lane SDS NEARLY COMPLETE ......
'EAH Tran~t Center SDR NEARLY 'COMPLETE, PC'
2. hearing 3123/04
" Tmmark SDR ........ ~mARrYCOM~I~'rz, CC '
3. H,~ 4/6/04
Zoning Ordinance'Amendments Temporary Storage Lots NEARLY coMPLETE,' CC
4. Hearing 4/6[04 ,,
6.' .... Park Master PI~ GPA UNDERWAY
7. Black Mountain Cu~0m'Homc - Lot 1' ' ' Under review
$. '" , Black Mountain C'ustom'Home'-,Lot 8 , Under review ,,
9. Fandangos SDR Under review
~0. McDonalds Redesign SDR '" Under review , ,
'" Under rcvicw
~ 1. Journey Cb ,m~,q,CUr ~xtension ,,
12. Honda PD/SDR (relocation) ..... Under review
13. , GMC Expansion SDR/TPM Under review ,,
2
COMMIJN~ DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (P~ING DMSION)
HIGH PRIORITY CITY COIJNCIL PROJECTS &
CITY COUNCIL ADDED PROJECTS IN FY 2003-2004
Number , ProjectDescripfion" statUs
14. Hnmmer &..Sp,~rn Preappli~nn SDR Under review
Transit Center Site B SDR (Avalon Bay/Western Pacific' Under review
I5. Honking)
16. '' Ulferts Shopphlg Ccater at KollSDR ,, 'Unde~ r~,'ew
17~ Tran.qit Corridor GPA No Progless .....
18. Dimanto GPAJPD Rezone No Progress ,
*This Fast is not the e~ire project workload of the Planning Division, rather, it highlights some of the more
complex current planning projects