HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 4/24/2001 (3) * PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at
the Workshops, Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council.
MINUTES
GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHOP SESSION
5850 West Glendale Avenue
April 24, 2001
8:00 a.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Scruggs, Vice Mayor Eggleston, and Councilmembers Clark,
Frate, Goulet, Lieberman, and Martinez.
ALSO PRESENT: Martin Vanacour, City Manager; Ed Beasley, Assistant City
Manager; Rick Flaaen, City Attorney; and Pamela Oliveira, City
Clerk.
FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 BUDGET PROCESS
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Ken Reedy, Deputy City Manager; Mr.
Charlie McClendon, Budget and Research Director; and Mr. Mike Hoyt, Director of Field
Operations.
This was the third of the scheduled City Council workshops to review the Fiscal Year
(FY) 2001-02 Annual Budget. At this meeting, staff focused on the departments within
the Public Works and Community Development Groups.
At the conclusion of the budget presentations, staff addressed any outstanding
questions or issues that the Council brought up during the previous workshops.
The November City Council Goal-Setting Retreat was the first step in the Fiscal Year
2001-02 budget process. At a December follow-up session, the Mayor and Council
adopted a list of goals that included enhancements to the City's Geographic Information
System (GIS), additional right-of-way beautification procts throughout the City, funds
for property acquisition, a traffic study in the area of 83 Avenue and Union Hills Drive,
and additional programming at the Glendale Adult Center.
Additionally, the Council approved additional police officer and police support positions,
and the positions required to staff Fire Station 158, which will be located at 83 Avenue
and Bethany Home Road.
The City Manager reviewed the budget requests of all departments and has prepared a
balanced budget for presentation to the City Council.
Public meeting notices will be posted in the same manner as regular Council
workshops.
1
The City Council reviewed the Fiscal Year 2001-02 budget at workshops held during
April of 2001. The recommendations made at these workshops will direct staff in
preparing for final City Council budget review and adoption in June of 2001.
The recommendation was to review the Fiscal Year 2001-02 Proposed Annual Budget
and provide staff with direction.
Public Works Administration
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Ken Reedy, Deputy City Manager; Mr.
Charlie McClendon, Budget and Research Director; Mr. Mike Hoyt, Director of Field
Operations; and Mr. Stuart Kent, Deputy Director of Field Operations.
Public Works Administration
Mr. Reedy said all Public Works' departments presented a balanced base budget.
Contract Maintenance of Right-of-Ways
Mr. Reedy explained that this supplemental, totaling $63,600, is partly related to a
Council goal allocating $50,000 to increased right-of-way maintenance. He said the
additional $13,600 would be dedicated to six specific projects that the Council
requested in its goal setting session.
Mayor Scruggs asked how often the right-of-ways are maintained. Mr. Hoyt stated they
are maintained once a month, with most of the work being performed by contract
maintenance. He noted that a litter crew supplements the maintenance crew. Mr.
Reedy pointed out that monthly maintenance is performed primarily on arterial streets.
Mayor Scruggs asked what the additional funds would go towards. Mr. Reedy
explained that the funds would be used to meet the same standard everywhere in the
City. He said the base budget has not been adjusted to meet the demand of increased
growth on arterial streets. Mayor Scruggs asked if they budget for ongoing
maintenance when improvements are made to arterial streets. Mr. Reedy said that is
what the supplemental would accomplish. Mr. Hoyt noted that landscaping matures
over time, thereby requiring more maintenance. Mayor Scruggs questioned whether
existing right-of-ways would be improved or if the funds would be used up by new
projects. Mr. Hoyt assured Mayor Scruggs that there would be a higher level of
maintenance on existing right-of-ways, as well as maintenance for newly planted areas.
He explained that newly planted areas are under warranty for a period of time and a
portion of the funds would cover those areas coming out of warranty and being turned
over to the City. He said they carefully inspect and adjust the level of maintenance
based on need. Mayor Scruggs asked if the Public Works Department would have
come forward with a separate supplemental had the Council not identified right-of-way
maintenance as a Council goal. Mr. Reedy explained that, while they had prepared a
supplemental, it was not funded due to the tight budget situation.
Councilmember Frate stated that the Adopt a Street program also supplements the
maintenance and litter control crews.
2
Electric Utility Cost Increase
Mr. Reedy said this supplemental was due to the use of buildings previously unused
and other areas where electrical costs have increased over the past year. He said the
base needs to be adjusted by $85,000 to cover additional electrical costs.
Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Control System
Mr. Reedy stated that they were asking for $125,000, $25,000 of which would go
towards an engineering design study to determine what equipment should be
purchased to improve the electrical control facility. He said the current budget is
$295,000 per year for electricity, but they believe they can save an average of $44,000
per year by implementing a control system that results in more efficient use.
Automated Fuel System Upgrade
Mr. Reedy said they were told that the technology currently being used would no longer
be supported. He stated that, consequently, they need $42,000 in one-time money to
upgrade to current: technology. He said they plan to keep the fuel facility in the same
location and use the equipment in the future.
Councilmember Clark asked for an explanation of the 12 cent per gallon markup on
motor fuels. Mr. Hoyt explained that the markup would cover the upgrade, as well as
the cost of transporting fuel to the various sites and maintaining the pumps. He stated
that a portion of the markup would be used to pay back the $42,000 over a three year
period.
Councilmember Frate asked how many gallons of fuel the City of Glendale requires on
a yearly basis. Mr. Kent stated the City uses just over 1.1 million gallons of fuel, split
fairly evenly between diesel and unleaded.
Mr. McClendon confirmed for Mayor Scruggs that other departments would not be
impacted by the 12 cent markup.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if the City uses any compressed natural gas. Mr.
Hoyt stated it does not. He noted that the equipment was sold several years ago.
Councilmember Goulet asked if there was any concern over rising gas prices. Mr. Hoyt
said, although they could not assure the Council that additional funding would not be
needed due to the volatility of the market, they believed the requested amount would
be sufficient.
Councilmember Clark asked if the City has underground fuel storage. Mr. Hoyt stated
that they have underground fuel storage at all five sites, with the typical tank holding
10,000 gallons of unleaded or diesel fuel. Councilmember Clark questioned whether
they could look at increasing fuel storage capacity at all sites, thereby allowing the City
to buy an increased amount of fuel during times when fuel costs are low. Mr. Reedy
stated that environmental risks associated with underground storage tanks are too high
to justify increasing storage capabilities.
Councilmember Lieberman pointed out that underground storage tanks have to be
placed in concrete lined vaults, which are extremely expensive to build.
3
Unfunded Supplementals
Cemetery Service:;
Mr. Reedy stated that their original request was for $65,000 for five years to build the
first of four phases of enhancement to the cemetery. He said the current cemetery is
landlocked and does not have room for expansion. He explained that taking 300
currently unoccupied spaces would allow them to build above ground facilities that
would dramatically improve the cemetery's ability to serve the community in the future.
He said they now propose that $265,000 be taken from the Perpetual Care fund to
construct the first phase. He noted that it would return approximately $4 million to the
Perpetual Care fund over time.
Councilmember Clark asked what the Perpetual Care fund was currently used for. Mr.
Hoyt explained that the fund is intended to provide ongoing maintenance after the
cemetery is at capacity. Councilmember Clark asked when they expected the cemetery
to reach capacity. Mr. Reedy said the proposed enhancement could add 20 years of
service to the cemetery. He noted that the Perpetual Care fund does not meet the
cemetery's currently expected perpetual care needs; however, borrowing the $265,000
would allow them to construct more facilities, thereby building the fund up over time.
Councilmember Martinez expressed his opinion that it would be a good business
decision because it not only pays for itself, but provides continuing services to the
community.
Mayor Scruggs voiced the Council's support of the Cemetery Services supplemental.
Environmental Street Sweeper
Mr. Reedy stated that they have an Air Quality Congestion Management grant to help
fund the current sweeper and need to purchase another sweeper to meet the new
particulate matter PM-10 standard on arterial streets. He explained that their intent was
to sweep both the curb lanes and entire street, including median and turn lane areas.
He said they plan to take money from a tanker truck they originally hoped to fund and
use it to fund the street sweeper.
Mr. Reedy confirmed for Councilmember Lieberman that the PM-10 sweeper is required
to meet the new County and Federal PM-10 standards. Councilmember Lieberman
asked about any ongoing expense for an operator. Mr. Reedy explained that they
planned to purchase the equipment and use current staff to operate it. He admitted
that current staff might have to be diverted from residential streets to ensure that
Federal requirements are met on arterial streets. He noted that the City of Glendale
currently maintains residential streets at a higher level than any other city in the
Phoenix area. Mr. Hoyt stated that residential streets would be swept once a month
and arterial streets would be swept once a week.
Councilmember Clark asked how many PM-10 sweepers the City currently owned. Mr.
Hoyt stated that the City has four environmental sweepers. He said the City also has
three older sweepers that eventually need to be replaced. Councilmember Clark asked
how much area a PM-10 sweeper could cover in one day. Mr. Hoyt explained that
vacuum sweepers are approximately 50% slower than the old mechanical sweepers,
both in terms of road speed and sweeping speed. Mr. Reedy noted that sweeping
would be done at night to minimize the impact on traffic. Councilmember Clark asked if
the reduced speed requires that the City purchase more PM-10 sweepers. Mr. Hoyt
4
said it would if they were also required to sweep residential streets once a week. He
said reducing the frequency of residential sweeping allows them to offset the difference
in production.
Councilmember Frate expressed concern about reducing residential sweeping service
to once per week. He noted that litter in residential areas accumulates quickly. Mr.
Reedy agreed that there are litter problems in residential areas, especially in areas
around high schools and fast food facilities. He suggested that the City might have to
enhance its litter patrol.
Mayor Scruggs asked who imposed the once-a-week mandate. Mr. Reedy said their
intent was to continue with the City's previous frequency, while increasing coverage to
include the entire street. Mayor Scruggs stated that the intent of the regulation was to
require that PM-10 particles be picked up, but not to mandate how often it is done.
Mayor Scruggs explained that, because it is out of attainment, the region was forced to
adopt the most stringent policies and remedies adopted in the United States.
Councilmember Clark suggested taking a two-prong approach, using the PM-10
sweepers on arterial streets and older sweepers on residential streets. Mr. Hoyt said
that could be done if the Council so desired. Mr. Reedy noted that much of the litter
spread throughout the community originates on arterial streets.
Councilmember Goulet asked if the City had a policy regarding commercial sites that
continually create litter. Mr. Hoyt said the City uses a variety of resources to address
businesses or schools that litter, including Code Compliance, Neighborhood
Partnership, Sanitation and Loose Trash Service, and inspectors in the field.
Councilmember Lieberman expressed his opinion that a full-time operator should be
assigned to the PM-10 sweeper rather than taking operators off residential streets.
Councilmember Martinez recommended going with staff's recommendation and
bringing it back if it was later determined that a full-time operator was necessary.
Mayor Scruggs voiced majority Council support for staff's recommendation.
Councilmember Martinez said the $55,000 increase in service benefits was a good
investment. Mr. McClendon said they were doing it on a pilot program through the
regular salary budget. He explained that there is an ongoing debate about restricted
and unrestricted standby pay. He said if it is ultimately determined that paying standby
is best, it would have to be worked into next year's budget. Ms. La Verne Parker-Diggs,
Human Resources Director, noted that standby pay is part of the compensation study.
In response to a question posed by Vice Mayor Eggleston, Mr. Hoyt explained that
$13,600 of the $63,600 supplemental for right-of-way maintenance was an ongoing
expense and was used for Council identified projects and enhancements.
In response to a question posed by Mayor Scruggs, Mr. McClendon explained that they
had decided during balancing to fund the installation of the antenna out of the City Hall
Remodel account. He explained that it was originally listed as ongoing because it was
going to be paid for over a period of time. Mayor Scruggs said people, including
children, use the basement rooms all the time; therefore, she hoped it was made a top
priority because of the safety issues involved.
5
Mayor Scruggs asked if the 26% markup to departments on parts was accurate. Mr.
McClendon stated that they had recently completed an analysis and found it to be the
required amount to recover costs associated with the four positions and the cost of
maintaining and dispensing inventory to the mechanics. He noted that this was how
most operations with a parts facility recover costs.
The meeting recessed for a short break.
Community Development Administration
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Tim Ernster, Deputy City Manager; Ms.
Debra Mazoyer, Building Safety Director; Mr. Grant Anderson, City Engineer; Mr.
Charlie McClendon, Budget and Research Director; and Mr. Jim Book, Transportation
Director.
Building Safety
Contractual Structural Plan Review Services
Mr. Ernster said they have had a couple of one-time funding requests in their budget for
the past few years to address peak loads in the Building Safety Department for
contractual structural plan review.
Ms. Mazoyer staled that single-family permits were down, but they expected to
maintain, if not exceed, what they did last year in terms of commercial permits. She
said they also expected commercial projects to exceed in valuation. She indicated that
they are larger and more complex. She said they were requesting $35,000 structural
and $15,000 fire plan review contractual money, $40,000 less than had been requested
in previous years. She explained that the money was used to maintain the level of
service to development customers.
Planning Department
Mr. Ernster reported no supplemental requests for the Planning Department. He
announced that, for the first time since he has overseen the group, they are fully
staffed, with the exception of the Planning Director. He said they have also made
structural changes within the department in an effort to provide better customer service.
He explained that one of the Planning Managers had been reclassified to a Senior
Planner and assigned to work at the Development Services counter. He said putting a
planner at the front counter allows them to provide a much higher level of service to the
development community. He said they hoped to come out with additional
recommendations for improving customer service later this year. He pointed out that
the department has carryover, a majority of which is for the General Plan Update. He
stated that they were scheduled to go before the Council on May 1, 2001 to discuss the
consultant selection for the General Plan Update and would come before Council again
on May 8, 2001 for formal award of the consulting contract.
Mayor Scruggs asked about the $61 ,000 being carried over for the census. Mr. Ernster
explained that the Planning Department staff hired contract help after the 1990 census
to go through the census numbers and, as a result, they picked up a number of
adjustments that resulted in the City receiving additional revenue. He said they would
like to consider hiring contract help again; however, the money would not be spent if the
contract help ultimately was not hired.
6
Councilmember Martinez asked if they considered paying a premium or incentive for
planners. Ms. Parker-Diggs said they had looked at pay ranges for planners and found
their salaries to be comparable to what was paid outside the organization. She stated
that an adjustment was made to allow them to bring new planners in at mid-range,
thereby helping in terms of recruiting applicants. She noted that the issue was included
in the compensatiDn study and they were waiting for any recommendations regarding
incentives. She explained that offering incentives could result in a domino effect in
other departments. Mr. Ernster said the City competes with not only other cities, but
with the private sector as well and it was determined that it was necessary to pay mid-
range or higher to attract qualified planners.
Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if the new structure would help reduce complaints that the
process moves too slowly. Mr. Gary Fulk, Planning Manager, said he believed having a
planner at the counter will help speed up the process. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked
what falls under the Planning Department's responsibility. Mr. Fulk explained that the
Planning Department does design review and all entitlement processes. He said they
are also responsible for the General Plan. He noted that they were currently updating
the Western Area General Plan and were in the process of hiring a consultant to help
with the General Plan update. He said they were also involved in variances and
individual property issues.
Councilmember Clark asked how the department had addressed retaining qualified
planners. Mr. Ernster said the workload for the past 18 months has been unbelievable;
however, now that the department is fully staffed, there will be a more equal distribution
of the workload. He stated that money was the main issue with planners; therefore the
City has to pay a competitive wage. He noted that the Human Resources Department
was also looking at other retention issues, including professional development.
Councilmember Goulet asked if planners were specialized in either residential or
commercial applications or if they are were trained to handle either. Mr. Ernster stated
that they currently have one planner dedicated to commercial projects; however, as
residential applications decrease and commercial applications increase, other planners
have the ability to transition into the commercial area.
Councilmember Martinez complimented the existing Planning Department staff. He
recognized the fact that they have had a very challenging workload. Mr. Ernster said
they have a young, talented, energetic, and enthusiastic staff. He noted that survey
cards are sent out to every customer and they typically receive comments to the effect
that, while the process is too slow, the Planning Department staff is very courteous and
helpful.
Councilmember Lieberman suggested that the Council meet and get to know the staff
of the Planning and Building Safety Departments. Mr. Ernster agreed with
Councilmember Lieberman's suggestion.
Engineering
GIS Development
Mr. Ernster explained that they were requesting $110,000 and the request includes one
full-time staff person.
7
Mayor Scruggs pointed out that changes will be made to the Council district boundaries.
She asked how development of the Geographic Information System (GIS) would
interface with those changes. Mr. Anderson explained that the GIS system is able to
accommodate changes to district boundaries and seamlessly report data related to the
new districts.
Additional Right-of-Way Projects
Mr. Anderson said additional monies were put in for sidewalks along 75th and 67th
Avenues, as well as landscapingprojects in various areas of the community. He said
those projects added up to this 1,048,000 supplemental. He reported that the design
of those projects had been completed and they were ready to go to bid when the
money comes into existence.
Councilmember Goulet asked what would happen if any of the projects had additional
unanticipated costs. Mr. Anderson said small increases could be absorbed by savings
realized on projects in other accounts; however, larger increases would require that
they come back before the Council for a transfer of funds from another location.
In response to a question posed by Councilmember Martinez, Mr. Anderson explained
that the design of sidewalks of this nature can be accomplished in-house. Mr.
McClendon stated that there would be no problem in bidding the projects before the
next fiscal year, but contractors could not be paid prior to July 1st. Mr. Anderson said
they planned to bid the projects in June, with final award occurring in July. Mayor
Scruggs stated that she would like to see the projects bid prior to Council's August
break.
Councilmember Clark asked for confirmation that the 75th Avenue and Bethany Home
Road project would be the least complicated because they had decided to wait until the
area was developed and let the developer bear the cost of putting in the sidewalk. Mr.
Anderson stated that this was correct with regard to 75 Avenue; however, thq
connecting sidewalk on Bethany Home Road and a portion of the west side of 75t
Avenue require easements from property owners.
Councilmember Frate pointed out that a private developer was paying for the sidewalk
north of Willow Avenue. Mr. Anderson agreed with Councilmember Frate.
Mayor Scruggs asked if all six projects would be completed in Fiscal Year 2001/2002.
Mr. Anderson reported that they would be.
Right-of-Way Beautification
Mayor Scruggs asked how this supplemental fits in with the money requested for
maintenance. Mr. McClendon said the Council, at its goal setting session, set up
$200,000, adding to the amount already in the Capital Budget, for additional and
accelerated beautification. He explained that the $50,000 was to help offset those
costs, as well as additional costs associated with the maturation of existing
landscaping. He stated that the additional $13,600 would be directed towards
maintaining the six right-of-way projects previously discussed.
Councilmember Clark asked how they determine which right-of-ways receive
beautification. Mr. Anderson said an arterial landscaping program has been ongoing
for a number of years and projects are brought forward as money becomes available.
8
He noted that beautification of the equestrian area along 51St Avenue, from Thunderbird
to Bell Roads, was largest project bging m9ved forward as a result of this supplemental.
He identified Olive Avenue from 55t to 57'h Avenues, 51St Avenue from Mountain View
Road to Brown Street, and 67th Avenue from Vogel Avenue to Mountain View Road as
three other projects scheduled for acceleration as a result of the supplemental request.
Councilmember Frate asked who was responsible for replacing vegetation in the area
between the sidewalk and the street. Mr. Anderson explained that right-of-way
maintenance in a majority of areas in the City is the City's responsibility, He noted,
however, that in some areas, such as master planned communities and commercial
developments, right-of-way maintenance was part of the associated development
agreement. Councilmember Frate asked who was responsible for the intersection at
59th Avenue and Thunderbird Road. Mr. Anderson stated that this was done through
an improvement district and he would have to get back with Councilmember Frate as to
who was responsible for each of the corners. He noted that, if the developer is
responsible, it then becomes a code issue.
Property Acquisition
Mr. Ernster explai led that this $330,000 one-time supplemental was for unspecified
property acquisition.
Engineering Office Assistant
Mr. Ernster stated that this one-time funding has actually been in the Engineering
budget for a number of years.
Mr. Anderson explained that the Engineering Department administers over 100 capital
projects in addition to various other projects. He stated that the existing secretarial staff
needs a lot of support to ensure specifications are done, copies are made, and so forth.
He said they have had a part-time temporary person performing these duties for the
past six years.
Parking Lease
Mr. Ernster stated that, in January of this year, the City identified the need for additional
parking for Civic Center activities. He said, consequently, the City entered into a
parking agreement with a downtown merchant, with six months of that contract being
absorbed into their budget. He explained that the request is for $17,000 of ongoing
funding to continue the three-year lease agreement.
In response to a question posed by Councilmember Lieberman, Mr. Ernster stated that
the initial area provided 54 spaces; however, the City has resurfaced and re-striped the
area, resulting in 52 remaining spaces. He confirmed that 30 parking spaces are also
available at the American Legion. Councilmember Lieberman asked if they had
considered marking the spaces so that the general public understands they are
available. Mr. Anderson said they have had that discussion with Traffic Engineering
Department staff; however, it does not appear to be a problem at this point. Mr. Book
noted that a sign used to be posted; however, there was confusion as to where the
public parking ended and the American Legion parking began. He said they removed
the sign because the ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act) requires designated
handicapped spaces and the ones located next to the building belong to the American
Legion. He explained that they could not designate handicapped spaces in the area
under the City's coitrol.
9
Councilmember Gculet stated that he would like the City to work with the American
Legion on delineating parking. He noted that the American Legion blocked the lot off
during an event last week. Mr. Anderson said he would look into the issue because he
was not aware that the lot was being barricaded.
Transportation Department
Increase in Fixed Route Bus Service Costs
Mr. Book explained that this item came about primarily because, at the time the City of
Phoenix had its successful transit election, the Bus Drivers' Union was successful in
renegotiating their contract. He stated that the request reflects those increased service
costs, as well as an increase in fuel costs.
Inflationary Increases in Electrical Costs, Contract Security Services and Vehicle Shop
Costs
Mr. Ernster noted that these three requests were fairly small and reflect inflationary
increases. He introduced Mr. Mark Ripley, the new Airport Manager. He noted that Mr.
Ripley had actually worked for the City in the late 1980's as an intern.
Loop 101 Northwest Traffic Study
Mr. Book explained that the study would be done jointly with the City of Peoria and look
at many transportation and cgestion items in the area bounded by Bell and Happy
Valley Roads, and 67 and 99`hAvenues.
Intersection Backup Power Supply and Traffic Signal Indication Replacement
Mr. Book stated that he and Mr. Jimmie Dixon, Utilities Department Senior Management
Assistant, had discussed the net effect on the City of the rolling blackouts in California.
He explained that LED light emitting heads take less power and, therefore, batteries
can be used to operate signals for up to 24 hours.
Councilmember Clark inquired as to the cost of the power supply backup for each
intersection. Mr. Book stated that the battery packs cost approximately $15,000 to
$18,000 each. Councilmember Clark asked if any other intersections currently have
backup power supplies. Mr. Book stated that these would be the first two in the City of
Glendale. Councilmember Clark said she hoped the program could be taken further.
She questioned what good two operating intersections in the City would do. Mr. Book
explained that current power outages are handled by using police officers to direct
traffic at intersections. He said they would also like to broaden the program, with their
first priority being arterial intersections.
Mayor Scruggs suggested that Mr. Book contact the Project Impact Team regarding
additional funding. Mr. Book said their intent was to demonstrate that the program
works and then partner with other agencies on intersections that are of key concern to
them.
Councilmember Goulet asked if the intersections would operate as usual under backup
power supply. Mr. Book said, although they would strive to have normal operation, they
would probably operate under a fixed time. Councilmember Goulet suggested adding a
component to the City's traffic campaign, concentrating on intersection etiquette when
power outages occur.
10
Councilmember Lieberman asked if the supplemental included protective cases,
switching equipment, and installation costs. Mr. Book stated that the supplemental
represents what it would take to install a battery pack at an intersection. He said the
lights themselves were a separate item. He explained that the current lights would
work, but the battery packs would not last as long. Councilmember Lieberman asked
where battery packs would be installed. Mr. Book stated that they would confer with the
Police Department as to which intersections would be most effective. Councilmember
Lieberman agreed that the program would probably need to be expanded. He
explained that using Police Officers to handle traffic concerns decreases their ability to
handle other matters.
Mayor Scruggs suggested that this item be brought up at the next Council goal setting
session. She recommended that they also include the costs associated with increasing
the frequency of right-of-way maintenance and street sweeping in residential areas.
Councilmember Clark said she had noticed that railroad warning lights at the
59th /Grand/Glendale Avenues intersection come on for no reason at all. She asked
staff to contact the railroad and inform them of the problem.
Transportation Tax Information Campaign
Mr. Ernster explaired that this item was related to the Citizen's Advisory Committee on
Transportation Issues. He noted that they would meet on Thursday night to vote on a
recommendation to the Council regarding an election package to put a half-cent sales
tax increase on the ballot in November of 2001 for a series of transportation
improvement projects. He said, if that passed, it would come to the Council for
consideration at the May 14, 2001 Workshop. He stated that, if the Council directed
staff to proceed with placing it on the ballot, the $100,000 supplemental would be used
to produce informational materials for the public, including district specific maps
indicating where the projects are located. He stated that the City of Phoenix did a
similar campaign when taking their issue to its voters. He said he felt it was an
important factor in getting it passed.
Councilmember Lieberman noted that the law states that a city cannot project success
for one side without also identifying the pros and cons. Mr. Ernster agreed with
Councilmember Lieberman. He confirmed that the materials would strictly provide
information regarding the ballot question.
Transit Reserve Fund
Mr. Ernster said Council had set aside $150,000 in Transit Reserve Funds last year in
an effort to establish a fund should the sales tax approved by the voters in 1985 go
away. He said the Council wanted to continue adding to that fund in the amount of
$300,000, bringing the total to $450,000. He said the Council indicated at the retreat
held in November that, if the election package moved forward and was approved by the
voters, it would be responsible for funding the services and, consequently, the $450,000
would go back into the General Fund.
Councilmember Clark asked about an unfunded supplemental stating she has found it
difficult to get buildings that have been burned or are otherwise dilapidated removed.
She said the unfunded supplemental is for a $12,000 one-time expense and would
allow for abatement of two additional buildings. She voiced her support of the
supplemental and encouraged Council to find a way to fund it.
11
Councilmember Martinez said he would also support the supplemental.
Councilmember Goulet asked if the increased costs were associated with the need to
locate owners and litigation matters. Ms. Mazoyer said the City cannot do much unless
the property owners voluntarily demolish the buildings. She said part of the money
would be used to do background and legal research.
Mayor Scruggs asked how many of the structures exist in the City. Ms. Mazoyer stated
that they had identified more than 12 buildings. Mayor Scruggs suggested that this
issue be added to the list and brought back for the Council for consideration at the next
goal setting meeting. She directed staff to find the requested $12,000.
Councilmember Martinez asked about the contractual Building Inspector position. He
noted that duties previously handled by the Engineering Department were being added
to the Building Safety Department. He pointed out that a decrease in compliance could
also put their money-back guarantee into jeopardy and the City could then lose more
than the $15,000 being requested. Ms. Mazoyer stated that, since they wanted to take
over those duties without jeopardizing the money back guarantee, they have done a lot
of cross training. She said she was confident they could start taking on some of the
other duties and the item could, therefore, be stricken.
Councilmember Martinez asked if the Materials Testing Laboratory item was a safety
issue. Mr. Anderson stated that it was purely a utility bill issue. He explained that utility
bills were higher than anticipated. Mr. McClendon said the utility bill obviously has to be
paid; however, this type of request often drops out of the balancing with the assumption
the base budget will be managed in such a way as to accommodate it. Mr. Anderson
stated that they believed they could cover the expense this year; however, additional
increases would cause a strain on the department's performance measures.
Councilmember Martinez asked if hiring new full-time transit operators would improve
their retention rate. He noted that temporary operators do not tend to stay for a long
period of time. Mr, Ernster said, although the funding would improve the retention rate,
it has been a difficult budget year for the City and they believed this item could be
postponed for another year.
In response to a question posed by Councilmember Martinez, Mr. Ernster explained
that, at one point, interest had been expressed in extending bus service up to the new
Adult Center site. He said they initially thought the Adult Center would open earlier than
currently scheduled and, therefore, the funding was not needed for the next fiscal year.
Human Resources
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Ms. La Verne Parker-Diggs, Human
Resources Director; Mr. Charlie McClendon, Budget and Research Director; and Ms.
Alma Carmicle, Human Resources Compensation/Classification Manager.
Mr. Beasley apologized for the confusion that had occurred during the previous session.
He said the organization had taken a creative path. He explained that they decided
approximately one year ago to change how they do business. He said part of the
change was to establish organizational competencies and all of those initiatives were
currently taking place within the City. He stated that the Diversity Coordinator would
have been responsible for implementation, strategy, training, and monitoring of the
programs; however, they recognized the Council's need to better understand the
position's responsibilities before placing a person within the position. He suggested
12
that they remove the position from the table and come back to the Council, outside of
the budget process, to further discuss the initiatives and what they hoped would be their
overall goal.
Ms. Parker-Diggs referred to a Human Resources Department organizational chart.
She explained that the Department is organized in a traditional manner and offers the
same types of services as would be found in other similarly sized cities. She stated that
they had four divisions, with a Division Manager overseeing each one. She explained
that the Employment Services Division is responsible for all hiring and works closely
with the departments to set a course for direct targeting for recruitment. She said the
Employee Development/Employee Relations Division oversees employee development
within the City. She said that division is responsible for conducting programs such as
sexual harassment training, civility training, and other training programs required by law.
She said the Benefits and Worker's Compensation Division oversees all benefits
programs and the worker's compensation program, while the Classification and
Compensation Division is working closely with consultants on the compensation study.
She noted that the City of Glendale's Human Resource Department compares closely
in size with that of the City of Tempe.
Ms. Parker-Diggs said their traditional Human Resources responsibilities are no
different than those found in other cities. She stated that, over the past year, they have
provided 23 skills tests, tested 1,000 applicants, including police and fire applicants,
conducted eight to ten job fairs, and provided orientation for new employees on a
monthly basis. She said they had also started doing executive recruitment. She noted
that six recruitments, which would have normally been handled by outside consultants,
had been completed this year. She reported doing 148 regular hires, 190 temporary
hires, and bringing 650 volunteers into the City.
Ms. Parker-Diggs identified functions of the Classification and Compensation Program.
She stated that they had conducted approximately 50 job evaluation analyses and
several labor market studies.
Ms. Parker-Diggs said the Employee Relations Division is responsible for assisting both
departments and employees in removing barriers in the workplace that could prevent
full productivity and service to citizens. She said internal and external complaints take
approximately 100 hours of staff time per case and 300 hours of staff time per case,
respectively. She explained that internal complaints might arise from grievances,
whereas external complaints arise from individuals going to an outside compliance
agency.
Ms. Parker-Diggs said the Benefits and Worker's Compensation Division administers
benefits for more than 1,500 regular status employees and 250 retirees. She said the
Wellness Program provided 750 health screenings, 550 immunizations and 250 tests
for various health conditions this year. She reported over 1,200 employee visits being
logged into the Occupational Nurses office. She explained that those visits resulted in
a substantial savings to the City. She noted that the modified duty program saved the
organization from 1,345 lost workdays by modifying employees' workloads based on
their doctor's permission.
Ms. Parker-Diggs stated that various Human Resource personnel also serve on the
Accident Review Committee, the Employee Health Care Task Force and/or the
Personnel Board.
13
Ms. Carmicle reviewed the modern compensation system training supplemental. She
explained that the Council identified a modern compensation system as one of its goals
during the November Council budget retreat. She said $250,000 was allocated to
conduct a study, which was ultimately awarded to Watson Wyatt and Company. She
stated that Watson Wyatt and Company was responsible for conducting an
independent audit of the City's systems, assisting with the selection of a new
compensation strategy, and recommending a new system design. She said the
consultants will also participate in presenting their findings to the Mayor and Council,
the Management Team, and then to the general employee population. She said, in
addition to overseeing the project, the Classification and Compensation Division is
responsible for maintaining the current system. She explained that, before a vacant
staff position can be filled, the Classification and Compensation Division meets with the
department to review the job description. She said they develop new job descriptions
when necessary and ensure that salaries are competitive so as to attract qualified
applicants.
Ms. Carmicle explained that the American Compensation Association offers two basic
fundamental courses, that takes the complex concepts of compensation management
and performance management and breaks them down at line management levels. She
said current information indicates the new system will require more participation by line
managers, thereby requiring training at that level. She stated that each course is a one-
day seminar, presented at the employer's worksite. She explained that employees
learn to apply performance to the new pay strategy, discuss current compensation
practices, and review examples from other organizations that currently use pay for
performance systems. She stated that students would not be taught the basic activities
involved in appraising employees. She said some of the members of the
Compensation Task Force attended both training sessions and found, after the training,
that they were better able to participate in the decision making process and making
recommendations.
Councilmember Lieberman noted that years ago the City had tried to initiate a pay for
performance system, but eventually dropped the effort. Ms. Carmicle said pay for
performance was a sound concept, widely used in the private sector for many years.
She said the reasons the pay for performance system did not work when initially tried
had to do with economic factors, including a downturn in the economy and inadequate
funding. She said they also believed there was insufficient training to provide managers
and employees the necessary information to succeed with the new concept. Ms.
Parker-Diggs stated that it was unlikely that the new pay for performance system would
include all elements of the organization. She noted that studies have shown those
programs do not work in public safety. She assured Mayor Scruggs that Public Safety,
below management levels, would not be included in the pay for performance program.
Ms. Carmicle said research shows that most cities using pay for performance systems
exclude Fire Department personnel with a ranking of Captain and below and Police
Department personnel with a ranking of Sergeant and below.
Councilmember Clark said the City encourages team building rather than individual
effort. She questioned whether the pay for performance system was consistent with
that philosophy. Dr. Vanacour stressed the fact that one system would not meet all
needs and, therefore multiple systems might be incorporated. He explained that the
City has moved from a relationship-based organization to a competency-based
organization.
14
With regard to cost of the training, Ms. Carmicle explained that they proposed sending
82 line managers and department heads through the Compensation Fundamentals
training and extending Performance Management training to the line supervisors. She
stated that both the Compensation Fundamentals and Performance Management
training sessions will cost $275 each. She said the facility training will provide eight
sessions at the Civic Center, for a cost of approximately $825. She stated that the City
intends to purchase 25 additional copies of training materials so that the Human
Resources Department can continue training new line managers and department heads
as they are hired. She explained that the in-house development costs are associated
with temporary assistance and duplicating costs as the City provides training to the rest
of the organization.
Councilmember Frate said modern compensation packages were hard for employees in
the private sector to accept when it was first introduced. He stressed the importance of
educating employees and accentuating the benefits of the new system to help alleviate
any concerns the employees might have.
In response to a question posed by Councilmember Clark, Ms. Carmicle explained that
they proposed eight individual training sessions, with no more than 30 students at one
time. Councilmember Clark pointed out that the City would pay almost $90,000 to train
250 people. She asked if that was in line with other training charges. Ms. Carmicle
said the American Compensation Association has done a tremendous job of packaging
and presenting this type of program. She noted that worldwide organizations send their
employees through this training on an ongoing basis. Councilmember Clark agreed
that training is critical to the success of the program. She explained that she was
amazed at how few people were trained for the amount of money being spent. Ms.
Carmicle stated that they would provide training to the rest of the organization through
sessions developed and presented by Human Resources Department staff.
Councilmember Lieberman expressed his opinion that training is vital. He explained
that a lack of employee buy-in was one reason the last attempt failed.
Ms. Carmicle stressed the fact that they see it as an opportunity, and not an expense.
She said they believed there would be a definite return in the form of increased
productivity and reduced employment practices liability.
Ms. Parker-Diggs reviewed what had been accomplished since the Employee
Development and Training Program contract position was added. She noted that the
programs are not mandatory, yet are taken advantage of by a large number of
employees. She said each of the programs were first offered on a pilot basis to ensure
they provided information that the employees needed.
Ms. Parker-Diggs reported that 125 employees currently participate in the Educational
Assistance Program, with six employees being in the masters program. She said three
employees from Public Safety had graduated and they anticipated five other graduates
in August.
Councilmember L.ieberman expressed his opinion that Employee Educational
Assistance programs are vital to retaining employees.
15
Councilmember Martinez noted that the City of Scottsdale has 33 Human Resources
staff members, while Glendale only has 19.5, even though Glendale is a slightly larger
city. Mr. McClendon explained that staffing levels in various cities is a direct product of
that City's revenue level. He said the City of Scottsdale has a stronger revenue stream,
which is reflected in its ability to provide services.
Mayor Scruggs asked if the Human Resources Department staff had looked at whether
the two FTE positions previously requested could be combined into one. She
expressed concern that reviewing each position at different times would result in their
overlooking that possibility. Mr. Beasley said the positions could not be combined
because the functions are fundamentally different and would require too many hours for
one employee to commit.
Councilmember Clark acknowledged that staff would return to further discuss the
Diversity Coordinator position. She asked why they did not plan to discuss both
positions at that time. Mr. Beasley stated that the Diversity Coordinator position was
removed to provide the opportunity to more clearly explain the position's responsibilities
and initiatives outside the budget process. He said they recommended that the
Council move forward with the Employee Development Coordinator position.
Mayor Scruggs stated that, while they interact with other departments and have a
certain level of understanding of what goes on, they do not have that same
understanding of the Human Resources Department due to the City Charter's
requirement that the Council be completely excluded from personnel matters. Mayor
Scruggs asked if it was typical to have over 25% of employees in the Human
Resources Department in management positions. Ms. Parker-Diggs explained that the
responsibilities for each unit are quite extensive. She noted that managers take on a
portion of the unit's work, in addition to their management responsibilities.
Mr. Beasley clarified that staff was requesting one-time contract monies to assist in the
ongoing implementation of the initiatives. He said he would bring all of the initiatives
back to the Council because they directly impact how they do business.
Mayor Scruggs asked if the cost of the contractual position would remain the same as
was identified for the full-time employee (FTE) position. Mr. McClendon explained that
the same amount was transferred from ongoing expenses to one-time expenses. Dr.
Vanacour assured Mayor Scruggs that the amount would be less because the City
would not have to pay benefits.
Mr. Beasley explained for Councilmember Clark that the contract money would be used
for a series of contracts that would assist the department in implementing the different
initiatives.
Dr. Vanacour explained that, three years ago, the City of Glendale had embarked upon
a diversity audit, now called a cultural audit, to see how the City compares with other
cities and to identify issues that needed to be addressed. He expressed his opinion
that the audit was very successful. She said they had decided to do another audit to
see how they were doing in terms of communication, hiring diversity, educational
issues, and so forth. He said their goal was to continue those audits to identify areas
where improvements were necessary. He explained that the diversity audit had been
completed and they were now discussing how it would be implemented throughout the
organization.
16
Councilmember Martinez stated that he supported staff's proposal. He said it would
help the City of Glendale avoid problems that were experienced by other cities in the
Valley.
Dr. Vanacour reviewed various competencies that employees would be rated on,
including innovation and creativity, political savvy, teamwork, and continuous learning.
Mayor Scruggs said the intent seemed to be to empower all employees. Dr. Vanacour
agreed with Mayor Scruggs.
Councilmember Clark stressed the need for usable information in terms of productivity
and citizen satisfaction with the service they received.
Budget Wrap-Up
Ongoing Funding
Mr. McClendon said there was $5,847 in unappropriated funds after they finished the
City Manager's recommended budget. He said deleting the Diversity Coordinator
position resulted in an additional $72,381, for a total of just over $77,000. He said
those funds had been used to fund the Code Compliance Inspector, $42,493, an
$8,000 increase tc Central Arizona Shelter Services, a $5,000 increase to the YWCA
Meals on Wheels program and $2,800 for tool replacement in the Community Volunteer
program. He said they were left with a total of $19,935 of unappropriated ongoing
funding. He said the final line shows those funds being used for one-time purposes,
resulting in a zero balance.
One-Time Funding
Mr. McClendon reported a balance of $39,970 in unappropriated funds as of three
weeks ago. He said the money for the initiatives and the components of the Code
Inspector position places them in a negative position of $47,219. He said the addition
of the ongoing funds totaling $19,935 reduces the out-of-balance figure to $27,281. He
said the deficit could probably be handled by making reductions in other areas or,
because it is one-time funding, he might be able to move items around to cover it.
With regard to a shift differential pay increase, Mr. McClendon stated there was no way
to fit the $100,000 ongoing expense into the budget without taking something else out.
He proposed that they fund the increase effective January 1 , 2002, reducing the
amount needed to $50,000, and funding it from salary savings throughout the
organization. He explained that, by approving the increase, the City would be obligating
the first $100,000 of new money available for the new fiscal year.
Mr. McClendon also proposed a one-time $10,000 contribution to the West Valley Arts
Council to come from the base budget item for an outside agency pool.
Mayor Scruggs asked if the $50,000 identified for the Gus the Bus route, but not used,
was taken into account. Mr. McClendon stated that the Gus the Bus route was
unfunded and, therefore, it was not calculated into the figures.
Mr. McClendon noted that they could shorten the Contingency Fund by $27,200 or trim
money from other contractual items. He stated, however, that he hoped those
measures would not be necessary.
17
Councilmember Frate asked about the Fire Pals program. Mr. McClendon said Mr.
Brooke Edwards, Fire Chief, had indicated he would be able to cover the $64,139
expense by shifting some base budget items. Dr. Vanacour pointed out that budget
items change throughout the year and department heads are being charged to manage
their budgets.
Councilmember Lieberman complimented staff on the job they did in satisfying the
Council's requirements while still meeting budget requests.
Mr. McClendon reviewed summary totals. He noted that they would change slightly, as
final benefit numbers and capital project amounts were refined.
In response to a question posed by Vice Mayor Eggleston, Mr. McClendon explained
that the contingency appropriations were down because a fairly large payment was
made out of the General Fund Contingency that they decided the City could not afford
to replace in one year. He stated that they would continue to have less in the
contingency over the three-year payback period.
Councilmember Clark thanked all of the employees who worked diligently and
effectively on the budget, in particular Mr. McClendon and Mr. Lynch. She said Mr.
McClendon and Mr. Lynch offer a valuable professional expertise that serves the City
exceptionally well. She stressed the importance of the City's municipal budget, stating
that it requires periodic and thorough testing. She stated that she felt confident, after
having sat through the three budget workshops, that she would be able to thoroughly
and accurately answer questions from her constituents regarding the budget. She
expressed her opinion that the Council has the opportunity to improve the budget
process and needs more time to thoroughly discuss the City budget and hear reports
from individual City departments. She noted that the Council had a budget
subcommittee at one time that served both the Council and the community. She
requested that the Council reinstate this budget subcommittee. She stressed that her
request in no way diminishes the need for a full Council review of the budget. She said
every opportunity Council has to discuss the budget provides them with an opportunity
to update, educate, and inform residents about what is occurring within the City. She
suggested that meetings of the subcommittee, if reinstated, be televised, thereby
allowing citizens to see what happens first hand. She stated that staff would relish the
opportunity to provide Council with a more in-depth look at their departments'
accomplishments and recommendations for future programming prior to final decisions
being made.
Councilmember Martinez said, while he appreciated Councilmember Clark's comments,
he believed the current process works. He agreed that the Council is given a lot of
information. He stated, however, that materials are provided well in advance of the
meetings, thereby giving the Councilmembers an opportunity to study the items and ask
questions. He stated that he has not received any comments from his constituents
indicating they were not provided sufficient information. He pointed out the fact that the
budget is available to everyone in the City and staff is willing to explain any items in
question. He expressed his opinion that another subcommittee was not necessary.
Councilmember Goulet agreed with Councilmember Martinez that staff has been
tremendously helpful in answering questions. He stated that, at some point, the
Council will have to decide how to keep up with a growing staff on a part-time basis. He
agreed that a subcommittee could be helpful. However, he said he believed the
Council has to make a full-time commitment to be able to effectively interact with the
City staff. He said the City is getting so big and the issues are becoming so complex
that not being able to interact with staff on a full-time basis was of great concern.
18
Councilmember Lieberman pointed out that the last three sessions dealt solely with
supplemental items and not the budget itself. He agreed that a Budget Committee,
made up of Councilmembers who review the entire budget, was a necessity. He noted
that four other major cities in the Valley have Council Budget Committees. He again
complimented staff on the outstanding job they did on the budget. He noted, however,
that the Council does not have a formal opportunity to interact with the various
departments.
Vice Mayor Eggleston agreed with Councilmembers Martinez and Goulet. He stated
that it was the responsibility of staff and the City Manager to review the budget. He
expressed his opinion that the current process works well.
Councilmember Frate stated that it is the job of the Mayor and Council to focus more on
broad policies. He said reviewing the entire budget would result in a lot of rehashing of
various items. He said he supported the current process.
Mayor Scruggs stated that she had operated both with and without a Budget
Committee. She noted that she had chaired the Budget Committee at one time. She
explained that the Budget Committee was done away with because the budget that
came to the Council was not supported by at least four members of the Council. She
said the City of Glendale's Council has never been willing to give their authority to make
policy direction over to a minority of the Council. She suggested that they review how
material is provided to the Council and how much time the Council is given to review
that material. She stated that Councilmembers want to be involved in the process, and
not just accept recommendations passed on by others.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 12:30 p.m.
19