Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 4/2/2002 (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 CITY OF GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP April 2, 2002 1:30 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, Vice Mayor Thomas R. Eggleston, and Councilmembers Joyce V. Clark, Steven E. Frate, David M. Goulet, H. Phillip Lieberman, and Manuel D. Martinez ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Terry Zerkle, Assistant City Manager; Rick Flaaen, City Attorney; and Pamela Oliveira, City Clerk 1. REVIEW OF THE FIELD OPERATIONS CENTER MASTER PLAN CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Ken Reedy, Deputy City Manager; and Mr. Stuart Kent, Deputy Director of Field Operations. OTHER PRESENTERS: Mr. Lynn Arrington, Principal; Mr. David Watkins, Principal,; and Mr. Mike Quinn, Project Manager, all with the architectural firm of Arrington Watkins, In 1998, the City developed a conceptual plan for a new Field Operations Center. This plan included several amenities that are no longer feasible including new office buildings and a parking garage. As a result, an updated plan that focused the resources towards the field staff was developed. The City retained the architectural firm of Arrington Watkins to update the master plan and complete design services for the project. Over 100 hours of interviews have been conducted with Cii:y staff at all levels in the organization to ensure the master plan will meet the City's needs for the next twenty-five years. Staff and the architects were at today's meeting to recommended the master plan and update the City Council on the plans for the phased development of the new Field Operations Center. At the May 1, 2001 Council Workshop session, staff updated the City Council on the planned capital improvements for the Field Operations Center. At that meeting, staff discussed five components in this first phase of activity. Those components are: • Updating the existing conceptual master plan; • Constructing a new equipment maintenance shop and warehouse; • Demolition of a portion of the Spring City Knitting building; • Tenant improvements for the vacated equipment maintenance facility and warehouse; and • Half street improvements to Orangewood Avenue. 1 The Field Operations Center opened in 1976 and is located at 6210 West Myrtle Avenue. The planning area for the master plan is approximately 50 acres. There is mixed land surrounding the area, consisting of commercial and industrial uses, a trailer park, and some single-family homes along Myrtle Avenue. Today the facility is home to the Utilities Department, the Field Operations Department, Traffic Signs and Signals, Parks and Recreations maintenance staff, and the Warehouse. The City Council was briefed by staff on this project at the May 1, 2001 Workshop session. On May 8, 2001, the City Council awarded a contract to the firm of Arrington Watkins for the ,Development of a master plan, design services, and construction services for the Field Operations Center. Since 1989, the City has acquired 25 acres of land adjoining to the current facility, including the former Spring City Knitting property, so that the expansion can be contiguous to the existing site. The City conducted an open house at Glendale High School on March 4, 2002, so that interested citizens and neighbors could view both of the proposed master plans for the facility. Over 800 notices were sent, including the residents of the Sands Estates Neighborhood and the Glen Orchard Neighborhood. The open house was also posted on the City web page. Attendees were supportive of the plans, especially the proposed landscaping along Grand Avenue. Currently there is $16 million identified in the Capital Improvement Plan for design and construction of the first phase of the master plan. Another $39 million is allocated in the second five years of the Capital Improvement Plan. Staff recommended that the City Council review the proposed master plan for the Field Operations Center and provide direction. Mr. Kent introduced the members of his team. He reviewed the existing site and stated that the recommended master plan is based, in part, on the master plan for the site completed in 1998. He said the goal for the plan was to put resources for construction towards the needs of the line employees at the site. He explained that they eliminated several features in the original master plan, primarily the parking garage and an annexed complex for additional office space. He stated that the architects spent over 100 hours interviewing onsite staff to determine what features they would like to see. He said they had developed a two-phase construction plan for the site. He explained that the first phase includes the new equipment management shop, a new warehouse, half-street improvements on Orangewood Avenue, and all design and construction services. Mr. Arrington ideni:ified the following as major program objectives developed during the programming process: (1) minimize the disruption to current operations and maintain use of existing facilities whenever possible; (2) improve overall site security and design the initial project around the Lazy J Trailer Lodge; (3) leave room for logical development of future buildings and site expansions; (4) improve the image of the complex from Grand and Orangewood Avenues and Vernon Street; (5) reduce truck traffic on Myrtle Avenue; and (6) maximize the potential site utilization. Mr. Arrington explained that they would construct the new facilities in the vacant land area, where possible. He said the fueling island and fitness center would remain where they are currently located. He said commercial and residential solid waste would 2 continue to be maintained onsite and a number of the smaller shops would remain in their existing structures. He stated that the training and conference centers would also remain in place. He explained that, by maintaining the use of existing buildings, they have an opportunity to renovate the interiors of the existing equipment maintenance shop, warehouse, and Field Operations Administration building. He stated that they were recommending a partial demolition of the Spring City Building in the initial phase, with existing departments being repositioned into remaining space within the building. With regard to the goal to improve overall site security, Mr. Arrington stated that they were developing a unified campus concept. He explained that they would create a walled perimeter around the entire yard and many internal buildings, with two major controlled access points. He said, because they wanted to maintain unrestricted public access to some of the parking lots, those lots would remain as they currently exist. Mr. Arrington stated that they had designed Phase I around the Lazy J Trailer Lodge and did not disrupt their operations at all. He said they would construct a wall around the trailer park, beth to increase site security and to provide better acoustic separation for residents living in the park. Mr. Arrington said they had left room for streets and utilities, as well as additional warehouse space, the Transit or Transportation Department, and the equipment maintenance shops. He explained that, in order to maximize potential site utilization, the proximity of vehicles to their corresponding departments and departments to the two common buildings drove the layout of the master plan. He stated that the equipment maintenance building would be approximately 60,000 square feet and oriented towards Grand and Orangewood Avenues. He said a new tar bay, wash bay, and service area would be constructed to improve the flow and fueling of vehicles. He stated that the 12,000 square foot warehouse would be located adjacent to the Spring City building. He said the Solid Waste Department would continue to utilize the existing structure; however, the refuse containers would be relocated to the storage yard. He stated that vehicle parking would be expanded to allow for single loaded parking rows. Mr. Arrington reviewed Phase II of the project. He stated that they could now add an additional 14,300 square feet to the equipment maintenance shop, bringing the total building to approximately 74,300 square feet. He said Solid Waste Operations is proposed to get a. new staff support building and locker facilities, at which time the modular buildings could be removed and the parking lot could be expanded. He said the warehouse would expand by 12,000 square feet and a 25,000 square foot locker space would be attached, bringing the warehouse to a total of 49,000 square feet. He said the 18,000 square foot Transportation Department building would be the next building constructed. He noted that they would have to remove the existing waste transfer station, car wash, and painting structure. He said construction of the Streets and Utilities building would be phased because a portion of the Spring City building would have to be removed. He stated that overall development allows them to expand equipment parking areas, increasing the number of public parking spaces along Myrtle Avenue and improving the half-street development and beautification work being done on Myrtle Avenue. Councilmember Goulet asked what the timeline was for the project. Mr. Watkins said they would proceed with the plans once they obtained Council's approval and occupancy should occur in January 2004. 3 Councilmember Clark mentioned the "eatery" designated in the 1998 Master Plan. He asked if any consideration had been given to adding cafeteria space to the fitness center or leasing space to a fast food provider. She also asked if they could provide grass and benches in the retention areas during the first phase. Mr. Kent explained that the eatery referenced in the original Master Plan was designed as a break area, not a cafeteria, and is currently on the site and would be retained. He said they could look into her suggestion to provide grass and benches in the retention areas. Councilmember Lieberman stated that he liked the fact that the existing maintenance facility will be used while the new facility is being constructed, allowing for uninterrupted service. Councilmember Goulet asked about the jogging trail mentioned in the 1998 plan. Mr. Kent said the jogging trail would be accommodated in the new plan. Councilmember Goulet asked if it was reasonable to assume that staff could continue to work onsite during construction. He pointed out the fact that construction activity would create a great deal of noise and possible safety concerns. Mr. Arrington stated that Solid Waste Operations would be able to maintain operations without disruption. He said current accesses would be maintained and all construction access would occur off Orangewood Aver ue. Mr. Kent stated that they were keenly aware of the operation's importance and the need to keep those facilities online. Councilmember Goulet asked if a contingency plan had been developed should it be determined that a particular department needs to be relocated. Mr. Kent stated that they were confident this would not be necessary. He added, however, that, if it were to occur, they might look at areas near the retention area as an interim solution. Councilmember Frate asked if the perimeter wall would be constructed during the first phase or after construction had been completed. Mr. Arrington stated that most of the perimeter wall would be constructed during the first phase. Councilmember Frate asked if there would be more control when vendors access the facility. Mr. Arrington responded in the affirmative. He explained that the gates would be controlled remotely from the warehouse. Councilmember Clark asked if they had done any exterior elevations at this point. Mr. Kent stated they had not. He explained that they intended to bring the design elevations back to the Council late in the spring or early in the fall. Mayor Scruggs thanked Mr. Kent and his team for their hard work. 2. WESTERN AREA PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. David Dobrotka, Police Chief; and Mr. Bill Passmore, Associate Civil Engineer in the Design/Survey Division of the Engineering Department. OTHER PRESENTERS: Mr. Jeremy Jones, Principal Architect in Charge with DWL Architects; and Mr. Greg Schon, Fire Facility Project Designer with Phillips Swager Associates. The architectural firm of DWL Architects attended this meeting to present the proposed architectural elevai:ions and floor plan for the Western Area Public Safety Facility to the City Council. These designs have evolved from the design development program 4 conducted with the Police, Fire, and Engineering Departments. The proposed site for the Western Area Public Safety Facility is 7-acres in the northwest corner of the 88-acre West Area Regional Park located on the northeast corner of 83rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road. The future develcpment of the City will require additional public safety services and facilities. The new Western Area Public Safety Facility will provide fire and police services in the western area and will operate seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The City Council approved the purchase of the 88-acre park site at the regular City Council meeting held on November 24, 1998. The City Council approved the professional services agreement for design and construction administration services with DWL Architects at the December 18, 2001, City Council meeting. The Fire and Police Departments have reviewed and endorsed the proposed architectural elevations and floor plan. Several public meetings for the West Area Regional Park were conducted between May and September of 2001. Discussions of the public safety facility have been included in these public meetings. Information gathered at the public meetings has been incorporated into the design of the facility. Funding for the public safety facility is available in the Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2001.2002 and 2002-2003 in the amount of $6,864,000. Staff recommended that the City Council review the preliminary drawings for the Western Area Public Safety Facility and provide direction to proceed with the preparation of fina design drawings. Mr. Schon showed a slide depicting the site as part ofjhe 88-acre master planned park facility. He said most of the building would front 83r Avenue, thereby screening the parking area. He said Olson Associates, who master planned the park facility, developed the landscape plan. He said a wrought iron perimeter fence would be constructed to secure the police vehicles. He explained that the building had been broken up to relate to the scale of the adjacent residential neighborhoods. He reviewed the floor plan for the 32,000 square foot facility. He noted that 15,000 square feet was designated for police and 12,700 square feet was designated for fire. He said both police and fire personnel would share the fitness room, training room, and lobby spaces. Mr. Jones reviewed the building's design and aesthetic characteristics. He stated that all of the elevations were dynamic and interesting. He showed samples of the brick colors considered. He pointed out that the lighter colored bricks they chose were more compatible with the residences in the area. He pointed out that other buildings would be built in the park. He stated that it was their intention to select materials that would continue to be available and appealing, as well as cost and energy efficient. 5 Mr. Schon reported that they were 60% through the design process and were ready to begin construction documents. He said they had approximately one and a half months to compile all of the information into a biddable format. Councilmember Frate asked if the 119 parking spaces include the spaces in the expanded parking lot. Mr. Schon responded that they did not. He explained that they designed the east site for expansion of the building, as well as parking. Councilmember Lieberman complimented Mr. Schon and Mr. Jones on their design concept. Councilmember Clark said she was excited that the facility was now becoming a reality. She thanked Mr. Schon and Mr. Jones. She stated that it was a beautiful complex. Mayor Scruggs noted that a certain contingent of safety personnel was interested in having horse stalls. She thanked Mr. Schon and Mr. Jones for their beautiful design. She directed staff :o proceed. Councilmember Clark asked about the equestrian drop off area that was to be designed along the Grand Canal. Mr. Smith said the current retention basin on the south side of 83rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road would be a neighborhood node that could accommodate horse trailers. 3. RENEWAL OF EMPLOYEE BENEFITS PLANS CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Art Lynch, Finance Director; Ms. Lupe Sierra, Employee Benefits Manager; and Ms. Alma Carmicle, Employment/Staffing Services Manager. The purpose of today's presentation was to review recommendations developed by the Employee Health Care Task Force, the Benefits Division staff, and the City's Management Team during the renewal process for the City's employee benefits program. The Task Force, a committee of employees and retirees representing several City departments, participates in the annual planning and development of the employee benefits program and assists the Employee Benefits staff in communicating the program throughout the organization. The Employee Benefit Program renews annually on May 1St. This renewal date applies to the medical, life, dental, vision, and the flexible spending account program. Recommendations for this year's benefit plan renewal include: • Reducing the cost increase required for the medical plan through a modification of benefits; • Eliminating the composite medical plan rates and charging the HMO and PPO plans the rates that reflect their actual cost; • Renewing the pre-paid (HMO-type) dental plan with no modification of benefits or premium; 6 • Renewing the PPO dental plan as a self-funded plan with the cost increase required to adequately fund the anticipated claims and administrative expenses; • Renewing the vision benefits and the administration of the flexible spending account program with the premiums and administrative fees required by the vendors; and • Renewing the life insurance benefits with no modification of benefits or premiums. Last year, the medical program underwent a modification of benefits and changed pharmacy benefit managers in order to mitigate the rate increase required from 30.6% to 23%. The dental PPO plan rates increased 5% and the pre-paid dental plan reduced rates by 8%. The vision, life insurance, and flexible spending account programs did not require a cost increase. On October 24, 2001, February 21, 2002, and March 7, 2002, the Employee Health Care Task Force met to review options for mitigating cost increases to the City's employee benefit program. On March 11, 2002, Human Resources Department staff met with the City Manager, the Finance Director and the Budget Director to discuss the recommendations developed by the Employee Health Care Task Force. On March 14, 2002, the recommendations of the Task Force, the human resources staff and management personnel were finalized for Council consideration. The City budgeted $500,000 for a possible increase in costs to the employee benefit program for the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 plan. The cost increase to the benefit program, if claims develop io their projected liability, is $875,000, resulting in a possible budget shortage of $376,000. The budget shortage of $376,000 can be funded by the Employee Benefit Internal Service Fund, if necessary. The Employee Benefit Internal Service Fund was created two years ago to Earmark any unused benefit premiums contributed by employees and the City for the purpose of stabilizing future employee benefit program costs, due to projected benefit cost increases and economic conditions. If the City experiences favorable claims during the upcoming plan year, the projected $376,000 shortage will be reduced and will minimize the need for the Employee Benefit Internal Service Fund withdrawal. Staff recommended that the City Council review the Employee Health Care Task Force recommendations for this year's benefit plan renewal and provide direction. Ms. Carmicle said the Human Resources Department, in close conjunction with the Employee Task Force, had identified national and local issues they believed would impact this year's benefits renewal. Ms. Sierra recognized members of the Employee Task Force and Employee Benefits Division. She explained that the Task Force's challenge was to maintain an equitable benefits package during an economic downturn. She said, unfortunately, the cost of 7 healthcare continues to greatly outpace inflation. Ms. Sierra explained that the Employee Benefit Program consists of basic benefits, including medical, dental, life insurance, the employee assistance program and the wellness program. She said optional benefits include optional life insurance, a vision plan, and flexible spending accounts. With regard to the medical plan, Ms. Sierra said the City has had a minimum premium funding arrangement since 1993, when it first selected Blue Cross Blue Shield as its carrier. She explained that, under a minimum premium funding arrangement, the City pays Blue Cross a flat fee for every employee, employee with family, and retiree each month for administration. She said the administration fees consist of claims processing, maintaining a provider network, identification cards, booklets and stop loss insurance. She said Blue Cross is also paid for the actual claims incurred each month. She said monies not used to pay for administration fees and claims are retained by the City, giving the City a cash flow advantage over a fully-insured funding arrangement. She said an Employee Benefit Internal Service Fund was established two years ago to ensure that the benefit program retained all of the premiums not remitted to Blue Cross Blue Shield in the form of administration fees and claims. She identified various factors impacting the medical plan renewal, including inflation of health care costs, increased administration fees and claims, the backlash against managed care and mandated benefits. She noted that the City saved $100,000 by moving the prescription drug benefit to Advanced PCS. She attributed the savings to better pricing and lower administrative fees Ms. Sierra reviewed medical plan cost control options identified by the Task Force. She said one of the options was to eliminate the dual choice of health plans. She explained that it would be more cost efficient to eliminate the HMO and keep the PPO plan. She pointed out, however, that approximately 70% of the enrollees are enrolled in the HMO plan. She said they were recommending that the City eliminate the composite premium because of the higher costs associated with the HMO. She stated that a number of plan changes were also being recommended, which would increase the costs to users of the plan rather than to all participants in the plan. Mr. Lynch said, as a result of Council's direction to utilize a more conservative and sound financial approach, they had established the Employee Benefits Internal Service Fund in Fiscal Year 2001/2002. He stated that the fund had now accumulated balances that could be used to provide a cushioning against the increased costs that the City now faces. Ms. Sierra explained that their recommendation was to approve the plan design changes, thereby increasing out-of-pocket costs to users of the plan. She explained that the Task Force felt the out-of-pocket costs were reasonable and affordable and would require the City to tap into the Employee Benefits Internal Service Fund only if claims develop to the maximum liability. Ms. Sierra reviewed the proposed cost increases. She said the office visit co-pay would increase from $15 to $20 on both the HMO and PPO plans. She explained that the PPO co-insurance would go from 90% to 80% when using a network provider and 70% for non-network providers. She said the PPO deductible for an individual would go from $200 per calendar year to $250 and the family deductible would increase to $500 per calendar year. She noted that individual out-of-pocket maximums would be capped at $2,000 (network) and $4,000 (non-network) per calendar year. 8 Mayor Scruggs commented on the individual out-of-pocket maximum. She stated that it is much lower than some plans offer. She asked how much the $500 increase would help with the overall problem. Ms. Sierra said the $500 increase would result in a 2% savings. Councilmember L.ieberman asked who would be responsible for payment once individuals have met their $2,000 maximum. Ms. Sierra explained that the insurance plan would pay 100% once individuals reach their out-of-pocket maximum. She noted that the out-of-pocket maximum does not include co-pays or deductibles. Councilmember Clark asked how much the City pays Blue Cross Blue Shield. Ms. Sierra said the City pays 100% of the employee premium, which totaled $5,686,358 last year. Councilmember Clark asked what impact it would have if the City increased the out-of-pocket maximum to $2,500. Ms. Sierra said increasing the maximum to $2,500 could reduce the potential $376,000 shortfall by half. She stressed the importance of maintaining the funds in the Employee Benefits Internal Service Fund as long as possible, because it is one-time money. Mr. Beasley said that, while increasing the maximum might help this year, they need to address the larger issues of where claims come from and where costs are incurred. With regard to the HMO plan, Ms. Sierra stated that the office co-pay would increase from $15 to $20 and co-insurance would go from 100% to 90%. She stated that the individual out-of-pocket maximum would be $2,000 per person. She noted that the maximum does not include co-pays or deductibles. Ms. Sierra stated that the combination of plan revisions and use of the Employee Benefits Internal Service Fund assist the City by reducing the overall cost increase and budget shortfall and reducing the increased cost for family coverage. With regard to the dental plan, Ms. Sierra said the City currently offers two dental plans, a pre-paid plan and a PPO plan. She explained that the pre-paid plan had no premium increase or benefit changes, whereas the PPO plan had requested a 7% premium increase. She said the Task Force was recommending that the City self-fund a dental plan, for an estimated savings of $50,000 next year. She said the Task Force felt comfortable making this recommendation because the dental plan is fairly easy to administer and the $1,250 per year/per person cap makes it a low risk plan to self- insure. Councilmember Clark asked what the 7% increase in the PPO plan would mean to both the City and plan participants. Ms. Sierra was unable to provide information as to the cost increase to the City. She stated that the individual premium would increase from $23.46 to $24.95 and the family premium would increase by $1.47 per pay period. She explained that the Task Force was recommending that the pre-paid plan remain as is, but that the City self-fund the PPO plan. She confirmed for Councilmember Clark that a large portion of the $50,000 savings would come from lower administrative costs. Mayor Scruggs asked how long the $1 ,250 cap had been in place. Ms. Sierra responded that it had been in place for two years. She said, prior to that time, the City was contracting with Delta Dental, which had a $1,000 cap. 9 Councilmember Martinez asked if the employees pay any portion of the dental premium. Ms. Sierra said the City pays 100% of the employee premium for medical and dental. She Said employees who purchase coverage for dependents pay a portion of the medical anc dental premium. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if there was a downside to self-funding the plan. Ms. Sierra said, although there is always the potential for increased activity, it is unlikely. Ms. Sierra said, although there were no benefit changes to the vision plan, there would be a $1 per pay period increase for single participants. She said life insurance benefits and premiums would not change. She noted that a number of employees had utilized and expressed appreciation for the debit card feature offered by the new Flexible Spending Account provider. She pointed out that the Flexible Spending Accounts will help employees mitigate the medical plan cost increases. Ms. Sierra reviewed the budget impact and employee costs. She said, if the Task Force recommendations were approved, the Medical PPO would increase $7.83 per pay period and the Medical HMO would increase $10.91 per pay period. She stated that the pre-paid dental plan would remain unchanged and the Dental PPO would increase $1.47 per pay period. Councilmember Clark asked if the City's premium increase was proportionate to the individual premium increases. Ms. Sierra responded in the affirmative. She stated that the City's rate for PPO single medical coverage would increase from $231.36 to $260.05 per month. She said the rate for PPO dental would increase from $23.33 to $24.95 and single vision would increase from $5.35 to $7.35 per month. In response to Mayor Scruggs' question, Ms. Sierra explained that the City pays two- thirds of the family rate for medical, while the employee pays one-third. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if it was standard for a carrier to insure additional family members at a lower rate. Ms. Sierra said adults are typically charged the same rate, but children are insured at a lower rate. Councilmember Martinez asked how much the City pays annually for each employee. Ms. Sierra said the current annual rate is $2,776.32 per employee. Councilmember Martinez asked if that rate was comparable to the rates paid by other cities. Ms. Sierra stated that the rates were very comparable. Councilmember Martinez asked if participation in the plan was optional for employees. Ms. Sierra said the City enrolls all employees after one month of service; however, dependant participation is optional. Councilmember Goulet pointed out that insurance costs associated with individual policies are astronomical. He asked if the Task Force had considered offering different types of plans (i.e. employee, dependent, retiree plans). Ms. Sierra said there are a number of factors that drive the increased costs. She said they had looked at breaking down the costs, but found that it would be cost prohibitive for employees with families. She said 99% of retirees elect to stay with the City's program because the State offered programs have been reduced. She noted that the State's rates for retirees are more than double that of the City's. Mayor Scruggs asked if insurance for retirees continues indefinitely or stops at age 65. Ms. Sierra said the City of Glendale allows retirees to stay on the plan as long as they wish. 10 Councilmember Clark asked if an employee's rate increased upon retirement. Ms. Sierra explained that, while employees pays the same rate when they retire, their rate decreases once they turn 65 and Medicare becomes the primary carrier. She explained that the State gives retired employees a subsidy to pay their insurance premium. Councilmember Martinez asked if the City of Phoenix receives a better rate because of the number of employees it has. Ms. Sierra said the City of Phoenix's rate is proportionate to that of the City of Glendale because with a higher number of employees comes a higher number of claims. Councilmember Martinez asked when employees would be given the chance to evaluate their plan. Ms. Sierra said employees are allowed to make changes during the open enrollment period in April. Councilmember Clark asked when the recommended changes would take effect. Ms. Sierra said the changes would be presented during the open enrollment period and would take effect May 1st. Councilmember Clark said she had learned a lot of information and would have appreciated an opportunity to revisit the issue prior to it being presented for approval. Ms. Sierra said it will be their goal next year to bring the information to Council earlier. Mayor Scruggs suggested that they hold this type of discussion in February. She explained that there is a lot of information to consider and other budget issues could impact their decisions. Councilmember C ark said the Council is dealing with a $376,000 shortfall and needs time to consider all of the information. Vice Mayor Eggleston asked if the Task Force had to wait to receive its information from the carriers. Ms. Sierra said they receive quarterly information from carriers regarding claims activity. Mr. Beasley noted that negotiations with the carriers takes a certain amount of time. Ms. Sierra agreed with Mr. Beasley. She said the process involves months of working with the carriers to ensure that the data they provide is accurate. She said it was her understanding that their May 1st deadline was set to allow the Council two months to incorporate the changes into the City's budget. In response to Mayor Scruggs' question, Ms. Sierra stated that the prescription program cost was included in the medical plan costs. Mayor Scruggs spoke about the rising costs and lack ofchoices with regard to prescriptions. Ms. Sierra noted that the City had experienced a 15% to 20% increase over the past two months due to the flu and other bronchial illnesses. Councilmember Lieberman expressed his opinion that the City has an excellent prescription service. Mayor Scruggs said the new service provider seems to be limited in relation to where they allow prescriptions to be filled. She asked if any concern has been expressed about the inability to fill prescriptions 24-hours a day. Ms. Sierra responded that they had not received any concerns. She noted that Advanced PCS's network includes about 98% of the pharmacies in the state, including Walgreens. Mr. Beasley confirmed for Vice Mayor Eggleston that the May 1st deadline was built into the process to give the Council enough time to review the changes before finalizing the budget. He pointed out that this year the City was going through a rather peculiar budget process. Ms. Sierra said she believed that, next year, she would be able to provide the information to Council in February. 11 Ms. Sierra continued with her presentation. She reviewed the budget impacts and employee costs. She said $500,000 was budgeted for the benefit plan renewal increases, however, costs increased by $876,000, resulting in a potential $376,000 shortfall. She said they hoped claims would not build to their full potential. She noted, however, that if they do, the Employee Benefits Internal Service Fund would be used. Councilmember Clark asked what the balance was in the Employee Benefits Internal Service Fund. Mr. Beasley reported that there was a balance of approximately $1.5 million. Ms. Sierra stated that the Task Force had been researching the potential of self-funding the medical program. She said lower administration costs associated with self-funding could result in substantial savings. She noted that Blue Cross Blue Shield rents its network to self-funded programs, which would allow the City to keep its current list of medical providers. Councilmember Clark asked if the City had self-funded the medical program at one time. Ms. Sierra clarified for Councilmember Clark that the Risk Management Department's Wor<er's Compensation is self-funded. Ms. Carmicle stated that the Task Force was also considering the benefits and downsides of passing along the costs of the medical plan to employees and retirees. Mayor Scruggs said, in her opinion, it would be unfair to require employee participation if they were being asked to share the cost. Ms. Carmicle said, in the past, employees had been discouraged from opting out of the plan because the City's rate is tied to the number of participants. She said there was concern that healthy people would leave the plan. She agreed that, should the City pass along the costs to its employees, the City would have to allow employees to opt out of the plan. She stated that they were also exploring the ssue of developing a total rewards strategy. She said some benefits are considered more valuable than cash compensation in terms of recruiting, retaining, and motivating employees. The Council expressed their appreciation to Ms. Carmicle, Ms. Sierra and all of the members of the Task Force for their efforts. Mayor Scruggs directed staff to move forward with the Employee Task Force's recommendations. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m. 12