Agenda - Council - 06/14/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CC: FM: RE: DT: MEMORANDUM Mayor Jim Gilbertson Councitmcmber Shcila Bcycr Councilmember Glen Hardin Councilmember Ken Peterson Councitmember Gerry Zimmerman Mike Auspos, Police Chief Mark Boos, Parks/Utiht/cs Supervisor Mary Gomez., Accounting Supervisor Dave Griffin, Fire Chief Dave Gustafson, Sergeant Jessie Hart, Finance Officer Steve Jankowski, City Engineer Dean Kaplcr, Assistant Fire Chief Merle Mevissen, Streets Supervisor Kay McAloney, Administrative Services Manager Ryan Schroeder, City Adminiswator 5-Year Staffing Plan April 6, 1994 You will recall that two years ago we began projecting five years into the future work plans, capital outlay and improvements, staffing, and training. Our staffing planning has resulted in a 1/sting, by year, of past employee complements and future projections. These future projections have amounted to "best guesses" from department personnel as to sta_fi~mg levels that may be required to complete the work plans. Since 1991 Council has approved several planning documents and memorandums in areas ranging from park improvements to financial policies. These approvals have generally been the culmination of several meetings at both the staff and Council levels. The overriding message I have heard through these discussions has been: 1) Keep taxes at reasonable levels. 2) Don't increase operational costs. 3) Don't increase staffing unless absolutely necessary. 4) Increase anention to technological and tra/ning improvements. The above is my understanding of the Council view of the operation. As such I have asked Administrative Services Manager Kay McAloney to prowide some surmm~, analysis of the 5-Year Staffing Plan. This fn-st draft critique of the existing document is attached. The direction I gave Kay was to suggest alternatives to increasing our full-time staffing. This comes before us now in that her analysis and your reaction to it will impact my 1995 budget recommendations and, certainly, how you view those recommendations. Therefore, I need your review and comments on this draft~ The primary assumption of the document is that adding full-time positions is not an alternative except in the extreme case. Further, knowing this, staff is left with the only other alternative of exarmning other methods of accomplishing an increased work load. Is this correct? Are there areas herein that have been missed or need additional thought? I have also included some training information herein for your review. I look forward to your comments. If you have any questions, or need clarification, please let me know. Otherwise I appreciate any necessary response within the next couple of weeks.