HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/01/1992, 2 - REORGANIZATION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS IN111%INIII1IIIIIII�I�111 "J f MEETING GATE:
c� o san ���s os�spo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER:
FROM: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer
Prepared by: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer
SUBJECT: Reorganization of Community Development, Recreation, and
Public Works Departments
CAO RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Receive and approve the recommendations for reorganization
outlined in the "Analysis of the Community Development,
Recreation, and Public Works Departments" , prepared by Hughes,
Heiss & Associates.
2. Direct staff to implement the recommendations generally in
accordance with the implementation plan outlined in the
report.
DISCUSSION:
Background/Study Approach
The City has a goal of conducting regular reviews of operations and
programs to increase productivity and improve service delivery.
Last Fall, issues and events combined to warrant the review of
three City departments: Community Development, Recreation, and
Public Works.
On October 29, 1991, the City Council approved the issuance of a
Request for Proposals (RFP) to complete an organization and
management review of these departments. After an extensive
selection process, in early 1992 the City contracted with the
management consulting firm of Hughes, Heiss & Associates. The
consulting team primarily consisted of Richard Brady (Project
Manager) and Gary Goelitz .
In terms of the study approach, this was not a study prepared "from
afar" based on organization and management theories. Instead, this
was an analysis prepared by consultants who visited the City many
times over the last few months, and who developed recommendations
directed toward the special concerns and needs of our City.
The team began their work in February 1992 by becoming thoroughly
familiar with the three departments. This phase included the
review of written materials and interviews with management staff,
employees, Councilmembers, and others. Throughout the analytic
phase of the study there were regular site visits and consultations
with employees and management staff (primarily through a steering
committee composed of the CAO, Assistant CAO, and the Directors of
Community Development, Recreation, Public Works, Personnel, and
Finance) . Employee workshops were also held. There was a great
deal of discussion, written correspondence, and analysis before the
final report was completed. The final report was submitted to City
staff on May 15, 1992 .
������ti►►►�Illllll�p �l�lll city of San tins OBISpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Overview of Consultant Recommendations
Attached is the portion of the Request for Proposals which outlines
the initial questions and concerns Posed by the City (Attachment
1) . In the interest of brevity, staff has attached only the
Executive Summary of the complete report, and pertinent
organization charts (Attachments 2 and 3) . The full report is over
100 pages and provides a substantial amount of data, analysis, and
rationale in support of the findings and recommendations in the
Executive Summary.
It is staff's opinion that the report addresses the issues and
questions posed in the RFP. In addition to recommendations for
reorganization, it also offers a listing of the abilities and
skills which should be sought in the next Public Works Director,
suggested customer service standards for the Community Development
Department, and comparisons of Recreation Department staffing to
other cities in the State. The complete report has previously been
provided to Councilmembers, employees, and other interested members'
of the community, and is available for review in the City Clerk' s
Office.
The recommendations contained in the Executive Summary will not be
restated in this staff report. However, staff would like to
briefly summarize the most fundamental changes in each department,
and to point out some issues of special note.
Community Development Department
For this department, the consultant was asked to examine issues
related to both organization and workload. In terms of
organization, the consultant was to determine what changes would
be necessary to: improve supervision and strengthen management;
meet high community expectations; and improve the department' s
customer service image. With regard to workload, .the consultant
was to examine both the Building and Planning Divisions to
determine if the existing number of positions are appropriate.
Planning Division. The consultant recommends establishing Current
and Advanced Planning Divisions headed by "Manager" positions to
oversee responsibilities in these two areas. The report recommends
the elimination of the Principal Planner and two Senior Planner
positions (with the second Senior Planner reduction to occur after
completion of the Open Space Element, concurrent with the creation
of a Parks Planner position in the Recreation Department) . An
Assistant/Associate Planner position is also recommended for
reduction. If the City "streamlines" its zoning ordinance and
aspects of its development review process, a second
Assistant/Associate can be eliminated.
The streamlining noted above is important to both an improvement
in the department' s ability to serve customers and to minimize
2
IIINN►1111��������IIID I�II� city of San %AIS OBISpO
NMI -10
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
unnecessary workload. The consultant points out that the City's
permit process is overly complicated in some areas. For example,
the consultant cites the need for at least two Architectural Review
Committee meetings before approval of even relatively minor
construction plans. This creates a burden not only for the ARC and
staff, but also for many residents pursuing relatively
uncomplicated improvements. The consultant also provides examples
of how the zoning ordinance currently requires permits for uses
which appear minor and incidental, such as computer service uses
on the ground floor of a building in the central commercial zone. *
The consultant is careful to point out that streamlining can be
achieved without sacrificing the City' s commitment to citizen input
and quality development. Council support for the recommendation
to pursue such streamlining is essential, since only Council can
approve changes to the zoning ordinance and other procedures.
Building Division. The primary focus was on workload analysis.
In this regard the consultant has recommended reducing the current
staffing of nine positions by three - one Building Inspector, an
Office Assistant I. and the Plan Check- Engineer. In addition, the
consultant has recommended assigning one of the three remaining
Building Inspector positions to assist the Zoning Investigator in
his workload, which currently has a substantial backlog.
Of all the staffing related recommendations contained in, the
report, staff and the consultant have struggled most with the
recommended elimination of the Plan Check Engineer position.
Although there are fiscal considerations, staff is concerned that
this reduction carries a fairly high risk that customer service
will be diminished as a result. This is because plan checking for
more complex projects would need to be contracted out, which would
take more time and create more coordination requirements. Less
complex plan checking would be done in-house, but could be delayed
as a result of other duties carried out by the Chief Building
Official and Permit Coordinator.
I
The Building Division is currently considered by many applicants
as very customer service oriented and timely in their provision of
services. Staff does not wish to significantly diminish this
capacity, especially since plan check fees were recently increased
and, consequently, a commensurate level of service is expected.
Therefore, while reductions and reassignments are appropriate and
recommended for this division, staff and the consultant agree that
the Plan Check Engineer reduction should not occur until January
1993 , and then only if workload remains static or diminishes or if
projected workload for early 1993 shows no sign of significant
increase. Staff will. carefully track the workload and further
evaluate the use of this position, with a recommendation to be
provided in early 1993 . If not justified by workload at that time,
staff will recommend position deletion.
3
a_3
,111 ►111111$I 110sl j city o� san L"is OBIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Recreation Department
Over the years the Recreation Department's organizational structure
has been established incrementally and has been staffed with a
number of "temporary" employees (though many of them have been with
the department for years) . The department has performed in a• very
"hands on" way in delivering recreation programs. This approach
has its advantages, but is not conducive to more proactive program
planning and evaluation. Therefore, the fundamental question asked
in the RFP was: "What changes are needed to assure a Recreation
Department that is progressive and appropriately organized for the
1990 's and beyond?"
The report recommends reorganizing and streamlining the department
by eliminating a number of part-time "temporary" Program
Coordinator positions (5 FTEs) and replacing them with two regular
Recreation Coordinator positions. In addition, the report
recommends that the department initiate a comprehensive master
planning process to evaluate existing programs and identify future
community needs and desires. This effort would dovetail with, but
go beyond the masterplanning now being completed relative to the
Senior Center and other indoor recreation programs. This master
planning process is to be completed by existing Recreation
Department staff over the next several months.
Although this process is recommended to be started in July 1992,
staff believes that the work would actually be completed sooner if
training is provided to department management relative to the best
way of approaching such a master planning effort. Such training
can be provided on-site at a nominal cost, perhaps by a recreation
professional from another city who has recently gone through a
similar process. In addition, as the management staff of this
department transitions from a "hands on" style to a more pro-
active style, ongoing management training is likely to be needed.
Public Works Department
I
The RFP posed a fundamental question similar to the one asked in
relation to the Recreation Department: "What organizational
changes are needed to assure a department properly organized to
meet the challenges of the 1990 's and beyond?" Two other key
questions related to whether or not transportation related
functions in the City should be consolidated in Public Works, and
if parks maintenance should be transferred to Recreation.
Transportation Consolidation. The consolidation of transportation
activities in Public Works, under a new Transportation Manager, is
recommended. The consolidation includes all transportation related
activities except those now organized in the Streets Division
(because Streets is essentially a maintenance operation) . The
report also recommends the addition of a Transportation Planner
4
a-
��l'idli{lilillllllll�p1lll�lU city or Sans OBISpo
WiN COUNCt AGENDA REART
position to the division to handle the numerous transportation
planning activities now underway. The report recommends that the
City seek a Public Works Director who possesses transportation
related experience and sensitivities.
Taken together, the consolidation, staffing, and skills recommended
by the consultant will shift the focus of this department and
strengthen the City's overall capacity to address both current and
future transportation challenges - particularly, the challenge of
minimizing automobile usage and air pollution through the enhanced
availability of alternative forms of transportation. With regard
to Transit, for example, the recommended reorganization will
i
support the Transit Manager by:
- helping with the transit planning workload (e.g. , Short and
Long Range Transit Plans, Transit Transfer Center planning)
providing greater administrative support as a result of the
allocation of Administrative Analyst resources (e.g. , budget
and fiscal issues, staff reports, procurement)
improving coordination with related activities (e.g. , parking,
j trip reduction efforts, traffic engineering)
providing greater management assistance and expertise from a
highly qualified and experienced Transportation Manager and
a transportation oriented Public Works Director
One aspect of this reorganization of transportation functions which
is not yet addressed is the physical location of the new division.
This poses a challenge, and it is not likely that all members of
this division can be co-located given existing City facilities.
However, following the approval of the consultant report, staff
will address this issue with the goal of co-locating as many
members of the division as possible. There could be some
additional costs associated with this, depending upon the solution.
However, it is our intent to pursue practical and cost conscious
solutions focused on the maximum use of existing facilities.
Other Public Works Recommendations. Three position reductions are
also recommended for the Public Works Department. Specifically,
it is recommended that the Project Manager, Engineering Field
Supervisor, and Parks and Building Project Assistant (a contract
position) be eliminated. It is also suggested that an Engineering
Assistant position be considered for elimination after the Autocad
mapping system is fully on line, depending upon workload at that
time.
I
Several other recommendations are offered, including: consolidation
of conservation programs in the Utilities Department; consolidation
of capital project management in the Engineering Division and
a-sW
MY Of san 1 s OBIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
related transfer of an Engineering Technician position from the
development review section to the design section; and the need for
the City to eventually consider adding a Landscape Architect to the
Engineering staff to enhance the City' s capacity in this area.
However, the report does not recommend the consolidation of parks
maintenance activities within the Recreation Department.
Workload Impacts. It must be noted that in the transition to a
more centralized capital project management approach, and with the
j elimination of the three Public Works positions, work on some
current projects and activities will undoubtedly be disrupted and
slowed. In addition, leaner staffing in these areas will require
a greater sensitivity to workload and prioritization. Similar
transitional impacts should be expected in other departments as
well.
Staff will attempt to minimize these impacts through phasing and
other implementation strategies. However, lasting differences in
workload capacity in some areas are likely, and should be
understood as a choice made for increased investment in other areas
(e.g. , transportation) . Further comment on such difficult
choices are offerred by the CAO at the conclusion of this report.
Employee Impacts and Implementation Timeframe
Employee Impacts. The staffing and organization changes
recommended by the consultant, including position reductions, are
not budget-driven, and as such, they should not be compared to the
layoffs taking place in many other organizations in the County.
Instead, this organization study was undertaken to achieve specific
organizational and community goals and priorities as outlined in
the RFP workscope provided in Attachment 1. However, because we
do have significant fiscal constraints, it has been essential for
the study to question the status quo, and to recommend reductions
in areas where workload is (or will be) down, and where service
levels and priorities will be least impacted (though there will be
some impacts, as noted above) . Therefore, some positions are
recommended for elimination, and some current employees,
unfortunately will be affected.
The report recommends the elimination of nine regular positions,
one contract position, and several temporary positions over the
next several months. However, this does not necessarily mean that
every individual in those positions will be laid off. One employee
has already been transferred to a vacant position in another
department (the Office Assistant I) . Staff is hopeful that similar
options will become available for other individuals whose positions
have been recommended for elimination.
6
S8
1ill I 'll city of San ' Is OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Staff is already meeting with representatives of the City' s Mid-
Management and General Employee Associations to discuss options for
mitigating the impacts of any necessary layoffs. Options could
include such things as retirement, transfer, longer advanced
notice, job search assistance, and continuation of health benefits
for a period of time. The approach may vary, dependent upon
factors such as the tenure of affected employees, whether it is a
regular or contract position, probationary vs. permanent status,
and other relevant factors.
Implementation Timeframe. The Executive Summary includes a
recommended implementation schedule. It is staff ' s intention to
implement the recommendations as soon as reasonably possible and
generally consistent with this schedule. An intradepartmental
committee will be established to refine implementation plans and
then to monitor actual implementation.
However, some individual aspects of the schedule could be modified
depending upon any opportunities which might arise to avoid layoffs
(e.g. , retirement, transfer) , the need to provide reasonable
advanced notice for those who may eventually be laid off, and to
address workload transition issues, especially in Public Works.
Again, a specific approach to these personnel issues will be
developed after discussions with the employee associations are
concluded.
FISCAL IMPACT:
As outlined in the consultant report and as noted earlier in the
staff report, some recommended staffing changes are to occur in the
near term, with others to occur later or conditioned upon workload
considerations. Therefore, not all of the fiscal impacts will
occur immediately. The schedule of staffing changes outlined below
divides these impacts into "near term" and "longer term"
categories. The dollar amounts shown are maximums, based on a
I computation of "top step" in the ranges. In some cases, actual
placement is, or will be, lower (e.g. , appointments to the new
positions) .
i
Staffing Adjustments: Near Term
i
Additions . No. Cost/ (Savinas)
■ Current/Advanced Planning
Managers 2 $158 , 800
■ Transportation Manager 1 93 , 000
■ Transportation Planner 1 69 , 900
■ - Recreation Coordinators 2 75 . 400
Total Additions 6 $397, 100
7
a-
� �►�uiiiliillllllli►► �IIIIIi city of San 's OBISPO
OftZe COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Reductions
■ Principal Planner (1) ($69,900)
■ Senior Planner (1) (67, 300)
■ Assistant Planner (1) (49, 900)
■ Building Inspector (1) (46, 100)
■ Office Assistant I (1) (31, 400)
■ Engineering Field Supervisor (1) (61, 600)
■ Projects Manager (1) (69, 000)
■ Parks and Building Project
Assistant (Contract) ( . 75) (37, 900)
i ■ Program Coordinators (temps) (5 FTE) (75, 400)
Total Reductions (12 . 75) ($508, 500)
Total Near-Term Changes (6.75) ($111,400)
i
Staffina Adjustments: Longer Term or Conditional
Additions No. Cost/ (Savings)
Parks Planner 1 $59, 600
Reductions
Assistant/Associate Planner (1) ($49, 900)
Senior Planner (1) (67, 300)
Plan Check Engineer (1) (61, 500)
Engineering Assistant .75 (37 , 200)
Total Reductions (2 . 75) ($215, 900)
Total Longer Term Changes (1.75) ($156,300)
Total Possible Changes (8.50) ($267,700)
As mentioned earlier, in addition to the staffing changes, other
fiscal impacts could eventually result from costs associated with
the co-location of the Transportation Division, assistance to
employees to help mitigate the impacts of any needed layoffs, and
the acquisition of an automated permit information system (est.
$30, 000) . . Staff will return to the City Council with specific
information on such costs when plans are further refined. The
first priority will be addressing the impacts of layoff, hopefully
within the next 30 days.
CONCLUDING COMMENTS BY THE CAO:
In the past two years the City of San Luis Obispo has experienced
significant change. This includes a slow down in building activity
as a result of drought, residential growth restrictions, and
8
,�hli�ii► ililill►►u°1°►` jl city osan JVs oBispo
a�1111
COUNCIL AGENDA RE;%RT
recession. Many long-established "ground rules" have been
questioned and are in the process of change, with one example being
the greater emphasis on air pollution reduction and alternative
Itransportation possibilities and another being that "business as
usual" must be replaced with a greater consciousness of the public
service goals we wish to accomplish.
iThe City is also no longer isolated from the changes that are
taking place in the State, the nation and internationally. While
we have been in a largely continuous growth mode for the past 30
years, under generally-accepted assumptions, we can reasonably
expect that the decade of the nineties and the first years of the
twenty-first century will be years of great change. They may be
years of financial stress, of questioning of old assumptions, of
the need for greater productivity, and of some uncertainty.
Organizations must be more flexible and capable of changing to meet
new demands. Organizations must also be willing to make difficult
choices.
The organizational analysis should be placed in this larger
context. The study comes at the end of a certain era in our local
government, and at a time when we are trying to anticipate the
► future. We must realize that these recommendations mean change,
that change by its very nature is painful, and that personal and
organizational growth most often emerge from challenges, not from
comfort.
Our charge to the consultant, transcending some of the specifics,
was to focus on the kind of organization which would best meet the
community' s needs for the 1990 ' s and beyond. There is probably no
one person that will fully agree with each and every finding and
recommendation in the report. However, I am recommending adoption
of the report in its entirety for these reasons:
I
I 1. The consultants took their task most seriously, and performed
it most objectively and professionally.
2. Their recommendations were established based on a great deal of
study and analysis of our organization, and their experience
with other California cities.
3 . The report has a certain internal consistency and logic which
could be destroyed by modifying bits and parts of it.
I
4 . Realistically, it is not possible to prepare a meaningful report
of this kind which will be universally accepted. Therefore, the
real question is: Has the process been honest and thoughtful
and does the sum of the parts make sense? My answers are "yes" i
and "yes" .
i
1
i
i
9
II���iii�Iliiilll�1° IIIIII city of San 1 S OBISPO
Xii% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
The consultants have given us their best recommendations, and I
believe that the sum of the parts does make sense. These are
i admittedly tough recommendations - recommendations which are
difficult to accept in an organization that has been created by
incremental growth and nurtured by stability. However, as we have
gone through this study process I have had to ask myself, who is
the report for, who is the ultimate constituency we serve? The
answer, I believe, is that this report has to serve the community
even more than the organization.
Yes, implementation of the report' s recommendation, in some cases,
will cause hardship for our employees. Some projects are likely
to be slowed during the transitional period. In addition, by
I having a leaner organization in some areas, staff. and Council will
need to be increasingly more sensitive to workload and priorities
in those areas. I wish the choices were not so difficult.
However, in an organization that has to change in certain respects,
to be more reflective of the times we face, which involves
significant resource limitations, difficult choices are a
regrettable but unavoidable consequence.
Therefore, as your CAO, I recommend that the report be adopted in
its entirety. At the same time, I support an implementation method
and schedule which positively responds to and supports the City
personnel impacted by this change process.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. RFP Excerpt
2 . Executive Summary
3 . Organization Charts
I �
NOTE: THE COMPLETE CONSULTANT STUDY HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY
DISTRIBUTED TO COUNCILMEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES, AND IS
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE CITY CLERK' S OFFICE.
I
i
i
\reorg.rpt
i
I
I
10
a-
REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND PROPOSALS:
REVIEW OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC WORKS
AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE
I. INTRODUCTION
The City has a goal of conducting regular reviews of operations and programs to
increase productivity and improve service delivery. Recently, certain issues and
events have combined to warrant the review of three City departments: Community
Development, Public Works, and Recreation.
As outlined below, there are issues which cross departmental boundaries that
must be examined (e.g., Should transportation functions in the City be
organizationally combined? Should park maintenance be transferred from Public
Works to Recreation?). There are also issues which are narrowly related to the
performance of one department, particularly the Community Development
Department.
With respect to this department, there have been a number of issues and concerns
which have surrounded the department over the years. Many of the issues and
concerns are typical and expected in a community attempting to reconcile growth
and economic pressures with the strong desire to protect a quality environment.
Other issues, however, are unique to the department as it is organized, staffed, and
performing today. Addressing these issues is a priority outcome to be achieved
by the consultant's evaluation.
The background and key issues for each of these three departments is described
below.
II. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Background
After 35 years of service, the City's Public Works Director is retiring. His retirement
will be effective in April 1992. As would be expected, over the years the City's
Public Works Department has evolved to a large degree based on the interests and
management style of its leadership. With the Director's retirement, the City Council
and city management need to take a fresh look at the Department to assure that
it is properly organized to meet the challenges of the 1990's and beyond:. The
results of this evaluation will also help the City determine the skills, knowledge, and
1
ATTACHMENT 1 ���
abilities to be sought in the City's recruitment of a new Director of Public Works.
Currently the Public Works Department consists of four divisions: Engineering,
Streets, Parks and Buildings, and Parking. These divisions include the following
major functions:
The Engineering Division includes design, inspection, survey, traffic
engineering, and development review activities.
The Streets Division includes pavement maintenance, street sweeping,
storm drain and creek maintenance, street signing, striping, sidewalk
maintenance, traffic signal maintenance, and vehicle maintenance.
The Parks and Building Division includes the City's tree program, park and
landscape maintenance, Swim Center maintenance, golf course
management, building and facility maintenance, and energy conservation.
The Parking Division includes responsibility for the City's parking program,
including on-street parking and two parking structures.
Other functions in the Public Works Department includes administrative analysis,
special project management, and a newly created Solid Waste Coordinator
position. There are a total of 74.5 regular positions, and, including temporaries,
102 Full Time Equivalents (FTE's). (Organization Chart Attached.)
Two of the most significant questions related to the Public Works Department are:
Should the City's transportation-related functions be consolidated into this
department? Will a consolidation result in a more cohesive delivery of
transportation programs and strengthen efforts to encourage alternative forms of
transportation?
As mentioned, the Department already includes streets, traffic engineering, and
parking programs. The City's transit function, which was transferred from Public
Works in 1985, is located in the CAO's Office and oversees the operation and
maintenance of the system through a third party contract. The City's Bicycle
Program is currently in the Community Development Department (the installation
of actual improvements is carried out by Public Works).
The Community Development Department also carries out most of the City's
transportation planning efforts, although in consultation with Public Works. This
includes the City's Circulation Element, neighborhood traffic management plans,
bicycle facility planning, pedestrian path planning, trip reduction plans, regional
transportation planning, congestion management planning, and traffic and
transportation related environmental review. The transit program is responsible
for short and long range transit plans, including planning for a downtown trolley
program, transit transfer center, and substantial route and service changes. The
City's parking planning and management program is handled in the Parking
Division of the Public Works Department.
2
a-//
A secondary Public Works question is: Should park facility maintenance continue
to be located in Public Works, or should it be consolidated with the Recreation
Department? If so, should it be done in the near future, or at some other specified
point in time? The Division was transferred to Public Works in 1975, during the
tenure of the existing department heads.
Key Issues for Review
In general, the City desires a Public Works Department that is progressive and
appropriately organized for the 1990's and beyond. Therefore, consultant
recommendations should not be bound by traditional concepts of the Public Works
function (however, models which have been proven successful elsewhere would
be desireable). With this in mind consultant recommendations are desired relative
to the following key issues:
General
Determine what functions should be included in the Public Works
Department, and which would be more appropriately located in another
department or elsewhere (e.g. another governmental agency, contracts
with private sector).
Identify whether changes should be made organizationally to improve the
Department's "customer relations"/public information capabilities.
Identify qualifications for future Public Works Director (e.g., is it necessary
for position to be registered civil engineer, or is a planning, transportation,
or management background acceptable, etc.)
Consolidation of Transportation Functions
Identify advantages and disadvantages of consolidating citywide
transportation functions into a single transportation division or department,
and provide a recommendation on this issue. .
With transit designated as an A+ Council priority, with the APCD mandates
on clean air and transit, with the impending consideration of expansion
contained in the Short Range Transit Plan, and with the recent urbanization
designation of our transit system, the consultant needs to more clearly spell
out the Council's intent with respect to transit within City government.
Identify total support staff and reporting relationships needed to create a
consolidated transportation division or department, if that were to be the
recommendation.
3
a-�
0
Parks and Buildings Maintenance
Identify advantages and disadvantages of moving all or some of the Parks
function of the Parks & Building Division to the Recreation Department, and
provide a recommendation on this issue, which includes timing and
conditions necessary for such a transfer.
Identify advantages and disadvantages of separating out the Parks and
Building maintenance functions into two separate divisions, whether or not
the Parks function is transferred to the Recreation Department.
Identify the impact on staffing levels and the use of maintenance equipment
if the Parks function were to be transferred to Recreation.
Other
Identify advantages and disadvantages of moving the Solid Waste
Coordinator position to the Utilities Department, and provide a
recommendation on this issue
Identify advantages and disadvantages of moving the Energy Coordinator
position to the Utilities Department, and provide a recommendation on this
issue
Determine if there would be a significant benefit in combining conservation
related programs in the Utilities Department (water, energy, solid waste).
Determine how the existing Administrative Analyst and Special Project
Manager positions should be utilized in a different organizational structure.
Provide an organization chart for the proposed new structure.
III. . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Backaround
There are a number of issues and concerns which have surrounded the
Community Development Department over the years. Some of these have recently
been articulated with the assistance of an informal community "focus group". The
group included a former Planning Commission Chairperson, a former Community
Development Director, representatives of neighborhood interests, an Architectural
Review Commission member, and a local developer.
Many of the questions and concerns regarding the Department are typical and
expected in a relatively "slow growth" community where the pressures of
development and environmental protection are in frequent conflict. However, there .
are other concerns which are unique to the Department as it is organized and
staffed today.
4 0�43
In terms of the Department's current structure, the Department consists of two
divisions, Planning and Building & Safety.
The Planning Division includes both current and advanced planning
functions, with planners sharing responsibilities in both areas. The Division
also includes a newly created Zoning Investigator position as well as
administrative and technical support functions.
The composition of the Building and Safety Division is typical of this function.
There are a total of 25.6 regular positions and, including temporaries, 29.1 FTE
positions in the Community Development Department. (Organization Chart
Attached.) Of this amount, 9.8 positions are professional planners (one principal
planner, two senior planners, and 6.8 associate/assistant planners). There are
conflicting perceptions as to whether this staffing compliment is "too few" or "too
many". Turnover of Planning staff has been low over the years, with both positive
and negative consequences.
In terms of major areas of evaluation, based on focus group input and preliminary
staff evaluation, the following four main areas need attention: (1) organizational
structure; (2) personnel and training; (3) public information/education; and (4)
procedural changes. City staff believes that items 2 through 4 are already being
addressed to a degree, and can be more fully addressed after an improved
organizational structure is in place. Therefore, the consultant will be asked to look
primarily at Item -#P61, organizational structure.
In general, the City desires a Community Development Department which is
organized to: (A) meet very high community expectations; (B) oversee a heavy
workload, and (C) to smoothly manage applications through a rigorous
development review process. In addition, the way the department performs its
responsibilities should be viewed by others as objective, consistent, and responsive
to direction.
Consultant recommendations are desired relative to the following key issues:
Key Issues for Review
Plannino Division
Determine if the existing number and type of positions are appropriate in
relationship to the existing workload (There are conflicting perceptions
regarding this issue; that is, the Department either "overstaffed" or
"overburdened").
Review organizational structure and determine what organizational changes
are necessary to:
Facilitate enhanced supervision and overall management direction
5 a—�I
ion, and
Expedite and assure consistent analysis, report preparat
decision making
Create a greater capacity for long range planning
Realign certain duties to bring greater expertise and continuity in
decision making to the current planning process
Evaluate and provide specific recommendations concerning the Principal
and Senior Planner positions, and the use and effectiveness of these
positions relative to overall departmental management and supervision
• Identify the advantages and disadvantages of the "generalist approach" for
allocating assignments among the various planner positions (i.e., each
planner having current and long range planning assignments, counter duty,
etc.), and provide a recommendation on this issue.
Identify the advantages and disadvantages of dedicating a position
specifically to assist the public with the development review process at the
public counter, and provide a recommendatidn on this issue.
Identify steps the Planning Division can take to improve its public image in
the community, including its "customer relations"with applicants and others
and its reputation as an impartial and objective organization.
• Identify the appropriate location for transportation planning functions, as
outlined under the Public Works Department "Background" discussion.
• Determine if the implementation of the Open Space Program should be
transferred to.the Recreation Department and, if so, in what time frame.
Building and Safety Division
• Determine if the Building and Safety Division is properly staffed, given
present and projected workloads, and appropriately placed in the
Community Development Department
IV. RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Background
The Recreation Department currently manages nine major recreation program
areas, including general recreation, aquatics, special instruction, trips and outings,
athletics for youth, teens, and adults, special events, and pre-school and school-
age childcare. In addition, the department schedules all City recreation buildings,
park.areas, and playfields for general public use. Recreation is also responsible
for park and' recreation capital project design and construction. Over 8,000
persons participate in City recreation programs each week. These programs are
carried out with 11 full-time regular positions. However, there are the equivalent
6
of 48.7 temporary FTE positions authorized in the Department to provide for
program leadership and coordination of various events and activities. (Organization
Chart Attached.)
In 1975, park and recreation facility maintenance responsibilities were transferred
from this department to the Public Works Department. Currently, the Public Works
Department also is responsible for Swim Center maintenance, general recreation
facility maintenance, landscape and park maintenance, and the City's
Tree Program. Whether or not the timing is appropriate to return some (e.g. the
golf course) or all of these functions to the current or a revised Recreation
Department is to be considered in the study.
In general, the City desires a Recreation Department that is progressive and
appropriately organized for the 1990's and beyond. The City's standards for
quality and the high level of programming are part of this examination. With this
in mind, consultant recommendations are desired relative.to the following key
issues:
Key Issues for Review
Is the current Recreation Department structure working adequately in
providing its existing services and programs?
If not, what organizational changes are needed to improve its existing
performance?
In particular, does the present method of operation, (i.e. fewer regular
employees and high use of part-time and temporary employees),
satisfactorily serve the needs of the Department and the program
participants?
Should the park and recreation facility maintenance functions be part of a
consolidated "Parks and Recreation Department" or, at a lesser level, should
some of these function be returned to the Recreation Department?
If consolidation is recommended, are present circumstances appropriate
for that change, or should it be deferred to a future (explicitly stated) time?
If to be deferred, what changes are needed in the existing Recreation
Department organizational structure prior to completing such a transfer?
Would it be advantageous to move the open space planner position,
currently in Community Development, to the Recreation Department? If so,
should that be done after Council adoption of the Open Space Element, for
implementation purposes?
a�
— —
Hughes, Heiss & Associates 675 Mariners Island Blvd./Suite 108 201 W. Fourth Street/Suite 205
MANAGEMENT CONSULTAN TS San Mateo. California 94404 Claremont:CA 91711
415/570-6111 FAX 415/570-5320 714/626-2014 FAX 714/626-5450
May 10, 1992
EXECUTra Sl<TIVT m
This report provides the results of our analysis of San Luis Obispo's
Community Development, Recreation and Public Works Departments. This study
had two focuses: the project team evaluated the staffing, organization and
operations of the Community Development Department; secondly, organizational
issues and alternatives were examined in the Recreation and Public Works
Departments. To complete this assignment, the study team conducted the
following steps in this project:
• Interviewed staff in each Department at all levels in each organ-
ization, including:
Conducted multiple interviews with top management and
supervisory staff in the Department for their views on key
organizational and other issues.
Conducted group meetings in each Department with line
employees and supervisory staff to elicit their views toward
organizational and other issues in their respective depart-
ments.
• Interviewed each City Council member individually to obtain their
views toward major organizational, programmatic, operational and
service level issues in each Department included in the study.
• In each department, the project team collected data portraying
trends in workload, service level indicators, and the like. In the
Community Development Department and in the Development
Services Section of the Public Works Department, this workload
analysis was in the greater detail needed to evaluate the staffing
needs in these organizations.
i
ATTACHMENT 2
In the chapters of the report, which follows this Executive Summary, the
detailed results of-this data collection and analysis is provided. In the paragraphs
below is provided a synopsis of the key findings, conclusions and
recommendations found in this report.
I. ANALYSIS OF THE COMMi_T1yi'i'y DEVELOP EPARTMENT
mea and Conclusions
• The City of San Luis Obispo has a relatively complicated development
review process. This process impacts staff time, increases costs to
the City since additional staff time cannot be covered through fees,
and lengthens processing time and frustrates the applicant.
• The "one-over-one" supervisory structure in the Planning Division
between the Principal Planner and the Senior Planner is inap-
propriate; the span of control of the Senior Planner is too broad.
• Given current workloads, staffing in the Building Inspection and
Regulation Division could be reduced. Workloads have also declined
for Current Planning in the past two years.
• Processing times for some types of current planning applications are
relatively long -- even for a quality and public input conscious city.
Typically, design review applications take eight weeks to process;
other quality conscious cities accomplish this review in four weeks.
• A Senior Planner was added to complete the Open Space Element of
the General Plan, but the role for this position is less clear once this
task is completed.
• Transportation planning and traffic operations functions are
fragmented in the City. Transportation-related responsibilities are
located in four places in the City organization (including two
divisions of the Public Works Department).
• The Planning Division utilizes "generalist" rather than "specialist"
planners which impacts their proficiency and, hence, the efficiency
of the process.
ii
a-�
• Ineffective project management approaches are utilized in
Community Development. Schedules are not defined in sufficient
detail, not updated as changes occur and staff are not held
accountable to adhere to the schedule.
• The Administrative Analyst position is not being utilized effectively.
There is little time devoted to analytical or project management
tasks.
• There have been a number of "customer service" and objectivity
issues raised by people who interact with Community Development
Department staff.
The "team" approach for current planning dilutes accountability for
projects.
Remmmendatinns
• The organizational structure of the Community Development Depart-
ment should be revised. This reorganization should be targeted to
improve processing and accountability and include the following
elements:
- An Advanced Planning Division created and headed by an
Advanced Planning Manager.
- A Current Planning Division created and headed by a Current.
Planning Manager.
- Eliminate the current positions of Principal Planner and
Senior Planner.
- There would be a net cost increase resulting from these
management staffing changes of$23,800 per year in salary and
fringe benefits.
• A "Case Planner" approach should continue to be utilized in the
Planning Division.
• Transportation planning and traffic operations should be conso-
lidated in the Public Works Department.
• Given current workloads, one Assistant/Associate Planner position
could be eliminated; if the zoning ordinance is streamlined, a second
Assistant/Associate position could be -eliminated. If both positions
were eliminated, departmental costs could be reduced by $99,800 per
year in salaries and fringe benefits.
iii
4Q
• Reduce Building Inspection and Regulation staff by three: a Building
Inspector, the Plan Check Engineer and an Office Assistant I.
Current, as well as typical workloads which were assessed by the
project team, lead to this recommendation. Annual cost-savings
associated with the reduction of these positions would be $139,000 in
salaries and fringe benefits.
• Transfer the Zoning Investigator from the Planning Division to the
Building Inspection and Regulation Division.
• Do ' not consolidate Building and Fire inspection -- assess the
successes and improvement needs of the recently implemented co-
location of inspectors first.
• A number of steps should be taken to improve customer services,
including:
Adopting a specific philosophy and staff statement.
Establishing customer services standards and measures.
Performing customer service surveys.
Providing more staff training in customer services.
• Enhance the case management system for current planning and for
advanced planning.
• Acquire an automated permit information system (at a cost of
approximately $30,000).
• If the City desires to aggressively pursue implementation of the open
space element, the Senior Planner position should be eliminated and
a new position created in the Recreation Department for imple-
mentation of the General Plan Open Space Element.
• Establish a Development Review Committee comprised of City staff
involved in the process to oversee the development review process.
• The total net savings to the City as a result of implementing the
personnel-related recommendations would be $215,000 per year.
iv
II. ORGANIZATIONAL ANAi,ysis OF THE RECREATION DEPARTMENT
�t�i 8'S and Con 1 xcinnc
• The Recreation Department in San Luis Obispo offers a wide range of
programs and services -- especially in light of operating with rela-
tively few facilities.
• The Recreation Department operates with more program managers/
supervisors than other communities its size.
• There is a lack of clarity between the roles of full-time Recreation
Coordinators and part-time Program Coordinators. In a program
oversight/coordination role, the part-time position is an unusual
organization feature.
• There are unequal programmatic spans of responsibility and control
among the three Recreation Supervisors.
• The Recreation Department in San Luis Obispo is managed in a
hands-on approach. This approach has affected the more
proactive, planning and evaluative needs in the Department and its
programs. Management approaches need to stress more formal
program and service commitments, planning and research, and
more interactive efforts among staff and the community.
• Consolidation of the Parks Maintenance Division in the Recreation
Department is not a priority alternative in comparison with internal
staff and management issues identified. While there are a number
of advantages and disadvantages associated with consolidation of
these functions, the key factor which influenced the project team in
this study was that the system was working effectively, at present,
and that any further improvements could be achieved without
consolidation.
Recommendations
• As noted above, do not consider merging the Parks Maintenance
Division with the Recreation Department at this time. It may be
desirable to re-examine the feasibility at a future time if new
managers affect the working relationship, or if it would help to
attract the best future Recreation Director.
• Responsibility for the Golf Course program should be transferred to
the Recreation Department.
v
a a�
• A reorganization of the Recreation Department should focus
on streamlining the organization by reallocated functions among
Supervisors and eliminating the part-time Program Coordinator
positions (and increasing the number of full-time Recreation
Coordinator positions). Two alternatives are presented in the report -
the difference in alternatives relates to the number of Recreation
Supervisors (two versus three). The study recommends the
alternative with three Supervisors (as in the current organization).
The principal reason for this recommendation is that it will not be
possible for the Department to address the programmatic and
management issues identified in this report if the number of
managers/supervisors is reduced. Supervisor reduction should be
re-examined at a later date once the Department's manage-
ment/programmatic issues are resolved.
• Reorganization should be accomplished at no additional cost to the
City.
• A master plan of recreational services needs to be accomplished as
soon as possible. This process needs to be analytical and public.
III. ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPART
Endings and Conclusions
• The Public Works Department is a results-oriented organization
geared toward "getting the job done". This is evidenced in Depart-
mental workload statistics for each unit.
• There are, however, a number of major issues facing the Department
and its new Director, both internally (e.g., implementing new
management systems) and externally (e.g., infrastructure renewal
and community relations). The future organization needs to focus on
these. challenges.
• As noted earlier, responsibility for traffic and transportation
functions is fragmented throughout the City and Public Works
Department.
vi
Recommendations
• Traffic and Transportation should be established as a separate
division in the Public Works Department. Consolidation of these
functions under a single manager would increase the attention and
expertise paid to a growing number of mandated and publicly
supported programs. Consolidation would group together the
following functions.
- Transportation planning.
Transit.
Traffic signal maintenance.
- Parking management.
Bike path system.
A Transportation Manager position would cost approximately $93,000
per year in salary and fringe benefits; a Transportation Planner
would cost approximately $69,900 per year. Other staff would be
reassigned to this new division from elsewhere in the organization.
As noted in the summary on the Recreation Department, conso-
lidation of Parks Maintenance functions with Recreation is not a
priority but could be re-examined in the future under changed
circumstances.
• If Parks Maintenance were transferred to the Recreation
Department at some point in the future, a single maintenance divi-
sion of remaining Public Works maintenance functions would be the
most cost-effective approach; a-two-maintenance division alternative
would increase costs by at least $70,000 per year.
• The Energy Conservation Coordinator position should be reassigned
to the Utilities Department if the City decides to make the policy
commitment to facilitate community energy conservation.
• The Solid Waste Coordinator position overseeing the City's recycling
program should also be reassigned to the Utilities Department.
vii
• The Engineering Division should assume responsibility for all design
and inspection of all capital improvement program projects in the
City. This would result in the elimination of the Parks and Building
Project Assistant and Projects Manager positions. The elimination
of these two positions would generate savings of $122,300 per year in
salaries and fringe benefits.
• The number of staff in the Technical Services Section can be reduced
by one.. This position, the Engineering Field Supervisor, is a full-time
supervisor with a limited span of control.* Responsibility for
supervising construction inspection and survey staff should fall to
the Supervising Civil Engineer in the Development Review Section.
The annual savings associated with this staff reduction would be
$61,600 in salary and fringe benefits.
• Transfer the Engineering Technician from the Development Review
Section to the Design Section.
• The Engineering Assistant assigned to the Autocad mapping system
and GIS should be eliminated upon completion of these tasks,
depending on workload. This will take one to two years to
accomplish. The annual cost-savings from eliminating this 0.75 FTE
position would be $37,200 in salary and fringe benefits.
• The next Public Works Director needs to be first and foremost an
accomplished manager; being an engineer is a lower priority.
• As with the Community Development Department, a thorough staff
program giving increased emphasis to customer services should be
developed.
• The total net savings to the City as a result of the personnel-related
recommendations in the Public Works Department would be $48,200.
The table, on the following page, summarizes the total personnel-related
changes recommended -in this study. Following the table is a proposed
implementation plan showing each task to be completed, timeframe for
accomplishing each task, and staff person responsible.
Viii
. a-a
Summary of Personnel-Related Recommendations
+/(-> Cost
Community Development
Reorganize top management $23,800
Eliminate two Assistant/Associate Planners(') (99,800)
Reduce Building Inspection by three positions(2) (139.000)
Sub-Total $(215.000)
Recreation
Reorganization of Coordinators
No Change
Add a Park Planner position(3) No Change
No Change
Public Works
Add a Transportation Manager $93,000
Add a Transportation Planner 69,900
Eliminate Parks and Building Project Assistant and Projects Manager (122,300)
Eliminate Engineering Field Supervisor (61,600)
Eliminate Engineering Assistant(4) (37,200)
Sub-Total ($48.200)
TOT'S' ( 263 200)
("One of the two positions depending on workload.
(2)The Plan Check Engineer position eliminated depending on workload.
MPosition transferred from Community Development.
('')When Autocad completed and ba-sed on workload.
The points, on the following page, summarize the project team's
recommended implementation sequence and responsibility.
ix
a a '
Community Development
Task Comnletion Date Staff Resnonsible
Recruit and hire the positions December 1992 Personnel Director
of Current Planning Man-
ager and Advanced Planning
Manager.
Eliminate a Principal Plan- December 1, 1992 Community Development
ner and Senior Planner Director
position.
Establish a Current Planning December 1, 1992 Community Development
Division and an Advanced Director
Planning Division
Eliminate an Assistant/ July 1, 1992 Community Development
Associate Planner position. Director
Develop a proposal to January 1, 1993 Community Development
streamline the zoning ordin- Director
ance.
Eliminate a second Assist- July 1, 1993 Community Development
ant/Associate Planner Posi- Director
tion upon Zoning Ordinance
streamlining.
Reduce building inspection Community Development
staffing: Director
• Office Assistant Completed
• Building Inspection July 1, 1992
• Plan Check Engineer January 1, 1993
(depending on workload)
Take steps to improve cus- January 1, 1993 Community Development
tomer service as noted in Director
report.
Enhance the case man- July 1, 1992 Community Development
agement system for current Director
planning and advanced plan-
ning.
Acquire an automated permit July 1, 1993 Community Development
information system. Director
x
- a-a,
Community Develonm .n.( .on'd)
Task Comm tion Date Staff Rec_nonsible
Establish a-Development Re- July 1, 1992 Community Development
view Committee. Director
Eliminate a Senior Planner April 1, 1993 Community Development
position upon adoption of the Director
open space element.
Transfer the Zoning Inves- July 1, 1992 Community Development
tigator to Building Inspection Director
Recreation
Task Completion Date Staff Responsible
Transfer Golf Course September 1, 1992 Recreation Director/Public
Works Director
Reorganize Recreation Super- July 1, 1992 Recreation Director
visor Responsibilities
Reorganize Recreation Coor- September 1, 1992 Recreation Director
dinators
Recreation Master Plan July 1, 1992-January 1, Recreation Director
1993
Hire a Parks Planner to April 1, 1993 Personnel Director
Implement the Open Space
Element
Public Works
Task Completion Date Staff Responsible
Recruit and Hire a Traffic December 1, 1992 Personnel Director
and Transportation Manager
and Transportation Planner
Establish a Traffic and December 1, 1992 Public Works Director/
Transportation Division Community Development Dir-
ector
xi
Public Works Cont'd)
Task Completion Date Staff Responsible
Reassign the -Energy Con- September 1, 1992 Public Works Director/Util-
servation Coordinator de- ities Director
pending on policy deter-
mination.
Reassign the Solid Waste July 1, 1992 Public Works ,Director/Util-
Coordinator to the Utilities ities Director
Department.
Do not renew the contract for July 1, 1992 Public Works Director
the position of Parks and
Building Project Assistant.
Eliminate the Projects Man- July 1, 1992 Public Works Director
ager position.
Eliminate the position of July 1, 1992 Public Works Director
Engineering Field Super-
visor.
Transfer the Engineering July 1, 1992 Public Works Director
Technician from Develop-
ment Review to Design.
Eliminate the position of July 1, 1993 Public Works Director
Engineering Assistant as-
signed to Autocad and GIS,
depending on workload.
xii
a—as
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CURRENT PLAN OF
ORGANIZATION
Community Development Department
Community Development Director
Clerical Support' Open Space Planning Planning
Senior Senior Planner Principal Planner
Administrative
Secretary
Graphics/ Building Inspection
Administration and Regulation
Administrative Chief Building
Analyst Official
Secretary Graphics Plan Checking Senior Planner
Technician
Plan Check Engineer
Office Assistant (.8) Associate
Planner (4.8)
Building Inspection Assistant
Planner (2)
Building Inspector (4) Zoning
Investigator
MMMI
Counter Services
Permit Coordinator
Secretary
Office Assistant '
2
ATTACHMENT 3
a-�5
SIT II:PROPOSED PLAN OF ORGANI7.ATION OF THE
COMM[JNrrY DEVELOPMENT DEPAR.INNT
Community Development
Department
Community Development
Director
Administrative Clerical
Support Support
Administrative Sr. Administrative
Analyst Secretary
Advanced Current Building Inspection
Planning Planning and Regulations
Advanced Planning Current Planning Chief Building
Manager Manager Official
11
�—�3e
§ )}f a
))(
_-
]aa
c
/_�\
) ]
_ �\{
� ]/I
zq �
/�
§ _ -
z -
�_
§E.
cr
k
- �-
�) }})
ƒ)$ !}\ )23
&2 3/
RECOMMENDED
EXHIBIT III-SECOND ORGANTLATIONAL
ALTERNATIVE FOR THE RECREATION
DEPARTMENT
Recreation
Director
ParksAdministrative
Planner Secretary
LOffice
Assistant
(2)
Recreation Recreation Recreation Golf
Supervisor Supervisor Supervisor Course
Athletics Programs Child Care Supervisor
Recreation Pool Recreation Recreation Recreation Recreation
Coordinator Manaeer Coordinator Coordinator Coordinator Coordinator
Athletics Aquatics Programs Facilities Child Care Trips/Events
EDIT I.• OVERALL PLAN OF MANAGEMENT AND
ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANUATION
Director of
Public Works
Projects Solid Waste
Manager Coordinator
Administrative Clerical
Analyst
ENGINEERING SUREEIS PARES& PAREING
DIVISION DIVISION LBLDGS. DIVISION DIVISION
�7 I
City Streets Parks & Bldgs. Parking
Engineer LManager Manager Manager
Design Shop Parks & Bldgs. Enforcement
Project Asst.
Technical Streets & Energy Maintenance
Services Drainage Coordinator
Pavement Trees Garage
Inspection
Maintenance 4 Operations
Paint & Misc. =(2)
Clerical
Maintenance
Survey
Golf
Development
Course
Review
Building
Clerical Maintenance
EX>ETIBIT VI:RECOMMENDED PLAN OF MANAGEMENT
AND ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION
Director of
Public oft Clerical
Analyst
ENGINEERING STREETS PARKS& TRAFFIC&TRANS.
DIVISION DIVISION BLDGS.DIVISION DIVISION
City Streets Parks & Bldgs. Traffic and Trans.
Engineer Manager Manager Manager
Design Administrative Trees Transit
Analyst
Development Streets& Parks Traffic
Review Drainage (2) Engineering
Clerical Vehicle Building Transportation
Maintenance Maintenance Planning
Paint & Misc. Parking
Maintenance
102
to
-� mid I . -1 �'�'cn
M A R T I N • BAGU E
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS
846 HIGUERA # 5 , SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 805.544.4398
1 June 1992 ����
❑•Deantes Aollm ❑ FYI
City Council CAO 0 ��
City of San Luis Obispo L�wc1►o ❑ FIRECHM
®'AT11ptnTEYFWDUL
❑ CLERK/OR1G POLICECFL
Re: Proposed reduction in staff. ❑ MCMT TEAM ❑ RSC DR
Honorable City Council Members,
It has come to our attention that the consultant hired by the City is recommending
the reduction of the building department staff. We are strongly opposed to this
reduction as it will adversely affect our business.
The building department plays a pivotal role in the process of designing and
building a structure in the City of San Luis Obispo. Our firm looks to the building
department during the design process to insure that the process goes smoothly
and that no unexpected problems will arise during the permit process. We often
request that the building officials meet with us and give opinions and
determinations that are absolutely necessary before proceeding farther with a
project. This is to insure that the life, safety and welfare of the public is provided
for and at the same time assuring the building owner that they are protected from
revisions or denials at a later date.. The building officials have always been happy
to meet with us and it has usually made the permit process easier for the official,
the architect and the owner.
During the actual building process there is also a great need to have access to the
bpilding officials. There are often conditions that arise in the field that require
an immediate decision or solution that is entirely dependent on the determination
of a building official or a building inspector. Invariably it is a decision which
affects many trades and has to be resolved quickly in order to proceed and not
cause long delays costing time and money. Access to a building official at this
point is a necessity that we can not more strongly stress. As you might expect it is
paramount to keep a construction job running smoothly without delays such as
waiting for an appointment with over loaded building officials.
With the above arguments we would strongly request that the city council
members not reduce the current size of the Building Department.
Respectfully yours,
Martin • Bague Architects
Thomas Martin Je Bague R E C E A�E
Architect chitect
JUN
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA
:TING AGENDA
DAtE ITEM#
:, T
• SIERRA CLUB %wL
SANTA UCIA CHAPTER
►O0MOl0 1, 1291
1 June 1992 P.O.Box 15755
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
City Council
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Council members:
The Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club opposes the proposed
restructuring of the Community Development, Recreation, and Public
Works Departments shown as "Organizational Analysis" on the City
Council's Monday, June 1, 1992 agenda (page 6, item 2) .
We were made aware of the completed report through one of our
members who shared her copy .with our committee on Saturday. May
30th. Some items in the report by Hughes, Heiss & Associates we
believe make sense, but several of their proposals we believe deny
public input into crucial decision-making in the City's future. We
surely do not believe the City increases the quality of democracy
by reducing the public's ability to comment officially; we believe
there are ways to speed up the permit process, but we disagree
forcefully that reducing public comment is the way to accomplish
that end.
We would like the time to prepare a detailed rebuttal to those
sections with which we disagree, and therefore suggest a 30-day
postponement for consideration of this item. We plan to have our
statement to you within 22 days.
Sincerely, p� O FYI
0 FKDM
CHM
( ACJ►flL0t=WFWQ
�C�1
64
loffia
Randall Knight C3 µ . RBCDu
Chair, Conservation Committee a RFAD=
Ir
cc: Tom Knepher, Chapter Chair
RECEIVED
RE���V'�►�
JUN - t 1992 JUN ,199
CITY L
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA
CITY CLERK . . . To explore,enjoy, and protect the notion's scenic resources . . . �QrA
a
Mr'T]NG �
�iillllll ill�l� ����III Illpllll Iill II
at ® Stuis-.oBi S
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
May 29, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: John Du
SUBJECT: Attach osal from Hughes, Heiss
A Councilmember asked for a copy of the Hughes, Heiss proposal,
which is in response to the Request for Proposal (RFP) . Any
questions, please give either Ken or me a call.
JD:mc
Attachment
n/nb
COP,VACA00
DDIL
DW
DIL
CLERK/OR>G PWC1 K RECEIVED
❑ MCMT.MM ❑ RRC G1R
a r REAr)m °�. �',�L MAY 2 9 1992
CITY COUNCIL
SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA
RECEIVED
DEC 6 1991 5:30 P
C1 TY CLERK
c'�J LU' OR;SPO. CA
Proposal for tke Review of
Community Development,Public Works
and Recreation Departments
Organization and Management Structure
December 5, 1991 Prepared by:
Gary Goelitz
Hughes, Heiss & Associates
675 Mariners Island Boulevard
Suite #108
San Mateo, CA 94404
(415)570-6111
r
® s
® a
® s
re �
® s
Hughes, Heiss & Associates 675 Manners island Blvd./Su to 108 201 W.Fourtn S;reevSu ie 205
MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS San:la1ec.Ca;'orn.a 94AC4 Claremont.CA 91711
4'15'570-6111 FAX-115i570-5320 714':626.2014 FAX 711-1626-5450
December 5, 1991
Mr. Ken Hampian
Assistant City Administrative Office
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93403-8100
Dear Mr. Hampian:
Hughes, Heiss and Associates is pleased to have the opportunity to present our proposal to
conduct an organizational and management structure analysis of the Community Development,
Public Works and Recreation Departments.
We have prepared this proposal after a careful review of your request for qualifications
and proposal. The request stated: (1) Proposals must be no longer than 10 pages; (2) The analysis
must be completed no later than March 15, 1992; and (3) The City is n.Qt seeking a highly detailed
operational analysis of these three departments. However, key issues identified by the request
regarding the Community Development Department included an assessment of staffing versus
workload.
The proposal which follows responds to these parameters. Our proposal is structured into
four major sections: (1) The first section presents the background and qualifications of our firm
and each member of the project team; (2) The second section presents the workplan for conducting
the analysis; (3) The third section presents our philosophical approach to organizational analysis;
and (4) The fourth section presents our schedule and a breakdown of the project cost.
1. BACKGROiT I)AND EXPERIENCE OF OUR FIRM AND PROJECT "M
Hughes, Heiss and Associates was established 17 years ago to provide quality
management consultant services to local governments in California and the western United
States. The basic service philosophy upon which the firm was established and will utilize for this
assignment includes the following:
• To employ senior, experienced analytical staff on all phases of our projects.
• To provide analytical experience in conducting organizational and
management audits.
• To avoid unproductive overhead on our consultant engagements. Principals of
the firm serve as project managers and working analysts on all projects. It is not
our practice to employ project managers or "partners in charge" in non-
working, oversight roles.
- To provide our clients practical and implementation study results.
With this philosophy as a base, we have completed over 700 consulting projects for 300
client agencies across California and the western United States.
We plan to conduct this analysis with a four person project team. Each member of this
team is a senior, experienced analyst with no less than sixteen years experience in analysis of
local government operations. The basic structure of the team would be as follows:
• Richard P. Brady is a partner with Hughes, Heiss and Associates and has 16
yearsmanagement consulting experience. Mr. Brady has recent experience in
analyzing public works including an analysis of the organizational structure of
the Public Works Department of the County of Alameda as well as analysis of
recreation services including the cities of San Rafael and Newark. Mr. Brady
would serve as Project Manager.
• John W. Heics is a partner of Hughes, Heiss and Associates and has 25 years,
management consulting experience. Mr. Heiss has broad experience in
analyzing complex organizational issues in the public sector and has
accomplished 25 organizational studies in the area of public works. This
includes analysis of large, complex organizations such as the Public Works
Departments for the County of Alameda, and the cities of Pasadena, Tustin, and
Santa Cruz. Mr. Heiss is currently analyzing the organizational structure of the
Public Works Department in San Buenaventura.
•
Gary Goelitz is a principal with Hughes, Heiss and has been an analyst to local
government for over eighteen years including eleven years with the firm. Mr.
Goelitz is currently conducting an operations and organizational analysis of the
Public Works Department of the City of Modesto as well as an analysis of the
development review process (Planning, Building and Engineering) for the City
of Oxnard. Mr. Goelitz has extensive experience in analysis of Public Works
services including the cities of Poway, San Rafael, Newark and San Clemente,
as well as extensive experience in analyzing Community Development services
including the cities of Novato, San Ramon, Riverside, San Mateo, Palo Alto,
Dublin, San Rafael, San Clemente and Newark.
• Richard W. Perry has nearly 25 years experience, both as a manager with and
consultant to local government. A partner of Hughes, Heiss and Associates, Mr.
Perry has taken the lead role in more than 80 executive recruitments conducted
by our firm. Prior to joining Hughes, Heiss and Associates, Mr. Perry has
extensive experience as a line manager serving as Director of Parks and
Recreation for the City of Belmont, Assistant Planning Director for San Mateo
County and the Manager of The Sea Ranch.
Each member of this four person analytical team would conduct on-site interviews of staff
of the City of San Luis Obispo. Mr. Perry, however, would be focused on interviews with the City
Administrative Officer and the City Council. . Messrs. Brady, Heiss and Goelitz would be focused
on interviews of top and middle managers as well as first-line supervisors.
Listed below are Hughes, Heiss and Associates projects relevant to the proposed
organizational analysis. A client reference has been provided for each assignment described. It
is important to note that the projects referenced below have all involved one or more members of the
proposed project team.
• City of Pacadena: Management and operations audit of the Public Works
Department including an analysis of the organizational structure.
Reference: Mr. Edward Aghjayan
General Manager
Public Utilities Department
City of Anaheim
(foi-mer Deputy City Manager of Pasadena)
(714)999-5173
• .o ante of Alameda. Conducted an analysis of the organizational structure of the
Public Works Department.
Reference: Mr. Don LaBelle
Public Works Director
(510)670-5455
• City of Santa Cruz. Conducted an analysis of the organizational structure of the
Public Works Department including its water utility.
Reference: Mr. Dick Wilson
City Manager
(408)429-3540
•
City of San Clemente. Conducted a city-wide management and operations audit
including street maintenance, building inspection, engineering, planning,
building inspection, and parks and recreation.
Reference: Mr. Mike Parness
City Manager
(714)361-8322
• City of Tustin. Analyzed the organization and management/supervisory
staffing of the Public Works Department.
Reference: Mr. Bill Huston
City Manager
(714)544-8890
• City of Galt Lake City. Comprehensive analysis of all programs and services of
this large department. Included survey of community attitudes regarding park
characteristics and maintenance service levels.
Reference: Mr. John Gust
Director
(801)972.7800
• North Bakersfield Parks and Recreation Dictrict -- Operations Review and
Program Evaluation. Management analysis and program evaluation of all
aspects of operations of this large district.
Reference: Ms. Jean Messmer/Barbara Gardner
Board Members
(805)392-2000
• City of San Mateo. Survey of applicant attitudes of planning and building
inspection/regulation services.
Reference: Ms. Barbara Kautz
Community Development Director
(415)377-3360
• City of San Ramon. Management audit of Building Inspection including staff
productivity, permit processing service levels, and plan checking and inspection
standards. Included survey of applicant attitudes.
Reference: Mr. Rich Bottarini
former Planning and Building Director
now Community Development Director
of Pleasant Hill
(510)671-5209
• City of Cunertino. Conducted management audits of the Planning and the
Building Inspection Divisions including staffing, filing systems, automation,
and opportunities to streamline the development review process. The project also
addressed building inspection utilization and inspection scheduling practices.
Reference: Mr. Bob Cowan
Community Development Director
(415)25214505
Please contact any or all of these references regarding the quality of our work.
2. OUR. APPROA .A TO THF. ANALYSTS OF ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
STRUCTURE.
This section provides a description of how we would conduct the project.
Task 1 -- Develop an Initial Understanding of the Overall Plan of Organization and
Maior Management and Administration Systems.
In this initial work task, the consulting team will conduct a variety of tasks to
become thoroughly familiar with how these three departments are organized and
function. To develop this understanding, we would accomplish the following:
• Conduct individual interviews with the City Administrative Officer, members of
the City Council, and City employees outside of these three departments as
identified by the City Administrative Officer.
• Conduct individual interviews with 211 managers and supervisors in these three
departments. These interviews would focus on such issues as:
Identify basic work responsibilities.
Basic management, supervisory and administrative work-load and
allocation of available time by task and responsibility.
Documenting all reporting relationships and spans of control.
Documenting each manager's and supervisor's attitudes toward key
strengths and weaknesses of the existing organization.
• We would also conduct group interviews with selected start' in employee units.
These discussions would focus on key organiza-tional and management issues
from the perception of line employee levels.
• We would review basic documents which describe the support the organization
and its management, administrative and communication systems. These
documents include:
Mission statements and goals and objectives for each organizational
unit and for the departments as a whole.
Classification descriptions and other documents which describe the
responsibilities of management and supervisory staff.
'.Management reports used to monitor organizational performance.
Prior organizational and management studies.
The result of the work performed in this task would be a descriptive profile of the
organization of these three departments and their major management, administrative
and communications systems. We would review this document with top management
staff. This important first step will form the base against which to evaluate
organizational alternatives.
Task 2 -- Conduct an Organizational Strate?iec and Alternatives Workchon Tnvoh-in?
Renr\--gentativeg from Thimughout the D n rtm n .c.
Review of workload and written plans can provide only a limited perspective of a
complex organization's goals, objectives and service strategies. To thoroughly evaluate
these three departments' abilities to meet organizational challenges and issues, the
project team needs to pursue in-depth the goals of individuals within the organization and
the extent to which these individual goals are consistent with the goals of the organization.
Individual interviews conducted in the first task of this phase of the project are important
initial steps. We propose that we conduct a workshop with representatives from all levels
of the three departments to discuss important organizational and management issues
facing the departments. We would want to accomplish the following:
• Help define their attitudes and perceptions regarding the future direction of the
departments.
• Provide all participants an opportunity to discuss each of their roles regarding:
Service levels.
Service philosophies and objectives.
Internal communications.
The future direction of the departments.
Constraints perceived by each participant and how these may be
resolved.
Inter-unit cooperation
• Provide an opportunity to begin to shape a plan by which the organization, its
managers and staff can cooperatively act to address a number of key issues,
including:
The ability to attract and retain top quality people.
The goals and objectives of the departments and how work conforms with
these goals and can be measured.
The efficiency of internal communications and how to facilitate this in
the future.
How to involve all levels in the organization in issue identification and
problem-solving.
These and other critical issues will be addressed in the workshop. Once
completed, the workshop results will be employed by the consultants as guidance for
subsequent analysis of overall organization and management structure.
Task 3 — Evaluate Chani .atinnal Tssuec and Evaluate PrelimiriaryAlternatiyeq_
In this third work task, the project team will evaluate the issues developed in the
earlier work tasks. While it is not possible to predict actual issues before accomplishing
these tasks, a variety of issues would be addressed, including the follo'Aing:
• Does the current organizational structure help or hinder the departments ability
to meet challenges in the future?
• Is the management organization too "flat" or too "layered" with unnecessary
mid-management levels?
• Are there 'one-over-one" management staffing patterns in which a manager
reports to another without.additional staff or program responsibilities?
• Are functions placed too high or too low in the organization in relation to their
importance?
• Are spans of management and supervisory control too broad or too limited?
• Should park maintenance be placed in the Public Works Department or in the
Recreation Department?
• Should transportation and transportation planning functions be consolidated the
Public Works Department?
• Should building maintenance be part of the Parks and Building Division or a
separate unit?
• Should the Open Space Planner position be placed in the Community Development
Department or in the Recreation Department?
• Are lines of authority and responsibility clear to all supervisory and
management personnel and to the employees in the organizational units?
• Are management and supervisory personnel spending their time on high .
priority tasks and responsibilities?
• Should planning staff be generalists involved in both current and long range
planning or specialists?
Based on the answers developed to the questions/issues posed above, the study
team will develop preliminary alternative plans of organization and management
staffing. We will review the results of these issues analysis and preliminary
organizational implications with the top management. This analysis and review will
provide the basis for our final analysis of organizational alternatives.
Task — Evaluate Staffing Verus Workload for the Community Develonment
Den rtrn n ..
This fourth component of the analysis involves an evaluation of staffing
requirements for the Planning Division and the Building and Safety Division. We will
address this issue by employing several different approaches including the following:
• Workload data will be collected and analyzed to provide relevant input to the staff
utilization equation. This would include reviewing the application processing
volume data in light of standards developed for the amount of staff time required
to process these applications, as well as building inspection workload.
• Identify what key projects or work tasks are not being accomplished due to lack of
staff.
• Evaluate the adequacy of major work practices within the Department. This
analysis would focus on how these staff are utilized, the types of tasks these staff
perform, whether opportunities exist to eliminate or simplify some of the tasks
performed by these staff, and the like.
Analysis of these issues will result in the development of detailed
recommendations for improving staff utilization to include:
• Specific staffing required given acceptable utilization levels.
• Specific levels of service which can be enhanced (e.g., long-range planning) if
work methods are simplified or eliminated.
• Specific steps which need to be taken to reach reasonable utilization levels to
include:
Specific changes in existing work methods and practices.
Where appropriate, specific tasks which could be eliminated with
positive impact on staff utilization.
Task 5 -- Evaluate Onnortunitinc to Imnrov the uctom r R lationc"Within the
Planning Division and the Public Works Department.
This task would focus on the adequacy of communication with applicants (e.g.,
requirements for an application to be deemed complete), and opportunities to improve
customer relations and their image with the public. In completing this task, a number of
analytical techniques will be utilized including the following:
• Review handout materials utilized to determine their usefulness and
understandability.
Compare these handouts to others utilized by other municipalities to contrast the
type and extent of information provided.
J
• Spend time with the "Planner of the Day" at the counter to get a "quick read" on
the quality of instructions and information provided at the counter.
• Document the extent of use of pre-application conferences to communicate
requirements for complete applications to land use applicants.
• The extent to which the Planning Division requires applicants with large or
controversial development proposals to hold public meetings prior to submittal of
their application to elicit community input and develop a more acceptable
development proposal.
• The extent to which the Planning Division and Public Works Department use
newsletters to communicate with the public.
The product of this task would be a specific plan of action to improve the customer
relations of the Planning Division and the Public Works Department.
Task 6 -- Develon a Recommended Plan of Ormanization n-ith Detailed Ste-pc Needed to
T.nnlement Alternative StrucMTvc.
In this final analytical step, the study team will finalize the results of the data
collection, interviews and analysis conducted in all previous work steps. We will
provide several alternative organizational plans, as appropriate, making a
recommendation for the plan which, in our opinion, best meets the objectives of the
organization. To accomplish this, our report and recommendations will include the
following:
• Outline the goals and objectives of the three departments.
• Describe the current organizational structure and issues identified in .our
analysis which impede the departments in meeting their goals.
• Provide alternative organizational structures which remedy these issues. Each
alternative would include:
Description of the alternative together with the roles which each manager
and supervisor would play.
A summary of our analysis of why each alternative represents an
improvement on the existing organizational structure. Disadvantages
would also be identified.
• A detailed cost comparison of each organizational alternative versus the existing
organizational structure would be provided.
• A recommendation of a plan of organization and its justification.
• A plan of implementation would be identified which would provide the
departments with a step-by-step to get from 'Point A" to "Point B". This
implementation plan would include:
Transitional costs.
Responsibilities of each manager in accomplishing transition.
Attrition planning, as appropriate.
Recruitment plans, as appropriate.
Year-by-year and long-range cost comparisons.
This analysis will constitute our final report on the subject of the three
departments organizational requirements. We will develop this report in draft farm and
review this with top management. Upon review, we will finalize this report and make
presentations, as appropriate.
3. OUR PEMOSOPHI :_ L APPROACH TO ORGA RATION L- N LYSIS
Analysis of organizational structure has the ability to generate a great deal of anxiety on
the part of the managers involved in the study, as it pertains to possible disagreements over "turf'.
To counteract these problems, we use an approach that maximizes managerial and supervisory
input. We view this involvement as critical not only to defining "turf' issues, but also to build a
basis for 'buy in" of any recommended changes and to gain acceptance on the part of these staff to
the revised plan of organization. We would propose to do this by:
• Extensive one-on-one interviews down to the level of supervisor.
• Use of a project steering committee consisting of key managerial and
supervisory representatives to review and consider organizational alternatives
before any final recommendation is considered (as well as the final
recommendation itself).
• Conduct of a strategic planning workshop to assess the future direction of the
departments, the strengths and weaknesses of the current organization to meet
the challenges of the future, alternative forms of organization and their strengths
and weaknesses relative to the challenges presented in the future, etc.
• Group interviews with many of the line employees of the departments, seeking
their input regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the current plan of
organization.
The approach utilized for this study is critical to the successful implementation of
recommendations contained in the study.
4. PR06JECT SCHEDULE ND QOST
The project cost for the analysis of the Public Works, Recreation, and Community
Development Departments is 528,940. The table below presents the staff hours by project team
member which would be allocated to this analysis as well as the costs of these staff hours and
reimbursable expenses.
(1) Pmfe«ionalStaff Time Allocation
rt �� _ StaffDa�c
. - 1�TaskEradv Heiss Goplitz
• Develop an initial under-
standing 3 3 1 1
• Conduct an organizational
and strategies and alterna- 0 2 0 0
tives workshop.
• Evaluate organizational
issues and evaluate alter-
natives. 3 2 0 1
• Evaluate staffing versus
workload for Community
Development. 0 0 0 3
• Evaluate opportunities to
improve customer relations. 0 0 0 2
• Develop a recommended
plan of organization. $ 4 4 1
TOTAL
(2) Proiect.Coct Estimate
Cost per
Professinnal Staff Time Hours Hour Clot
Richard Brady 72 8100 $7,200
John W. Heiss 88 100 8,800
Richard Perry 8 100 800
Gary GoelitzR� 90 Lm
Reimbursable Exnencey
Transportation/Subsistence $5,420
Clerical support 9,�Q
TOTAL COST 529.940
(3) Proiect SchedLe
We would complete this analysis -- as requested in your request for
qualifications and proposal -- by March 15, 1992. The preliminary schedule for this
analysis is as follows:
Task Completion
• Develop an initial understanding December 23 January 10
• Conduct an organizational
strategies and alternatives
workshop January 13 January 24
• Evaluate organizational issues
and evaluate alternatives January 27 February 7
• Evaluate staffing versus workload
for Community Development January 13 February 7
• Evaluate opportunities to improve January 13 February 7
• Develop a recommended plan of February 7 February 28
organization.
If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact me at (415) 570-6111. We
hope we have the opportunity to present our qualifications and review our approach with the
selection committee.
Sincerely yours,
�'&�
Gary Goelitz HUGHES,HOSS&ASSOCIATES-)
Principal San Mateo
RECEIVED
2 1992 MEETING AGENDA
MpY �
DATE� Z
CI UNCIL
SAN Lu ISPo._CcA
. COPIF5 TO:
May 19, 1992 ❑•Demo Ammon
Caunw
0 ❑ FIN.MX
To: Mayor Ron Dunin ACAo ❑ RUCHW
vice-mayor Penn Ra a TTOR Y 0 r-WDIX
Y Y PP CLMK/OR C. ❑ POUC EC K
Councilwoman Peg Pinard ❑ MCMT.TE4M ❑ RECDIR.
Councilman Bill Roalman ❑ CRFADRU ❑ [nILDIR.
Councilman Jerry Reiss ��� D' q�
Subject: Analysis of Community Development, Recreation and Public Works
Department, by Hughes, Heiss & Associates as it effects the Engineering
Division.
The named report recommends the elimination of the Engineering Field Supervisor
position. The gentleman currently occupying this position is Tom Gingg. Mr. Gingg has
dedicated 35 years of public service to this City. At a recent retirement banquet for Dave
Romero, this type of long term dedication was recognized by the community as the
foundation for continuity in the organization. Without this type of dedicated employee, the
City will be reinventing the wheel over and over again.
The report is incorrect in some areas, implying that this position is strictly a "supervisory"
position; this is a farce. Mr. Gingg is actively involved in many phases of private and
public projects review and inspection. He is an asset to the operations/productivity
of this Division which will be adversely affected by his absence. Similarly, Mr. Kenny's
position (Development Review Section, Supervising Civil Engineer) is not strictly
"supervisory". He is very involved in the plan check process, as well as other required
duties. To add the Technical Services Section to his present workload, as indicated in
the report, would render him less efficient and will cause delays in development review
processing.
It was just 10 years ago that the City paid an outside consultant to evaluate City
operations and staffing levels. The result of that study (Ralph Anderson Report, 1982),
as it relates to the Engineering Division, recognized the unique nature and functions of
the Field Engineering Supervisor, Public Works Inspectors and Survey Crew. The report
recommends, on page 45:
"It is recommended that the following organizational changes occur within the
Engineering Division:
Establish a Technical Services Section, headed by the current position of
Engineering Feld Supervisor, with a reporting relationship directly to the City
Engineer."....
The Hughes, Heiss & Associates report recommends regressing into a staffing structure
of a decade past. How many times must we spend the taxpayers money before we
understand that a circle is round. This is certainly not improvement nor is it progress.
Many of us attended the Council meeting where you passed Resolution No. 7030 (1991
Series) which increased development fees quite substantially. With this increase in
development fees, you guaranteed the community improved levels of service. The
elimination of the Field Engineering Supervisor position will suppress the Public Works
Department's ability to provide timely inspections. This is in direct conflict with the
guarantee of "improved levels of service" communicated to the public.
The employees of this Division are in disagreement with the report's recommendation to
eliminate the Field Engineering Supervisor position and place the remainder of the
Technical Services Section under the supervision of the Development Review Section's
Supervising Civil Engineer. The City has an extremely valuable investment in Mr. Gingg
which cannot be replaced when gone. A responsible government must consider the loss
of long term investments wisely and with great care. Improvement to City operations
must ALWAYS be a primary goal of City staff, City Council and the community. Deleting
the Field Engineering Supervisor's position is not a step in this direction.
G�-
r
v
MLLANG AGENDA
DATE ITEM #
May 21, 1992
IPIFSTO:
DeiotnAcdon ❑ FYI Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director
Z Connell aCDD DIP, John Dunn, City Administrative Officer
D SAO ❑ FN.mx Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer
ZACA0 ❑ FmCHIEF Ann McPike, Personnel Director
CQ'ATrcRNEY 0 Fw DIR
12 CMK/OPJC. ❑ POLICEQ-l. ,
IfB(iJWT.TEAm C (FEC Dix Terry Sanville, Principal Planner
❑ CRTEADFIIE r unLDIX
The Reorganization Study as if effects changes in the Planning
Division in the Community Development Department.
OVERVIEW
I would like to take this opportunity to comment on the reorganization study prepared by
Hughes, Heiss and.Associates and request that these comments be made available to the
City Council prior to their June 1, 1992 meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to
contact me.
I feel that the reorganization study is insightful and has identified may important changes.
I believe the changes in the structure of the planning function can allow for better program
management and accountability by reducing the span of control of those managing the
current and advance planning functions.
It is interesting to note that several of the concepts proposed by the consultant have
occurred in the past in the Community Development Department. For example, the "two
division" concept (current and advanced planning) was in fact present in our department
roughly between 1978 and 1983. That structure changed when Toby Ross became
Community Development Director and a more generalist staffing strategy was employed.
Given our current and upcoming work load challenges, it is time for change. I believe that
the two division concept can work but will need to remain flexible to address changing work
loads and Council priorities.
Many of the concepts suggested by the consultant were also ideas identified by City staff.
Unfortunately, the report does not acknowledge that staff is active and supportive of change
to the current system. (I can provide documentation of this involvement.) To accomplish
structural change, however, requires.top management sponsorship and perseverance. Since
Mr. Ross left the department.in 1987, the focus of top department management has not
been on operational issues.
Finally, I would hope that the consultant's analysis would have included interviews with
"non-professional" developers (eg. applicants of one-time administrative permits) and the
general public to determine whether they were treated fairly and their permits processed
expeditiously. Since administrative permits are targeted as a potential area of change
(which I agree with) and are one of the most numerous types of permits issued, further
research may have helped to establish a broader picture of staff relations with department
clientele and with the public at large.
The following are more specific comments about the reorganization study:
REC , �
MAY 2 71992
clTv 6i_LRK .
cera I r ns OBISPO,CA
SPECIFIC C01%4MENTS
1. (Page 1) The Senior Open Space Planner reports to the Director. The availability
of the Director to review documents and manage the program has been limited. To
provide support, the Principal Planner has reviewed draft reports and provided
feedback. The creation of an "Advance Planning Manager" recommended by the
Consultants should help address this access concern.
The Senior Open Space Planner was hired to prepare more than the Open Space
Element. Updating of the Conservation Element (1973) and the Parks and
Recreation Element (1982) were also her responsibilities after the Open Space
Element was completed. The report acknowledges other more focused projects (eg.
Laguna Lake Plan and the Creek Ordinance). However, additional work elements
that were considered part of the Senior Planner's work responsibility included the
preparation of a street landscaping plan (previously managed by Randy Rossi), and
preparation of an "Urban Trails Plan" called for by the draft Circulation Element.
These additional advance planning projects will have to be reassigned to the
proposed advance planning division; or the Senior Planner position retained until
they are completed; or the responsibilities for doing this work assigned to the new
position in the Recreation Department or in some cases to the new transportation
division in Public Works department; or deleted from the City's advance planning
work program.
2.. (Page 2, Existing Organizational Chart) As with most diagrams, this chart does not
encompass all of the functional relationships between positions. Notably, the
Principal Planner routinely meets with the Administrative Analyst to review
department work and identify graphic and technical services needs. This is one of the
reasons why the Principal Planner is responsible for preparing performance
appraisals for this position.
3. (Page 3, paragraph 3) As previously noted, the consultant's might have talked to
"non-professional" applicants concerning the expediency and fairness of the review
process. This feedback should supplement comments made by professional
developers.
4.' (Page 4, paragraph 1) The report cites the complexity of our development review
process as a major concern. I agree (as do most department staff) and fully support
the evaluation of our existing zoning regulations to identify incremental changes that
can improve streamlining. Staff has already begun to identify components of the
zoning regulations that need improvement.
I do not feel that incremental measures will address a larger concern: the overlap
and duplication of our development review process. Issues of overlapping authority
have not been addressed to date. Complicated projects may involve approvals from
two separate commissions (Planning Commission and ARC), the City Council, and
even the Administrative Hearing Officer. All of these actions require public
hearings. To significantly streamline the system will require elimination of these
overlaps and a consolidation of authority and responsibility.
In the past, I have suggested to department management and administration that the
City pursue a two commission system:
A. Planning Commission: Advance Planning. This would be the group that
maintains the general plan and would conduct ongoing policy research and
development.
B. Planning Commission: Current Planning. This commission would act on land
use permits and be. responsible for design review. It would absorb the
responsibility for reviewing use permits and replace ARC.
I believe this two commission system can work. (My thesis in Public Administration
presents a strategy for establishing such a system.) Incidentally, the two commission
approach would mirror the "two division" approach being recommended by the
Consultant for the Community Development Department. The Advance Planning
Division's work program (recommended by the Consultant) could also become the
Commission's work program, all of which would be approved by the City Council.
As a final note, State law allows communities to establish more then one Planning
Commission and, although not a common practice, there are some communities in
the.California that have done so.
5. (Page 4, last paragraph) Some of the land uses cited by the Consultant require use
permits before they can be established in the Central Commercial Zone. This
specific use permit requirement is a method of implementing current General Plan
policies which give preference to retail sales uses on the ground floor in the
Commercial Core. If the City wants to eliminate these policy preferences and allow
for a wider mixture of uses, then the use permit requirements for a number of non-
retail uses in the downtown can also be eliminated. In sum, in some cases the City
has used its use permit process to ensure consistency with broader planning policies
embodied in the General Plan. This may not be a traditional function of
"conditional use permits," hence the Consultants misinterpretation of our zoning
regulations.
This section of the report also indicates that the use permit process is redundant
because the planning staff sees these projects during the plan checking process.
Since the plan checking process is a "administerial process" the planning staff cannot
unilaterally establish "discretionary conditions" at that point to ensure the
compatibility of a particular use. We do not have the legal discretion to do so.
Clearly, the decision is to permit the use outright without discretionary review, or
require some type of discretionary review -- which could be less stringent then is
now required. However, since many small scale use permits do not require ARC
or other approvals, administrative hearings are often the only opportunity for public
participation. The City will need to determine whether there is a valid need for
public participation for these small scale projects as well as the need for technical
review for compliance with City land use policies.
6. (Page 6, Staffing .of Building Division) Recently the City Council indicated an
interest in considering a"Property Maintenance Program"suggested by Residents for
Quality Neighborhoods (reference Council direction at its May 19th meeting). When
evaluating staffing level needs in the building division, the Council should understand
how current enforcement activities and potential future responsibilities will impact
staff levels.
7. (Page 6, paragraph 4, Processing Time is too Long) The consultants comments are
insightful and a "one meeting process" for small and intermediate size ARC projects
should work well. Making it work will require discipline, a shared responsibility of
the ARC, Planning Commission, City Council and staff.
For some of the more complicated projects (eg. annexations, example, Stoneridge
II), if the City Council feels that a "streamlined process" is of paramount concern,
then some General Plan policies may also have to be changed.
8. (Page 7, Senior Open Space Planner Has no Agenda) When the City first hired
Randy Rossi as the contract Open Space Planner, the department had prepared a
specific work program which included time frames and expected outcomes and
products. Over time this work program and expectations has changed. I agree with
the Consultants recommendation elsewhere in the report that advance planning work
programs should be prepared and endorsed by the City Council. Work programs can
be used to clarify Council expectations, achieve agreement on the process, and
improve accountability. (See also Comment #1.)
9. (Page 8, Ineffective Project Management of Advance Planning) As previously
mentioned, the ability maintain project schedules is a shared responsibility. I have
no problem with establishing specific "production" deadlines for staff work and being
accountable for these deadlines. However, once public review begins (especially for
controversial policy documents), staffs ability to mandate specific performance is
severely diminished. Council adoption of work programs at the beginning of the
process can providing direction to its advisory commissions and committees on
process expectations.
10. (Page 12, Transportation Planning) I agree that transportation planning and
management should be consolidated and have personally suggested this for some
time. In reviewing the proposal for consolidation, there were several questions
about how the proposals on page 82 will be carried out by the staffing plan shown _.
on page $1.
A. Who will be responsible for traffic monitoring and maintenance of the
computer traffic model. (Note: the draft Circulation Element calls for
maintenance of the model.)
B. Who will be responsible for alternative transportation activities?
C. Who will be responsible for promotional programs for transit, bicycle,
pedestrian transportation?
D. Who will be responsible for grant programs for various transportation capital
projects?
E. How does Circulation Element updating interface with the work of the
Advance Planning Division in the Community Development Department?
I'm sure that further refinement of the concept will sort out these questions. It
might be helpful if the new division were required to prepare a work program
(similar to the CDD Advance Planning Division) that outlines division activities for
each fiscal year. The work program could be reviewed by the Council to receive
support for recommended programs and priorities.
11. (Page 13, Bicycle Coordinator) Is the bicycle coordinator's position being created
as a permanent half-time position? The Consultant's recommendations are unclear.
If the Transportation Division is involved in a variety of alternative transportation
programs, maybe the role of this position should be expanded to deal with ride
sharing, trip reduction programs and the like. This expanded scope would probably
warrant a full-time position.
12. (Page 21, staffing levels for the planning division) This is probably one of the more
sensitive issues addressed in the report. Based on current work loads, I believe that
the Consultant's recommendation for the reduction of one position can be justified.
However, beyond that point,;I would encourage the City to proceed with caution.
The Consultant has indicated that a second position might be eliminated if the City
revises and streamlines its zoning regulations. I believe that streamlining the process
will in fact reduce work loads and staffing demands. However, the extent of this
reduction will depend on community and Council acceptance of zoning ordinance
changes and agreement on the appropriate balance between community access to
the process and efficiency of the process.
The executive summary of the report suggests that the Zoning Ordinance be
streamlined and the second assistant/associate planner be eliminated by July 1, 1993.
The elimination of the second position is contingent upon achieving work load
reductions as part of the zoning ordinance streamlining process. I would suggest that
at that point in time the City also evaluate ocher work load increases that may be
coming on line.
For example, the draft Housing Element(targeted for adoption in 1992) suggests that
the City become active in housing programs. _This is also true of the Land Use
Element and Open Space Elements targeted for adoption before July 1, 1993.
Implementation of the Noise Element and the Circulation Element will, to some
degree, also involve the Community Development Department. And finally, if the
City pursues the adoption of a Downtown Plan (which is beginning processing at this
time), specific implementation planning could be significant.
A suggested strategy would be for the Council to review a "planning division" work
program in late spring or early summer of 1993 and make decisions about further
staff reductions based on the scope of that program and priorities set by the Council
and other budget considerations at that time, assuming zoning ordinance changes had
been adopted.
13. (Page 30, last paragraph, Processing Schedules and Time Frames for Permits) I
agree that setting target processing times is a good idea. For any single "free
standing" application this is possible and desirable to do. However, when multiple
applications apply (eg.subdivisions, architectural review,use permits,etc.) to a single
project, setting processing deadlines becomes more involved and not easily addressed
at the public counter when the applications are received. When the City streamlines
its regulations (as suggested by the Consultants) it should look more closely at how
applications effecting different aspects of the same project might be consolidated or
eliminated. For example:
A. If a use permit and design review is required, enable the design review body
act on both elements of the project. This seems appropriate since the design
and site planning of new structures often affectsthe compatibility of
"conditional" uses.
B. Allow the design review body to act on condominium subdivisions and
planned development applications since their design is contingent on the site
planning of structures.
C. Collapse all"exception"and"variance"requests into the design review function
when it involves new buildings.
These types of changes may not be considered "minor" in scale. Creating the "two
commission" system that I have previously suggested could enable this collapsing of
steps and achieve significant efficiencies in processing complicated projects.
14. (Page 32, Target Processing Times) I think it an excellent idea to establish target
processing times. However, we should realize that some of the targets suggested by
the Consultants (Administrative Hearing Items, Variances) may reflect an actual
increase from current response times. If this is acceptable to the City, then the
targets suggested by for other types of applications may be achievable.
I feel that establishing processing times by staff is possible when staff has
management control over the decision process (eg. Administrative Hearings,
Variances, Parcel Maps). However, when public hearings are required, the actual
processing time may vary widely depending on public and commission response to
the proposal.
It occurs to me that maybe the Consultant is talking about "staff processing time" on
page 32. If this is the case, it should be clarified; in general staff could meet the
suggested targets.
15. (Page 32, Updating General Plan Schedules) The report indicates that general plan
processing schedules are not updated. This updating occurs as part of the "goals
reporting program" administered by the City administrative staff. I'm not sure
whether the Consultant was aware of this process or how the frequency of goals
reporting has changed over time.
I think the preparation of annual advance planning work programs is a good
idea. However, as changes in workload occur throughout the year (eg. new projects
assigned), I believe the work program should be amended and priorities again
evaluated by the Council at that point.
16. (Page 34, Acquire Automated Permit Information Software) I'm not sure the City
needs to spend $30K on computer software. The department already has an
computerized building permit system that automatically calculates fees. We have
recently established an automated planning application process where fees are set,
planners assigned,target dates for hearings established and a project tracking process .
initiated. I believe that better use of these existing systems and expansion of these
systems can achieve the "accountability" objectives suggested by the Consultant. The
project tracking component of the system (which is connected to our"permit history"
and "land use data" files) could be improved and that tracking of building permits
established.
I appreciate the Consultants ideas and suggestions; it supports the basic direction
that staff has been moving for some time.
FINAL NOTE
Given the limited time I have had to comment, I apologize for the "roughness" of some
of my observations and suggestions. However, I felt that it is important for Administration
and the Council to understand that, with refinement, the Consultant's suggestions are
workable. After discussing the reorganization proposal with the planning staff, I feel that
there is support for the concepts. Staff feels that the reorganization provides an opportunity
to improve public service and the quality of planning and that it is not the final step in that
process.
I appreciate.the opportunity to participate.
TS:ts
cc Planning Staff
MEETING AGENDA
May 26, 1992 DATE ffEM.#
Dear Mayor Dunin:
We of the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department
were shocked and dismayed with the conclusions reached by Hughes,
Heiss and Associates of San Mateo for the restructuring of our
Division. Why dismantle a system that is working well?
Each of our section managers are working managers which seemingly
was overlooked in the report. With only two supervisors and a
larger staff to supervise, their usual work load will have to be
delegated to others within the section, who already have a full
work load. Add to that the loss of one very experienced and
long-time City employee who oversees bath office and field work,
together with his own projects brings me to the conclusion that
this study and recommendation in our case is badly flawed.
It is obvious to me, and I hope to you, that this will cut down
on our production when more production will be needed due to
handling some of the Street Division project. I hope that you
reject the recommendations affecting the Engineering Division and
stick to the main concerns of the study.
My major criticism is the ethics involved or lack of it in this
report. How dare anyone just terminate a person who has 35 years
experience with the City, is only 54 years old, and is doing a
good job. Social justice is required of those who are
responsible for stability in our community. This City Government
has been and must continue to be a leader in this area. If jobs
must be phased out, it should be done over a long period of time,
i.e 2-5 years. This insures individual security, but most of all
family and community stability.
Our basic needs are these:
1. Work--which provides a justsalary for food, housing, medical
insurance and sufficient retirement income.
2. Educational opportunities--After 35 years of work for the
City, Tom Gingg if terminated, would lose his medical
insurance and a decent retirement income. Our retirement
system is based on 2% at 60, not 55, and we are in effect
penalized if we retire before 60 years of age.
An operational study that does not take business ethics into
account is incomplete. Therefore it is now on the shoulders of
you, the City Council, to see that social justice and ethics are
complied with.
O rArIURNEY
S' cerely,, ,�,� ❑ �7
Ernie Miller Z RECEIVED 0 ��
M AY 2 6 1992 ❑
c: John Dunn C�Ti CLERK 4o� ❑ �Q{
City Council Members SAN LUIS OLF_R O,.CA p CCMLiFAAo(QO W UX
QTT�o� UnL