Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/29/2000, 1 - MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW council j acEnba Repoin In.Na" CITY OF SAN LUIS O B IS FROM: Bill Statler,Director of Finance Prepared By: Linda Asprion,Revenue Manager Carolyn Dominguez,Accounting Manager SUBJECT: MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW CAO RECOMMENDATION ■ Consider the mid-year budget review for 1999-01. ■ Approve mid-year budget requests for operating programs and capital improvement plan projects totaling$536,600 in 1999-00 and$140,000 in 2000-01 summarized as follows: 1999-00 2000-01 General Fund Other Funds General Fund Other Funds Operating programs 229,000 9,000 110;000 Capital Improvement Plan 167,100 121,500 30,000 Total 3969100 130,500 1109000 309000 DISCUSSION Overview—How Are We Doing? While the enclosed mid-year budget review takes a comprehensive look at our financial condition and trends at the mid-point of the fiscal year, the following briefly answers.the question "how are we doing." Overall, our updated projections compare very favorably with the 1999-01 Financial Plan projections. Key revenues throughout the General Fund are performing very well compared with budget estimates (largely due to an improving local economy), and expenditures are generally on- target with our projections. These two factors—improved revenues and contained costs—result m General Fund balances at the end of 1999-01 that are stronger than original Financial Plan projections. While a number of fiscal challenges continue to face us,the simple fact is that we are in a better position today to meet these challenges than we have been since the very early 1990's. ■ Ending general fund balance. We will end 1999-01 with a General Fund balance of$6.1 million. This is $1.2 million greater than estimated in the 1999-01 Financial Plan; and represents an ending balance that is 25% of operating expenditures compared with our minimum fund balance policy of 20%. ■ Future prospects. In short, we have an improved fiscal situation; and because of this,there will be interest in considering enhanced programs and new CIP projects in orderto more 1-1 Council Agenda Report-Mid-Year Budget Review Page 2 fully address adopted goals,policies and plans. However, we need to put this in context of our longer-term goals as already set forth in the third and fourth years of our adopted capital improvement. For example, the average annual General Fund contribution to the CEP (excluding equipment replacements and debt-financed projects) is $4.4 million for 1999-01; for 2001-03, this increases to $7.4 million, an annual increase of$3.0 million. This means our improved situation covers less than 25% of the budget-balancing steps we already knew we would have to undertake in 2001-03. So while we our fortunate that we are in better shape than we previously thought, we also have a large number of currently unmet community needs which will compete for any additional resources. We will be analyzing our longer-term fiscal outlook as part of the Ten Year Fiscal Forecast. Where to From Here? At this point, we have only proposed mid-year budget requests that need to be approved now in order to meet timing requirements; make minor improvements to operations or adequately fund current programs through the end of 1999-01. With the exception of considering the addition of a biologist/mitigation monitoring position as part of the 2000-01 budget process as discussed below, we recommend considering any program enhancements or new policy initiatives (in light of our improved fiscal condition) in the context of the 2001-03 Financial Plan process for the following reasons: ■ Purpose of the Financial Plan. The Financial Plan process is designed to link high- priority goals with resource needs. In this context, it makes sense to consider new or enhanced programs in the goal-setting context that the Financial Plan process provides. ■ Major CIP Projects. There are a number of major projects on the horizon requiring significant funding commitments. These include flood protection, downtown improvements, pedestrian and bicycle paths, civic center improvements, Mid-Higuera area improvements, new community center and park improvements. Before we can make informed decisions about funding these improvements, almost all of them require the completion of studies that are currently underway. Based on the status of these studies,the 2001.-03 Financial Plan will be an appropriate time for considering their funding requirements in light of other City priorities. ■ Preparation for Revenue Ballot Measure. Preparing for a possible revenue ballot measure in November 2000 is part of the "Action Plan" approved by the Council for the_ Long -Term Fiscal Health major City goal in the 1999-01 Financial Plan. The work program for this includes preparing a ten-year financial plan and conducting a community survey. The results of this work—which will largely determine our long-term fiscal capacity to achieve.adopted CEP goals—will be available for consideration as part of the 2001-03 Financial Plan process. BiologisbMitigation Monitor. In December 1999, the Council directed that staff return with an analysis of the need for this type of position as part of 2000-01 budget process. We are currently working on this analysis, including scope of duties, organizational home and contract savings that we might experience if we added this type of position. Consistent with Council direction, the 1-2 Council Agenda Report—Mid-Year Budget Review Page 3 results of this analysis will be presented to the Council in June 2000 as part of the 1999-01 Financial Plan Supplement for 2000-01. Background—Purpose of the Mid-Year Budget Review The City's two-year Financial Plan provides for the submittal of a report on our financial status to the Council every six months. For fiscal monitoring purposes, on-line access to up-to-date information is available to all departments, financial reports are issued monthly to key staff members and comprehensive quarterly financial reports and"newsletter"summaries are distributed to the Council and Department Heads on an ongoing basis. However, the formal submittal of a review at the mid-point of the fiscal year provides an opportunity to take a broader look at the City's financial picture,including: ■ Comparing revised revenue and expenditure projections with those originally made in the 1999-01 Financial Plan. ■ Identifying and presenting any fiscal problem areas to the Council and recommending corrective action or additional funding if required. ■ Reviewing the progress being made in achieving major City goals and other important objectives. Report Organization Introducing the accompanying mid-year budget review is an Fxecutive Summary that highlights key mid-year budget issues and trends,and summarizes the General Fund's projected financial condition at the end of 1998-99 compared with original projections in the 1999-01 Financial Plan. Following the Executive Summary is the transmittal memorandum providing a comprehensive review and analysis of the City's financial position, and summarizing the need for the requested mid-year budget adjustments. The report also includes: ■ Comprehensive presentations of projected revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balanceJworking capital for each of the City's funds for 1999-00 and 2000-01 compared with original budget estimates. ■ Detailed supporting documentation for the requested mid-year budget adjustments. ■ Status report on major city goals,other Council objectives and CEP projects. ENCLOSURE Mid-Year Budget Review for 1999-00 a r:t§� �.. '?.'T1�- _ere_ .,^w-':s.F� •�;,� t fEex--�^x:�i�.n_.-: dJ �:,,,,' :v".'�V'{ G:FinancdBudga Foldas/Mid Year 1999-MCouncil Agenda Report 1-3 LFE IVED 9 2000 N!``Tla z9-oaAGENDADATE_rEM #Y CLERK OM: Dr. Richard J. Krejsa DATE: 29 February 2000 189 San Jose Court, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 TO: Mayor Allen K. Settle and Council Members City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 FE 0 Z 12000 SUBJECT: City Biologist Qualifications Previously Submitted by EQTF SLO C17Y Col JNCIL Hon. Mayor and Members of the Council: In previous hearings for the 1995-96 and 1997-98 Budget Cycles, in behalf of the EQTF, I presented the Council with a list of qualifications which the EQTF had determined must apply to the candidate selected for the recommended position of City Biologist. Once again,as former EQTF spokesperson and as current representative of the remaining EQTF members still living locally, I present you with a list of qualifications for this recommended position. The ideal candidate for the position of City Biologist) would: a) have a PhD* in primarily in Wildlife Biology or Fisheries Biology,Zoology,or Ecology and be recognized for his/her advocacy of bio-resource programs; b) be certified as either a terrestial wildlife ecologist with an extensive training and appreciation of riparian and aquatic habitats and cross-training in botany,or,a freshwater fisheries biologist with extensivetraining and appreciation of terrestial wildlife ecology and cross-training in botany; c) have had some experience in being directly responsible for the inventory,protection and/or enhancement of the natural bio-resources of an area, region,or state,preferably in the western states; d) spend much of his/her time in the field being anadvocate for the enviromneiA and all organisms within the San Luis Obispo Watershed.The most immedi � t or s D DIR position should be the implementing the inventory; MAO &NMr DIR � WCAO RE CHIEF Ideally, s/he would not EMTtORNEY 2ft DIR d) have served primarily as a resource manager, 0I,IGMT TEAORIGM ❑POLICE CHF P Y nl8nag ❑l,1GMT TEAM VDIR e) have served primarily as an environmental wnsaltanfi r� IR V (ERIsru, ILSDIR g f) be newly-graduated but have had at least 46 years in the field; g) be expectedto become all things(environmentally speaking)to all people or departments within City government, i.e., there are more jobs than one person can do! * Alternately,a candidate with a Bachelor's.degree in Biology/Zoology and a Master's degree in Ecology,Wildlife Biology,or Fisheries Biology would be acceptable providing s/he had: h) at least 5 years of experience as an active field biologist. The salary for a qualified full-time biologist would be equal to the rank of beginning step Associate Professor at a California State University campus. It would be a full-time, civil service, career opportunity for the qualified, chosen candidate. Five years after the original EQTF proposal, the need is even greater. I suggest you give this action your very highest priority and consideration.Thank you for hearing this recommendation from the former EQTF members. richard j.krejsa [STATEMENT of DR. RICHARD J. KREJSA(re: Mid-Year Budget Review,29 Feb 2000)] In February, 1995, much of the environmental philosophy I share was incorporated into a city document prepared by the Environmental Quality Task Force(EQTF) and presented to the City Council after 15 months of deliberation by 14 of the top environmental specialists in the County. The estimated professional street value of the EQTF report was greater than $200,000, but these volunteers gave it to the City as a gift.Their report had four parts including 1.&2.below: 1.A Commitment to Goals.The EQTF highlighted several environmental goals which the City had already adopted as part of its Land Use Element(1994 revision),Water and Wastewater Management Element, Energy Element, and Open Space Element. We urged that they be translated into measurable objectives and implemented.Among Major City Goals adopted by City Council for the 1995-97 budget cycle, two had been recommended in the EQTF report: "Inventory,prioritize,and fund acqusition of open space,while continuing inventories of natural resources within the Citv the urban reserve line and greenbelt areas" "Prepare and begin implementation of natural resource protection plan Including adoption of a creek setback ordinance which incorporates adequate capability for flood and habitat protection:' Comment: Midway thru the 1999-2000 cycle,portions of these Major City Goals (underlined) adopted in the 1995-97 budget cycle have not yet been implemented or,perhaps, even initiated! 2. City Organization.The EQTF discussed how City Government could be structured for more consistent attention to environmental quality. It recommended four priority measures including the three(a.,b.,c.)listed below: a. Establish and fill a position of"Open Space Manager." Within'the Job Announcement for the renamed"Natural Resources Manager" position [Announcement Circular,August 1995], one of two adopted Major City Goals to be accomplished by this manager was: "identifying and maintaining an Inventory of natural resources within the City's urban reserve line and greenbelt area". Comment: This part of the NRM position has yet to be implemented even though it also was adopted as a priority goal in the 1994 Land Use Element(#8,p. 6; LUE program 6.0.2-3, p.57)! b. Establish and fill a position of"Biologist' which, according to the EQTF report,"would be a resource for all City departments,and would" perform the following tasks: "A.Review project proposals of both private applicants and the City,and help with environmental review." "B.Advise on management of City-owned open space land and easements." "C.Monitor construction of City and private projects,to assure that required mitigation measures are carried out and biologically responsible practices are followed." "D.Work with other City staff,other agencies,and community groups to protect and restore wildlife habitat,including environmental cleanup:' "E.Advise the City on its role in regional state,and federal biological issues,and represent the City's Interests before other agencies Involved In biological issues." To this list of duties, we would add other duties implied in the EQTF report(especially pp.13-22)including that portion of the NRM position not yet being implemented, i.e., F.Help identify,facilitate the production of,and maintain a detailed inventory of the natural resources within the City's urban reserve line and greenbelt area. Comment: It is not necessary for staff to re-invent the wheel: qualifications for this position already have been spelled out by the EQTF(see letters attached). A certified fisheries/wildlife field biologist on staff would significantly complement the duties of the existing NRM position. c.Adopt a Policy which states that Environmental Protection is Everyone's Job and conduct citywide training to remind staff of daily actions that help protect the environment. Comment It is now five years later and only one of these EQTF recommendations(a) has been adopted(and that only in part) by the City Council. In its document on the city's"Commitment to Goals," the EQTF also recommended that: "evaluation of progress in meeting the goals would be greatly improved by adding measurable performance standards(so that)citizens should be able to tell how well the City Is meeting its goals." Comment The city has yet to adopt measurable performance standards. Without such standards, it is difficult for any citizen to measure your performance relative to adopted city goals. RECOMMENDATIONS PROPOSED (for City Council's action, 29 February 2000) These recommendations now have been re-endorsed by 11 former EQTF members.As their representative,I urge you to take action tonight to adopt these recommendations as proposed: Recommendation 1.Establish and fill a position of Biologist(with EQTF qualifications). Decide which division within City hierarchy the Biologist will be administratively anchored; prepare documentationl; and direct City Personnel Department,to advertise the position.t Recommendation 2.Identify,maintain, and monitor an inventory of natural resources within the City's urban reserve line and greenbelt area. The EQTF report favored"Achieving Balance."In the interest of proper land use planning, e.g., the necessity of having appropriate resource over lay maps available on all city lands and greeebelt areas,and to fulfill the environmental parity and balance called for in previous City Council and EQTF documents, it is essential that the natural resource inventories and overlay maps already called for in the 1994 LUE within the city's urban reserve line and its greenbelt areas be implemented as soon as possible after the City Biologist position is hired. Recommendation 3: Implement Measureable Performance Standards We recommend that you complete the major goals adopted in the 1995-97 and subsequent budget cycles by implementing measurable performance standards that will enable citizens to determine how well the City is meeting its adopted goals in any given budget cycle. Recommendation 4. Adopt a Policy that Environmental Protection is Everyone's Job. Just as every employee is expected to honor City economic, safety,disability awareness,and equal opportunity goals, so too they should be expected to honor the City's environmental and sustainability goals. We recommend citywide staff training be conducted to reinforce those goals and to remind staff of daily actions that help protect and sustain the environment. Recommendation 5:As part of lhCk training,every Council member and CAO staff members ought to read the EQTF Report[Feb.'95]. It's contents are current and more urgent now than 5 years ago. Accountability and"Achieving Balance"[EQTF Report,p.9-101 demands that it is time to centralize environmental functions in one place rather than keep them dispersed and weakened among 8 city departments! If EQTF priorities had been taken seriously, we'd already have staff doing these tasks in a cost-efficient way and(among many others) not have had : -to pay $40,000 for poorly manged environmental monitoring at the Santa Rosa Street Bridge project which resulted in repeated siltation events in SLO Creek downtown last autumn; -to hire yet another consulting firm to act as environmental monitor for an even more difficult I iguera Street bridge project next summer. [How many consultant monitors can we afford?]; -to have a disputed environmental result on the construction of the SLO Creek Walk; -to be involved in a squabble between Murray Street residents and the city arborist over the ill-advised trimming street median palm trees which bore nesting owls; -to be involved in a contest with local citizens over the [lack of] protectio olden eagles in Perfumo Creek area of the city. Thank you for your serious consideration of our recommendations. hard jsa i I would be happy to serve on the Biologist selection committee;we also wish to review fi announcement draft. MEETING AGENDA D( ii-a - Q ITEM I�I ... RICHARD SCHMIDT 112 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (805) 544-4247 • P`COUNCIL O C�D DII�"mal: hmidt®calpoly.edu InAO FEIN DIR February 28, 2000 3'ACAO D FIRE CHIEF rATTORNEY D PW DIR C�C GR C10RIG D POLICE CHF Re: Budget Review 2/29 Agenda ❑ :T TEA ��� D REC DIR VIA FAX o' ` D Um DIR ❑L D PERS DIR �I To the City Council: The city needs to get on with implementing the environmental protection provisions of its adopted plans and policies as per the recommendation of the late great Environmental Quality Task Force. For the past 6 years, the city has been ignoring the implementation of these policies while it willy-nilly promotes every form of growth and development that comes its way. This has gone on for too long. The city Is now at a point where if these policies are not implemented, the object of the policies -- providing environmental protection -- will become moot due to the bulldozing of environmental values. In specific, I urge you to include in your budgetary revisions three major implementations. 1. Implementation of LUEr—oaram 6.0.2 Overlay Mappinq. The reason for this resource inventory and overlay mapping is to make sure environmental values are knowingly considered as land is annexed and developed. Not only has the inventory and mapping not been done, but -- contrary to staff assertions -- the information that would come from the inventory and overlay mapping is not being considered via other routes, even when such information is readily available. A recent case in point: Staff told the planning commission when considering annexation of land along Tank Farm Road near Higuera that the soil was not prime soil. Not only is this wrong (the land is clearly shown on U.S. Soil Conservation Maps as prime), it is clear that staff is not bothering to properly consult the alternative sources they allege make overlay mapping unnecessary, or they would know that this land is prime. Had the overlay mapping been done, there would have been no missing the prime nature of these soils. The purpose of the overlay mapping would-be.to-integrate ALL pertinent information about a given piece of land in a single resource so that NOTHING KNOWN gets overlooked. This will involve some new field work in certain areas to supplement existing documentation. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT PROJECT, AND IS LONG OVERDUE. LET'S GET ON WITH IT NOIM RECEIVED FFB 2 a Z000 SLo CITY COUNCIL nicnarcz�cnmici Y544-424% 17112/28/0 W11'06AM D2/2 2. Implementation of LUE 6.0.3 and 6.0.4. Once the inventory and overlay mapping are completed, then the city needs to implement LUE Programs 6.0.3 Land Use Element Map Revision and 6.0.4 Resource Protection. One major purpose of overlay mapping is to find which land is most suitable for development, and which is not. This differs_markedly from the two-dimensional ivory tower "commonsense" drawing of lines on maps irrespective of what actually exists in the multi-dimensional landscape. (Do you recall that the city's street map of Terrace Hill as recently as the 1970s showed a geometric grid of streets unrelated to topography or the ability to construct such streets?) Ever since Ian McHarg showed in the 1960s the importance of this multi-dimensional resource overlay approach to planning, there has been no excuse for a city like ours to continue its regressive, nature-be-damned approach to planning. Once a summation of natural and man-made characteristics show land is better designated for non-development or light development rather than heavy development, we need to modify our plans to reflect those discoveries. We also need to be aggressive in protecting areas that overlay planning shows merit protection. 3. Staff Biologist. Key to the city's having an enlightened management of its bioligical resources is having a field biologist on staff, to guide everything from planning decisions to routine city maintenance activities. This is per the EQTF recommendations of 1994. The city has stalled too long on hiring a biologist. As a result, we are incrementally destroying the biota of our region through decisions made without professional consultation and through just plain ignorance. The recent episode of city tree trimmers rousting nesting owls from Murray Street is a great example of how the city, on a daily bais, does biologically stupid things it doesn't need to do. The biologist should also be of • help in doing the overlay mapping discussed above. Sincerely, Richard Schmidt • 1 M..ANG AGENDA DATEa.�ITEM # Imemomnbum DATE: February 23, 2000 E3COUNcII :[3FIRE R E3 CAO WCAO HIEFTO: City Council G7 ATTDRNEY EXLERIUORIG E CHF❑MGMT TEAK RFROM: John Dunn, City Administrativ ffic IRTF &LL F_ DIR SUBJECT: Biologist Position In December, at the request of the Mayor, the City Council referred to staff the idea of creating a "biologist"position as a regular part of our workforce, and that staff return to Council with a position option during the 2000-01 Budget update in late May/early June. This timeframe was established to allow staff sufficient time to complete the analysis. In addition, a Council majority wished to consider the option within the context of other position needs that may surface during the 2000-01 update(new City positions are typically considered during the adoption of annual budgets, and not at mid-year). Recently, some individual Council members have expressed an interest in approving such a position sooner,perhaps during the Mid-Year Budget Review. While staff has no problem with the Council making an earlier commitment to a new position, we continue to ask for adequate time to fully develop the proposed role,responsibilities, qualifications and reporting relationships for the new position. The saying"Sometimes you have to slow down to speed up"is appropriate in developing this new position idea. Our organization is a complex one, consisting of over 340 employees located in eleven departments. Six of these departments are potentially directly involved in the duties of this new position—Administration, Community Development,Utilities,Public Works, and Parks and Recreation, Fire and two more—Finance and Human Resources—have a less direct stake in the outcome. This means that eight departments, and dozens of employees,have a stake in this position, either in terms of its development and/or in interfacing with the position once created. Nothing could be worse in this complex and interdependent environment than speeding a position into existence with an unclear role and unclear lines of authority. Sorting out such ambiguities after-the-fact will take far more time—and will be far less constructive—than investing a little more time in the analytic process at the"front end". Completing this analytic process is more complicated than it might appear on the surface. Attached are just a few examples of the questions currently being addressed in order to thoughtfully prepare a position option for Council consideration. Few, if any, cities our size have full-time biologist positions. In fact,regardless of size, such a position will be at the"cutting edge"of cities nationally (if not internationally). San Luis Obispo has been cutting edge before, and staff looks forward to the opportunity to be reali RECEIVED FEB 2 4 2000 SLO CITY CLERK developing this new position for the Council. If the Council wishes to commit to the position now,we ask that you continue to give staff sufficient time to work through the attached and other issues. We can do so consistent with the initial timeframe and bring a position to Council and the community with the 2000-01 Budget. All things considered, this is not too far away and will be time well spent. Cc: Ken Hampian,Neil Havlik,Arnold Jonas,Paul LeSage,John Moss,Mike McCluskey,Bob Neumann Ann Slate,Bill Statler EXAMPLE QUESTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED IN DEVELOPING BIOLOGIST POSITION CONCEPT FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION • There are several possible duties that could be handled by such a position that are now spread across several departments—Public Works,Community Development,Utilities,Parks and Recreation,and Administration(Natural Resources). Which of these duties should be "relocated"to a new position,and which should remain where they are? • There are tasks now contracted out that might be done in-house with an added position; there are things that are now being done in-house that.might best be contracted out. What is the best "mix"? Can we save some money in contract costs? If so,how much? • Will the biologist be handle the biological aspects of all City capital projects,or will PW project managers call him/her in as an in-house consultant? (this relationship must be clear). • There are General Plan goals that are not presently being accomplished due to a lack of resources. Can such a position tackle some of these? If so, are these among the higher priority goals,or are there other more pressing goals that depend upon adding resources elsewhere(e.g Community Development,Public Works). How would an added position assist in meeting the spirit and goals of the EQTF report? • What land management responsibilities are now accumulating due to our continuing success in acquiring open space,and how are we going to meet these responsibilities? (e.g. site surveys, enforcement and monitoring issues,development of more formal land management policies, plans and"best practices"). • What added things would the Natural Resource Manager like to accomplish now,if he had added support resources? • If we assume significant in-house mitigation oversight responsibility,how can we best handle the added agency reporting and paperwork associated with such a responsibility? (If, for example,the new position were located in the Natural Resource Protection Program,the Secretary H that now supports the Natural Resource Manager also supports the Economic Development Manager,the Assistant CAO, and the Assistant to the CAO). • Although locating the position under the Natural Resources Manager is the most obvious option, what"not so obvious"impacts might this have on other departments that previously held, or at least shared, some of the tasks to be assumed by the new position? • When all the potential tasks are gathered—things now contracted out,things now being done by other staff,things we are going to have to do as our inventory of open space increases,other new things,what is the"right mix"of duties to be carried out by the position?(even with an added position,we can't do them all). • Once a recommended set of duties is compiled, what skills and qualifications are needed,and what is the most appropriate"organizational home"? • What is the total estimated cost—salary,benefits,equipment,office space(always a challenge in City Hall),and support staff? M ...nNG AGENDA DATEa-rlEM 9 ';mEmomnbum, EMOUDATE: February 23, 2000 PMAO CII :UVEEC BCAO WCAO F TO: City Council GNITTORNEY DCLERKIORIG F FNM FROM: John Dunn, City Administrativ ffic Tp ��pl F SUBJECT: Biologist Position In December, at the request of the Mayor,the City Council referred to staff the idea of creating a "biologist"position as a regular part of our workforce, and that staff return to Council with a position option during the 2000-01 Budget update in late May/early June. This timeframe was established to allow staff sufficient time to complete the analysis. In addition, a Council majority wished to consider the option within the context of other position needs that may surface during the 2000-01 update(new City positions are typically considered during the adoption of annual budgets, and not at mid-year). Recently, some individual Council members have expressed an interest in approving such a position sooner,perhaps during the Mid-Year Budget Review. While staff has no problem with the Council making an earlier commitment to a new position,we continue to ask for adequate time to fully develop the proposed role,responsibilities, qualifications and reporting relationships for the new position. The saying"Sometimes you have to slow down to speed up" is appropriate in developing this new position idea. Our organization is a complex one, consisting of over 340 employees located in eleven departments. Six of these departments are potentially directly involved in the duties of this new position—Administration, Community Development,Utilities, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation, Fire and two more—Finance and Human Resources—have a less direct stake in the outcome. This means that eight departments, and dozens of employees, have a stake in this position, either in terms of its development and/or in interfacing with the position once created. Nothing could be worse in this complex and interdependent environment than speeding a position into existence with an unclear role and unclear lines of authority. Sorting out such ambiguities after-the-fact will take far more time—and will be far less constructive—than investing'a little more time in the analytic process at the"front end". Completing this analytic process is more complicated than it might appear on the surface. Attached are just a few examples of the questions currently being addressed in order to thoughtfully prepare a position option for Council consideration. Few, if any,cities our size have full-time biologist positions. In fact, regardless of size, such a position will be at the"cutting edge"of cities nationally(if not internationally). San Luis Obispo has been cutting edge before, and staff looks forward to the opportunity to be LSLFED ED LERK developing this new position for the Council. If the Council wishes to commit to the position now,we ask that you continue to give staff sufficient time to work through the attached and other issues. We can do so consistent with the initial timeframe and bring a position to Council and the community with the 2000-01 Budget. All things considered, this is not too far away and will be time well spent. Cc: Ken Harnpian,Neil Havlik,Arnold Jonas,Paul LeSage,John Moss,Mike McCluskey,Bob Neumann,Ann Slate,Bill Statler EXAMPLE QUESTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED IN DEVELOPING BIOLOGIST POSITION CONCEPT FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION • There are several possible duties that could be handled by such a position that are now spread across several departments—Public Works, Community Development,Utilities,Parks and Recreation, and Administration(Natural Resources). Which of these duties should be "relocated"to a new position,and which should remain where they are? • There are tasks now contracted out that might be done in-house with an added position; there are things that are now being done in-house that.might best be contracted out. What is the best "mix"? Can we save some money in contract costs? If so,how much? • Will the biologist be handle the biological aspects of all City capital projects, or will PW project managers call him/her in as an in-house consultant? (this relationship must be clear). • There are General Plan goals that are not presently being accomplished due to a lack of resources. Can such a position tackle some of these? If so,are these among the higher priority goals,or are there other more pressing goals that depend upon adding resources elsewhere (e.g Community Development,Public Works). How would an added position assist in meeting the spirit and goals of the EQTF report? • What land management responsibilities are now accumulating due to our continuing success in acquiring open space, and how are we going to meet these responsibilities? (e.g. site surveys, enforcement and monitoring issues,development of more formal land management policies, plans and"best practices"). • What added things would the Natural Resource Manager like to accomplish now,if he had added support resources? • If we assume significant in-house mitigation oversight responsibility,how can we best handle the added agency reporting and paperwork associated with such a responsibility? (If, for example,the new position were located in the Natural Resource Protection Program,the Secretary II that now.supports the Natural Resource Manager also supports the Economic Development Manager,the Assistant CAO, and the Assistant to the CAO). • Although locating the position under the Natural Resources Manager is the most obvious option, what"not so obvious"impacts might this have on other departments that previously held,or at least shared, some of the tasks to be assumed by the new position? • When all the potential tasks are gathered—things now contracted out,things now being done by other staff, things we are going to have to do as our inventory of open space increases,other new things,what is the"right mix"of duties to be carried out by the position? (even with an added position,we can't do them all). • Once a recommended set of duties is compiled,what skills and qualifications are needed, and what is the most appropriate`organizational home"? • What is the total estimated cost—salary,benefits, equipment,office space (always a challenge in City Hall),and support staff?