Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Operations - 11/13/1990 OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES November 13, 1990 COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Christi Houser Jon Johnson Paul Mann STAFF PRESENT: Norm Angelo Tom Brubaker Mimi Castillo Ed Chow Jim Hansen Charlie Lindsey Roger Lubovich Tony McCarthy Alana Mclalwain Kelli O'Donnell Don Olson Tom Vetsch Barney Wilson MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC: Kirk Manahan Scott Schermetzler The meeting was called to order at 4:35 pm by Committeemember Mann. APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS All claims for the period ending October 31, 1990 in the amount of$1,722,659.91 were approved for payment. Centennial Center Move Bid Concern Assistant City Administrator Hansen updated the Committee on the planned move into the Centennial Building and then introduced Mr.Manahan from Lile northAmerican,a moving company in Kent who had a concern in regard to the process used in retaining a moving company for the Centennial building move. Mr. Manahan outlined his relationship with the City in this process. Mr. Hansen contacted him in June requesting counseling regarding move concerns. On June 21, 1990 Mr. Manahan met with Mr. Hansen and Mr.Vetsch. At that time, he asked how the City would choose a moving company. There was no clear process at that time and Mr. Manahan explained to them how other agencies usually handle it. At the June 21 meeting Mr. Manahan walked through the building. Mr. Manahan explained to the Committee that the moving industry was regulated by the State. These rates are not necessary for government entities. During the walk through there was not a clear schedule, knowledge of what furniture would be moved. Mr. Manahan stated at that time he would like the business but understood it could not be decided yet. He asked that he be included when a determination of steps was decided. Mr. Manahan sent a proposal in July but considered this an estimate until further details were received. Mr. Manahan learned in September that the contract had been awarded "through the grapevine". He was surprised no notification was given. Mr. Manahan felt he was treated unfairly in the process and contacted members of the City staff and was eventually referred to this Committee. Mr. Manahan went over previous experiences with other government agencies and stated that he felt his company was treated unfairly and should be compensated. Committeemember Mann asked how he felt he should be compensated. Mr. Manahan explained that he agreed to do the City favor and gave the benefit of his experience with the understanding that his company would have an opportunity to compete. He felt he had been lied to and would not have a problem if he had a fair opportunity. Central Services Supervisor Vetsch explained that the same process had been followed with the other moving companies and this was simply a misunderstanding and there was no intent to lie to Mr. Manahan. It was purely accidental. After further discussion, Mr.Vetsch apologized for the misunderstanding and that was all he could do. The three companies were contacted at random and it was impossible to go back and cancel the contract at this point. City Attorney Lubovich stated that there was not a well defined procurement process and as he understood the situation there was a misunderstanding, but as there is no requirement for bids we would be liable for a lawsuit if we canceled the current contract. Lile northAmerican was not defrauded; it was a case of poor communication and not something to compensate. After further discussion, it was determined that there was nothing the Committee could do. Further, it was stated that it was appreciated that this problem was drawn to their attention so that a policy may be set up to avoid such problems in the future. Library Service Recommendation from the Kent Library Board Assistant City Administrator Hansen introduced the Library Board packet which reviewed the Georgette report which suggested that the City pursue the development of an independent library. The Board does not concur. They recommend we stay with our current contract status. The report does contain valuable information that will be beneficial analysis. Committeemember Johnson reported that the Suburban Cities Association has looked at this issue. The questions raised there were the governance issue - no direct input, and, the cost assessed valuation billings does not seem equitable. Population may be a more accurate gage. Other cities had looked at annexing. The service of the King County Library system is great but the cost raises questions. The option of annexing was discussed and it was noted that the Library Board is still in contact with other cities looking at ways to get more accountability and a balanced relationship. Operations Committee Minutes - November 13, 1990 Committeemember Johnson put forth a motion to concur with the Library Boards recommendation and to look at the possibility of annexation before 1992. Committeemember Mann seconded the motion and it carried with a vote of 3-0. Library Maintenance Agreement Assistant City Administrator Hansen informed the Committee that the King County Library System had made an offer to take over full maintenance of the library. This reduction in costs would be partially offset due to a possible rise in assessed valuation. The exact amount of the assessed valuation will not be known until December. This was an information item only and will go to Council as a budget consideration when the amounts are determined. Laser Printer Contract Renewal Customer Services Manager Lindsey requested permission to renew the utility bill printing contract. There is no significant cost increase for the new contract. Committeemember Mann presented a motion to renew the contract which was seconded by Committeemember Johnson. The item was moved to the consent calendar by a vote of 3-0 Department Head Salary Survey Personnel Director Olson brought back the salary survey to the Operations Committee. Per the Committee's request, the department heads had met with Mr. Kenny and after further review of information received there, the consultant submitted a revised salary survey dated October 1990. The October salary survey recommends four levels instead of the previous three which Personnel Director Olson outlined with the Committee as well as the cover letter received from the consultant explaining these changes. Personnel Director Olson stated that the department heads were given this information the morning of this meeting and the internal personnel committee recommends acceptance of the October survey with implementation January 1, 1991. Further he requested that this item be placed on the next City Council Agenda under Other Business. Chairperson Houser asked if placement within ranges was determined by Administration based on merit levels so there will actually be no cost to implement. Personnel Director Olson confirmed that the salary plan just set up ranges which will allow the City Administrator to reward department heads meritoriously. Finance Director McCarthy stated that there was no detailed Cost of Living in the budget but the contingency fund set up related to four such issues can handle merit pay adjustment unless everyone was put at the maximum level. Committeemember Mann asked if his understanding that pay is not directly related to level numbers was correct. Operations Committee Minutes - November 13, 1990 Personnel Director Olson noted that a certain amount of latitude was designed into the levels. Assistant City Administrator Hansen pointed out that variables need to be allowed for in the levels such as time in grade, turnover, longevity, and merit. Committeemember Mann noted that it seemed fair and he would endorse the October survey. City Administrator Chow explained that the ranges were the most important feature. All of the department heads have an increased pay potential. Parks and Recreation Director Wilson interjected that he had received the survey today and asked if the Committee would allow him to address them today or he could take it to the Parks Committee if they preferred. Chairperson Houser asked him to proceed. Parks and Recreation Director Wilson stated that he was not sure the consultant had accurate and complete information. An eight minute interview was not enough time to fully understand his department and move his position from a level two to a level three. He is also not sure he agrees with a fourth level. He had requested information from Mr. Kenny in regard to what information he had received from other cities and has not had a reply. Parks and Recreation Director Wilson explained he could not understand how his department could not be considered a major department when looking at revenue, expenses and employees. Finance Director McCarthy noted that budget questions don't always give a total picture and he had walked through the 1990 budget with Mr. Kenny to give him a better understanding. Parks and Recreation Director Wilson noted that even looking at employees alone his department was a major department within the City and compared to other cities he further outlined comparison of his department to departments within the City and from his research outweighed comparable departments in other local cities. It was incomprehensible to him why to reduce a major department to level three. Further, if it goes through as is the Parks position median would be raised $243 and the average of the other departments would be raised $647 not including Planning and Personnel. He could not understand the discrepancy. Personnel Director Olson explained that comparing level two to level three does not give an accurate picture. After further discussion of dollar amounts, Parks and Recreation Director Wilson stated that he felt this would affect his status within the State of Washington. Personnel Director Olson noted that he had received a salary survey from Waldron and Associates dated November 9, 1990 and the majority of our positions were first or second in the state. The only higher paid position for Parks is Federal Way. Chairperson Houser requested a motion. Operations Committee Minutes - November 13, 1990 Committeemember Mann made a motion to accept the salary ranges as presented in the October recommendations and forward it to the full Council. Committeemember Johnson stated that he had no problem with raising the Parks and Recreation Director position to a level two. Further, we have an unusual situation in the City in that the top position is not the highest paid position. Perhaps the City Administrator should be a level one and everyone else a level two. Chairperson Houser proposed that we accept it as is and allow the management study to make changes if necessary. Committeemember Johnson pointed out that all of the actual pay levels were within the level two range already. Assistant City Administrator Hansen noted that the consultant had looked not only at the scope of the positions but also the outside market. One of the objectives of the study were to maintain outside competitiveness. He suggested the Council accept the survey and look at revising if the Management Study showed the need for changes in 1991. Committeemember Johnson moved to amend Committeemember Mann's motion to make City Administrator level one and all other level two. City Administrator Chow stated that there needs to be a comparison to other cities. Accepting the amendment will not benefit the departments or City. After further discussion, Chairperson Houser asked for a vote on the original motion to accept the October Salary Survey and move it to full Council. The motion passed with a vote of 2-1. Parks and Recreation Director Wilson requested permission to discuss the issue with the Parks Committee which was given. The meeting was adjourned by Chairperson Houser at 6:05 p.m.