HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 11007 (Budget Amendments)RESOLUTION NO. 11007
A Resolution of the San Rafael City Council
amending the 2001-2002 Budget
WHEREAS, the City Council approved Resolution 10867 adopting the Fiscal
Year 2001-2003 two year budget; and
WHEREAS, additional funds are required for some City operations; and
WHEREAS, it is the intention of this Council to review recommendations from
staff regarding the City's financial condition, including revenue projections and available
resources and provide funding for various ongoing, capital and other service needs; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has submitted to the City Council a report outlining
the additional budget items; and
WHEREAS, after examination, deliberation and due consideration, the City
Council has approved the same report and recommendations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the San Rafael City Council that
Resolution 10867 for fiscal year 2001/2002 is amended to bring total expenditures for
the City budget to a sum of $58,469,005 and total projected revenues to a total of
$57,121,907 as presented in the staff report and related Exhibits I, II and III,
I JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular
meeting of the Council of said City on Monday, the 4th of February, 2002 by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS : Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Bora
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS : None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS : None
WF/MS/Council Material/Resolutions/02/Amend 01-02 mid yr Budget
JEA E M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
CONSOLIDATED FUNDS SCHEDULE
Resources:
Revenues
Operating Transfers In
Total Resources:
Current Expenditures:
Salaries and Wages
Fringe Benefits
Supplies and services
Capital outlay
Capital & Special Projects
Operating Transfers Out
Total Appropriations
Excess of Resources over Appropriations
Beginning Balance
Ending Balance
Less Reserves & Designations:
Total Reserves & Designations
Undesignated Balance
t.omoinea
uperatmg
L;apital
Agency
Budget
Budget
Totals
Totals
Totals
57,121,907
52,217,207
4,904,700
0
0
0
917
$52,217,207
$4,904,700
-
30,161,449
30,161,449
7,840,915
7,840,915
14,204,681
14,204,681
1,357,260
1,357,260
4,904,700
4,904,700
0
$0
$07; )tsaq
($1,347,098)
$41,376,467
$40,029,369
($39,906,586)
$122,782
EXHIBIT III
02/01/2002 City -comb fds mid yr 01-02
Page 1 01-02 mid year summary
STAFFING/OVERTIME PROBLEMS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
The Problem
For several years now, the Police Department has been grappling unsuccessfully with
staffing problems and resultant overtime cost overruns. Only by the excessive use of
overtime have we been able to meet our commitments.
The Department's authorized strength of 48 officers and 10 corporals is sufficient if they
are all present in their assigned tasks but that is never the case. The number of officers
who are unavailable is increasing and we are forced to resort to more and more overtime.
Injuries, family medical leave, sick leave and the time it takes to replace vacancies are all
significant factors driving the increase in overtime. Increases in calls for service,
increasingly complex reporting and a sharp increase in the number of personnel in the
Field Training Program are also factors.
The net effect is that we are being forced back into reactive policing, negating any
progress in community policing and the department is no longer meeting commitments in
the following areas:
• Response time
• Gang and vice suppression
• Fully staffing the downtown foot beat
• Community policing
They are not being met because we can no longer consistently field enough officers by
spending more overtime. Last calendar year we worked about 31,000 hours of overtime,
an average of over 300 hours per employee.
The Cost
Our overtime costs for calendar year 2001 were:
• Training $150,000.00
• Filling vacant positions $280,000.00
• Covering sick, injured, vacation, etc. $207,000.00
• Arrests, investigations and reports $340,000.00
• Court $128,000.00
• Supervisory tasks $ 60,000.00
Total $1,207,260.00
We are on track to spend this much again this FY in overtime. We expect to spend an
additional $212,000.00 this FY in salary and benefits for the six officers that have been
"over hired" and are now in the academy. The department will be over budget this FY by
roughly $450,000.00
Some solutions
Part of the solution lies in making better use of the time the Police Department has
available. We have either changed or are working on:
• Restructured field training program to assure a greater retention rate.
• Software that will provide real time information on overtime use
• Changed training practices to reduce costs while meeting POST mandates
• Implemented stricter review processes for overtime expenditures
• Improved report writing practices
• Re -aligned beat structure
• Adjusted schedules
• Increased revenue generating activity (citations, fines, fees and grants).
The practice of over hiring (up to six officers) to speed replacement of vacancies is critical
but one consequence has been to eliminate salary savings that were once used as a
hedge against overtime expenditures.
Another change of lasting importance is the new accounting software and the CAD/RMS
package in the Police Department. They will provide timely management data that we are
currently unable to access except by the most time consuming processes. The re -cap of
last years overtime was done by manually reviewing thousands of handwritten overtime
forms.
Recommendations
Convert the six "over hires" to budget positions. The cost, starting on July 1, 2002, will be
an increase the police budget of $502,475.00 next FY.
I recognize that we cannot "go to the well" every year with the same sad story but I am
confident that the addition of six new officers, coupled with changes that we are making or
have made, represents the major part of a long term solution.
I also believe that with the coming availability of accurate and timely management data we
will avoid future over runs or at least be able to predict them and therefore retain the ability
to control them.
Outcomes
We will be able to address our current service deficiencies by fall of this year and reduce
overtime to about the level we were budgeted for in FY2001 (including adjustments to
salaries).
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, CALIFOK..iA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM
TO: KEN NORDHOFF DATE: JAN. 25, 2002
ASST. TO THE CITY MAXAQ911
FROM: ANDREW PRESTON FILE NO: 06.01.126
DEPUTY PUBLIC WORZD14CTOR
SUBJECT: SAN RAFAEL COMMUNITY CENTER HVAC
Problematic Situation:
Construction work has started on the replacement of 5 of the 13 HVAC units that provide heating
and cooling to the community center. During the construction another 2 units failed, and I have
just been advised that a 3`d unit has just failed. We have already directed the contractor to
replace units 6 and 7, at an agreed cost; however, I am now evaluating how we should continue
with the rest of the project.
Background:
The community center was constructed in 1975, and therefore all of the HVAC systems are 27
years old. When it was designed, they installed a very efficient system, which comprised of 13
separate small HVAC units that provided heating and cooling to 13 different zones in the
community center. This means that when rooms or different parts of the center are not used, we
do not have to provide power to heat or cool them. Last year 5 of the units failed and a project
was designed to replace these failed units. At the same time, we performed an evaluation to see
if it would be more cost effective to abandon the existing system and replace it with large
capacity HVAC units located on the roof. It would take 2 or 3 larger units weighing up to four
tons to be placed on the roof to replace the existing ones. It was determined that the roof would
need to be reinforced and so would the walls in order to carry the load of the roof mounted units.
The total cost of this alternative was in the region of $500,000 to $600,000. The cost of
replacing the units individually was far less, and so the project was designed to replace the units
with in-kind units.
The bid price for the original contract, i.e. replacing 5 units, was $138,000 which equates to
approximately $28,000 per unit. When units 6 and 7 failed, the contractor was able to give us a
very favorable price of approximately $22,000 each for those. The question now is what should
we do with the 8`h failed unit and the other ones that are of the same age that may fail in the
foreseeable future.
Options:
1. Replace unit #8 and add this to the existing contract. Estimated cost $25,000.
2. Take no action at this time and wait until the completion of the Building and Facilities Study;
prioritize the replacement of the failed unit and the remaining ones relative to other capital
project priorities.
3. Extend the existing project and replace all of the remaining units at this time. I think this Will
probably be the most cost effective solution because the contractor has advised us that he
should be able to replace the remaining units for a similar cost to units 6 and 7, which was
lower than the bid price. He is able to perform the work at a lower cost because he has
already mobilized his forces and gone through the submittal and review process required for
the project. Estimated cost $150,000. If we decide to select this option, the total project cost
would be approximately $330,000, which is still considerably less than the alternative
approach.
4. If we were to go out to bid for the 6 remaining units at a later time, I feel it would be more
expensive than extending the existing contract.
I await your direction and the direction of the City Council on how to proceed with this project.
AJP:dw
Cc: Carlene McCart
Janet Nibbi