Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_GGAF_03.27.2013 The General Government and Finance (GGAF) Advisory Subcommittee established by the Georgetown City Council met at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, March 27, 2013, in the Friends of the Library Room, located at 402 West 8th Street, Georgetown, Texas. MINUTES The meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m. These minutes were approved at the April 24, 2013 GGAF Meeting. 1. Review minutes from the February 19 and March 6, 2013 GGAF meetings – Danella Elliott, Executive Assistant Unanimously approved. 2. 2012 Compensation Plan overview and update – Kevin Russell, Director of Human Resources and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer Micki and Kevin gave a presentation and update on the comp plan. During Fiscal Year 2011/12, the City undertook a major compensation and market analysis project to address long –term issues regarding pay for City employees. Individual jobs were reviewed and classified according to a new pay structure. The results of this study were presented to the GGAF Board on June 27, 2012 and to City Council on July 10, 2012. At that meeting, the Council directed staff to develop a plan that funded basically 60% of the total $1.5Min pay adjustments needed to implement this project. The 2012/13 Annual budget included over $1.2M in funds for the plan implementation. This $1.2M included benefit costs and had $700K being recognized in the General Fund. Initial plans were to ensure that every employee was within the correct pay grade. Therefore, employees were adjusted to at least be at the bottom of their new pay grade. (Phase 1) Next, the City’s high performers were adjusted (Phase 2), using evaluations from the previous two years to determine percentage allocation within the pay range. The assumption was that the mid-point in the salary range was “market” or 100%. The highest performers, which had received an “outstanding” evaluation the previous 2 years, would have a maximum increase to 107% of midpoint, with no single employee receiving more than $10,000 or 20% in Phase 2. The balance would be paid in Phase 3, along with any other adjustments. It was during this period that the methodology was amended in order to impact more employees. Since the dollars were already budgeted, it was determined that the Phase 2 recipients would only receive 80% of their Phase 2 adjustments, with the remaining balance added to Phase 3 (or Phase 2.5 in this presentation). This 20% of funds allowed adjustments for “meets” employees based on years of service. Meets employees with 5 Members Present: Patty Eason, Danny Meigs, Steve Fought, Joe Pondrom, Jerry Hammerlun Members Absent: None Staff Present: Paul Brandenburg, Micki Rundell, Laurie Brewer, Susan Morgan, Kevin Russell, Paul Pausewang, Trina Bickford, Wayne Nero, Cory Tchida, Laura Maloy years of service were adjusted 95% of mid-point, with meets/exceeds being adjusted between 97 and 98% of mid-point. These adjustments followed the 80% adjusted in 2012/13 and 20% planned for 2013/14. Issues became relevant when new employees were hired during fiscal year 2012/13. Because there are tenured employees who were making less than mid-point, new hires that had experience from other entities where being brought in at higher salaries then existing employees, thus creating a new compression problem. Therefore, staff is recommending a Phase 3.5, which effectively recognizes years of service within this organization regardless of high performance by moving employees closer to mid-point. The assumption is made that a 5 year employee has “journeymen” status and should be receiving the mid -point of the salary range. Phase 3.5 also adjusts high performers that were previously adjusted in Phase 2 to prevent added compression issues. The original recommendation of 107% maximum pay resulting from the comp study remained. This recommendation also includes the adoption of a maintenance system to maintain the City’s pay plan, thus ensuring that the City has a competitive salary structure going forward. The details of the maintenance plan were included in the presentation. Staff is also recommending that Phase 2.5 (the 20% not given as originally p lanned) be implemented May 1, with funds remaining from the implementation of Phase 2. These funds are available due to salary savings within the budget. The GGAF Committee suggested adding an additional slide for the Council presentation to answer qu estions before they are asked regarding “salary savings” and also suggested presenting the savings differently and give examples, i.e. Project Coordinator salary savings due to delayed hiring etc. They also suggested alternate verbiage:  “Reprogramming” Instead of “unfunded money” or salary savings  “Maintenance funding” instead of “merit”  Remind Council and clarify FY vs. MY 3. Purchase of Replacement Data Center Storage Platform – Mike Peters, IT Director Mike explained that currently the City data center has two storage platforms (each suited to different types of data):  A Compellent platform (product now owned by Dell), which primarily stores server and database information  A NetApp platform, which stores end user information (Office documents, etc.) Recently we were informed by our Dell reseller that they are abruptly ending support for portions of the Compellent platform, forcing us into previously unscheduled upgrades in both FY 2013 and 2014. We negotiated with the reseller for relief due to the abrupt nature of the change, and received a tentative proposal relieving us of the increased costs for FY 2013 only. Required upgrade costs for FY 2014 are estimated to be $41,000 in addition to our current maintenance costs. Additional upgrade costs (no t quantified) are also projected for FY 2016. As a result, we contacted our NetApp reseller for an alternative, and they have proposed a competitive buy -out of the Compellent platform. While the cost of this option would increase our out-of pocket costs in FY 2013 by approximately $71,000, the reduced ongoing maintenance costs for the NetApp product would reduce our FY 2013-2015 three year total cost by approximately $93,000. In addition, the NetApp product is capable of consolidating data from both of our current platforms, which saves operational effort for the IT team. NetApp reseller’s quote for the replacement product is $125,147; however, if the product can be purchased and implemented prior to April 30, we can cancel a previously issued purchase o rder for FY 2013 Compellent maintenance in the amount of $54,000, for a net incremental purchase of $71,147. A spreadsheet showing the three-year cost comparison for both options is attached. The cost gap between the NetApp option and the previously bu dgeted Compellent costs will be covered by delaying other equipment replacements into FY 2014. Unanimously approved. 4. Purchase of 20 Replacement Panasonic Toughbook Computers from Paradigm System Solutions for $105,234 – Mike Peters, IT Director Staff requests purchase of 20 Panasonic Toughbook laptop computers to replace units that will be retired as part of a previously approved annual scheduled replacement of police vehicles. The old Toughbooks are four (or more) years old, are out of warranty and will be disposed of. Unanimously approved. 5. Public Safety Training Operations Center (PSTOC) Data Center Study – Consultant Selection – Mike Peters, IT Director Information Technology and Purchasing released an RFP soliciting consulting assistance for techni cal design assistance for the PSTOC Data Center. Responses were received, and staff has completed their review of those responses. Two of the bidders involved in the process received very high and close scores in our evaluation process. Since the results of this study will ultimately drive an estimated $800,000 or more in IT equipment and services purchases in fiscal year 2014, staff is recommending that we select both of the top bidders at this time, allowing us to subsequently select the better study work product produced by the consultants for implementation purposes. This project was budgeted during the FY 2013 budget process, and the budgeted amount ($75,000) is sufficient to conduct both consultant studies. These top bidders (in alphabetical order) are:  Flair Data Systems, in the amount of $15,000.  Nexus IS, Inc., in the amount of $54,600. The GGAF Committee recommends awarding the bid to Nexus, as the best value bid for this project, having received the highest evaluation score, and possibly hire Flair Data Systems on an hourly basis as a second effort opinion. Unanimously approved. 6. Overview of Customer Service initiative for the Vehicle Service Center – Paul Pausewang, Support Services Manager and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer Paul Pausewang gave an overview of the proposed changes in services for the Vehicle Service Center. In preparation for the annual budget and in review of results from last year’s internal customer service survey, staff will be making changes in ho w customer service is handled, as well as addressing another area of concern. The VSC is modifying its Customer Service Plan to address communication issues with our customers as well as to more effectively manage the workload.  1 senior mechanic will be on duty as a “Service Agent” to meet customers when they come to the VSC  The Service Agent’s job will be to assess the vehicle’s situation and to determine the best method to address the situation. The Agent will: o Be aware of the work underway on the floor of th e VSC and will be able to estimate the time needed for the vehicle to be repaired, or o Determine if the repairs warrant outsourcing and if so, what the timing of such repairs will be o Schedule Preventive Maintenance appointments o Keep the customer updated as to the status of the vehicle, notifying them when the repairs are completed o Also help in securing a “loaner” vehicle for this down time.  This plan will also target customer response and personal attention to each situation In preparing the 2013/14 ISF budget, staff will meet with the various departments to access their needs for the upcoming fiscal year, and it was determined that the useful life of some of the equipment used in the Electric Department was in need of replacement.  Higher than expected down time due to repairs results in down time for crews  Delays in getting specialized equipment back in the fleet  Higher mileage resulting in less efficient usage This resulted in the need to shorten the useful life of the bucket truck and other major equipme nt used by the department in maintaining the electric system. In doing this, a cash infusion from the Electric Fund would be necessary in the next budget cycle. Another item that was brought up was that the timing to receive vehicles was up to 12 weeks or more, and if new staff was approved in the budget with an October 1 hire date, their wasn’t equipment available for their use for several months after they would be hired. Therefore, staff is recommending we purchase ½ the vehicles that would be purchased in fiscal year 2013/14 in May 2013. The Electric Fund will need to transfer additional monies to fund the shorter life adjustment in any case, so by making the transfer at midyear, these replacement vehicles could be ordered and on site by October 1. This would also mean that if a new crew was approved in the upcoming budget, they could use the replaced equipment until their new vehicles were ordered and received. Additionally, this would allow the VSC to order vehicles throughout the fiscal year, re ceiving them throughout the year as well, thus evening out the related workload. Currently, replacements are annually. Staff is recommending we separate annual purchases into beginning year and mid-year, thus allowing purchases to occur throughout the year not all in October as is current practice. Budget wise, the first year the department implements this new process will be higher. The budgeted amount to fund vehicles for replacement would include not only that year’s purchases, but also include a rol l forward of the following year purchases to allow for the advance purchase to meet the October 1 delivery date. Once implemented, there annual amounts would be level. This program will improve customer service by:  Having a speedier turn around on replaced vehicles  Establishing reserve units for GUS departments  Increasing efficiency for the departments by allowing use of retiring vehicles by new crews that are added to the budget until their new vehicles are received.  Leveling workload at the VSC since all the new vehicles wouldn’t all come be delivered in the same time frame  Reducing required overtime to accept replacement vehicles into the fleet and make ready for use by the departments. Staff is recommending implementing a pilot program with the Electr ic Department in May. $655,000 in funds will be requested from the Electric Department as part of the mid -year budget process. The Electric Fund has excess funding available for this program. The Committee commended staff on this new Customer Service initiative. 7. Consideration and possible action to authorize the Police Department to proceed with the procurement of 80 Personal Video Recorders (PVRs) for immediate field deployment in an amount not to exceed $75,000.00 – Wayne Nero, Chief of Police Chief Nero gave a presentation on the PVRs and explained that the Georgetown Police Department currently deploys in-car camera’s only, which capture less than 10% of officer’s daily interactions. The department has successfully deployed digital pocket recorders (audio only) for the last two years in order to offset the limitations of the in-car camera capabilities. GPD has set a goal of issuing a Taser and PVR to every officer. The Taser goal has been met this FY and GPD is seeking to procure and issue PVRs to every officer for immediate field deployment. The use of PVRs is a very promising and growing trend in law enforcement. GPD has field tested several PVRs over the last 18 and determined that the VieVu camera best meets current needs. They have worked with VieVu and L3 Mobile-Vision to ensure that our data can be managed seamlessly utilizing the same software. All requisite infrastructure for secure data management has been procured, installed, and is functional. The use of PVRs offer many advantages such as enhanced prosecution, they deter negative and/or assaultive behavior against the officer, provide a situational perspective of rapidly evolving situations not previously available, offer an unprecedented degree of transparency and accountability to the public, and reduce false claims against officers. The estimated financial impact of 80 VieVu Personal Video Recorders is $72,796.00. Unanimously approved. 8. Adjourned at 3:25 p.m.