Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/20/2002 Work Session City of Springfield W::)f'k Ses(iiion Meeting - . . MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, MAY 20, 2002 The city of Springfield council met in work session in the Jesse Maine Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, May 20, 2002, at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding. ATTENDANCE Present' were Mayor Leiken, Councilors Ballew, Fitch, Hatfield, Lundberg, Ralston and Simmons. Also present were City Manager Michael Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Joe Leahy, Administrative Coordinator Julie Wilson and members ofthe staff. 1. 10- Y ear Service Plan. Gino Grimaldi introduced this item. Council was asked to discuss existing outcomes and indicators and provide direction to staff regarding any desired changes. The purpose ofthe work session is to review the outcomes and indicators currently being used in the Managing for Results Program and included in the budget document. In late June and early July the council will hold two additional work sessions to establish long-term service levels for each indicator. At the January 12, 2002, goal-setting session, the council received preliminary information regarding the city's 10- year financial forecast. At the Apri11, 2002 work session, the council continued the discussion of the 10-year outlook. At that time, the council developed a general outline of how to develop a plan that would result in a 10-year service plan. The major steps for preparing a 10-year service plan include the following: . . Establish acceptable levels of servicelbenchmarks. . Determine cost to provide acceptable levels of service. . Identify funding gaps and identify alternative ways of closing the gaps. Attachment 2 of the agenda item summary packet provides additional detail regarding the steps that will be taken to establish a lO-year service plan. It is staff's desire that the lO-year service plan will also be used to make any needed modifications to the vision of the Springfield community that was initially developed during the Springfield Tomorrow process. ' Attachment 1 of the agenda item summary packet includes the FY 03 department outcomes and indicators that are in the FY 02/03 proposed budget. These outcomes and indicators represent the initial efforts of a multi-year program to move toward measuring actual outcomes or results of city activities as opposed to the more traditional measurement of the quality of work performed by the organization. Staff plans to continue to refine the outcome and indicators over the next few years. Councilor Ballew suggested a cost benefit (unit cost) analysis be conducted. Councilor Hatfield agreed. Development Services Department. Council reviewed the outcomes and indicators for Development Services. Councilor Lundberg said we are very economic development oriented. She noted that Public Works is stretched to the limit. We need to look at overall service provided by the city and prioritize these services. She said we are at the limit, as far as capacity for economic development, and we should evaluate this, in conjunction with the outcomes and indicators. She said we should prioritize, define objectives, and then identify areas we want to prioritize (e.g., complete Glenwood, work on Gateway area, etc.). . W Qrk Sys~ion Meeting Minutes .May 20, 2002 Page 2 . Councilor Ballew agreed with comments made by Councilor Lundberg. Councilor Lundberg said new projects will surface. Given the fact new things will come up, council needs to give a 10-year perspective, with a focus on short- term (3 year) goals. Councilor Fitch agreed in concept, with previous comments made by councilors. She said from a policy standpoint, council needs to determine ifthey would like to have additional master plans for projects such as Island Park area, Peace Health project, etc. If council directs staff to work with/on the Jasper Natron plan, the Glenwood plan, etc., and do not allow staff to work proactively, staff may be limited in areas where resources are specifically designated. We need continuity as well as the ability to conduct pre-negotiations, working agreements, etc. She said as we deal with the private business sector, we must be flexible. Councilor Lundberg asked, if there were a choice in the matter, would council direct something [specific] as a priority? Councilor Ballew said if we prioritize specific things, it does not mean that staff can't work on other projects consecutively, with the assigned priorities. She said CDBG has been used to serve low-income housing and other projects. She said we might need to review how we conduct business. Councilor Ralston said the market drives projects and priorities. Councilor Hatfield said the purpose of this discussion is not to prioritize what is more important, but the level at which the city plans to deliver service, as well as identify citizen expectations. An example would be to identify what response time is acceptable/expected by citizens when they place a 9-1-1 call for police or emergency medical services. . Councilor Hatfield said if we determine our service level is 90 percent ofthe time, within a certain response time, a cost is associated with this service. If a different service level is expected (e.g., 95 percent ofthe time, certain response time expected), the cost for this service delivery may increase. He said the level of service delivery is the question that needs to be addressed. He said council needs to define these issues between now and June, so that staff can come back with a cost associated with meeting the defined benchmarks. Councilor Ballew said the only way we can balance things is through a value score, how we will allocate resources tied to services. She said the city couldn't overspend the amount of money we have. Councilor Ralston reminded the group that at this time, the group was reviewing the Development Services Department. He suggested we focus on reviewing information on a department-by-department method, starting with Development Services. ' Councilor Lundberg discussed CDBG funds. She said if a certain amount of money is available, council should identify where they want to focus use of the funding. Councilor Hatfield said council is establishing a level of service as they approve budget amounts for the various departments. He said council knows a certain amount of funding is available. Council needs to identify what we want to do, and how well we want to deliver the service. Councilor Hatfield said the allocation process should be product oriented. . City Manager Mike Kelly said the two review options included the incremental approach or a 5-10 year approach. The incremental approach (compare services against each other) would be used to identify priority of services. The Work Session Meeting Minutes M~y 20,' 2002 Page 3 . second method was to consider a 5-10 years forecast of where council wants to be in the future, as related to services such as community development, police and fIre. Councilor Simmons discussed service related fee increases, limited resources of the city, and goal setting. He said staff has been pursuing the benchmarking process. He said balancing the benchmarking figures takes time. He said council will need to develop a strategy to identify how staff can get from point A to point B. He said Development Services is on target. Gino Grimaldi said council was being asked what parameters they would like to set as they prioritize services in the future (June). Councilor Fitch said as a council, they should set broad goals. She said she did not want the council to micro-manage the specific on-goings of each department. She said the city manager is able to manage workload within the departments. She said during the budget process, the council was provided with what services could be delivered along with the approved budget amounts. Councilor Hatfield agreed and said he did not want to micro manage within departments. He used police as an example. He.discussed policy level issues. The public cares about the level of service delivery the community will receive. He again discussed response times for police/fITe, based on specific resources. He said we need to understand service level delivery expectations. Councilor Fitch referenced the Springfield Tomorrow survey conducted and what citizens identified as important services. She wondered if we were using this information in this process. . Councilor Hatfield responded that Springfield Tomorrow was a critical document. Gino Grimaldi asked council to identify outcome and indicators that are policy issues. Mike Kelly reminded council of direction provided to staffearly this year. He said council leadership stated that if the city is going to make budget cuts, we should make the right ones, not eliminate services we want to retain and offer in 5-10 years from now. He said we need to look at what services we want to make available in the future. He said our cuts should be consistent with future forecast. Mayor Leiken said we need to keep parameters in mind, as we make future cuts, and identify what level of services we want to see in the future. He said we need to focus on this. Councilor Hatfield said we need to make revenue or service decisions at this time. He said we need to look at our city (Public Works) infrastructure, and determine how we want to measure level of services in 5-10 years. Councilor Hatfield provided an example regarding street conditions. He said the city could have many potholes on the road, or we could have streets that are regularly slurry sealed, in a proper manner. He explained that there is a cost associated with each level of service provided. Councilor Simmons said if we are going to talk about policy issues such as maintaining good streets, which could be a high priority, but there is not enough money to support this, we are left with the same cycle we are in. There is only a certain amount of allocated funding to accomplish what we need to do. ' Councilor Hatfield provided, an example regarding balance of resources and prioritization of services. If the city provides current support to maintain drainage systems at 95 percent, we may need to cut back this percent in order to compensate for improvement/support for maintaining streets, if this is direction provided to staff regarding priority of . W Qrk S<1s~ion Meeting Minutes May 20-, 2002 Page 4 . services. Again, this is an example of how the priority of services will assist in dedicating resources according to ' priority of service delivery. Councilor Ballew said council does not need to micro manage activity of the staff, although, council may not be informed of required/mandated versus discretionary services. She said knowledge of the mandated versus discretionary services is another element of information that is needed to further discuss the issue of service priorities. Gino Grimaldi said there might be 4-6 items that could be identified as policy items. Staff could develop an initial list of what they think could be policy items and bring back to council. Council could then add or delete items from this list. Councilor Ralston would like to know the cost difference between repairing the street versus long-term road repairs. He asked which would be more cost effective, long term. Mike Kelly said staff could identify mandated issues as well as life cycle cost analysis, affordability, etc. Councilor Simmons would like to follow the recommendation of Mike Kelly as well as look at delivery of service using enhanced, advanced technology. Councilor Lundberg discussed efforts ofthe Blue Ribbon panel as well as other input that has been provided by the community. She said based upon those comments, other prioritizationlbenchmarking could occur. Mayor Leiken reminded council members that they always have the opportunity to meet with department directors to become reacquainted with services and responsibilities offered by the various departments. . Councilor Hatfield said this process is critical to the long-term health ofthe organization and community. He said we need to identify where we want to be in the future, and identify how we get there. Do we reallocate resources to higher priority services and when we start looking at revenues, we must be ready to provide facts to the public. He clarified the difference between policy level decisions and micro managing. Councilor Hatfield suggested staff bring this item back to council for further discussion. He also requested that council be provided with information regarding mandated regulations, Springfield Tomorrow information, Blue Ribbon Panel information and 10 year targets/goals. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson ( ~~ Kim Krebs City Recorder .