AGENDA DATE: 11/2/2016
TITLE:
Title
Community Development Workload and Staffing
BODY
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Consider authorizing additional staff in response to increased development activity
ITEM TYPE: Regular Action Item
STAFF CONTACT(S): Foley, Walker, Kamptner, Graham
PRESENTER (S): Graham
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
REVIEWED BY: Thomas C. Foley
BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department (CDD) is currently facing distinct challenges presented from significant increases in development activity and constrained staffing resources. Attachment A provides a quantitative evaluation of development activity and staff resources. The data presents a clear picture of a increasing workload and a significant elevation in turnover in the department. The current condition of staffing capacity is impacting both development review and staff’s ability to address CDD work program priorities creating a need for additional staff resources.
STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal 7: Operational Capacity. Ensure County government’s ability to provide high quality service that achieves community priorities.
DISCUSSION: Staffing/Funding: CDD is currently funded with 66.5 full time equivalent employees (FTEs) compared to 85.0 FTEs in 2007 (22% less). Attachment A illustrates the effectiveness of the staffing efficiencies the department has put in place since 2010 that have improved operational effectiveness. Going forward, additional gains would require consideration of modifications to ordinance requirements or more significant fee levels above those of comparable communities.
Workload: Attachment A illustrates the increased workload CDD is experiencing. CDD workload is largely a function of the number of applications submitted. This data supports the assertion that the number of applications per planner is currently at or near record levels. While not illustrated in the graphs, the administrative support for permit processing is following a similar trend with a need for additional support.
Turnover: Attachment A illustrates a trending increase in turnover. FY16 was a significant year for turnover. Prior to this, CDD was experiencing manageable turnover as equilibrium had been established in FY11. Noting that there have been no significant changes in supervision or advancement opportunities since FY11, CDD’s focus has turned to workload and a need for additional review planners and permit intake staff appears to be the most serious concern.
Proposed Remedy: Based on the data provided in Attachment A, CDD has determined the need for two additional planner positions and additional permit intake support to restore balance between workload and resources. More specifically, staff contends that the most cost effective action is to hire one or both of the new planner positions at the entry level and shifting work among the more experienced staff to allow new planners to focus on simpler tasks. In this way, the new planners can more quickly become effective staff resources and more experienced staff can better focus on those activities that require a greater degree of knowledge and experience. Additionally, staff recommends additional temporary permit intake support with a re-evaluation of the need for permanent staff capacity within the next six to twelve months.
Alternatives Considered: Staff has already utilized overtime and has also considered the use of contract services to supplement current staff capacity. Both of these strategies are more expensive than hiring professional staff and neither effectively address the longer term implications represented by the projected upward trend in department activity and associated workload. CDD staff were reduced significantly in the recent past in response to a sharp decline in activity/workload. Staff is confident that any similar change in activity levels can be addressed effectively with a similar use of attrition and/or re-assignment.
CDD has also considered reducing current programs and service levels. While attention to process improvements and streamlining as a means of improving service has previously and will continue to be evaluated going forward, staff does not propose program and/or service level reductions as austerity measures in this instance.
BUDGET IMPACT: Assuming a January 1 start date for these additional resources, the impact on the FY17 budget is estimated to be approximately $106,000. This assumption is based on half-year funding for one Planner position, one Senior Planner position and temporary permit intake support. This expense is off-set by a revised revenue projection for CDD-related fees in an additional amount of $296,000 for FY17.
It is recommended that funding for these positions, if approved, come from Reserve for Contingencies and the General Fund Balance as follows: Reserve for Contingencies - $78,000 for on-going half-year costs for 2 planner positions. GF Fund Balance - $28,000 for half-year costs for temporary permit intake support and one-time start-up costs for 2 planner positions.
Costs for FY18 and beyond will be considered as part of the 2-Year Fiscal Plan and annual budget.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Board authorize two (2) additional planner positions and funding for temporary assistance with permit processing effective January 1, 2017. Assuming the Board approves this request, an associated appropriation request will be presented to the Board for consideration and action at an upcoming meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - CDD Development Activity