HomeMy WebLinkAbout35 - NB-4 - Reorganization in the Development Serv. - 2/4/2014CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: February 4, 2014 ITEM NUMBER:
SUBJECT: REORGANIZATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DATE: JANUARY 29, 2014
FROM: THOMAS R. HATCH, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PRESENTATION BY: THOMAS R. HATCH, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: THOMAS R. HATCH, CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER AT (714) 754-5328
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
Eliminate the following Development Services positions:
Inspection Services
• 1.5 FTEs (Part -Time Permit Technician and a Senior Combination Inspector)
• 2 Contract Combination Inspectors
• 1 Part -Time Combination Inspector
1 Part -Time Inspector
Plan Check Services
• 1 Building Technician (full-time)
• 1 Contract Building Technician II
2. Authorize the following Development Services positions:
Inspection Services
• 1 Permit Processing Specialist
• 5 Building Inspectors
Plan Check Services
• 1 Part-time Plan Checker
• 2 Building Technician II
Planning
• 1 Assistant Development Services Director
• 1 Principal Planner
• 1 Associate Planner
• 1 Assistant Planner
3. Appropriate $250,000 from the General Fund fund balance to fund these positions for the
remainder of FY 13-14.
4. Appropriate $150,000 from the General Fund fund balance to Development Services for general
consulting assistance needed.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The Development Services Department is responsible for building, planning and code enforcement
which is led by the Director of Development Services/Deputy CEO. Table 1 below shows the total
department staffing from FY 2009-10 to FY 2013-14.
Table 1: Development Services Department Staffing FY 2009-10 to FY 2013-14
Fiscal Year
Total Development
Services Staffing (FTEs)
2009-10
50.84
2010-11
35.48
2011-12
31.70
2012-13
27.59
2013-14
27.00
Table 1 shows that the Development Services Department staffing in FY 2009-10 was 50.84 full-time
equivalent (FTE) and in FY 2013-14 is 27 FTE, which is a reduction of 23.25 FTEs.
Building — Inspection Services
The Building Division is currently staffed utilizing a hybrid inspection staffing model which consists
of contract staff and City employees, which the City Council authorized in May 2012. The
inspection team is currently comprised of the following positions all of whom report to the Building
Official.
• 1 Chief of Inspection (full-time)
• 1 Senior Inspector (full-time)
• 2 Part-time Combo Inspectors (both at 1,560 hrs)
• 1 Contract Senior Inspector (1,960 hrs)
• 2 Contract Combo Inspectors (3,390 hrs)
• 1 Contract Building Inspector (500 hrs)
The Building Division has experienced a steady increase in the number of inspections, which is
projected to continue. Table 2 shows that number of inspections from 2009-10 to 2014-15
(projected).
Table 2: Inspections FY2009-10 to FY2014-15 (projected)
Fiscal Year
Total
Inspections
Average
Inspections/Per Da
2009-10
15,904
63
2010-11
13,837
55
2011-12
16,175
64
2012-13
18,994
76
2013-14(projected)
23,214
92
2014-15 projected
25,500
102
Table 2 shows that the total number of inspections between FY 2009-10 and FY 2014-15 is expected
to increase by 9,596 or a 60% increase. This is an increase of 39 inspections per day. Attachment A
shows the inspections trends from May 2005 through December 2013.
The table below shows the number of building permits issued between FY 2009-10 and FY 2014-
15.
Table 3: Building Permits Issued between FY 2009-10 and FY 2014-15
Fiscal Year
Building Permits
Issued
2009-10
1,836
2010-11
2,017
2011-12
2,259
2012-13
2,386
2013-14 projected
2,500
2014-15 projected
2,650
Table 3 shows that in FY 2009-10 the City issued 1,839 building permits and in FY 2014-15 that
number is expected to rise to 2,650. The increase in inspection activity is due to the increase in
infill projects on the West side, the 113 units Fairfield project, the Mesa Verde Senior Apartments,
the Villa Venetian major renovation, South Coast Plaza tenant improvements, and the recent
entitlement approval for the 250 unit midrise project on Avenue of the Arts (slated for construction
in the Spring of 2014).
Staff and the contractors work extremely hard to provide the highest quality customer service every
day; however, the significant increase in the workload in the last several years has resulted in an
inability to provide the highest levels of customer service at all times. Thus, there have been
customer complaints about the length of time it takes to receive assistance and even customers
having to leave the counter and come back later to get their questions answered.
In addition, CalPERS annuitants (retirees) are limited to their respective employment tenure and by
the number of hours they can work for an agency. Effective January 1, 2012, Assembly Bill (AB)
1028 amended Government Code (G.C.) section 21224. G.C. 21224 allows public agencies to
temporarily employ CalPERS retirees. These sections apply to retirees employed as temporary
"extra help" appointments during an emergency to prevent stoppage of public business or to
perform work of limited duration, i.e., elimination of backlog, special projects of what the
employer's permanent employees can do, etc. CalPERS retirees should not be appointed to
vacant permanent positions even if hours worked will not exceed 960 hours per fiscal year. Many
of the contract providers utilize PERS retirees. Thus, the City is limited in the amount of time they
can work for the City. This has caused staffing issues since the new regulations went into effect.
Based upon the increase in the inspection workload, customer complaints and changes in the law
regarding the use of CalPERS annuitants as contract staff, several staffing changes are
recommended.
Positions to Eliminate
• 1.5 FTEs (Part -Time Permit Technician and a Senior Combination Inspector)
• 2 Contract Combination Inspectors
• 1 Part -Time Combination Inspector
• 1 Part -Time Inspector
New Positions
• 1 Permit Processing Specialist
0 5 Building Inspectors
The estimated annual net result of eliminating the positions listed above is a savings of $529,000 and
adding the additional five (5) Building Inspectors and one (1) Permit Processing Specialist is a cost of
$605,000 including salaries and benefits. This is an increase cost of the general fund of $76,000 per
year.
Building — Plan Check Services
Currently staffing in Plan Check Services in the Building Division consists of the following staff who
report to the Building Official.
• Plan Check Engineer
• Building Technician
• Contract Building Technician II
• Part-time Building Technician II
• Supplemented by 5 plan check consultants
Table 3 above shows the increased building permit workload from FY 2009-10 to FY 2014-15. Based
upon this workload increase staffing changes are needed in Plan Check Services. The changes are
described below:
Positions to Eliminate
• 1 Building Technician (full-time)
• 1 Contract Building Technician II
New Positions
• 1 Part-time Plan Checker
• 2 Building Technician II
The estimated annual net result of eliminating the positions listed above is a savings of $166,000 and
adding the additional part-time Plan Checker and two (2) Building Technician II positions is a cost of
$244,000. This is an increase cost of the general fund of $78,000 per year.
Administration and Planning
The Planning Division provides comprehensive planning services in both advanced and current
planning. Advanced Planning functions involve General Plan amendments, rezones, ordinance
preparation, environmental review, urban plan preparation, socio-economic data collection and
analysis, and Federal Flood Insurance Program implementation. Current Planning functions
include processing land use applications and plans. The Planning Division staff includes the
following:
• 1 Principal Planner
• 2 Senior Planners
1 Associate Planner
• 1 Assistant Planner
All of these positions report to the Assistant Director of Development Services.
The workload for Planning Services has increased significantly during the second half of calendar
year 2013 and, like Building Permit activity, is rising to pre -recession levels. Entitlement projects are
being contemplated and submitted at a record pace. In addition, the General Plan Update is a work
plan item that requires a significant amount of staff time.
Further, the Planning Commission Goals (Attachment B), as a result of the May 2013 Study
Session, have created additional priorities and an increased workload for the Department. The
significant workload has resulted in Development Services having limited time to spend on other
critical assignments such as Economic Development, raising the bar on design elements
throughout the city, improved customer service, attracting new development projects and
businesses and ensuring that we provide quality services and meet expectations. Additional staffing
will allow staff to take on some of these priorities and expectations and anticipate needs for the
future of the City.
In order to achieve the goal of increase economic development, additional staff is needed to assist in
this area as well. The Director of Development Services/Deputy CEO needs the assistance of an
Assistant Director to ensure high levels of customer service are being provided across the department,
bringing forward new initiatives and to work with developers to ensure the final outcome of the projects
in the City meet Costa Mesa's standards.
Based upon the significant increase in the workload described above, staff recommends that the
following full-time staff be added to the Development Services Department:
• 1 Assistant Director of Development Services (focused on Economic Development)
• 1 Principal Planner
• 1 Associate Planner
• 1 Assistant Planner
Attachment C shows an organization chart for the department. The annual fiscal impact of these four
(4) new positions is $559,000, including salaries and benefits.
Conclusion
Overall, these changes result in an elimination of three (3) contractors and a net increase of eight (8)
FTEs in the Development Services Department, which would bring the total FTEs in the department to
35.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
1. Approve all positions recommended by staff.
2. Approve a combination of positions, but not all positions recommended by staff.
3. Do not make any changes to the organizational structure.
FISCAL REVIEW:
Table 4 below shows the total development services revenue from all permit and plan check fees, and
planning applications for FY 2008-09 to FY 2013-14.
Table 4: FY 2008-09 — FY 2013-14 Development Services Revenue
Fiscal Year
Development
Services Revenue
FY 2008-09
$ 876,000
FY 2009-10
$1,060,000
FY 2010-11
$1,278,000
FY 2011-12
$1,629,000
FY 2012-13
$1,704,000
FY 2013-14*
$1,900,000
*projected
Table 4 shows that development services revenue increase by over $1 million from FY 2008-09 to FY
2013-14.
Table 5 below shows the estimated annual cost of these organization changes.
Table 5: Fiscal Impact of Organizational Changes
Title
Total Annual Cost
Inspection Services
Eliminate: 2 Contractors & 3.5 FTEs
($
529,000)
Add: 6 FTEs
$
605,000
Sub -Total
$
76,000
Plan Check Services
Eliminate: 1 Contractor & 1 FTE
($
166,000)
Add: 2.5 FTEs
$
244,000
Sub -Total
$
78,000
Administration & Planning
Add: 1 FTE — Assistant Director of Development Services
$
207,000
Add: 1 FTE — Principal Planner
$
146,000
Add: 1 FTE — Associate Planner
$
111,000
Add: 1 FTE Assistant Planner
$
95,000
Sub -Total
$
559,000
TOTAL
$
713,000
The estimated annual increase in General Fund cost is $713,000. Funding for these positions for FY
2013-14 will be $250,000 from the General Fund fund balance as discussed on November 12, 2013
at the City Council Budget Study Session.
CONCLUSION:
Each of these additional positions is critical to the Development Services Department
achieving its goals now and in the future. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the
proposed reorganization plan for the Development Services Department, appropriate
$250,000 from the General Fund fund balance for FY 13-14 for these positions and
appropriate $150,000 annually for general consulting services. Additional revenues in future
years will offset some of these increased costs.
THOMAS R. HATCH
Chief Executive Officer
Attachment A: Trimester Inspection Counts
Attachment B: Planning Commission Goals
Attachment C: Development Services Functional Organization Chart