Laserfiche WebLink
Various Updates <br /> December 14, 2005 <br /> Page 2 of 2 <br /> NEW ENGINEER: CITY ENGINEER STATUS <br /> With the new Civil Engineer starting in early January, we need to have a discussion as to who we <br /> wish to designate as official "City Engineer". URS currently serves in that role for us. The City <br /> Engineer is the person authorized to sign engineering plans. This responsibility was not <br /> anticipated for the newly created Civil Engineer position — it would really mean the position <br /> would be more of a department head level and would have higher job and salary requirements. <br /> In addition, the Civil Engineer will not be able to fulfill all of the engineering needs that the City <br /> has, so we will continue to have a strong need for consulting engineers. Therefore, I believe <br /> there are two options for us: (1) Appoint the City of Roseville's City Engineer and our City <br /> Engineer; or (2) Continue with URS serving as' our City Engineer. We could also delay the <br /> decision for a little while, continuing with URS in that role until the Civil Engineer has been on <br /> board for a while and we've worked closely with Roseville for awhile. My recommendation is <br /> that we appoint Roseville's City Engineer as our City Engineer. Since that person will be the <br /> direct supervisor of the Civil Engineer, and the Civil Engineer will be coordinating all of our <br /> engineering needs, I think it makes more sense from an organizational perspective. City Council <br /> needs to discuss the options and decide what you are most comfortable with. <br /> \\Metro-inet.us\ardenhills\Admin\City Administrator\Memo\2005\12-14-05 Memo RE Various Updates.doc <br /> s <br />