Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 2 of2 <br /> <br />not sure how appealing our position would be to a somewhat experienced engineer with a PE <br />since many of the duties would not be at the more experienced or "City Engineer" level. . <br /> <br />I think that changing the position to an Engineering Technician would be a very good option. <br />However, the market for those positions is also very, very limited. Many of the schools that <br />offered Technician degrees/certifications are no longer offering them. So the market is limited <br />and will become more limited as time goes by. <br /> <br />In terms of Option 2, I mentioned to Shoreview, New Brighton, and RosevilIe that I'd like to find <br />out if the idea of a shared arrangement appealed to them at all. The only City that I've had a <br />follow-up discussion with was Roseville. In brief, this is an option that I personally would like <br />to explore further. I think it provides us with most of the benefits we were hoping to achieve by <br />hiring a civil engineer on staff, with some possible additional benefits. <br /> <br />In terms of Option 3, if we wanted to pursue this model, I would probably recommend that we do <br />it as part of an RFP process. The arrangement some other cities have is that as part of the <br />engineering contract, the consulting engineers agree to assign someone to the City, who works <br />out of the City offices, for a certain annual fee. This would provide us with expertise in-house <br />and access to an engineer right at City Hall. <br /> <br />COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED <br /> <br />Which options would the City like staff to investigate further? We can focus on one option, two, <br />or all three. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />\\Earth\Admin\City Administrator\Engineering\2-16-05 Memo to Council RE Engineering <br />Services.doc <br />