Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Regular Meeting - 12/18/06 <br />Minutes - Page 27 <br /> <br />· Increase the budget for the City and Project Planning Division <br />by $5,750 in "Personnel Services" and by $8,400 in "Other <br />Services and Charges." <br />· Increase the budget for the Building Permits and Codes <br />Division by $1,000 in "Other Services and Charges." <br />· Authorize the creation of a part-time (.75 Full-Time <br />Equivalent) Senior Office Assistant at a Salary Grade of 6. <br /> <br />Mr. Stark addressed the proposed job description for a part-time <br />Senior Office Assistant available for review at Council discretion; <br />and opined that current management and senior planning staff was <br />spending their time on administrative tasks (i.e., collating agenda <br />packets for Planning Commission meetings), rather than planning <br />activities. Mr. Stark also noted potential for cost-sharing with the <br />HRA in the future; and addressed the numerous transitions within <br />the department over the past year. <br /> <br />Discussion included approval of job descriptions and salary grade <br />assignment by the City Council; and the role of contract <br />consultants for the HRA and current contractual obligations. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan supported the allocation for increased <br />gasoline expenditures and funding for increased professional <br />service costs (primarily a recording secretary for the Variance <br />Board and Planning Commission); but opposed any other <br />personnel-related actions, such as creating a position without <br />justification that there was a continuing need. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka opined that a part-time administrative <br />assistant position made sense, rather than paying senior planning <br />staff for doing administrative tasks. <br /> <br />Mr. Stark noted that, up until September of 2005, there had been a <br />full-time administrative assistant position within the department <br />for approximately 20 years, but that for cost-savings, upon <br />retirement of the employee, the position had been eliminated. Mr. <br />Stark thought the rationale was that not enough work was <br />available to support a full-time employee, thus his suggestion for <br />a part-time position. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pust clarified that money had been taken out of <br />