My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2012_0813
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2012
>
CC_Minutes_2012_0813
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2012 11:54:07 AM
Creation date
8/28/2012 11:54:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/13/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,August 13,2012 <br /> Page 23 <br /> restructuring of departments and consolidation of positions had not allowed for <br /> internal comparisons and equities. City Manager Malinen sought City Council <br /> support in moving forward to get the City back on the plane they were on short- <br /> ly after the 2002 study and its subsequent implementation. City Manager Ma- <br /> linen noted, as addressed by Ms. Bacon, that the 2012 budget did not include <br /> funding for this $150,000; however, he noted that sufficient funds were availa- <br /> ble to initiate the compensation study, and future budgets could be amended ac- <br /> cordingly to accommodate the cost,beginning in 2013. <br /> At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen noted that the 2012 fund- <br /> ing could come forward as a budget amendment, similar to other amendments <br /> throughout the year; and anticipated funding it in part through currently vacant <br /> positions. <br /> Councilmember Pust asked that Finance Director Miller provide cost savings <br /> from vacant positions at his earliest convenience; anticipating that some of those <br /> savings could be applied to the geothermal costs. <br /> Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of proceeding with the Compensa- <br /> tion Study, since the last study was done ten (10) years ago, and given the time <br /> required to implement the study; opining that the City Council owed it to its <br /> employees. <br /> At the request of Councilmember Johnson as to whether this would be handled <br /> through a best value contract, per City Policy, Ms. Bacon questioned the validi- <br /> ty of such an extensive process, since this was such a minimal dollar amount, <br /> and whether the City would realize the best value from such a process. Ms. Ba- <br /> con noted that the last study cost $15,000 and that included a complete over- <br /> haul, which this would not require; and questioned the need to consider a full <br /> $30,000 expenditure. <br /> Mayor Roe opined that it was up to staff's discretion to implement a proper <br /> evaluation of this type of service evaluation, per City Policy. <br /> City Manager Malinen opined that, if it was more prudent, since the cost and ef- <br /> fort are fairly significant for the best overall value for professional services, he <br /> wasn't sure if this warranted that level. <br /> Mayor Roe recommended that the City's Policy be followed. <br /> Councilmember McGehee opined that she felt confident that the lower dollar <br /> amount would be applicable; and was comfortable with the traditional profes- <br /> sional services process. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.