Hello everyone.

I would like to call to order the April 21st meeting of the Edmund City Council Public Safety Planning, Human Services, and Personnel Committee, also known as PSPHSP, at 4 30 p.m.

And we will be starting with an item 2.1, the request to increase administrative assistance from 1.4 to 2.0 FTEs, which will be presented by Mike Luxon.

Please take it away, Mike.

Awesome.

Thank you.

So it was as was noted in your packet.

We found out over the last couple of years that our administrative support isn't meeting our needs.

And as I outlined in the memo, before COVID, we had two plus people.

And those staff were largely working on separate tracks.

And so what we've been doing with the administrative staff is cross-training on a number of different things.

And while we've been able to get by, I think that's largely due to a couple of things.

One, we've been fortunate enough to have support from past assistants who we could call in when we needed it in an emergency situation.

And so we we had done that.

And of course, we're not supporting as many boards and commissions right now as we had been either.

So the workload is somewhat reduced.

But even so, um, with that 1.4, we've uh now noticed we no longer have that on call support that we did have.

Um it was Janice Bellman who used to work here for many years, and so she was filling in on occasion.

Um she's no longer doing that, so we don't have that um sort of emergency call-in.

Um and so what we've found is it's been difficult to have coverage when one or the other assistants um, for example, wants to take some time off or needs to take some time off or has um illness or any of those sorts of things.

And so we've had people um, you know, just other staff members sitting up at our front permit counter um desk on occasion because we've needed to take in calls and doing those sorts of things.

And so something not in their job description for sure, but um, needs must.

And so folks have pitched in and and we've certainly been uh grateful to those folks.

But um, so now though we've just seen it, it it's it's not getting any better.

Um, we've become just about as efficient as we can be with what we have.

And so um we're requesting that the um.9 position uh that's primarily supports the department um gets bumped back up to uh 1.0, and the halftime admin that primarily supports planning um gets bumped from 0.5 to 1.0.

Um as I mentioned, you know, there's been a lot of cross-training over the last few years, and so these folks support each other um in ways that never happened before.

And so that we have gotten efficiencies out of that, but um, we just don't have enough time for uh these people to be in seats to get um work done.

Um there's work that we're not doing um as efficiently as we could, and so um having that extra 0.6 of human being would be um really useful.

The one thing for 2026 is we already have um existing budget savings um in the form of two senior planners who haven't been hired yet.

Um, so uh that amounts to oh in your packet, I think it was 50, what was it?

98 98,000, yeah, in in savings for the first four months.

So um uh, you know, not definitely a pretty good amount of savings.

And so the increase um in 26 to the admin assistance um would be about 57 seven.

So um for for 26, I mean, we basically have the increase covered.

Now going forward in the next biennium, we we would not have that um extra uh free board.

And so that would be you know new funds coming out of um uh the general fund for sure.

Um I can say though, as we look back up to or look toward the next biennium, if we begin um servicing more boards and commissions, which I expect we will.

Um if if we take on um additional land, like through an annexation, for example, there's gonna be another uh couple thousand parcels to um have to service as well.

Um permitting would increase as the result of that work.

So um I don't think we're gonna get any less busy um anytime soon.

In fact, we'll probably be becoming more busy.

So um while there will be an additional budget hit in 207 and 28, um, I I think the need it will be there uh as well.

So um I'm hoping you look uh favorably on this request.

Um it would definitely help us out and um smooth our transition as we go forward.

Thank you.

Are there any questions from our committee member or ex FAQ members?

Please go ahead, Susan.

Thank you.

Um I appreciate this.

And um it sounds like you have this built already inside your budget, but mainly due to salary savings.

And that means that if you would if those positions were in place, and I uh and it might be strategic to not have those all full.

Um, you know, so uh a couple of questions is so ultimately I I agree that you probably need it.

Um and I also understand that you know we need to get the the permits out the door.

So um will for next year will you have um are you ex you're expecting more more work?

Now, does that also mean more revenue to the general fund through the permitting process?

I mean, is there is is adequate overhead being charged to I mean I I think you know, Michelle and I and I think others on the council have been very interested in in making sure that the overhead costs, which include all the administrative support, the building, the air conditioning, et cetera, um are all taken into consideration for the permit fees.

Um and I know that it costs some money, but I know that you've been working on that or have already you know figured out that what we have is good enough.

Um how can you how can we make it sustainable?

I guess is the the short version of my question.