San Diego Budget and Government Efficiency Committee Meeting - March 16, 2016
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
San Diego Budget and Government Efficiency Committee Meeting - March 16, 2016
The Budget and Government Efficiency Committee met on March 16, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. (17:00 UTC) to consider six items: SDCERS charter amendments, a revised reserve policy, an amendment to the CGI IT services contract, an MOU with the County for a case management system, an increase in expenditure authority for office furniture, and a report on hiring process improvements. All items were approved unanimously, some with modifications. Chair Gloria noted he would leave at 11 a.m. for a ground-breaking ceremony; Vice Chair Sherman would take over.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of committee actions from the February 24, 2016 meeting was granted by unanimous consent.
- No non-agenda public comment was requested.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No members of the public spoke on any agenda item.
Discussion Items
1. SDCERS Charter Amendments (Item 1)
- Presentation: Johnny Trent, SDCERS, presented two proposals to clarify the City Charter: (1) incorporate the group trust powers (already approved by council in 2007) and (2) make charter language consistent with the California Constitution regarding investment plenary authority. He argued the current language is outdated and unnecessary.
- City Attorney Position: Joan Dawson stated the charter already references the California Constitution and the amendments are unnecessary. She also noted that striking the auditor/controller oversight language could affect CFO’s ability to stop certain payments to SDCERS.
- CFO Comment: Ms. Lewis confirmed that the CFO still needs ability to withhold payments for non-pension services (e.g., retiree health administration).
- Committee Discussion: Members expressed that while the changes might be nice, a ballot measure is costly; higher-priority charter changes exist. They agreed to recommend to the Charter Review Committee not to advance these changes.
- Vote: Motion by Cole, seconded by Sherman, to oppose the amendments. Passed unanimously.
2. Revised Reserve Policy (Item 2)
- Presentation: CFO Mary Lewis and Budget Coordinator Michael Clark proposed increasing the general fund reserve from 14% to 16.7% over five years, establishing a pension payment stabilization reserve at 8% target, and funding risk management reserves (public liability, workers’ comp) to current policy levels. Total contributions of $96.9 million over five years, with $27.2 million from FY2016 excess equity.
- IBA Position: Andrea Tevlin supported the policy but recommended deferring the actual funding allocations to the FY2016 year-end report and FY2017 budget process to maintain council flexibility.
- Committee Discussion: Chair Gloria, supported by IBA, moved to approve the policy but defer funding decisions. Councilmember Sherman asked to strike the IBA’s suggested modification #2 (which would have removed a specific funding date), fearing delays. Chair agreed, and the motion was amended.
- Vote: Motion by Chair, seconded by Cole, as amended by Sherman. Passed unanimously.
3. CGI Technology Solutions Contract Amendment (Item 5, taken out of order)
- Presentation: CIO Jonathan Banke requested a two-year, eight-month extension and an increased not-to-exceed amount of $144 million (from $70.6 million). The contract supports application development and maintenance for over 300 city applications. Savings from competitive rates: $7.1 million in first four years; blended hourly rate of $64 vs. $78 (SDDPC) and $93 (County). Customer satisfaction scores were high (8–10 out of 10).
- Discussion: Councilmember Kate asked about modernization progress and SLBE participation ($10 million projected). Savings since dissolving SDDPC were estimated in the range of $7.4–$20.1 million; staff expect to confirm within six months.
- Vote: Motion by Kate, seconded by Cole. Passed unanimously.
4. Case Management System MOU with County (Original Item 3)
- Presentation: Tanya Tomlinson, City Attorney’s Office, described a long-standing partnership using the District Attorney’s custom case management system. No initial software cost; annual costs average $60,000. The system handles misdemeanor prosecutions, allows easy case transfers, and includes recent updates for body-worn cameras.
- Discussion: Councilmember Sherman praised the low cost and collaboration. The current MOU had expired about a year ago; no interruption of service occurred.
- Vote: Motion by Sherman, seconded by Kate. Passed unanimously.
5. GM Business Interiors Furniture Contract (Original Item 4)
- Presentation: Christina Peralta, Purchasing & Contracting, requested a $7.6 million increase for a cooperative furniture contract (expiring Dec 31, 2016). Funds cover moves for several departments (e.g., Development Services, Code Compliance) and unscheduled moves. Cost per employee (~$3,900) includes full office furnishings.
- Discussion: Councilmember Sherman noted the need for modern workspaces. Councilmember Cole linked furniture investment to building upgrades. Chair asked about lease negotiations; staff confirmed that moves depend on successful lease agreements.
- Vote: Motion by Sherman, seconded by Cole. Passed unanimously.
6. City Hiring Process Improvements (Item 6)
- Presentation: YA? (Yahida) and Doug Edwards, Personnel, reported on progress since 2014 IBA and Auditor recommendations. Key metrics: time to provide eligible list dropped from 100 days (2012) to 46 days (2015) when recruitment needed; from 17 to 11 days when no recruitment needed. Hiring volume increased: 910 hires in 2012 to 1,375 in 2015; recruitments from 203 to 356. Efficiencies include online hiring center (NeoGov), digital fingerprinting, and out-of-state recruiting for police.
- Discussion: Councilmember Sherman requested additional breakdowns by department. Councilmember Kate acknowledged need for more resources; staff mentioned budget requests for additional personnel to support expanded recruiting. Chair thanked staff and IBA.
- Vote: Motion by Sherman to accept the report, seconded by Kate. Passed unanimously.
Key Outcomes
- All six agenda items passed unanimously.
- The committee formally recommended to the Charter Review Committee that the proposed SDCERS charter amendments not be advanced.
- The revised reserve policy was approved, but actual funding allocations for FY2016 and FY2017 will be addressed in the year-end and budget processes.
- The CGI contract amendment was approved, extending the term and increasing the expenditure cap; savings will be tracked in the coming months.
- The MOU with the County was retroactively approved.
- Expenditure authority for the GM Business Interiors contract was increased by $7.6 million.
- The personnel department’s hiring process report was accepted; staff will provide additional data and pursue budget requests for more recruiters.
- The next meeting is scheduled for April 13, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.
Meeting Transcript
Quorum is present, consistent of council members Cole, Kate and myself. We expect the other uh Mr. Sherman shortly. Uh just to let my colleagues know, uh I'll need to leave the meeting this morning at 11 a.m. so that I can join the mayor to break ground on the Bayside Fire Station uh here in downtown. Uh it's a reflection of the good budgeting that we've been doing around here. We can get this thing started, right? Um and uh Vice Chair uh Sherman will take over to finish the meeting if necessary. So uh we are the government efficiency committee, so I do like to see if we can get this done by 11, but let's see how we do. Uh we'll start this morning with the approval of our committee actions. Uh these are from the February 24th, 2016 meeting. They will stand approved uh by unanimous consent unless pool for discussion. Anyone wish to pull that item? There are none. We'll move to non-agenda public comment. So opportunity to talk about items not on this morning's agenda. Uh I have no requests from members of the public to speak. So going, going, gone. All right. Uh ask the committee if there's any committee members that wish to speak. Any mayor, city attorney, or uh IBA comment. None? All right. This is efficient. Uh there any requests for continuance from an item today on today's agenda. I have no request for that. All right. Well, let's start with our item number one this morning, which is to review a report from the San Diego City Employees Retirement System regarding items referred to the budget and government efficiency committee by the Charter Review Committee related to the retirement system. Ms. Trent is present. Welcome, sir. I understand you have about five minutes for your presentation. I do. You got it. Thank you. Good morning, Council members. Uh Johnny Trent with the San Diego City Employers' Retirement System in support of this item. I just want to give you a little background. Two years ago, the Charter Review Committee asked SE SERS for recommendations on how to improve the city charter, how to clarify it, clean it up, and we came back with a lot of recommendations, two of which are before this committee. The two recommendation recommendations. What are they? Uh what do they do, and how come the city attorney's office doesn't like them? That's what I'd like to talk about now. The first recommendation uh is written in my March 7th letter to you. I hope you had a second to read that. But I'm going to summarize what it says. The first one is to incorporate the powers and authorities of the group trust into the charter. In 2007, the city council uh decided to participate in the group trusts, so that way for IRS tax purposes, it could pull its money with the airport authority and the port district to share costs in investing. And we've done that since. What this recommendation simply does is it brings that decision of the city council to the forefront and puts it in the charter uh so that anyone reading the charter understands the relationship with SD SER's relationship with the port and airport.
openpublica.com