Memorandum

City of Lawrence

City Manager’s Office

 

TO:

City Commission

FROM:

Thomas M. Markus, City Manager

DATE:

March 28, 2016

RE:

Lawrence Police Department (LPD) request for an over hire of 17 police officer positions

 

Background

The City Commission is scheduled to discuss the subject request at the regular commission meeting on Tuesday March 29, 2016. You have received a very thorough report dated March 23, 2016 from Police Chief Tarik Khatib.  I and the Chief along with other staff members from the police department, finance department and management staff met on March 23, 2016 to discuss Chief Khatib’s request. My reaction to the request was:

1.    I did not believe that I  had the authority to approve such a request administratively ( especially considering the magnitude)

2.    That the timing of the request, urgency of the request and my unwillingness to unilaterally approve such a request required the request to be placed on the next available commission agenda.

3.    That the request was out of context to the budget process and that the past practice of administratively granting such requests should end.  In the future, further discussion should be incorporated into the annual budget process for review and discussion.

4.    Knowing from my review of numerous public documents that our department  believes they are understaffed, in need for more equipment and  new expanded facilities  I wanted to be supportive and yet I am concerned as a manager that this practice of over hire is not in my opinion a good management practice except in rare or emergency conditions.

 

Discussion

Simply defined over hire is the hiring of too many employees. In the current context the Police Chief is asking to hire 17 additional police officers beyond the 152 authorized positions. This over hire is expected to be temporary. As officers separate either by voluntary or involuntary means the over hire will be gradually to the authorized position level of 152 positions. The estimated cost of this over hire is in the range of $644,396 to $1,017,061.

 

The Police Chief has done an excellent job of explaining the concerns and consequences of not establishing some level of over hire for the department.

 

It is incumbent upon me to express my views and concerns with you and they are stated below:

1.    Attrition occurs in every organization. Attrition is defined as “a reduction in the number of employees or participants that occurs when people leave because they resign, retire etc.”

2.    Over hire is from my opinion and experience not a common practice in city government.

3.    In previous budgets that I have prepared instead of showing a budgeted salary line item at the full salary pay according to an adopted pay plan we actually discounted the line item to account for a certain percentage of attrition so that our budget more accurately reflected the actual anticipated cost.

4.    In my opinion altering the number of authorized positions of an adopted budget requires commission approval.

5.    Approving the over hire outside of the context of the annual budget review is not a sound budgeting practice. Anytime the city is faced with requests outside the budget process the city does not have the benefit of comparison. Budgeting is about choices and comparing each request against all others and making determinations about resource allocations. Additionally, budgeting matches resources to services and as a result determines rates for revenues (tax, fee, contractual, revenue rates, etc.)  In the current situation we did adjust our tax rates to provide funding for the over hire request.

6.    As a result of the over hire request the city will likely need to draw down on fund balances, unless the police department can reduce other  expense line items to cover the over hire expense. The Police Chief has already indicated that the other police line items are needed and therefore would not provide a likely alternative for funding.

7.    Now that the over hire issue has been given more public attention (transparency) it is possible that the other departments will make a similar request. Again from my review of various reports other departments feel their departmental needs for staff, equipment and facilities are similarly unmet.

8.    The stated goal of the LDP is to “match resources with expected community service levels”. It is clear the department does not believe they are adequately staffed, equipped and that their facilities are lacking. I believe this view has led the department to pursue alternative staffing initiatives such as “over hiring”. In my past experiences attrition was viewed as a normal part of the employment cycle and therefore over hire was rarely deployed.

9.    The current attrition challenge has been known for a long time. We know that for the last 13 years our average attrition is about 9 (rounding up) positions per year. We know that since 2011 our attrition attributable to retirement is 21%, medicals is 8% and all other separations is 71%. The current crisis seems to have stemmed from a 1991 sales tax increase which resulted in the hiring of 27 officers.  19 of these hires are now at or close to retirement eligibility. So we have known this was coming for some time now. (Est. 25 years).

10. Knowing the normal attrition and the potential for a “bubble retirement” should be cause for us to develop a succession plan so that time issues are addressed going forward. This will provide for greater transparency, better budgeting process, better internal leadership opportunities, training and stronger fiscal control.

11. Taken to an extreme I suppose that one might argue that vacation, holiday and sick leave might be arguments for over hire.  Obviously, they should not, in part because of their predictability on the workflow. I would suggest that the police departments experience that on average 9 (rolled up) officers attrit out every year has also become predicable and should likewise not be subject to over hire but rather be part of our full staffing considerations to begin with.  Further, my view is that over hire should only be considered under rare circumstances and only outside of the budget process in an emergency situation.

12. If an over hire is approved this year it will be the fourth year in a row that an over hire has been authorized.

13. The Police Chief has done a very credible job of describing the service changes that have been made and that may potentially occur due to staff shortages. Essentially staff is being over hired due to the departments concerns with the adequacy of existing full time staffing levels.

 

Conclusions and Recommendations

Crisis should not result from issues that are known and completely predictable and thus manageable. I apologize to the Commission for placing this matter before you on such short notice. We will endeavor to get ahead of this issue so that in the future it is dealt with as a part of the budget process.

 

The City Manager is responsible for budget preparation and presentation. The City Commission retains authority over public policy which includes budget approval. Even a temporary over hire can have significant consequences on an already approved budget and as such the decision will rest with the commission.  As I start my role as city manager it is critical that I build trust with the Commission, community and our employees. As with most decisions a City manager faces I feel tugged in numerous directions over this issue.  I have found that there are never enough resources to satisfy even the most conservative of department heads. My experiences have also taught me that overcommitting of resources is not sustainable and may result in more harm than good over the long term.

 

Recommendations:

1.    Recommend that the City Commission approve an over hire of 14 police officers.  12 officers would still place us at risk for an added expense of $894,396.  14 officers would create slightly more risk.  I believe the expense is estimated at the high end but I would remind you that we did not accommodate for this expense in the budget which began 1-1-16.

2.    Recommend the City Commission direct the City Manager to develop a succession plan for the city organization.

3.    Recommend that the City Commission direct the City Manager to make future over hire determinations a part of the regular budgeting process and discussion unless an emergency exists as determined by the City Manager.