Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket - 10/11/2010 - Finance and Personnel Committee City of McHenry .� 'V, FILF Y x , 1� 1 333 South Green Street _ www.ci.mchenry.il.us McHenry,Illinois 60050-5495 -- x Mayor's Office (815) 363-2108 Fax (815) 363-2119 Administration (815) 363-2100 FINANCE/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEETI Fax (815) 363-2119 Construction and City of McHenry Municipal Center Neighborhood Services 333 South Green Street (815) 363-2170 Fax (815) 363-2173 Aldermen's Conference Room Finance Department(815) 363-2100 Monday, October 11' 2010' 6:30 PM Fax (815) 363-2119 Parks and Recreation (815) 363-2160 Fax (815) 363-3186 AGENDA Police Non-Emergency (815) 363-2200 Fax (815) 363-2149 1. Call to Order Public Works (815) 363-2186 2. General Fund Forecast Fax (815) 363-2214 3. City Administrator/Department Head Performance Evaluations Mayor Susan E. Low 4. Adjournment City Clerk Janice C. Jones Treasurer Posted: October 5, 2010 Steven C. Murgatroyd Aldermen WARD 1 Victor A. Sand WARD 2 Andrew A. Glab WARD 3 Jeffrey A. Schaefer WARD 4 Geoffrey T. Blake WARD 5 Richard W. Wimmer WARD 6 Robert J. Peterson WARD 7 Geri A. Condon MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Black, City Administrator FOR: October 11, 2010 Finance and Personnel Committee RE: General Fund Forecast Background The 2009/10 budget experienced an $89,975 deficit resulting primarily from a significant loss in sales tax and income tax revenue due to the economic downturn. For these two revenue sources, receipts were about $560,000 less than projected for the fiscal year. Fortunately, conservative budgeting and good fiscal management by the operating departments resulted in expenditures being roughly $600,000 under budget. As a result, a much larger budget deficit was avoided. General Fund reserves at the end of the fiscal year totaled $2.51 million, or 15.3% of budgeted expenditures. For 2010/11, the City's budget is $16,294,748, a decrease of $441,900 (2.7%) from the prior year. The budget includes the elimination of five full-time and one part-time position, as well as a pay freeze for exempt employees and wage concessions from two of the city's bargaining units. In addition, a one-time reduction in debt service payments of $110,000 was realized through refunding a prior bond issue and other cost cutting measures in the service contract and supply accounts were implemented. 2010/11 Forecast Revenues for 2010/11 are expected to be approximately $16.427 million, about $575,000 more than the budgeted amount. The local sales tax, which is effective January 1, 2011, is projected to bring in $475,000 in the last four months of the fiscal year. An additional $186,000 in one-time revenue was received through the sale of property as part of the Medela expansion. These increases are partially offset by projected shortfalls in the vehicle impound fee, parking fine, and vehicle sticker fee revenues. Sales tax and income tax receipts are expected to meet budgeted amounts. Expenses are projected to be approximately $16.377 million. The local sales tax receipts, which total $475,000, will be dedicated to additional Police Pension funding. Personnel and benefit costs are expected to exceed the budget amount by approximately $50,000 because of severance benefits from two unexpected retirements in the Police Department. Our projected year end surplus is expected to be approximately $50,000 and our unreserved fund balance will be approximately$2.56 million, or 15.6% of our expenditures. 2011/12 Financial Outlook In 2010/2011, General Fund revenues are expected to increase $1.4 from the 2009/10 budget to $17.84 million. Most of this increase is attributable to an increase in the local sales tax of $1.25 million, because the city will receive twelve months of this revenue source for the first time. Sales tax receipts and income tax receipts are expected to increase by 1.3% and 3.0%, respectively. Preliminary estimates indicate expenses will be $17.735 million, an increase of$965,000 from the prior year's budget. The salaries estimates are preliminary. FOP Unit I and Local 150 have agreements in place for the fiscal year. FOP Unit 2 (dispatchers/records/community service officers) and non-represented employees are yet to be determined. In the area of benefits, health/dental benefits are a great concern as many employers have seen premium increases exceeding 15% over the last year. Contractual and supply expenses are projected to increase three percent. The 2011/12 projection also includes funding for capital equipment. Summary The financial outlook for the next two years is adequate. The additional local sales tax revenue will allow the City to address Police Pension funding and allow for funds to be reserved for capital equipment and building improvements for General Fund operating units. The City will need to continue limiting the growth in expenditures, adjust fees annually, and continue strong fiscal management to assure financial stability in future years. In an effort to guide future financial decision making, staff would like also to discuss amending the City's Financial Policies to address the use of local sales tax revenue. The local sales tax was established to fund the city's Police Pension contributions, deal with future projected deficits, and address capital equipment needs. Staff believes it may be useful to modify the financial policies to reflect these goals and establish a Capital Equipment & Building Improvement Fund as a mechanism to reserve funds and plan for future capital equipment and building improvement needs in the General Fund. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Black, City Administrator FOR: October 11, 2010 Finance and Personnel Committee Meeting RE: City Administrator and Department Head Performance Evaluations Background. Performance evaluations will be conducted annually for City of McHenry employees. Staff believes evaluations are an important tool for accountability and communicating with employees regarding the positives aspects of their performance and addressing areas where improvement is necessary. In the past, aldermen have requested improvements in the performance evaluation document used for the city administrator and department heads. The specific concern was the current evaluation document included evaluation areas for which the aldermen had insufficient knowledge to form an opinion about an employee. Alderman Schaefer suggested staff research how city administrator and department head appraisals are done by other communities. Analysis. Attachment A is the document used by the City of McHenry for the city administrator and department head evaluations. Our evaluation document includes many categories, such as attendance and project management/task completion, which would be more common to an evaluation conducted by a manager having daily contact with an employee. Attached are documents used for evaluation of city administrators from the City of Woodstock (Attachment B) and the Village of Woodridge (Attachment C). Both municipalities seem to use performance criteria better suited for evaluation by each member of the City Council. Also, the attached evaluations contain fewer criteria and focus on leadership, management, and council relations. Staff believes both documents could be used as a template to develop a new performance evaluation for the City of McHenry. The City of McHenry evaluation process for the city administrator is a variation of that used by other communities. The administrators who responded stated each of their board members or aldermen completed independent evaluations, which were used to complete a composite evaluation for distribution to the Board or City Council for review and discussion at a meeting. In other communities, department heads evaluations were not performed by the Board or City Council. The evaluations were done by the city administrator with informal feedback from the board members or aldermen. In summary, staff is looking for direction from the Finance Committee on the contents of the city administrator performance evaluation document. Hopefully, the examples provided are viewed as an improvement over the existing document. Also, staff is seeking guidance from the Committee regarding changes in the evaluation process for department heads. 4chmen+ A )EFINITIONS OF RATINGS: Unacceptable: substantial need for improvement Improvement Needed: shows need for further training or required additional employee initiative Meets Expectations: consistently meets all requirements and expectations Exceeds Expectations: more than fulfills essential requirements Outstanding: performance is of highest caliber Not Applicable: not responsible for this activity Section I GENERAL APPRAISAL Improvement Meets Exceeds Not Unacceptable needed Expectations Expectations Outstanding Applicable 1. Observes Work Hours 2. Attendance 3. Quality of Work: Accuracy, Completeness, Neatness 4. Job Performance: Timeliness Use of Time Utilization of Resources 5. Accepts Responsibility 6. Respects Authority 7. Initiative: Amount of Direction Required Seeks Improved Methods/Techniques 8. Job Skill Development 9. Conflict Management Ability to resolve problems 10. Properly applies (or assists in applying) progressive discipline procedures 11. Is uniformly fair and objective in dealing with subordinates 12. Promotes an atmosphere which encourages subordinate development 13. Communication: Presentation skills/written and verbal 14. Maintains discretion and/or confidentiality when necessary 15. Actively listens to others; gives positive feedback and is approachable 16. Planning: Anticipates—develops objectives/goals/standards 17. Operational Practices: Applies standards; motivates and directs others and delegates tasks. 18. Overall leadership, management, training, and risk management activities Improvement Meets Exceeds Not Unacceptable needed Expectations Expectations Outstanding Applicable 19. City Council and Staff meeting attendance, preparation and input 20. Budget preparation, planning, presentation, follow-up, and expenditure levels 21. Project Management/Task Completion 22. Independent follow-up of items brought to your attention by the public, Mayor/Aldermen/City Administrator 23. Level at which you communicate City activities and actions to the public, Mayor/Aldermen/City Administrator 24. Handling of emergency and non- routine situations 25. Interaction with Community 26. Interaction with Elected Officials SECTION II Comments by Evaluator Comments citing specifics are required if appraisal falls at either end of appraisal spectrum; i.e. "Unacceptable" or "Outstanding" are checked in Section II. Comments are encouraged if the appraisal falls in the areas of"Improvement Needed" or"Exceeds Expectations." SECTION III DEPARTMENT HEAD COMMENTS The Department Head may comment on any portion of this appraisal or on the appraisal instrument as a whole, using additional sheets of paper if needed. If the Department Head does not concur with the appraisal, check the appropriate box in Section VI and explain the reason(s). SECTION IV SIGNATURES Department Head: Date: I do not concur (use Section V for explanation) City Administrator Date: Mayor Date: SALARY RECOMMENDATION:$ effective May 1, 20 for (Department Head name) VILLAGE OF WOODRIDGE VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION This form shall be completed by each member of the Board to evaluate the Village Administrator's performance in each of the areas noted below. Performance levels can be noted,based on the following scale: X= Insufficient Knowledge to Judge I = Poor(rarely meets expectations). 2 Below average (usually does not meet expectations). 3 = Satisfactory(meets performance expectations). 4 = Above Average (generally exceeds performance expectations). 5 = Excellent (almost always exceeds expectations and performs at very high standard). Each member of the Board should sign the form and forward it to the Mayor, who will.be responsible for compiling the comments. EVALUATION PERIOD: TO` 1. PERSONAL Invests sufficient effort toward being diligent and thorough in the discharge of duties. Composure, appearance, and attitude fitting for an individual in his executive position. . 2. PROFESSIONAL SKILLS AND STATUS Knowledgeable of current developments affecting the management field. Respected in management profession. Has a capacity for innovation. Anticipates problems and develops effective approaches for solving them. Willing to try new ideas proposed by Board Members or Staff. 3. RELATIONS WITH MAYORIBOARD OF TRUSTEES Carries out directives of the Board as a whole rather than those of any one Board Member. Assists the Board on resolving problems at the administrative level to avoid unnecessary Board action. Assists the Board in establishing policy, while acknowledging the ultimate authority of the Board. Responds to requests for information or assistance by the Board. Informs the Board of administrative developments. Receptive to constructive criticism and advice. VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 4. POLICY EXECUTION Implements Board action in accordance with the intent of the Board: Supports the actions of the Board after a decision has been reached. Enforces Village policies. Reviews enforcement procedures periodically to improve effectiveness. Offers workable alternatives to the Board for changes in the law when an ordinance or policy proves impractical in actual administration. 5. REPORTING Provides the Board with reports concerning matters of importance to the Village. Reports are accurate and comprehensive. Reports are generally produced through own initiative rather than when requested by the Board. Prepares a sound agenda which prevents trivial administrative matters from being reviewed by the Board. 6. ` CITIZEN RELATIONS Responsive to complaints from citizens. Dedicated to the community and its citizens. Skillful with the news media, avoiding political positions and partisanship. Has the capacity to listen to others and to recognize their interests--works well with others. Willing to meet with members of the community to discuss their real concerns. Cooperates with neighboring communities. Cooperates with the County,State, and Federal Governments. Cooperates with other governmental units within the Village, such as Parks, Fire Districts, and Schools. 7. STAFFING Recruits and retains competent personnel for Village positions. Aware of weak or indifferent administrative personnel and works to improve their performance. Accurately informed and concerned about employee relations. Professionally administers the merit system. 2 VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 8. SUPERVISION Encourages Department Managers to make decisions within their own jurisdictions without Village Administrator approval, yet maintains general control of administrative operations. Instills confidence and initiative iri subordinates and emphasizes support rather than restrictive controls for their programs. Has developed a friendly and informal relationship with the work force as a whole, yet maintains the prestige and dignity of the Village Administrator's office. Evaluates personnel periodically, and points out management weaknesses and strengths. 9• FISCAL MANAGEMENT Prepares a balanced budget to provide services at a level directed by.the .Board.. Makes the best possible use of available funds, conscious of the need to operate the Village efficiently and effectively. Prepared budget is in an intelligent format. Possesses awareness of the importance of..financial planning and control. 3 VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 10. What would you.identify as the results achieved during the evaluation period as representative of the strengths of the Administrator? 4 s VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 11, What performance areas would you identify as needing improvement? Why? What constructive,positive.ideas can you offer the Village Administrator to improve these . areas? 5 VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 12. Identify any performance areas or goals the Administrator should focus on during the coming year (i.e., not performance needing improvement, but rather new focus areas and goals.) --------------------- VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 13. Other Comments? Name Date: hAadministrator's survey and evaluationladministrator performance evaluation form.doc 7 City of Woodstock City Manager Evaluation Form Instructions The rating and evaluation form is divided into three parts,each representing a major aspect of the role of the City Manager. 1. Chief Administrative Officer charged with the responsibility for the proper administration of the affairs of the City. 2. Staff Assistant to the Mayor and City Council, charged with providing the Council with technical information,policy recommendations, and legislative advice. 3. City Representative representing the City in its relations with the public,press and media, other governmental units, and professional organizations devoted to municipal government. The Mayor and each Councilmember will evaluate the City Manager on his performance in fulfilling each of the three roles he serves for the City. Under Chief Administrative Officer, the Council evaluates Budget,Supervision,Personnel,Leadership,and Execution of Policy. Under Staff Assistant, the Council evaluates Reports, Council Relations, Agenda Planning, and Policy Recommendations. Under City Representative, the Council evaluates the aspects of Community Reputation, Citizen Relations, Professional Reputation, and Intergovernmental Relations. The City Manager is evaluated on a 1-5 scale, as follows: 1. Overall performance is significantly poorer than expected of individuals in this position. 2. Performance that is expected of experienced and qualified individuals in this position with some significant exceptions. 3. Performance that is expected of experienced and qualified individuals in this position. 4. Performance exceeds that expected of experienced and qualified individuals in this position. 5. Performance significantly exceeds that expected of experienced and qualified individuals in this position. Performance is consistently exceptional. City of Woodstock City Manager Evaluation Form Page Two CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 1. BUDGET: Is the budget presented by the Manager realistic? Is it prepared in an understandable format? Is it balanced? Is it presented in a timely fashion? Is it administered so that the City operates within its financial capabilities? Rating: Comment: 2. SUPERVISION: Does the Manager properly supervise Department Directors? Does he maintain a standard of respect for their ability and encourage their initiative? Are employees evaluated on a regular basis, pointing out areas for improvement. Are employees successfully motivated? Rating: Comment: 3. PERSONNEL: Have qualified and motivated employees been recruited and retained? Is he reasonably available to employees for guidance and counseling? Is he concerned about employee training,insurance,benefits,promotions,and pensions? Are personnel policies and procedures impartially administered? Rating: Comment: City of Woodstock City Manager Evaluation Form Page Three 4. LEADERSHIP: Is the Manager enthusiastic about working for the City? Is he respected by employees? Is he able to generate enthusiasm toward new ideas? Are his opinions respected? Rating: Comment: 5. EXECUTION OF POLICY: Does he understand City policy and ordinances? Does he cause them to be consistently enforced? Does he review enforcement from time to time to improve its effectiveness? Does he make recommendations to the City Council for changes in policy and ordinances if they prove impractical in actual administration? Does his attitude reflect a devotion and respect for City policy and ordinances? Rating: Comment: CITY COUNCIL STAFF ASSISTANT 6. REPORTING: Are the Manager's reports readable? Are they comprehensive and understandable? Does he provide information that you need to know to make sound decisions? Does he ask the City Council from time to time what they need to know? Overall, is the City Council well-informed? Rating: Comment: 7. COUNCIL RELATIONS: Does he try to generally work with the City Council as a whole? Is he helpful to Councilmembers with their concerns in such a way as to solve them at the administrative level,avoiding unnecessary Council action? Does he promptly answer Council questions? Is he candid and forthright, yet engaging in attitude appropriate to the situation? Is he receptive to constructive criticism and advice? Rating: Comment: City of Woodstock City Manager Evaluation Form Page Four 8. AGENDA: Does he prepare a workable agenda? Is it balanced so that the work flows smoothly and does not become a burden on certain dates? Does the agenda bring routine or trivial administrative matters before the Council, or does it focus on policy making? Rating: Comment: 9. POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION: Does the Manager have a proper sense of understanding of the difference between policy and administration? Does he help formulate policy without unduly pressing his ideas and recommendations? Does he offer sound advice to the Council on the formulation of policy and ordinances? Does he respond to suggestions to improve his administration? Rating: Comment: REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY 10. COMMUNITY REPUTATION: What is the general attitude of the community toward the Manager? Is he usually regarded as a man of high integrity,ability,and devotion to the City? Rating: Comment: 11. CITIZEN RELATIONS: Does he respect the individual citizen? Does he properly handle inquiries or complaints from citizens? When complaints are not valid, does he explain why they are not valid to the citizen? Does he properly defend the City Council and its reputation? Does he get out of the office frequently,look at things personally,take a deep and honest interest in the City and its people? Is he skillful with the media? Are you proud to have him represent the City before groups? Does he properly avoid politics and partisanship? Rating: Comment: City of Woodstock City Manager Evaluation Form Page Five 12. PROFESSIONAL REPUTATION: Does he approach his duties in a professional manner? Is he recognized as a professional administrator by his colleagues? Does he work well with other Administrators and Managers? Does he actively participate in professional organizations and professional development? Are you proud to have him represent the City at municipal associations and at City Manager conferences? Rating: Comment: 13. INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS: Does he cooperate cordially with neighboring communities and citizens? With the County, State, and Federal governments? Rating: Comment: City of Woodstock City Manager Evaluation Form Page Six Which elements of his performance need improvement? Are there any specific activities which need improvement? Do you have any ideas how he can improve in certain areas? During the coming year,what do you feel should be the priorities for the City and performance goals for the Manager? Which elements of the Manager's performance are strongest? What were his better accomplishments? City of Woodstock City Manager Evaluation Form Page Seven PERFORMANCE RATING: Evaluate the City Manager's overall performance in relation to his/her accomplishments by placing an(X) along the line below. 5 4 3 2 1 Excellent Highly Satisfactory Improvement Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Needed Comments: Signature Date