SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUDGET WORK SESSION
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY, MAY 17, 2006, AT 4:00 P.M.
Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
Council members present were Laurin Easthom, Sally Greene, Ed Harrison, Cam Hill, Bill Strom, Bill Thorpe, and Jim Ward.
Council Member Mark Kleinschmidt was absent, excused.
Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Town Information Officer Catherine Lazorko, Finance Director Kay Johnson, Information Technology Director Bob Avery, Planning Director J. B. Culpepper, Engineering Director George Small, Public Works Director Bill Letteri, Police Chief Gregg Jarvies, Fire Chief Dan Jones, Transportation Director Stephen Spade, Human Resources Director Pam Eastwood, Assistant Human Resources Director Anissa Graham-Davis, Library Director Kathleen Thompson, Inspections Director Lance Norris, Parks and Recreation Director Kathryn Spatz, Housing Director Tina Vaughn, and Deputy Town Clerk Sandy Cook.
Mayor Foy requested that downtown parking be added to the agenda and discussed at the end of the meeting. The Council agreed by consensus.
Item 1 – Recommended Compensation for Town Employees
For Fiscal Year 2006-2007
Human Resources Director Pam Eastwood stated they had conducted a survey that was completed in December. She said they had reviewed 21 benchmark positions that were indicators of market changes or where the Town needed to make sure it was aligned. Of those jobs, Ms. Eastwood said, they found that about 42 percent of the positions surveyed had range midpoints that fell below the market average.
Ms. Eastwood said after their analysis they found two things. First, because of the step increases that the Council had approved in three of the last four years, many employees had moved up into the middle or upper parts of their job ranges. She added that about 65 percent of the Town’s employees were at or above the mid-point of their job range, which was appropriate for employees with an average length of service that exceeded 10 years. Secondly, Ms. Eastwood said, because the mid-point and maximum had not been moved for three of the last four years, they had dropped behind the mid-points of some of the ranges in the labor market.
Ms. Eastwood said, having found those two things in mind, rather than recommend a step increase they recommended adjusting the pay ranges themselves, giving the Town the opportunity of moving the ranges up and allowing employees additional room to continue advancing. She stated that even though some employees wanted to be at the maximum of their pay ranges, from a staff standpoint that was not a good idea because it gave employees nowhere to go.
Ms. Eastwood said for those reasons, they recommended a 3 percent range adjustment, and if that were approved that would adjust Town ranges to be closer to the mid-point of the market, and also would provide employees with a significant pay increase that would be appreciated.
Ms. Eastwood said each year they provided information to the Council about the small number of job classes that have fallen greater than 10 percent below the market average. She said this year those jobs included Fire Captain, Fire Equipment Operator, Inspector, Senior Inspector, and Inspector Supervisor. Ms. Eastwood said the recommendation was that the pay grade for those jobs be increased, as noted on page 3 of the April 24 memorandum, before a range increase for all employees. She said that would allow those positions to remain competitive and allow the Town to recruit at a competitive level.
Mayor pro tem Strom said that Council Member Kleinschmidt had advocated for a 3.78 percent increase for employees, but Ms. Eastwood was recommending a 3 percent increase in the pay range in lieu of that pay increase. Ms. Eastwood said that was correct. Mayor pro tem Strom said that the 3 percent increase in pay range more directly addressed the market research then. Ms. Eastwood said she had indicated to Council Member Kleinschmidt that if the Council had more money to spend, she would still recommend that it be spent on the ranges.
Mayor Foy asked exactly what did “spend it all on the ranges” mean. Ms. Eastwood responded if the Council told her that they believed they could spend more than 3 percent on salaries, such as 3.25 or 3.5 or 3.78, she would still recommend that the funds be used to adjust the ranges rather than granting it as an employee step. Ms. Eastwood said salaries were at a competitive range for which an employee was hired. She said the range itself was low against the market.
Mayor Foy said if the range was $25,000 to $30,000, and the Council said they would increase the range to $30,000 to $35,000, if you were at the mid-point of the range, which might be $27,000, then the employee would move to the mid-point of the new range. He asked would that mean that certain employees would be affected differently. Ms. Eastwood replied no, that the value of every step would change by the same percentage, and the value of the minimum, mid-point and maximum salary would change by the same percentage.
Council Member Ward said that was clear in terms that employees would then have farther to move to reach the maximum of their pay grade. Ms. Eastwood said that was correct. She said if the Council grants 3 percent then the maximum of every range would increase by 3 percent, meaning that every employee would receive 3 percent. Ms. Eastwood said that would result in employees who were close to the maximum having a little more room to continue to advance. She added that any percentage increase would be an across-the-board increase for all employees.
Mr. Horton stated another way to look at it was that an employee who was on step four of their range would continue to be on step four, but step four would be 3 percent higher. He said if merit increases were provided, a person who was 3 percent below the maximum who received a 3 percent increase would then go to the maximum. He said if the next year merit increases were provided but no market adjustment, that person would have no headroom and may not receive any adjustment.
Ms. Eastwood said their base pay would not increase once they reached the maximum in their range. She said she had talked with employees to explain why she believed they really did not want to be at the maximum of their pay range, noting that if the Council did not continue to move the range then it became flat. Ms. Eastwood said that was usually referred to as being “frozen.” She said this year, the Town’s pay was relatively better than its ranges, which was why they were recommending an increase in the ranges.
Council Member Ward asked if this would have any impact on starting salaries. Ms. Eastwood responded yes, that minimum salaries would increase by 3 percent as well. She said that would result in the Town being more competitive for new hires, and we would be more attuned to the minimum ranges in our market area.
Council Member Ward asked Ms. Eastwood how she would characterize the Town’s starting salaries relative to the market. Ms. Eastwood replied that was difficult, because some were narrower and some were wider than the Town’s. She said some employres did not start all new employees at the beginning of the range, making it even more difficult to use as a comparison. Ms. Eastwood said that was why they looked at actual average pay when making comparisons.
Council Member Easthom said what was recommended was a range increase of 3 percent, but she was also recommending a step increase of 2.5 percent. Ms. Eastwood said no, that was not correct.
Mayor Foy said this could be confusing because conflicting memoranda had been produced. He said that the information on a 2.5 percent increase had been provided on request, but was not a recommendation. He said the basic information was that everyone would receive a 3 percent increase, and the way it was done was through adjustment to the pay ranges.
Mayor Foy said in most years the Town did not adjust the range, which was where the issue of the 3.78 percent increase came into play, and sometimes created a problem for the Council. He said this year staff was recommending 3 percent and the Town was able to do that without moving the steps, because the steps were 3.78 percent apart. Ms. Eastwood said that was correct, noting it was not an either/or, that either the Council granted a step or it did not because the Town was working with pay ranges.
Ms. Eastwood distributed a document that she had received a few days ago that gave some idea of what other organizations in the area were expected to do regarding pay increases for the coming year. She said she had received survey results of a survey conducted by the Town of Cary which the Town of Chapel Hill had participated in. Ms. Eastwood said it had included 14 organizations, and some were organizations that were in the Town’s market area. She said the survey had asked early on what the Town believed its recommendations would be, so it was not complete. Ms. Eastwood said the information was coded so that one did not know which recommendation went with which organization, because these were preliminary recommendations that had not been presented to the elected bodies.
Ms. Eastwood said she was surprised by some of the results, noting they were larger than she had expected to see. She said some organizations were considering a cost-of-living or automatic increase for all employees, and others were planning a merit increase, as well as some considering an increase to their pay schedule. Ms. Eastwood said the right-hand column of the chart indicated each organization’s estimate of what its employees would receive. She said she provided that information so they would have some sense of where they would end up if the Council did approve what was recommended.
Item 2 – Pay Plan with 2.5 Percent Steps
Ms. Eastwood briefly described the two concerns they had regarding 2.5 percent steps. She said one was the impact it would have on the Pay Plan, adding two additional steps in order to maintain the Plan at its current level without lowering or raising them. Ms. Eastwood said it would also take an employee time to get to the mid-point of the range. She reminded the Council that their goal was to get employees with five years or more of service to the mid-point, so that their pay would be competitive with employees with other organizations with about the same years of service. Ms. Eastwood said that was so it would not be easy for other organizations to “pick off” the senior, experienced, highly trained employees.
Ms. Eastwood said, for example, when she looked at the Town’s inspectors and saw that they were 10 percent below the mid-point of the market area, she knew it was time to act. She said that was a seasoned, highly skilled, and valuable group that the Town would not want to be hired away by other organizations because they had allowed the pay range to fall.
Ms. Eastwood said the other concern was what it would take to move from the 3.78 percent steps to the 2.5 percent steps. She noted that first of all it would cost more to put 2.5 percent steps in place, because it would raise employees to the step that was closest to their current salary on the new range. Ms. Eastwood estimated that would cost an additional $180,000 annually.
Also of concern, Ms. Eastwood said, was that getting people onto the new step closest to the one they were on now had a “wave” effect, meaning that to put an employee who is on step one onto the next step would be a 1 percent to 1 ¼ percent increase. She said if that employee were on step two now, it would take a 2 ½ percent increase. Ms. Eastwood said she would find it difficult to explain that to employees in a way that they would think was fair. She said it would have widely varying effects on salaries, would redistribute equity within a pay group, and she believed it would make employees very unhappy. Ms. Eastwood said they honestly did not believe this was needed in order to have flexibility in salary increased from year to year.
Ms. Eastwood said they always base their recommendations on their salary survey and their market analysis. She said if the Council were to tell her that they could not fund a particular increase, she would ask what amount was available and apply it to the ranges. Ms. Eastwood said it could be a dynamic, negotiable, flexibility amount within any amount the Council granted, and the Pay Plan did not have to be changed to accomplish that.
Ms. Eastwood said because of what they believed would be a strong negative reaction by employees, she urged the Council to move to 2.5 percent steps.
Mayor Foy noted that this came up because the Council was searching for a way to not always be cutting the expectation and appear miserly. He said what Ms. Eastwood was saying was that if the Council could only fund a 2.5 percent increase, the Town could live with that under the current Pay Plan. Ms. Eastwood said the other thing they could do was spend more time and effort in helping employees to understand the rationale for pay increases, the variations in pay increases, and where they fall within the market.
Item 3 – Discussion of Pay Plan Review Committee Report
Ms. Eastwood said she believed the Pay Plan Review Committee was worthwhile and resulted in better informed citizens and better informed employees. She said a periodic review of the Pay Plan was a good thing, and should be done every few years. Ms. Eastwood said the Committee had focused on career progression ladders, and the difficulty of having a perfect performance system and how that might be improved.
Council Member Hill stated that not changing the Pay Plan was a legitimate way to go, noting the benefits may not outweigh the negatives largely in the way it was perceived by employees. He commented that a lot of the issues regarding dissatisfaction about the Pay Plan were the result of communication and education. Council Member Hill said he was not saying that efforts were not made to communicate and educate employees regarding the Pay Plan, but there were some misconceptions.
Council Member Hill said there was some feeling among mostly non-employee members of the Review Committee that a true merit-based review and system of raises was a good idea. He said there was no specific recommendation on how to do that in the public sector. Council Member Hill said those non-employee members believed that the merit system currently used was not really about merit since about 96 percent of the employees received it.
Council Member Hill said the Town had talked about adjusting the benefit package in a way that might put more cash in employees’ pockets, but had gotten nowhere with that. He said the comment heard most frequently from employees was you couldn’t eat benefits, meaning they might prefer cash. But, Council Member Hill said, essential you could eat retirement benefits. He said he had pushed the idea of exploring higher deductible, lower premium health insurance, and had gotten nowhere with that. Council Member Hill said that had taught him a new term, “adverse selection,” which meant that people might make a choice that was not in their best interest, resulting in uninsured Town employees.
Mayor Foy asked why the Town would have uninsured employees. Ms. Eastwood replied because employees would waive insurance benefits in order to get the cash. She said adverse selection came into play whenever you had a choice that allowed one group of employees to make a choice that was different from another group, which had an impact on the shape and nature of the employee group we were getting bids on and it became less attractive to insurers. Ms. Eastwood said it might mean that premiums would rise because of the number of employees who would opt out of the program.
Mayor Foy said he thought she was talking about having the deductible rise by a large percentage. Ms. Eastwood said that was correct, and she had concerns about lower-paid employees being able to cover that.
Council Member Hill said they had explored many areas and did not find any “chinks,” noting that the status quo seemed to be justifiable. He said the way people perceive their jobs was linked to how they felt about their supervisor, and front-line supervisors were the most important group in any organization. Council Member Hill said those supervisors were usually elevated line-workers, and may need additional training to become excellent supervisors. He said that transition was a difficult one, and educating those supervisors about policy and employee review did not come naturally. Council Member Hill said that was an area where misconceptions could theoretically be addressed.
Council Member Hill said that was where any true merit-based system would have to be applied, because those supervisors would set and evaluate performance goals. He stated it took at lot of training and commitment, and that was where the burden would fall. Council Member Hill said that was an organizational question and a policy question, and was the one big question that came out of the Review Committee.
Council Member Hill said there were a number of people who were concerned that the Town’s employee benefits package was higher than what was offered by our competitors, although no one suggested cutting it. He said such things were difficult to evaluate, but it was suggested that the level of benefits and pay was reaching a point that it would become a competitive disadvantage. Ms. Eastwood said provided with the information for this meeting was a survey they had conducted using the same organizations that the Town used to compare pay, and she believed that was the most accurate representation of the labor market for employees. She said, as of last year, the Town was solidly in the upper half but by no means at the top. Ms. Eastwood said municipal and county benefits appear to be a standard package, with only a few exceptions. She said Chapel Hill’s benefits package was within the norm, but did not exceed it.
Mayor pro tem Strom said one huge element of that package was health insurance, and some time should be spent discussing that because in overall dollars it was an enormous percentage of the Town’s budget. He said now if someone worked for the Town of Chapel Hill they received coverage. Ms. Eastwood said an employee could decline coverage. Mayor pro tem Strom said he understood Ms. Eastwood had said the Town gets a better rate from insurance vendors because all employees participated. Ms. Eastwood said that was basically correct, adding that if employees declined coverage it would change the distribution and the shape of the group.
Mayor pro tem Strom said if an employee’s spouse worked for a company that provided coverage for both the spouse and the Town employee at no charge or a reduced rate, the employee had no option to take money from the Town in lieu of that insurance coverage. Ms. Eastwood said that was correct. Mayor pro tem Strom said he would like the Council to receive more information on cafeteria benefits or flex dollars that the City of Raleigh and the County of Durham provided for its employees. He said it would be helpful to see how much it was costing per employee. Ms. Eastwood said they could provide that information if available. She added that when looking at such benefits the greatest difficulty when considering a transition to a cafeteria plan for employees was that the Town would have to discontinue paying 100 percent for the employee. Ms. Eastwood stated that the City of Raleigh and the County of Durham do not pay 100 percent employee benefits, and both were in the minority. She said this would be perceived as a step backward or a loss.
Mayor pro tem Strom said he understood that and was not advocating doing that. He said he was only curious about what those plans looked like and what the level of participation was, and would also like to know how they had transitioned to that plan and what steps had been taken.
Mayor Foy asked what the cost was for health insurance. Ms. Eastwood said currently it was approximately $3,800 per employee annually. Mayor Foy asked what the gross cost was to the Town. Ms. Eastwood replied around $4 million, including dependents.
Mayor Foy said regarding the chart on page 21, Attachment 2a, of the materials, he would like some clarification. He said under the County of Durham, the chart stated that they had a cafeteria plan, and each employee received $444 flex credit per month to purchase benefits. Mayor Foy said in the column for health insurance for the City of Raleigh, it stated they paid 100 percent, and then if you look at OWASA, it stated they paid $468.23. Mayor Foy asked what those various numbers meant. Ms. Eastwood said they were the various monthly premiums of the plans for those organizations. She said each of those organizations used different companies and insured different numbers of employees.
Mayor Foy asked why the Town did not pool with OWASA to create a larger group of employees. Mr. Horton responded that he did not believe the insurance companies would agree to do that. He said most carriers would not pool separate legal entities. Mayor Foy said he thought OWASA was a subunit of the Town for certain purposes. Mr. Horton said they were a proponent unit of the Town for generally accepted standards for governmental accounting, but that did not apply to insurance companies.
Mayor Foy asked about the flex credit mentioned by the County of Durham. He said it had been mentioned that if the Town offered employees $450 a month in lieu of health insurance, some would take it and risk going without health insurance. Mayor Foy said this appeared to be a credit of $444 and you choose which benefits to purchase. Ms. Eastwood said the employee could distribute the credit among the various offerings of their employer. Mayor Foy said that was not cash. Ms. Eastwood said that was correct.
Council Member Ward asked why some of the organizations identified their benefits in a percentage while others used dollar amounts. For instance, he said, does the dollar amount noted by OWASA equal 100 percent of the cost. Ms. Eastwood said they did not always receive perfect information as a result of the survey. She said they would continue to try to flatten that so that the Council could use the information as a comparison. Ms. Eastwood said she believed the OWASA dollar amount was equal to 100 percent, but she would check to make sure.
Mayor pro tem Strom reiterated he was not advocating for a change in this budget cycle, rather he was advocating for the Council to look at ways to receive more information regarding benefits. He said he remembered some small change last year that had resulted in a savings of a few hundred thousand dollars. Ms. Eastwood said actually no change was made, except that they had negotiated hard during contract review and had saved a few hundred thousand dollars.
Council Member Hill said last year he had brought up the notion of a higher deductible and a lower premium health benefit. He wondered with the decreased premium if the Town could pay the deductible and still come out ahead. Mr. Horton said that was often just swapping dollars for dollars and frequently caused higher administrative expenses. He said that part of the difficulty was the Town’s awkward size. Mr. Horton said if they were a group of 2,000 employees they would have more options available, but they were a small enough group to limit the creative things they could do. He said that Ms. Eastwood and her staff each year had to find ways to keep costs from increasing at a lower rate than the costs of other organizations, and they had been successful over the last several years.
Council Member Easthom asked if it was true that health care costs had risen 11 percent this year. Ms. Eastwood said she believed it was closer to 12 percent to 14 percent, adding that last year’s increase was 4 percent for the Town. She said they should know in the next several weeks what the final number would be.
Council Member Easthom said she wanted to make the point that the Town was not the only organization facing these rising costs. Mr. Horton stated that the Council deserved praise for its long record of being a responsible employer, and the Town had set a good example that if other employers followed, would help solve the problem in America of many people not having adequate health insurance coverage.
Mayor Foy reiterated that the Council was not making changes to the benefits package this year, but was only asking for information regarding what other employers were doing.
Item 4 – Internship Program
Mr. Horton noted that at the January planning session Council Member Thorpe had expressed continued interest in establishing a broader internship program. He said that six departments already offered graduate or undergraduate internships, and they had identified ten departments where there was an opportunity to establish new undergraduate internships. Mr. Horton said the arrangement they propose would be to employ interns on a semester basis, work about 12 hours each week, and receive a stipend of about a $1,000. He said the internships would provide the interns with valuable work experience in local government, provide the opportunity to attract young people to service in local government, and give the Town an opportunity to accomplish objectives that it simply could not accomplish with that resource.
Mr. Horton said it was possible there would be a semester when a department did not have an intern, and it was possible that an intern could work for two semesters rather than one. He said they would want to retain some flexibility to take advantage of the market and to take advantage of services from good students.
Mr. Horton said the cost would be a total of about $20,000, with $16,000 in the General Fund, $2,000 in the Housing Fund, and $2,000 in the Transportation Fund. He said the Town’s experience with interns had been good, with most coming from UNC but a few from NC State University and NC Central University. Mr. Horton said he believed the internship program should be open to all university students in the State who could meet the requirements.
Mayor Foy commented that the materials noted that the Police Department provided employment opportunities for 35 high school students, and asked if that was an internship. Mr. Horton said that was a separate program.
Council Member Thorpe, noting that Mr. Horton had put forth a lot of effort on this, commended him for his work. He added that he would like to see two interns added for the Council to utilize among the eight of them. Council Member Thorpe requested that two additional interns be included in the budget proposal.
Council Member Ward asked for additional information on the pros and cons of suggestions such as offering additional opportunities to high school students or volunteer internships. Mr. Horton noted they had accepted volunteer interns ever since he became Manager, with good success. He said almost all had been college undergraduates seeking experience. Mr. Horton said they had a good success rate working with high school students in the Academy Program, and that had provided an opportunity to learn about occupational interests in a general nature such as accounting or information technology.
Mr. Horton said they’d had limited experience with vocational students, noting they had two successes and two that had not succeeded in an apprenticeship program. He said there were likely additional opportunities for such learning experiences for high school students in any area of Town government that did not expose them to hazardous work.
Council Member Ward stated he would like to see the Town put more energy into encouraging the staff to identify ways that high school students could provide assistance to the Town as well as identify the value it would have to the community and the individual. He said he would like to see interest generated internally as well as externally through the information officer, or other means. Mr. Horton said in the past students had been referred to the Town who had to meet community service commitments, which had been useful. Council Member Ward said another group that could be utilized was retired persons with particular expertise and interest, and they may be a good resource to meet needs currently unmet.
Mayor pro tem Strom endorsed the request by Council Member Thorpe to add two additional interns for the Council to the budget proposal.
Mayor Foy suggested that the Council ask the Manager to include the two additional interns for the Council, but hold the budget impact to $20,000. Council Member Thorpe agreed with that, noting the Manager did have flexibility. Mr. Horton said to achieve that they would most likely have to leave other internships vacant, making some internships one semester instead of two. He said he could make it work as long as the Council understood that there would have to be four semesters held vacant in order that no change be created in the budget amount.
Council Member Ward said he wanted more information about how those four semesters would be shared by Council members and what the Council would be taking away from staff by doing that and what would suffer as a result. He said he was very aware of how these internships had helped the staff in the past, and wanted to understand the tradeoffs.
Mayor Foy said, for example, that currently there was not an internship at the library, so they would not be taking anything away if that were reallocated to the Council. He said he believed the internships should be placed where they were most needed and prioritized by the Manager. Mayor Foy said, if they found it was or was not working in a year or so, they could make adjustments then. Mr. Horton said his point was that he could not manage 24 semester slots with $20,000, but could manage 20.
Council Member Thorpe said on another note, he was pleased to see that longevity pay for long serving employees was still a part of the budget, noting he had been on the Council when that benefit was first adopted. He said at that time the Council had varying opinions with some against the idea. Council Member Thorpe said he was pleased to see this Council so readily embrace the internship program.
Item 5 – Downtown Services Expansion
Public Works Director Bill Letteri stated that as part of the budget submittal for the Public Works Department next year, an additional groundskeeper position was identified for expansion of downtown services starting July 1, 2006, with the cost in fiscal year 2006-07 estimated at $36,800. He said the Council indicated support for expanding this service, but requested information as to whether or not it could be achieved without expansion of the department’s current staffing.
Mr. Letteri said based on the discussion with Council, they considered three possible options for expanding the downtown program:
Mr. Letteri said he had been unable to identify any practical solution for how to do that. He said as he had looked at some of their operations he had been reminded of just how thinly staffed they were. For example, he said, solid waste crews collect weekly residential municipal solid waste other than vegetative debris throughout the year and streets crews attend to their primary function of providing street maintenance when curbside leaf collection is not operational. Mr. Letteri said transfer of positions from either program to the Landscape Division would reduce the functionality of respective crews in these other operations. He stated that not only would such transfers present logistical challenges, but also the ultimate impact would be reduction of public services within the specific programs from which the staff were transferred.
Mayor pro tem Strom said he appreciated Mr. Letteri looking into the possibilities, and accepted that it did not make sense given the way the department was structured. He said it was important that the Town evaluate how it was using its employees, and thanked Mr. Letteri for doing that.
Mayor Foy reminded the Council that an additional groundskeeper position was included, specifically for the downtown, in the Manager’s budget proposal. Mr. Letteri said that was correct, adding he believed that would vastly improve the conditions downtown.
Mr. Horton said they would challenge Mr. Letteri each year to identify ways to improve the downtown, such as the gum removal machine, and do it in a way that made sense.
Mayor pro tem Strom asked Mr. Letteri if he was pleased with the recent progress. Mr. Letteri noted he was, stating that areas that had been pressure-washed two weeks ago had remained clean, which was encouraging. He added that they had recently placed an order for purchase of a gum removal machine.
Mayor pro tem Strom said he saw value in the watering request proposed, and asked if that new groundskeeper could perform that function. Mr. Letteri said the Friends of the Downtown and the Downtown Foundation had arranged for a grant that funded watering of the planters downtown. He said his department did maintain a couple of them, including watering. Mr. Letteri said that grant was in question for next year, and he was in discussion with both groups to explore ways to address the issue.
Mr. Letteri said that the additional groundskeeper position perhaps provided an opportunity to consider watering the planters, noting that individual would overlap with the existing person. But, he said, it would have to be a limited amount of watering.
Mr. Horton said he had asked Mr. Letteri to attempt to convince the volunteers who put the plants in to install plants in the future that did not require such extensive watering and which could survive in challenging environments.
Mayor pro tem Strom suggested that the Town make a commitment to water on a limited basis, such as every 10 days or two weeks. He said if they were not installing those plantings, then those who were would have to plant to the Town’s watering schedule. Mayor pro tem Strom stated that this was a nice program that existed in the community, and he would like to accommodate the watering in some way, particularly given the grant money.
Mayor Foy asked Mr. Letteri if Public Works crews conducted watering anywhere else. Mr. Letteri responded that they watered in a number of locations, noting they had two trucks with tanks and trailers to water the various plant beds around public places. He said that equipment was highly used, and if they were to take on watering planters downtown it would have to be done very early in the morning using groundskeepers.
Mayor Foy asked if it was an issue of people or equipment. Mr. Horton said they had limited equipment, and they would have to add additional work hours for someone capable of operating that equipment. Mr. Horton said it could be done if the Council wanted to do it, but unless they devote a substantial number of hours of the new person to it, then they would not have gained much in the downtown during the watering season.
Council Member Ward said it appeared the Town already did a significant amount of watering, and he encouraged those who were planting downtown to use plants as suggested by the Manager that did not require significant water. He said perhaps a closer inspection of what was currently being maintained might allow the Town to free up some time to make the equipment more available to a broader range of landscapes, including the downtown. Mr. Letteri stated he had talked with the downtown groups about the variety and types of plants that might be more drought-resistance.
Council Member Harrison asked if a new downtown employee was included on the chart on revenue and cost estimates. Ms. Johnson said it had not, but was included as a possible addition in the budget for the Downtown Service District.
Council Member Hill said he was amazed by the amount of gum present in the downtown. He commended the team that had come in and cleaned the downtown, noting they had done an excellent job.
Item 6 – Discussion of Other Matters of Interest to the Council
A. Downtown Parking
Mayor Foy noted he had met with the Downtown Partnership this morning and discussed free parking on the weekends. He said the Partnership was in favor of that as an inducement for people to visit the downtown, but the point was made that if you come downtown and want to park the on-street parking was the most attractive. Mayor Foy said the problem was that once people arrived downtown, all parking spots were already taken and the Town lots were the alternative.
Mayor Foy said he had remarked at the meeting that the Town could not afford to subsidize parking in the Town lots on the weekends. He said he believed the Town should provide free parking on weekends at the metered spaces only, noting they went the entire length of Franklin Street and other places. Mayor Foy said if it costs $20,000 to provide free parking in Lot 3 or Lot 5, he believed that was reasonable if the Partnership contributed half of that cost with the Town providing the other half.
Liz Parham, with the Downtown Partnership, stated they believed that was a good idea in terms of providing user-friendly parking downtown. She said the Board was in support of contributing half of the cost, as mentioned by the Mayor, and had also voted in favor of the proposed tax increase for the Downtown Service District as well as the additional groundskeeper.
Mayor pro tem Strom suggested bringing this back at the Council’s next work session to allow the staff time to evaluate it and respond. He said he was generally in favor of supporting the Downtown Partnership’s initiatives and thanked the Mayor for bringing this issue forward.
Mayor Foy said the other thing the Partnership had planned that the Council should be aware of was that the Partnership would be initiating a valet parking program that would operate Thursdays through Saturdays.
Council Member Ward said he wanted to understand and have a high level of confidence that the Town knows how this would work, what kind of turnover it could expect, and if there was enough known about it that it would be obvious to business owners that this could be a wonderful asset to them. He said there was the possibility that someone might park in the morning and stay all day, and that was not how we wanted the spaces used.
Mayor Foy said he believed the Partnership was recommending that the on-street spaces have a two-hour time limit. Mr. Horton recommended letting the staff look at the entire picture and re-evaluate everything at once. He said they would want the opportunity to discover any financial implications and then make a recommendation.
Council Member Ward asked about long-term parking in the lots. Mr. Horton said that was a significant problem because of the manner in which the Town collects the money there. He said with the pay station in Lot 3, they had not been able to figure out a way to allow the first two hours to be free. Mr. Horton said the more complicated they made this program the more costly it would become, the harder it would be to explain, and the more problems they would have.
Mr. Horton said they would be reviewing the requests presented at the last budget hearing and would prepare a brief response to each of those, then provide those to the Council at its next budget work session.
Mayor Foy asked the Manager if he understood that the Council supported the pay recommendation. Mr. Horton replied that he did.
Council Member Harrison said he wanted to highlight one of the requests made at the last budget meeting from the Transportation Board regarding buses and bus shelters that were overcrowded. He said the Board would be providing photographs of those conditions at the next budget meeting.
Council Member Easthom asked for a reminder regarding the budget schedule. Ms. Johnson said the next budget work session was scheduled for June 7, and then another on June 14.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:32 p.m.