General Manager of Utilities, Development and Operations Position Comes with a Significant Bump in Salary
When the Public Works Director position came open about a year ago, the City of Davis did an internal search process and used in-house staff to advertise the position.
It was a basic position whose job description was: “To plan, direct, organize, coordinate, supervise and review the activities of the divisions comprising the Public Works Department; and to provide highly responsible professional and technical staff assistance to the City Manager.”
Furthermore, the position would receive “administrative direction from the City Manager” and it “exercises direct supervision over management, professional, technical, and clerical staff.”
The salary range for such a position was $111,000 to $135,000, plus pension and the typical city benefits plan.
But the position either drew no interest or did not get any quality applicants. So the city utilized Ralph Andersen and Associates, the same firm that they hired to do a search for the new City Manager, to find a replacement for the retired Bob Weir at public works.
However, this time it would be different – much different. As part of the reorganization and consolidation efforts, the city would create a new position entitled “General Manager of Utilities, Development and Operations.”
As the name suggests, this is a much broader job description. City Manager Steve Pinkerton told the Vanguard that the idea was that no longer are city government’s functions simply in one area and this new position, which combines at least two existing positions and possibly more, is far broader than the current Public Works Director position.
As the brochure put out by Ralph Andersen describes it: “This newly created position of General Manager of Utilities, Development and Operations will be a key member of the City’s Executive Leadership team. This position offers an exciting opportunity for a well-rounded individual with significant experience in construction and capital projects to oversee a variety of public works and community development programs for this community, including oversight of planning.”
The position would serve at least three functions:
1) Administration/Community Development
a) »» Capital Projects
b) »» Planning
2) Engineering
a) »» Traffic Engineering
b) »» Design & Development Review
c) »» Major Projects
d) »» Environmental Compliance
3) Operations (including Utilities)
a) »» Asset & Facilities Maintenance
b) »» Street/Storm Water Maintenance
c) »» Water/Water Distribution
d) »» Wastewater
Furthermore, “The General Manager of Utilities, Development and Operations will oversee a combined team of 134 FTE and an overall operating budget of $39.8 million plus an $8 million Capital Improvement Budget (not including two major multi-year projects that includes a water treatment plan [$300 million] and a wastewater treatment plant [$100 million]).”
In addition to overseeing all aspects of the Community and Development Agency’s daily operations, the General Manager of Utilities, Development and Operations will have a focus on:
- Planning and oversight of major capital projects;
- Financing and alternative funding mechanisms/options/bonding;
- Overseeing the public bid process and contracting;
- Balancing competing city-wide and community priorities; and
- Ensuring best practices in public works, construction, and planning administration.
Other key responsibilities include being able to:
- Communicate frequently with the City Manager’s Office on issues of key importance and of a sensitive nature;
- Deal with public involvement on significant and strategic issues related to master planning for all public works and capital projects;
- Present highly technical information and concepts clearly, convincingly, and effectively both orally and in writing; and
- Enhance employee morale and productivity, and hold managers accountable for exceptional performance.
The brochure further describes: “The General Manager of Utilities, Development and Operations will work to streamline permitting and planning procedures and, in general, coordinate and improve the regulatory process currently in place. Maintaining the character of the community is of vital importance to the residents of Davis. Working collaboratively with the City Manager, this position will contribute to comprehensive strategies that will ensure that Davis continues to encourage a healthy and diverse economic foundation yet, at the same time, preserve the small town character that makes Davis such a special place to live and work.”
It goes on to say: “Frequent interaction with local, state and federal regulatory agencies, including representatives of local community organizations, will also be a major part of this position’s expansive responsibilities. This position will also be actively involved with ensuring open and transparent dialogue with the community at-large.”
“Importantly, this position will also take the lead in the development of systems, procedures, and standards for the evaluation and establishment of benchmarks for related programs and services provided by the City. Based on a recently completed management study and evaluation of the Public Works Department, the selected individual for General Manager of Utilities, Development and Operations will have significant focus on the implementation of recommendations resulting from this study.”
It short, this position reflects a new way of the city organizing itself, with a recognition that the tasks of public works, in fact, overlap with the tasks of other departments.
The compensation range for this position is a good deal higher than the previous position – with the high range at $148,754 instead of the $135,000 for the Public Works Director position.
There are several different considerations at play here.
On the one hand, the city is beginning to actually re-structure government, to make it more efficient and effective. This position certainly captures the need for thinking outside of the box, creating a position that does not simply fall into the pigeon-hole of the neat department heads that the city previously utilized.
Moreover, while it is true that the position represents around a 10% increase in salary from the previous position, the fact that it combines positions means that it will be a net cost-savings in the long run.
However, there are three quite serious problems with that scenario.
First, currently both the Public Works Director position and other positions that this position would encompass are vacant, which means that a hire here means that the city is actually, in the short term, adding salary and benefits.
Second, it is a position only slightly lower in salary than the City Manager position was prior to the hiring of Steve Pinkerton, which means that it continues the salary escalation.
And third, the city now will have to explain to employees at the bargaining table how it is that they can hire a City Manager at a raise and create a new and well-paid position, while at the same time asking rank and file employees to make sacrifices and take concessions.
It will matter not that the city is going to save substantial amounts of money from the hiring of a good City Manager who will enact wholesale and desperately needed changes to the city government, both in organization and in terms of new blood bringing fresh ways to look at current situations.
In the end, it is probably worth it to bring someone dynamic in from the outside who can look at things with fresh eyes and who does not have organizational biases. The ongoing problems that the city is suffering from suggest that new blood and change is badly needed.
Unfortunately, this also brings the realization that, along with the City Manager hire, while we can create a leaner city government that is more efficient, we may not be able to stop the acceleration of employee compensation. And in the long run that could prove disastrous.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
[quote]When the Public Works Director position came open about a year ago[/quote]The fact is that the position became vacant in December 2009, and has been filled on an interim basis since. It has been two years & ~ 2 months since Bob Weir retired.
Man time flies. I’ll fix that.
BTW, David, do know when the CC approved the new position? I’m having problems finding it on previous agendas…
Doesn’t that fall under the province of the City Manager or if not at least their authorization for reorganization?
No… job descriptions need to be approved by CC… see Asset Manager position approved by CC on Jan 24…
That’s a huge job for anyone to do at any salary. Public Works is so critical to our safety (stormwater drainage, roads, etc.) and our health (water that doesn’t give us diseases, safe and clean sewage removal, etc.) that I am concerned about not having a plain old director of Public Works.
If this is truly a consolidation that will save the city money in the long run, then on the surface I don’t see a problem. The salary jump is commensurate with the additional duties. However, I agree w Barbara King’s concern – what about a plain garden variety public works head?
What we have consistently asked for in budget talks is, break the mold and think different. Stop just eliminate vacant jobs to ‘save’ money and current positions. Different ways to do the “job”. So they finally have and we get grumbling! Maybe elimination of all the org chart supervising positions will change too?
[quote]What we have consistently asked for in budget talks is, break the mold and think different. Stop just eliminate vacant jobs to ‘save’ money and current positions. Different ways to do the “job”. So they finally have and we get grumbling! [/quote]
The tactic here is what I call “raising the bar”. Complain, then get improvements; then “raise the bar” by complaining some more about the imperfections of the improvements – so there is a perpetual reason to carp! At some point the law of diminishing returns sets in, where we are paying beaucoup dollars for infinitesimal improvement…
Disagree completely.
[quote]Disagree completely.[/quote]
How so? Just curious…
Because I think the new position offers a different way to approach these areas in the city and I feel for way too long the city and most cities have cut costs primarily by eliminating jobs that were vacant RATHER THAN looking at how things could be done differently. There seems to be some of the former here too according to David’s article, but still a new integrated approach.
When the pest mgmt position was cut, several of us suggested partnering with UCD, using their expertise etc in addressing this issue OR sharing the position with another city. Again different way if doing business. As you have said many times on this blog (with many if the rest of us), we cannot continue the way we have been.
Clearer?
Elaine: Part of the problem as was explained to me by Pinkerton that they were not getting quality hits. The other problem is that looking at what the city is actually doing it makes sense to create a larger position.
It’s not that there are not drawbacks to it, but on the whole I think it is a reasonable approach.
[quote]Clearer?[/quote]
Yes, thanks for a more complete explanation of your position. You make a very good point.
I probably did not make my position clear here. If this new position will save the city money, by consolidating positions, then that is all to the good. And I don’t see where the complaint is (except for perhaps Barbara King’s expressed concern, which I think has some merit), which is directed more at DMG’s comments in his article, e.g. this sends the wrong signal to city employees. If this position is a consolidation, saving the city money, and with more job responsibility, then what city employees think is irrelevant…
[quote]Elaine: Part of the problem as was explained to me by Pinkerton that they were not getting quality hits. The other problem is that looking at what the city is actually doing it makes sense to create a larger position. [/quote]
I completely agree, but that wasn’t what I took from your article…
So… we got quality hits when we recruited for City Manager?
I have a few questions.
What positions, beside the Public Works Director, are being combined?
How much is the outside consultant charging?
Personally I feel that this “new” position is not a combination, just one that assumes some duties of the CM, in order to make his job easier. Not against that, just calling it as I see it.
If we have to hire outside companies to hire our employees, what does that tell us about our HR? Do we not have the confidence in the HR Director and staff to recruit competent candidates? If not, is this and area of city services that should be “contracted” out.
BTW, thanks David for writing about this. I tried to get the word out a week ago, even posted on the bulletin board.
Interesting points and questions.
Here’s what I know:
I was told by Pinkerton that it will at least encompass two positions, but he’s not sure what the second one is.
I’m not sure the exact cost, maybe Sue knows, it was part of the RFP that went out for the new city manager.
While I have problems with our HR, I do think it is a tough time to hire quality people ironically. The reason is that the economy is down and therefore quality people who are employed elsewhere as probably waiting to move until positions up with more money. That’s one reason they had to sweeten the pot.
[quote]I was told by Pinkerton that it will at least encompass two positions, [b]but he’s not sure what the second one is[/b].[/quote]Scary…
After reading the job description again, this almost sounds like a combo of the city engineer and pw dir. If this is the case, than this is not a step forward, but a step back, as those positions used to be one in the same years ago. Also, one person has been doing those jobs for the last two years. Mr. Clark must not have been what the new CM was looking for, and so, should start polishing up his resume. Ouch! “Hey, thanks for watching over the sinking ship the last few years, but we’ve decided to just scuttle it.”
It can’t include the City Engineer position, as no professional registration as a Civil Engineer is required.
[quote]Education: A Bachelor’s degree in business administration, public administration, construction management, engineering, or a related field is required. A
Masters or other advanced degree in a related field may be a major advantage
for the successful candidate.
Certification/License: None required although a professional engineering
license may be a plus based on overall career experience.[/quote]
Based on this language, I believe that if a candidate with an engineering degree is chosen, it just might be a possibility.