HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-12-05 PACKET 09.C.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA
MEETING ITEM #
DATE 12/5/2012 • •
PREPARED BY Administration Ryan Schroeder
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT HEAD
COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
Receive response to previously raised Council comments and requests regarding City staffing
levels.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
® MEMO /LETTER: Memo from Ryan Schroeder.
❑ RESOLUTION:
❑ ORDINANCE:
❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION:
❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION:
® OTHER: Attachments.
ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS
a,... t Administrator bate
COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER
UAnbelscampeffemplates \City CouncilAction Form.doc
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Director of Public Safety Craig Woolery
City Administrator Ryan Schroeder
Date: November 29, 2012
Subject: 2013 STAFFING UPDATE
Background
At the November 21, 2012 meeting a member of Council requested an update on patrol
division staffing. It was suggested that with the various scheduled and unscheduled
absences current and upcoming maintenance of minimum staffing levels could become
strained.
The City has a long history of staffing at minimal levels. This staffing approach works to
the benefit of the taxpayers and it is a major contributor in our tax rate success and in
allowing for revenues to be allocated toward facility upgrades and other community
enhancements. This approach exists throughout the organization. In comparison to
staffing levels of our peer communities across the organization Cottage Grove
authorized full time staffing is twelve positions (just over nine percent) below the mean
of this comparison group. Staffing below the mean exists in all three of Public Safety,
Public Works /Parks and General Government positions.
Staffing at constrained levels works well "on average" or when operations are running
smoothly. Strain can occur during periods of peak service demands or when vacancies
or injuries beyond minimal levels occur.
Introduction
In the last half of 2012 the police division patrol schedule has been challenged by
staffing shortages through resignations, injury and military deployments. Beginning in
2013 the police schedule will continue to be challenged with a 20% (5 of 24) reduction
in street assigned patrol personnel. This shortage will create difficulties throughout the
schedule. It is suggested here that there are responsible approaches to mitigate these
shortages within 2013 budget allocations.
Discussion
For the past five years the 12 hour day patrol schedule has proven to be extremely
resilient with the ability to absorb injuries, scheduled leave and other "short term"
absences from the workforce along with providing financial savings in training and
overtime costs. Until the latter part of 2011 the 12 hour schedule could accommodate
the smaller staffing shortages without much of a financial impact. During the last three
months of 2011, overtime cost due to staffing shortages began to increase. Through
November 2012 overtime costs for police shift coverage have increased 43%
($33,831.00) over 2011.
The indefinite use of offered and mandatory overtime to cover vacancies is beginning to
have a detrimental effect on the officers who are already working 12 hour shifts. Long
term stress and fatigue are becoming evident. During the Good to Great process one of
the biggest overarching themes within the Police Division was the lack of staffing for
police services. Staffing at current levels provides limited opportunities to be engaged in
training for specialized or targeted enforcement functions. With responsibilities for
minimum street level staffing for police paramedics flexibility in special assignments is
also limited.
Staffing comparisons based upon a review of Part 1 / index crimes alone would not
support the addition of a patrol officer as demands upon staffing is much broader than
that. Even as we add to Fire full time and duty crew staffing one cannot disentangle the
effects of the EMS service on police staffing demands.
Following is a snap shot of the Personal Services budgets impacted by this discussion.
PUBLIC SAFETY PERSONAL SERVICES BUDGETS
The goal of the 2013 proposed budget is to address several challenges faced in public
safety, primarily in EMS. Within the 2013 budget as proposed are significant
enhancements to Public Safety. The addition of a full time Firefighter /Paramedic, plus
$53,000 in allocations to create both Firefighter status to the existing part time .6
paramedics and additional hours to support a 24/7 duty crew is targeted to handle
primary first medical calls. These changes, already authorized, should significantly help
the EMS service demands once fully established in 2013.
Maintaining a minimum level of police staffing levels on the street for the short and long
term will require additional measures. Increasing the authorized sworn officers from the
current 39 would assist in balancing our crew staffing and would further provide
proactive officer opportunities in provision of services to the citizens.
In Minnesota, the 2011 Uniform Crime Report shows the average staffing ratio at 1.23
officers per 1000 residents for cities with a population of 25,000 to 50,000 (See
Budget
Budget
Projected
2011
2012
2013
2014
EMS
759,068
757,700
901,660
946,210
Animal
Control
11,743
11,600
12,560
12,560
PD
4,328,904
4,367,900
4,507,800
4,659,300
Emerg.
Mgmt
33,104
27,700
28,900
29,600
Fire
455,581
435,000
470,190
509,240
Total
5,588,400
5,599,900
5,921,110
6,156,910
The goal of the 2013 proposed budget is to address several challenges faced in public
safety, primarily in EMS. Within the 2013 budget as proposed are significant
enhancements to Public Safety. The addition of a full time Firefighter /Paramedic, plus
$53,000 in allocations to create both Firefighter status to the existing part time .6
paramedics and additional hours to support a 24/7 duty crew is targeted to handle
primary first medical calls. These changes, already authorized, should significantly help
the EMS service demands once fully established in 2013.
Maintaining a minimum level of police staffing levels on the street for the short and long
term will require additional measures. Increasing the authorized sworn officers from the
current 39 would assist in balancing our crew staffing and would further provide
proactive officer opportunities in provision of services to the citizens.
In Minnesota, the 2011 Uniform Crime Report shows the average staffing ratio at 1.23
officers per 1000 residents for cities with a population of 25,000 to 50,000 (See
Attachment A). Staffing ratios within that average vary somewhat widely through our
standard peer group of communities (see enclosure). Cottage Grove, with a sworn
officer strength of 39, currently has 1.12 officers per 1000 residents which is 92% of our
peer group average. (See Attachment B - 03 -01 -12 Police FTE Comparison).
None of the departments in Attachment A provide EMS with the exception of Woodbury
at staffing levels of 1.07 and Maplewood at 1.39 per 1000 residents. Cottage Grove
police paramedics dedicate approximately 10 % of their time to the ambulance service,
and to make a responsible comparison 1.5 FTE's should be assumed as EMS
attributable and therefore adjusted from the sworn officer ratio bringing the ratio down to
1.08 officers per 1000 residents.
Regardless of the above, filling the patrol schedule continues to be the challenge. For
example, we have a patrol officer trained in computer forensics but cannot free up the
schedule to allow for forensic computer examinations. Washington County and
Woodbury have been helpful, but we cannot rely upon that assistance much longer.
Additionally, with staffing at minimums, bike patrols, targeted enforcement and proactive
policing get set aside. Beyond that, it is notable that our overtime expenses have been
increasing beyond manageable levels.
Short Term Contingency Plan for 2013
Public Safety has begun planning for 2013 staffing challenges. At this point we are
intending to establish the following changes as an interim solution.
One day shift officer to be transferred to night shift.
Command staff (Chief and Captains) and detectives will be required to take turns
covering the vacated daytime patrol shift.
- All training on a scheduled day off will no longer be scheduled for alternate
(2080) time off but will be paid in overtime.
Scheduled 2080 overages. Each year an average of 80 hours must be scheduled
off for each of the 36 labor represented officers which totals 2,880 hours or over
1 FTE. The 2080 overages that occur with a 12 hour schedule will be restricted to
one person off per shift scheduled by administration, no longer at the discretion
of the employee. Certain circumstances may require the payment of overtime in
lieu of the 2080 day(s) off.
As mentioned earlier, overtime costs already increasing in 2012 will see increases again
in 2013. Having the command staff and detective division take patrol shifts will obviously
have an impact on public safety administration and criminal investigations.
We believe we could hire an officer in 2013 beyond the authorization level of 39 sworn
officers and pay for that additional officer through savings in overtime and planned for
absences. At a cost of $83,000.00 the first year costs in 2013 can be offset through
wage savings of vacated positions. Savings in 2012 as shown below will be allocated to
cover already incurred overtime and duty crew costs. Overages in these areas in 2012
will exceed the savings shown below by a significant margin.
ESTIMATED POLICE OFFICER SALARY
COST SAVINGS
Year
2012
2013
Vacant PO /Paramedic Position (Kaszas)
$9,640.00
September - December 2012
Military Leave - PO Position (Nickle)
$33,500.00
September - December 2012
Military Leave - PO Position (Nickle)
$60,680.00
January - July 2013
Electoral Leave - PO /Paramedic Position
(Schoen)
$43,050.00
Five Months
Military Leave - PO Position (Petersen)
$41,780.00
February - June 2013
$43,140.00 $145,510.00
$188,650.00
COMPARISON - SALARY COST SAVINGS 2013
Salary Cost Savings 2013 $145,510.00
New Hire Cost - Entire Year 2013 $82,952.00
diff $62,558.00
During the 2013 -2014 budget process, public safety staff determined the additional
police officer position should be removed from the 2013 -2014 budget in order to free up
resources to add an additional firefighter /paramedic. Though both positions are
important, EMS needs are deemed greater, and the police staffing difficulties in the
latter half of 2012 and into 2013 were not entirely foreseen. Additionally, we have had
the challenge of managing through injuries during which there are no payroll savings but
the injured personnel are removed from the street. We have also had the challenge of
an officer leave since August 2012; the void from which will be filled in January.
Conclusion
The proposed 2013 public safety budget is heavily focused on the fire department's
ability to address the annually increasing medical call load, and lessening the impacts
on police officer staffing. The data provided supports funding ability for a sworn officer
in 2013, with savings from the loss of five street officers for half of the 2013 year. Wage
savings from the vacant positions will more than cover the 2013 costs. In addition,
immediate short term contingency measures will be taken to address staffing shortages,
but not without impacting other areas of the department's operations. Making this move
would create an expenditure tail beyond 2013, however, we would have the opportunity
to react to this additional expense over the next several months.
If Council is supportive of the above we would request authorization to recruit for a
sworn patrol officer with expected funding as noted above.
Council Action:
By motion, authorize the requested recruitment of a sworn patrol officer.
TABLE 29
POLICE, SHERIFF AND STATE PATROL EMPLOYEE DATA - 2011
TABLE 30
RATE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES (SWORN AND CIVILIAN)
* EstLnated 2011 population, F.B.I. 104
PER 1,000 INHABITANTS - 2011
Command
Sgt -PO
Command
Sergeants
Sworn
Population
Total
Chief
Deputy Chief
Captain
Lieutenant
Sergeant
Police Officer
Total
Ratio
Per 1,000
Per 1,000
Per 1,000
Cottage Grove
34,734
34.73
3
1
2
6
30
39
5.00
0.09
0.17
1.12
New Hope
20,339
20.34
3
1
2
4
24
31
6.00
0.15
0.20
1.52
Golden Valley
20,371
20.37
3
1
2
7
20
30
2.86
0.15
0.34
1.47
Farmington
21,086
21.09
1
1
6
18
25
3.00
0.05
0.28
1.19
New Brighton
21,456
21.46
3
1
2
4
20
27
5.00
0.14
0.19
1.26
Rosemount
21,874
21.87
2
1
1
3
17
22
5.67
0.09
0.14
1.01
Hastings
22,172
22.17
3
1
2
6
21
30
3.50
0.14
0.27
1.35
Ramsey
23,668
23.67
3
1
1
1
4
16
23
4.00
0.13
0.17
0.97
Fridley
27,208
27.21
4
1
2
1
6
28
38
4.67
0.15
0.22
1.40
Brooklyn Center
30,104
30.10
4
1
3
6
38
48
6.33
0.13
0.20
1.59
Roseville
33,660
33.66
4
1
3
5
40
49
8.00
0.12
0.15
1.46
IGH
33,880
33.88
3
1
2
5
27
35
5.40
0.09
0.15
1.03
Richfield
35,228
35.23
5
1
1
3
8
32
45
4.00
0.14
0.23
1.28
Maplewood
38,018
38.02
5
1
1
3
7
41
53
5.86
0.13
0.18
1.39
St. Louis Park
45,250
45.25
5
1
1
3
8
39
52
4.88
0.11
0.18
1.15
Edina
47,941
47.94
4
1
1
2
8
38
50
4.75
0.08
0.17
1.04
Lakeville
55,954
55.95
3
1
2
10
39
52
3.90
0.05
0.18
0.93
Blaine
57,186
57.19
5
1
1
3
7
47
59
6.71
0.09
0.12
1.03
Coon Rapids
61,476
61.48
4
1
3
7
53
64
7.57
0.07
0.11
1.04
Woodbury
61,961
61.96
5
1
1
3
9
52
66
5.78
0.08
0.15
1.07
3.60
6.30
5.15
0.11
0.19
1.22
average
average
average
average
average
average
Mendota Heights
11,071
11.07
1
1
3
13
17
4.33
0.09
0.27
1.54
Robbinsdale
13
13.95
2
1
1
4
16
22
4.00
0.14
0.29
1.58
Hopkins
17
17.59
2
1
1
6
20
28
3.33
0.11
0.34
1.59
Forest Lake
18,375
18.38
2
1
1
4
19
25
4.75
0.11
0.22
1.36
O
o
N
FP
;u
<
<
=-,
c
p
(D 7
Cl)
o
2
C) m
CD
N
3 m
m s
.�. m
3
rn
N
to
0
O
y
C
W 9
O
f-- -A A
x�
N
3 of
55
3 m
-n
N
3
N
7
rn
m
N
z
n
�T
d
7
n
N � � y 0 30
n m 3
fD
N
(n M
m 0
O
m
m
N N
0 0
o'
m c x
M 3
N rn
O
3
m y
= G7 m -0 r
n
=
= z 3
x
cp
_
a
a
i
m
a
C)
O
(n N
j ry O ry
3 N C
N N
O
ti d Q
m
N
m
(D
O
W W
A >>
N
N
=
(
CD
°
m
W
CD N
0
CD q
N O O
FD
O
O
U) r
J
;u
' f] C
s
.T.
S
� _
N
CC' to
-• co
� m
o
A>
(n
N A T
N A
X
F
W
_,u
a
to
(D
m
O
CD
w
N
W
=
(D
o
N to
(
fD
0
CL
w
N N
O
O
O
CD
N
W
W
Q
A >>
N y
fT
7J
D ID
(
�
a
N N
J
o
O
SoFD0
FP
<
<
=-,
c
p
w
n
O
N
O
p
7
(D
<
W 9
O
W
O
v (D
-n
N
N
0
O
7
n
=
(n M
(D
O
m
m
O
(D
o'
w
D
W
N
O
O
O
N
O
W W
A >>
N
U
W
N
T
O
O
_
w
o
>
J
(
W W
A>
--• N
N
(T
W
N
m
O
CD
w
N
W
W W
A >>
N
(
w
N
O
O
O
W
W
O W
A >>
N
fT
J
o
A
N
N
>
N
A W
(P -•
--• N
N
(T
W
N
f0
O
CD
�
(T
w
t W
(T >
> N
J
w
N
w
O
T
fD
O
O
w
V
w
N
to
CD
O
co
W
A
�
O
A
NO
N
N W
O
A
w W
(n >>
N
J O
c0
w p
N
0
W
t W
(T >>
N
w
V t0
O
(''
A
N
0
N
A W
(T >>
N
W
A
w
CD
N
W W
Ch >>
N
V O
N
#A U.THO I�IZEP PER NEL
.rte w cn w p w 7-4 w oo w
in Cn fn 0 Cn v Cn W Cn Cfl
rn
O G.1
0)
O
N W
N� O
O �
O
w f.J
O
A W
CD d� 0
C
r
CD
I Cl)
CD -
,� o � 0
o rn
cD
° - rnW
O �9 r A
O v♦
co W
0
° z
O W
( z
D
rn
I Ca
r
(D
W
(fl
N W
CD
C
U N c
C c
O
O
n y
N �
0 O
H
L a)
O U 4
O :E S
j +
C
U a
L S
f0 +
J
t
N
CL ..
O
ai
a
ai
>
m L
bD
0A
Q
N
Q
V f
t
L
O '
LL
� O +
N h0
-O C
c O O f
G C
U f
I�1 C
L
� f
a
{ d
S.
a
M +
r Y+�1 L
r
rl
O
N
LO N ci ci m m n O in Ct O O 00 w m m O W W to ci 00 W N i\ to Ln M m ci .-I O O m 1 10 N O) 0 00 m
Ln lf1 Ln Ln CI' M M M M fn m M N N N N N rl ci c-I c-I c ci 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O) m Cn ci (D O O
`-i ci �-I ci ei ci ei ci ci ci ci ci ci .-I ci ci ci ci a-I s-1 a-i a-i ei ei ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ri ci ci . q O O O ci U) N N
!»
i C))
r l0 ci ci w 00 Ln LO Ln O m LO lf) i` O Ln N N Ct Ln N M W'zT LO M M M M O d' M 00 M N M M N c-i o O ct
N Ct M M N M O'ZT N M N'zT N'ZT M r N M N N U•) M M Ln lD N LD N LD Ln W LO Ln N N 'ct N Ln N M O 00
i i N M co Ln
� N
O)
O 00 t O l0 O 00 Ln Ln 'ct N M M M M LO O N O) O ci ct: 1\ M c-I Ln M 00 LO O V O ci M M Ct 00 o LD LD
O) C)1 c-I Cn 00 ci O n LO N Ln O M O n LO w O) Ct m n tD N O) m Lo l0 n M T M N n M LO ci O LO Ln Ln 00
r ci O 00 N l0 O) O O) M ci W ' N .-i Ln O) N - O 00 c-i': M W O) m O N Ln LO O) O LD ct ci Ln c4 00 lfl
c-I M c-1 ci N Ln M ci ci ci c-i N ci M ei c-I N a-1 c-I c-I c-I' M N N ci Ln N M N ci ci' 00 00 11 Ln
Ol Ln V N
ci
c-I c-I N .-I -;t N CO m m Ln O N W V N Ln ci ci M c N .-I. O) C)) Ln N Ln W M O c+') N 0 0 0 Ln c lzt N o O (O
ci .-I ei ci ci ci d_ N V O
ct' O c-I ci
N
N
LD dl O d' W O Ln O r O Ln L)D LD L)D 00 l0 dt O r� l0 n to O e-i N LD O) 00 O �t rl N ci n CO M M O Ln \ Lf) Ln
i M 00 M Vi N LO eMi O M M N d' ci N N %t ci N lzr W -i. N m N ct Ln N ci Ln 't Ln c-i N .-i N 0) N rl W
M 4 ci ci
It
O ct O) O (O O M n N 00 O C)) M d' O C)) r m 00 M O m d' Ln ci O W E l0 Ln 1 l0 LO M O m O M Ln o ci O
m m O m m N O m N ci m Ln m rl 00 ci n a-i w 00 e-I 00. O) N c-i ci n M Nnd l0 t.0 1-1 n 00 N W d' Ln Lo ci C))
n ci �t M t O N N M Ln �t l0 'ct W u•) �t M Ln ci m ci i -t n 00 ct N C)) O lD M (5 n M N (D T LO Lf1 m M 00
c-I c-1 N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-1 N .-i ei ci O) O N l0
n C o c
N N V' v) 00 c1 lD O Lf) �t 00 N l0 dt O) 'zT M LD c-i N 00 n O d' n 00 Lf) Ln LD 00 �t N M ZT M O) Ln 00 O '0 n
c-I Lf) Ln w N w O m l0 m 00 LO N N Ln .-1 00 m�* n N f\ ci Ln N Ln W ( Ln O Ln O) 0) (D V M Ln O O N O O)
ci N ci c-I L ) ci ci c-I .-i ci N N ci c-I c-I ci ci .-i c A N -4 ci c-I ci l6 lD c-i a-i
7
m 6 Lni M
ei Ln
W m m W N O d• 1\ Z' N m m m lO n m et ci l0 14 N W V O O ct N n N N N O O qt w Iq 00 ci O\ (D N
n M O) M ei n 'z�' O rl ct W l0 n N LO n n M .-i O O n N .-I tD i\ ci ci O l0 N O l0 Ln N (i) Il r- Ln CLl m
W Ln t f LD N 00 Lf) ct LO Ln 00 Ln O n l0 4 iD N Ln d +:Ln LO O) O) 4 Ln ci N n l0 M C)) d' CO c-i Ln n ^ ^ c-I O)
e-I c-I N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N c-1 c-I a-1 LD Cil C)1 ci
O) Ln c-I ci
Ln M � oo 00 O) N M r- a-I t O -i dl O) 00 00 m tl' 1\ Lf) Lf). u) M -:i O) m 00 00 M r, ct O Lf) n O) W Lf) n o Ln It
ci Ln c-I M M O m N N M 1\ V c - I 1\ c-I c-I c-I m :..: Ln ci a-i N N ei Ln ci m c-1 ci c-I 00 c-I e-i O
a-i U) LO ^ `t
N W e c-I
ci
•I 1` '�T ci M O M M M r d - N M O d' W ct M LO O O M N. M .A N LD ci (D ci n LO 'd• d• r N M t M M o M �t
L - i LD ` - i N N O (N ci m ci N c-I N 1-1 11 ci ci c-I ci ci ci O) 00 00 O
ci ,d; M Ln O
ci M c-I
ci
c O c O O O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c-i O O O O -i O O O O O O N O O N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 t o N 00
m O m
o O
C7
LD LD 00 LD W LD O 1` N M O W N ci ci LO O1 N N M
r M m N'T 1-1 LD N H N'T O ci lO W n LO ci n N m
N M I Ln LO ` M O) Ln M M Ln M M O) n m ci M O Ln
n O O O 0) n lD M 00 N N Ln O h M 0 00 n O c-I Ln
ci M N N 11 N 1\ M c-i N N m N m N LD c-I N N N Ct
N
L ♦✓
O J p i
U N r6 a Y N m O h t f1
f6 - = N E N -�! > y f6 O L O N vj m t4 .J m O
0 0 3 a 0 a) v �^ Ya 3> O 3
c 2 ai 0 0 O O i m c.) 0� m Ln U) -j Z Ln
Q CO Z U'' U Li m = LL U = � Ln Ln
ci w LD n N m N. i O m N N m M ci LO c Ln
. N N O^ Ln O M Cr V' LO Cn O lzj' 00 M Ln LD
d' O ci M d n N 00 ci N t* N N Ol M LO Ln 1\
M Ln l0 N LD N LD d' W LO Ln N N %t N Ln 00 00
m N
N
L 0A
bA @
N N
_ v a a' N
0 0 .L O Q L N O 0 O
L 0 i N C7 cu m 0OC ], U1 v CL
Q) d. ❑. M N f0 o N J C N N J (6 N N n Co
j N to b A @ c�6 0 O m O v iZ E ai t6 C d
w U u O w U rr Q ar a v Ln
2011 Staffing Comparison
Most staff, does not include golf, assessing, legal, etc.
Population"
Name
# of Staff Staff /Population
(thousands)
30,598
30.60 Andover
53
1.73 Police service contracted with Sheriffs office
55,954
55.95 Lakeville
165.2
2.95
23,089
23.09 Champlin
72.7
3.15
23,668
23.67 Ramsey
74.72
3.16
22,952
22.95 Chanhassen
75.75
3.30 Police service contracted with Sheriffs office
57,186
57.19 Blaine
193.5
3.38
37,076
37.08 Shakopee
126.025
3.40 separate water utility- #'s not included
61,567
61.57 Maple Grove
210
3.41
34,589
34.59 Cottage Grove
119.125
3.44
22,796
22.80 Prior Lake
80.5
3.53
27,378
27.38 Oakdale
96.85
3.54
23,797
23.80 White Bear Lake
84.4
3.55
20,160
20.16 South St Paul
72
3.57
49,084
49.08 Apple Valley
177.25
3.61
33,880
33.88 Inver Grove Heights
122.5
3.62
21,874
21.87 Rosemount
82.9
3.79
49,734
49.73 Minnetonka
190.5
3.83
26,911
26.91 Savage
104.1
3.87
21,456
21.46 New Brighton
84.75
3.95
38,018
38.02 Maplewood
151
3.97
61,961
61.96 Woodbury
248.93
4.02
22,151
22.15 Crystal
94
4.24
33,660
33.66 Roseville
146.9
4.36
30,104
30.10 Brooklyn Center
133
4.42
20,339
20.34 New Hope
91
4.47
47,941
47.94 Edina
215.5
4.50
27,208
27.21 Fridley
125.5
4.61
45,250
45.25 St Louis Park
218.25
4.82
22,172
22.17 Hastings
108
4.87
35,228
35.23 Richfield
176.75
5.02
20,371
20.37 Golden Valley
116.9
5.74
average 3.80
'2010 Census Population
ON
IN
�`
�°
q p s y
_
2011 Staffing Comparison
General Government (Admin, Finance, IT, Community Development)
Population*
Name
# of Staff Staff /Population
(thousands)
31,023
31.02 Andover
16
0.52
49,983
49.98 Apple Valley
32
0.64
23,983
23.98 Champlin
15.6
0.65
34,017
34.02 Cottage Grove
22.575
0.66'
54,328
54.33 Lakeville
36.2
0.67
51,756
51.76 Minnetonka
35.5
0.69
59,932
59.93 Maple Grove
42.5
0.71
20,250
20.25 South St Paul
14.5
0.72
24,679
24.68 White Bear Lake
17.8
0.72
27,230
27.23 Oakdale
19.75
0.73
58,430
58.43 Woodbury
43.97
0.75
48,169
48.17 Edina
36.5
0.76
23,445
23.45 Ramsey
18.22
0.78
20,860
20.86 New Hope
16.5
0.79
33,917
33.92 Inver Grove Heights
27
0.80
22,511
22.51 New Brighton
18
0.80
33,969
33.97 Shakopee
28.125
0.83
36,717
36.72 Maplewood
30.5
0.83
56,888
56.89 Blaine
48
0.84
26,852
26.85 Savage
23.1
0.86
22,917
22.92 Prior Lake
20.75
0.91
30,330
30.33 Brooklyn Center
28
0.92
26,422
26.42 Fridley
25.5
0.97
22,167
22.17 Crystal
21.5
0.97
22,590
22.59 Chanhassen
22
0.97
20,956
20.96 Rosemount
20.9
1.00
22,491
22.49 Hastings
23.5
1.04
33,676
33.68 Richfield
35.5
1.05
34,345
34.35 Roseville
38.65
1.13
47,221
47.22 St Louis Park
53.25
1.13
20,326
20.326 Golden Valley
25.6
1.26
average 0.83
*2008 Met Council Population Estimates
�1
1
ME M
1 •1
11 F
In 01 1P ON
10 N
OF
MA
1 11
•
2011 Staffing Comparison
Public Works (Arena, Engineering, Streets, Utilities, Parks, Recreation)
Population*
Name
# of Staff Staff /Population
(thousands)
23,445
23.45 Ramsey
25.5
1.09
27,230
27.23 Oakdale
29.85
1.10
24,679
24.68 White Bear Lake
27.25
1.10
23,983
23.98 Champlin
26.6
1.11
31,023
31.02 Andover
35
1.13
54,328
54.33 Lakeville
62
1.14
33,969
33.97 Shakopee
38.9
1.15 separate water utility- Vs not included
56,888
56.89 Blaine
67
1.18
36,717
36.72 Maplewood
45.5
1.24
34,017
34:02 Cottage Grove
42.5
1.25:
20,250
20.25 South St Paul
26.5
1.31
59,932
59.93 Maple Grove
79.5
1.33
34,345
34.35 Roseville
46.75
1.36
22,917
22.92 Prior Lake
31.25
1.36
33,917
33.92 Inver Grove Heights
47.5
1.40
26,852
26.85 Savage
38.5
1.43
30,330
30.33 Brooklyn Center
45
1.48
20,860
20.86 New Hope
31
1.49
22,167
22.17 Crystal
34
1.53
22,511
22.51 New Brighton
34.75
1.54
22,491
22.49 Hastings
35
1.56
26,422
26.42 Fridley
41.5
1.57
49,983
49.98 Apple Valley
78.75
1.58
47,221
47.22 St Louis Park
77
1.63
51,756
51.76 Minnetonka
85
1.64
33,676
33.68 Richfield
56.75
1.69
20,956
20.96 Rosemount
35.5
1.69
48,169
48.17 Edina
87
1.81
58,430
58.43 Woodbury
114.91
1.97
22,590
22.59 Chanhassen
49.25
2.18
20,326
20.33 Golden Valley
47.05
2.31
average 1.37
*2008 Met Council Population Estimates
Staffing- PW
2.50
c 2.00
Q
v
U)
Q
°0 1.50
0
m
CL
N 1.00
w
H
LL
0.50
R M
of m a o j - ° o o n. >2 •5 m 2 m c o y -
O `m m o `o in U E w >
2011 Staffing Comparison
Sworn Police Officers
Population*
Name
# of Staff Staff /Population
(thousands)
31,023
31.02 Andover
contract with Sheriffs office
22,590
22.59 Chanhassen
contract with Sheriffs office
54,328
54.33 Lakeville
52
0.96
49,983
49.98 Apple Valley
49
0.98
23,445
23.45 Ramsey
23
0.98
22,917
22.92 Prior Lake
23
1.00
56,888
56.89 Blaine
58
1.02
48,169
48.17 Edina
50
1.04
23,983
23.98 Champlin
25
1.04
51,756
51.76 Minnetonka
54
1.04
20,956
20.96 Rosemount
22
1.05
27,230
27.23 Oakdale
29
1.07
58,430
58.43 Woodbury
63
1.08
59,932
59.93 Maple Grove
65
1.08
47,221
47.22 St Louis Park
52
1.10
22,511
22.51 New Brighton
25
1.11
33,917
33.92 Inver Grove Heights
38
1.12
34,017
34.02 Cottage Grove
39
1.15'
26,852
26.85 Savage
32
1.19
24,679
24.68 White Bear Lake
30
1.22
20,250
20.25 South St Paul
26
1.28
22,491
22.49 Hastings
29
1.29
34,345
34.35 Roseville
46
1.34
22,167
22.17 Crystal
30
1.35
36,717
36.72 Maplewood
50
1.36
33,676
33.68 Richfield
46
1.37
33,969
33.97 Shakopee
47
1.38
26,422
26.42 Fridley
38
1.44
20,860
20.86 New Hope
31
1.49
30,330
30.33 Brooklyn Center
46
1.52
20,326
20.33 Golden Valley
31
1.53
average 1.18
*2008 Met Council Population Estimates
•1
■
91
jS
0
��
i
2011 Staffing Comparison
All Public Safety Support Personnel (not including dispatch)
Population*
Name
# of Staff Staff /Population
(thousands)
Average 29
31,023
31.02 Andover
0
contract with Sheriffs office
22,590
22.59 Chanhassen
2.5
0.11 contract with Sheriffs office
36,717
36.72 Maplewood
7
0.19
22,917
22.92 Prior Lake
4.5
0.20
20,956
20.96 Rosemount
4.5
0.21
24,679
24.68 White Bear Lake
5.35
0.22
54,328
54.33 Lakeville
12
0.22
22,511
22.51 New Brighton
5
0.22
23,983
23.98 Champlin
5.5
0.23
51,756
51.76 Minnetonka
12
0.23
59,932
59.93 Maple Grove
14
0.23
33,917
33.92 Inver Grove Height:
8
0.24
20,250
20.25 South St Paul
5
0.25
48,169
48.17 Edina
12
0.25
47,221
47.22 St Louis Park
12
0.25
56,888
56.89 Blaine
14.5
0.25
23,445
23.45 Ramsey
6
0.26
58,430
58.43 Woodbury
15.05
0.26
34,345
34.35 Roseville
9.5
0.28
22,491
22.49 Hastings
6.5
0.29
49,983
49.98 Apple Valley
14.5
0.29
33,969
33.97 Shakopee
10
0.29
26,852
26.85 Savage
8.5
0.32
34,017
34.02 Cottage Grove
11.05
0.32
33,676
33.68 Richfield
12.5
0.37
27,230
27.23 Oakdale
10.25
0.38
22,167
22.17 Crystal
8.5
0.38
30,330
30.33 Brooklyn Center
13
0.43
20,326
20.33 Golden Valley
10.25
0.50
26,422
26.42 Fridley
13.5
0.51
20,860
20.86 New Hope
12.5
0.60
average 0.29
*2008 Met Council Population Estimates
Public Safety- All Support Positions
Average 29
0
to
m
0.60
l
0.50
r
0.40
0
0.30
r
as
0.20
0.10
w
J
U-
0.00
i
C - 0 N a) (D C C t6 a) N O (D a) - 0 Q) T >+
N
N O Y Y= O �e > > C C N = 0) N 0 0) >
>O '� C
u) O J 0 M > L E C O O a : a @ O_ (6 2 i N 'a
O
_
O N E ' t6 w N m 0 0 N Y N U N 0 � u-
N (�
co (D
J O
U
d m 3 ( n U
> � J
Z
O O
V Q 0
Z U o C9
m
2011 Staffing Comparison
Full -time Fire
Population*
Name
# of Staff Staff /Population
(thousands)
22,167
22.17 Crystal
contract with West -Metro Fire
20,860
20.86 New Hope
contract with West -Metro Fire
20,250
20.25 South St Paul
contract with South Metro Fire
20,956
20.96 Rosemount
0
0.00
23,983
23.98 Champlin
0
0.00
30,330
30.33 Brooklyn Center
1
0.03
22,917
22.92 Prior Lake
1
0.04
54,328
54.33 Lakeville
3
0.06
33,969
33.97 Shakopee
2
0.06
33,917
33.92 Inver Grove Heights
2
0.06
49,983
49.98 Apple Valley
3
0.06
31,023
31.02 Andover
2
0.06
26,852
26.85 Savage
2
0.07
51,756
51.76 Minnetonka
4
0.08
23,445
23.45 Ramsey
2
0.09
22,590
22.59 Chanhassen
2
0.09
22,511
22.51 New Brighton
2
0.09
56,888
56.89 Blaine
6
0.11
34,017
34.02 Cottage Grove
4
0.12!:
20,326
20.326 Golden Valley
3
0.15
59,932
59.93 Maple Grove
9
0.15
24,679
24.68 White Bear Lake
4
0.16
34,345
34.35 Roseville
6
0.17
58,430
58.43 Woodbury
12
0.21
26,422
26.42 Fridley
7
0.26
27,230
27.23 Oakdale
8
0.29
36,717
36.72 Maplewood
18
0.49
47,221
47.22 St Louis Park
24
0.51
22,491
22.49 Hastings
14
0.62
48,169
48.17 Edina
30
0.62
33,676
33.68 Richfield
26
0.77
average 0.19
*2008 Met Council Population Estimates
FT Firefighters
0.90
0.80
w 0.70
0.60
°0 0.50
0.40
0.30
C'L 0.20
W 0.10
0.00
U.
> O)
Y= N L N D) Y N p> O C > N > Y = N O C CU
0 CL U 3 ti r o J L 2 Q c - m m m O o 0 n m W U
O Yo o Q U z o o
to o 0 0
m �
2011 Staffing Comparison
Fire Support Staff
Population*
Name
# of Staff Staff /Population
(thousands)
22,167
22.17 Crystal
contract with West -Metro Fire
20,860
20.86 New Hope
contract with West -Metro Fire
20,250
20.25 South St Paul
contract with South Metro Fire
27,230
27.23 Oakdale
0
0.00
22,917
22.92 Prior Lake
0
0.00
56,888
56.89 Blaine
0
0.00
23,983
23.98 Champlin
0
0.00
34,017
34.02 Cottage Grove:
0
0.00:
31,023
31.02 Andover
0
0.00
20,956
20.96 Rosemount
0
0.00
26,852
26.85 Savage
0
0.00
22,590
22.59 Chanhassen
0
0.00
22,511
22.51 New Brighton
0
0.00
33,676
33.68 Richfield
0.5
0.01
59,932
59.93 Maple Grove
1
0.02
51,756
51.76 Minnetonka
1
0.02
49,983
49.98 Apple Valley
1
0.02
47,221
47.22 St Louis Park
1
0.02
20,326
20.326 Golden Valley
0.5
0.02
36,717
36.72 Maplewood
1
0.03
34,345
34.35 Roseville
1
0.03
33,969
33.97 Shakopee
1
0.03
54,328
54.33 Lakeville
1.6
0.03
33,917
33.92 Inver Grove Heights
1
0.03
48,169
48.17 Edina
1.5
0.03
30,330
30.33 Brooklyn Center
1
0.03
58,430
58.43 Woodbury
2
0.03
26,422
26.42 Fridley
1
0.04
24,679
24.68 White Bear Lake
1
0.04
23,445
23.45 Ramsey
1
0.04
22,491
22.49 Hastings
2
0.09
average 0.02
*2008 Met Council Population Estimates
Fire Support Personnel
N 0.10
�a 0.08
.
d
0
0.06
0
0.04
a�
0.02
w
LL 0.00
a N 3 N UI N C N N C N C c , N . T Y T , N N N N .
> 3 N y O N >> C N N N O
2 E o > w rn C7 r > > o m w E
m m � m m o �
U 3 U o .c m � c Q d U r c d '9 c a o m m = o `m m
z °- U m a0 . 3 m c J T m
o U N Q o o o d
n 0 z n (D 2 3
�, m
Finance
Accountant- PT
Administration
Accounting Clerk II- AP /AR
Administrative Assistant
1
City Administrator
1
City Clerk
1
Communications Coordinator
1
Economic Development Specialist
1
Economic Development Director
1
HR Coordinator
1
Office Clerk II
1
Administration
8
Finance
Accountant- PT
0.8
Accounting Clerk II- AP /AR
1
Accounting Clerk II- Utility Billing
1
Finance Director
1
Assistant Finance Director
1
MIS Coordinator- PT
0.6
MIS Specialist- PT
0.725
Payroll Clerk
1
Finance
7.125
Community Development
Building Inspector 1
Building Inspector 1
Chief Building Official 1
Code Enforcement Officer 1
Secretary- Building 1
Secretary- Planning 1
Senior Planner 1
Senior Planner 1
Community Development 8
Parks & Recreation
Arena Manager
1
Forester
1
Lead Worker- Parks
1
Office Clerk II- Arena- PT
0.5
Parks & Recreation Director
1
Public Service Worker- Arena
1
Public Service Worker- Parks
1
Public Service Worker- Parks
1
Public Service Worker- Parks
1
Public Service Worker- Parks
1
Public Service Worker- Parks
1
Assistant Arena Manager
1
Recreation Assistant- Recreation
1
Recreation Coordinator
1
Working Foreman- Parks
1
Public Works
14.5
Public Works
Administrative Secretary
City Engineer
Lead Worker- Streets
Lead Worker- Utilities
Mechanic
Mechanic
Mechanic
Public Service Worker- Stormwater
Public Service Worker- Streets
Public Service Worker- Streets
Public Service Worker- Streets
Public Service Worker- Streets
Public Service Worker- Streets
Public Service Worker- Streets
Public Service Worker- Streets
Public Service Worker- Streets
Public Service Worker- Utilities
Public Service Worker- Utilities
Public Service Worker- Utilities
Public Service Worker- Utilities
Public Service Worker- Utilities
Public Works Director
Public Works Supervisor
Public Works Technician
Secretary- Public Works
Working Foreman- Fleet
Working Foreman- Streets
Working Foreman- Utilities
Public Works
Sworn Police
Detective
Detective
Detective
Police Captain
Police Captain
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer
Police Officer /Paramedic
Police Officer /Paramedic
Police Officer /Paramedic
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
28
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Officer /Paramedic
1
Police Sergeant
1
Police Sergeant
1
Police Sergeant
1
Police Sergeant
1
Police Sergeant
1
Police Sergeant
1
Public Safety Director
1
Sworn Police
39
Police Support
Assistant to the Public Safety Director
1
Community Service Officer
0.7
Community Service Officer
0.7
Community Service Officer
0.7
Community Service Officer
0.7
Property Room Technician
0.5
Investigative Aide
1
Management Assistant
1
Records Coordinator
1
Secretary
1
Secretary
1
Support Services Supervisor
1
Transcriptionist - PT
0.5
Transcriptionist - PT
0.25
Police Support
11.05
Fire Marshal 1
EMS Coordinator 1
Fire Chief 1
Firefighter /Paramedic 1
Fire 4
Golf Course
Golf Manager 1
Asst Food & Beverage Manager /Chef 1
Food & Beverage Manager 1
Assistant Golf Superintendent 1
Golf Superintendent 1
Golf Course 5
Total 124.675