Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental Information Received after Posting of Agenda - Items C, E, F, G" Questions & Comments for 1/23/17 G(Fl F, v) Item C: Demands of Treasury Page 5, top: Check to Charles Abbott Associates for $6436 for October'16 database maintenance. We usually pay $1000 /month for this. Why was the October charge so high? Item E : Strategic Obiectives Update Page A, Beach and Pier Objective 1 is to obtain Coastal permits for picnic tables by 1/15/17. The "Status" column indicates that this Objective is still "On Target ". However, this objective was not accomplished by the target date. Why hasn't the Status and target date been revised? Page C, Fiscal Sustainability Objective 1 was to present a Procurement and Contract Administration Policy at Monday's Council meeting (per the last update in December). This objective was not accomplished by the target date. However, the "Status" column indicates that this objective is still "On Ta rget ". Why hasn't the Status and target date been revised? Why is there no explanation for failure to accomplish the objective on time? [Comments provided were not revised from December]. Objective 2 is to present new water and sewer rates to Council. The previous target date was 2/27/17 (per the last update in December). This has now been changed to 4/1/17. However, the "Status" column indicates that this objective is still "On Target ". Why doesn't the Status column indicated "Revised "? Page D, Improve Infrastructure Objective 2 was to present an agreement to update costs in the 2010 Facility Condition Assessment at Monday's Council meeting (per the last update in December). This objective was not accomplished by the target date. However, the "Status" column indicates that this objective is still "On Target." The Comments state that two proposals have been received, but this is the same comment from December. Why doesn't the Status column indicated "Revised "? Since two proposals were received in early December, why was the goal of presenting these to Council this Monday not accomplished? Objective 3 is to present to Council a discussion of water infrastructure loans. The previous target date was 2/13/17 (per the last update in December). This has now been changed to z 3/27/17. However, the "Status" column indicates that this objective is still "On Target ". Why doesn't the Status column indicated "Revised "? Why is there no explanation in the Comments column for this push back of target date? Suggestions: 1) Present the Objective Table in "red -line" format so that changes are easily seen. 2) The staff report should discuss in detail all changed or missed target dates. Item F: Exec Management Contracts Regarding inflation raises, the staff report makes a comparison to increases "similar to other City employees." The contracts that Council approved for a large portion of these employees provided for a minimum annual inflation raise of 2 %. The proposed wording for the Exec contracts in Exhibit A make no mention any minimum raise. Is this an oversight, or by intention? The second contract change is an $850 reimbursement for an annual medical exam or wellness program. This proposal falls within my professional area of expertise as a physician. I am Board - Certified in Preventive Medicine with 29 years of experience in evaluating and delivering occupational health programs including wellness programs to municipalities. The Council should be aware that annual medical exams are no longer recommended. In fact, there is concern that they cause "more harm than good" by resulting in "over- diagnosis" and "over - treatment" of minor abnormalities. These concerns were publicized widely in 2015. From the Harvard Medical School: "Careful reviews of several large studies have shown that these annual visits don't make any difference in health outcomes. In other words, being seen by your doctor once a year won't necessarily keep you from getting sick, or even help you live longer. And some of the components of an annual visit may actually cause harm." (See full article at http: / /www. health.harva rd.edu /blog /a- checkup- for - the - checkup -do -you- really- need- a- yearly- p hvs i ca I- 201510238473 ). Our Exec and Management employees are already provided with health insurance, and can obtain medically indicated appropriate preventive care at no cost now. Rules under Obamacare eliminated co -pays for these examinations and tests. This proposal will do nothing but encourage excessive testing at various "Wellness" centers outside of the employee's primary health care network. If the Council does want to spend tax dollars to encourage healthy lifestyles among our Execs and Management, I would strongly recommend revising the wording of this proposed benefit in Exhibit A.2 to delete all references to "wellness programs ", "medical exams ", "physical exams ", and "medical tests." This would leave intact reimbursement for weight loss, stop smoking, and membership in health clubs. The third proposed contract enhancement is to allow payout of an additional 25% of unused sick leave at retirement, deposited into a health savings account. These existing contract provisions provide that "Credit of Unused Sick Leave' at retirement is pensionable, i.e., added to the calculation of the employee's final salary which is used to calculate the monthly pension amount. Will the additional 25% payout count as Cal /PERS "Credit of Unused Sick Leave "? The top of page 3 states that future budgetary impacts will be off -set by a reduction in Compensated Absences balance. Please explain. Item G: MWDOC Amendment The third paragraph on page 2 states that the City is currently participating in the School Program and Water Use Efficiency. However, in the 2011 Agreement, we also chosen the Poseidon HB Desalination. Have we dis- enrolled from this? The First Amendment requires us to do installation inspections of water conservation devices installed. Will we use in -house staff or a contractor to do these?