- We adopted a resolution dissolving the Clayton Successor Agency. Since the City's Redevelopment Agency (RDA) was dissolved by the state in 2012, the Successor Agency was established to fulfill any remaining obligations of the RDA. Since that time, activity has been winding down, including the repayment of RDA debts. As all activity is now concluded, there is no longer a need for the Successor Agency. The City did receive approximately $250K per year from the state to administer the Successor Agency, so there is expected to be a decline in revenues in the out years for that amount.
- We extended the contract of our outside City Engineer while the recruiting for an in-house City Engineer continues.
- We modified the City's salary schedule to repurpose the existing role of Management Analyst to a Project Manager to better meet the needs of the City.
- We designated Councilmember Enea as the City's representative to the League of Cal Cities for their annual conference in early October.
- We had an extended discussion about the City's infrastructure needs both in terms of work needed, and the associated costs. This discussion focused on two main areas - pavement and hardscape, and staff compensation as it relates to recruitment and retention.
RE: Pavement and Hardscape:
We discussed back in our March 18 meeting the current state of our streets, and what it costs to maintain them. Approximately $2.6M per year in order to keep the roads in their current condition is what the City would need to spend. We currently receive approximately $800K/year in road related funding from a mix of sources. In addition to the roads, there are several areas in the City where the sidewalks are in need of repair. Net new sidewalks could cost over $1K/foot, where repairing an existing sidewalk could be in the range of $3-$800/ft.
After discussion, the Council provided feedback to staff that we would like to maintain the roads as they are now - no significant increase in cost or quality, and no significant decrease in quality either. In total, the high level estimate of this policy including the cost of sidewalks would be an additional approximately $3M in spend each year. Staff will use this figure, refine it, and come back with a future agenda item to discuss what options exist to make this happen.
RE: Compensation as it relates to recruitment and retention:
We discussed that overall City staff is approximately 22% below market in terms of compensation, with certain positions less than that in the mid teens, and some positions greater than 45% below market. We as a Council gave guidance to staff that we would like our aspirational target to be approximately 15% below market. Staff will include this in determining possible options to make this happen as well.
When we meet in mid October (first meeting in October has been cancelled), we should have a more full picture to discuss our plans going forward in order to close the projected future deficits.
