CITY OF LOVELAND CITY COUNCIL CITY ATTORNEY SELECTION

CITY OF LOVELAND CITY COUNCIL CITY ATTORNEY SELECTION PROCESS January 10, 2017

Background ■ City Attorney vacancy effective November 10, 2016 ■ Proposed recruitment timeline and job description provided on October 27, 2016 ■ City Council provided subsequent information requesting further discussion related to the position and City Attorney’s Office in-house service model versus an outsourced contract model 2

Overview ■ Current Service Model ■ In-house Selection Process ■ Outsource Analysis ■ Outsource Cost Comparison ■ Value Comparison ■ Council Discussion and Direction 3

Current City Attorney Office Model Assistant City Attorney II (vacant) Assistant City Attorney II City Attorney Assistant City Attorney I – Municipal Prosecution Paralegal ■ 9 FTE’s with a 2017 budget of $1. 3 million ■ “City Attorney serves as chief legal adviser for the City, shall advise the Council and other City officials in matters relating to their official powers and duties, and shall perform other duties as may be designated by Council. ” ■ Assistant City Attorney I and II’s: – Assigned departments to become specialized in each respective area – Provide litigation and specialized legal services – Municipal prosecution and opportunity to provide alternate prosecution programs – Attorneys are cross-trained to provide more than one advisor/expert in various city functions – Attorneys provide training support to various city departments ■ Paralegal and Legal Assistant support City Attorney’s Office and fulfill office administration functions Legal Assistant 4

In-house Selection Process ■ External Recruitment – Council direction to contract with executive recruitment firm ■ Internal Recruitment – Updated recruitment timeline ■ ■ – City Attorney Job Description ■ ■ – Draft recruitment timeline, subject to change based on council direction Estimated time to fill is between three to four months Includes minor changes from previous City Attorney review Clarification on residency in City of Loveland is requested Recruitment Brochure ■ ■ The “position and ideal candidate” included is a draft, subject to change based on council direction, to be used within the recruitment brochure This document also outlines for council the job advertising strategy 5

Outsourcing Analysis ■ Comparable Colorado Cities with in-house City Attorney services, including respective population. Loveland’s population estimate for 2017 is 75, 612 Arvada 109, 157 Aurora 339, 030 Boulder 103, 166 Broomfield 63, 860 Fort Collins 155, 400 Greeley 100, 596 Longmont 91, 911 Thornton 123, 648 Westminster 108, 807 ■ Top 15 Colorado cities by population have City Attorney and City Attorney staff in-house, with the exception of Lakewood ■ Identified Colorado Cities outsourcing City Attorney services, including respective population and related costs. Population Services Outsourced Louisville 19, 588 All City Attorney/Legal Services Northglenn 36, 891 All City Attorney/Legal Services 2016 YTD Expense $300, 000. 00 $253, 000. 00 Lakewood 147, 220 Primarily City Attorney Only; limited other attorney support $329, 293. 00 Lafayette 28, 278 All City Attorney/Legal Services $236, 468. 00 ■ City service levels vary, with many not operating their own utilities 6

Outsourcing Cost Comparison Position Service Contract Annualized Outsource Rate @ 40 hours per City Staff Average Annual Salary/Benefits week Cost/(Savings) $203, 098. 43 $414, 600. 00 $ (211, 501. 57) City Attorney Assistant City Attorney II Assistant City Attorney I Paralegal/legal Assistant $123, 979. 38 $405, 600. 00 $ (281, 620. 62) $107, 542. 70 $343, 200. 00 $ (235, 657. 30) $75, 214. 73 $187, 200. 00 $ (111, 985. 27) Total Estimated Savings (In-House versus Outsourcing per position) • • • $(840, 764. 76) Outsource rates do not include mileage reimbursement for travel or other misc. charges and are based on survey data collected from other cities using contract services (Source is Lakewood and Lafayette) In-house rates do not include costs for Attorney CLE’s Recommend a full study of current services and baseline costs for outsourcing same services or reduced services to determine detailed cost/benefit analysis 7

Value Comparison In-House Outsource Institutional knowledge and in-house expertise Multiple areas of specialized expertise: Multiple firms and/or RFP process for services to determine lowest costs possible with performance measures Less management of outside counsel scope/costs On-site staff contract manager to monitor scope/assignments/costs, including coordination with departments billed for services Exempt employees, not subject to overtime hourly expenses Typically hourly rates for contract services at various costs depending on level of expertise Continuity and in-depth knowledge of issues provided by assigned attorney Third-party perspective: highest objective view possible Accessibility of attorneys to provide recommendations, direction and be present for meetings, etc. Greater risk exposure, possible shift in culture where staff may not seek as much legal advice due to costs and/or turn-around time, limited community engagement City expenses incurred for continuing education (CLE’s) and overhead Contract costs are typically hourly rates with reimbursement for travel/meetings, copies, etc. 8

COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND QUESTIONS Confirm Council Direction