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

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

Current City Attorney Office Model 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 City Attorney Assistant City Attorney II Assistant City Attorney II (vacant) Assistant City Attorney I Assistant City Attorney I – Municipal Prosecution Paralegal Legal Assistant

In-house Selection Process External Recruitment Council direction to contract with executive recruitment firm Internal Recruitment Updated recruitment timeline Draft recruitment timeline, subject to change based on council direction Estimated time to fill is between three to four months City Attorney Job Description Includes minor changes from previous City Attorney review Clarification on residency 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

Outsourcing Analysis Comparable Colorado Cities with in-house City Attorney services, including respective population. Loveland’s population estimate for 2017 is 75,612 Top 15 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. City service levels vary, with many not operating their own utilities Arvada Aurora Boulder Broomfield Fort Collins Greeley Longmont Thornton Westminster 109,157 339,030 103,166 63,860 155,400 100,596 91,911 123,648 108,807 Louisville Northglenn Lakewood Lafayette Population 19,588 36,891 147,220 28,278 Services Outsourced All City Attorney/Legal Services Primarily City Attorney Only; limited other attorney support 2016 YTD Expense $300,000.00 $253,000.00 $329,293.00 $236,468.00

Outsourcing Cost Comparison Position Ave. Annual Salary/Benefits Annualized Outsource Rate @ 40 hours per week Cost/(Savings) City Attorney $203,098.43 $414,600.00 $ (211,501.57) Assistant City Attorney II $123,979.38 $405,600.00 $ (281,620.62) Assistant City Attorney I $107,542.70 $343,200.00 $ (235,657.30) Paralegal/legal Assistant $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 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

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 City expenses incurred for continuing education (CLE’s) and overhead Contract costs are typically hourly rates with reimbursement for travel/meetings, copies, etc.

Council Discussion and questions Confirm Council Direction