Council approves 20 engineering positions amid debate over contracts, staffing and project pace

The City Council on Monday approved a mid‑year amendment to the Engineering Services staffing authorization, adding 20 position slots and equipment to the department’s operating complement and directing those costs to be charged against capital project budgets.

Jeff Edmonds, director of Engineering Services, told the council his group is managing roughly $600 million in awarded construction contracts and a steady pipeline of projects totaling roughly $1 billion in the adopted capital plan. Edmonds said award and payment volume has jumped in recent months and the department is running close to capacity.

“Our sales are up 60% over last year, and they’re predicted to continue at that rate of growth,” Edmonds said, using a business metaphor for the department’s workload. “We’ve made the sale, and we’ve got to deliver the goods on $600 million worth of construction.”

Why it matters: Council members heard a technical and fiscal case for hiring new inspectors, project managers and administrative staff to maintain project timelines, avoid re‑bids and limit cost escalation. Opponents said the city should first expand competitive master‑service agreements with outside firms before creating long‑term payroll obligations.

Key arguments raised: - In favor: Edmonds and supporters said in‑house staff are generally cheaper over time (Edmonds cited an internal cost estimate lower than typical contractor rates), improve continuity on long delivery schedules and reduce risks of delays and rework. Supporters also noted recent improvements in the city’s ability to deliver bond projects in a shorter cycle than historically. - Against / caution: Several council members, including Kalynn Paxton and others, urged the administration to obtain comparative proposals and timelines from contract providers (to show how many roles contractors could fill, at what rates and how fast) before confirming long‑term hires. Council members also highlighted a citywide hiring review process and the possibility of shifting existing employees prior to recruiting new staff.

Budget and timing: City staff said the requested slots are funded from project budgets in the capital program; the corrected mid‑year numbers presented to council were approximately $1.7 million in FY25 one‑time costs and roughly $1.97 million recurring in FY26 to support salaries and related equipment. Edmonds and assistant Claudia Fernandez told council filling the positions will take months; a formal HR hiring review and the city’s position‑approval process will determine the actual hiring schedule.

Contract alternatives: Council members recommended the department execute multiple master service agreements (MSAs) or expand existing competitive contracting pools so the city can rapidly place experienced contract inspectors and project managers while testing whether long‑term hires are needed. Edmonds said the city already uses contract partners for program support and that one local firm (and a few neighboring firms) perform much of the available local construction‑inspection work.

Vote and outcome: After more than an hour of discussion, council approved the staffing authorization. Several members requested additional detail on contractor availability, Spanish language public materials, and stronger public reporting on the capital program’s expenditures and timelines.

Ending: Edmonds said he will pursue both internal recruitment and expanded contracting while working with HR and budget staff to sequence hires and avoid unnecessary long‑term obligations. Council members asked staff to return with comparative contractor proposals and clearer public summaries of how new positions and contracting choices affect project timelines and costs.