7/23/2019 FTE String
1/3
RE: bids v book
I am using the same website, just calculating using the Budget
column compared to the Proposed column to
explain the major increases in the budgeted FTEs. While there
are underruns in FTEs, most departments are
close to their FY16 budget in dollars, indicating that the funds
allocated for staff are being spent either with
temporaries, overtime, contracted labor and/or through
contracted services. Im working on getting some more
detail for you to better explain the variance on the FTEs
between the FY15 Estimate and the FY16 Proposed
Budget.
FTEs
FY15 Budget 14,197.00
FY15 Estimate 13,541.40
FY16 Proposed 14,317.30
Variances:
FY15 Budget vs FY16 Budget 120.30
FY15 Estimate vs FY16 Budget 775.90
From:Kingston, Philip
Sent:Monday, August 17, 2015 8:20 PM
To:Chipperfield, Jeanne
Cc:Griggs, Scott
Subject:Re: bids v book
Jeanne, I'm really struggling to understand why the 775 number
comes up on the proposed budget on thewebsite. I went back and
looked at how it appears to have been calculated and it seems to be
a simple
sum of all the requested FTE additions. How are you getting to
the hundred twenty number? Myproblem is that if I can't access the
same information you and AC have, I can't perform
adequateoversight.
Philip T. KingstonDallas City Council District 14
214-670-5415
"Chipperfield, Jeanne" wrote:
Chipperfield, Jeanne
Tue 8/18/2015 8:58 AM
To:Kingston, Philip ;
Cc:Griggs, Scott ;
Page 1 of 3RE: bids v book - Kingston, Philip
8/18/2015https://outlook.office365.com/owa/
7/23/2019 FTE String
2/3
After we talked this afternoon, I looked in more detail at the
expenses for the services which had the greatest
increase in FTEs from FY15 estimate to FY16 proposed. The
variance explanations included on the Form As
mainly indicate vacancies in permanent positions with the work
being performed by contract employees or
service contractors.
The net change in FTEs from FY 2014-15 budget to the FY 2015-16
budget for the general, enterprise, and
internal service funds is 120.3 FTE increase. This is a net of
both decreases and increases. FTEs include full-time,
over-time, part-time, and temporary labor. The change is from
14,197.0 to 14,317.3, an increase of 120.3 or
0.85%. This comparison is for FY 2014-15 budget to FY 2015-16
proposed budget. These net increases are
primarily related to increased hours at the libraries; increased
hiring over attrition and civilianization in DPD;
additional staffing for Animal Services; and Building Inspection
staff.
I am working on breaking out the FTE estimate between regular,
overtime, temporary help so we can compare
employee headcounts to FTEs and positions. Will follow up with
you when information is pulled together.
From:Chipperfield, Jeanne
Sent:Sunday, August 16, 2015 6:27 PM
To:Kingston, Philip
Subject:Re: bids v book
Seems high. I'll check on the count tomorrow and let you
know.
On Aug 16, 2015, at 6:05 PM, Kingston, Philip wrote:
Hey, when I look at FTE changes by KFA, it appears to me that
we're proposing to hire 775 new FTEs in
'15-'16. That can't be right, can it?
From:Chipperfield, Jeanne
Sent:Sunday, August 16, 2015 2:09 PM
To:Kingston, Philip
Subject:Re: bids v book
Are you using the link I sent a few weeks ago - it was a
"snapshot" of the bids at that time and not the
final budgets. The final Form A's may be found at this link
which is also on the City's financial
transparency website. There should not be discrepancies because
the data for both the services in thebudget book and the Form A's
comes from the same source.
http://www2.dallascityhall.com/FY1516ProposedBudget/
Let me know if you need more information or if this doesn't work
for you.
Page 2 of 3RE: bids v book - Kingston, Philip
8/18/2015https://outlook.office365.com/owa/
