PSPP060821PUBLIC SAFETY, PERSONNEL & PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING
June 8, 2021
Elected Officials Participating Virtually Staff Participating Virtually
Councilmember Kristiana Johnson (Chair) Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director
Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Serv. Dir.
Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Edmonds City Council virtual online PSPP Committee meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m.
by Councilmember Fraley-Monillas.
2. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
1. Urban Forestry Planner Job Description
Ms. Hope explained the City is involved in more tree issues; the Council adopted a code regarding
development and is considering other tree related codes. The was a general understanding by the
Council and Mayor that additional resources would be necessary. The job description is at the senior
planner level and is focused on outreach to the public during development and other tree related issues.
The job description was shared with the Parks Director and HR for their input and includes all the
necessary certifications and arborist credentials.
Questions and discussion followed regarding arborist certification from ISA for this position and
experience in urban forest management, concern an urban forester may not be an arborist, a suggestion
to strongly recommend but not require arborist certification, required knowledge in the job description,
whether not requiring an arborist certification changed the salary, education required to obtain an
arborist certification, tasks this position would undertake, private property owners hiring their own
arborist, potential to hire more staff if the Council adopts a robust program, intent this position would
work with the Parks Department field arborist, and the difference between an urban forestry planner
and a field arborist.
It was agreed to modify the job description to state that arborist certification from ISA is strongly
recommended but not required.
Action: Consent Agenda
2. Update to City Compensation Policy
Ms. Neill Hoyson explained all City positions are being considered to ensure internal equity is aligned
as well as looking at the external market. Before doing that, it makes sense to look at the compensation
policy to ensure it reflects current best practices and what the Council wants to achieve. The
compensation policy was last updated in 2012. The update policy reflects bargaining issues, having a
clear purpose, a clear compensation philosophy, definitions, and compensation goals. The most
significant change is how the City defines its market and how comparators are selected. The
methodology in the current policy looks only at just population, 10,000 above and below the City's
population. The Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) supports a process that selects like
employers which are defined not only by size but also economic resources. The proposal is to continue
06/08/21 PSPP Committee Minutes, Page 2
using population (PERC supports looking at cities 100% above and 50% below the City's population),
and economic resources (assessed valuation and assessed valuation per capita). Kitsap County was
also removed as a geographic comparator based on prior Council action.
Questions and discussion followed regarding the number of cities that would result from this
methodology, including metrics in the policy, using the metrics to select comparator cities, use of this
methodology by 95% of multiplicities, why 100% above and 50% below is used, using the PERC
supported policy to provide consistency, hiring a consultant to do the compensation study, the
compensation policy reflecting the Council's philosophy regarding compensation, whether to use 100%
above and below, concern with hiring at mid -range, implicit bias that occurs during hiring, analysis to
determine if there are internal pay gaps, intent to review all job descriptions, current review of WWTP
job descriptions due to turnover and difficulty hiring, timeline to complete compensation study, and the
cost of the consultant.
Action: Full Council
3. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 5:37 p.m.