2014-03-26 Salary Commission MinutesCITIZENS COMMISSION ON COMPENSATION OF
ELECTED OFFICIALS
Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2014
5:30 p.m. Public Safety Training Room (Police Department)
250 Fifth Avenue, Edmonds
PRESENT
Commissioners
Staff:
Public:
CALL TO ORDER
Brent Hunter
Co -Chair Dilys Rosales
Co -Chair Mike Hathaway
Evelyn Wellington
Norma Middleton
Mary Ann Hardie, HR Manager
Co -Chair Dilys Rosales called the meeting to order at 5:35 pm.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Commissioner Brent Hunter made a motion to approve the Agenda for the March 26, 2014
meeting. Co -Chair Hathaway seconded the motion. The motion carried.
APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES
Commissioner Norma Middleton requested that HR Manager Mary Ann Hardie make a revision to the
March 20, 2014 meeting minutes (last paragraph on page 3) to reflect that a previous employer, not a
current employer, was able to hosting a training class at a minimal cost. Co -Chair Mike Hathaway
additionally requested that the "Open Public Hearing" section be redacted from the minutes (as the March
20, 2014 meeting was not an open public hearing). Commissioner Hunter made a motion to approve
the March 20, 2014 meeting minutes with the noted changes by Commissioner Middleton and Co -
Chair Hathaway. Co -Chair Rosales seconded the motion. The motion carried.
Ms. Hardie stated that she would bring a revised copy of the March 20, 2014 meeting minutes to the next
Commission meeting.
DISCUSSION OF FEEDBACK FROM INTERVIEWS WITH ELECTED OFFICIALS
There was some discussion that followed by the Commission about the feedback received to date from
the elected officials that they had talked to since the last meeting. Some of the concerns that were
mentioned by the Commission (which included feedback) were as follows:
1. The net amount (of the pay check) which was impacted by benefits costs (cost for dependent and/or
spouse coverage.
2. PERS eligibility requirements for elected officials.
3. The loss of "meeting pay" which was rolled in to their entire pay in a cafeteria style compensation plan.
(since not all meetings were the same location or distance away or were of the same length).
Pagc 1
4. The unknown impact of health insurance legislation up to 2018 and should the Commission encourage
Council members to look at the Affordable Care Act.
5. Interest in the training/professional development benefit or program.
There was some discussion that followed about whether or not the questions that were agreed upon by
the majority of the Commission members at the last meetings were sufficient questions. Commissioner
Evelyn Wellington stated that, for the record, she did not agree with the questions that were discussed
and agreed upon by the majority of the Commission during the March 20, 2014 meeting. Commissioner
Wellington further stated that the questions did not discern the greatest insight possible and that she
would like to ask additional questions of the elected officials she was interviewing.
There was further discussion that followed by the Commission regarding the questions that were agreed
upon to be used at the first meeting. Ms. Hardie inquired of the Commission as to whether or not they felt
that additional questions needed to be asked. Co -Chair Hathaway stated that he did not have an opinion
yet as to whether or not additional questions may need to be asked since he had not been able to contact
his assigned elected officials. Additionally, since he is new to this process, he would like have a chance
to ask the questions the Commission agreed upon at the previous meeting.
Co -Chair Rosales inquired of Commissioner Wellington as to what the additional questions were that
Commissioner Wellington had and if she could share those with the Commission. Commissioner
Wellington then stated that she did not have any additional questions prepared, but that she wanted to
ask additional questions that addressed the questions asked by Council (from Commission presentation
to Council in May 2012). There was concern expressed about this since it was unclear as to what
specific questions would be asked that they would not be privy or had agreed upon. Co -Chair Rosales
stated that Commissioner Wellington could certainly ask additional questions, but that it would have to be
clear that it was not on behalf of the Commission.
After further discussion, in order to continue to progress with the meeting, Ms. Hardie clarified that if
Commissioner Wellington had additional questions to ask the Council (which she had not prepared nor
was able to provide a definitive date as to when they would be ready to share with the Commission) that
she would need to communicate and identify to those she interviewed as to the questions she was asking
on her own, not on behalf of (or as a representative of) the Commission.
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE TRAINING INFORMATION
The Commission reviewed the AWC training courses for elected officials and the upcoming WCIA training
course for Open Government. Ms. Hardie stated that the WCIA training course was free and that it
looked like there may be some scholarship opportunities available for the other training courses through
AWC. There was some additional discussion that followed by the Commission as to what types of
professional development programs would be helpful for Council (including classes on culture and
government and perhaps in helping Council understand the relationship of the Director roles in the
organization.
Commissioner Hunter stated that it would be important to know if the Commission was able to include a
training benefit (from the Council budget) as part of the benefits package for consideration with this
process. Ms. Hardie stated that she would get confirmation from the City Attorney on this for the
Commission by the next meeting.
DISCUSSION OF MAYOR/COUNCIL SALARY AND BENEFITS
Co -Chair Rosales inquired as to whether or not any of the comparator cities had made any changes [in
benefits or salary] since last Commission convened [in 2012]. Co -Chair Rosales further stated that it
would helpful, for the sake of comparison, to have the 2012 Mayor/Council/Judge comparator salary and
benefits spreadsheets used in 2012. Ms. Hardie stated that she would send an e-mail to the Commission
the following morning with the 2012 Mayor/Council/Judge salary and benefits comparison information.
Co -Chair Rosales stated that she would like to hear which cities Commissioner Wellington would like to
include. Commissioner Wellington stated that she still thought that the comparison cities being used for
this process should include some additional information for other cities including: Wenatchee, Lake
Page 2
Stevens, Mount Vernon and Pullman. There was further discussion that followed by the Commission
about the cities that were used as comparators. Commissioner Middleton pointed out that, at the last
meeting, the Commission had voted on the use of the comparator cities and had agreed upon which
comparator cities to use. Commissioner Wellington again stated that she did not agree with the cities that
the Commission agreed to and that she still did not agree with them. Additionally, Commissioner
Wellington inquired as to where in the code or the City Policies, the information about where the agreed
upon comparator cities information had come from.
Co -Chair Rosales explained to Commissioner Wellington that while she may disagree, that the
Commission as a group had agreed upon the comparator cities used and that she may choose to
respectfully disagree, but that, in her experience in working with groups, while and individual may
disagree, if the majority of the group votes and come to an agreement, it is expected that the individual in
disagreement may still disagree but then commit to the decision made by the group. Co -Chair Rosales
further explained that Commissioner Wellington was expected to commit to the process, even if she
disagreed because this is important to the function and work of the Commission. Commissioner Hunter
pointed out that it has been a Council policy (used for employee groups at the City) as to the comparator
cities they have used and referred Ms. Wellington to a page from the 2012 Commission presentation
which clarified this.
GOALS FOR THE NEXT MEETING
1. Review the Mayor and Council salary/benefits information.
2. Discuss further elected official interview feedback from Co-Chair(s) Hathaway and Rosales and
Commissioner Wellington.
Commissioner Middleton stated that it would also be important to start discussing who (on the
Commission) is going to do the presentation to Council and preparation of materials. There was a short
discussion that followed by the Commission in which it was discussed that, usually two Commissioners
had worked on the presentation in the past, and that all Commissioners went to the presentation (while
two presented) to support the Commission.
The meeting adjourned at 7:15 pm.
Upcoming Critical Dates:
April 3
5:30
Public Hearing
April 17
5:30
Public Hearing
Page 3