Loading...
2014-04-03 Salary Commission MinutesCITIZENS COMMISSION ON COMPENSATION OF ELECTED OFFICIALS Meeting Minutes April 3, 2014 5:30 p.m. Public Safety Training Room (Police Department) 250 Fifth Avenue, Edmonds PRESENT Commissioners Staff: Public: CALL TO ORDER Meeting & Public Hearing Brent Hunter Co -Chair Dilys Rosales (present by phone) Co -Chair Mike Hathaway Evelyn Wellington Norma Middleton Mary Ann Hardie, HR Manager None Co -Chair Mike Hathaway called the meeting to order at 5:55 pm PUBLIC HEARING Co -Chair Mike Hathaway made a motion to open the public hearing at 5:58 pm. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Brent Hunter. The motion carried. Since no members of the public were present for the meeting, Co -Chair Hathaway made a motion to close the public hearing at 5:59 pm. Commissioner Hunter seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Co -Chair Middleton made a motion to approve the meeting agenda for April 3, 2014. Commissioner Norma Middleton seconded the motion. The motion carried. DISCUSSION/CREATION OF COMMISSION GROUND RULES Commissioner Hunter explained that, after the last meeting, there had been some discussion about the need to establish ground rules to ensure the group's compatibility and that the absence of ground rules may have caused a need for ground rules. There was some discussion that followed by the Commission, which came up with the following 9 Ground Rules: 1. Have an agenda. 2. Stay with agenda. 3. Try to control input and hold disruptions to a minimum. 4. Be courteous to each other. 5. Respect confidentiality. 6. Always be moving toward the completion of the presentation (ultimate goal). Pagc 1 7. No one-on-one or side meetings (no side conversations). 8. Use of majority rule (Chair should have the ability to add an item to the agenda on his/her own). Commissioner Evelyn Wellington inquired as to who creates the agenda. HR Manager Mary Ann Hardie stated that the items on the agenda include items that are developed by the Commission as goals for the next meeting (at the end of every meeting) as well as items that HR (as the liaison to the Commission) nay need to make the Commission aware of. Commissioner Hunter explained that these items under "New Business" have come forward outside of the last meeting. Ms. Hardie pointed out that the Agenda has to be approved by the Commission at the start of the meeting and if any changes need to be made, it is at the determination of the Commission to do so. There was a short discussion that followed by the Commission as to whether or not to include a ground rule on having a "consensus." Co -Chair asked Ms. Hardie to send out a copy of the rules that the Commission had decided upon via e-mail. Ms. Hardie stated she would. DISCUSSION OF THE SCOPE OF WORK OF THE COMMISSION Commissioner Middleton stated that the scope of the Commission's work is pretty set and she didn't feel it was appropriate to go into discussion about [the need for] performance evaluations, etc. and that the Commission should focus on the salary and benefits piece(s). Commission Middleton further pointed out that she did not think it is a good year to look at [changing] the benefits with the possible Affordable Care At (ACA) impacts given that the Commission had a lot of work to do and a limited amount of time. Commissioner Hunter stated that it was very important for the Commission to have asked for input from the Council and the Mayor as this input valuable and this also is a way to let Council know "they have been heard" as well as to get their input on the idea of including training as a benefit. Commissioner Wellington inquired as to what the relationship was with the ACA and the structured insurance benefits. Commissioner Middleton stated that this had not been talked about at the last meeting. Ms. Hardie explained that there were a lot of "unknowns" with the implementation and impact of the ACA provisions, including for example in 2018, that there was a "Cadillac tax" of 40% that would be imposed upon employers who have a "Cadillac" standard of a health insurance plan. The definition of a Cadillac plan type (which is a very rich benefit plan) is a plan that many cities have, including the City of Edmonds. Ms. Hardie stated this would likely impact negotiations and the future budget significantly since health insurance is a mandatory subject of bargaining. Co -Chair inquired as to whether information on the scope of the commission was provided in the binder of materials for the Commission [prepared by HR]. Both Commissioners Middleton and Hunter stated yes. Commissioner Hunter stated you have to be careful in how the Commission defined "compensation," but there is some flexibility in the scope as well as being aware of the ACA requirements (which is too early with the ACA timeline now to consider). There was further discussion that followed by the Commission of the importance of the 2016 Commission to consider the ACA impacts (on benefits) at that time. DISCUSSION OF CITIZENS' COMMISSION ORDINANCE UPDATE Ms. Hardie stated that, after the last meeting, she worked with Reporting HR Director Carrie Hite, who worked with City Attorney Jeff Taraday to review the current Citizens' Commission ordinance under City Code as one Commissioner had repeatedly voiced concerns about the number of Commissioners needed for a majority vote. Ms. Hardie further stated that Mr. Taraday would be presenting an updated draft ordinance at the Public Safety/Personnel Committee and (provided it was approved) would be forwarded to full Council for consent. Ms. Hardie briefly explained that the updated ordinance would extend the Commission's presentation deadline date to be submitted to the City Clerk's Office to August 1 instead of May 1. Additionally, the ordinance would be updated to comply with state code (as to who appoints the Commissioners) and to clarify the term "majority" on the Commission for voting purposes. With the Commission only having five members (although it is a seven member Commission), this would be helpful if there is a difficulty in having candidates for the vacancies to the Commission. Page 2 Commissioner Hunter requested that Ms. Hardie provide a copy of the draft ordinance to the Commission for review and inquired as to when the Public Safety/Personnel Committee would be meeting to review the updated ordinance draft. Ms. Hardie stated that the meeting would be on April 8, 2014 and that these committee meetings usually started at 6 pm but that she would send the Commission the information via email. Additionally, Commissioner Hunter expressed concern about providing input on the ordinance from the Commission's perspective and stated that the thought it would be helpful for the Commission members to attend the Public Safety/Personnel Committee meeting and that he would like to attend the meeting. STATUS REPORT ON THE RE -OPENING OF THE RECRUITMENT FOR THE COMMISSION VACANCIES Ms. Hardie stated that, since there were still two open spots on the Commission and given that the draft ordinance would be extending the presentation deadline date to August 1 (instead of May 1), that it seemed appropriate to open the posting for the 2 vacancies to the Commission again. This opening (which will be posted for two weeks) was posted earlier in the week and Ms. Hardie stated that there was already one candidate who had applied. Ms. Hardie further explained that the Commission would need to think about the process for interviewing the candidate and when they might like to do so. REVIEW OF SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS FOR THE COMMISSION Ms. Hardie pointed out that, given there is another recruitment going out for the 2 vacancies to the Commission and with the extension of the presentation deadline date by the Commission to Council, that it would be a good idea for the Commission to look at their schedules/calendars to see if they wanted to make changes to the current meeting schedule (through the end of April). Co -Chair Rosales stated that she would be out of the country from June 22, 2014 for several weeks. Commissioner Hunter stated that he thought it would be a good idea for the Commission to continue with next week's second public hearing so that the Commission could hear input from the public. Ms. Hardie suggested that the Commission could continue working with a flexible time table for the meeting schedule and that it could be reworked as needed. The Commission expressed some thought that there may be a possibility that the work of the Commission could be completed before June 22, 2014. Commissioner Middleton requested, that, if the Commission could meet on the same day of the week for the night meetings that would be great as she may have some schedule conflicts with other meetings. Co -Chair Hathaway requested that the Commissioners bring their calendars/schedules to the next meeting for review. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON FEEDBACK FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS The Commission discussed the continued feedback from the interviews of the elected officials. The feedback comments included: 1. [The elected official] Likes public service. 2. Feels current pay/benefits structure is good; doesn't think those serving on Council do it for money. 3. Benefits more important than salary. 4. Would like to see the City pay for benefits (in terms of medical insurance premium costs sharing, etc.) like the employees. 5. Wondered if net pay comparisons provided any insight (net vs. gross). 6. How can the city/agencies reach out to diverse communities - how to get the word out. 7. Thought professional development is excellent; believes in it strongly. Helping new elected officials understand the basics of Robert's Rules of Order, Finance and basic government. The City provides excellent legal support. Perspective that there may be conflicts on Council and how can Council build a more collegial culture? Commissioner Hunter pointed out that if the Commission used net wages, that it may distort comparison and that the Commission has base salary information which is easier to compare, for example, to premium cost sharing (medical insurance) percentages. Page 3 There was some discussion that followed about the best way for the Commission to analyze the feedback/input from the elected officials that they had interviewed. Commissioner Middleton suggested using a matrix that included grouping together the information provided from the elected officials to include a chart listing out which ones liked the following factors: motivation, salary, attracting candidates/diversity and training. Commissioner Hunter thought that including how many thought salary and diversity were important could also be a factor (for example, if the elected were paid more money, they may be able to attract additional candidates). Co -Chair Hathaway stated that he thought it would be important to group the information together anonymously. There was some discussion that followed by the Commission about how to put together the information. The Commission requested that Ms. Hardie group the responses together in bands by question (A, B, C, D and E) with all responses for the first question following under item A, etc. Ms. Hardie stated she would provide this information as requested for the Commission to further analyze at the next meeting. DISCUSSION/REVIEW OF COUNCIL/MAYOR SALARY Commissioner Hunter suggested that the Commission first start by looking at which cities were used to clarify that policy is in compliance with the criteria [in order of consideration as noted in the last presentation by the Commission in 2012]. Co -Chair Hathaway asked if population size was the first criteria. Commissioner Hunter stated that it was and that it would be cities with population size between 30,000 and 50,000 roughly, as the City of Edmonds is approximately 40,000. This would include Olympia and below. There was a short discussion that followed about comparing to forms of government and the L5 policy by the Commission. Commissioner Hunter stated that the criteria were: 1) population size; 2) type of government and; 3) our City budget (or an awareness of the budget). Co -Chair Hathaway clarified that Olympia was at the high (top) end of the salary comparison range. Commissioner Hunter stated that the comparison cities would include: Olympia, Shoreline, Redmond, Burien, Lacey, Bremerton, Puyallup, Lynnwood, Bothell and University Place. Commissioner Middleton moved to approve these for the Council salary/benefits comparison by the Commission. Commissioner Hunter seconded the motion. Commissioner Wellington abstained from voting. The motion carried with four votes by the Commission. There was further discussion that followed by the Commission about the premium insurance benefits (comparison) for Council. Commissioner Wellington stated that she thought that the salary should be evaluated separately from benefits. Ms. Hardie stated that the salary and benefits make up the total cost of compensation for any position and that the information on the salary and benefits had been provided to include a separate and total cost for the use of the Commission. Commissioner Middles stated that, with the last process, the Commission looked at the total amount (total cost of compensation) and it seemed to make sense to do the same this time. Co -Chair Rosales stated that she thought it was also important to look at the total package. Commissioner Hunter stated that the Commission could choose to look at salary and benefits separately and combined (different options). GOALS FOR THE NEXT MEETING Ms. Hardie stated, for clarification, that the items discussed would be added to the next week's agenda. There was a short discussion that followed by the Commission about the Judge's salary/benefits. Given that the Mayor may be bringing a request forward to Council to change the percentage of full-time hours that the judge works to increase it to 85% from 55% and to increase the salary for the position and also that the wage is determined by the grant % set by the state, there may not be a lot to look at further with salary for this position. The Commission seemed to agree. The following items were determined for the next meeting's agenda: 1. Discussion of ongoing business 2. Review the Judge's benefits and Mayor's salary and benefits information; evaluate best information. Page 4 3. Review the summaries (feedback comparison) provided by Ms. Hardie of the elected officials' interview information. 4. Review a copy of the ground rules agreed upon by the Commission. OTHER Ms. Hardie distributed copies of the meeting minutes from the March 20 and March 26, 2014 meetings and asked the Commission to review them for approval at the next meeting. Ms. Hardie inquired of the Commission as to how they would like to proceed with the interviewing the first candidate who has applied (with the recruitment process in the last week). The Commission requested that the candidate come to the meeting at 5:15 and the Commission would spend the first 15 minutes interviewing the candidate. Ms. Hardie stated that she would send out the candidate's redacted application to the Commissioners for review before then. Ms. Hardie further inquired as to if the Commission had specific interview questions that they wanted to use. Commissioner Middleton stated that she could work on some questions for the Commission. Commissioner Hunter stated that he thought that there were questions used with the last process. Ms. Hardie stated that she would go back and find the questions to send to the Commission for review/editing before the next meeting. It was further determined that the second public meeting would start at 5:30 pm. Commissioner Hunter made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:36 pm. Commissioner Middleton seconded the motion. The motion carried. Upcoming Critical Dates: April 17 5:30 Second Public Hearing Page 5