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