HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1980/06/24 4:30 PM MINUTES O~ AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Held Tuesday - 4:30 p.m. June 24, 1980
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, was
held on the above date beginning at 4:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber, Public Services Building,
276 Fourth Avenue.
ROLL CALL
Councilmen present: Mayor Hyde, Councilmen Gillow, Cox, Scott, McCandliss (arrrived late)
Councilmen absent: None
Staff present: City Manager Cole, Assistant City Manager Asmus, Development Service5
Administrator Roberts, Director of Personnel Thorsen
PURPOSE OF MEETING Mayor Hyde explained that the purpose of the meeting was to
hear a presentation by representatives of Arthur Young &
Company regarding the classification and salary study.
Mayor Hyde said he would permit testimony from the audience
as it would relate to the study itself but not for indivi-
dual classifications inasmuch as the Council is not sitting
as a "super appeals board."
.Joel Grushkin Mr. Grushkin explained the background, scope and methodology
Arthur Young & Company used in compiling the salary survey and the final report
and recommendations.
City Manager's Mr. Cole submitted a written memo (dated June 24, 1980) in
recommendation which he recommended that the Council adopt the report as
it relates to classification and pay recommendations exclud-
ing all recommendations pertaining to department heads,
Assistant City Manager and Deputy City Manager. He added
that he would be making a further recommendation on the
salary bands for the department heads at an early date.
Jim Fuller Mr. Fuller expressed his appreciation for the study stating
Chula Vista Employees it was a report that "was badly needed" for this City. He
Association asked that the Council consider the recommendations and
adopt the study in order to correct the problems existing
in the classification structure of this City.
Greg Alabado Mr. Alabadonoted the denial of his appeal stating he could
Administrative Analyst I not understand why only this one classification in the City
Transit Division has been recommended for downgrading in pay scale. The
Arthur Young & Company report (page 15) states that they are
unable to make a recommendation for the Administrative
Analyst I position in the Transit Division because of
reorganization of this department. Mr. Alabado stated that
no reorganization is being done in this Division nor is
there a study for one.
Susan Harvey Miss Harvey explained that the downgrading of the salary
Arthur Young & Company range for this position was based on the duties and respon-
sibilities of the incumbent at the time the job was studied.
She added that they did not want to make a final recommenda-
tion on the salary range since they felt that this depart-
ment would be undergoing a reorganization and as a result,
the duties of this Analyst might change.
June Sims, President Miss Sims said she appreciated the study and felt it was
Chula Vista Employees "money well spent." She expressed concerns regarding the
Association recommendations of the Clerk Ill and Administrative Clerks
asking that further "maintenance" work be done on these
positions before the final report is accepted.
Held Tuesday - 4:30 p.m. -2- June 24, 1980
Discussion Council discussion fo]lowed with the representatives of
Arthur Yount & Company answering Council's questions per-
taining to Employee input in the salary report, the input
of the supervisors and the appeals process.
RECESS A recess was called at 5:05 p.m. and the meeting reconvened
at 5:]3 p.m.
Further discussion Councilwoman McCandliss questioned the rationale of creating
the position of Risk Management. Mr. Grushkin explained it
was done because the duties of this position did not
fit any other category in the City structure. Mr. Grushkin
further remarked on the "benchmarks" for the positions used
in the survey; comparison with cities of near population;
the feasibility of using the cities in the Los Angeles and
San Francisco area; rationale for changing the titles of
some of the positions (Key Punch to Data Entry Operator);
difference of pay scales between first and second levels
of supervision; and the need for a Reclassification Commit-
tee.
Executive Session It was moved by Mayor Hyde, seconded by Councilman Cox and
unanimously carried to recess to Executive Session for
further consideration of the report in the light of personnel
negotiations.
The Council recessed to Executive Session at 5:28 p.m. and
reconvened at 6:09 p.m.
Motion for approval of It was moved by Councilman Giltow, seconded by Councilman
report in concept Cox and unanimously carried that the report be accepted in
concept subject to further Council review and that the City
Manager be directed to provide in the budget sufficient
funds to cover the necessary salary adjustments to implement
the report.
Clarification of Council Mayor Hyde explained that by the motion, the Council appears
act.ion to accept the concept of the report and much of the details;
however, there are some items in the report on which the
Council would like to have more information and an oppor-
tunity for further discussion.
ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hyde adjourned the meeting at 6:11 p.m. to the regular
Council meeting beginning at 7:00 p.m. (June 24, 1980).
' - c tf Clerk d9F