Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1980/07/09 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULPSR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Wednesday - 7:00 p.m. July 9, 1980 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California convenm at 7:08 p.m. on the above date in Conference Room Nos. 2 and 3 of the Public Services Building 276 Fourth Avenue. ROLL CALL Councilmen present: Mayor Hyde, Councilmen Scott, Gillow, Cox, McCandliss Councilmen absent: None Staff present: City Manager Cole, City Attorney Lindberg, Assistant City Manager Asmus, Development Services Administrator Robens, Director of Personnel Thorsen REVIEW OF CLASSIFICATION/ In his opening remarks, City Manager Cole briefly reviewed SALARY REPORT the Arthur Young study noting Council's action taken on June 24, 1980 to approve the study in concept. Mr. Cole noted that the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Chula Vista Employees Association is conditioned on the adoption of the Arthur Young study. He added that the MOU's are conditioned to be effective on July 11, 1980 (the be- ginning of the first full pay period in the fiscal year). Assistant City Manager Asmus explained the charts prepared by staff indicating the current differentials as opposed to those recommended by Arthur Young & Company. Mr. Asmus stated that no significant changes are recommended with ex- ception of the administrative series. SIGNIFICANCE/RATIONALE OF Mr. Joel Grushkin of Arthur Young & Company explained that DIFFERENTIALS the basic method in establishing the recommended structure began with a "benchmark salary survey". He said that the survey was not based on titles but on duties and responsi- bilities. Mr. Grushkin added that each job is compared within a "family (relating positions) for experience, technical skills, judg- ment and contact with others in an effort to establish the difference between the positions in terms of levels of responsibility. In response to Councilman Scott's concerns regarding the manner in which the differentials are established, Mr. Grushkin commented that it is not totally internal -- that a labor market survey is conducted. He added that internal equity between positions and across families must be present and that salaries must be competitive with the market place. Mr. Grushkin said that once the system is established where there is "internal equity", then the across the board in- creases can be looked at. He said that the department managers and supervisors must remain very cognizant of working their people within the given classification in order for the system to remain in good order and added that the City should conduct annual salary surveys of at least the benchmarks prior to going into salary negotiations. Following discussions regarding the percentage difference between families, differentials existing throughout the various steps, Ms. Harvey of Arthur Young & Company :~ said that in setting the differentials, Arthur Young & Company simply used salary range numbers not actual dollar figures. Adjourned Regular Meeting -2- July 9, 1980 RECLASSIFICATIONS Mr. Grushkin reviewed the process used in determining re- classification: (1) questionnaires were received from those within a classification having the same job titles; (2) comparisons of the questionnaires were made to determine whether or not each of those people were doing the same level of work, types of skills etc and comparing this to the exist- ing job description. In answer tea query from Councilman Scott, Ms. Harvey com- mented that the addition of the Administrative Analyst within the City Manager's office had been taken into consideration. SECRETARY TO THE BOARDS AND In reply to several questions from Councilman Scott, Ms. Har¥ CO~qlSSION RECLASSIFICATION commented that: (1) Arthur Young & Company reviewed only the RECOMMENDATION TO ADMINISTRA- duties which are currently being performed by the incumbent; TIVE SECRETARY (2) no consideration was given with respect to the Council's policy on the job description relating to that position; (3) that their firm was aware that this position would be placed under the supervision of the City Clerk, however, they were unaware of when that change would occur; (4) that Arthur Young & Company recommends reclassification of the Secretary to the Boards and Commissions to Administrative Secretary. FINAL APPEALS FROM ARTHUR City Manager Cole distributed a~re~ort prepared by the YOUNG & COMPANY STUDY Director of Personnel covering the final appeals from Arthur Young & Company giving his recommendations as follows: ARTHUR YOUNG NAME & DEPT CURRENT CLASSIFICATION RECOMMENDATION Gregory Alabado Administrative Remain Administ (Transit) Analyst I tive Analyst I (*Mr. Alabado questioned the methodology used in arriving at the salary range for Administrative Analyst I.) City Manager's Recommendation: Remain as Administrative Analyst I Milagres Galsim Clerk II Library Clerk ~ (Library) City Manager's Recommendation: Library Clerk I Roy Hedge Zoning Enforcement Retain current (Building & Officer salary - restuc Housing) in 6 months (*Mr.~Hodge~s appeal was based primarily on his desire to ha~ Zoning Enforcement Officer designated as a benchmark to es- tablish a new salary for the position.) City Manager's Recommendation: Retain current salary - rest~ in 6 months Martha Roth Clerk III Clerk II (City Clerk) City Manager's Recommendation: Reclassification to Clerk II Elvera Humphrey Clerk III Clerk II (Parks & Rec) City Manager's Recommendation: Reclassification to Clerk II Frances Stringer Clerk Ill Restudy Positi~ (Police) City Manager's Recommendation: Reclassified as Clerk II untl staff completes study. Adjourned Regular Meeting -3- July 9, 1980 ARTHUR YOUNG NAME & DEPT CURRENT CLASSIFICATION RECOMMENDATION Helen Mapes Secretary II Restudy position (Planning) City Manager's Recommendation: Complete additional studies regarding levels of functionin before making recommendation for reclassification to Admini trative Secretary. Jana Seegrist Secretary II Upgrade to Legal (City Attorney) Secretary City Manager's Recommendation: Remain as a Secretary II until restudy of classification is completed. Mayor Hyde and Councilman Scott commented that they felt the City Council should not become involved with the appeal pro- cess and that the Review Committee should handle appeals. EXPLANATION OF APPEAL PROCESS Assistant City Manager Asmus explained that those employees who chose to appeal their classification were given that opportunity by completing written statements to the Director of Personnel and added that those employees met personally with the Personnel Director, their supervisors and again re- viewed the work that Arthur Young had completed. He said that Arthur Young was consulted and made their recommendation~ Mr. Asmus concluded by stating that of the eight appeals re- ceived three had indicated some validity to show that further studies should be made by the Personnel Department. DEPARTMENT HEAD SALARY BANDS City Manager Cole distributed hi5 memorandum concerning the Revision of Department Head Salary Bands requesting that a separate band be established for the City Engineer, Director of Planning and Director of Community Development. OPPOSITION TO SECRETARY II City Attorney Lindberg commented that he concurs with Council- CLASSIFICATION (CITY ATTORNEY) man Scott's comments on the acceptance of the consultant's work especially as it relates to the appeal process. He added that Secretary II Seegrist, working within his depart- ment, appealed and was granted a reclassification by Arthur Young & Company. He noted that the City Manager does not concur with this recommendation and asked that his opposition to the override be placed in the record. CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDS Following Council discussion concerning the proposed depart- APPROVAL OF ARTHUR YOUNG STUDY ment head salary bands, Councilman Scott asked the City Manager for staff's recommendation. City Manager replied that with the changes on the department head salary bands and the action which was recommended on the appeals, he would recommend approval of the report. Motion for Executive Session It was moved by Mayor Hyde, seconded by Councilman Cox and unanimously carried to recess to Executive Session to dis- cuss personnel matters. EXECUTIVE SESSION The Council recessed to Executive Session at 8:50 p.m. with the Acting Deputy City Clerk being excused and the meeting reconvened at 9:45 p.m. Mayor Hyde announced that the Council would be making modifications to the Arthur Young & Company study, voting separately on each modification. He added that the motion to approve the study, as amended, would be made following the voting on those modifications. Adjourned Regular Meeting -4- July 9, 1980 Modification No. 1 Relating ~iwa~ moved bM.M~yor Hyde, seconded by Councilman Scott and to the classification of unanimously carried that with regard to classification, the Secretary to the Boards and position of Secretary to the Boards and Commissions would Commissions remain at its current position (Secretary to the Boards and Commissions); that the position will be reviewed within six months following a shift in organization (contemplated in September 1980) and that until such time as the shift in organization is made that a pay differential be provided for the position to make it equivalent to that of an Administ tire Secretary. Modification No. 2 Relating It was moved by Mayor Hyde, seconded by Councilman Scott and to the Final Appeals from unanimously carried to accept the proposal of the City Manage the Arthur Young Study as outlined in the report prepared by the Director of Person- nel, dated July 9, 1980, as the process for handling those particular positions for which appeals were further reviewed by the City Manager. (*See below for change in vote.) Modification No. 3 Relating It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded by Councilman to the Revision of Depart- Gillow and unanimously carried that Council not accept the ment Head Salary Bands band as suggested by the City Manager and that it be studied by the Committee which is formed within a six month period to be reported back to the City Council. Clarification of Mayor Hyde clarified Modification No. 2 which approves the Modification No. 2 City Manager's recommendations regarding appeals -- in particular within the City Attorney's office that the Secretary II remain as Secretary I1 and not upgraded to Legal Secretary as recommended by Arthur Young & Company. Modification No. 2 Councilwoman McCandliss referred to her vote on Modification Vote Change No. 2 and asked that her vote be changed to a "no" vote as she does not concur with the City Manager's recommendation regarding the Secretary II position in the City Attorney's office. Motion to approve Arthur It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded by Councilman Cox Young Study as amended and unanimously carried to accept the Arthur Young & Company report as amended. City Manager Cole stated that Council referred the salary bands of department heads to the Committee which is to study classifications noting that this Committee was never intende¢ to study salary bands. Clarification of Mayor Hyde clarified Modification No. 3 that the executive Modification No. 3 classifications would be as recommended by the Arthur Young study not as proposed by the City Manager but the City Manager's recommendations would be studied further and re- considered at a later date. Motion to convene following It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded by Councilman Redevelopment Agency Meeting Gillow and unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting until of July 10, 1980 July 10, 1980, following the Redevelopment Agency meeting, to adopt resolutions on the Memorandums of Understanding in addition to other salary-related resolutions. Motion to consider salary It was moved by Mayor Hyde, seconded by Councilwoman Mc- ranges for City Manager, Candliss and unanimously carried that Council also consider City Attorney, City Clerk the salary ranges of the City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk following the Redevelopment Agency meeting of July 10, 1980. Adjourned Regular Meeting -5- July 9, 1980 ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hyde adjourned the meeting at 9:55 p.m. to the Council Conference following the Redevelopment Agency Meeting of Thursday, July 10, 1980. JENNIE M. FULASZ CITY CLERK Acting Deputy City Clerk MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Wednesday at 7:08 p.m. July 9, 1980 The City Council met in Council Conference Room 2 and 3, 276 Fourth Avenue on the above date at 7:08 p.m. with the following: Councilmen present: Mayor Hyde, Councilmen Scott, Gillow, Cox, McCandliss Councilmen absent: None ADJOURNMENT The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 9:55 p.m. until Thursday, July 10, 1980 following the Redevelopment Agency meeting scheduled to begin at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. I, Patricia Wesp, Acting Deputy City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that this is a full, true and correct copy of an order adopted by the City Council at the meeting of July 9, 1980. ~c t~n g D~p~t y-C £t~~C/erk -- City of Chula Vista, California STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING ORDER COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss OF ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, Patricia Wesp, being first duly sworn depose and say: That I am the duly chosen, qualified and acting Deputy City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista; That the adjourned regular meeting of the Council of the City of Chula Vista was held at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 9, 1980 and said meeting was adjourned to the time and place specified in the order of adjournment ATTACHED HERETO: That on Thursday, July 10, 1980 at the hour of 1:00 p.m. I posted a copy of said order at a conspicuous place on or near the door of the place at which said meeting of July 9, 1980 was held. Ac~ing--D~epuly Cfty Cl-er~-- ~-- Subscribed and sworn to before me this 10th day of July, 1980. /~otary Public in and for said and State 276 t~o~th Avenue, Cbula Vista, CA 92010 l//County of California ' '~'- !- ' ~-~