PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to request the City Council to discuss and, if desired, adopt a resolution and an ordinance for compensation package adjustments for City Clerk, City Treasurer, and City Council respectively.

BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION:

Tonight the City Council will be acting upon the proposed compensation package increases for the BCEA, Unrepresented Managers, and Executives.  The BCEA proposed package represents an overall 2.52% (2.40% re-occurring) increase to the General Fund, and the Unrepresented Managers and Executives proposed package represents an overall 2.50% increase to the General Fund. 

As the City Clerk and City Treasurer positions are both an integral part of the Executive team, their proposed compensation package is also being brought to the Council this evening for consideration.  However, as Elected Officials, the salaries for the City Clerk and City Treasurer can only be discussed and determined in public session.

Similar to the City Clerk and the City Treasurer, Council compensation can also only be discussed and determined in public session.  The issue of Council compensation was last brought before the City Council in February 2004.  At that time, it was indicated that staff would present the Council compensation package on an annual basis at the same time the City Clerk and City Treasurer compensation package was brought before Council.

Due to budgetary considerations, the City decided not to survey the marketplace salaries for 2004-05 for either the BCEA, Unrepresented Managers, or Executives.  Instead, the City continues to work on bringing the groups closer to the 2003-04 market survey. In the same light, staff is presenting the 2003-04 market survey for City Clerk, City Treasurer, and City Council to facilitate discussions.  

ANALYSIS & CONCLUSION:

CITY CLERK AND CITY TREASURER

Traditionally staff had used elected-only surveys for the City Clerk and City Treasurer positions and has tied the two positions to each other, using the City Clerk position as the benchmark.  However, in 2003-04, four different variations utilizing the same 12-city survey methodology as collected for the Executives were compiled.  There were two survey versions prepared for each position (Exhibit A � D):

                                    ●          one for elected-only positions, and

                                    ●          one with elected and comparable appointed positions

At that time, the survey showed that these positions were between 7.73% to 20.29% below survey average.  Subsequently, the compensation for these Elected classifications was increased by 2.50%.   As such, comparing the current salary to the 2003-04 survey for these positions reveals the following:

            CITY CLERK (Elected Only)                                    5.11% below survey average

            CITY CLERK (Elected & Appointed)                      14.18% below survey average

            CITY TREASURER (Elected Only)                         9.43% below survey average

            CITY TREASURER (Elected & Appointed)           17.35% below survey average

Based on an average of the elected-only surveys, these positions are still below survey by 7.27%.  Using the same methodology staff used for the Executive survey (approximately 98% of the survey average), the positions of City Clerk and City Treasurer would receive a 5.12% increase.  This would increase the fixed monthly salary from $7,466.00 to $7,848.00. 

For discussion purposes, the following is a sliding scale of potential increases:

                        1.00% = $7,541                                            3.50% = $7,727

                        1.50% = $7,578                                            4.00% = $7,765

                        2.00% = $7,615                                            4.50% = $7,802

                        2.50% = $7,653                                            5.00% = $7,839

                        3.00% = $7,690                                            5.12% = $7,848

In addition to the above salary issue, it is proposed that like the Executives, the annual Professional Development funds ($900) for the City Clerk and City Treasurer be converted to cafeteria dollars ($75/month) in order to help offset rising medical premiums over the past several years.  This conversion would not impact the General Fund.  However, it would eliminate the Professional Development Program for Elected Officials and reduce costs associated with the administration of this program.  

CITY COUNCIL

Market survey comparisons were also completed for the Council in 2003-04 (Exhibit E), using the same 12-city survey methodology as collected for the City Clerk and City Treasurer.  At that time, the survey showed that the Council positions were 15.21% below survey average.  Subsequently, the Council compensation was increased by 2.50%.   As such, comparing the current compensation of $ 975.00 per month to the 2003-04 survey reveals that the Council compensation is still 12.47% below survey.  However, it should be noted that pursuant to California Government Code � 36516 (c), the Council compensation can only be increased up to a maximum of 5.00% from the previous year.  A 5.00% increase would raise the City Council salary from $975.00 to $1,024.00 per month. 

For discussion purposes, the following is a sliding scale of potential increases for the City Council to consider:

                        0.50% = $   980                                             3.00% = $1,004

                        1.00% = $   985                                             3.50% = $1,009

                        1.50% = $   990                                             4.00% = $1,014

                        2.00% = $   995                                             4.50% = $1,019

                        2.50% = $   999                                             5.00% = $1,024

Also provided for discussion purposes, is a list of the Council�s potential salaries permitted by the California Government Code versus Council�s actual salaries since January 1994:

            PERMITTED BY GOVT. CODE                APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL

January 1, 1994        $   929            5.00%                         $ 830              3.30%

January 3, 1995        $   975            5.00%                         $ 855              3.00%

January 3, 1996        $1,024            5.00%                         $ 855              0.00%

January 1, 1997        $1,074            5.00%                         $ 881              3.00%

January 1, 1998        $1,127            5.00%                         $ 881              0.00%

January 1, 1999        $1,183            5.00%                         $ 881              0.00%

January 1, 2000        $1,242            5.00%                         $ 881              0.00%

May 1, 2001               $1,304            5.00%                         $ 925              5.00% (by ballot initiative)

May 1, 2002               $1,369            5.00%                         $ 951              2.80% (by ballot initiative)

July 1, 2003               $1,437            5.00%                         $ 975              2.50%

FISCAL IMPACT:

A 2.50% increase for the positions of City Clerk, City Treasurer, and City Council (which is consistent with other employee bargaining groups in FY 2004-05) would have a total impact on the General Fund of $6,766. 

These proposed salary increases were anticipated in the Fiscal Year 2004-05 Budget, but were not officially appropriated.  Thus, the current budget will need to be amended to appropriate the necessary funds from the Unappropriated Fund balance to cover these recurring costs. 

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council discuss the compensation package for the City Clerk and City Treasurer and, if so desired, adopt a resolution setting the salary level for these two positions.  A blank resolution for the City Clerk�s and the City Treasurer�s compensation package has been included.  It is also recommended that the annual Professional Development Fund ($900) for these Elected Officials be eliminated and the dollars ($75/month) be converted to cafeteria dollars.

Staff further recommends that the City Council discuss their total compensation package and, if so desired, introduce and adopt an ordinance setting the salary level for City Council Members.  A blank Council compensation ordinance has also been included.

Lastly, it is recommended that any salary adjustment that may be approved by the City Council be retroactive to July 1, 2004 for all Elected Officials.

Respectfully submitted,

Judie Sarquiz

Management Services Director

go to the top