Agenda Packets - 1999/04/12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9F. Consideration of resolution 5313, Chief Ramacher's severance agreement. '; Motion/Second: Marty/Coughlin. Move to extend meeting one half hour. Ayes - 4. Nays-0. Mr. Whiting stated he was offered the opportunity to take the severance payment based on the amount of sick leave hours they have accumulated. Also, an offer allowing them to take 65% of their total value to ongoing health insurance premium payment if health funds expire, or until they reach 65, or they cease to exist. That option has not been put into a personal policy. Chief Ramacher expressed interest in attempting to reach an agreement with the City that would allow for his ongoing health insurance to be paid for from those accumulated sick leave hours. It should be noted under no circumstances with the other employees that have that option, they allow to change once they have exercised that choice. The question is whether or not the City �I Council would consider the option of an agreement with the outgoing Chief to allow that option, if so, to what extent. Ms. Thomason proposed a compromise taking the number as an officer times the 65%rate of pay and then adding to that the 960 hours at 50%, which staff employees are allowed and adding the tt. two figures together to come up with $45,514 to be held in an interest bearing account paying S! about$400 a month over 114 months. Motion/Second: Thomason/Marty. To approve 5313, Chief Ramacher's severance agreement. Mr. Stigney stated the City provided with four options, A, B, C and D, one of which applied to the Chief and that was using the current policies that we have, he would treated as any other nonunion management director of the City management employee,that would be 50 percent of his accumulated sick leave not to exceed 960 hours or 120 days that is the option that should apply. That figure would be $15,676. The next option was the City provided to us that combined both the union and nonunion provision and give the Chief 65 percent of the 960 hours. Mr. Stigney stated the reason that does not apply to the Chief is that he has never been in the union, except when he was a patrol officer. When he was a patrol officer the 65 percent did not apply. It didn't apply and still doesn't apply to him. That figure is $20,379. Option C is another one provided by the City which have the Chief accumulated over the years, 2700 hours. Staff negotiated with him to compromise and give 1800 hours payable to the Chief and that would have cost a figure of$38,212. Option D would be to treat him just like any other patrol officer and give him 65 percent of everything and that would cost the City $57,318. In addition to those four options Council Member Thomason brought up the option that would cost the City $45,514. As mentioned at the work session, Mr. Stigney contacted other cities to see what they do with their Police Chief and seemingly the way we are doing it now with our 50 percent of 960 hours is very generous but the other cities checked with being Maplewood,North St. Paul, Ramsey County, Roseville, Shoreview, Falcon Heights, only pay up to 45 days and that is 50 percent of 90, and pay a maximum of up to 45 days. Our policy is very liberal and we should not start 21 U:\CARIS\COUNCIL\MINUTES\MVCC22.MAR