Agenda Packets - 1999/09/13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council August 23, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 34 Council Member Stigney inquired regarding the step increases as projected to the 2000 budget. He stated this proposal was to start the position at a Step 2, and inquired regarding the following years. He inquired where they were going with the salaries for the City. He stated, if they are offing job functions from one employee and placing them on another,then the cost savings should go from one to the other. He stated they should not necessarily grant someone up into a different bracket, and make the City pay forever. He stated he was strongly opposed to what he had seen presented. Community Development Director Jopke stated he had reviewed the Stanton Survey to base the proposed salary range for the upgrading of the Planning Associate position. He stated the Housing Inspector/ Code Enforcement position would remain at the existing level, which would provide a cost savings from a Step 5 to a Step 1, however this would progress in future years. He stated that staff acknowledged this, and had attempted to account for what would occur within the next two years, in terms of step increases, in staff's analysis. Community Development Director Jopke stated he had researched the Senior Planner level, as he believed the functions requested of this position were consistent with those requested of Senior Planners in other communities. He stated he did not take the average of the salaries within that range,but decreased it by 5 percent, so they would be at the low end of the communities within that range. He stated he had also looked at the communities in the Stanton Survey at the next level down, basically for communities under 10,000, whose average is approximately the starting level that is being proposed,but the range is not as high on the upper end. He stated he believed that based upon what they were asking of this position, this was a fair level of compensation. Council Member Stigney stated he would contend they should be basing this salary upon cities with a comparable tax capacity,which is the City's ability to pay, and whether or not the City can afford to compensate. He added if they are offloading a function from one position to another, he would like to see this done with no additional cost effect at all. He stated he was firmly opposed to this, and the City had been following this same procedure year after year. He stated he could understand Community Development Director Jopke's point of view,however,they should not base the salaries upon the population. Council Member Marty inquired regarding the salary at the step 2 level, and how many steps there were. Community Development Director Jopke stated there were 5 steps. He explained the reason he was proposing Step 2,was in consideration of a six-month probationary period at the Step 1 level. Council Member Marty stated that Planning Associate Ericson had already completed his probationary period. Community Development Director Jopke agreed, adding that he should be at a Step 2 level, and that was why this was proposed. Council Member Marty inquired regarding the top salary of this position at Step 5. Council Member Stigney stated this would be$4,504. Council Member Marty stated that this salary was based upon a Senior Planner position, and he believed Planning Associate Ericson with a Masters Degree in Planning, has the educational qualifications of a Senior Planner. He stated they were asking more 34C:\ADMIN\MINUTES\CC\8-23-99.CC