Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 12, 2024 4 <br />She said we can start people anywhere on the scale. We can give additional bumps if someone is <br />exceptional. <br />Councilmember Fabel sought confirmation that a new hire can be started anywhere on the scale, <br />as appropriate, and that the City is at liberty to increase a person by more than one step for <br />particular merit. <br />Councilmember Monson thought we are using a lot of tools to try to retain people and we should <br />continue to use them. She believes the question is what can be set as a policy? Market adjustment <br />has to be done. People get a pay raise because there was a market adjustment. That doesn't forego <br />their opportunity to receive the cost of living adjustment. She thought that was not one or the <br />other, they are often hand in hand. She believes we are below market and have to catch up. She <br />likes Option 1 because over half of the employees are maxed out and she would like to give them <br />a runway. She also believes a policy should be in place that this grid is looked at every three years <br />so there wouldn't be the need for the large increases. She thinks that we need to at least meet <br />market but she would prefer to be above market. <br />Councilmember Rousseau is interested in Option 1 but recognizes there may be some wiggle <br />room in Option 2. Based on staff comments regarding recruiting/retention and knowing how <br />competitive the market is, she would prefer to be able to compete with other cities, regardless of <br />size. <br />Councilmember Fabel would like to lean back against the thought that an employee ought to be <br />paid more or less depending on size. He thinks the work that people do for this city is equally <br />important, if not more, to the work done at larger cities. He likes the idea of us being above <br />average. <br />Mayor Grant stated that initially he favored Option 2. He said that it was established that we <br />want to be about 4% or 5% above market. He is not concerned about the dollar amount difference <br />between Option 1 and Option 2. He doesn't think we need to be a full 8% above market <br />minimums and maximums but some progress needs to be made to be competitive. He reminded it <br />is always at the Council's purgative to give an extra step and to hire at an advanced step if <br />appropriate. He thinks maintaining at about 4% above average minimum and 5% above average <br />maximum is appropriate. He favors Option 2. <br />Councilmember Holden corrected that she didn't say anyone was less important because they <br />didn't work in a big city. Big cities have a lot larger tax base and are able to pay their workers <br />more money for doing the same job. She referred to Councilmember Monson's comment <br />regarding we should have a policy to review this topic every three years. Councilmember <br />Holden said there is a policy, because the state law requires it. She prefers Option 2 but would <br />like to include a 5% cost of living increase this year which would equate to an 8-10% raise vs. <br />6%. <br />Councilmember Monson stated the state law requires the internal pay equity study. <br />Tessia Melvin confirmed the pay equity is required by state law. She said pay equity doesn't care <br />about market competitiveness it only cares about the jobs and the classifications. A market review <br />can be done whenever. <br />