Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 12, 2024 2 <br />Tessia Melvin discussed Job Content Evaluation explaining that the jobs are classified based on <br />qualifications, decision making, problem solving, relationships, effort and conditions/hazards. She <br />stated pay is decided by the Council and the City's pay philosophy. <br />Tessia Melvin discussed the job classification changes she recommends based on the market <br />benchmarks and the job descriptions where positions have additional duties that were not included <br />before. <br />Councilmember Holden thought there was a discrepancy between the slides showing four <br />positions at 10% or more below market and the ten suggested job classification changes. <br />Tessia Melvin responded that the four positions shown in pink are based on a comparison to the <br />market. The classifications changes are based on the job descriptions, some of which have <br />changed. <br />Councilmember Holden asked about the Recreation Supervisor position. She wondered how the <br />comparison was made when some of the other benchmark cities have much larger recreation <br />programs. <br />Tessia Melvin agreed that some of the other cities have much larger Parks and Rec programs but <br />this recommended change is based the job description and the internal equity. <br />Councilmember Holden asked for confirmation that when Tessia Melvin stated internally it was <br />based on Arden Hills. <br />Tessia Melvin confirmed. The recommendation was based on duties, accountability and budget. <br />She clarified the market information tells where the City is in comparison to other cities and the <br />classifications are based on an internal value to the City. She agreed some of the positions aren't <br />comparing apples to apples, but based job descriptions specific to Arden Hills. <br />Tessia Melvin presented four options the City has, showing the recommended market <br />adjustments and the cost of implementation. Councilmembers asked for clarification on if Public <br />Works was included in any of the options. Tessia Melvin confirmed that the Public Works <br />positions were excluded from the study because they are union employees. <br />Tessia Melvin concluded with a comparison table showing where the four options would put the <br />City in the market based on pay philosophy and showed the cost for 2025. <br />Councilmember Monson requested clarification regarding option three. She stated that if you <br />add the 2%, there is more cost because the increase will happen up front, rather than changing the <br />grid and the ability to step up. <br />Tessia Melvin confirmed. She stated that option fixes the grid immediately, but you pay for it all <br />at once. The other options slow it down because steps would be added. The benefit of this option <br />is everyone gets the same and it's all done right away. Tessia Melvin stated if the cost is too <br />much, but the Council likes the philosophy, the cost could be reduced if the Council decided to <br />implement the adjustment in July. <br />