My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013_0617_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2013
>
2013_0617_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2013 1:51:40 PM
Creation date
6/13/2013 3:31:12 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
216
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
these revenue sources are stagnant or are not expected to increase beyond inflationary-type <br />63 <br />amounts and therefore cannot be relied upon to fund the Compensation Study implementation. <br />64 <br />These costs are based on the roster of employees as of May 31, 2013. <br />65 <br />66 <br />Adjustments could be phased in over the next year such as implementing the <br />67 <br />reclassifications($20,000) and 2% (to achieve at least the 97% of marketplace) on 7/1/13, and <br />68 <br />1.5% + COLA on 1/1/14, and the final 1.1% on 7/1/14. It is important to note here that delays in <br />69 <br />implementation create componding results. Under this implementation schedule the costs would <br />70 <br />be as follows: <br />71 <br />72 <br />$20,000+ <br />* <br />1.5%Jan14 <br />Source2%Jul141.1%Jul14 <br />TaxLevy$84,808$63,606$46,644 <br />CableFranchiseFees$2,696$2,022$1,483 <br />ITRevenues$18,868$14,151$10,377 <br />LicenseCenterFees$17,520$13,140$9,636 <br />BuildingPermitandPlanReview <br />Fees$15,498$11,624$8,524 <br />WaterandSewerFees$8,086$6,065$4,447 <br />RecyclingFees$674$506$371 <br />GolfCoursefees$4,044$3,033$2,224 <br />Reclassifications$20,000 <br />$ <br />Total172,194$114,146$83,707 <br />*excludes any potential COLA increase as that has not been determined yet. <br />73 <br />74 <br />To stay current, the Council will need to provide ongoing funding for future years to maintain <br />75 <br />the pay plans at 100% of the market average by providing a cost of living adjustment that meets <br />76 <br />the market’s average. <br />77 <br />78 <br />Whether the existing 97% + merit pay compensation plan stays in effect or the proposed new <br />79 <br />compensation plan is instituted, there will be a need to allocate over $320,000 additional funds. <br />80 <br />SR <br />TAFF ECOMMENDATION <br />81 <br />1.Abandon the policy that sets non union, exempt and non-exempt pay plans at 97% of the <br />82 <br />average with merit pay component that was never fully funded or implemented. This <br />83 <br />practice is very unusual in the public sector and has proven to be ineffective. <br />84 <br />2.Reestablish the pay plans for non-union, exempt and non-exempt, at 100% of the 10 City <br />85 <br />average as shown by the study, resulting in a 4.6% increase to the pay plans as implemented <br />86 <br />above (without the merit pay component). <br />87 <br />3.Positions found to be more than 6% under the market average after plan adjustments are <br />88 <br />completed would be reviewed and potential reclassified to the next higher grade at the step <br />89 <br />just above their current rate of pay. It is expected there will not be more than 8 positions <br />90 <br />with a total cost not to exceed $20,000. <br />91 <br />RCA <br />EQUESTEDOUNCILCTION <br />92 <br />Motion to implement staff recommendations as indicated above. <br />93 <br />Prepared by: Eldona Bacon, Human Resources Manager <br />94 <br />Attachments: A: None. <br />Page 3 of 3 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.