|
Therel~re,i~ might be perceived that the exempt package is too high, however, again the
<br /> tenure:~ta~;$ and market portion of the package is below the Stanton cost of living
<br /> adjuStrr~nt~iand it is only due to the performance provisions that increases are suggested on
<br /> averag~ al~,e these levels.
<br />
<br />3) There iq anI unknown actual impact upon the AFSCME mediation.
<br />
<br />Given the abo~e., it is my position that we have delayed as long as is reasonably possible for this
<br />group. It is ft/Jx~ h~,r my position that the percentage increase as presented, given the long-term
<br />benefits of th¢[p6rformance system, is reasonable even in a year when adjustments within like
<br />cities is s°mew~af{lower.
<br />
<br />Regarding the i~sge~of the City Engineer's car, the following is a section of the memorandum dated
<br />May 8, 1992 frbn~!City Adminisu'ator Schroeder to the Personnel Committee and the City Council
<br />members: ~
<br />
<br />Since I have b~en With the City of Ramsey, on two or three occasions members of the City Council
<br />have discussed w~ether or not it is appropriate for the City Engineer to have a staff car for his
<br />personal and l:i;us!,ngss use. Most recently, ~t was suggested that I place th~s on the agenda for
<br />discussion duri~,~ g~0nsideration of the exempt pay package for 1992. For your edification, the car
<br />under discussiCn !iS a four-door 1991 Crown Victoria with air conditioning, has logged 33,223
<br />miles to date a~d ~jas a retail value between $10,500 and $11,000 and a wholesale or trade-in value
<br />of between $81,50~. ' and $9,000. During 1991 we put 13,080 miles on the car of which 4,085
<br />miles were pel~$or~.~l engineering use and 724 miles were building maintenance personnel use. It
<br />should further be rioted that personal use of a City vehicle is a taxable benefit according to the IRS.
<br />
<br />I have attache,d for your review the June 7, 1990 Special City Council meeting minutes during
<br />which Mayor~e~ann and Councilmembers DeLuca, Pearson and Peterson authorized offering
<br />the position o~ Clty Engineer to Steven Jankowski with the offer for employment to include an
<br />annual salarY~f $42,000, $1,000 for moving expenses or $41,200 as a salary and $1,800 for
<br />moving expen~es,2he authority to utilize a City vehicle for professional and personal transportation
<br />and miscellan~ou~S[considerations. All members present at that meeting voted in favor of that
<br />motion. I hav~ a~q5 included the letter dated June 12, 1990 formally offering those terms, which
<br />included the u.~e c)f a City owned vehicle, and the June 13, 1990 letter to the City Administrator
<br />from Steven J~nk0. wski accepting the terms of employment including the use of a City vehicle for
<br />travel to and frbm~iwork exclusive of long distance.
<br />
<br />It is my positiO? th. at the City of Ramsey offered th~s C~ty vehicle to the candidate for the position
<br />in that it was t0oli:ing for an opportunity to provide non-monetary compensation. It is also my
<br />position that ~ho~ald this personal use of the City vehicle be removed, the incumbent could
<br />reasonably be ~ex~6cted to experience between a $350 and $400 per month increase in expenses
<br />which in¢lude~ a~0rtizing an $11,000 loan at 12% over either a four or five year term and 4,085
<br />miles per ye~ ati}28¢ per mile in operating expenses. Further, if the City then traded off this
<br />vehicle, we ¢O~Ul~p.otentially receive $9,000 which, if invested at 7% in a five year note, would
<br />generate a tota~~ of $10,975 or, at a four year term, would generate $10,628.
<br />Therefore, my PoSition is as follows:
<br />
<br /> 1) iln Order to attract a City Engineer, the car became part of the package as an
<br /> 'alternative to an increase in wages.
<br />
<br /> 2) iRemoval of that car should result in a mileage allowance to the incumbent of
<br /> ibe~Ween $350 and $400 per month.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|