Laserfiche WebLink
Page 9 <br /> <br /> 2. Proposed salary range for position: The City Admin- <br />istrator stated that the City should establish a salary range for <br />this position as we have this with all oum other positions. He <br />submitted the following range for their review and comments. <br /> <br /> Minimum Mid Point Maximum <br /> $17,000 319,975 ~22,950 <br /> <br />This range reglectS a 35% differential from the low and to the high. <br />The Council Personnel Committee reviewed the above without recom- <br />mending any changes. However, the Committee did discuss what kind <br />of salary they should be looking at when they are looking at filling <br />this City position with an individual who meets the cPiterla that <br />Council has set for this job which would be a degree in ul~ban planning <br />or related field and with three years work experience or five (5) <br />years work experience in urban planning with a municipal government. <br />A1 Sorteberg thought if they got a fully qualified individual, they <br />would have to start him close to the $20,000 range. Gary R~imann dis- <br />cussed the issue, but didn't comment on this, only to say he didn't <br />want to get locked in too high and we should first see. <br /> The City Administrator stated that the City should pay a fair salary <br /> according',to the qualifications. It would be ridicules to hire the <br /> person too low and have him leave us within the year.-In~that case <br /> it is better to not hire the individual. <br /> Council Action- Council should give their approval to suggested set up <br /> of the interview committee or disapproval. If they disapprove, they <br /> should give direction as to how they want it handled. <br /> Council Action- Council should establish salary range for the position <br /> as you do on all other city positions. It should also look at where <br /> they want the individual to fall in salary range if applicant meets <br /> our published criteria. <br /> c. Annual Personnel Evaluation on the C~ty Administrator. - <br /> The Personnel Committee reviewed the City Administrator job performance <br /> and discussed it with him. Accordingly, they a~e submitting the e~al- <br /> uation on to the City Council for your review and action. Gary Relmann <br /> asked Lloyd G. Schnelle about his vacation. He stated that up until <br /> this point he has been extremely busy, however with the proposed person <br /> coming on boaz~d within the next g0 days, he would be able then to take <br /> vacation. Councilman Reimann stated he felt it was important for all <br /> to take a vacation. <br /> Council Action: Council action will be to approve/disapprove the Annual <br /> Personnel Review on the City Administrator. <br /> <br />P/March'6, 1981 <br /> --2-- <br /> <br /> <br />