CC Minutes - 05/16/07 Work Session

Home Browse Search

City Attorney Glenn Klein explained that part of the contract addressed the COLA. He said the council might need to authorize an amendment to the contract. In response to a question from Ms. Ortiz, City Manager Taylor explained that the COLA had been placed in the salary matrix when he received the contract. Ms. Bettman was pleased that the council officers recommended a comprehensive look at the evaluation process. She referred to the League of Oregon Cities (LOC) Evaluation Handbook. She felt the handbook had much to contribute to a viable evaluation process. She related that the book suggested the evaluation process be determined by the entire council and that there should be public input, especially on the criteria. Ms. Bettman shared her concern with the recommendation of the council officers to have an interim modification to the process. She felt this would lead to having different data for three consecutive years. She believed this would mean the City would lose data because the years would not be comparable to each other. Mr. Pryor commented that there were three pieces to the discussion. He said one was what to do this year, one was what to do next year, and the third was how to handle the compensation part of the process. He observed that the current evaluation was a subjective process. He stated that he would not have a difficult time drawing comparisons between the two years given that the categories proposed for the present year were the same as the categories used in the previous year and only the numbering would change. Mr. Pryor said he had not been satisfied with the existing evaluation process. He wanted it to have more narrative, rather than just numbers. He thought the LOC handbook would be a good resource for the process but he would not support a motion that required the council to use it at this point. He stated that the evaluation was a basis for compensation and was a vehicle to talk about goals and outcomes. He added that the transition process was similar enough to the previous year that he could still use that year as a basis, but it was different enough that he did not feel he was doing “a whole lot of stuff” he did not consider helpful. Mr. Poling expressed appreciation to Mr. Pryor, Ms. Ortiz, and the Mayor for making the decision to review and modify the process. He agreed that using the numbered rating scale was outdated and was not accurate. He felt it was cumbersome and time-consuming. He favored the proposal. In response to a question from Mr. Zelenka, Mr. Chouinard explained that there were two pieces to the compensation that the council dealt with in each evaluation: a merit decision and the COLA decision. He said the past practice had been to give the City Manager a COLA at the same rate as the exempt employees, which is as of July 1. Ms. Ortiz averred that the COLA should be automatic and not contractual. Mr. Zelenka asked if there was an existing compensation policy. Mr. Chouinard replied that compensation was supposed to be +/- 5% of the market rate. He said generally speaking compensation was such that if an employee was performing satisfactorily, he or she would receive a merit raise. He underscored that the City only withheld merit increases when faced with employees with serious performance difficulties. City Manager Taylor added that an employee only received step increases based on merit until he or she reached the top step. MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 16, 2007 Page 2 Work Session