Laserfiche WebLink
does not want the council to not feel that the termination of the City Manager is so traumatic that <br />it does not want to use it. He encouraged both parties to use the clause if things were not going <br />well, adding he wanted to avoid a situation similar to what happened six months ago. Mr. Farr <br />emphasized that Mr. Johnson had made it quite clear that that was his intention. <br /> <br />With regard to the request for retroactive pay, Mr. Johnson explained that he was due for a merit <br />increase in June 1996. Acting City Manager Linda Norris failed to act on it and then new City <br />Manager Vicki Elmer did not feel comfortable in immediately granting a step increase, which <br />lasted for the entire year. He said the result was that he had not received an increase in over <br />two years and the request was in partial payment for that period. Mr. Farr noted that two other <br />executives received step increases "ahead of Jim" during that period. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson said she found it very awkward to fill out evaluations for previous City Managers <br />because she was not fully aware of their daily activities outside of council meetings. She asked <br />Mr. Johnson to think about developing a regular simple oral or written report to the council. Mr. <br />Johnson said he would add such a report in discussion later of performance evaluations, noting <br />that he will suggest anonymous evaluations from the City's executives. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor agreed that regular reports from the City Manager would be very useful, suggesting <br />that the reports be made monthly. <br /> <br />Ms. Swanson Gribskov said it should be clear if the six-month review included a compensation <br />review, suggesting that if the retroactive pay was approved, salary negotiations be postponed to <br />annual evaluation periods. Mr. Johnson said that was his intention. Mr. Tollenaar said even <br />given Mr. Johnson's explanation for the retroactive pay request, he still believes it should not be <br />approved. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr summarized the discussion, saying the only point of contention was that of retroactive <br />pay. <br /> <br />Mr. Tollenaar said he reluctantly concluded that Mr. Johnson's explanation makes no difference in <br />the question of retroactive pay. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner agreed, which is not to say, he added, that he would not consider it if it were to come <br />up in a different request. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson withdrew his request for retroactive pay and said he would strike that section of the <br />contract. <br /> <br />Mr. Laue asked for the wage/salary figure for the lowest paid employee, excluding temporary and <br />part time employees. Ms. Grondona said she was not prepared to respond but would provide the <br />information to the entire council via e-mail. Mr. Farr asked her to fax the council the entire pay <br />matrix. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson suggested that Section 4.2 should be changed to reflect August 1, 1998, as the <br />effective date of the contract. <br /> <br />City Attorney Glenn Klein reviewed the suggested changes: paragraph 4.2--delete the first <br />sentence; Paragraph 5, third line--substitute "January or February of 1999" for "after six months <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 14, 1998 Page 4 <br />5:30 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />