CC Minutes - 03/13/06 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to set the salary for the Police Auditor at Range 37 on the City of Eugene Exempt Salary Schedule. Ms. Solomon opined that Range 37 was high for a starting salary. Ms. Ortiz countered that Range 37 was a fair wage for the level of expertise that would be required for the position, which was a position that would meet with controversy on a regular basis within the community. Mr. Laue stated that the committee reviewed and discussed this issue thoroughly, including a comparison analysis of other municipalities. Additionally, the Police Commission weighed in that the position would be quite complex and, as there was a limited field of individuals who could meet the qualifications, Range 37 was appropriate. Mr. Poling pointed to Attachment C of the AIS which provides Police Auditor salary information in other jurisdictions across the United States. He said Range 37 was well within the median range of the agencies listed. The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to provide the benefit package as outlined in Attachment C of the Agenda Item Summary. Mayor Piercy pointed out that the benefit package before the council was the basic package the City offered to its higher-level employees. Ms. Solomon asked if a moving allowance had been determined. Ms. Ortiz stated the Ad Hoc Committee did not act on that component and it would be revisited. Ms. Bettman stated that, depending on the applicant field, it may be appropriate to offer incentives. The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to allocate up to $17,000 from the general fund contingency for the purpose of recruitment and selection expenses of the Police Audi- tor; the funds to be allocated to the Human Resources and Risk Services Department. Mayor Piercy commented that Attachment E details such expenditures. She confirmed that these expenses do not include hiring a professional recruiter. The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to hold a specific public forum at the City Council meeting on April 10, 2006, to hear community comments on the auditor Candidate Profile. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Kelly commented on the Draft Selection Process and referred to Page 29 of the agenda packet. He complimented the proposal and pointed to critical components: “Any city councilor who chooses to, may individually review all applications and provide input on applicants to be considered fur- ther/selected as a finalist; additionally, (re telephone interviews) the Ad Hoc Committee would outline the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate and make it available to any City Councilor . . .” Mr. Kelly then pointed out that it was certainly appropriate for the Ad Hoc Committee make a recommenda- MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 13, 2006 Page 4 Work Session