City Council Minutes 11-30-1982 SpecialMINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
November 30, 1982 - 6:30 P.M.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Phil White,
Thomas Eidem.
Members Absent: Dan Blonigen.
The meeting was called to order by the Mayor. Administrator Eidem
began with a brief introduction on the preliminary negotiations he
had held with each of the non-union employees. He explained how he
arrived at the figures he had, and explained some of the aspects he
considered critical to granting salary increases. He noted that he
had used approximately 8.4% as a cost of living adjustment in de-
termining suggested salary increases. He stated the reason for
this was that the early months of the year, inflation and cost of
living were at double digit levels while the latest CPI reflected
a 5.5% increase, thus he selected a middle ground. He explained
that he had told each employee that merit increases were not being
considered by him, but that if the employee wished, they could
address the Council individually on the question of merit in-
creases or salary adjustments. He also stated that he had in-
formed the employees that their attendance at this Council meeting
was optional, but that most had said that they were willing to
stop in to visit with the Council prior to the salary decision.
The following employees appeared before the Council briefly:
Lynnea Gillham
Marlene Hellman
Diane Jacobson
Karen Hanson
Walt Mack
Roger Mack
Jim Miller
Sean Hancock
John Simola
Rick Wolfsteller
At the conclusion of the individual interviews, the Council began
their salary deliberations. Council Member Maus raised the ques-
tion as to what exactly is the cost of living. He stated he did
not feel the cost of living was actually 8.4% and that the real
cost of living was more accurately reflected by a figure of 512
to 6%. Council Member White concurred with this. Maus stated
that he did not seriously object to the dollar figure that was
proposed in some cases but he was uncomfortable with calling it
cost of living if it did not accurately reflect cost of living.
He went on to say that if it does not reflect cost of living then
in fact,it would have to be a salary adjustment or a merit raise
and, if that is the case, do all the employees warrant a merit
increase.
- 1 -
Council Minutes - 11/30/82
Eidem stated that it was his contention that the increases should
reflect slightly more than what is determined to be the actual in-
creasing cost of living so that employees may continue to improve
or "get ahead". He stated that if the cost of living increased
5.5% and a pay raise was 5.50, then the employee is not improving
his life, but merely staying the same, and perhaps, in some cases
playing catch up. Eidem stated that was part of the reason why
he looked at the 8 to 812% range. A motion by White, seconded by
Maus, and carried unanimously setting the cost of living figure
to be used for salary increases at 6%. A motion made by Maus,
seconded by White and carried unanimously to increase the clerical
wage range by 6%, and extending the ceiling of that range by 2M
Eidem was then directed by the Council to assign clerical wages to
Gillham, Hellman and Jacobson within the defined range. Council
discussion again returned to the problem of cost of living in-
creases. Maus then suggested that perhaps cost of living percent-
ages should be dispensed with totally and that dollar amounts be
determined and agreed upon and increases be granted in that fashion.
He also stated that in the future, if cost of living or percentages
were to be used in determining salary increases, Eidem should be
given a clearly defined frame work within which to work prior to
any salary negotiations with the employees. Maus suggested that
since the Council felt strongly on a dollar amount generated by a
figure of 6%, but the employees and the administrator had negoti-
ated in good faith at approximately 8.4%, that a middle ground be
established with respect to actual dollars assigned, and that that
figure be granted as the salary increase. A motion by White,
seconded by Maus and carried unanimously to adopt the following
salary schedule for 1983:
- 2 -
FROM
TO
Lynnea Gillham
$6.82
per
hour
$7.57
per
hour
Marlene Hellman
5.95
per
hour
6.63
per
hour
Diane Jacobson
6.65
per
hour
7.33
per
hour
Karen Hanson
11,040
per
year
12,000
per
year
Walt Mack
20,748
per
year
22,308
per
year
Roger Mack
21,252
per
year
22,812
per
year
Jim Miller
21,300
per
year
22,860
per
year
Sean Hancock
19,800
per
year
20,500
per
year
John Simola
26,412
per
year
28,332
per
year
Mark Irmiter
24,528
per
year
26,448
per
year
- 2 -
Council Minutes - 11/30/82
With respect to the administrator's salary, Eidem raised the issue
of a 22% disparity between the former administrator's salary and
the current administrator's salary, when in fact, credentials were
nearly identical. He provided data that reflected the mean
salaries for city managers/administrators nation wide and State
wide. He also raised the question that upon relocating in Monti-
cello, he had forfeited several benefits that he had accrued
through 10 years of public service and requested that some of
those benefits be reinstated by virtue of his total experience,
not just Monticello experience. Council Member [shite stated and
other members concurred that the starting salary when Eidem was
hired was largely because the new administrator would be unknown
commodity, but that it had been agreed upon between members of
the Council at the time of hiring, that when the new person had
adjusted to the position the salary would then be readjusted to
more accurately reflect what was being paid to the former admin-
istrator. A motion by White, seconded by Maus and carried to
adopt the following salary increases for Wolfsteller and Eidem.
FROM TO
Rick Wolfsteller $26,800 per year 29,690 per year
Thomas Eidem 29,000 per year 35,000 per year
A motion by Maus, seconded by White and carried unanimously
allowing Eidem to take 2 weeks vacation in 1983 and 3 weeks
vacation for 1984.
A motion by Fair, seconded by White and carried for meeting to
adjourn.
i
R
Thomas A. Eidem
City Administrator
- 3 -