1973 12 10v I
1904
CITY COUNCIL MEETING -(Continuation ofrecessed meeting ofDecember 3,1973).December 10,1973
Council Chambers -City Hall 8:00 P.M.
Members present -Councilman Robt.E.Hill.W.B.Moe,Norman W.Johnson,Gordon M.Ebbert,
Otto M. Skaug, Donald E. Swanson and Michael Boyle.
The reconvened meeting was called to order by Mayor Skaug.He called for approval of the minutes oftherecessedmeetingofDecember3,1973.Norman Johnson stated he wished to make an addition or noteoneadditionintheminutes.It Is more ofa clarification as to what was inthe newspaper he stated.ItwashisresponsetotheMayorwhenheindicatedthatwehadtakenadvantageofasituation,"read thatwehadagreedtosomethingandthatwehadbrokenfaith,and this is not.true.We had opposed some itemsinit(the budget)from the beginning and feltthat we were entitled tostaythat way and express our opinion
in the open meeting.
Norm Johnson statedthathe would like to insertinthe minutes for record purposes that his response was,"that I didn't feel we were taking advantage of anyone or anything.That we did not create the situation of
a 3 or a 6-man council:1 MayorSkaug stated that the minutes will show this insertion.
Motion by Hill to approve the minutes with this insertion.Second by Swanson.Motion carried.Council-
manMoe abstained due to not being present at the meeting of December 3, 1973.
Mayor Skaug proceeded with the meeting stating that inasmuch as this is a conintua'tion of the recessedmeetingofDecember3,1973,.--etthat meeting the Council had decided to proceed with Item No.7(Resolution -Amending the Basic Compensation Plan)before Item No.6 (Ordinance -Adopting the 1974 Budget),
and upon a voteof 3 to 3the resolution was negated ,therefore,ihe Mayor felt it was in order to call for a
motion to leconsider the resolution as it was presented.
Motion by Boyle to bring back as an item of business reconsideration ofthe Resolution Amending the Basic
Compensation Plan.Second by Ebbert. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO.652 -AMENDING BASIC COMPENSATION FLAN /09'<^
The resolution was read by title only,setting forth the compensation for eachclassificationand step for
all city officers and employees not covered under union agreement for 1974.
Norm Johnson commented that he felt the main objection was in some areas where the salary is over the
5.5%guidelines,which we didn't feel were neces-.ary,possibly the City Manager can elaborate more on
that and specifically list those salaries over the 5.5%.
City Manager Waggener listed exactly those over 5.5% and where the schedule stands in total,and pointed
out that the overall salary increases are almost exuetly at 5.5?&.Those salaries over the 5.5%are the
ones discissed with the Council where we needed to make adjustments on,exclusive of his own salary
which was not discussed in that fashion,and is just below 7%. The others are:Finance Director =9.7%;
Community Development Director =13.8%;Public Works Director =i3.6%;Public Works Superintendent =7.6%;
Building Inspector =12.4%;Sewage Treatment Plant Operator =12.7%.These are at the step from where the
increase occurred.All other salaries are at the 5.5%as shown on the schedule.There ?»-s other salaries
that are union negotiated that are below 5.5%.They are two-year contracts;one is in the second year and
the other is in the first vear,referring to the Police and Fire Department respectively.There is another factor
that enters into those contracts,they were negotiated at the bargaining table and in some instances agreed
to lower salaries in order to gain some other concessions that they felt were valuable to them.
He added,that discussions were held with the Council either in September or October regarding specific
positions where we needed to increase salaries in order to attract personnel.We went over the salary
schedule with the Council and also the salary schedules that other cities were paying,and what we were
going to have to offer to attract the caliber of people we should have for these positions.I asked the
Council at that time specifically to make a job offer to these people (Finance Director and Park &Recreation
Director)based on the top of the then salary range,with an approximate 5.5%.added for 1974.I received
permission from the Council to make a job offer to those employees with the increase as noted,and place
them in Step B for 1974.The Finance Director position needed to go above the 5.5%in Step B and the Park
and Recreation Director position was right at 5.5%for 1974.The jobs were offered at those figures and
these people accepted and have been with the City since that time,with a letter in theiT personnel file
assuring them that they were going to receive these increases on January 1,1974.At the same time discuss
ed with the Council then that it was definitely obvious these changes in department head positions would
affect some other positions.The basic proposal to the Council then at that time and still would be,the
proposal that every department head or position ir that same category would have to be at Step B in 1974,
and assure them one additional Step in 1975.We also discussed in budget sessions with the Council regard
ing some other positions that were out of line for our salary schedule,that of the newly created Fire Marshal
which is a change oyer from Fire Inspector;the Public Works Supt.and Sewage Treatment Plant Operator.
All of these positions carry additional responsibility.
He continued,that the commitments were made in order to employ people on one hand and in making those
commitments almost pre-commited adjustment for other department heads in order to keep them at the same
relative level.There have been no increases above that.In fact looking at the total schedule,in the
Community Development position,when calculated out,actually does not show the full increase as it does
the ethers for that position,and brought it into line with the same salaries as that of the other positions.
A salary'structure was presented and approved by the Citv Council.We were positively pre-commited
1905
/o/o
City CouncilMinutes: 2 December 10,1973
by agreement of the City Council in order to increase,and in order to bring these new people into the
community,and would hope that the Council at this time would not chose to break faith with these people
and not pay them the salaries that they were assured when they agreed to move to Moses Lake.
Bob Hill commented - I don't recall in ourdiscussion that as of January 1,1974 a jump o.r this magnitude.
Don Swanson inquired regarding other positions such as the Fire and Police under their union contracts are
getting approximately or minus 5%, and thought some consideration should be given these positions also.
Chet Waggener replied that these contracts were negotiated at the bargaining table.When those contractscomeup again we will negotiate for whatever we can do. He also noted that we are looking at different
job markets in that area.These positioncan be filled within the salary that is allocated,-and competitivewiththe local job market.The positions indicated,however,could not be filled at the salary that was
previously listed,and not with just the 5.5%increase.Weare no longer competing in the local job marketforthose positions-we are competing in the northwest job market,andthe scheduled salaries are competitive. Acursory surveyof salaries throughout the State this year indicates that almost every city's salaries
are higherthan ours and In these specific positions they are higher.At the same time they are considering
salary increases anywhere from 7 to 9%.vVe are very concerned about keeping ourentire salary structure
within the 5.5%, andthis schedule does that.At the same time other people are not doing that,"andeventuallywe are getting to the point where we are not competitive and we simply cannot hire qualified people.
Gordon Ebbert commented - then, only someof these people would automatically go into C Step the first
of the year?Chet Waggener explained that - only in the instance of Department Heads have we slid
back to Ster Bfor 1974,and enter into Step C in 1975.Otheremployees eligible,regarding length of timeemployedin a particular category,will automatically enter Step C.
Bob Hill stated that,based uponan agreement which he was not aware of (referring to a meeting he had
presumably missed)regarding our newly hired employees,the only two items he would object to is the
City Manager's and the Community Development Director's salary.
NormJohnson stated he misunderstood-I thought the Finance Director was going into Step C as of
January 1,1974.I would have togo along with Bob on the other two items.I don't like to arrive at 5.5%ov«
all by taking 13.8%in one position to make it appear to balance out.
The City Manager commentedabout the Community Development Director position stating,that in comparing
other city structures our size,we have probably been the only one in the area for many years who has not
had someone with professional planning capability m their staff.We have been without that for several
years.If you hold the guidelines for such a valuable position to the community and its future growth as
against other department head positions,that would put his salary at the lowest salary of any department^
heads,and don't feel it should be downgraded in that fashion.
Motion by Johnson to hold the guidelines to 5.5%on the two specifics that Mr.Hill mentioned,and he con
curred with,that of the City Manager and the Community Development Director salaries."Second by Hill
Mayor Skaug commented that the City Manager's salary on the preliminary schedule was listed at the 5l5%
level and the majority of the Council amended his own suggested increase.
OThequestionwascalled- the motion failed.Moe, Ebbert,Boyle and Skaugvoted against the motion.^JSwanson,Johnson and Hill in favor.*-£
Motion by Boyle to adoptthe Resolution as presented.Second by Moe.Motion carried. Moe,Ebbert,:£Skaugand Boyle voting in favor. Swanson, Johnson and Hill voting against the resolution.'^*
ORDINANCE NO.682 -ADOPTING BUDGET FOR 1974
The Council was presented with a copy of the 1974 Budget including the changes as noted at the public hear
ing on December 3,1973.The ordinance was read in its entirety.
Motion by Boyle to pass the ordinance and adopt the Budget for 1974 for the City of Moses Lake as presented.
Second by Moe.
Bob Hill commented that he felt Mr.Weaver should not drive his personal car on city business.Where he
goes on city Jobs,etc.,it should be in a city marked car.
Chet Waggener commented that Mr.Weaver has had a city car furnished him in the past.He has expressed
a desire to be allowed the latitude of using his own car.If it does not cost the city additional money to
have a person furnish their own car,there is no reason they should not do so.In calculating the amount in
this instance we took the total mileage he had driven a city car for one year and subtracted from that mileage
for driving back and forth to his residence to work,because department heads are generally allowed to take
their cars home in order to respond to emergency conditions,and respond often directly from home.We
multiplied that by 12£per mile figure and arrived at the mileage figure.It would cost more than that to
have the city furnish him a car on this basis.If allowed,we would take one car out of the city fleet.The
provision for furnishing his own car would be available at such time as we trade in those or eliminate one
from the fleet,which is not going to happen on January 1.
V t
1906
City Council Minutes: 3 December 10,1973
Use of private cars by departmentheads is a fairly common practice in many cities.When a city staff
member assigned a city-marked car needs to go out of town on city business overnight,there are occasions
in the evenings where a little more latitude is desired,and not risking possible criticism for stopping for
dry cleaning or picking up a loaf of bread on their way home from work while driving a city-marked car.
The question was called.Motion carried.
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT -OFFER TO PURCHASE SURPLUS PROPERTY /Q Q(j?
A letter was read from Farm Management Services replying regarding requested estimated development
costs on the 100 acre parcel adjacent to the Municipal Airport. The following figures were quoted,which
had also been reviewed with Lad Irrigation:
Approximately 300ft.12"well 7,000
100 h.p.pump 10,000
Irrigation installation &ground work 1,200
2600 ft.of mainline .7,800
four -1/4 mile while lines 12,800
Minor land leveling and fence clean-up 1,200
$40,000
A letter was read from Richard L.Weaver,Public Works Director,recommending that"the Council not accept
the offer to sell and consider development by one of the possible alternatives.
Norm Johnson inquired if the City has an appraisal of the Land. Rich Weaver stated that two appraisals are
in process and not as yet available.Motion by Johnson that the city do nothing with this property until
appraisals are received.Second by Hill.Motion carried.
DAY CARECENTER LOCATED IN MOBILE UNITS BEHIND CENTRAL SCHOOL V/^/^/
A letter was read from Fidencio Vela,President of the Moses Lake Day Care Center,submitting their annual
request ol a zone variance for the Day Care Center at Fifth and Chestnut,subject to the continuing property
lease from School District #161.
Gordon Ebbert inquired if we still need fire Inspection,and he was informed that they no longer are needing
to use portions of Central School.Otherwise there are no additions or changes.
Motion by Hill that a one-year extension be granted.Second by Johnson.Motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 9:35 P.M.
-6l<6l.
City Clerk,R. R.Gan&ei
ZhM/a iffMAYOR-Otto Mi.Skaug
ATTEST:
t