CCMIN102103 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. McKeehan pointed out there should not be a situation where a manager is making less money than the employees reporting to the manager. It becomes more problematic in police and fire departments, because the individuals who are a part of the association or union work and receive overtime, and those individuals in the management ranks are precluded from receiving overtime. In response to an inquiry fi.om Mr. Bmzosky, Mr. Roush mentioned there was discussion in closed session that indicated what the staffrecommendation to the Council would be. The idea was carded forward to the joint meeting of the Pleasanton and Livermore representatives to the JPA Board. Based on that recommandation, the matter went to the full Livcnaore and Pleasanton City Councils. Because both city councils do not meet on the same evening, Liwm~ore took action prior to Pleasanton. Ms. McKeehan pointed out that the City of Pleasanton was scheduled to hear this matter first, but the matter was continued; therefore, the City of Livermore moved forward and completed its action. This matter was discussed in closed session, but the actual vote is not taken until it is taken at a regular public meeting. Ms. Host~m~an apologized for her misunderstanding but she believed the Council had reached some sort of consensus prior to the joint meeting of the Pleasanton and Livermore JPA Board. Mr. Brozosky pointed out that he did not want the public to believe Council was making a final decision on the issue in closed session. He noted that Council will sometimes give direction to staff, but until public input is considered, no decision is made. He also provided a spreadsheet to the Council, which outlined the amount of paid in salaries to date throughout the entire organization. He also provided projections to 2009. The information used for projections was what was currently available through the union contracts, and he assumed that management and confidential would receive the same rate increases as other employees. It was disturbing to him to see the additional cost of salary increases per year. If a cumulative total were done fi.om the current year to the year 2009 for additional costs, it would be an additional $57.7 million dollars of expenses that the City would be committing to. His projections take into account benefits remaining at the same current amount. Ms. McKeehan noted that the figures provided by Mr. Brozosky were based on estimates. She pointed out that staffhad done this same type of comparison when the long-term contracts were presented. During this same period, staffbelieved the cumulative total to be $75 million; however, the City is likely to receive $92 million dollars in revenue over this same time flame. She noted that there are increases in expenses and revenue. When staffbased the comparison over a 20-year period, everything remained relatively the same. Pleasant City Council 16 10/21/03 Minutes