CCMIN111505 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Fialho said no. Ms. McGovern said her concern was that this item was only agendized once when it was up for approval, which did not allow the public sufficient time to comment. Mr. Brozosky asked legal counsel if Council was allowed to discuss this matter in Closed Session, particularly because the management and confidential employees are non-union. Michael Roush, City Attorney, said the Brown Act permits this type of discussion because it involved wages, terms and conditions of employment for a group of employees. Council is not required to discuss this matter in Closed Session and it could choose a different process. Mayor Hosterman invited public comments. Doug Miller, a Pleasanton resident, thanked Council for continuing this issue and noted that this issue has only been discussed amongst staff and Council and the public was not aware of this matter until it was on Council's November 1 agenda. He believed it was important to look at the industry and total compensation and not solely a salary increase of 3.5 percent. He supported Mr. Fialho's comments and the three suggested concepts as outlined in the staff report. June Thompson, a Pleasanton resident, asked that the compensation enhancements of the City employees always be agendized and outside analysis of total compensation be considered. She supported staff's suggested concepts as outlined in the staff report and believed Council should consider them. It was her understanding that City employees do not contribute to their retirement pensions. She asked when this started, if it was standard for all cities, and what was done prior to that time? Kay Ayala, a Pleasanton resident, thanked Council for continuing this item. She presented a petition to Council, which was signed by Pleasanton residents requesting Council to always agendize compensation enhancements of City employees and initiate an outside analysis of total compensation for City employees that compares Pleasanton with the private sector and like cities. She noted that this is not solely Pleasanton's problem and it is a problem that is occurring throughout the State and it should not matter whether the City has money in its General Fund to cover expenses; it is the public's perception. She agreed with Mr. Fialho's concept to compare City salaries with the private sector to evaluate comparability. She mentioned that the comparative study that was used for salaries was different and a majority of attention was paid to the Livermore Pleasanton Fire Department Management employees, which she believed skewed the percentages. Mayor Hosterman closed the public comments. Mr. Thorne wanted the employees and the public to understand that he believed the employees are the most competent, professional and dedicated group of employees that he worked with either in the private or public sector, and their accomplishments and performance compared to the goals and objectives established by this Council and the public was outstanding. He noted that the workers compensation issue was broad enough that every business in town was impacted. He preferred to post the structure and process on the City's Pleasanton City Council Minutes 6 11/1 5/05