Come on. Come on. Come on. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Good evening. I will call to order the finance committee meeting on June 1st,
2026 at 6:30 p.m. We have two items on the agenda this evening. Uh we have a trans uh year-end transfer request in the amount of $3,731,000. We have a proposed non-UN salary ordinance change to job description pursuant to chapter 125 personnel
section 5. And I will begin with order number 26-1009752 year end transfer request in the amount of $539,000 which moves funds from and to various accounts for department of public works
comp patroller treasurer city clerk legal department in addition to a transfer totaling $3,192,000 from free cash to open space stabilization. uh $15,000 for open space stabilization and snow and ice in the
amount of $3,177,000. I'll begin by reading the letter submitted by the mayor. Pier council president Oing and counselors enclosed for your review and approval are the fiscal year 2026
year-end transfer request in the amount of 3,731,000 relative to the number one 3,177,000 from undesated fund to fund the snow and ice deficit for FY2026
$32,000 from the collector assistant finance director line item to go towards the unemploy employment account in the amount of $12,000 and $20,000 into $493,000 from various departments of public works
salary accounts to fund the following transfers in the amount of $50,000 for natural gas bills. $68,000 to fund the fuel and lubricants account. $120,000 to fund the city repair and maintenance.
uh a vendor to assist with the processing annual street listings uh notices and 5,000 from the unfilled parallegal position to fund the legal services account for ongoing matters. Department heads and I will be available
at future finance meetings to answer any questions you may have. Sincerely, Jay Christian Dumis mayor. Um with that uh beginning with the uh the letter submitted by the mayor, we can start with the first one uh item which is the undesated fund to fund the snow and ice
deficit for FY2026. Council vital. >> Mr. Chair, I make a motion to approve the transfer. Motion made and I will second that to approve the $3,177,000 from the undesated fund to fund the snow
and ice deficit for FY2026. Any further discussion? >> Mr. Chair, >> councelor Orm. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, we talked about this during our budget hearings and I believe I read it was 430%
over the original budget. Obviously, we're lucky to have these vacant pos. We're not lucky. I'll look at the commissioner and say we're not lucky to have all these vacant positions. It doesn't make it easy for any department head in here to run a department.
Concerns me is that FY27 hopefully will start filling some of these positions and more or less have some truth in financing in respect to snow and budget. And we're not the only I know in the state people underestimate, but you
know, we're I'm not sure if winter is going to change in the future, but there's not much we can do. And I guess we should be grateful there was some leftover money from vacant positions. But my concern, as I noted in budget time during the full budget, is that I
don't think we're budgeting this properly. And hopefully someday we'll get at least 50% of it budgeted. you know, to be 3 million over is concerning and it's no and there's no reason that we can't look at it a little bit more thoroughly maybe in the next budget
season. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Councilwoman. >> Mr. President, >> thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, just as a point of clarification, the transfer does not involve any underruns and saled funds that we aren't touching any salaried items for this. and the comment
regarding funding. This is the funding way. We increased it from 500,000 a couple years ago to a million and the state allows us to overspend this account as just about every municipality and Ted and his staff do an outstanding job. But, you know, we had 20 events
over 68 inches of snow and Ted you can correct me if I got that math wrong, but that's my tracking where last year we were only 1.3 million over with 14 events and 42 in of snow. And in 24 we were only $600,000 over with nine events
in 27. So it's a function of what kind of snow we have and we have money in undesated fund to cover it. So there's my opinion there is nothing we are going to change on how we fund the snow and ice account. Thank you Mr. Chairman. >> Mr. Chair, I will stand corrected. He is correct. It's coming from the undesated
fund. It's again trying I know we can't gamble too often on winter but we'll see what next year brings. But if we see another winter like we saw this year or close to it, I think we need to start looking at that 1 million and increasing
it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Council, >> Mr. Chair, I didn't get a chance to ever say this publicly and I'd like to do it right now. I thought that DPW did a phenomenal job uh throughout the winter. Um I I would drive into other towns and there would always be slush and snow on the roads and Marorrow did a phenomenal
job. So I think we're getting uh the best bang for the buck. So thank you, Mr. Chair. And that's a good point, Council Vital. Um, because I do know I got a lot of feedback with the uh school children having to walk a little further. Uh, DBW was right on the ball doing their clearing at night. Um, so
good point. Motion's been made and seconded. All in favor? 1 2 3 4 5. That carries. Moving on to the $32,000 transfer from the collector assistant finance director item to go towards the unemployment
account in the amount of $12,000 and $20,000 for the uh postage account. >> Mr. Chair, >> Council Fill. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, no questions on this line. I'm with that move to
approve the $32,000 transfer. Motion has been made and I will second that to approve the 32,000 account. Any further discussion? Council or >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a question. Um I don't know if our clerk is here. I
don't see the mayor's here at least. Is that this was for additional mailings due to motor vehicle excise taxes. I was just curious if we're going to see an increase in motor vehicle excise taxes since we need Thank you. So
>> I hope you're correct. I did in my projections I did increase the motor vehicle excise tax collections um from last year to this year. So um you know we do have to increased population increased motor vehicle tied to this story and that's the increase in motor
vehicle excise taxes. So thank you for your response. I don't know if the mayor he looks like he's ready to roll there. No. >> Oh that's that's the goal. >> Thank you both. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, council. Motion is made and seconded to approve. Any further discussion? All in favor? 1 2 3 4 5.
That carries. Next up is a transfer of $15,000 from undesated fund, which is the wireless antenna payments to fund the open space stabilization account. >> Mr. Chair, >> council vital. I'd >> like to make a motion to approve the
$15,000 transfer. Motion's been made and I will second that to approve the $15,000 transfer from undesated fund uh to fund the open space stabilization account. Any further discussion, Mr. President?
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was wonderit if we could uh provide some insights as to why the collections have continued to decrease. went from 28,000 in fiscal year 22 to 29 to 25 to 19 and now 15.
Are we not collecting? Did we redo the contract? That's question one. I'll let you answer that. >> I'll answer that. So, um, on an annual basis, there are 19 that should be paying us at $1,500 a piece. It should
be $28,500. So this was brought to my attention uh end of March, early April. Um I will thank uh the pro procurement Crystal Homie for bringing it to my attention. When she went to do a contract, she was checking to see if people had been paid
and we found a little glitch in the system, let's say. So back in the day, this was tracked through one department. That person left employment with the city. It got moved to another department. that person was tracking it
an invoice to build these on the date and therefore we have a system to track it. So if people leave we would see an invoice outstanding saying where's our money. So that's kind of where we're at right now and we are going to go back and try to collect any fees that haven't
been paid if that answers your question. >> You actually answered the funds aren't being collected. So, we're about 13,500 short. And as Brian said, and I appreciate that, Brian, have a process in place so that we collect those funds so that we get this the the money that's
owed the city. Um, because they won't if we don't bill them, they're not going to just voluntarily send the money is my it's like if you told me you're not going to send me my excise tax or you know, I'm won't be sending you a bill for my excise, right? send me a bill and I'll send you the money, but don't just
expect me to pay my excise tax. Right. So, thank you, Brian. I appreciate that. I have no further questions and support. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. And if I can comment to that, good catch, and I would expect the wireless companies will not forget that when they bill us, we need to pay them. So, hopefully they'll start
getting their bills on time. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Council, >> Mr. Chair, I'm just curious since we're on the subject, how long are these contracts with the antenna companies? cuz I think over the last year we've added like three or four more. So this number should be going up from 28. I
would assume. >> But how long are the contracts? I guess >> we added we would add them to the spreadsheet and you're right. They're long-term contracts. So I think one of them was like a 20-year contract. I think that's the oldest one that's now coming up. I mean they're they're longterm. Um again kind of back these
are special permits. So they were added on. So, the tracking, who who's in charge of tracking special permits that are approved here? And that was really the loophole that we're trying to cover, >> right? >> Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> All right. So, motions are made and
seconded to approve the $15,000 uh transfer from undesated fund to fund the open space stabilization account. All in favor? 1 2 3 4 5. That carries. Moving on to the $493,000
from various departments of public works salary account to fund the following transfers. And uh we have the letter from uh Commissioner Scott. And uh we can start with the first one which is $50,000 to city natural gas account for
projected increase usage costs. A motion. Are you going to do each one separately? >> Yes. >> A motion to approve. >> Motion's made and seconded to approve the $50,000. Now, any further discussion, >> Mr. Chair? >> Council Villo. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just very briefly,
um uh every year when we go through the budget, right, the natural gas accounts are ones that we always take a look at to make slight reductions. This year between the two and the maintenance of schools and and the public facilities made modest $10,000 adjustments. So, right, we're always, you know, I'm expecting this transfer to come.
>> Moving on to the same thing. 68,000 to fuel lubricant accounts for projected increased usage cost. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion's been made and I will second that to approve the $68,000 fuel lubricant account for projected increased usage costs. And this will be
coming from various accounts as noted on the spread. is a $120,000 transfer to the city repairs and maintenance accounts for unforeseen cost. >> I will entertain council but >> um I'd just like to know what those
unforeseen costs were if you don't mind. There's a few smaller ones designed. The the big one is when um so the interlock system for the doors on the on the public buildings. We were um we've changed the software system and
we're um in the process of turning some of the buildings over and the card crashed. So in emergency we had to um do the senior center, city hall, DBW,
uh fire station one and part of the police station and in an emergency so that the end locks would work. So that's that's most of it right there. And then there's some others. >> Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Thank you. >> Motion to approve. Motions are made and
seconded to approve the $120,000 transfers to city repairs and maintenance accounts for unforeseen costs. And this will be coming from the various accounts as submitted in the spreadsheet. Any further discussion? All
in favor? 1 2 3 4 5. That carries. Next up is $255,000 to professional and technical services to fund additional engineering services. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion has been made and seconded to
approve the $255,000 to professional and technical services to fund additional engineering services and this will be coming from uh various accounts as noted on the spreadsheet from the department of public works. Any further discussion, >> Mr. Chair? Council,
>> this is where my mistake was on the beginning. These are excess funds from positions that are not filled and I would like can we prioritize um the general foreign positions like I said before those will be filled uh
before by the end of the month. Um we're filling a couple more uhmeos. Um it's a it's a tough process. We are we are um we are interviewing. We get through a process. We've working with HR
to see if we're competitive with our as they're doing with other positions. >> As far as cost >> as far as being competit offering competitive salaries and >> it's it's hard to say. Some of some of some have probably renegotiated their
deal after they got our offer. >> Yep. Um, >> and most of those positions are union contracts or or union positions as well. So, it's not as easy as one can just to leverage. So, >> okay. Well, I just would ask that you
continue to make these competitive so you're not losing people as fast as you're getting them and your department can function properly. So, >> we try. >> So, thank you both. >> Y >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Motion has been made and Oh, Mr. President.
>> Thanks, Mr. Commission. Can you just shed some insight on the engineering services? >> Sure. >> Just so that's for um that's for the design of uh West Main Street and South Street and Pleasant Street. Um that's how much design costs
>> for a traffic intersection. Uh we're we're hoping to get uh the mayor's office worked with the uh the federal government lawyer Johannes office to try to secure a million dollar grant for that. So, if we can have the design ready for that, um, hopefully we can get
that grant. >> Well, thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Motion's been made and second to approve the $255,000 transfer. All in favor? 1 2 3 4 5. That carries.
Moving on to the $9,000 transfer from the election budget to the city clerk's budget for a vendor to assist with the processing annual street listings. We did receive the letter from Mr. Clerk Carrian on this and this is for $9,000 transfer.
>> Mr. Chair, >> Council Pillow. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good reminder for folks to fill out their annual street listing um or else they are removed from the active voter list. Uh so these notices will be going out with this transfer. And with that, uh move to approve the $9,000 transfer.
>> Motion has been made. I will second that to approve the $9,000 transfer uh from uh coming from funds from the election programming and pole workers account to to to fund the city clerk's budget exp
uh processing of this parallegal notice are returning their street list uh request. Um, the question I had is the prepaid return. Uh, if obviously they decide not to return it, do we get that
postage back or is that an We don't. So, we're mailing out cost to mail it out and we have a prepaid postage. It says prepaid return. Postage prepaid. And I know you're not the clerk's not here, but curious. They say they sent them out
with a pre uh sent with a postage prepaid return. Um, I was curious if it's not used, do we get that money back from the >> Yeah, I would have to check, but I always put a stamp on when I return my >> throwing money out the window. Thank
you, Mr. Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Just this is for people who didn't return their annual street listing. They're getting an additional mailing saying, >> if you want to vote, you need to return this form. So, I've never gotten one,
but it does say prepaid. >> Yeah. Well, for inactive, that makes sense. But >> the original one I got, but Right. >> It didn't have to. >> Correct. Right. Right. Yeah. >> Yeah. I just the responsible one and just mail is supposed to mail it in.
>> Right. Yeah. >> People motion's been made and seconded to approve the $9,000 transfer for professional technical services in the clerk's department. Any further discussion? All in favor? One, two, three, four, five. That carries.
Moving on to the last item is $5,000 from the unfilled parallegal position to fund the legal service account for ongoing matters. We did receive the letter from the city solicitor Gfield on this if anyone had
any questions. Council vital. >> Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve the $5,000 transfer. >> Motion's been made and I will second that to approve the $5,000 transfer from the par parallegal account to the legal services account as
in the amount of $5,000. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? One, two, three, four, five. >> Mr. Chair, >> Council Villo. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. um would just ask that um at our next meeting suspension
of the rules in order for us to take these up. >> Perfect. Finance committee is all said with that. Thank you. Thank you. Council reminding me, >> thank you so much. Okay, moving on to the next item on the agenda is uh order
number 26-1009697. uh proposed position of the city collector, assistant finance director, city collector, and assistant recreation director. I'll begin by reading the letter submitted by the mayor. >> It's a very long letter. I don't know if
you want to cut lengthy. Um I'll go through it maybe not as quick as uh clerk Carrian. Uh comprehensive study took an objective look at each job description uh which will be sent down at a later date. uh salaries and
recommended classification salary plan structures. Uh the city last comprehensive salary change for non-un non-union positions was 10 years ago in 2016. I'm sending down for your review and approval an ordinance with the classification salary salary plan for
many of our non-un positions based on the recommendations of the Collins Center study as a guide. Our recommendations are to move to a 15-step pay structure classifying positions with grouping systems, reorganization of the recreation and human resources
department, and changing the city collector's position to 40 hours, now currently 35. Uh certain job title changes and approval of certain job descriptions. Uh class classification of the 15step pay structure. Uh the reason
why we chose a 15-step pay structure was to ensure that the employees will stay to ensure consistency long-term inst institutional knowledge. The grouping of positions allow pay equity across department level based on job responsibilities.
Uh the main objective was twofold for the city. Uh the first was to ensure the starting rate for each position was s significant to attract new candidates and to also be competitive with surrounding municipalities. Uh second it was to establish a grouping system to so
the job uh responsibilities within the city are consistent with the salary ranges. Uh while identifying these solutions, it was imperative that we address other challenges such as reorganization of departments. Uh this task was not an easy feat.
And numerous versions of this process occurred over many many months. Uh working with HR, the comproller and legal we looked at based on very long-term vacant positions. Um
thank you. Thank you. Uh continue with the sevenstep and even a 12step model. Uh the grouping of each position was analyzed to uh to the position utilizing this uh Colin center study as reference point. Uh regarding the grouping of the
positions, you will see that it starts with a group B. Uh group A is reserved for potential future uh use if needed. Um as you know inating uh in separate salary ordinances and or employment agreements.
Uh all groupings have a starting uh step one uh which is a competitive starting salary based on the market. Having said that, we have numerous incumbent employees that cannot start at step one in the new grouping system. Uh because the positions current at step one, uh
this method would cause uh huge strike uh hu huge spikes in salary increases across the board uh that were not consistent and would not have an equity uh for for years of service for particular grouping. Um, if our current
sevenstep uh model were updated based on the Collins Center study, 30% over the 15 years of service, uh, averaging about a 2% increase per step as we currently have with the sevenstep model. Uh, based on the analysis and keeping the budget
in mind, uh, this is how the current proposed 15-year salary step model uh, before you came to fruition. I've outlined in the attached uh documents the positions that are currently filled and what steps uh each employee in their current position would need to be placed
in so there is no pay disparity uh with city council approval. Uh recreation human resources departments the recreation department will include reinstating an assistant recreation director and will not be filling the program coordinator role. Uh it would
allow the city to be more competitive with the market and to directly assist the director with daytoday operations. This department has not seen any reorganization despite the expanded aquetics and seasonal programs that continue to grow within the city.
However, staff and resources have not. This also creates the possibility of succession plan. Uh the city has discussions with MMEA on certain aspects of this uh human resource department include a change to the role of human resource assistant to human resource
manager as well as adding 5 hours per week to the human resource administrative assistance role which is currently at 35 hours uh to 40 hours. This change is necessary to support the change in our insurance broker uh that took effect on January 1st. This
transition has resulted in several administrative uh functions that previously were handled externally by our broker uh including an average of 20 hours a month uh in-house support services that are now assumed by the city human resources department. Uh this
adjustment assures that we have appropriate oversight within our insurance plan and allows for effective operation of human resources department functions based on the very long city collector assistant finance director and the
recreation department positions so the job descriptions can be posted and the interview process can be started. Uh changes on title and number of hours per week. Please uh take note that we currently have a few positions that are 35 hours and they are labeled
accordingly and should not be sides with all other department heads. Seeing this position is vacant, it is an appropriate time to make this change. Uh the city council support in considering these changes to support our operations and workforce is greatly appreciated. I
would like to thank human resources legal and the comprol for all the input and work with uh that have went into this. I look forward to having the further discussion about the ordinance changes. Uh I am available for any questions. Sincerely, Jade Christian Dumis mayor. Um
>> Mr. Chair, motion to approve for discussion purposes. I do have some questions or comments. >> What what I would what I would suggest is I I I know that the mayor and and and when the mayor did highlight um for the uh uh uh bring in uh uh to expedite the
approval of the city collector, assistant finance director, recreation department director for the assistant. That's basically why I wanted to have this meeting uh tonight and I am on board to uh uh uh uh uh approving uh the
job descriptions. I would like to take these in two votes. I would like to have the job description and then go forward. Uh President Austin, what you just said can't happen. Period. We're only talking about four positions.
you you have no idea what the salary is for any of those current positions because it's in dollars per hour. I think it's an irresponsible motion and the finance committee should not support that until we vet it. Don't make a motion that we don't know what the cost
is to this city. I think that's totally fiscally irresponsible. >> Mr. Chair, if I may, >> I was motioning for the positions you noted, but if I indeed did not include the classifications of those positions,
and I'll break my motion into two parts, but we do see in the schedules provided the cost for each step and each position that's in our packet. So, we do know the
cost as shown in the packet. I'm not sure if I misunderstood the package. >> It is broken down in sections and by hourly. Mr. President, again, council Orum, I would ask that you do not make any motions on this particular topic in
dollars per hour. Everything's done on an annual salary. >> So, we see and if I may, Mr. chair. I don't want to have a direct back and forth here, but as you can see in the chart that was provided, the recreation director, assistant director is shown at
a rate in the chart that's provided in this audio hours times that rate times 50 weeks. But if indeed this is to be motioned in a different way, then I'll wait for that motion to be
made. But I'm I am in support. First of all, I want to thank the mayor, comproller, HR, and legal for doing all this work and for providing this package. Uh it's long overdue. The Collins Center study I
previous mayor kept asking when are we going to update some of our positions so these departments can function appropriately. But if it's to be broken down in a different way and we get to the same end goal, I don't have a problem with that. But I want to see this move on. And I
was going to ask that we move this along as quick as possible so these departments can function properly. That was my intent, but I'll wait to see if indeed there's a better way to make a motion on this. >> Council Roby and then I'll go to President O. >> So uh thank you Mr. Chair. I I guess my
I was uh questioning the same thing as councelor Orm. I did the math a little differently. I did the hours time 40 time 52 weeks cuz that's what I always thought was in a year. Um so I came up with more money than we have in the budget. I I also question the fact that
the budget only has a line called city collector. Yet all the information within the budget that we got from the controller indicated that they want a city collector slash assistant finance
director. We don't have an assistant finance director. We have a controller and we have a >> city collector >> an auditor. So the term is confusing to me. Um and which one do we want? Do we do you
want to have both of them so that if you hire somebody who's not able to be the assistant finance director but is a collector and so you've got somebody in the collector's position you can hire that person or do you really want someone who can take over and help the controller do
their job? >> Both of those positions are if you if you don't mind Mr. Chair through you those all those positions are are already part of the salary ordinance that we have. We're just updating the job descriptions based upon the Collins.
>> So, you're asking for the collector to be paid at $103,15 according to my math, >> the hourly rate times 40 time 52. So, >> we classified them in group C, which
step one would be 103. Correct? When we put this salary study down, we were under the assumption that's why we had reserve for salaries because we didn't know the direction of the city council. So when we put this down in March, we were I was hoping we're all hoping that
this would be concurrent with the budget so we can have an honest conversation about where we are at so we can apply this to the actual budget for fiscal week just focusing on the job description. You can correct me if I'm wrong. That's a bigger conversation about the 15 steps. How are we funding
for these positions and moving forward? >> So, if we're not talking about the job the salary ordinance changes, why are we talking about it? The job descriptions to me are totally different. >> The job descriptions are new based upon the Collins Center and they have to be
approved by city council. Also, doesn't the salary change need to be approved >> at some point? But if you want to take that up today, we can't. I don't know what the direction of the city council is point. One of the reasons I want to address this because I do support definitely the assistant recreation director. We we
need that. That was in your letter saying that. So, yes, I wanted to first have uh u approve the uh the job descriptions and then we I'm sure we're going to have a lot of conversation when it comes to how we want to structure
salaries. Is it seven steps? Is it 12 steps? Is it the 15 steps? But I definitely wanted to have the meeting uh because I do support these positions uh for the job uh descriptions. >> Mr. President, then Mr. President, Mr. President, Mr. Chair. So then in in
honor of the way I guess the committee would like to take this would be to approve the job descriptions first and take up the salaries at a different time. Uh reasoning is because I'm thinking it's going to be quite the debate on
some of those. >> That's fine. So then I will take back my original motion and just at this point although I'm ready to discuss the salaries too, but at this point I would motion to approve the job descriptions as shown.
>> Motions been made and I will council vital. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. because we put it in writing and because we say it a lot that the Collins uh study is valid. I would I would counter that. Having spent
20 years in executive human resources departments and developing many studies survey you you ask survey you survey all the adjourning towns. Everyone that touches marble should be in this in the Collins uh study.
Not all the towns that touch Marorrow are in that study. Why? I wondered. I wonder why that town wasn't there. So I checked into it. Well, they pay less than Marorrow does. Objectionable I think was in the letter. This objective study I would counter that it may not be
objective. >> If I may, Mr. Chair to comment to council vital. I've been involved with salary studies as well and in Ashland where I work full-time and indeed it doesn't always uh involve the abuing
towns and cities because the amount of responsibility could be different. The type of government could be different. Uh but what we used to do and I'm expecting that this would be what Collins is looking at is a comparable
city or town to Marboro. And then they also look at regions too. They look at what's the cost of living. If I'm out in the end of the state, my house may be a lot cheaper to afford than working here in the city of Marbor and trying to afford a home or anywhere in Metro West,
I'll say. But you know it depends on those o those issues as well. you know, you just you can't always touch the city or town. You know, in respect to salary surveys, you have to look at the responsibilities such as what does the health agent do in
Actton versus Ashland. You know, that's how we looked at it back in our salary reviews. But I, you know, Collins, you may be correct to some of that degree, but touching cities and towns, I know we never that was not the crux of what we were looking at.
was more the type of services and population and so forth. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Councelor Ruby. >> Right. So, if we're talking the actual job descriptions and skipping the salary ordinance at this juncture in the discussion, I would still go back to my
initial question. Why do we have a city collector and a city collector/assistant finance director? Do you want to be able to hire both of them or do you want one or the other? >> I think we just put this down for the
option of either or. Um the goal is to keep that collector assistant finance director if we have a candidate that can actually when we're talking secession planning that can take over for a controller and slide into that role and move forward. Um I believe that position
was filled at one point with the prior administration and that's why it doesn't exist. Um, so we just kept that all candidates to see what we would get for that position and if there was a candidate that was that fit that narrative with that position, then we would go with that candidate as opposed to limiting ourselves with just a city
collector position. >> And I I would guess that there's a whole different education and certification to be the assist. >> Some collectors just want to stay collectors, others would like to move into a higher position. It just depends
upon their desire as as their what their journey consists of with the position that they want. >> And then when the budget is created because there's only the one line versus separate lines, the amount of money
is enough for the responsibilities and functions of the assistant finance director piece added on to the collector's responsibilities. Well, the collector assistant finance we grouped as group C, >> right? >> So, the difference between the two
salaries is $5.72 cents an hour. It's not, and I could be wrong, but it seems like the responsibilities of the assistant finance, the additional of what's in the job description
is it doesn't seem like it's enough to add that that extra, but it's just me speaking. So, >> Mr. But I don't I guess I don't see a issue with the job descriptions per se,
but I'm not on finance either. So, >> Mr. President, >> so councilors, I don't know how you can honestly evaluate a salary ordinance and say it's good by a dollar per hour. We have worked in this council in my 27
years and every salary ordinance is seven steps and based on an annual salary. Now, if you're telling me you're doing that hand scratching math for each one of these, God bless you. But I know you're not because you are incorrect. You short
change the recreation director by $20,000. And I don't think he wants an $80,000 salary. So, I know you're not looking at what this really is. And so, to not understand what you're voting on is irresponsible. And you you're asking the taxpayers to
just go do this and not know what the ramifications are. You could not turn around to a member of the public other than saying it's a salary study. Well, I've said it a thousand times. There's not a salary study in the world that comes back and says cut everybody's pay.
It just doesn't happen. Period. Are a 15st step. So 15 steps. And I didn't want to get on this path, but if I'm going to start, that's 2% a year for 13 years. Add a colar on top of that.
That's 5% increase for every year. There's not a department head out here that wouldn't say sign me up. Well, guess who's listening? The folks that we have union contracts with. Irresponsible. You just can't do it. My recommendation, approve the job descriptions. Tell a
mayor to go back and resubmit this on a seven-step process. I've told him how to do it. I've given them the information. Cut it at seven steps. Annual salary just like we just did. The DPW commissioner, the assistant fire chief, the assistant police chief, the city
engineer, the city planner, the assistant commissioners, all just did seven steps. The world was okay last year and now all a sudden we got to go to 15 steps and 2% increases that cover 13 years. I'm telling you, you did not do your homework if you're not paying
attention and reading this. Unless you think we're just going to give money away, which is what this does, and I will not be supporting it. I will support the job descriptions and I will support the mayor to go back and send this down with seven steps capped just like I sent
to him and Brian because otherwise just empty the checkbook, folks. And Council Roy's right. There's not enough money in any of this to do this. Well, technically there is. We underspend a ton in salary. So there'll be money to move around to cover them. We have to set an effective date. All right?
Doesn't mean they're going to be all be effective July 1. We can set the effective date for this. But I'm telling you, read it. Don't just because they said the Collins Who the heck is the Colin Center that they're that smart that they're going to make make this the right decision. Go. If that's how you do
your homework, God bless you. >> Mr. Chair, >> couple comments. First of all, the motion on the floor is for the job description. So, um I would ask that we look at that first and then I'll have questions on the salaries and the 15st
step versus the sevenst step, but right now that's not for the motion that was made. >> So, your your original motion was to approve the job descriptions. >> Yes. >> I will I will second that motion. Uh motion has been made and seconded uh to approve the uh job descriptions uh
pursuant to chapter 125 personnel section 5 preparation classification descriptions for position city collector assistant finance director city collector and assistant recreation director any further comments council vital >> Mr. here. I uh I too will approve the
job descriptions with the understanding that the department because they can't fund anything without the salary ordinance. We haven't approved the salary ordinance. All we're doing is saying here's the job description. You can go post it, but they don't have a salary to go with the posting. So, they probably won't post it. All right. The issue is going to be get a salary
ordinance that is reasonable and if you if the finance committee says what's in front of you is good, then go vote on it. And God bless you, Council Roby, if you did. I cheated and had the mayor send me what the salaries are. And your eyes are going to pop out. I recommend you look at it because $70 an hour and
$40 an hour means nothing to anybody that's evaluating salary. Nothing. And you this body is responsible for appropriation. And if you don't move forward with that position. >> Yeah. >> I just want to make sure that we're on the same page. That's all. And and the
second part that's not being discussed is even though I support the assistant recreation director, there's issues that got to get addressed with how it's going to be funded because that's a >> thank you >> non-union position that's currently in the budget as a program manager. That's
a union position that I know, God bless Chuck, he's trying to get his department organized. That should be upfront and we should be updated on what that status is so that we can approve a functioning. Not that doesn't function now, Chuck,
but you're you're killing yourself there, kid. >> You got to get them help is my my easy way to say that. But that's got to come before us cuz approving is not going to do any good if the if we have to battle with the union. >> Work with the union and come back with a package that works. So point of
information, we do not need to battle with the union because that position was already existed. So we do not so the position was already there. So we've just reclassified the actual department and brought back that position. So there's no need to negotiate with the union for that position.
>> What about the senior clerk? >> That will need to be negotiated with the union. You are correct with that. But not the assistant director. >> That's encouraging. >> It is. Thank you. >> Thank you. So motion has been made and seconded to approve the job
descriptions. All in favor? One, two, three, four, five. That carries. Now, uh, the pleasure of the finance team, we can make a decision on what we wish to do. Um, send this back, refer this back to the mayor. Um, but I'm
willing to have the conversation. >> Mr. Chair, in the conversation, I think the mayor noted and I thanked them, you had HR involved with this. You had the legal department involved with this. You had the mayor, the controller. Those people are experts in what they do
and I entrust them with we are looking at departments that are in need of these positions and we need to be competitive. Now, are we overcompetitive? I don't think so because they're unfilled. These are
positions that have been unfilled for quite a long time. And in my view, the way we get to that is having profession put work into this. And I won't down the callin center because they've been around for years. But if we want to pull
that report apart, we can. It was discussed before. One of the more important things here too is redundancy. If for some reason your finance director wasn't here tomorrow, do we have someone that can get into that step such as
what's being proposed here? So, but it probably will need further discussion and indeed if you want to send down what the salaries are per the hourly, maybe my math was off and I apologize to the recreation director if I'm short changing your person by 20. There was no
intent on that. and then look at some other cities and towns that are comparable to Malboro and see what they're paying, you know, but I don't want to underestimate the work that went into this. I've been on this floor many of times asking that we get to this
point. I'm glad we're at this point and if it needs further discussion, I have no problem with that. I'm not going to make an opinion if I like the seven step or the 15 step. We'll see how that all falls into the cracks and how it matters
in respect to attracting good solid employees that will stay here. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Council Council Fill. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, appreciated the conversation so far. And I I don't um couple points that President Osing made that I do want
to emphasize as well. I really believe that um 15 steps what is bothering me the most is the inconsistency with what we have been doing over the course of the last year with some positions here in the city that are all at seven steps. So, I would like to see the positions brought down, right? The the recreation
director, assistant wreck position, um, and that collector position along with the assistant finance in that seven steps just to kind of get an idea of what we're looking at compared to 15. If that's >> I I mean, we'll we evaluated the seven steps. We did a 12step, we did a 15 step, but if you do the range of what
the other mass municipalities are paying, if you do a sevenst step increase, it's going to be like a 5% increase per each step. So like we've looked at this and analyzed it, what is the least impact on the taxpayer? So that's why we did a 15st step, you know.
So like when we looked at it and we evaluated what was the less hit, that doesn't mean that that's going to happen either, especially those increases across the board every year. So this was again a lot of work went into this. We evaluate a lot of different scenarios. I can't
tell you how many spreadsheets I have in regarding um what was the best game plan for this because when we're talking consistency and equity that's why there's a grouping and then if you do a there's so many layers to this um it wasn't an easy task and like every
roadblock we hit we had to pivot and the 15 step was the best scenario to try to make so many other things work within this and we sent down an hourly pay scale because not everyone one even works a 40hour that component as well.
So um we will evaluate and do whatever you want to do. If you want to see a breakdown with the ranges with the seven steps, we can do that. That's but like I said, you will notice the significant increases per the per the steps. But again, I we don't have to have this
debate now. We're more than welcome to talk about it and share. But again, this was an animal to to to take over. Um, it's been it's been an incredible ride to say the least, but this is what happens when we don't do anything for over 10 years. We were so far behind the
eight-ball with a lot of great employees that I'm very just thankful that if they were to go somewhere else, they'd be making incredible amount of more money than what we're offering. And a city of this size should be comparative and competitive with other municipalities.
>> I I I appreciate that, Mr. But I think that's all the more reason why I would like to see some of those options and to see that presented to us and and especially the fact that we should in my opinion be taking these one at a time because of the the nuances that you discussed 35 hours versus 40 hours. And I would like to see um right the yearly
annual salary for these people rather than the hourly rate, right? I mean we've had folks working at 35 or 40 hours, you know, for as long as I can remember being here at the city. So um and we've always seen those in a yearly setup. So, I I would just like to see it all presented to us and um that's where I stand, but that's that's my time
there, Mr. Chair. I appreciate it. >> Uh Mr. President, >> thank you. So So this 15step process, there's 1 2 3 4 5 6 seven individuals that fall outside this sevenstep process. The current sevenstep process is a 2% increase. All right. Why would I
want to change that? Told you one-time exemptions for these if the council sees fit. We did it with DPW. We did it with the assistant fire chiefs. If there's a need, the comproller, the solicitor, they come down and see us. We just want to blanket give all this money away
because we want this is so-called equity somewhere. Okay. I I it's a big deal. And to just oh, make a motion to prove it. I I I I can't tell you how that just sends me over the edge. That that's just
irresponsible. It should be sevenstep process like we always do. Same 2% increases. If you want to go put somebody in a new category and they're outside that at that point, okay, come down and say it. But
15 steps, it it's it's financially unattainable for the city. I I I cannot stand behind that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Council Roby. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I know there was a motion to approve the job
descriptions, but the comment that the mayor just made regarding 40 hours per week. In the document of the salary schedule, there is the section two Roman numeral 2, the above position shall be 40 hours per week except the following
shall be 35 with nothing in there, which to me indicated that you want all of these to be 40 hours per week. So why not put that in the job description? It's not there. I just looked. There's nothing about hours. If it's in the job description, you know it's a 40hour
week. >> I'm not understanding your question. >> You had said some are 35, some are 40. Make them all 40. Just put it in the job description. It's a 40hour a week job. >> And that's the goal. When those 35 hours retire, I can't do it now because they'll be making significant less
amount of money. The collector, I believe, is a 35 hours and it's not filled yet. So, it will be moving over to a 40 hours, but I can't I can't have someone go to a 40 hour because they'll make less money now if they go to a 40 hours because they'll make less per hour >> because of what's in the budget
currently versus what you're proposing to >> based upon their wage. If they go up to a 40hour work week, their salary is going to be less than what they need. >> You said there's nobody in the position now >> for collector. Correct. That's why new person coming in isn't going to know
what to compare a salary. There's other there's other 35 hour per like IT the nurse. There's other positions that are 35 hours. So I can't bring them to a 40hour work week because they'll make based upon their wage they'll make less
money at 40 hours than they will at 35 hour based upon their salary. So I have to keep them at 35 hours as of right now until they retire. Then we can bring down the job description and move that position to a 40 and then they'll fit in that classification. >> But what difference does it make for other people? I'm only talking about the
four positions you've got on the salary schedule. >> Correct. They'll all be 40 hours. >> So, why not put that in the job description work week? >> Typically, >> typically you don't put um hours in a
job description. You do it in your postings. Um but it's not because it's the job function. It's not the hours someone works in a job description. It's based upon uh that's about what you do with the posting because it could technically you could hire doing less hours of the same job. So the job
description is the function of the job and the hours is what you do in a posting or budget for. We do have some positions in the city that are 35 hours and some that are 40. So the lowest common denominator is an hourly rate of compensation.
Um, and that's why the the colony have a position that are 20 hours. Some have it at, you know, the the full full-time based upon what the community's full-time hours are. So, um, here we don't put the hours in a job description. Uh, we we it's it's done as
a posting because it's about the function of the job, not the hours they work. >> Okay. So, if you come back with a revised salary ordinance that is the seven steps, will it simply say all positions are 40 hours per week? the this except that is throwing me off
because there's nobody there. So, you really only want people to be 40 hours per week. >> We do have some that are are 35 >> in this particular posting which is for the collector assistant finance director, city collector, and assistant recreation
director. That's this specific posting >> posting for I think if I'm not mistaken the current city collector role as city collector um in the ordinance that exist was just a 35-hour position. The last
person that held that role was uh two three people ago and after that um they created the uh city collector/assistant finance director and that position went to 40
hours. So trying to make sure we maintain the two job description in case down the road, let's say you have someone internal that may not have all of the qualifications if you're doing succession planning because the collector role is a hard position to fill. Um, in municipalities, we also are
looking for someone that could potentially down the road fill an assistant finance director. We want to make sure we keep maintain those two job descriptions. It's not looking to fill right now those two as separate positions. It's just making sure that as
we move forward in this process that we're we're keeping ourselves in line that if for some reason a position's vacant and this decision at that time is to go the direction of the city collector. >> But we don't have the salary ordinance
and you hire a collector, they're only going to be working 35 hours a week. If I think if you do it the way it is currently and Brian >> and then what happens when we change the salary ordinance to be 40 hours a week and they don't want to work 40 hours a week
>> I they don't want 40 if we don't have the salary ordinance approved can you >> what we recommended was based on a 40 >> but we haven't approved it yet and evidently that's going to take some time to get done so do you want somebody in
the position yesterday. >> Yes. I think at this moment where we we've moved forward with the current um the assistant finance the city collector assistant finance director already is a 40hour position. That's what you guys voted
several years ago >> and you have the candidate for that position. >> Uh we are in we we move forward with uh the current job description would look to >> if you mind jump in. So correct. So, we're moving forward with the current
position as collector assistance finance director. We when I left before they created that position, but when they did that, they didn't fix the collector position and made that a sevenstep 40hour position.
They just left it alone. And we're trying to fix that so that down the road, say things happen and someone wants to move up into that position, but they're a little green, you can hire them as the collector. Then as they accumulate from that, saying, "Hey, we
like this person. Let's make them collector assistance finance director." You can now keep them longer instead of them jumping somewhere else trying to be the collector treasurer or something else with another community. So, we're trying to use that as a stepping stone to get someone
secession plan and then fill the position. As you guys know, it's difficult to find finance positions. >> Right. >> Again, the goal when we submitted this in March was to have these conversations so when we put this out, we would have the budget that would fit the need based upon the position.
>> Yeah. >> So, >> so Mr. Yeah. >> So, if the mayor's office is in a hurry to get a collector, assistant collector, and assistant recreation director, we just told him we want seven steps. I'm going expect on Thursday he's going to tell me here's the salary sevenst step salary ones for these three positions.
Leave the rest alone because it looks like there's a lot more discussion. But if those are really the priority, I think you got the sense of the council we want seven steps, right? You don't have to like it, but if you want to get something approved,
you'll do it. If not, we're going to go to 15 steps, which is 5% a year, which is just it's insane. It's going to your negotiating powers going forward with all your other contracts. >> Mr. chair
>> contour. >> I would ask that they provide a comparison a decision yet. So I would say speak on behalf of yourself if you're saying the council has indicated they want seven steps. I haven't indicated that. I would
like to see the data. Take a strong look at it and see what is best for the city including retaining employees. Just want to emphasize the fact that we looked at several job descriptions tonight that you know have from your perspective
mayor this is based on the conversation we've had today are priorities right now that we need to work on. So you know I would specifically ask that we see the seventh step for the city collector assistant finance director and the right city collector position the two of those um as well as rec director and assistant
recck director because that to me appears to be the urgency right now. So that that's what I would expect for us to review immediately. So I I personally I I believe there's a motion on the floor from councelor Oram to, you know, get a comparison between the seven steps, but specifically I would like to
see those. That seems to be the urgency and that's what the conversation today should have been about, but we we're kind of getting ahead of ourselves a little bit, which is fine. Um, obviously there's a lot more here to discuss, but I want to make sure I see the rec directors here tonight that we're taking care of these items, you know, as soon
as possible. And I I appreciate, mayor, the fact that you have relayed that urgency to us. >> Yeah. I mean, I will do my best to get this down for Thursday, but um looking at the data, like where do you even start from a step seven, you know, looking at 15 steps, that's the min and
the max, you know, and that's what we did. So, if we cut it in the cut it in the middle and then we do a percentage of the increase for min and max, then we can do that. But, >> so again, I'm going to disagree that that seven our current sevenstep process doesn't have 2% for 13 years. Stop it at
step seven. That's your seventh step right there. >> Right. >> I'm you prove me wrong. The other positions that we just did are all 2% increases. >> Correct. >> Right. So I don't So now you're going to go set something up for 15 years. >> I gave you I told you the I gave you
information how to solve the problem. >> Cut it at seven if >> and you're done. But DP the DPW salary was started before I got here and those start extremely high and they don't fit on this classification. So I can start higher
but I don't think that's the route that we want to go. That's why it's only a 2% because the starting max on any of the 15 sub salaries. I'm I'm I don't know how clearer I can be. I'm done at seven. All the extra 2% for the next I don't get rid of them. Just stop them at
seven. because that's that they'll be no different than right now if you would come down without this stupid Collins Center study and said, "Okay, you call it the FIFA schedule." Great. But you you're you're trying to force us into something that I don't buy
into. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. Councel Vital. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. again from from my own experiences um in setting up compensation programs uh both salary scales and grades and so forth and so on
and teaching it. In fact, I never and and I've never been in municipalities. So, I I I start off with that caveat, but I've never seen a a a pay range that had 15 steps. Never once. 10 is the max that I've ever seen. Now, if
municipalities are different, well, then I I'm just not familiar with municipalities, but typically it's it's like 10 steps. >> It's actually pretty common between it can go 10, 12, 15, even up to 20. The schools have quite a bit of steps and they have lanes. Um, it's not that
uncommon. Like I said, it's just uncommon here in Malbor. And I think that's the uniqueness of Malro because just because it's you guys haven't seen it before doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Um and we're just trying to again write a lot of wrongs over the last 10
years and we're trying to classify so there's pay equity across the board. So all of different department heads that are in the same job functions or same responsibilities are getting paid the same. So when you peer back take take back the layers of this onion you can't
have this step this step this step when the job functions based upon department heads are somewhat similar. So that's why there's a whole grouping process and that's why when we developed the grouping process then that's why we discovered okay what is the range for the min and max based upon the calling
center whether you agree with it or not disagree with it if you look at um any type of MA website the the data is there and you can you can see that um so again I I I hear your concerns and looking at the numbers it's I I get I get why we're
scared for those numbers but we're 10 years behind behind this and now even with the Collins Center based upon when they started this and evaluated the municipality state that was two years ago. So now we're even 12 years behind the rate. So I get it. It's not a
position that I want to be for and it's not something that I wanted to send down. But at the same time when you're talking long a sevenst step unless it's big spikes or you start at a higher rate and then they get increased moving forward that's why we went with the 15.
I can share and compare all the data with you and you can see that. But if you look at the min and the max, that's what we based things on based upon the study that was done. >> Mr. Chair, >> find out where we stand as a city to find out why we're not retaining
employees. So, this has all been healthy discussion hearing it from our experts. And with that said, I think the mayor made it very clear in his letter. The reason why we chose a 15-step pay structure was to ensure that tonight and
more importantly, I look at all our employees as the most valuable resource within this city and let's start treating them that way. Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. President, >> those are words on a letter. I can put similar words on a letter. So, so great.
Good for you. That that doesn't make it right. So, so great for you to reparent what the mayor said. That doesn't make what he said is right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Mr. Chair, what makes it right? What councelor arson is saying? You know, we need this healthy discussion with
factbas not just hearsay. Again, I think we can continue this, but I'm not going to bicker back and forth. >> And I don't want to do that tonight. I mean, the the whole goal for me this evening um is is with these positions that we just uh we approved the job
descriptions, I want to go forward because I support these position definitely with the assistant recreation director which is which is adamantly needed there for going to some if approved when we get there it still has to be advertised. So we're talking a lot
of time. So that's taking a page out of council fill with his idea with these positions. I I would support that because we need to get going on these. Um and it is and I thank the mayor these these this is a tough position to be in
and uh yeah it's it's it's quite a debate having this when we're talking about having all these steps and trying to retain workers for succession plan and absolutely I support that but I do support these positions that we have in front of us this evening. Council Ro.
>> Thank you Mr. Chairman. So, um, that what has occurred to me is we have a salary ordinance change that starts with group B and ends in group H, yet only three of the groups have positions aligned with them. What are the other
groups for? Future changes are going to bring down to us who who will be in group >> in your packet. You should see a list of everyone that's listed in what group they are actually, >> but there's only three groups. Group E, group D, and group C. You've got a group
B, a G, and an H with nobody in them. >> Yeah, it should be in the packet. >> If I call Council Ro, there are people in each group. >> It's not done what you're used to, and that's why there's a lot of
consternation. >> So, are it like we're used to seeing at seven steps and see where it goes. You can give the 15 steps side by side, but dollars per hour is not going to get you anywhere. How do you go turn to the publicans? Anybody gets the 100 bucks if they can
tell me how much this salary ordinance if approved as is for everybody costs the city? >> And I get that point. My my point is who are the who are these other people and are they also increases to them? And should we not be
>> if you look if you look at the original packet looks like they're whited out. So there were a lot more positions that are in these groups. So for example, group B, it has the assistant solicitor, the building commissioner, city auditor, the IT director.
>> All right. Yeah, because there's nothing in the >> Right. Right. They were they were whited out for some reason. I don't know. I'm assuming whoever created this packet wided them out. Just so you all it was put that way because those are the only four we're supposed to be talking about tonight. That's why it's that way.
>> Correct. And I'm not disagreeing with that. That's just the reason why there should be more information in this. There's just not in your packet for tonight cuz we weren't going to dive into how much we've dived into tonight. >> But technically would if we approved this salary ordinance as
presented, we would have been increasing everybody's salary. >> Again, we wanted to have this conversation before the budget process. So that was the goal. So now we're in June and now things have shifted which I'm thankful that you guys took this up. However, the conversation would I would
had hoped would have started that coincided with the budget process so we can have this debate so when fiscal 27 happened we would be able to budget accordingly. That did not happen. So now we're behind the eightball and now we're trying to not scramble but now we're trying to figure out things as we move
forward which is fine. We can do that. But it was just a we I was on the depression. It will be a different conversation back in March or April or even towards May. >> So if I go back and look at the March 23rd >> Well, I'm going to I'm going to send you all this information with the hour with
with the salary per year and with the seven steps. So I will provide all that information. So it'll be broken down for you >> for everybody or for only these specific people. >> Everyone. I only have I only have the data for everyone. and I have debate as well as where you think we should start or not start.
>> Okay. And and then I'll just state it. My concern is the agenda does not cover anything about job descriptions. It only talks about the salary ordinance. If you go to the very last page of the posting or not the
put the stuff on there, council Roby, it's just doesn't know what format to put it in right now. So, >> all right. >> Posting is correct. It's job descriptions with the four positions listed. >> Thank you, president. >> But it doesn't say that on the posting.
The posting is order number 9697 for the positions of city collector, assistant finance, city collector, and assistant recreation director. But there's no order number with it. >> Again, they were all sent down with the
same order. I think >> same letter from the mayor. >> Correct. It was all bundled. Technically, this should if it's just job description should have gone to personnel as well, but not finance >> and they might have been sent to both. I don't remember back when it was done,
but and that's I was totally confused when you started talking job descriptions because it doesn't say anything on the agenda about job descriptions. >> Sure it does. >> Council vital. >> No, it does not. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, and this is more directed to the mayor. Mayor, um,
the Collins study came down around the t right around the beginning of the year. And you keep saying we wanted to get it done by the budget. We wanted to get it done by the budget. We wanted to get Why didn't it get done by the budget? >> We submitted this in March.
>> Finance never took it up. >> What's that? >> The finance never took it up. We submitted this in March. the reclassifications, the 15 steps that we came out in in go uh not gods um the
Colin report um that that study was done at the beginning of the year and you presented these 15step reclassifications to the finance committee in March. >> 15step classifications, >> right? >> Well, he did not he did not present it
to the f he sent the letter to the city council. >> City council >> with all the stuff in it. Okay. >> And that was referred to the finance committee. Correct. >> Th this process that we went through went it was to get the job descriptions with every department, every um every employee went through their own job
description. So like the the whole Collins center study took well over a year to get all the information documented went through the union. So it was a very long process and then to figure out what steps actually worked and >> that's why it didn't come down
>> April and that did not happen. Now we're meeting him on it for the first time today, June 1st. >> Mr. Chair, President, >> the reason it wasn't taken up is because we never would have got through the budget process, >> right? And that and that's fair. It's
that's now moot like we just need to move on and figure out what direction we want to go. >> Mr. Chair, um the sense of on the seven steps for now, if you don't mind, >> councelor Fel. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Councelor Vital. I um yeah just just going back and again mayor correct me if
I'm wrong but my opinion of this I am a firm believer that we take these as they are case by case and we give each job description each individual in the city uh the the full length of the process I think it's going to take us a while but um so for that reason right before us it
appears to me that the priority is the city collector/assistant finance director rec director assistant rec director and then that collector position right the two collector positions as they are um so I would move to have the mayor resubmit this to us in the sevenstep format for those positions, the ones that are on our
agenda for today's meeting. >> Motion's made and I will second that to have the mayor resubmit uh with the seven steps for the uh for the city collector, assistant finance director, city collector, and assistant recreation director and to
send it refer back to the mayor uh to have the seven steps. >> Mr. Chair, >> any further discussion? um discussion would be a point to make as well as in a friendly amendment. The point would be
first um the Collins study. I remember when you first started, Miss Purple, I was asking questions about it. So, how long have we had the Collins study and has it changed since the initial or the mayor, whoever, if I may, Mr. Chair, threw you to them?
>> I thought it was here for more than just the beginning of the year. last uh they actually finished it um >> July remember >> it started with the previous HR director >> that's what I >> and that sat for a while and then obviously a change and then we regrouped
and then >> and then they changed their staff >> correctly okay because I was saying wait >> and then went to every department every department had to had several iterations of um the job descriptions that was the big big component of the study was not
just financial was what do you do for your job? How does it compare to what your current you know what we currently have or don't have for you? So that took a really long time and then once they came back each employees had an opportunity to go through it but um >> thank you for refreshing my memory
because I didn't think it was just the beginning of this year. Uh the other friendly amendment Mr. Chair would be to request that just for the sevenst step. >> Okay. A motion >> Mr. Chair Council. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. Just question through the M. We already have the 15 steps in front of us, do we not?
>> I will put it into a an yearly salary range so you can have that >> year. Yes, that's fine. Yearly 715 provided all. Happy to look at that. That >> to see the seven I mean you draw where you think it is, but that's
>> and and that's fair. Okay. I I think that's what we did this with the 15, but I we'll try to make it work with the seven. So, okay. But >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That >> fits perfectly in what I would like to >> I would that I'm happy to go through
them all, but right now those four I would like to see. >> Okay. I I'm hesitant only because >> Mr. Chair, Mr. President, >> there is no rush. You make the speed is what you want to work at. We're not telling you we want to you whenever you're done.
>> Perfect. >> Come on down. >> Thank you. I just thought you said by the next meeting and I just wanted to make sure that like I don't want any set me up for any type of failure by not >> send I know it was floated right Thursday no like do do what you have to do let's do it right thank you
>> m Mr. Chair, I know I heard there's no rush, but I think for the position, >> there is a rush. I just don't want to make I just don't want the expectation that I'm sending it down for the next meeting and if I don't deliver, I just don't want any further complications. This already >> not the best juuju when it comes to this. I don't want to add any more
insult to injury with this if I don't. >> Mr. Chair, >> I can't make it by Thursday. >> I'm sorry, Mr. May. I think I'm agreeing with council vicello that the four positions we're looking at would be nice to see first if you have to do additional work so that we can resolve
some of the vacancies that we have in these departments. So I agree with council vello start with the first four if I'm agreeing with you councel vello and >> that's what was motion and >> okay thank you Mr. Chair. >> All right motion was made and seconded. All in favor? One two three four five
that carries. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Mr. Chair, could you just >> restate what that last motion was? >> Yep. >> I'll have council. It was for the It was to refer back to the mayor with the uh for the definitely for the four
positions that we approved the job description this evening that would uh refer back to the mayor that would show the seven steps. >> Yep. The seven steps with the annual >> annual >> annual um salary >> and not the 15 >> also. I mean that we can review them as
well. >> We can review those as well. >> Yeah. >> So he's only doing in group C, D, and E and not B and G >> because those positions are in those >> each other. So you need to have the
salary ordinance as a total package. >> Sorry. to see all that. >> I thought we were ready to go. That's why I shut it off. >> 2 3 4 5 We are adjourned at 8:01 p.m.