2023-10-12 Salary Commission Minutes

Home

Salary Commission October 12, 2023 If you chose to decrease that number, we would need to publish the new numbers, yet again. So, when we think about time and taxpayer dollars—unnecessary publications are also something that we should keep in mind because it is an expensive requirement to run that information in the newspaper in two different publications. So I just want to be cognizant of taxpayers' dollars in the same sense, right—and once you decide what you want to do be secure, be solid, be grounded in what you're doing and why. And either you hold firm or you don't. If you do not, that's fine. We would need to re -publish and provide notice, yet again—exactly what you are now reconsidering doing. So, I just wanted to put that out there that it would require—change would require re -publication. CHR. PAVAO: Thank you. I'd like to add my own personal comments. I think, personally, I would continue to support the 5% for a variety of reasons. I know that the HGEA Bargaining Unit 13 just recently received a 4% raise on July 1st of this fiscal year. And they will get a 3.59% raise on July 1st 2024. And HGEA Bargaining Unit 13, which probably is the bargaining unit that closely relates to most of the administrative staff, appointed staff, and elected staff as far as salary schedules—also, get step movements to most people. I mean, all the members in Bargaining Unit 13 get a step movement based on the years of seniority. Initially two years and then after that every three years, which is an equivalent of another 4% raise when you get a step movement. So, I think that 5% is actually reasonable given the reality of the raises that HGEA has negotiated and if we take in mind the step movements as well. Because the idea is, to me, is parity. We want to make sure that as much as possible that directors and deputy directors are being paid at the right level and that subordinates are not being paid more than their supervisors. Any further discussion? MS. FRENZ: So, I'm thinking, Chair, we could—we don't have a motion on the table right now, right to adjust the 5% as suggested by Commissioner Nelson. So, what we do still have in the agenda item that we are, in fact, on—is the "New Business" with Vice -Chair Farahi's very helpful commentary on the proposed findings of fact that I drafted. So, if we want to continue down the path of reviewing those proposed findings, any and all suggestions by this body would be appreciated, so we can try to fine-tune that—and should there be a motion from Commissioner Nelson or anyone else to make specific adjustments in that regard, we can consider that at the time. But, right now, I believe we're still on the "New Business" agenda itemso I want to make sure we track where we are now. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, yeah, probably the best thing to do is to review it from line -by-line and we can always come back to that, if there's—someone wants to make a motion to change any part of the proposed salary schedule. So, we're looking at I guess, we can start with Item number 1. Does anybody have any issues there? I personally see that the language that was changed is appropriate and much better than the original language. Anybody have any issues with the first item? Page 7