 announcement of electronic devices off and out of sight please okay I'm going to call the Cheboygan Common Council committee at a whole meeting for Wednesday December 14th to solve this 2011 to order please call the roll belt here born here Carlson here Dekker excused Hammond Hammond here Heidemann here Cobb here Kittlesen here Matticek Bresler here Samson here Ben Akron here Vanderweally here before I stand for that we stand for the pledge we are on television tonight but it's on a delayed basis so we will need our mics tonight if we could rise for the pledge please item number four on the agenda is approval of the minutes from December 12th 2011 we have a motion and a second on the minutes from December 12th is there any discussion all in favor I opposed chair votes aye next we have item number five a public forum on agenda items does anybody wish to be heard on in the public forum does anybody wish to be heard and for the third time does anybody wish to be heard nobody for public forum chairman's comments I do not have any at this time next on the agenda we have items for discussion and possible recommendation of the common counsel Alderman Hammond is miss Adams still recuperating yes all right well we'll move on then move down to council doc item number eight on the agenda counsel document number 1648 submitting a communication from all her person borne being a survey of mariole salaries in various municipalities and then I referenced the update that we received at the council meeting on 1121 I think I'll lead the discussion on this and then we can discuss it together our HR department did a survey of some cities around the state I believe all her person kiddison found one that was even more up-to-date but just looking at the list of cities that either have city managers that form of government where they do not have a mayor or a city administrator starting up out up on top Appleton has runs with a full-time mayor a salary of ninety one thousand dollars and benefits four-year term no city administrator and then we have several cities colloid Eau Claire Fondelac Jamesville who all have city managers and it lists the salaries there for their city managers they have no mayor at all and I believe with the city manager form of government they're usually isn't a mayor unless the city manager would decide to or have the council appoint a part-time person Kenosha has a full-time mayor no city administrator with a salary of seventy nine two seventy two Oshkosh is kind of interesting in that they have a city manager hired by the council and the salary of a hundred and twenty seven thousand dollars a year and they have a part-time seasonal mayor whatever that means and the salary for that part-time seasonal mayor is six thousand dollars and the older person salary I believe is thirty seven hundred and fifty dollars a year and then the last one on the list here a wabatoza has a city administrator at one hundred and fifteen thousand one hundred and sixty nine dollars they have a part-time mayor that they pay they were paying twenty two thousand five hundred dollars and that included benefits now just within the last week or ten days the mayor the part-time mayor in wabatoza resigned and took a position with Milwaukee County I believe as their development director but in the development department it's my understanding that the salary in wabatoza of twenty two thousand five hundred dollars has been that way without any increases since the early nineties the new mayor that they're going to hire in wabatoza part-time they're going to increase the salary to thirty thousand dollars and that position also includes benefits older person kittleson did you have anything you wanted to add or let me just say that we're looking here and we said west Dallas here they have a full-time mayor sixty thousand dollars with full benefits and a full-time administrator at a hundred and eleven thousand and they're the population there is sixty thousand people and then it costs the cost is like two dollars and eighty four cents per person to have that those administrative costs there's several cities here greenfield new burlin brookfield west Dallas Tosa Waukesha West Bend Franklin Oak Creek Mekwan they all you know some do have the full most do have a full-time mayor West Bend has a part-time mayor and then they have a full-time city administrator but their population is thirty thousand four hundred people so it you know runs the game it's interesting so anybody have any on the survey the one that I went over here briefly and the one that older person kittleson any any discussion on that at all I'll entertain a motion on document sixteen forty eight I would presume probably file it second we have a motion in a second to file document number sixteen forty eight any further discussion all in favor I posed chair votes I the next document that we have is I think I see Ms. Adams is in the room so I think what we'll do is we'll go back up tonight item number seven is to not keep Ms. Adams waiting much longer so let's go back up to item number seven council document number sixteen seventeen submitting a communication from dimple Adams stating her concerns about the election of older persons for district number five privatizing garbage collection committee of the whole meetings in closed session and the executive powers of the city stopping with the president of the council I would entertain a motion to open up the floor to Ms. Adams as she wants to speak so moved second we have a motion and a second to open up the floor to Ms. Adams all in favor opposed chair votes I thank you very much wow we're small group tonight here is everybody dimple could we have your address please you sure can and I can hear you tonight okay good it's dimple Adams fourteen twenty four Virginia Avenue Sheboygan Wisconsin and the floor is yours thank you I'm sorry about being late ran into a little snag downstairs and as you can see I have a little trouble today but I was determined to be here and I'll tell you why I love the city I have been living here since 1976 my children were 12 and 7 now they are 47 and 42 and I've had two grandchildren that also graduated from South by school and I go to Alabama almost every year but I come back to Sheboygan and my family loves visiting in Sheboygan I'm very sorry about my voice that's why I'm here tonight I know that okay the first thing I'll just get out of the way right away is I don't care about the garbage thing you guys to care of that and it's okay I mean we had to do what you had to do to get the budget balanced but I am upset about what you did to Susie LaSard and I don't think that was fair and I don't think it was honest and I think that you left twelve point five percent of the city without representation and that's not good for that district and it's not good for our citizenship and I don't know what your motives were but I've got to believe that you must have spoken about it before that night because there was no discussion and this vote came and it was 10 to 5 so I feel like shame on you you're bullies saying you're not going to play in my sandbox tonight for the next five months and that's not fair and I grew up in a moderate household my father worked for the railroad my mother was a stay-at-home mom and we played a lot of games because we didn't have TV and so forth and we all had her chores and the one thing that I learned at an early age and playing games in my family and in going to school is that you don't cheat and you don't bend the rules and I'm sorry guys I respect all of you for what you do I think it's notable to give up your time for the meager paycheck that you get to do the service that you do for the city and I respect that very very much and I respect all of you very much and I appreciate it but I do have to say that what I think is happening now and this has nothing to do with the name of the mayor it could be Mayor John Jones or John Doe alright but he was caught in a situation that was not nice and you've investigated this thing for three months now I'm the taxpayer along with 30 something other thousand people living in the city that was paying for that investigation we're going to have a mayor election in one month two of you have put your name up for candidates and two of you are related very closely to another candidate and you're doing all these changes about what we're going to do with mayoral position before we have the selection that's not a level playing ground but what I really got upset about I already was upset because this letter was dated the 14th of November so that's been over a month ago with meetings and not being transparent with the investigation and so when I ran the paper yesterday that you had suspended see you know I thought great it's over and then two hours later I read the headline again on press and you're telling me it's on hold no you can't do that that is wrong and I don't know how you think that can be fair and I want someone to tell me how and it's not because of who the mayor is it's because I don't know how to vote I don't know what the mayor's position is going to be doing I don't know what the investigation showed you're keeping information from the citizens and I want all of you to explain to me how this is fair and I don't know how four of you can even vote on this stuff tell me how that's fair please mr. Warren tell me how that's fair well I'm not going to make any comments right now miss Adams but the only thing I will say is that when we go into closed session we're discussing very sensitive issues and it's not only for the council's protection and I'm not just talking about when we go into closed session about the mayor about any individual that's very sensitive material that should not be out there because some of it may be true some of it may be allegations and that's a reason why we go into closed session those items I understand the closed session while the investigation was going on but I read in the paper that the investigation is over now if you found something that you think the mayor has done wrong then go ahead and start with your hearing now don't wait don't put it on hold until after the election because that's not fair to the electric who's going to be voting because then if we vote him back in then you're going to go forward with the hearing maybe maybe not not an equal playing field us citizens who have paid for this investigation have a right to know if you're going to have the hearing or not if you found anything that he's guilty of that stands the cross-digital hearing you cannot put it on hold until the election is over and call it a fair playground it's not how can it be fair we don't have all the information that we need and we can't get it I was told that once the investigation was over with we were going to be told what it showed now I want I want you to explain to me and not just to me but to every voting citizen in the city how it is fair that you hold the information up if you're going to charge charge it if you're not then let us know what it showed and be with it that's you know I was taught not to cheat and not to stack the deck and that's what you're doing in my opinion and I'm very very concerned about it and I wrote a letter to the editor back in September and it has nothing to do I don't feel this way no matter who is mayor I would have felt this way with the lights mayor and another thing is you're doing all these things without asking the citizens if we want the mayor's job changed we need a referendum on this the citizens need to be allowed to speak we need to be able to decide so you need to just back up a little bit and quit this that's just the way I feel about it I'm not angry I'm being honest and if I didn't think it was important trust me I wouldn't be here tonight thank you all very much but I expect fairness thank you dimple and honestly I'll entertain a motion on document number 1617 we have a motion on a file motion on a second file document number 1617 any discussion all in favor opposed chair votes aye go ahead okay we'll go back to I agenda item number eight which is council document number 1648 originally council document number 1442 submitting a communication from older person born being a survey of mayor oil salaries oops I'm sorry we're on number nine forgot to cross that one off council dot document number 1637 council document number 1637 your committee to whom was referred general ordinance number 39-11-12 by older person's belt boron and Heidemann re-establishing the salary schedule for the office of mayor part-time recommends that a copy of this ordinance be referred to the committee of the whole and that was a originally was was council document numbers 1441 all of them belt if you want to lead the discussion on this one you can or I've got a few comments but if you want to go first go ahead well I'd like to be able to take both number nine and number 10 together because it's a debatable whether it's part time or full time all right any objection to taking those two together item number 10 on the agenda is document numbers council document number 1638 your committee to whom was referred general ordinance number 40-11-12 by older person's boron Heidemann Cotth and versey re-establishing the salary schedule for the office of mayor full-time recommends that a copy of this ordinance be referred to the committee of the whole do you want to start out Alderman belt well the part-time position now that we've got a full-time city administrator I believe the mayor we could get by with a part time mayor in the city it looks like there's other cities in the in the state that that do that our size some some even bigger some smaller but I believe we can very easily get by with the part-time mayor we can save some money by going to a part-time mayor and if if my initial thoughts were to have the office of mayor part-time with no benefits but looking at the other survey here the you know with the Wauwatosa their part-time mayor does get benefits we can always you know put benefits out there but I honestly don't believe that we at this time need a full-time mayor thank you Alderman belt just to follow up on some of your comments for that for the people at home that maybe don't have the document the document proposes that and this would not go into effect until 2013 with with that mayoral election that the part-time salary would start out at $24,000 and then ending in 2016 the salary would be up to $25,845 that's a 2.5% increase per year and the original document said that the part-time mayor would work a maximum of 1175 hours per year and that the part-time mayor would receive no benefits now using that initial salary of $24,000 if we did include benefits the the health insurance for the part-time mayor we would we would be paying 88% of the of the health insurance benefit which amounts to 18,273 dollars and 58 cents if the mayor part-time mayor work more than 1200 hours a year then that then that mayor would be subject to us making contributions to the Wisconsin retirement fund right now this year elected officials like the mayor the city clerk and the city attorney the taxpayers are making contributions of six of 13.3% next year with the Walker budget bill our elected officials will start paying 6.6 0.5% into the Wisconsin retirement fund or half and that amounts to with the $24,000 salary starting that would be $1,596 so that part-time mayor that starting out with a $24,000 salary 18 to for health insurance and almost $1,600 for the Wisconsin retirement fund then that part-time mayor would be making $43,869.58 so there that would that would be first of all the original intent of the of the document was a part-time mayor with no benefits and as alderman belt mentioned if we did go with a part-time mayor starting out at $24,000 that would be a hypothetical salary then with benefits that would end up to be 43,869 then going over to document number 1638 which originally was document number 1442 I ran some numbers on that also and again starting in 2013 with a hypothetical salary listed on the document of $45,000 and ending in 2016 of $48,460 and again that amounts to a 2.5% increase per year with the $45,000 salary again we would if the if our new mayor had a family health plan that would be $18,273.58 and the 6.65% into the Wisconsin retirement fund would be 2,992.50 then with a with a salary of $45,000 the first year all in it would be approximately 66,266.08 then another hypothetical I ran the numbers on is for example if you didn't want to start out with a $45,000 salary and you wanted to go to a $40,000 salary again if that new mayor had the had a family health plan we would be paying 88% of that which would be $18,273.58 and our contribution to the Wisconsin retirement fund at 6.65% would be $2,320 so all in with a salary of $40,000 we would be at $61,043.58 so that's how those scenarios on the documents plus an added one with $40,000 would play out and now I would like to open it up for discussion to think what your thoughts are should we go with a part-time position should we go with a part-time position should we include benefits shouldn't we include benefits first we have Alderman Hammond I believe go ahead thanks I guess I have a kind of I have a concern with the full-time versus part-time and limiting the hours of of that position I have no problem with lowering the salary and we have the debate about the benefits or no benefits but to tell a mayor who's supposed to be the representative of the city the face of the city that once you hit 1175 hours you can no longer do ribbon cuttings or economic development trips or those types of things you know I really have a I have a problem with that you know I don't know how schedule X which is the 1200 hours that Alderman Bourne was referring to works for elected officials because I can speak for myself I know I put a lot more than 1200 hours a year since I became Alderman into it and I don't get a Wisconsin retirement system contribution I may file for one now though but you know I I think we the full versus part-time and again Mrs. might be a Steve McLean question you know how we can get around the 1200 hours thing but I don't want to see us limiting the number of hours that the mayor works if we got a mayor that you know wants to come in and and at whatever salary we set you know work 80 hours a week great you know if they're willing to do it and they do it well that's the way I think it should be I don't want to limit the number of hours so thank you thank you Alderman verse a year next thank you two things I mean to mimic action one of those is was my concern with the hours trying to restrict that how can you restrict that how do you punch in a time card every time he goes into a ribbon cutting or going to a meeting he's not going to be doing that so I'm actually against kind of the part-time mayor a little bit in theory the other part is it should be a referendum should once it should go to a referendum part-time or full-time mayor we should set the new salary and we should lower the salary for a full-time mayor because that's what we can do right now is lower the salary and I'm thinking 50 55,000 because he still want a qualified person because he is the face of the city he's your biggest cheerleader he's the salesman of our city so he still needs someone who's qualified he or she I'm sorry so you're gonna need someone that that's my qualified to be that face of our city to be out there for development and recreation of things and out there trying to promote our city going to a part-time scenario and trying to limit hours you're not gonna have that not you don't have that ability so two things it should go to a referendum but we should reset the full-time mayor salary you know much much lower than the 902 it is now or 76 salary plus the benefits and my suggestion would be going down to 55 or 60 like West out West Alice for a mayor salary plus benefits so it is much less yes we have a full-time administrator you know we're gonna be moving forward having those two full-time positions are gonna complement each other so we're gonna it's not a huge detriment to our budget by lowering the mayor's salary and keeping on the full-time position and also going to a referendum if the people want part-time mayor well then we got to discuss it then we got to go forward and and do what the citizens want they want to keep a full-time well it's already in place and when the budget's already already fixed because we have our 13 months ahead of time so I think as far as moving forward we should do the two things of setting the mayor salary full-time salary down to 55 or 60 and then also bringing a resolution in for going to a referendum for a part-time or full-time mayor and we can get that on probably in February for the primary or just do it in November because it's a presidential election so everybody be voting and we'll get a bigger voice of our city in that time. Thank you Alderman Heidemann you're next. Thank you Chairman. Having had the privilege of serving as a part-time mayor in Sheboygan Falls I'm gonna tell you there are any amount of hours that you can spend doing it you put into the job what you want to do now I also had the opportunity to sit on the government structure committee for over two years we looked at the city administrator we brought it to the council it was voted down voted down we finally got what we finally got to where I thought the city needed to go is a direction with the city administrator but during those discussions we just say so what do we do with the mayor we've got two options here and I in fact I have my name on both recommendations we either have to decide one to go to a part-time mayor or two lower the salary there we cannot exist having a full-time mayor at the salary have right now we'll be basically just appointed a city administrator to do what two-thirds what the mayor was doing before so it makes sense to take a look at this and I hope that we can come up to some type of a resolution that our citizens will be satisfied with but I know the people that were on the government structure committee were both Alderman and citizens and people that worked with the city and they said quite honestly I believe Jody if I'm not wrong they said to go to a part-time mayor but I'm not I'm also not certain that we wouldn't have to deal with a charter ordinance for the for the mayor so we might have to we might be involved in having to have the referendum or do something in order to change the charter ordinance as far as what your boy is responsible to have a full-time mayor so we might just be looking at just lowering the salary. Thank you Alderman Heidemann, Alderman Raceler you're next. Thank you Mr. Chair. I guess first of all I would be in agreement with doing the referendum as well for us to determine whether it's a part-time or full-time I think should go to the citizens. The problem that I see with it is the timing. If we do it in November we're going to be stuck for the next four years because we have to have everything set I believe the wages and benefits have to be set before I would say March I think it was 13 months ahead of time so even if we could get in on the February one would be the earliest and the only one that we could utilize it for but I guess one of the problems I have is we didn't hire a chief financial officer all right we didn't hire a new person we took an existing person that we have that had his full slate of duties that he has taken on an additional responsibility so we didn't hire someone new to to relieve responsibilities from the mayor we took on someone that's going to hopefully lead our city and be again our chief financial officer there's still plenty of development and job searches and and and business creating that again is Alderman Hammond said we want our mayor to be the the cheerleader or the person going out and getting these I mean I would feel terrible if if we limited this to 1200 hours and and a business that we didn't come there because we didn't get recruited to come to Sheboygan all right because our chief financial officer who I'm sure will do a good job but also needs to help as well the other thing and I know that you're not some people aren't thrilled about this but if you look at reducing the size of the council down I think there's going to be plenty of work to go around all right I think the mayor is going to have plenty to do I guess a suggestion that I'll throw out there just so we covered all of our ends and I can be satisfied is you know I get a lot of feelings that it should be a part-time mayor so we get this quality of candidates and I'm not going to say what that quality is or what what they are we know what they are or we want a full-time mayor so that we get someone who can put the hours in and do the job and and all those and they're two different people one takes in the four years excuse me as a part-time job and one takes it on as a full-time career for four years at least so I guess you know we do have an opportunity here to say take whatever wage we decide upon break it down if it's possible to do I'm not sure statutory we can do it break it down into an hourly position and basically tell the person who's elected you have the ability to put this many hours in if you so choose to work full-time you can have it as a full-time career if you win the election and you want to work it as a part-time position and you can get the work that's needed done that's something we have and then we have no just no problem with whoever chooses all right say you know person that is unemployed or retired or wants to says a side position wants to do it they could put that amount of hours in at the hourly wage and the benefit package and such or if they said this is what I want to do for a career for the next four years they could do it that way too and the last point I guess I'll look I'll say is we looked at the schedule we looked at what other places do where we're we shouldn't try to reinvent the wheel here I don't see too many full-time mayors on there for for forty five thousand dollars I see it as a profession and a career of something that is sixty one to whatever the ninety thousand dollars it might be I think that for us to look at reducing or cutting the wage in half I think is ridiculous I don't think we're going to get the quality of candidate no offense to anyone who's running or plans to run in the future thank you Alderman Racler Alderman Maddachek you're next I believe Ben Akron was before me he's not flashing anymore I just had to go along with Scott a bit with the ideas but questions of has this been ran past the attorney's office has this been properly looked at just a couple years ago we had the Wisconsin had an issue with sheriff's department answering questions via tax on the phone or a call and then they had to pay out overtime wages back overtime wages because the state found that that was working but yet they were not on the clock but they were working if we limit the hours that we have the mayor as a part-time mayor and then at the end of the year he's used up all his hours and say that we have a huge issue. Well it would be monitored by the finance department if it was a part-time that's what it says on the document and as far as the city attorney vetting this the city attorney is the one that did these documents for me as far as he did both of these documents for me. Did you put together how other cities handle the limited hours? Well I guess that would be our choice I mean you could have a part-time mayor and actually any elected official whether it be a mayor, the city attorney or the city clerk they can basically work as many hours a week as they want to as long as they can get their job done so if they could get for example if the city clerk could get her job done in 20 hours a week and she wanted to take the rest of the week off hypothetically she could. So when you're an elected official you know you can say full-time mayor but you might have a full-time mayor that's working 60 hours a week and you might have one that's working 25 or 30. You can't really direct an elected official. Bush put into the way of minimum wage laws here in Wisconsin and there's also federal minimum wage for salary employees. If the mayor puts in too many hours he has to be making minimum wage when you divide all the hours between the salary so you can't just have a part-time mayor and say oh he can put in as many hours as he wants. Well he can. If you have a set salary for example if we had a part-time mayor with $24,000 that's his salary and at part-time if we took out the line in here that it was a maximum of 1175 hours back when you were a part-time mayor in Sheboygan Falls Alderman Heidemann you know what your salary was and you basically whatever took the job done that's what you work right? When I was the mayor I made less than I made as an Alderman here so I mean I gotta bump up and pay going into Sheboygan. You know political office each one of us holds an office and we spend a lot of time working where the constituents and looking at our documents it's what that individual wants to put into it. I don't know how you can put an hourly number of hours into any position that comes with an elected official. There's no way you either want to do it or you don't want to do it. I'm not there to judge somebody on the job they're accomplishing I just want to make sure that our constituents since we went to a city administrator aren't overpaying for jobs that don't have to be done in a position that some of those responsibilities were cut away so whatever some of the responsibilities that the mayor previously had and lost to that city administrator he shouldn't be paid for. Now if he wants to pay if he wants to work for $40,000 a year and put in 80 hours a week I'm happy about that. Go you go for it but again like I said it's what you want to do with your position it's I don't think you can put a number of hours per year on any elected official so. Did you want to continue the government matter check I'm sorry for interrupting you. Sorry I just believe we're opening up a whole new can of warms because we're creating this position we're not fully understanding exactly how the state handles this as I already spoke to the government to come and bill it board. Previously they were paid to take the oath we're not paid per hour to come in instead of meetings we're paid to take that oath and for the entire year you could not show up and you still got the salary because you took that oath the citizens could elected official recall you after that year and so on but you're paid to take that oath and now we're going to be putting a cap on the hours we're going to be defining this position I don't think this has been looked into properly given the attention that it's needed to be put together. Plus I'm just concerned about this council is moving towards putting government employees greater responsibility and in charge of themselves while removing the public's voice and control if we're going to be switching to a smaller council and a part time mayor while creating a city administrator that's making hundreds and thousands and putting a mayor in charge that's making twenty some thousand who really has the power right there and where is the responsibility going back to well under our current system with going to the chief administrative officer the chief administrative officer has the power now the mayor has been much reduced in that capacity including the fire chief and the police chief now reporting to the chief administrative officer and one other thing I want to comment on is we have a very talented person in our development department in Chad Pellecek and I believe we're in the process if we didn't hire already a very talented person in the development area I don't see where the mayor has to be that in my personal opinion has to be that involved in development yes if a business comes into town and they want to be part of the process of the opening and that type of thing we're paying professionals in our planning department a lot of money right now to do that type of thing and I don't really necessarily think that that's a prerequisite for a mayor I see the mayor as we go forward as presiding at the council meeting the mayor probably still being on the plan commission probably still being on the transit commission and then a lot of ceremonial duties that's about what it's reduced to right now a lot of those other responsibilities are gone and I can't see paying somebody with that many reduced duties I think $45,000 is more than fair our state legislators which are a full time job I believe our state senators and our state representatives are making about $48,000 plus benefits and I know they haven't hit the 50 mark yet so I think for a full time mayor if that's the way we want to go I think $45,000 plus a nice benefit package and particularly in this economy we're going to get a lot of qualified people and by the same token with a part time position I think there's a lot of people out there that would even take the job at $24,000 with or without benefits that's my opinion Alderman Carlson you're next I guess I would respectfully disagree with just about everything you said there Cory the last part that you've talked about is I completely agree with I can't support either of these documents I think a part time mayor in the city of this size is just out of the question in my opinion and then cutting the pay down almost I mean just about half I think once again the goal I mean everyone should have the goal of moving the city forward and by cutting, well cutting the part time like I said is just ridiculous because you're going to get in a certain pool of people running for that position so I mean sure one of them could probably do a great job but once again you're narrowing that pool by a lot and then even cutting the pay down by that much money you're once again limiting the talent pool that you want to get once again we want to move the city forward we need that CEO I mean if we want to talk about the city being a business we need a CEO we need the figure head and both of these documents I think are just going to stunt any growth that we could possibly have here in Sheboyan thank you Alderman Carlson Alderman Versi you're next we have an election coming up on January 17th that I'm sure a lot of people in the city are going to probably be out and vote maybe that would be a time to throw it on if we could not enough time you've got to have an extra amount of time before for a referendum I think it's nine weeks nine or twelve weeks from the time it's introduced to the time it gets on a ballot thank you Alderman Versi Alderman Alderperson Kittles and you're next thank you Chairman thank you I just wondered where did these numbers come from you just for setting this up consultation with some of the sponsoring Alderpersons okay that's where I came from and by the way with the since the mid nineties and I got a stress again that Mayor Don and Wawa Tosa up until now that she resigned has been working for whatever the figure was twenty two twenty two thousand five hundred dollars with benefits since the mid nineties with no cost of living increase at all and now that she resigned the next mayor they are going to sweeten it up to thirty thousand dollars and from what I know about Mayor Don and Wawa Tosa very dynamic person very dynamic woman and she's been in that position for a number of years now at twenty two five with benefits it says though too in this other this article that was just printed here how much is a mayor worth and they said they took the physicals and the administrator in Franklin said a more fair comparison to take the physical size of the city and its total valuation and then you can come up with your salary that way it's what they said but my thought is too why not keep the mayor a full time position and just set the salary lower that salary I mean we could do that as well I mean you heard Dimple and I think and I think the community does want to keep the mayor a full time position as I go out and about and I'm talking to people they like a full time mayor and so therefore we could just set the salary just lower the salary of the mayor at this time sure. Thank you. If you look at if you go back to the survey and you look at the one you have there they're paying city managers and city administrators a ton more money than we're currently paying Mr. Amorio so eventually if we have to get up into that league of one hundred and twenty seven or one hundred twenty one and then you're paying a mayor all in over two hundred and twenty five thousand dollars you got two hundred and twenty five thousand dollars roughly for those two positions and again with the responsibilities that our mayor is going to have going forward on my mind I can't justify having paying two people well over two hundred thousand dollars I just can't with the reduced duties who's next here Mr. McRan go ahead. Thank you chairman I would have to agree with some of the statements that have been made so far I believe the city were to look at a part time position for mayor I think that is something that the citizen should decide in a referendum type basis however I do think it's appropriate to lower the salary base based on the duties that have shifted to the chief administrative officer however I think for a city this size and for all that we are trying to accomplish I think a full time mayor is appropriate to provide direction leadership vision for this city going forward to work in conjunction with the chief administrative officer as well as us as a council to provide the best services we can for a city I'm in favor of a full time mayor but I do think it's appropriate to adjust the salary in compensation package based on again a lot of those shift the some of those duties have shifted to the chief administrative officer so I'm in favor of adjusting the compensation package but keeping a full time thank you all of an acronym all of an racer you're next thank you Mr. Chair I guess I'll make two comments number one I don't think that we've shifted that much total responsibility that the mayor is not doing I think the mayor is still doing a lot of these responsibilities and working in joint with the chief administrative officer which I think is a good thing now that being said if we want to trim because all these responsibilities have shifted I don't think that it's fair to the chief administrative officer then that he's not being compensated more if he's so busy and has so many responsibilities from the mayor and we want to trim off $30,000 from the mayor are we taking the $30,000 and putting on his salary that's the only fair thing when we talk about fair if I want you to do more I'm going to pay you more if I'm going to have you do less I'm going to pay you less and I don't think that that's necessarily the appropriate thing to do but I don't know any other point I'm just going to make is I don't think it's fair to compare them to the state politicians because they've received the mileage the meals the benefits that we don't hear so when you look at the overall compensation package for them I think they're satisfied and they're doing okay and they're probably equal to what our mayor is if not more so that's a poor comparison I would agree to a certain extent but those are also covering out of pocket expenses those reimbursements those per diems when they're down there to get reimbursers staying overnight and they've got a certain meal allowance but the basic salary is pretty close Alderman Hammond you're next Thank you Mr. Chair just a kind of a point of clarification and it's my understanding we again certainly need to confirm this with the city attorney's office but our mayor being full time is a charter ordinance which would require a referendum and the whole nine yards to go part time obviously the city's been had part time mayors in the past and they've been successful but you know again with respect to our requirements I still firmly believe we need to stick with a full time mayor we want to lower the salary and determine what a reasonable salary is you know I think we need to be a little bit more exacting than just a couple guys getting together and determining this is the number and I think we need to put some faith and credit in the voters here they're going to determine whether the mayor is putting in enough hours and doing a good enough job to stay as mayor regardless of what hours requirement we put on them so I think again we need to focus on what is a reasonable salary and also stay with a full time mayor just to clarify something the mayor's responsibilities have changed he's no longer all the department heads now report to the Chief Administrative Officer so his duties have diminished substantially he's got the things he's statutory required to do presiding over the meeting's budget those types of things but the Chief Officer Mr. Amodio has taken on the lion's share of the day-to-day administrative duties and I don't want to get into what Mr. Amodio's salary is but he did agree to take on these additional responsibilities for the salary that he's working now will that have to be revisited possibly but he accepted the position at that salary next I have Alderman Bursi actually on that point may we also remind that when we hired Mr. Amodio he came on at $19,000 more than what our former finance director is doing so in my eyes he got an extra pay already to accept some extra duties so I guess that's the way I kind of look at it now when we assume that position and he comes in that much higher than our former finance director well now having those duties added to him now maybe if you want to include terms now he's making you know now he's earning what he's making if you want to make it that way but you have to remember that also when he came on so now Alderman Racler thank you Mr. Well let's start out with baby steps then I'll make a motion that we continue to keep the mayor at a full-time position and we can debate the salary after that maybe we can go baby steps here okay we have a motion and a second to keep the mayor's position a full-time position who made the motion Alderman Racler who is the second Alderman Carlson a whole lot of people alright any we've got that motion and a second and do we have any further discussion on whether we want it to be a full-time or part-time position Alderman Belt did you want to make any comments yet well I guess I'd like to see it go to a referendum myself and possibly put three questions out there one to leave it the same one to lower the salary leave it full time but reduce the salary and third one part-time and with a much reduced salary I'm not sure we'd be able to get it on the ballot in February but that would be the option would be to put it out there for a referendum and see what the people have to say Alderman Belt would when you're putting that on a referendum then would you like to attach a number to what the salary is like full-time X amount of dollars part-time X amount of dollars changing keeping it full-time or part-time well it'd be nice if the people knew what the salaries were going to be I mean at each one of those but that would have to be set by this group I mean as far as what do we want to leave it the same do we want to lower salary and to what and if the people wanted it as a part-time position what should the salary be then? I just wanted to speak to the comment that yes the mayor is every day the day-to-day operation has changed he isn't so involved in that but there's still plenty plenty to do for the mayor you can make that job whatever you choose it to be and there are lots of things for a mayor to do that they could be working full-time plus I believe so that's just my comment thank you Alderman Versi you're next for your referendum I believe actually by March 1st we have to have it decided because that's our 13 months out so the February would be and you wouldn't have to do three questions you want a full-time error part-time error cut and dried you don't have to put how much they're going to make because we set that and we already all decided that it needs to be reduced so you don't have to have the third question it's going to be a reduced salary whether it's 45, 55, 65, wherever it's going to be we're going to debate that but it's full-time or part-time that's it we can lower the salary right now tonight well or decide on a price and then forward it on to full council and have that in place so if they decide the referendum comes back and they want a part-time mayor okay we're going to a part-time mayor and it's $24,000 so we can do that the price doesn't have to be on the referendum it's just full-time or part-time that's the question and I believe I think in February we'll have plenty of better turnout for that as well so I think it's a perfect time and if we have it all set in place it's going to be okay voters wanted a part-time mayor we're going to part-time there's no leg time there's no discussion time there's no let's refer to 50,000 committees and think about it another month and a half it's done if we make all the ground work done now go to referendum if it comes back full-time mayor great it is a full-time mayor we don't do another thing we already reduced the salary so that's what we need to do tonight and that's what obviously what we've started with is keeping it full-time mayor and I think getting close to West Alice's price is fair being all in with the benefits you still want to keep the candidate pool much greater so keeping it 45 I was one of the initial people that came up with the $45,000 going through and looking at other cities I've also changed my own view on that not by much I'm going to go over 60 for them because of the reduced duties but I mean you got to add the benefits in right now we're over 100,000 it's 74,000, 76,000 in salary plus its benefits reduce it to 50 or 55 because you have to remember every year he's in there he gets that increased anyways it's a salary increase every single year so I think if we start at 50 or 55 I think that's more than fair our candidate pool will be big and that's a fair price for what it's moving forward so I think that's where we should go I guess the second motion would be to make it $50,000 starting alright we'll do the first one first all are Pritz and Kittleson did you want to talk on the motion again or well no I just wanted to we talked about West Alice 60,000 for their full-time mayor with full benefits and they have a full-time administrator at $111,000 for a total of $171,987 their population is 60,000 and it costs per resident for the salary of the mayor and the administrator is $2.84 per resident so that's how they've got it broken down $60,000 for the mayor could you do a quick average there of the ones that have a mayor and a city administrator what the mayor salaries are do a quick average is somebody got a calculator I'm sorry Alderman race right in here would you say just call the question for this so we have a motion in a second to keep it a full-time position and I believe Alderman Samson has called the question all in favor of calling the question opposed chair votes aye I'll call the roll on this one no aye aye aye aye aye aye aye motion carries so the motion is passed that we stay with a full-time mayor now the next thing we want to talk about Alderman versey I'd like to make a motion to set the new mayor's salary at $50,000 plus benefits Alderman Carlson are you done with your calculations yet there's only two cities on this that have both a full-time mayor and a city administrator and they're pretty close and what does that figure? West Alice is at 16 Waukesha is at 70 both those cities are slightly bigger than the average per citizen is 276 okay did you make a motion Alderman versey what was it I did starting salary at $50,000 second to set the full-time mayor's position starting in 2013 at $50,000 Alderman versey would you want to make a friendly amendment that you you give 2.5% increases per year or not I mean how are we going to I think traditionally traditionally the mayor has gotten a raise every year of his term now that doesn't necessarily mean we have to do it when I did talk to Attorney McLean about that he was concerned about CPI issues and he thought it would be a good idea to set a definite percent and that's why we came up with a 2.5% and that would be fine and that's what I was expecting so that would be a friendly amendment to your motion that we start out at 50 with a 2.5% increase per year for a year two three and four plus benefits Alderman van Agren are you just amending the current document that was submitted the full-time document rather than $45,000 it would be $50,000 following that same steps same benefit structure Alderman Carlson if I could ask you to work on something for us before the end of the meeting to expedite things if this passes at $50,000 a year plus benefits with a 2.5% increase could you give me the numbers for 14, 15 and 16 thank you you got the calculator out because we'll have to have a clean document to go to council alright we have a motion and a friendly amendment to start the salary out at $50,000 a year starting in April of 2013 with 2.5% increase per year and did I say plus benefits we have a motion and we have a motion and we did get a second on that any further discussion call the roll please oops I'm sorry Alderman Madicek I maybe goofed up your light here thank you go ahead I still think that we don't have all the homework done on this and we don't have all the data I mean you just asked for an average without Mequon Mequon is in Ozaki the 7th wealthiest per capita county in the entire nation and now you want to use that as a comparison for Sheboygan Wisconsin as a city we're also the county seat we have issues here very different from Mequon I don't think she talked about Mequon it was only the two cities that had a full time mayor I'm just showing a shortfall of data I believe we don't have all the information in front of us and we're comparing cities and we're not even looking at demographics property values other issues that the mayor would have to address rather than just going ahead and looking at population size that's it thank you Alderman Madicek thank you Mr. Chair I guess just for clarification I won't support anything under 60 thank you we have a motion in a second starting in 2013 to start out the mayor's salary at $50,000 with a 2.5% increase per year with full benefits and I guess we're done with the discussion I don't see any lights on would you want to call the roll? Carlson? No Hammond? No Kittleson? No Riesler? No Ben Akron? No Versi? Aye Motion fails Alderman Riesler? Thank you Mr. Chair I'll make a motion that we keep the salary at $60,000 comparable with what the other ones are that we've researched under discussion Alderman Versi you're comparing to cities that are 10,000 more population than we currently have that was the reason why I kind of threw the $50,000 I don't think we have all the data like Alderman Madicek said and I think $60,000 is a fair amount for what we're looking for in a professional mayor full time my opinion? Alderman Hammond? Thank you Mr. Chair you know there's a lot of I think this would be a good I think this would be a good number I think this would be a good number there's how many cities in the state or in the country why are we not looking at this a little bit more holistically I know we want to try to get something into council but I think we well agreed that a full time mayor makes sense maybe we need to do a little bit more research on what a per capita or per head would you say Alderman Carlson $2.76 per residence $2.76 per residence what does that look like versus and then put that into a formula for paying the mayor versus I think it should be $60,000 or I think it should be $60,000 and maybe we do need to do a little bit more homework on the salary and we've got a little time to do it maybe we should step back from that side and look at it for other look at other municipalities and it's really interesting if you look at the city manager form of government and I know that's a different form of government we've got Beloit or Claire Fondelac and Janesville that have a city manager pay that person substantially they have no mayor at all now who's doing the development in that town do they have a development manager Alderman Carlson I guess a more important question that's been touched on already is that we still need to have more than just the city council and the city clerk and the attorney as an elected official so the question of not having a mayor and that's not even a question so we can't even compare ourselves to a city that does not have a mayor if we're not even going to go that route I understand it but I'm making a point that there are cities in this state that have substantial populations that have city managers and again that's a different form of government than a city administrator but those towns a neighbor as close as Fondelac I'm very familiar with Claire because my dad used to live up there they have no mayor at all and apparently they're still doing development over there you don't know the structure of their government you don't know if they have a finance director instead of the different levels we don't know plus a city manager is a statutory position with statutory rights and responsibility is very similar to what a mayor would have where a city administrator doesn't have those rights and you would have to have a mayor to execute some of those statutory rights Alderman Maddichick you're next Thank you I appreciate trying to run the city as a business but we also have to look at you know it's been compared do we want to run it a master in one's better than the other perhaps a Walmart or a target you walk into one and the other and they're completely different yet they're both business models but you still appreciate one differently than the other here in Sheboygan do we want to run things like Deloitte do we want to end up like Detroit do we want to end up in what way what direction do we want to take the city and who are we going to put into that place to take the direction take the city into that direction and all I'm hearing is a lot of cut and dry just cut and paste if you will answers and numbers being tossed around not in-depth look at the cities that we're comparing them to and what direction we want to take the city into thank you did you make a motion Alderman Reisler I don't have a second unless someone planned on seconding it somebody second that motion for sixty thousand I need to go to seventy I'll second the Alderman Reisler's motion for sixty further discussion Alderman Hammond thank you Mr. Bourne I don't know what the number is I don't think anybody in this room knows what the number is at this point there's been a lot of numbers thrown out but no rhyme or reason how we came up with any of those numbers would it kill us to step back from this one and say whether make a recommendation to the council find somebody put together a subcommittee whatever the case may be to research what others are doing put together a little bit more of a thoughtful process on selecting the salary we're not that much in the time crunch we've got until essentially March so why rush this through in the next four days thank you Alderman Samson I believe you're next well if I may ask how was the current salary that the mayor is getting paid right now how was that set some time ago good question it's been progressively higher as years have gone along I think when Mayor Perez started we were probably somewhere in the sixties and we've gradually increased it up to what is it going to be next year seventy three what was that based on originally as I said it with Mayor Perez and probably before that it's been a gradual increase as time has gone along Alderman Carlson are you next yes thank you I would also agree with Alderman Hammond that I think that no one here is really qualified just to pull a number out of the sky that there's no hurry to ram this through there's no reason why we can't actually put some real facts and figures into this before we just make a decision on some random number we decided on well I would recommend I think the logical committee for it to go back to would probably go back to salary and grievance and then come forward with a recommendation after you average ten twenty thirty cities whatever you want to whatever factors you want to take into it and then come back with a number sixty thousand he's a committee chairman that's not going to change but I do feel that we do have two examples we are on the low end of those two examples for what we are recommending here at sixty thousand I did some of the math it's an increase of about fifteen hundred dollars a year so at the end of that four years you're talking in the range of sixty four thousand sixty four and a half somewhere in that range I was comfortable with the last salary that was proposed I'm comfortable with moving forward with this salary I think it is something that we should vote on and move forward with I think this is appropriate we have two examples that show it's in an appropriate range and we can move forward with this Alderman Versey you're next thank you no offense to Alderman Hannah but this really isn't rocket science figuring out what a salary should be when you're trying to compare it to just a few other cities it really isn't you want to go make a big deal out of something that's not how do you set salaries for your employees do you average it with you know fifty other companies that are just like yours and say well this employee is going to get that no you don't you set your number that's what this this is what the job description is this is the work detailed this is how much I'm setting your salary to be it's doesn't have to be a big big production I agree we can slow down sure we're no rush but as far as having this big long drawn out process to figure out a salary for a mayor well let's go back to when we first became a full time mayor let's see what that salary was since it's been progressively more every year with every mayor well why isn't it the way it should be set up is the mayor starts at this salary ends at this salary if he gets reelected he gets to continue on but it should always go back to starting at the same salary you know and that's why I don't know why it hasn't been that way I don't know but we don't need to make a big statistical nightmare if you may to find a salary it's not rocket science to figure out what a salary should be and you're looking at other cities that have higher population same form of government they're more per capita their property values are more than ours and we're going to set them the same or less I don't see how it's a big production did you want to make a comment yeah I think just adding on to all the diversity I don't think we really have time to dive into the circumstances of these other cities you know they may have just felt the need at that time to go 70,000 or 60,000 or 85,000 or whatever their conditions were at the time that they made the vote or the decision to go to the salary that they have so I think that's I mean we can try to compare but I don't think we understand the circumstances of each individual city and each person that voted on that the reason why they went to whatever salary they have so I think we're pretty comparable I think we have to do it we as a city can do and what we're willing to do and I think you go back to when Mayor Shram was in and then we had Mayor Perez somewhere along the line those councils were making an evaluation on the salary with no personality involved and that's the same thing we're doing now as we go forward for 13 and the same thing when the council decided somewhere during Mayor Perez's term what the salary was going to be for the next mayor but it's been at one time at one point in time there must have been a base salary for the mayor and there's been an upwards progression as time has gone along probably a cost of living or whatever the case may be with really no personality involved or really no probably perhaps even description of what the job description was and I guess I agree with Alderman Versi we can spend another month looking at a bunch of other cities in Wisconsin and other places I think we're I'm going to hold my nose and vote for 50 as the original one was just voted down but I'm not going any higher than 60 knowing what this job is going to be and what it is right now with what Mr. Amori was taken over with the responsibility for all the departments including fire and police I just have an awful hard time going above 50 so I'm going to hold my nose to vote for that thank you Mr. Chair I guess I'll put it this way salaries and grievance sent here for the discussion and I appreciate that I guess what we're looking for is a number to go back and the next salary and grievance will not be until the second week of January and then if we look at getting it to the council for the last meeting in January if it's not held and we act on it right away and we're going to be pushing right up against that deadline the way it is so if we were going to put a community together and do all this stuff it's going to go back to salaries and grievance no matter what because that's what we ask for is for it to come back to us with some discussion like we had tonight which I appreciate but I guess I would kind of like a number to go back because I don't think I think we will have time in between that if we want to do some more research we can do the research beforehand and look at some of the other comparables so I guess we'll go back to our council of what our recommendation is to come back by us and at that point in time again we can debate the whole thing on the floor again but we probably will have a little bit more information too so just because we're voting on 60 doesn't mean 60 is coming back to the council when we're done we might hash it out a little bit more in salaries and grievance and say okay yeah we might 50 right and it might so I guess we're just looking for a general number and whatever recommendation we come out with tonight goes back to council salaries and grievance has been here asking for to be sent back with a recommendation I guess I misread that then that's what we had originally asked for it's basically it looks like it was making a recommendation to council no we wanted it to be debated by the committee the whole because we didn't make it take any action on it we asked the committee to come back to us so that we could then it changes my opine a little bit because I thought this was going to council on Monday right no no we have several weeks we have a good period of time to look at this just a couple points of clarification from my friend in the second row first off when I hire an employee I'm hiring them based off their qualifications that I can determine through the process we're setting a salary for something we don't even know we're setting a salary for something that's basically hired by a popular vote that the individual is going to have so that it's apples and oranges to compare me hiring anybody versus the election process secondly any first year statistic student can tell you when you're putting together a sample size to determine something 33 is the number not two you know and again if we want to say based off it essentially he's the CEO of the city or she's the CEO of the city his rate his pay should go up or her should go up $65 million budget the city has I don't know many CEOs of a company that with a $65 million budget that are making 70 grand so I mean if the argument is well we'll just pull out of there because of the job or it's not that difficult to figure it out maybe we're not paying them enough that position enough you know again that's far-fetched I understand that but to say two cities really close to us is the way to make this decision doesn't make any sense. Thank you Chairman. So the first motion to keep the mayor full time with reduced pay was just a recommendation to the citizens in grievance. Thank you just to clarify the motion on the floor is to amend the current full time document to start at 60 progress upward to that $64,000 range at 2.5 a year with benefits that's what we are at. I'd like to go back to Salary's agreement. I'd like to call the question. All in favor of calling the question. Opposed? Chair votes aye. Let's have a vote on $60,000 with benefits with a 2.5% increase and if it passes to go back to Salary in grievance. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No, no buses. So it's going back to Salary in grievance with a recommendation of $60,000 plus benefits with a 2.5% increase over the four years. I guess there's no further discussion warranted. Just aside to that if anyone has any other information before Salary's agreements if you want to get it to us, we'll forward it to the committee. If we have other examples or we have other things that we want to do, more than willing to take any input that anybody has. Well you might want to ask your new HR, you might want to ask your HR manager to do any research that you think is appropriate Alderman Raceler before your next meeting. I guess I'm looking at if someone else has some other aspects that they want to throw in like the last one that we just got and stuff like that. Or input at that meeting that night, that's fine too. We'll live in our comments. Alderman Cuth. Thank you, Chairman. Would this really need to go back to salaries and ravens? I mean, it's going to go back to your committee and then it's going to come back to this or back to the salaries and ravens, no matter what it is. Could we just skip the salaries and ravens and send it right to the council? No, that's what we voted for. And that's what we had asked for. We had asked for a recommendation back from the committee. I don't think it would have to come back to this committee again when you're done with it. It can go to the council. It'll go to the council right from salaries and ravens after January 9th. The next thing on the agenda is the next meeting date and that will be determined, I can promise you, unless there's some kind of an extreme emergency, it won't be before January. But I appreciate your attendance tonight and the attendance at the number of meetings we've had over the last few weeks. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. Motion and a second to adjourn. Thank you very much. Merry Christmas, everyone. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi.