 regular common council meeting to order. Will the clerk please read the quote for today. Thank you Alder Felde. When you can't find the sunshine be the sunshine. Would the clerk please call the roll? Alderperson Ackley. Alderperson Decker. Here. Alderperson Felde. Here. Alderperson Felicke Paneski. Here. Alderperson Heidemann. Here. Alderperson Mitchell. Here. Alderperson Pirella. Here. Alderperson Salazar. Here. Alderperson Rust. Here. Alderperson Ramey. Here. There are 10 present. Thank you. I ask that everyone stand for the pledge of legions if you are able. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Approval of minutes. Alderperson Felicke Paneski please. I move to approve the minutes of May 16. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Chair says aye. Motion carried. Resignation. I'm gonna call on Attorney Chuck Adams to read the resignation. Yep. Thank you, Alder Felde. There is one resignation tonight. Patricia Weisrock, who is resigning from the Board of Review, effective immediately. I move to accept the resignation and file. Second. There'll be a voice vote. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Chair votes aye. Motion carries. Mayoral appointments. Again, Attorney Chuck Adams. Yes. So the mayor provides the following appointments to the members of the Common Council submitting the following appointments for your confirmation. Alder Angela Raimi to be considered for appointment to the Public Works Committee. Alder Zach Ross to be considered for the appointment to the Architectural Review Board. Christine Campy to be considered for the appointment to the Library Board as the Sheboygan Area School District Designate. Andy Ross to be considered for the appointment to the Board of Review. Stephanie Getz to be considered for the appointment to the Senior Service Commission. James Van Ackeren to be considered for the appointment to the Sustainable Task Force. Darlin Leanna to be considered for an appointment to the Sustainable Task Force. Rebecca Clark to be considered for an appointment to the Sustainable Task Force. And Laura Hagan to be considered for appointment to the Sustainable Task Force. Thank you. That will lay over. I'm going to ask the clerk if there's anyone for public forum. No one this evening. We have a presentation compensation study review from Patrick Lynn Carlson Detman. Good evening everyone. Today we have Patrick Lynn joining us from Carlson Detman, the consultant engaged to complete a compensation study for all non-represented or non-union employees. This study touches all departments within the city from the library, city hall, public safety, transit to public works. Though Patrick will give an overview on the actual data processing and results of the study, I wanted to supply some context of how the project was completed on the city's side and why the project took longer than anticipated to complete. The original resolution had been passed by council in April of 2021. Each employee was asked to complete a job description questionnaire detailing their day-to-day job duties and responsibilities, including assigning percentages to the tasks required of them. In addition, staff was to provide information related to interactions with individuals inside and outside the organization, work environment, physical requirements, and the management role they hold. Once turned in, supervisors reviewed the questionnaires to make sure that they agreed with the information provided by the employees but also filled in additional details that included minimum education, experience and licensing required of the position. These questionnaires were then turned into human resources who was in charge of final review and submission to the consultant. In August and September, department heads met with Carlson Detman and human resources to review the questionnaires and talk through the positions to make sure that there's a clear understanding of each job. Other than working with the finance department's questionnaires, I personally was not involved in the study until October. At that time, I was pulled in for reviewing the potential financial impacts of the different options of implementation. In November, when some staff changes occurred here at the city, I stepped in as the department head lead on this project. Over the past several months, there has been continuous reviews and discussions to fine-tune the scale, calculate costs of implementation, and be sure that all positions were evaluated. In May, administrator Wolf and I met with department heads for their review of the draft schedule to make sure that their concerns were communicated to Carlson Detman before publication. Last Wednesday, I sent an email to all employees included within this study to inform them that the draft pay scale would be considered by finance and personnel tomorrow and additional communication will be coming dependent on future council action. I have been at the city for just over a year. Not only have I taken on this project for the Human Resources Department, but the finance team and I have been doing a lot of additional HR tasks to make sure the employees of the city are taken care of. It has been challenging to say the least. Due to the number of projects and tasks that have been required to be completed, this project took longer than any of us had anticipated. I understand that there has been frustration experienced by the council and employees related to this study. Please know that any lack of communication over results was not to be elusive or secretive. We wanted to make sure that the results were complete and thought through. I've spent countless hours reviewing and making sure that all the positions received the consideration they deserve. I feel confident with the efforts that have been put into this process. I know that not everyone will be happy with the results, but I do know from my experience that is normal for a compensation study or any time that wages are discussed. With that said, I believe this study can provide a baseline for the council to implementing a fair comp plan that can be built off of in the future. I will defer at this point to Administrator Wolfe if he has any additional comments. Thanks, Director Krieger. First off, I want to make sure that I express my sincere appreciations to Director Krieger. This has been, she has just been here just over a year as she had stated and for all of the work that she has put into not only this project, but the many other projects and areas as well. She has gone above and beyond the call of her job to make sure that this project made it to where it is, where we are today, where the council is able to hear the results and consider adoption. In the past, municipalities were considered to be ahead of other markets when it came to the overall compensation. Since Act 10, and the many changes that were implemented thereafter, municipalities have struggled to remain competitive in the job market, as we all know. This has been aspirated since 2010 with the market instability due to the pandemic and the great resignation creating an employees market where higher compensation is required to retain and hire new employees. During the study, we also have found that adjustments were made departmentally with human resources to create additional disparities and unbalanced scales amongst positions. Moving forward, there will be a defined process to any changes to the non-represented pay scale. This study purpose, this study's purpose, is to be sure that the city has a fair wage scale of non-represented staff compared to other similar employers. I must say that I'm very proud, again very proud to say, that we have some exceptional employees here at the city and we will not be able to serve members of our community without them and again throughout the city that includes all departments throughout the city. Please note that this process is the start of our path in taking care of our present team so that we can be competitive and attract additional talent in the future. I will now turn over to Patrick Glenn to present on the Carlson Detman process and the results of the study. Patrick? He's, he just noted he's having difficulty with his audio. He just lost the audio again. While we're waiting for Patrick to come online, this will be a slimmed down version of the overall program but the program will be sent out to all elders and the actual video site that was recorded during his original presentation and his original presentation going by memory but I believe that it's around 52 slides so this will be a slimmed down version for for the council. Thank you. Patrick we can see you and we're ready for you but I don't know if your audio appears to be off. I have somebody's got Patrick's cell phone number he just held up his telephone on the screen. I don't know that everybody can see him so I'm just giving you a play by play. He's getting a technical difficulties message. Eric do you want me to, I have, I have Patrick's cell number, should I just call it and then he can talk through myself through into the mic? Are you able to hear me now? There we go. Okay sorry about that everybody I was hearing everything and all of a sudden right in the middle of Caitlyn description to you it went completely blank so I apologize for that. I saw a message that it's up to me here. I don't have screen control so I'm going to have to do the old-fashioned next process here and I can't see the screen. Am I able to share my screen? You have just lost him. Patrick I don't know if you're seeing what I'm seeing also remotely but if you look at the WSCS screen that is the screen with your, yep. That's going to be tough to see. Trying to isolate one screen. Yeah I'm having eye issues actually right now so this is not, so I'm going to look at my presentation and talk to you at the same time here. So I apologize I didn't get a chance to hear what Scott said, I'm sorry Todd said. But I will go through this hopefully relatively quickly especially since we are kind of on a time crunch now but as we went through this process and again as Caitlyn said you know I don't think anyone necessarily thrilled with the pace that things went but sometimes that's the way things go in this sort of a project especially when we have turnover of staff throughout. But I think what's important as we look at this is in terms of talking about what the process is all about and what it's not about and I think especially from the standpoint of framing expectations and managing those that we went through this whole process to look at every single job non-represented job for that matter as it relates to job content. Regardless of you know the individual's performance in that job looking at the content of that particular position looking at the marketplace and helping devise a competitive position and then designing a pace structure that takes both factors into consideration both of the internal and the external factors. I think what's just as important as what the process is not about and one we're not looking at how many jobs the city should have whether it's a department or as a whole and that goes hand in hand with the workloads of those departments. Certainly something that has been discussed and will be discussed for probably time in memorial but this is not a workload analysis not a performance review and nor is it an opportunity to cut wages by needing given employees and so we want to make certain that we are covering that and as we go through this sometimes just taking a peek at the employee level demographic someone can change the slide here. As every project we look at two two main cuts of information. This is the first one being the age of the employees and I would say age profiles. It helps give us a snapshot in terms of what the organization is up against as it relates to the the turnover related to to retirement. I would say that probably the first number I would look at is that cumulative percentage at least 30 percent of your employees are aged 55 or older. Again about a third of your workforce is expected to retire at some point in the not too distant future. Of course I always say that the eligibility to retire and the ability to retire the desire to retire are all different factors but again as we kind of look at what's anticipated that's an important number and if we look at age 50 or older kind of those who have retirement at least on the horizon and for an organization to begin planning succession planning those sorts of things. So over 40 percent of your organization is kind of on that track and this is not uncommon I would say that about five years ago that number was tracking closer to 50 percent across our public sector base and over the last several years especially during the pandemic we saw a much larger number of retirees and so about 40 percent is tracking with the rest of our public sector project. As it relates to years of service it's another metric that we try to track looking at this and again the average 10-year in organizations if you look at the BLS data is roughly five years of employment and so when we see that next slide please as we see that and we talk about it less than five years of service at about 38 percent. Again our public sector metrics that we track is somewhere between 35 and 40 percent but again our reason for doing that and there are many reasons why employees stay with an organization. Being one of those factors culture opportunities for advancements you can keep going down the list of various things like people might stay with an organization but having a competitive pay structure is probably one of those key things that reduces that temptation for people to look for alternative employment and so we want to make certain that from both of these factors you want to have a competitive wage structure for the anticipated recruitment you're going to be engaged in as well as the existing employees and try to retain them in their slide and so when we do this we look at a number of factors and if we can skip ahead a couple of slides here to the total reward slide that when we look at this our practice we look at this through the lens of total reward like any other consultant who does this work should be doing and I believe most do that we look at it through the lens or our three-legged tool I would say of compensation benefits in the employee experience. The primary focus of this project was the employee compensation piece and again as we talked about before internal equity the external competitiveness and making certain that we marry those two things together using a common system that's not to say that benefit or experience aren't important they're incredibly important and I would say that even even to the point of being equally important but our primary if not exclusive focus in this project was the compensation side of things and in doing so and then we talk about a compensation program you know we we talk about a few things and if we look at the next slide here we want to make certain that we're aligning with the organizational strategy and I think the first thing is that you want to be able to attract and retain qualified talent oftentimes we hear things like the best and brightest those sorts of grandiose terms oftentimes to find their way into a strategic plan or of sorts I think at the minimum being able to attract qualified talent and quality talent is a good starting point when again we talked about equity we talked about competitiveness we also want to make certain that you're supporting the employees as it relates to growth whether it is performance and that's not necessarily the focus of this process and we'll talk about that in a little bit here but also as employees duties and responsibilities shift the ability to have those jobs evaluated and reviewed as much as I say that compensation is a primary focus of this study still need to have the conversation as it relates to those other two pieces the benefits and the culture of the organization they can't be swept under the rug but but again it's a comprehensive approach that that really needs to be looked at we want to make certain that you're legally sound that you're not taking illegal factors into account we'll talk about affordability as we weave our way through this understandable but also something that you look at on a semi-regular basis you know in in good times you know every three four years might be fine as it relates to measuring the marketplace as it relates to an overall comprehensive study hopefully this has a shelf life of at least a decade if it's again maintained and we'll talk about what it takes to maintain a structure something that is reviewed on a periodic basis to make certain that you are aligning with the marketplace and in doing so and if I again I'll skip ahead here to a couple slides it's part of our process again we work challenge with reviewing each of the jobs and getting the job documentation to review that in in doing so we we apply our point factor job evaluation system to look at every single one of the jobs and in in our system there are five factors that we look at and again if you can skip ahead a couple slides please that every job we go through a series of factors and in this particular case are five main factors that really where we are doing our work are in the 11 sub-vectors that occur so looking at the thinking challenges and problems that we are at or that you are asking employee to resolve in the course of their work and then once you have a set of information or begin to establish those parameters in terms of thinking challenges then we look at what decisions are they empowered to make and over what portion of the organization are they allowed to make decisions and in what role are they playing in that decision-making process are they contributing information are they contributing you know input and actually participating in that decision-making process are they indeed the final decision maker we also look at the the interactions communications of that classification engagement you know again the setting is it fairly limited to quite expansive and again each one of these has a spectrum or continuum of a rating level that we can apply and appropriately evaluating each job and with the interactions the second portion of that is what is the impact of their communication in the flow of information or data or the like in the organization then those last two elements that we look at are probably the more traditional things that people think of what is the work environment and what are the hazard factors that that might apply to that job as well as the physical requirements of the job and then that last piece the formal education or preparation and experience required to qualify for that job and again we're not looking necessarily at the individual qualifications of each and every employee well that can be useful and I can oftentimes provide us some guidance we are looking at the from the lens of if you were to fill that job's moral what would you require and so when we do that and if we can thank you that as we look at this this is just a sample organization each one of these rating levels has a number and a letter or a couple of letters that really do mean something to us it looks like a jumble of alphabet number soup up here but you know for example that supervisory classification kind of in the middle of those jobs that 6d in formal preparation and experience for example is a bachelor's degree in four to five years of experience you know one l essentially being that the profile for an office job for work environment so again each one of those has a letter or number each of those letters and numbers has a point value attached to it which we can then begin to build that hierarchy can so you can see those those numbers on the right hand side for total points that we can begin to build your organizational structure based on those point values now every once in a while we have to take other factors into consideration the two primary things that we have to look at at times are internal compression salary compression this almost always occurs within the police and fire ranks with the city every once in a while other jobs but again we want to make certain that we have those aligned appropriately especially as you look at trying to incentivize or encourage employees to promote through the ranks in those particular roles on the other ones would be market every once in a while we will get a job where the market for that particular role is so far above and beyond that which we would otherwise place based on job evaluation that we have to take that into consideration again being very mindful of that but if i look at this next slide you know this is just a snapshot of your organization's current pay practices for the benchmark jobs when i talk about a benchmark job it's a job that we can confidently find in the marketplace where there's consistent matches from one organization to the next oftentimes cities sometimes you know if i would say largely cities but there are a number of jobs that might have also applicability to the private sector as well especially as when you get to a lot of your office roles or some of your blue collar positions but my first observation and if i look at this is that going across the bottom is our observation which is the point factor job evaluation scores for each of those jobs going up the left hand side of that chart is the current pay for employees and by and large the organization is situated pretty well as it relates to internal equity yes there's variance off that line and quite honestly there will always be variance off that line because you're you're looking at individual pay as opposed to the pay structure itself but it appears very clearly that as jobs increase in responsibility and in education or environment there's a corresponding increase in in compensation so this is usually a good place to start when we see that there's at least some relationship to the way we view the world and and way you've compensated those positions and as we look at this and then with the next slide here you know there are many reasons why a number might vary from that line whether it's the market education the location in some organizations where location is definitely a factor 10-year job evaluation points performance but the thing that we are not taking into consideration i think it's quite important are any of the illegal factors such as race age or sex and in fact i think we kind of every once in a while we'll have the opportunity to to work for an organization in minnesota and the reason why i like that is in the public sector in minnesota they have pay equity legislation that requires the job evaluation system to be validated to ensure that it's not taking any illegal factors into account and we're quite proud of the fact that when when we do have those projects that we pass with flying colors for that particular testing process in terms of the marketplace i think one of the things that we we've talked about quite extensively in our work is that there are really two marketplaces that we're talking about there's a ton of overlap between the two but that that notion of the comparable marketplace you know who is like us who have we traditionally compared ourselves to a lot of times that is you know if back to the bargaining days you know who are the comparable for that perspective who is like you as it relates to the population who's like you as it relates to other you know things such as property valuation those sorts of things but the other factor is is a competitive marketplace in which you're situated and again i don't need to to tell you where you're situated you know that quite well but the reality is sitting between you know milwaukee and green bay there are abundance of opportunities for employees and for employment and so making certain that we're taking that into account as well as we're looking at this as well as the fact that for many of your classifications especially i would say for your advanced technical your professional even your supervisor your management job that marketplace might be a little bit more broad than just a local area and so as we look at the you know this next slide we had a very comprehensive listing of communities to which we drew comparisons what i forgot to include on here but is included are the immediate surrounding counties you know for some of those roles making certain that we included county level data for jobs like you know street flavor and those sorts of roles because again that's a highly competitive role we want to make certain that we're capturing that we also for jobs that where there are private sector on equivalence or at least semi-equivalent in some cases you know we're very careful about doing so but we have other data at our disposal your bureau of labor statistics publishes data pay factors count data will have powers Watson are all sources that we pay for and make certain that again they're aligning with the particular roles to which we're matching and then for a handful of your jobs the american waterworks association also conducts a salary survey that we're able to use for some of your your water and wastewater jobs within the city and so in doing so our next view of the world is a very similar graph a little bit different line here and this is just simply the same exact job that you saw in that prior graph but instead of your current pay what we're substituting on this particular graph is the market rates of pay for those various classifications and my first observation as we look at this is it's very tight to the line we're happy when that happens it gives us a high degree of confidence in the model that we're using to build your compensation structure and we can then come back to you with a pretty high degree of confidence we start recommending pay practices or design of a pay structure one of the things i think is important if we can go to this next slide here it's a little bit busy but i'll walk through it because i think it's important that we look at your pay from a couple different angles and we want to do this quite extensively with the finance committee but that gray line is are your current i'm sorry is the average 50th percentile marketplace or the median marketplace also is also known as that when we talk about the median marketplace we talked about half of the organization's paying more half of the organization's paying less that's just by definition what the median entails that black line is your current rates of pay so if you look at that your current pay is slightly ever so slightly above the market in effect i would tell you that that's both close to being dead on the market as you're going to get is it's in our observation that your pay structure has been tested to its limits where your your current employees are being paid fairly i mean there's no question about that but at the same time you're you're in a highly competitive marketplace and as katelyn alluded to in her introductory comments and we've talked about these roles we talked about the market quite extensively over the last several months and one of the things that was apparent to us is you are you're experiencing difficulty in recruiting and retaining employees and i don't think you're any different than most employers out there and so as we talked about this we had to devise a methodology to give you a competitive compensation structure i think the first thing that i would say and i will see this in a some moments during a different slide but we know that the market's going to continue to move it has moved quite extensively um probably to the point at times where our surveys and our own data collection can't always keep up and if i were to recommend a structure to you three years ago or if i were to do it in the future you know three years from now i would have recommended quite confidently the 50th percentile of the median marketplace knowing that we are in a state of change and we know that the public sector is going to be i would say this fall is going to be having very deliberate conversations in the various um council chambers county board rooms whatever it might be that how are we going to continue to compete as budgets are developed and so in this case i also show two other lines on this graph the green line is indicative of the 75th percentile of the marketplace basically um 75 percent of the organizations are going to pay less than that line 25 percent are going to pay more that's pretty close to the upper bound that we traditionally worry about is usually the maximum of a pay structure is said at the 75th percentile our recommendation for this structure you know we'll talk about this in a little bit more detail is taking the 75th percentile in the 50th percentile data and averaging those kind of give you that little nudge towards market competitive and the example i used when we were discussing with the committee the other evening and i think it is a pretty apt um comparison is that just imagine that you were watching a race in my in fact i i thought about this when my son was running tracks this last spring that you know you would watch a kid go out and and go gangbusters you know for the first you know half a laugh or full laugh and you think to yourself you know okay the pack is going to catch up to them and lo and behold the pack catches up to them i i i view this being exactly the same approach is that i'm reasonably confident that the pack even placing this at the blue line that average of the 50th and 75th if we were to fast forward a year to two years i truly do believe that the pack is going to catch up to you and if we were to reassess the market at that point you're going to be a lot closer to the median market by establishing your pay structure at that blue line and it's not putting the foot completely on the gas that that green line would indicate so i spent a little bit of time on this but i think it's also necessary to know why we're recommending what it is we are recommending and if i go to slide 20 here this is probably a good example world at work which is our professional association for compensation professionals is they do a survey every couple years and they ask organizations about their pay practices and the goal for most organizations in this particular case about 77 percent of organizations have the goal of building their structure at the 50th percentile you have another 11 percent that are going above that and what you will see that in practice again the best of intention sometimes doesn't always lead to you know actual practice you know that two-thirds of organizations roughly are actually building their structures at the 50th percentile but you're seeing a few more kind of nudge upward i would also note that as we were coming out of the pandemic shirms society of human resources management last summer wrote an article kind of on the after effects of the pandemic as it relates to compensation or one of the things that they indicated and I think it aligns with what we're trying to do is that maybe for the time being the 50th percentile isn't the ideal marker for building a pay structure again with the pressures we're seeing what we're we're trying to do the best we can to keep organizations in a competitive position in terms of the structure itself there's a few things I want to touch on first of all traditionally we would if I were to pull a pay plan off the shelf in terms of the structure it would normally be an 11 step structure from with two and a half percent steps five steps below the midpoint five steps above would take an employee approximately um 10 years to get from minimum to maximum because we are keenly aware of the the financial challenges organizations are facing and the desire to have a plan with longer shelf life and knowing that structural increases have to be balanced with with movement through the structure and I the next slide we'll talk about that but in terms of design itself we do firmly believe that employees starting at the minimum and we know that the minimum is not always oh we go back to five here I'm sorry it's not always possible to start an employee at the minimum but doing so getting employees to that midpoint that control point well that's what cp stands for it's about a four to six year window is important to be have a competitive structure after that um it's not uncommon even in a performance-based world to slow down after the midpoint of a structure and that's why we made the decision to recommend for the the final steps of the structure at one or a quarter percent and you know certainly as as you get more adept at managing the structure and managing the plan there are things that can be done to build performance elements in this you know where maybe you know or employees can can advance a little bit more rapidly through the structure based on set criteria I don't think that we in fact I know we don't believe that you're there quite yet but it's something that certainly can be considered in terms of the the numbers that you see at the top in terms of 90 percent to 115 percent mathematically that's intended to represent the 25th percentile through the 75th percentile of the marketplace so you're competing in that sweet spot of the market that we're always looking to compete in and so one of the reasons why we try to do that so if I now if I go to that next slide in terms of the challenges that there are two types of increases that organizations especially in a step based structure need to be taken into consideration that first one at green the the structural adjustments every year you know that conversation of how much is the market moved you know do we do cpi do we do some other number and I would argue that cpi isn't always the only in fact it is not the only metric you should be taking into consideration it is a number that's not the only number that we need to look at but that purpose of providing that structural increase is to keep your entire structure competitive for the outside marketplace if wages in general are increasing by two percent if you don't apply that then you begin to gradually flip in the marketplace to provide more than that obviously you know put yourself in maybe a more advantageous position the the yellow is indicative of the employee individual employees moving through that structure so from step to step normally in a step structure it's an annual step movement assuming the employee has performed adequately for the prior year but you can also look at it from the lens of performance and some other factors and arguably an employee who navigates their way from the minimum to the maximum has continued at the very least to demonstrate acceptable performance for the organization if they're not performing acceptably I think that's a different conversation and we would strongly advocate for policies that retain the ability for the city to withhold a step increase if the employee is not performing acceptably if we look at the the next slide here every once in a while we'll get a question or an observation from a department from an employee that well I'm I'm just gonna use some examples here I'm placed at grade 10 I think I should be at grade 11 we don't disagree that that is something that we we need to have tidied up or tightened up as much as possible in the final deliberation of this but if you'll notice that there is a significant amount of overlap from one grade to the next and so if I channel our our prior one of our company founders on Charlie Carlson he would often talk about that there's no point factor system that's so perfect that you can't be one grade off and that's why we want to ensure that we have overlap between those grades so it's not a travesty if a job is misplaced in one grade now if it's two or three or four grades then we really have some work we need to do and I don't think we're giving you anything that that is is indeed the case but I just wanted to make certain that you understood in terms of of the structure itself that there is sufficient overlap between those two to put you in a position where we hope jobs are placed appropriately and if we need to make adjustments we certainly can at some point where the work really begins I think where a lot of our conversations have have occurred especially as Kate almost brought more and more into this process is that the implementing the structure is oftentimes where the frustrations or the questions arise you know so I have not yet had a structure in the typical public sector I've had a couple utilities where budget really wasn't a big concern to every world everywhere else I go that the budget is indeed whether it's levy limits expenditure restraints what have you you're dealing with a finite pool of funds and trying to be fair is certainly the goal of this process you know whether somebody is happy with the final results I certainly hope they are thrilled when employees are happy with the final results but I also know that what makes one employee happy might upset somebody else and so again we're focused quite a bit on this notion of fairness and as we look at that you know sometimes there are some things that we're not able to take into account or you know in my job I have at the maximum from you know if I look at paid pay range maximum today to the the proposed plan I might have $5,000 more earning potential than what I had before unfortunately due to budget that's not something that you just are able to move and accomplish overnight usually there's a there's a planned approach to to meet those dollars out over the course of time and have employees move through that structure and the same token will blanket service is incredibly hard to recognize to the full extent for many of the same reasons that you're dealing with a limited pool of funds and so in doing so and we have talked about these options exhaustively internally is trying to find out a way of being fair and recognizing some of those concerns that I just got done talking about with your available funds and so you know we often describe it as you know as I say here doing as much as you can with what you have and so coming up with an option set of options for for doing that so if I talk about that costing we can go to the next slide here that the numbers provided here and I'll elect Caitlyn talk a little bit more Caitlyn or Todd talk a little bit more about these but if we were to simply implement the structure just providing an increase in pay and what I mean by that is if an employee is currently paid $25 and the step in the structure that provides an increase in pay is $25.01 under this first line here the employee moved to 2501 not ideal and and certainly can be challenging by the same token that if at 2501 I've been there you know 20 been with the city for 20 years but that's the step that provides an increase that would be the placement even if it was step two or even step one of the structure again not ideal so if we look at that second line the proposed implementation is trying to take a little bit of both in the consideration and as we talk about this the separation between the long-term employees and the newer employees and there's always a a a cut point here is that if employees have at least five years of service to the city that placing them on the structure at step five at a minimum begins to provide that separation and and some and there is some value you know seniority and tenure certainly are not the only factors um but we we're talking about this um we're on slide 25 um so as we look at this and if we go to the last slide here it is a delicate balancing act in terms of what we are trying to accomplish you know we want to be you know we talked about these these concepts you know quite exhaustively here you want to be equitable you know has that internal hierarchy been designed in such a fashion that jobs you know appropriately are layered as are duties and responsibilities are you competitive with the outside marketplace and we talked a lot about you know competitiveness and the need for maybe a sharper eye toward competitiveness in today's marketplace supportiveness and we again we talked about that those are the three main factors I think employees are focused on first and foremost um certainly the other factors come into play the last three I even though I would argue that I think everyone's concerned about all of these that is it affordable you know that at first pass through year one can you afford the dollars to implement it that's usually an easier conversation than the next line sustainable is it something that year over year over year um is it going to be able to be sustained by the organization and I will tell you that every single organization that I work with or even those that I don't work with that have a pay structure the sustainability of a compensation structure in the face of of fairly high inflation and as other costs are increasing it's going to be a challenge I just don't want to kind of brush that under the rug but if we've met those goals and if we identify those and then tackle those hopefully it's something that you can sign your name to and and adopt the structure so that's what I I always ask to kind of keep it at a fairly high level I don't present anything else that I need to address um Caitlyn Todd as I touched on what you you thought I needed to this evening thank you Patrick I appreciate your help presenting the results we will be sending out the PowerPoint and also the long version like Todd said to Patrick's presentation which goes into a little bit of the detail on specifics and I would just say that anybody on the council if you have any concerns questions that those can be forwarded to either myself or administrator will thank you Patrick for your time that's it that's it thank you thank you have a good evening everyone okay moving on to consent um items nine through 20 on the consent consent agenda we'll call on Alderperson Flicky Paninsky for a motion file all ROs reports of officers receive all reports of committees and adopt all resolutions and ordinances second this is going to be a roll call vote Alderperson Ackley Alderperson Decker aye Alderperson Feldy aye Alderperson Flicky Paneski aye Alderperson Heidemann Alderperson Mitchell aye Alderperson Pirella aye Alderperson Salazar aye Alderperson Rust aye Alderperson Raimi aye 10 ayes all right moving on to report of officers RO number 18 through 22 by city plan commission to whom was referred RO number 10 22 23 by capital improvements commission to whom was referred RO number 122 23 by city administrator Todd Wolk submitting capital improvements program CIP request for the year 2023 through 20 27 recommends approving the CIP request i'm going to call for a motion from Alderperson Mitchell thank you chair i move to receive the RO and approve the request second i'm gonna call for a roll call vote Alderperson Ackley aye Alderperson Decker aye Alderperson Feldy aye Alderperson Flicky Paneski aye Alderperson Heidemann aye Alderperson Mitchell aye Alderperson Pirella aye Alderperson Salazar Alderperson Rust aye Alderperson Raimi 10 ayes okay items 22 through oh are we done sorry items 22 and through 24 will be referred to their committees resolutions items 25 through 31 will be referred to committees and then we're on report of committees roll call vote for for resolution RC number sorry 26 through 22 23 by finance and personnel committee Alderperson Mitchell thank you chair i move to receive the RC and adapt the resolution with stack recommendations as presented second okay roll call vote Alderperson Ackley aye Alderperson Decker aye Alderperson Feldy aye Alderperson Flicky Paneski aye Alderperson Heidemann aye Alderperson Mitchell aye Alderperson Pirella i think i'm going to abstain on this okay Alderperson Salazar aye Alderperson Rust aye Alderperson Raimi aye it's nine ayes one abstain motion carries um number 33 RC number 27 22 23 by finance and personnel committee to whom was referred i'm going to call for a motion from um Alderperson tray Mitchell thank you chair i move to receive the RC and adapt the resolution as amended second roll call vote Alderperson Ackley aye Alderperson Decker aye Alderperson Feldy aye Alderperson Flicky Paneski aye Alderperson Heidemann aye Alderperson Mitchell aye Alderperson Pirella aye Alderperson Salazar aye Alderperson Rust aye Alderperson Raimi aye 10 ayes thank you um i'm going to call for a motion to convene in closed session i'm going to call on Alderperson um Flicky Paneski um i moved to convene in closed session under the exemption provided by the Wisconsin statutes 19.851g for the purpose of conferring with legal counsel for the governmental body who is rendering oral or written advice concerning strategy to be adopted by the body with respect to litigation in which it is or is likely to become involved and under the exemption provided in wisconsin statutes 19.851f for the purpose of considering financial social or personal histories or disciplinary data of specific persons which if discussed in public would be likely to have a substantial adverse effect upon the reputation of any person referred to in such histories or data to wit consideration of the matter of pavago h hernandez versus the city of shabuigan police department erd case number cr202101990 eoc case number 26g 202200011c this will be this will be a roll call vote we have to do both i i would i would suggest that alder flicky paneski also um make the second motion and then you vote on them together thank you all right we're going to follow his recommendation right second motion i moved to convene in closed session under the exemption provided in wisconsin statutes 19.851g for the purpose of conferring with legal counsel for the governmental body who is rendering oral or written advice concerning strategy to be adopted by the body with respect to litigation in which it is or is likely to become involved and under the exemption provided in wisconsin statutes 19.851f for the purpose of considering financial medical social or personal histories or disciplinary data of specific persons which if discussed in public would be likely to have a substantial adverse effect upon the reputation of any person referred to in such histories or data to wit consideration of the matter of vicki a schneider versus the city of shabuigan erd case number cr 202200171 eoc case number 26g 202200443 second roll call vote all the person accley hi all the person decker hi all the person felli hi all the person flicky paneski hi all the person heidemann hi all the person michael hi all the person perella hi all the person salazar hi all the person rust hi all the person ramey hi ten eyes thank you um next on the agenda is a journey to meeting but we are going into closed session and we will not convene after closed sessions that will end our broadcast thank you everyone for coming