10-24-16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 24, 2016 simple as many people believe. We need to treat those issues with the sensitivity they require but also the courage to have the conversation and understand the nuances. Race is an issue that runs through every issue we have in this community. When we start having those conversations, we will make mistakes and say things that we will learn were wrong. She encouraged everyone to up their game on this discussion including herself. With regard to this particular salary increase that is a separate issue. She stated this issue in her mind is how can we look at all these different salaries in all of these different departments the same way. That is hard to do. There is some corrective action that needed to be done to get people in -line with where they should be. For this position there are three (3) pieces of evidence that points to the fact that we should fund this increase. First, we need to look at the difference in the Clerk's position and the directors throughout the City. She stated when she first saw that $20,000 difference from the lowest paid department head and the Clerk, she asked herself is there really that much of a difference between those two (2) positions. Second, the issue of parity with other clerks around the state. That information shows the salary for our Clerk is far too low and we need to look at some kind of increase to bring it into parity. She stated she appreciated the amendment to lower the amount to look at other clerks in the area and find a place in the middle. That makes sense. Third, she stated she learned way back in 1984 the Council saw fit to say the salary for the Clerk's position is not in line with what it needs to be and there was an ordinance written to say we need to start the process for increasing that over time so that it will come into parity. They did it for one (1) year in 1984 but then was not followed through. This is something that probably happened a long time ago but it hasn't so now it warrants some bump up. Councilmember Randy Kelly stated he is in support of this raise and could go on and on about the exceptional job Clerk Fowler and her staff do every day. We have talked recently about the expanded responsibilities for Councilmembers, there are more and more meetings we have to attend and be prepared for. The Clerk's Office has to be at all of them while Councilmembers don't have to attend meetings outside of their committee. They work very hard and very well but putting that aside we should focus on the position because the reality is she may not be doing herself any political favors. This should really be brought into parity with other department heads. Councilmember Dr. Varner stated if he followed his same suggested amendment for this position, the increase would be five percent (5 %) for a $60,000 salary. That would be a $3,000 increase for this year. He stated the middle between those numbers would be $67,000 not $69,000. He stated we could get there by working our way to it over the years. Councilmember Davis stated in the paper there was a mistake and it stated he would support the $4,000 raise. He stated he would really be able to support five percent (5 %). He stated he agrees with Councilmember Dr. Varner. Given the whole concept of the fiscal cliff to give this raise would be a mistake. We know the positions we run for and the salary of that position. It would be wrong for the Council to ask for raises for ourselves or these other positions. He stated he has known three (3) clerks and if any one of them would have come to him asking for a raise he still would have felt the same way. He stated he has a big problem bringing up the diversity and inclusion issue when it comes to the fact that we have an African American in office now because then it turns into a different conversation. That is not the issue, it is the position we have to deal with. We have to' be very careful of separating race because it becomes a rift within the community. Councilmember John Voorde stated he never believed the City Clerk position was terribly underfunded to begin with. When the facts are laid out perhaps the argument is shown that the salary may have slipped somewhat to where it should be. It is very hard to separate person and position. He stated he is the one (1) who hired Clerk Fowler in his office and promoted her twice and never once has been disappointed in any of her performance. He stated Clerk Fowler continues to do an excellent job. When looking at the position itself, it does not warrant a director's position salary. He stated the Clerk supervises four (4) people but it probably ought to be three (3) because the Ordinance Violations Bureau should probably as a function be in a different department. He stated he believed that and fought to change that when he was Clerk. He stated he concedes an adjustment for the position is necessary and is glad the increase dropped but it is still about double what it warrants. The Clerk keeps accurate records for posterity and 24