The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About110921 Packet SALARY COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA November 9, 2021 | 3:00 p.m. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 540 Water Street • Join virtually via computer or tablet at http://joinwebinar.com enter the 9 digit Webinar ID 578- 066-435 • Join by phone in listen-only mode United States: Local Dial In – (360) 390-5064 (Ext. 1 Council) access code: 942-105-283# • Submit public comment emails to be included in the meeting record to: publiccomment@cityofpt.us I. Approval of Agenda II. Approval of Minutes – November 9, 2021 III. Public Comment (3 minutes per person) IV. Commission Business a. Draft report b. Report presentation plan V. Set Agenda for Next Meeting – November 23, 2021 VI. Confirm Next Scheduled Meeting VII. Adjourn DRAFT CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MINUTES OF THE SALARY COMMISSION OCTOBER 26, 2021 CALL TO ORDER The Port Townsend Salary Commission met on Tuesday, October 26, 2021, virtually in the City Council Chambers at 540 Water Street. Chair Deborah Stinson called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m. Other members present were Jack McCreary, Kristine Morris, George Randels, and Julia Cochrane. Also present: Heidi Greenwood, City Attorney and Nora Mitchell, Director of Finance and Administrative Services APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Commission approved the minutes of the October 12, 2021 meeting. DISCUSSION Chair Stinson began by explaining the Commission had information from two additional cities, Anacortes and Woodinville. Chair Stinson also shared some further research about the City of Port Townsend Council salaries. The member salary of $500 went into effect in 2005 after 2 years of $125 increments from $250 and remained since 2006. The $750 for Mayor was implemented in 2004. The Port Townsend salary was set in 2003 and the deferred compensation plan was added in 2007. The Commissioners then shared their individual recommendations. The recommendations ranged from $675 to $1600 per month for Council members and $1000 to $1600 per month for the mayor. Some Commissioners also recommended possible annual adjustments ranging from 1% annually to 4.6% biannually. The Commissioners then discussed the various numbers and agreed to apply the annual consumer price index increases since 2007 to the current council salaries and use a round number. The Commission preliminarily agreed that the 2022 mayor salary should be $1025 per month and Council member salary should be $700 per month. They also agreed on an 2.3% annual increase that would be awarded in even number years upon the seating of a new Council. Finally, the Commissioner Morris moved and Commissioner McCreary seconded DRAFT a motion to appoint Chair Stinson and Commissioner Randels to create a draft Commission report for the Commission to review at their next meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT - NONE SET AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING AND FUTURE MEETING SCHEDULE The Commission plans to discuss the draft Commission report at their meeting on November 9, 2021 at 3:00 pm. The meeting will be held virtually. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:56 p.m. Memo to Members of the PT Salary Commission From The Drafting Subcommittee – Deb and George November 4, 2021 Re: Draft Documents Deborah and George here, with a package for your consideration. Accompanying this memo are two sets of documents reflecting our decisions last week by putting those decisions in context via a) a “determination” constituting the narrow dollar amounts to be submitted to the City Clerk for implementation in January of next year and in January of each subsequent even-numbered year, and b) an explanatory memo intended to report to City Council, other City officials and the public on the Salary Commission’s discussions, research, deliberations and ultimately decisions as we carried out our responsibilities. Why two sets? Well, after seeing how our conclusions would appear, and be explained, using the “exact math” approach to salary amounts in future years, we concluded that the idea of rounding those numbers should be revisited and reconsidered. We should emphasize that if we did go to a rounding approach, it should be in both directions, either up or down, and not biased in either direction alone. Our concerns were based on two elements: First, if we use the “exact math” approach we think that the determination document filed with the Clerk would be potentially confusing to readers, either because an explanatory paragraph such as the one which addresses those future adjustment in the draft accompanying Version One of our decision package draft (italicized in the Version One draft provided in this week’s meeting package) or, instead, which would simply list the odd numbers that result from the calculations (e.g., $1122.60/month for the mayor in 2026). Using rounding, instead, would result simply listing $1125/month for that slot. It’s a difference of $2.40 a month – half a latte – which we think well worth having numbers that won’t elicit a “huh?” when used, as these are, in public. So… Version One reflects the precise instruction to the subcommittee in preparing draft documents to reflect the completion of our work. Version Two reflects the same information with the exception of including the rounding feature for those salary levels to be applied in future years. That version assumes that the “nearest $25” option would be the one chosen, but if it’s preferred we have come up with a “nearest $10” option and adjusting the documents to move to that option will be easily done. See the chart reflecting past CPI data and all of these options for future adjustments for a fuller picture of what “rounding” means and how closely they parallel the “exact math” approach. The italicized text in all versions highlight the differences. We look forward to settling this aspect and, hopefully, proceeding to finish up the Commission’s work oat our meeting on November 9. Version ONE Determination We the members of the City of Port Townsend Salary Commission, which was formed as of _______, ___, 2021 under the provisions of RCW __________ and after being appointed and confirmed by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Port Townsend, having addressed the issue of setting salaries for City Council members and for persons designated to serve as Mayor during the period 2022 through 2028, and after several meetings to consider said issue, have unanimously determined that those holding these positions during said years should receive salaries as designated below: First, initial salaries, to become effective for the month of January, 2022 or such date as the determinations outlined herein have become final, whichever occurs later, shall be $700 for City Council members and $1025 for that member of City Council chosen by the Council as a whole to serve as Mayor. Second, at the end of 2022 and each year thereafter until 2028, the preceding salary designations shall be increased by 2.3 percent; provided, however, that the amounts paid to Member and Mayor recipients shall not be paid the increased amounts until two years (and two computations) have elapsed, thus making new payment levels take effect in January of 2024, 2026 and 2028 at the new amounts that these computations produce. Respectfully submitted this ___ day of __________, 2021, to the Clerk of the City of Port Townsend for final implementation. ________________________ Deborah Stinson, Chair 2021 Port Townsend Salary Commission, on her own behalf and on behalf of members Kristine Morris, Jack McCreary, Julia Cochrane and George Randels Version TWO Determination We the members of the City of Port Townsend Salary Commission, which was formed as of _______, ___, 2021 under the provisions of RCW __________ and after being appointed and confirmed by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Port Townsend, having addressed the issue of setting salaries for City Council members and for persons designated to serve as Mayor during the period 2022 through 2028, and after several meetings to consider said issue, have unanimously determined that those holding these positions during said years should receive salaries as designated below: First, initial salaries, to become effective for the month of January, 2022 or such date as the determinations outlined herein have become final, whichever occurs later, shall be $700 for City Council members and $1025 for that member of City Council chosen by the Council as a whole to serve as Mayor. Second, salaries thereafter shall be adjusted according to the following schedule: January 2024: Member $725, Mayor $1075 January 2026: Member $775, Mayor $1125 January 2028: Member $800, Mayor $1175 Respectfully submitted this ___ day of __________, 2021, to the Clerk of the City of Port Townsend for final implementation. ________________________ Deborah Stinson, Chair 2021 Port Townsend Salary Commission, on her own behalf and on behalf of members Kristine Morris, Jack McCreary, Julia Cochrane and George Randels 1 Port Townsend Salary Commission VERSION ONE Draft Explanatory Statement [date] M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Manager John Mauro Finance Director Nora Mitchell City Attorney Heidi Greenwood City Clerk Joanna Sanders City Council Members City Council Members-Elect FROM: City of Port Townsend Salary Commission through its Chairperson, Deborah Stinson SUBJECT: Salary Commission Determination for Council Members’ and Mayor’s Salary Levels, 2022-28 In the summer of 2021 the Mayor Michelle Sandoval proposed, and the Council confirmed, the appointment of five Port Townsend citizens – Deborah Stinson, Jack McCreary, Kristine Morris, Julia Cochrane and George Randels – to serve on a Salary Commission (“the Commission”) which, under state law, was charged with assessing salaries paid by the city to elected Council member and to that Council member named, from time to time, to serve as Mayor of Port Townsend, and authorized the Salary Commission to adjust salary levels in the present and for a period of seven years to come. What follows is the Commission’s report outlining and explaining its processes, deliberations and determination. Our final conclusions have been submitted this day to the City Clerk, as proscribed by the state law authorizing the Salary Commission process. The Commission’s determinations were approved unanimously by its members, and they all endorse this memorandum as well. On August 16, 2021, we met in person, accompanied by the City Clerk, the City Attorney, and the City Finance Director, during which Deborah Stinson was chosen to serve as Chair. City officials briefed us on our responsibilities, and the scope of, and the limits on, that authority. We learned at this meeting that salary levels for the designated officials had been set approximately 14 years ago and had remained static throughout the intervening years. We began discussing how to proceed in carrying out our responsibilities. At our initial meeting several of our members asked whether we were allowed to consider items beyond salary payments, such as health insurance or other fringe benefits. We were advised that the measure adopted to form the Commission did not authorize such additional considerations. (Later, when we met with sitting members of City Council, several of them also referenced the health insurance question in particular as a major consideration but one which all involved acknowledged to have 2 complications that do not have easy solutions.) We recommend that this issue remain on the table and that consideration be given to broadening the coverage if possible, unless, as many hope, events in the other Washington, or perhaps in Olympia, might make this superfluous. We also learned that state law does not permit our using an index, such as the US Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index, to adjust salaries in the future but we could require such adjustments either with arbitrary increases or by applying an historical percentage based on past inflation. Subsequent meetings were held virtually on a bi-weekly basis. All meetings were announced in advance and carried out electronically with normal provisions for attendance by the public to participate and/or observe the Commission’s work. Initial decisions made were to identify possible areas where research might be useful in carrying out our responsibilities, including: • cost-of-living changes during the period when these salaries were unchanged • salaries for these officials in comparable communities • particulars about time required to carry out the functions of the offices in question • salaries received by members of governing boards of other public bodies in Jefferson County • city budget history and particulars as they might pertain to the Commission’s work Commissioners also shared the values, philosophies, and practical considerations that they would bring to the discussions and decision-making processes on which we were embarking. There was substantial consensus that while Port Townsend had been fortunate to have a history of dedicated, thoughtful members on its governing body, and while the membership over the years had had a reasonably robust diversity of members, nevertheless, salary levels for these positions needed to be high enough so as not to disincentivize people of limited means from putting themselves forward to serve. Several Commission members stressed this concern and their hope to foster economic diversity on the Council. Commissioners wanted to be cognizant of, and sensitive to, the fact that our determinations should be made in the context of how they might affect the fiscal impact on the overall city budget. We saw our work as trying to set a level of investment in attracting high quality members of the Council but doing so in full awareness that every city dollar spent is an investment, in one way or another, in the community’s many priorities. Undervaluing the work and responsibility of these community leaders risks a less dedicated, experienced or thoughtful legislative body, but on the other hand setting remuneration levels too high could result in constraining budgetary resources and impinging on the city’s ability to provide municipal services that our citizens rightly expect. We knew we would be 3 seeking a balance among those interests that, while unquantifiable, might meet the “I’ll know it when I see it” test. Having identified data which we thought might help us find that balance point and articulated some of the core principles we would hope to apply, we set a plan for proceeding. Included was a division of labor for the needed research, with individual commissioners volunteering for one or more of the categories. City staff also agreed to help in the research effort, providing information from city budget and other financial records and in several other ways facilitating the collection and presentation of information. We also decided that some of the best expertise available to help put our responsibility in context would be the seven individuals presently serving on City Council. What did they think about the job’s workload, about the level of compensation, and did they have specific suggestions that might help us as we addressed our work? We decided to ask them to appear before us, individually, and share their knowledge and opinions. The next several meetings of the Commission put the plan into action. Data that was gathered were presented to our membership, refined, and assessed. Two meetings were devoted to the dialogue with present Council members. We found them very valuable and we are very grateful for the contributions from all seven of these individuals. Our October 12 meeting was devoted to letting each Commission member provide, in as much detail as she or he thought appropriate, those principles and philosophies considered most important for our deliberation, along with his or her assessment of the data our research had produced. We were pleased that there was unanimity among us concluding that while it was a good exercise to seek the volume of data we did, in the end two elements from our data collection stood out as by far the most important: cost-of-living information, and remuneration for comparable officials in comparable cities. Salary levels for other governing bodies such as PUD, Port, Hospital, School or Fire districts were difficult to compare. Those salaries are set by either the state legislature and are based on a per diem or per meeting basis, or in the case of County Commissioners, aligned with state judges. Additionally, all these bodies have fewer members and, in some cases, provide healthcare benefits on top of the mandated salaries. The job of a City Councilor, we felt, is sufficiently unique that comparisons to other boards or governing bodies were imprecise and thus of minimal value. All data collected and analyzed for comparison purposes can be found in the commission’s records. The cost-of-living and comparable cities information is included in an addendum to this memo. We hope that this report and all commission worksheets will be made available to future Salary 4 Commissions (if this process continues statewide and in Port Townsend), and we have asked that city officials take steps to help ensure that this record will be available to our successors. For this and other reasons, we also recommend that future mayors give serious consideration to appointing at least one member of a previous Salary Commission to future iterations to help provide institutional memory and continuity. At the end of that October 12 meeting, we decided to ask each Commission member to return at the next meeting with a specific proposal for the group to consider. The rationale was that these proposals would serve to spur and focus our deliberations and, hopefully, assist in reaching conclusions at that meeting, which took place on October 26. At that meeting, members were somewhat surprised when four of us proposed determinations very similar to each other and, ultimately, very close to our final judgment as well. The fifth member’s recommendation included a higher base salary plus a proposed “per diem” or “per meeting” payment that would have resulted in a significantly higher level of compensation than what the others proposed. After discussion of this and some of the other more minor differences, all five of us reached a unanimous consensus which is reflected in the determination filed with the City Clerk today. In terms of methodology, the proposals had begun with applying the U.S. Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) for our region to the salary levels that had held steady for well over a decade, and to bring those numbers up to date by calculating what they would have become if they had kept up with the inflation that the CPI measured. These calculations resulted in a monthly salary for Council members of approximately $700, and for the Mayor of approximately $1025. Those amounts would put Port Townsend close to the higher levels in comparable cities (but not the highest). To avoid falling behind as had occurred during the fairly long period of unchanged payments, we also agreed to calculate increases to be applied in January of even numbered years until our Commission’s seven-year horizon would end. To do that we calculated annual amounts using annual average of the historical CPI data, then calling for bi-annual increases at the amount calculated for that year. We believe that these adjustments, timed to coincide with Council turnover from the previous odd year’s election, will help keep Port Townsend’s compensation approach up to speed with similar communities and will help ensure that those who run for Council do so without fearing unreasonable sacrifice for doing so. We are not unmindful that service on the City Council has benefits beyond monetary considerations – primarily the good feelings that one gets for serving one’s neighbors, our community, and future generations. The seven sitting Council members acknowledged that this was an important element in their own 5 thinking about running for office, as did the two former Council members who are members of the Commission. We have tried, to the best of our ability, to find that balance that results in a “fair” compensation for those who serve our community on its governing body. Recognizing that Council members, present and soon to be sworn in, may have questions or seek clarification on our work, we stand ready to respond and to help everyone fully understand what we did and why. We want to thank city staff members who helped greatly: Nora Mitchell, Heidi Greenwood, Joanna Sanders, and Haylie Clement, and doubtless others. Lastly, we want everyone to know that we took our responsibilities seriously and wish to say how honored we were to have been asked to take on this function. Respectfully submitted, on my behalf and on behalf of my Commission colleagues: _____________________ Deborah Stinson, Chair, Port Townsend Salary Commission 6 ADDENDUM (update to show only the selected option) Year CPI Mayor Member 2007 3.8%750 500 $45,000 2008 4.5%779 519 2009 0.4%814 542 2010 0.8%817 545 2011 3.2%823 549 2012 2.5%850 566 2013 1.2%871 581 2014 1.9%881 588 2015 0.9%898 599 2016 2.3%906 604 2017 3.3%927 618 2018 3.4%958 638 2019 2.1%990 660 2020 1.9%1,011 674 Avg 07-20 2.3% 2.3% Nearest $10 Nearest $25 2.3% Nearest $10 Nearest $25 2.3% Nearest $10 Nearest $25 2021*1,034 687 2022 1,025 1,025 1,025 700 700 700 17,700 17,700 17,700 1,025 1,025 1,025 700 700 700 17,700 17,700 17,700 2023 1,049 1,050 1,050 716 720 725 1,723 1,740 2,100 2024 1,073 1,070 1,075 733 730 725 1,009 960 300 1,073 1,070 1,075 733 730 725 2,732 2,700 2,400 2025 1,097 1,100 1,100 749 750 750 1,736 1,800 2,100 2026 1,123 1,120 1,125 767 770 775 1,743 1,680 2,100 1,123 1,120 1,125 767 770 775 3,479 3,480 4,200 2027 1,148 1,150 1,150 784 780 775 1,030 1,080 300 2028 1,175 1,170 1,175 802 800 800 1,757 1,680 2,100 1,175 1,170 1,175 802 800 800 2,787 2,760 2,400 2029 1,202 1,200 1,200 821 820 825 1,764 1,800 2,100 $71,698 $71,640 $71,700 Port Townsend Salary Commission CPI historical data averaged and applied through 2028, with rounding options 2021 Annual Total Mayor Member Combined Annual Impact Highlighted rows reflect years in which new salary takes effect January 2022 January 2024 January 2026 January 2026 Ending Annual Total * applied 2007-2020 avg CPI to 2021 since current year CPI is anomalous. 2021 salary paid same as 2020 7 City Form 2019 Pop County Mayor Member Sequim Manager 7,940 Clallam $565 $350 Airway Heights Manager 10,030 Spokane $1,200 $500 Shelton Manager 10,470 Mason $500 $500 Gig Harbor Mayor 11,490 Pierce n/a $713 Ridgefield Manager 11,560 Clark $1,050 $525 Poulsbo Mayor 11,660 Kitsap n/a $750 Kelso Manager 12,401 Cowlitz $1,000 $500 Woodinville Manager 12,800 King $700 $600 Port Orchard Mayor 15,260 Kitsap n/a $1,000 Anacortes Mayor 18,050 Skagit n/a $1,200 Port Angeles Manager 20,200 Clallam $650 $550 MEDIAN $1,000 $550 AVG $863 $653 Current PT Manager 9,815 Jefferson $750 $500 Proposed PT $1,025 $700 Comparable Cities Sorted by Population Reported Monthly Salaries 1 Port Townsend Salary Commission VERSION TWO Draft Explanatory Statement [date] M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Manager John Mauro Finance Director Nora Mitchell City Attorney Heidi Greenwood City Clerk Joanna Sanders City Council Members City Council Members-Elect FROM: City of Port Townsend Salary Commission through its Chairperson, Deborah Stinson SUBJECT: Salary Commission Determination for Council Members’ and Mayor’s Salary Levels, 2022-28 In the summer of 2021 the Mayor Michelle Sandoval proposed, and the Council confirmed, the appointment of five Port Townsend citizens – Deborah Stinson, Jack McCreary, Kristine Morris, Julia Cochrane and George Randels – to serve on a Salary Commission (“the Commission”) which, under state law, was charged with assessing salaries paid by the city to elected Council member and to that Council member named, from time to time, to serve as Mayor of Port Townsend, and authorized the Salary Commission to adjust salary levels in the present and for a period of seven years to come. What follows is the Commission’s report outlining and explaining its processes, deliberations and determination. Our final conclusions have been submitted this day to the City Clerk, as proscribed by the state law authorizing the Salary Commission process. The Commission’s determinations were approved unanimously by its members, and they all endorse this memorandum as well. On August 16, 2021, we met in person, accompanied by the City Clerk, the City Attorney and the City Finance Director, during which Deborah Stinson was chosen to serve as Chair. City officials briefed us on our responsibilities, and the scope of, and the limits on, that authority. We learned at this meeting that salary levels for the designated officials had been set approximately 14 years ago and had remained static throughout the intervening years. We began discussing how to proceed in carrying out our responsibilities. At our initial meeting several of our members asked whether we were allowed to consider items beyond salary payments, such as health insurance or other fringe benefits. We were advised that the measure adopted to form the Commission did not authorize such additional considerations. (Later, when we met with sitting members of City Council, several of them also referenced the health insurance question in particular as a major consideration but one which all involved acknowledged to have 2 complications that do not have easy solutions.) We recommend that this issue remain on the table and that consideration be given to broadening the coverage if possible, unless, as many hope, events in the other Washington, or perhaps in Olympia, might make this superfluous. We also learned that state law does not permit our using an index, such as the US Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index, to adjust salaries in the future but we could require such adjustments either with arbitrary increases or by applying an historical percentage based on past inflation. Subsequent meetings were held virtually on a bi-weekly basis. All meetings were announced in advance and carried out electronically with normal provisions for attendance by the public to participate and/or observe the Commission’s work. Initial decisions made were to identify possible areas where research might be useful in carrying out our responsibilities, including: • cost-of-living changes during the period when these salaries were unchanged • salaries for these officials in comparable communities • particulars about time required to carry out the functions of the offices in question • salaries received by members of governing boards of other public bodies in Jefferson County • city budget history and particulars as they might pertain to the Commission’s work Commissioners also shared the values, philosophies, and practical considerations that they would bring to the discussions and decision-making processes on which we were embarking. There was substantial consensus that while Port Townsend had been fortunate to have a history of dedicated, thoughtful members on its governing body, and while the membership over the years had had a reasonably robust diversity of members, nevertheless, salary levels for these positions needed to be high enough so as not to disincentivize people of limited means from putting themselves forward to serve. Several Commission members stressed this concern and their hope to foster economic diversity on the Council. Commissioners wanted to be cognizant of, and sensitive to, the fact that our determinations should be made in the context of how they might affect the fiscal impact on the overall city budget. We saw our work as trying to set a level of investment in attracting high quality members of the Council but doing so in full awareness that every city dollar spent is an investment, in one way or another, in the community’s many priorities. Undervaluing the work and responsibility of these community leaders risks a less dedicated, experienced or thoughtful legislative body, but on the other hand setting remuneration levels too high could result in constraining budgetary resources and impinging on the city’s ability to provide municipal services that our citizens rightly expect. We knew we would be 3 seeking a balance among those interests that, while unquantifiable, might meet the “I’ll know it when I see it” test. Having identified data which we thought might help us find that balance point and articulated some of the core principles we would hope to apply, we set a plan for proceeding. Included was a division of labor for the needed research, with individual commissioners volunteering for one or more of the categories. City staff also agreed to help in the research effort, providing information from city budget and other financial records and in several other ways facilitating the collection and presentation of information. We also decided that some of the best expertise available to help put our responsibility in context would be the seven individuals presently serving on City Council. What did they think about the job’s workload, about the level of compensation, and did they have specific suggestions that might help us as we addressed our work? We decided to ask them to appear before us, individually, and share their knowledge and opinions. The next several meetings of the Commission put the plan into action. Data that was gathered were presented to our membership, refined, and assessed. Two meetings were devoted to the dialogue with present Council members. We found them very valuable and we are very grateful for the contributions from all seven of these individuals. Our October 12 meeting was devoted to letting each Commission member provide, in as much detail as she or he thought appropriate, those principles and philosophies considered most important for our deliberation, along with his or her assessment of the data our research had produced. We were pleased that there was unanimity among us concluding that while it was a good exercise to seek the volume of data we did, in the end two elements from our data collection stood out as by far the most important: cost-of-living information, and remuneration for comparable officials in comparable cities. Salary levels for other governing bodies such as PUD, Port, Hospital, School or Fire districts were difficult to compare. Those salaries are set by either the state legislature and are based on a per diem or per meeting basis, or in the case of County Commissioners, aligned with state judges. Additionally, all these bodies have fewer members and, in some cases, provide healthcare benefits on top of the mandated salaries. The job of a City Councilor, we felt, is sufficiently unique that comparisons to other boards or governing bodies were imprecise and thus of minimal value. All data collected and analyzed for comparison purposes can be found in the commission’s records. The cost-of-living and comparable cities information is included in an addendum to this memo. We hope that this report and all commission worksheets will be made available to future Salary 4 Commissions (if this process continues statewide and in Port Townsend), and we have asked that city officials take steps to help ensure that this record will be available to our successors. For this and other reasons, we also recommend that future mayors give serious consideration to appointing at least one member of a previous Salary Commission to future iterations to help provide institutional memory and continuity. At the end of that October 12 meeting, we decided to ask each Commission member to return at the next meeting with a specific proposal for the group to consider. The rationale was that these proposals would serve to spur and focus our deliberations and, hopefully, assist in reaching conclusions at that meeting, which took place on October 26. At that meeting, members were somewhat surprised when four of us proposed determinations very similar to each other and, ultimately, very close to our final judgment as well. The fifth member’s recommendation included a higher base salary plus a proposed “per diem” or “per meeting” payment that would have resulted in a significantly higher level of compensation than what the others proposed. After discussion of this and some of the other more minor differences, all five of us reached a unanimous consensus which is reflected in the determination filed with the City Clerk today. In terms of methodology, the proposals had begun with applying the U.S. Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) for our region to the salary levels that had held steady for well over a decade, and to bring those numbers up to date by calculating what they would have become if they had kept up with the inflation that the CPI measured. These calculations resulted in a monthly salary for Council members of approximately $700, and for the Mayor of approximately $1025. Those amounts would put Port Townsend close to the higher levels in comparable cities (but not the highest). To avoid falling behind as had occurred during the fairly long period of unchanged payments, we also agreed to calculate increases to be applied in January of even numbered years until our Commission’s seven-year horizon would end. To do that we calculated annual amounts using annual average of the historical CPI data, then calling for bi-annual increases at the amount calculated for that year, and rounding that number, up or down, to the nearest $25 as reflected in our determination. We believe that these adjustments, timed to coincide with Council turnover from the previous odd year’s election, will help keep Port Townsend’s compensation approach up to speed with similar communities and will help ensure that those who run for Council do so without fearing unreasonable sacrifice for doing so. We are not unmindful that service on the City Council has benefits beyond monetary considerations – primarily the good feelings that one gets for serving one’s neighbors, our community, and future generations. The seven sitting Council members acknowledged that this was an important element in their own 5 thinking about running for office, as did the two former Council members who are members of the Commission. We have tried, to the best of our ability, to find that balance that results in a “fair” compensation for those who serve our community on its governing body. Recognizing that Council members, present and soon to be sworn in, may have questions or seek clarification on our work, we stand ready to respond and to help everyone fully understand what we did and why. We want to thank city staff members who helped greatly: Nora Mitchell, Heidi Greenwood, Joanna Sanders, and Haylie Clement, and doubtless others. Lastly, we want everyone to know that we took our responsibilities seriously and wish to say how honored we were to have been asked to take on this function. Respectfully submitted, on my behalf and on behalf of my Commission colleagues: _____________________ Deborah Stinson, Chair, Port Townsend Salary Commission 6 ADDENDUM Update to reflect selected option Year CPI Mayor Member 2007 3.8%750 500 $45,000 2008 4.5%779 519 2009 0.4%814 542 2010 0.8%817 545 2011 3.2%823 549 2012 2.5%850 566 2013 1.2%871 581 2014 1.9%881 588 2015 0.9%898 599 2016 2.3%906 604 2017 3.3%927 618 2018 3.4%958 638 2019 2.1%990 660 2020 1.9%1,011 674 Avg 07-20 2.3% 2.3% Nearest $10 Nearest $25 2.3% Nearest $10 Nearest $25 2.3% Nearest $10 Nearest $25 2021*1,034 687 2022 1,025 1,025 1,025 700 700 700 17,700 17,700 17,700 1,025 1,025 1,025 700 700 700 17,700 17,700 17,700 2023 1,049 1,050 1,050 716 720 725 1,723 1,740 2,100 2024 1,073 1,070 1,075 733 730 725 1,009 960 300 1,073 1,070 1,075 733 730 725 2,732 2,700 2,400 2025 1,097 1,100 1,100 749 750 750 1,736 1,800 2,100 2026 1,123 1,120 1,125 767 770 775 1,743 1,680 2,100 1,123 1,120 1,125 767 770 775 3,479 3,480 4,200 2027 1,148 1,150 1,150 784 780 775 1,030 1,080 300 2028 1,175 1,170 1,175 802 800 800 1,757 1,680 2,100 1,175 1,170 1,175 802 800 800 2,787 2,760 2,400 2029 1,202 1,200 1,200 821 820 825 1,764 1,800 2,100 $71,698 $71,640 $71,700 Port Townsend Salary Commission CPI historical data averaged and applied through 2028, with rounding options 2021 Annual Total Mayor Member Combined Annual Impact Highlighted rows reflect years in which new salary takes effect January 2022 January 2024 January 2026 January 2026 Ending Annual Total * applied 2007-2020 avg CPI to 2021 since current year CPI is anomalous. 2021 salary paid same as 2020 7 City Form 2019 Pop County Mayor Member Sequim Manager 7,940 Clallam $565 $350 Airway Heights Manager 10,030 Spokane $1,200 $500 Shelton Manager 10,470 Mason $500 $500 Gig Harbor Mayor 11,490 Pierce n/a $713 Ridgefield Manager 11,560 Clark $1,050 $525 Poulsbo Mayor 11,660 Kitsap n/a $750 Kelso Manager 12,401 Cowlitz $1,000 $500 Woodinville Manager 12,800 King $700 $600 Port Orchard Mayor 15,260 Kitsap n/a $1,000 Anacortes Mayor 18,050 Skagit n/a $1,200 Port Angeles Manager 20,200 Clallam $650 $550 MEDIAN $1,000 $550 AVG $863 $653 Current PT Manager 9,815 Jefferson $750 $500 Proposed PT $1,025 $700 Comparable Cities Sorted by Population Reported Monthly Salaries Category Assigned 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Notes City Budget Nora General Fund Expenditures Nora Percentage Change Nora Total Revenue Nora Percentage Change Nora Assessed Value Nora Percentage Change Nora CPI Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue George CPI Western Cities George Number of meetings Deborah/Heidi City Council Deborah/Heidi 48 46 34 34 37 36 38 41 33 37 37 39 41 36 Council Committees Deborah/Heidi 17 15 25 16 12 35 27 27 Intergovermental Meetings w/Committee of the Whole Deborah/Heidi 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 7 Outside Boards Deborah/Heidi 94 total 13/mem 150 total 21/mem See Boards Tab for details Other Deborah/Heidi Population Nora 9113 9180 9185 9225 9355 9380 9485 9500 9665 9815 Comparables - Cities Deborah/Kris See Comparable Cities Tab for details Airway Heights $1200/$500 Port Orchard $1000 Anacortes $1200 Sequim $410/$330$250 Kelso $1000/$500 Woodinville $700/$600 Poulsbo $750 Port Angeles $650/$550 Ridgefield $1050/$525 Other Jefferson County Agencies - Monthly Base rate and other benefits Kris/Jack See Word Documents for details PUD $1,054 $1,054 $1,054 $1,800 $1,800 $1,800 $1,800 medical, dental, and vision for $1 per month plus $40 VBA and $5000 life insurance policy. County $4,695 $4,836 $5,327 $5,327 $5,327 $5,327 $5,327 $5,327 $5,327 $5,327 $6,497 $6,627 $6,759 $7,489 $7,821 Medical and dental insurance EJFR George $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $114 per day up to $10,944 $114 per day up to $10,944 $114 per day up to $10,944 $114 per day up to $10,944 $114 per day up to $10,944 $128 per day up to $12,288 $128 per day up to $12,288 $128 per day up to $12,288 $128 per day, up to $12,288/yr Adjusted by OFM every 5 years based on CPI. $12,288 equates to $1,024/mo No insurance. Per day = per meeting School Board $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Actual data, no salary or benefits Hospital $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $104 per day up to $9,984 $114 per day up to $10,944 $114 per day up to $10,944 $114 per day up to $10,944 $114 per day up to $10,944 $114 per day up to $10,944 $128 per day up to $12,288 $128 per day up to $12,288 $128 per day up to $12,288 $128 per day up to $12,288 Also eligible for health and dental insurance for self and immediate family. Port $200 per month plus $90 per meeting $200 per month plus $104 per meeting $200 per month plus $104 per meeting $200 per month plus $104 per meeting $200 per month plus $104 per meeting $200 per month plus $104 per meeting $254 per month plus $114 per meeting $254 per month plus $114 per meeting $254 per month plus $114 per meeting $254 per month plus $114 per meeting $254 per month plus $114 per meeting $285 per month plus $128 per meeting $285 per month plus $128 per meeting $285 per month plus $128 per meeting $285 per month plus $128 per meeting up to 96 meetings Includes medical and dental including family 96 meetings = $12,288 CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS Committee Name Scheduled Location Rep. Intergovernmental Collaborative Group Qtrly: Feb/May/Sept/Nov BOCC WholeInfrastructure and Development 1st Wed., 3pm Chambers DF/AH/MSCulture and Society 2nd Wed., 4:30pm Chambers PA/OR/AS Ad Hoc Rules 2nd Thurs., 9am Chambers AS/OR/AHFinance & Budget 4th Tues.; 3 pm Chambers MS/AH/MM Alternative Electric Mgmt. Committee As needed City Hall #3 UnassignedLodging Tax Advisory Committee Jan/Apr/Aug/Nov; 2nd Tues.; 3:00pm City Hall #3 PA annual meetings North Olympic Peninsula Development Council (NODC)4th Thurs.; 1:30pm John Wayne Marina, Sequim MM (MS)12 Jefferson County Board of Health 3rd Thurs.; 2:30pm 615 Sheridan St.PA 12 Jefferson County Developmental Disabilities Advisory Board Jan/Mar/May/July/Sept/Nov; 4th Tues.; @ 2:45pm 615 Sheridan St.OR 6 Jefferson County Behavioral Health Committee 1st Tuesday; Every Other Month- 3:00pm to 5:00pm Public Health-Pacific Room AS 6 Jefferson County Clean Water District Advisory Council Quarterly 2nd Thursday Feb, May, Aug. Nov. 3-4:30pm 615 Sheridan St.MM 4 Public Infrastructure Board (PIF)unknown MS 1 Jefferson Co./PT Regional Emergency Planning Committee 4th Fri.; 10am PT Fire Station MM 4 Jefferson County FEMA funds (Dove House Advocacy Services, administrative agency)AS (MM alt)1 Jefferson Transit Authority Board 3rd Tues.; 1:30pm 63 4 Corners Rd.AS/DF 6 Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization Executive Board 3rd Fri.; 10am Varies regionally AS (DF Alt)4 Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) Selection Committee Thurs., September 30, 2021 at 10:00AM DF 1 Climate Action Committee Feb/May/Aug/Nov; 4th Wed.; 3:30pm Cotton Building PA 4 Fort Worden Advisory Committee 3rd Thurs.; noon Bldg. 200 - Jean Dunbar Room OR 12 JeffCo/PT LEOFF I Retirement/Disability Board Apr/Nov; 1st Tues.County Admin Conf Room DF 2 Jefferson Higher Education Committee unknown MS OlyCAP Board of Directors Jan/Mar/May/July/Sept/Nov; 1st Wed.; 5:00pm OlyCap PT or PA offices AH 6 Joint Growth Management Steering Comm Not currently meeting MS/DF/MM JeffCom Administrative Board 4th Thurs.; 9:00am 7650 Oak Bay Rd.AS 12 PT Main Street HUD Loan Committee Spring & Fall 211 Taylor St.PA 2 Creative District OR 4 Fort Worden Public Development Authority 4th Wed (except Aug) 9am 200 Battery Way MS 12 Affordable Housing Task Force 2nd/4th Wed. 2pm 1820 Jefferson St.MS 12 Joint Oversight Board of Affordable Housing Task Force 4th Wed. 4pm 1820 Jefferson St.MS 12 Association of Washington Cities Nominating Feb. 9, April 13, June 22, 2021 3-4:30 AH 3 Jefferson Broadband Action Team every other Friday, from 8:30am to 10am next Feb. 12, 2021 2409 Jefferson Street MM 12 150 Total meetings/year in 2021 21 Avg meetings year/member (total/7) 56 Added 2016 - 2021 8 Avg meetings year/member added 94 tot diff 13 avg diff Days/times subject to change/please check with contact CITY COUNCIL STANDING COMMITTEES CITY BODIES WITH COUNCIL REPRESENTATION OUTSIDE BODIES WITH COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES 11/4/2021 Form Pop County How Calculated Escalators Other Benefits # Meetings Salary history Notes COLA City Mayor Deputy Member Port Townsend Manager 9,815 Jefferson $750 $500 $500 Was ordinance, now commission none none 2 Business, 1 or 2 Study see Boards tab for others Same since 2007 18.40% Sequim Manager 7,940 Clallam $565 $450 $350 Periodically reviewed by Council, ordinance none none 2 Business, except Aug and Dec only 1 Committees and Boards: varies between 0 & 4 94-14 $150/member, $200/DM, $250/M + $20/extra meeting w/$80 cap + trvl 15-20: $250/member, $330/DM, $410/M Used Woodland as comp (pop 6500) Uses base rate + per meeting per diem ($150 + $50/@) Values reflect 2022 voted amounts per minutes 15.20% Airway Heights Manager 10,030 Spokane $1,200 $750 $500 No response -9.50% Shelton Manager 10,470 Mason $500 n/a $500 Set by reorganization ordinance no plan as of this time. See note Health Ins. for previous commission, none for Council 2 Business, 2 Study Initial rate with this structure. See note Note: only comp this is also sole city in county Shifted from 3 person commission to 7 person Council in 2019. No discussion or consideration on salary adj. since then. Did have health insurance for 3-person commission, dropped with council.4.90% Gig Harbor mayor 11,490 Pierce n/a $713 $713 Salary Comm every 2 years (also sets COLA for intermim year, % based on HR input)none none 2 Business 5 bi-monthly Committees 4 external boards 96-11: $254/mo 12-$600/mo w/bi-annual COLA to $713 in 2021 6.00% Ridgefield Manager 11,560 Clark $1,050 $525 Salary Commission none none 2 Business 02-14: $50/meeting CM & $100/meeting Mayor to Maximum 15-16: $375/mo CM & $750/mo Mayor 17-19: $500/mo CM & $1050/mo Mayor More on Salary Commission: https://library.municode.com/wa/ridgefield/codes/co de_of_ordinances?nodeId=CO_TIT2ADPE_CH2.62INSA CO 17.10% Poulsbo Mayor 11,660 Kitsap n/a $750 compare to like jurisdictions none none 3 Council plus committees 07-16: $6k/yr, 16-21: $9k/yr, 22 proposed: $12k/yr 7% Kelso Manager 12,401 Cowlitz $1,000 $500 half councilmembers at $400, implies recent vote to increase - email 9/27, 10/1, no response 16.70% Woodinville Manager 12,800 King $700 $600 Ordinance none none 3 scheduled, usually only 2 Comm/Board meetings: 2 attend 1, 1 attends 2, 1 attends 3, 1 attends 5 and 1 attends 6 No change since 2000 35.40% Port Orchard Mayor 15,260 Kitsap n/a $1,000 2017 Ordinance Council Vote none $50k Life and AD&D Policy 2 Business 1 workshop 07-12: $385.62 every other week, 13-16: $500 per meeting, 2017: $1,000/mo 7.10% Anacortes Mayor n/a Skagit n/a $1,200 Ordinance see history medical insurance as long as underwriting rules satisfied and at same levels & premiums of non- represented part- time staff 4 Council per month variety of committee and board meetings. See link $50/mo increase for 8 years - 2006: $850 to 2013: $1200, flat since then meetings link: https://www.cityofanacortes.org/DocumentCenter/Vi ew/5071/Committee-Meeting-Schedule-PDF?bidId= benefits link: https://anacortes.municipal.codes/AMC/2.32 3.50% Port Angeles Manager 20,200 Clallam $650 $600 $550 Ordinance none none 2 Business comm/board not provided no change since 2007 7.40% Total: all Cities less PT $4,915 $2,013 $7,188 Average: w/o PT $702 $503 $653 MEDIAN w/o PT $700 $657 $550 PT repeated $750 $500 $500 I: How is Commission/Board base pay calculated? J: What are the escalators of Commission/Board base pay? K: What are the historical data for Commission/Board base pay from 2007 to 2021? L: How many regular monthly meetings? Are there any other Commission/Board benefits? M: What was the base pay 2007-2020? 2021 AWC - Monthly Salary City Form 2019 Pop County Mayor Member Sequim Manager 7,940 Clallam $565 $350 Airway Heights Manager 10,030 Spokane $1,200 $500 Shelton Manager 10,470 Mason $500 $500 Gig Harbor Mayor 11,490 Pierce n/a $713 Ridgefield Manager 11,560 Clark $1,050 $525 Poulsbo Mayor 11,660 Kitsap n/a $750 Kelso Manager 12,401 Cowlitz $1,000 $500 Woodinville Manager 12,800 King $700 $600 Port Orchard Mayor 15,260 Kitsap n/a $1,000 Anacortes Mayor 18,050 Skagit n/a $1,200 Port Angeles Manager 20,200 Clallam $650 $550 MEDIAN $1,000 $550 AVG $863 $653 Current PT Manager 9,815 Jefferson $750 $500 Proposed PT $1,025 $700 Reported Monthly Salaries Comparable Cities Sorted by Population Regional CPI Historical Data Year CPI Mayor Member 2007 3.8%750 500 2008 4.5%779 519 2009 0.4%814 542 2010 0.8%817 545 2011 3.2%823 549 2012 2.5%850 566 2013 1.2%871 581 2014 1.9%881 588 2015 0.9%898 599 2016 2.3%906 604 2017 3.3%927 618 2018 3.4%958 638 2019 2.1%990 660 2020 1.9%1011 674 Avg 2.3% 2021 2.3%1034 687 Annual budget impact 2022 2.3%1058 703 $250 2023 2.3%1082 719 $1,455 2024 2.3%1107 735 $1,489 2025 2.3%1133 752 $1,523 2026 2.3%1159 769 $1,558 2027 2.3%1185 787 $1,594 2028 2.3%1213 805 $1,631 2029 2.3%1241 824 $1,668 183 121 $2,191 $1,455 $11,169 Year CPI Mayor Member 2007 3.8%750 500 $45,000 2008 4.5%779 519 2009 0.4%814 542 2010 0.8%817 545 2011 3.2%823 549 2012 2.5%850 566 2013 1.2%871 581 2014 1.9%881 588 2015 0.9%898 599 2016 2.3%906 604 2017 3.3%927 618 2018 3.4%958 638 2019 2.1%990 660 2020 1.9%1,011 674 Avg 07-20 2.3% 2.3% Nearest $10 Nearest $25 2.3% Nearest $10 Nearest $25 2.3% Nearest $10 Nearest $25 2021*1,034 687 2022 1,025 1,025 1,025 700 700 700 17,700 17,700 17,700 1,025 1,025 1,025 700 700 700 17,700 17,700 17,700 2023 1,049 1,050 1,050 716 720 725 1,723 1,740 2,100 2024 1,073 1,070 1,075 733 730 725 1,009 960 300 1,073 1,070 1,075 733 730 725 2,732 2,700 2,400 2025 1,097 1,100 1,100 749 750 750 1,736 1,800 2,100 2026 1,123 1,120 1,125 767 770 775 1,743 1,680 2,100 1,123 1,120 1,125 767 770 775 3,479 3,480 4,200 2027 1,148 1,150 1,150 784 780 775 1,030 1,080 300 2028 1,175 1,170 1,175 802 800 800 1,757 1,680 2,100 1,175 1,170 1,175 802 800 800 2,787 2,760 2,400 2029 1,202 1,200 1,200 821 820 825 1,764 1,800 2,100 $71,698 $71,640 $71,700 Port Townsend Salary Commission CPI historical data averaged and applied through 2028, with rounding options 2021 Annual Total Mayor Member Combined Annual Impact Highlighted rows reflect years in which new salary takes effect January 2022 January 2024 January 2026 January 2026 Ending Annual Total * applied 2007-2020 avg CPI to 2021 since current year CPI is anomalous. 2021 salary paid same as 2020 Monthly Rate Min Mid Max Mid x # Members # Mems Notes School Districts (low)$0 0 no benefits Fire (min/mid/max)$128 $256 $1,024 $1,280 5 no benefits, likely avg $256 Hosp (min/mid/max)$128 $256 $1,024 $1,280 5 Insurance Port (avg)$1,096 $1,309 $3,287 3 Insurance Avg Comp Cities (Council Member)$653 $4,571 7 no benefits, one exception PUD $1,800 $5,400 3 Insurance County (high)$7,821 $23,462 3 Insurance, annual cola plus reconsidered by state every 2 years Median all $653 $3,287 4 of 7 provide insurance Median w/o low & high $653 $3,287 Avg all 1697 5611 AVG w/o low & high 812 3164 Port Townsend (members+mayor))$500 $750 $3,750 6+1 no benefits Port Townsend Proposed (members+mayor)$700 $1,025 $5,225 6+1 no benefits Monthly Rate Min Mid +100 w/ins Max Mid x # Members # Mems School Districts (low)$0 0 no benefits Fire (min/mid/max)$128 $256 $1,024 $1,280 5 no benefits, likely avg $256 Hosp (min/mid/max)$128 $356 $1,024 $1,780 5 Insurance Port (avg)$1,196 $1,309 $3,587 3 Insurance Avg Comp Cities (Council Member)$653 $4,571 7 no benefits, one exception PUD $1,900 $5,700 3 Insurance County (high)$7,921 $23,763 3 Insurance, annual cola plus reconsidered by state every 2 years Median all $653 $3,587 4 of 7 provide insurance Median w/o low & high $653 $3,587 Avg all 1755 5812 AVG w/o low & high 872 3384 Port Townsend (members + mayor)$500 $750 $3,750 7 no benefits Port Townsend Proposed (members+mayor)$700 $1,025 $5,225 no benefits Adjusted to add est. cost of insurance