►
From YouTube: San Bruno City Council Meeting August 27, 2013 10f. Amend Benefits for City Clerk and Treasurer
Description
San Bruno City Council Meeting August 27, 2013
10f. Amend Salary and Benefits for the Elected City Clerk and City Treasurer Positions
A
Kind
of
10f
adopt
a
resolution
amending
the
resolution.
Number
two
thousand
six
dash
75
establishing
salary
and
benefits
for
the
elected
city,
clerk
and
city
treasurer
position
and
adopt
a
resolution.
Amending
the
cable
television
promotional
account
policy
to
improve
city
clerk
in
city,
treasurer
positions.
B
Mr.
mayor
members
of
the
City
Council,
the
item
before
you
tonight
would
implement
by
adoption
of
two
separate
resolutions
a
program
of
salary
and
benefits,
changes
its
amended,
the
existing
program
of
salary
and
benefits
to
update
it
for
this
elected
city
clerk
in
the
elected
city.
Treasurer
positions,
I
would
like
to
note
for
the
City
Council's
information
that
these
topics
were
discussed
by
a
sub
committee
consisting
of
council
members,
Ibara
and
Salazar
prior
to
the
last
regular
city
council
meeting
on
july.
B
Twenty
third,
at
which
time
a
oral
report
and
discussion
was
provided
by
the
city,
councillor
oral
report
by
staff
and
its
city
council
discussion.
The
report
that
you
have
in
front
of
you
tonight
is
staffs
attempt
to
synthesize
the
discussion
by
the
subcommittee
and
by
the
city
council
as
a
recommended
program
of
salary
and
benefits
based
again
on
the
discussion
at
those.
B
So
again,
just
with
that
clarification,
we've
attempted
to
take
the
take
the
discussion
that
occurred
at
those
two
meetings
and
bring
you
back
a
complete
salary
and
benefits
program
that
we
believe
represents
the
City
Council's
intent
as
expressed
following
the
subcommittee
meeting
on
july
23rd.
So
with
that,
the
information
that
you
have
in
front
of
you
would
update
to
previous
actions
by
the
City
Council
in
2006
and
2009,
to
address
a
couple
of
very
specific
issues
that
were
discussed
by
the
City
Council.
B
The
first
is
that
the
current
salary
program
for
the
elected
positions
provides
a
4-step
salary
schedule
through
which
the
elected
officials
progress
essentially
during
their
first
term
in
office.
The
salary
program
does
not
currently
address
any
salary
increases
or
any
opportunity
for
salary
increases
for
either
an
elected
city,
clerk
or
an
elected
city
treasurer
who
might
be
re-elected
for
a
subsequent,
a
second
or
third
or
a
fourth
term
following
that
first
term.
So
what
has
happened
with
the
two
incumbents
as
an
example?
B
They
had
their
re-election
for
a
third
term
has
now
been
confirmed.
This
program
would
provide
a
regular
annual
salary
increase,
which
would,
for
those
incumbents,
not
be
retroactive,
but
that
would
provide
an
annual
increase
at
a
cost
of
living
adjustment
for
each
year
following
a
first
term
in
office.
Now
again,
these
this
program
would
not
be
retroactive
for
those
for
the
two
incumbents
currently
in
office,
but
would
take
effect
now,
beginning
with
the
third
term.
B
At
the
beginning
of
the
term
would
provide
a
cost-of-living
adjustment
at
the
beginning
of
the
term
that
will
take
effect,
December
of
2013
and
each
year
thereafter,
for
the
term
in
any
subsequent
term,
that
cost
of
living
adjustment
would
be
calculated
by
a
by
the
cost
of
living
index.
There
are
many
different
indices
for
cost
of
living,
calculation
and
staff,
and
the
city
treasurer
were
tasked
by
the
subcommittee
with
providing
a
recommendation
to
you
about
what
index
to
use
we
have
done
so
in
the
report.
B
B
The
City
Council
discussion
at
your
july,
twenty
third
meeting,
suggested
that
there
should
be
a
cap
on
the
amount
of
any
cost
of
living
adjustment,
and
the
number
that
was
discussed
was
two
percent.
So
accordingly,
the
recommendation
that
you
have
before
you
tonight
would
provide
an
annual
cost-of-living
adjustment,
beginning
with
the
second
in
any
subsequent
term,
not
retroactive
for
the
two
incumbents.
Currently
in
office
that
cost
of
living
adjustment
would
be
calculated
by
the
CPI
you
for
the
San
Francisco
Oakland
San
Jose
area,
and
it
would
be
capped
at
two
percent.
B
B
Similarly,
the
subcommittee
considered,
and
the
city
council
discussed
July
23rd
a
request
by
the
incumbents
for
consideration
of
a
benefit
that
would
match
that
that
let
me
back
up
the
incumbents
requested
consideration
of
a
personal
professional
development
benefit
that
is
comparable
to
that.
That
department,
heads
and
mid
managers
receive
currently
department
heads
receive
one
thousand
dollars
per
year:
eligibility
for
a
personal
professional
development,
mid
managers
receive
500,
the
elected
city,
clerk
and
elected
city.
Treasurer
do
not
receive
that
benefit.
B
So
you
have
two
resolutions
in
front
of
you
tonight
that
staff
believes
fully
capture
the
discussion
that
was
held
by
the
subcommittee
and
by
the
City
Council
again.
This
issue
is
fully
your
discretion.
Staff
actually
makes
no
specific
recommendation
other
than
to
try
and
capture
the
information
that
was
previously
discussed
by
the
City
Council
and
to
present
that,
in
the
form
of
recommended
program,
based
on
your
discussion
that
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Any.
C
The
chair,
thank
you,
I
I
know.
I've
said
this
before,
but
I'd
like
to
make
sure
it
gets
in
the
record.
I
am
fundamentally
and
philosophically
opposed
to
any
automatic
pay
raises
for
elected
officials,
not
because
they
may
or
may
not
deserve
it
or
any
of
those
other
reasons,
but
I
elected
officials
or
just
that
they're
elected
and
they
they're
a
have
no
nest.
They
not.
They
may
not
necessarily
have
any
qualifications
for
the
job
they
are
elected
to.
You
know
they're,
just
like
any
other.
C
D
Noticed
that
in
the
staff
report,
it
says,
there's
a
line
in
here
and
says.
Additionally,
the
City
Council
reserves
the
discretion
to
determine
if
in
any
future
year
of
economic
constraint,
where
salary
increases
for
employees
are
not
being
provided
to
to
similarly
not
grant
the
annual
cost-of-living
adjustment
to
the
city
clerk
and
treasurer-
that's
not
extremely
clear.
But
what
it
says
is
that
we,
the
council,
reserves
the
right
to
pretty
much
cancel
the
increase
in
years
that
are
determined
to
be
financial
hardship
years.
B
D
E
Was
a
received
confirmation
I?
Could
that
the
indexes
that
we've
used
our
the
indexes
that
we
use
for
for
the
rest
for
the
rest
of
the
organization,
so
short
of
you
know,
shopping
for
another
index?
I
would
say
that
that
was
you
know
that
would
be
an
appropriate
index.
Okay,
thank
you.
That's
I
just
want
to
redo
it
that
I
put
it
out
there
at
the
last
meeting.
If
whether
two
percent
would
be
an
appropriate
cap
and
other
than
the
vice
mayor,
I
believe
there
was
no
other.
You
know
comment
as
to
as
to
it.
E
As
to
a
cap,
I
I
pointed
out
that
a
an
incumbent
of
to
be
simple
to
the
incumbent,
City
Clerk,
the
steps
are
six
percent
increases.
You
know
so
that's
collectively
an
eighteen
percent
increase
over
four
years,
and
so
a
two
percent
cap
would
be
an
eight
percent
cap,
for
you
know
for
the
entire
in
the
next
four
years.
So
you
do
the
math
and
it's
I
think
it's
very
reasonable.
You
know,
for
you
know,
for
under
seventeen
hundred
dollars.
Is
that
1700
ollar
figure
again
that
sixteen
hundred
eighty
dollars
would
be?
E
You
know
the
overall
increase
you
know
for
one
year,
I
think
that's
that's
reasonable,
I'm
in
favor
of
because
it's
not
a
in
a
represented
employee,
I'm
in
favor,
with
even
putting
a
clause
saying
any
any
cat,
City,
Council
or
any
future
city
council
does
have
the
right
to
you
know
to
to
alter
that.
You
know
that
that
increase
and
really
at
any
given
time,
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong.
So
the
placing
the
clause
in
the
in
the
resolution
is
I'm
in
favor
that
good.
F
F
There's
that
potential
so
I
think
on
councilman
councilmember
salazars
point,
because
we
had
discussed
that
that
it
was
at
least
my
position
that
if
the
employees
and
I
think
it
was
also
of
the
clerk
in
the
treasure
we're
not
receiving
an
increase
or
if
there
were
furloughs
as
there
were,
then
that
should
not
be
automatic.
That's
that
was
I,
thought
our
discussion
I
believe
that
that
was
a
concurrence.
F
The
other
thing
is:
is
that
the
only
one
other
aspect
that
makes
you
wonder,
is
that
it's
a
potential
within
four
years
for
eight
percent,
potentially
not
but
the
maximum
in,
in
essence,
I
think
back
to
city
employees
who
don't
have
an
automatic
cost-of-living
index.
You
don't
have
that
opportunity
or
potentials
through
meet
and
confers
through
labor
negotiations,
which
I'm
familiar
with
being
on
both
sides
of
those
and
so
in
essence,
having
to
come
up
every
year.
We
kind
of
get
back
to
where
we
were.
F
Where
again,
it
comes
back
up
to
the
council
on
an
annual
basis,
really
is
a
position
elected
by
the
people
and
that
that's
the
qualification
being
a
resident
being
18
and
being
elected,
and
there
therefore
you're,
not
gonna
qualified
you've
been
given
that
position
that
trust
in
that
honor
to
hold
that
position.
So
I
just
don't
know
if
the
subcommittee
had
thought
that
that
means
a
potential
of
eight
percent
for
years,
another
eight
percent
for
years
and
then
I'm.
F
E
E
That's
why?
I
believe
you
know.
If
you
want
to
question
the
salaries
of
you
know
of
a
newly
elected,
then
we've
got
a
you
know
home
other
can
of
worms.
But
if
a
city,
clerk
or
city
treasurer
proves
themself-
and
you
know
it
does-
you
know
capable
and
competent-
you
know
service
to
the
community,
then
they
will
move
on
and
get
reelected
and
I
believe,
if
they're
doing
the
right
again
doing
the
job,
then
I
believe
after
four
years
they
should
get
to
me
is,
you
know,
is
a
you
know.
E
F
Chair
was
not
the
original
resolution
to
have
this
reviewed
at
prior
to
each
election,
so
that,
therefore,
before
the
nomination
period
opens
up,
that
was
clear.
Now
again
we're
not
talking
about
a
newly
elected
we're
talking
about
re-elected,
so
that
really
kind
of
disqualify
that
but
I
think
in
the
old
resolution.
That's
what
it's
specified
in
the
2006
resolution
of
my
memories
correct!
D
Well,
to
address
the
question
that
was
posed:
yeah,
we
I
concur
with
the
Council
on
Navarro.
We
did.
We
did
consider
that
and
one
of
the
considerations
I
put
a
lot
of
emphasis
on
is
the
ability
to
attract
qualified
candidates
and
if
our
salary
range
and
the
improvement
to
that
salary
isn't
comparable
to
what
other
cities
are
paying,
then
the
pool
of
applicants,
of
course,
is
going
to
be
greatly
diminished,
and
so
in
order
to
keep
the
position
attractive
to
qualified
candidate
ease
I
think
we
do
need
to
do
something
to
improve
it.
D
F
Is
competitive
and
I'm
just
trying
to
get
clarification
that
the
comments
that
you
made
as
far
as
adding
it
into
the
resolution,
councilmember
Salazar
and
Councilman
ibera,
which
you
discussed
in
regards
to
it
annually
being
available
to
be
looked
at
reviewed
and
or
changed,
is
in
there.
That's
what
I'm
trying
to
I'm
trying
to
ask
if,
on
included
within
the
resolution,.
G
F
D
Through
the
chair
at
some
point
during
our
discussion
here,
I'd
like
to
recommend
that
that
the
council
provide
direction
to
staff
to
look
into
how
presenting
an
option
to
to
the
voters
of
making
these
positions
appointed
rather
than
elected
positions.
So
I
don't
know,
that's
something
that
we
would
want
to
discuss
and
recommend,
or
something
that
we
can
discuss
and
recommend.
Since
it's
not
agendized
is
just
providing
a
suggestion,
something
that
would
come
back
to
us.
D
A
D
Okay,
so
yeah-
and
my
thought
was
that
since
we're
we're
discussing
the
positions
now
and
we're
we're
at
a
point
where
we
know
there
are,
we
know
our
incumbents
are
going
to
remain
in
office
for
another
four
years,
that
it
might
be
a
good
time
to
start
looking
at
that
and
possibly
put
something
on
a
ballot
in
two
years
and
provide
plenty
of
a
planning
time
for
anyone
who
might
be
considering
future
years
or
even
if
our
incumbents
were
considering
running
again.
But
I
do
think.
D
There's
a
lot
of
things
that
need
to
be
considered
in
terms
of
what
the
costume
costs
and
benefits
would
be
to
the
city
by
making
that
switch
and
maybe
trying
to
gauge
the
appetite
of
the
public
for
for
making
that
change.
So
I
think
the
sooner
the
better.
If
we're
going
to
make
that
that
decision,
but
having
thrown
that
out,
there
I'll
introduce
this
particular
actually.
The
first
resolution,
which
is
for
the
salary
adjustments
for
a
vote.
E
D
B
Have
me
I
asked
for
a
precise
clarification
of
her
discussion
about
having
this
reviewed
annually
by
the
City
Council
or
are
you
is
her
councilmember
Medina's
comment
earlier?
Is
that
what
the
City
Council
is
looking
for,
or
are
you
looking
for
that
too
for
this
council
to
exercise
discretion
at
its
option
when
an
if
a
situation
were
to
come
again
where
we're
bargaining
units
are
not
receiving
any
adjustments,
in
other
words,
initiated
by
the
City
Council
or
brought
back
to
you
annually?.
B
F
How
do
I
don't
think
it
should
be
just
an
annual
review?
If
I
want
to
just
be
for
clarification,
I
think
it
should
just
be
at
the
latitude
right
now.
My
understanding
is
resolution.
You
have
to
wait
four
years
before
you
even
discuss
it
now
there
would
be
a
two
percent
for
that
good
point.
It
gave
the
latitude
to
the
council
to
be
able
to
review
it
prior
to
that
point,
okay,
but
not
that
it
would
come
up
for
action
item
every
year.
We
have
to
go
through
this
edge.
Yes,.