HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem Q liz:L SEA(°eF
AGENDA STAFF REPORT iU Z
ti
°N- /
DATE: October 24, 2016
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: Jill R. Ingram, City Manager
FROM: Patrick Gallegos, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: CLASSIFICATION / COMPENSATION STUDY UPDATE
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
That the City Council:
1) Receive and file an update on the Classification and Compensation Study;
and,
2) Provide input to the consultant regarding comparator agencies for
inclusion in Classification and Compensation Study.
BACKGROUND:
At its meeting on March 28, 2016, the City Council approved a Professional
Services Agreement with Koff & Associates ("Koff") for a comprehensive
classification and compensation study ("Study") for all full-time and part-time
personnel. The City of Seal Beach last conducted a classification and
compensation study in 2008. It is recommended practice, as an industry
standard, to periodically review and update personnel classifications and adjust
compensation levels as necessary. The Study will determine whether the City's
defined classification structure and compensation levels are commensurate with
similarly-sized and geographically local communities.
The components of the Classification and Compensation Study broadly include:
• Updating the classification plan;
• Developing a classification structure reflecting the City's overall
classification and compensation strategy, with a clear definition of terms
and the development of career ladders for full and part-time staff;
• Conducting orientation and briefing sessions with employees, supervisors,
managers, and department heads;
• Matching labor market and benchmark classes most closely representing
the City of Seal Beach;
• Assigning salary ranges to each classification, reflecting the results of the
market survey and analysis of internal relationships;
Agenda Item Q
• Assisting in the development of a strategy for implementing the
compensation recommendations and plan; and
• Presenting the final Classification and Compensation Report to the City
Council.
DISCUSSION:
On April 25-26 2016, Koff hosted an orientation for employees to provide them
with an overview of the Classification and Compensation Study process and to
answer any questions from staff.
Following the orientation, Position Description Questionnaires (PDQs) were
distributed to all employees. The PDQs were completed by each employee,
reviewed by the employees' supervisors and were submitted to Koff for
evaluation.
In late July and early August, individual employee interviews were held over four
days with Koff Project Manager Georg Krammer and his staff. These interviews
were conducted to better understand the scope of work of each employee.
As part of this Study, Koff personnel seeks to engage the City Council in the
identification of the desired comparator agencies from which compensatory data
will be gathered. At the September 12, 2016 City Council meeting, Koff
presented thirty-five (35) comparator agencies for the City Council to consider
and recommended the top twelve (12) comparator agencies for the purposes of
the Study.
The top twelve (12) agencies brought forth by Koff for comparative purposes at
the September 12th City Council meeting were as follows: the cities of
Huntington Beach, Redondo Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Cypress,
Buena Park, Signal Hill, Cerritos, Brea, Bell Gardens, Hermosa Beach, and
Lakewood.
Criteria considered by which the comparator agencies were identified include:
comparable services, geographic proximity, agency population, full-time
employee to population ratio, median household income, and median home
price.
After a thorough discussion with the Council at the September 12th meeting, Koff
was directed to bring back some additional comparator agency options. Koff ran
four (4) additional scenarios (Attachment A) based on feedback from the Council.
Each of the four new scenarios include modifications to the criteria as follows:
Scenario 1: Removed Cost of Living
Scenario 2: Removed Cost of Living and added number of employees
Scenario 3: Removed Cost of Living, added number of employees, and
added additional weight for Marine Safety
Page 2
Scenario 4: Removed Cost of Living, added number of employees, added
additional weight for Marine Safety, and removed geographic
proximity
As depicted in the table (Attachment A), there are only a few agency changes
when adjusting the criteria as described in the aforementioned scenarios.
Scenario 1 adds the County of Orange. For both Scenario 2 and 3, Brea is
replaced by Covina. Scenario 4 replaces Lakewood and Cerritos for Covina and
La Habra.
After considering the feedback of the Council and weighing the outcomes of all
the scenarios, Koff recommends utilizing the following twelve (12) agencies for
the purposes of the Study:
1. City of Bell Gardens
2. City of Hermosa Beach
3. City of Cypress
4. City of Redondo Beach
5. City of Calabasas
6. City of Huntington Beach
7. City of Fountain Valley
8. City of Signal Hill
9. City of Costa Mesa
10. City of San Clemente
11. City of Laguna Beach
12. City of Manhattan Beach
Given that other coastal cities would be most similar to Seal Beach in many of
the issues and challenges they all encounter, it would be appropriate to swap out
some of the non-coastal agencies that scored better for other coastal agencies.
This would also provide better representation for Marine Safety. The above
recommendation includes an addition of three coastal agencies (San Clemente,
Laguna Beach and Manhattan Beach).
The Council may also decide to create a separate supplementary Marine Safety
survey of comparator agencies such as the survey created in the City's 2008
Classification and Compensation Report ("Report"). This Report included the
following supplementary Marine Safety survey agencies: Dana Point, El
Segundo, Hermosa Beach, Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach, Manhattan Beach,
Newport Beach, Redondo Beach, San Clemente and Santa Monica.
It should be noted that Huntington Beach, San Clemente, Newport Beach,
Laguna Beach, and Long Beach have Marine Safety Departments that are most
closely aligned with the City with respect to training, command structure,
emergency operations, mutual aid calls, departmental outreach programs and
year round beach attendance numbers.
Page 3
Koff is available to discuss the findings and recommendations further at the
October 24th City Council meeting.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
There is no environmental impact related to this item.
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
The City Attorney has reviewed and approved as to form.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1) Receive and file an update on the Classification and Compensation Study;
and,
2) Provide input to the consultant regarding comparator agencies for
inclusion in Classification and Compensation Study.
SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED:
Patrick Gallegos R. Ingram, City M.gri•er
Assistant City Manager
Attachments:
A. Comparator Agencies
Page 4
I 0
6
a
E
0
U
0
N
D
12,
a
o
E
E
E
Q 0
U
m
C z 111
i
p v 3 m i i i€ i L: : : : . . . . : : . :>
:p a if,! f,: mL . , ; oR U9 W ! € 'c L i . o s : - ;
t : imi"i imimi oiTi_! -1 o[Li !kV
i Z N ig ! . I-E f aEl i im1 0 m:l:c!mi : iti:a;0i 1 i
2
W T m 7i E ! ! i iU] «-1 ro1 1 E mim ms csi°i a g1§1
i2 g - !0! i° 8: i im:a!OL 3imit E rg1 2 N!ai io! 8malcc i 2iWiN mi JiUimi 1 aili_ 2iSiZ!NmiU!JiOm:JiWiJlmim =Ni m
7 OO
O 616:6051'6 o6ioi6 6i 5:6:61`50;61'61`6;c'E 61`61 of oi`oi`o '� o 51.31`6"51 o8
E i:i:ti .1A. A.:P. 1k ai it i?z-i: :SI z': '1?.1z.1 :Piz‘izqPiz.1..:a':?.:z.:z'
ILI oio€vioiU 6161616 v:U!0i5ioioi5;0i015;5i0€o5:o€o:biu:bi5:5€0€o:5
L
i
i
i1
. :Z
,]
r!'Ol
* a o
' i ' 37- y `g Iti=i
hU � ,m m :
i>i i [g c � co: m!mL= m !�u 1 o6ia3 a y i 21 i !g0 ro:ga!romiE rol = iu: i ors %' :_sl 1 1 'm i l °i E §;d ` m:f, Ii i so€a i g =i m ii 1i=`g WI i 1 U ✓ 0 i i a: !(a!mU`Ja ZNi J �:S -:N:NJiLDiJ Q
ii o O : i i3 E 6i5s616!6:5i6s56i5E5 5i6i6i 66i o5i.3 i6i5i5ioi`oi5i.3i`i`:`i65i5i.3
w �ciQSi)4i�'iwo Q001 o 0 U i i lo: Q0 i 010100:010:0 :O O : 150 o :515:0 U
w i
R . 1 1 T i 1 a a i i >E it i
i ° cf,! im y! y mm 4 't `_ 71,0 �i : ;01E1 ! I ci oi !6.,01�:�. ;g!6ia:ar_N ._y O y ! ii ro1 m'm!a!3i ` i immi di=!t ! ]mi !gi=!Z!=
i� 6i � M'�'Qi m:ro:E !Oi g:m:mi_'m:ii ' C!a!a: f, ro]ro t)p a Q R 7 m! 1Q1 7 :2i 61i2!roiofyi 1!L�i Ui a: !n !ro N: : V m5 aC i i SiFi s i J!Ui716: : iUi !J: iNe :SiZimNNJ:�;_ ¢ J: .0 U N Z a S3 : 1 1 ; : : 16 i 5i f6 i i ioi 16i5: f i6 . f.3i :6:5i6 'o E o m w -I ilk s i S k2.i Di Di 2: -i D1Ai:e..1Di,;Ai Di2,i.,y.iz.:Z, y.i.a.iy.i Z„y.m UNN NU i 8.i6,i8.i i ss !U!U!U!U:U U.U:U:U U.U:U:U U.U:U]U.UiU;U.U:U;U
TOO m y U i i i i c
r J
i i i
i i
v o f iFi i 1 i ! ! i a
2a3 8 Q L > MO
o m O p tilt' i i m .f,: . m
:Q H � i Ig s ! i a!2 ° i i .10: iiro:Ei imi ic;bZ2. IIhfflI! I �:_1�i t` ro � 5a - m 61 t S iUiin1mz 1 wi pi
m
'D6 6i 6i666:5 5 6i65i6i.3i6 0 oi6 0 0 615 0 6 6!5 0 .3 o `6 oio E
i�i1�11 ' i� alr;aiaii ; iairiiaiafairiiiial�iriiaip o
IOioi ioioioi0i
v UiUUi�iU:UiUU � U]U:U€U€010: 0:6 U€6
c i c4 0
y . ; 0 13
W S C
cu . . , . . m
« j 1 E m
440 N C O
N Z i i y >
' 7 i m y L .8 a rn
i�i { m
y
CD r 51 C!i i i f i_! :5 i i U i .0i ' i .V o f m!N; !C!t0: :N.N y Of .c > >,
i c 1 i ro i i c: _:a:c i c;m i a i m i i = C t c Wy i i�:S' E :yi i :6i ci ro! o: y:Ei di- Zi=roi : a!c! c:m! `6'c`..i 6!zi .roi r: c t p
.'.9i RI' i ro!ro! [OE �L ci ai V!t€ti p:of 0i �g e,Lai 0!-(gi c�49 �!ci imi• !C7i ro' a.ci«!E: ro: ro: of _ pp E E �qr Si ffi!gi iroi28?amis:1c�1'oi0i m'i1081 Ei``1SN1= o :cic!«3i 3 a o' 'c E fp i yq i4 !�p!ro:6.ro:N!o!O` i«Oi ro: roi° i0!ro ro!ro!S: roi Ol Q 6
o 2icco,„ : m'i�:simI,. . ;J:C7i o:U:0,-i,Q;N NiW.2 :CliNiQ,xia.'i-.iZ 3iQ ° m
0 et� Z�I V IS i s 81 o 0 83 0 'S S '6 r o i`o i`o c:o o!of`o:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D o i"61 o f o e
GikigisieAl " ,tkeki y"241'oi2:2.:2iLiZ .1.,"2.2i2idL`D2".Z`Z D!2 O of O 000
0€ Ui i 010101010IUi01010:U'U U U!U!U U.U.0 01010:U oio.U.0 U:Uio:o 0 ¢ U 0
- cm . . i
T.'Y C 1 i s
'i,_i 10,1VlNlmiNi.1W 0i ini•tioicoir-lcoiai Oi•-:Nicni ViN:fpihicoia:oi.-iNieni.:[i N .- cv NiN N]NiN'N N?NiN:N MiMiel:M;M:(0 Q 1 : .•. • : . . .■