HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020.05.05 - Minutes - Study Session CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
MAY 5, 2020
STUDY SESSION: M/Tye called the Study Session to order at 5:31 p.m.
Mayor Tye stated that consistent with COVID-19 regulations, all Council Members and
staff are participating via teleconference and there is no physical location for public
attendance. The Public has been invited to join the meeting online or by phone at the
numbers printed on the agenda.
Public Comments:
CC/Santana stated there were no public comments submitted by email and no members
of the public requested to speak.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Andrew Chou, Jennifer "Fred"
Mahlke, Ruth Low, Mayor Pro Tem Nancy Lyons, Mayor
Steve Tye
Staff participating telephonically: Dan Fox, City Manager; Ryan McLean, Assistant City
Manager; David DeBerry, City Attorney; Ryan Wright, Parks and Recreation Manager;
Anthony Santos, Assistant to the City Manager; David Liu, Director of Public Works;
Amy Haug, Human Resources Manager; Dianna Honeywell, Director of Finance,
Grace Lee, Senior Planner; May Nakajima, Associate Planner; Greg Gubman, Director
of Community Development; Ryan Wright, Director of Parks and Recreation; Ken
Desforges, Director of Information Services; Cecilia Arellano, Public Information
Coordinator; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; J.R. Ybarra, Media Specialist;
Kristina Santana, City Clerk
► PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS:
CM/Fox reported that at the Council's last regular meeting there was an agenda
item that contained amendments to the Personnel Rules and Regulations.
Following Council discussion, the City Council directed staff to schedule the matter
for a study session.
HRM/Haug provided a PowerPoint Presentation that summarized the purpose of
the Personnel Rules & Regulations, the Municipal Code regarding the City's
organizational structure and the makeup of the City's workforce.
She further indicated that Diamond Bar does not have a union and employees are
not represented by an employee association. When amendments are proposed to
the personnel rules, staff goes through a considerable vetting and thoughtful
process by reviewing it with the Executive Management Team, City Manager or
City Attorney to take into consideration the imbalance of power because the
employees do not have the ability to negotiate and provide evidence in bargaining
as others would in other public agencies for such things as wages, hours, and
working conditions. Historically, there has been a great employer/employee
relationship in large part because the City Council has been so supportive,
MAY 5, 2020 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION
evidenced through the Council's support over the years in providing Cost of Living
adjustments and the recent adoption of the City's Strategic Plan, which uniquely
identified the City's workforce as a priority.
HRM/Haug reviewed a graphic representing payroll data that is submitted to the
State Controller's office, information that is available on the website at
www.publicpav.ca.qov. Currently, information is available through calendar year
2018 for all 482 California cities and illustrated that Diamond Bar salaries and
benefits are less than the average public sector employee in the state. The
difference can be attributed to the fact that Diamond Bar contracts out its Public
Safety Service and those salaries plus overtime rates tend to contribute to a higher
payroll. She indicated that the Council's goal is for the compensation plan to be
within the median of this labor market. Within this labor market, Diamond Bar is
appropriately positioned.
MPT/Lyons asked what was included in the $9,403 benefit.
HRM/Haug responded it is the average Diamond Bar pays for employee benefits
and may include such things as the benefit allotment and contributions toward
PERS.
MPT/Lyons asked if it included vacation pay.
HRM/Haug responded no, vacation pay is included in compensation.
MPT/Lyons said that to her, having a paid vacation is a benefit and if the paid ;
vacation was worth a certain amount, it would not be included in benefits. '
�
HRM/Haug responded that the accrued vacation time employees take (two weeks �
per year) is not included in this report because it is salary and is included within the
base pay of 2,080 hours.
HRM/Haug said that in considering the direction of the City Council with respect to
the Personnel Rules and compensation philosophy, salaries and benefits are able
to attract high quality candidates and once new hires get to the City, it is the ,
organizational culture that keeps those candidates.
HRM/Haug stated that the personnel rules presented are the approved set of rules
for the City staff and personnel administration. Personnel Rules take the long-view
that provides a really strong framework to handle current and future personnel
issues/situations that may arise throughout the lifecycle of an employee tenure. At
the next Council meeting, FD/Honeywell and CM/Fox will talk about the operating
budget for the next fiscal year which is the proper place to consider cost-saving
measures or temporarily suspend funding for discretionary programs.
HRM/Haug discussed items that were raised at the previous Council meeting
including Merit Step Advancement which addresses when and how frequently a
City employee receives merit increases/step increases. This recommended
change is to clarify that this policy applies only to benefit full time employees and
not part time temporary employees. This policy has been in effect for about 15
years and also clarifies the 12-month probationary period during which new hires
MAY 5, 2020 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION
can receive a merit increase at month 6 and month 12 upon satisfactory
performance. If an employee is not performing satisfactorily, they would not be
eligible for a merit increase. Thereafter, merit increases are provided annually as
long as the employee maintains satisfactory perFormance until the employee
reaches the top step.
M/Tye said that if step three is equivalent to step one, would that indicate Diamond
Bar does not hire anybody at step one or two?
HRM/Haug responded that those decisions are made on a case-by-case basis
depending on experience. Many hires start at step one and some are brought on
mid-way.
HRM/Haug spoke about Performance Pay and trying to align the current policy with
the adopted Strategic Plan wherein the Council identified a strategic priority in the
City's human capital and focus on efforts to create and sustain a high-perForming
workforce. Currently, the policy as written, results in a quasi-longevity pay program
which means that employees have to have been with the City at the top step for
more than a year before being considered as providing exceptional perFormance.
The "one year at top step" requirement was removed because it is important to the
City that everyone within the organization have an opportunity to be incentivized by
this program and be provided an equal opportunity to be a recipient of the
performance pay. For the past four years, the City has budgeted $90,000 a year
for the program but not used it. Diamond Bar has been working diligently on its
Performance Management Program to make sure evaluations are being completed
in a way that is objective, fair and meaningful, while providing valuable feedback so
that employees can excel within their job duties.
MPT/�y9ns asked if HRM/Haug said the City has been funding the Performance
Management item at $90,000 a year but never actually paid it out.
HRM/Haug responded "yes".
MPT/Lyons said she is thinking this is not a one-time bonus, but an addition to base
salary.
HRM/Haug responded no, it would be a one-time incentive.
HRM/Haug said that another item identified at the last meeting was criminal
background checks/California Department of Justice live scans. The City submits
applicant's fingerprints electronically which are used to run the person's criminal
history background and the City gets a report back with either no results found or a
list of the convictions. This section was updated to reflect state law that changed
last year wherein the State of California prohibits employers from asking about
criminal history or obtaining criminal background reports until after a conditional job
offer of employment has been extended. If the City gets a live scan hit or notice of
criminal conviction, it requires the City to do an individual assessment or job nexus
analysis where the City looks at the nature of the offense, when it occurred, how
much time has passed since that conviction, and what are the specific job duties
that this employee would be performing for the City and how all of these things
would interact. The Government Code Section requires that cities go through these
MAY 5, 2020 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION
steps to determine whether the offense was disqualifying. In addition, the City is
enrolled in "subsequent arrest notifications" so that once someone is live scanned
by the City of Diamond Bar, whether it is a volunteer, contract class instructor or
employee, they are enrolled and while volunteering or working with the City, should
they be arrested, Diamond Bar gets a report upon which staff would address the
matter.
HRM/Haug indicated the final section that was discussed last Council meeting was
regarding holidays and that recommendation came as a result of operational and
staffing challenges the City has from time to time that primarily occur during
demanding summer months with a lot of programming and a large special event
normally attended by thousands including, Concerts in the Park, Day Camp and
sports activities. The current practice is that if an employee works on an actual
holiday, that individual is able to observe their holiday at another time within the
same pay period which leaves little time for scheduling. The intent of the �
amendment is to allow, as a convenience to the City, the employee to take a day �'
off at a future date, on a mutually agreed upon convenient time. The language
previously suggested by MPT/Lyons to convert the holiday to a floating holidy rather
than having the option to cash-out has been included in the recommended
revisions.
C/Mahlke commented that HRM/Haug's presentation was great and reminded her,
as one of the more recent hires who received a presentation from HRM/Haug during
her orientation, her presentation contained similar information and was just as
informative and well-structured as tonight's presentation, which she greatly
appreciated.
C/Mahlke questioned the use of "their" versus his/her and wondered if it might be
time to update the language of the entire document to use the more inclusive
pronouns of they or their for both single and multiple employees.
HRM/Haug said C/Mahlke's point is well-taken and would be an easy fix and
appropriate to consider if that is Council's direction.
C/Low thanked HRM/Haug for a good presentation. She has many questions. She
indicated that Slide six which refers to Compensation and Benefits graph was not
helpful. C/Low said that she is very supportive of staff and she befieves that in all
of the years she has sat on Council she has voted in favor of each and every
recommendation to provide COLA's for employees as well as, each and every rules
changes that have come before the Council. However, the Council also has a
Strategic Goal for Financial Responsibility. The job of Council Members is to
balance the various strategies and because there are a lot of things going on and
because there are a lot of questions and because, as C/Mahlke indicated, it has
already been four years since there has been a total look of this document. She
asked M/Tye to create a subcommittee of two Council Members to work with staff
to get all of the questions answered and update what needs to be done to do right
by the Council and staff in relationship to all of the goals.
MAY 5, 2020 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION
M/Tye said he is not understanding why that would be necessary and asked what
input C/Low would envision coming from the Council that has not already been
provided by staff.
C/Low said it is troubling to her that she is hearing that vacation days and holidays
plus sick leave and administrative leave plus additional days that can be granted
are not reflected on the graph. M/Tye said that question was asked earlier and the
difference is, while it is certainly considered a benefit of employment, it is not
considered a retirement and/or health contribution benefit or compensation. C/Low
said in that case, it should be lumped in with the salary or there should be a separate
graph of the value of those benefits.
M/Tye said he did not necessarily disagree with C/Low's premise but did not see
how a subcommittee would serve any useful purpose. C/Low said she sensed
during the presentation that there was some misunderstanding of where the Council
is coming from and the subcommittee would be able to work on that issue.
C/Chou said that after listening to C/Mahlke and C/Low provide their input, at the
last Council meeting it was brought up as an idea to go through a study session
about which he was hesitant because he felt that something as specific and detailed
as a Human Resources Policy should be written by staff specializing in this
particular area. This is a very specialized field that has many sides that are
unknown to most lay persons. He understands the concerns about different
benefits and how they are approved and lumped, but out of the entire budget, the
City spends about $6.2 million a year on personnel which, for a city the size of
Diamond Bar is fairly reasonable. And as HRM/Haug mentioned earlier, the
employees are not unionized and he feels that the money spent is very reasonable.
After going through this presentation, he feels that the document and its contents
ar� very �tr�n� �nd h� f��l� th�t staff �id an excellent job in putting this together.
He does not feel comfortable about what kind of additional input the Council
members as lay people, can provide to staff.
M/Tye said he believes the items C/Low referred to are included in the $42,195 that
is annual compensation.
CM/Fox suggested that the Council not put too much weight on this slide. This slide
is, as HRM/Haug mentioned, something that is statistically calculated and
submitted by every agency in the State of California and the State Controller defines
what information goes into what box. This was a result of the Bell scandal for
transparency in government compensation. This was put in the report as a broad
reference that Diamond Bar tries to keep living within its means and that the
Council's Policy is to be at the median of compensation within this particular labor
market.
MPT/Lyons said she understood what CM/Fox explained. The reason the slide is
giving her heartburn is because it does not paint a very good picture of Diamond
Bar and its attractiveness to potential hires. She believes the City is very generous
in giving out days off along with the 9/80 schedule, etc. and she would like to see
something that shows where Diamond Bar is in relationship to cities similar to
Diamond Bar. Are we generous, are we miserly, and are we competitive?
I
MAY 5, 2020 PAGE 6 CC STUDY SESSION
M/Tye said Diamond Bar is higher than some and not as high as others. This slide
shows that someone on average somewhere of the 482 cities is averaging $70,000 �
and Diamond Bar is not there. The City has a terrific staff he believes is exceptional.
He believes Diamond Bar is very competitive and very fortunate to have the staff
that it has, and he believes longevity speaks to how attractive Diamond Bar is.
C/Low agreed that Diamond Bar's compensation package is very attractive
evidenced by the longevity of employees. She feels this particular graph does not
reflect that and that it should be removed. The original rationale was to reward
people who were doing work at a level where there was no other way to
compensate them. Someone who is not at the top step but who is at the mid step
and doing well has an opportunity to be rewarded. We can reward them by giving
them a merit increase that is earned every year after they have completed their
review. We have promotions — not just merit, but step increases. We can give
them a better title and the City Manager can grant them additional leave time. She
does not think that an employee who is not at the top step is similarly situated with
an employee at the top step, which is what this program is for. And there are
alternate ways to reward an employee who is not at the top step and who does a
great job and we call that "promotion". Thirty-five percent of the employees are not �
at the top step currently, but if we wait a couple of years, based upon the City's �
employee longevity numbers, we are likely to get close to 80-90 percent of
employees being eligible. She does not believe it is time to do an adjustment
because she has not been convinced that the original rationale is no longer valid.
M/Tye said that whether one is at step one or step seven, if the employee has done
an exceptional job, that employee would be recognized for it and he does not see
that as one does an exceptional job in the second month of the year and their
recognition comes 10 months later when that employee gets a merit increase that
he was going to get anyway, exceptional or otherwise. This does not trouble him,
whether it is the slide, or whether Diamond Bar looks cheap —this does not trouble
him at all. He believes it is just information for evaluation and he does not see it as
black and white. The fact that this has never been used is not a reason not to have
it in the tool chest of the City Manager.
MPT/Lyons said it might be helpful to explain why there should be a change from
only those at the top step to anybody. M/Tye said he has listened for an hour and
thought HRM/Haug did a good job explaining that.
HRM/Haug reiterated the following key points of management wanting to align the
personnel rules, regulations and policies with the City Council's Strategic Plan. One
of the Strategic Policies was to create and sustain a high perForming organization
and what we wanted to do, should the time come that funding would be available
for it, is to incentivize all employees and motivate and engage them to all want to
strive for excellent perFormance. The reality is, this is not an incentive that will be
available to everybody because not everybody receives an "exceeds standards"
evaluation. It is a smaller percentage of the workforce that is exceptional. Staff
wanted to remove the barrier of longevity so that those that are newer within the
organization would not be discouraged by this particular policy. This is something
that has been budgeted for the past couple of years and staff felt that the
management program was not in a place to support a policy like this. This is a great
MAY 5, 2020 PAGE 7 CC STUDY SESSION
policy to have available in the tool chest, but discretion must be used and the City
has to be in the right financial situation to support this particular program because
it is discretionary and it is not a part of base pay. This document has served the
City well in the past and it will continue to serve the City well going forward. She is
recommending a solid foundation of policies and when budget discussions begin,
the Council and staff can look at cost saving measures i.e. this performance pay
program.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the City Council,
M/Tye recessed the Study Session at 6:32 p.m. to the Regular Meeting.
Respectfully submitted:
Kristina Santana, City Clerk
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 19th day of May, 2020.
, ,
Steve Tye, Mayor