COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -Minutes 20110111
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE – CITY OF MUSKEGO (Approved)
MINUTES OF MEETING HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2011
Mayor Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:16 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Johnson, Aldermen Harenda, Borgman, Werner (excused at 7:32PM), Soltysiak,
Schaumberg, Fiedler.Also present Finance & Administration Director Sharon Mueller. Ald
Snead was absent (appeared at 6:45 PM).
STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
The meeting had been noticed in accordance with the Open Meeting Law.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There were no issues with the agenda items listed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ald. Borgman moved for approval of the December 14, 2010 minutes. Ald. Schaumberg
seconded; motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Fireworks.
At the December 14, Common Council meeting, Ald. Werner moved to remove the ordinance
from the Council agenda and refer it back to the Committee of the Whole. Ald. Borgman
seconded; motion carried. Mayor Johnson gave an overview of the amendments within Chapter
9, Section 9.03, of the Municipal Code of the City of Muskego (Fireworks Ordinance). Ald.
Borgman explained his issues of concern being 1) enforcement 2) residence be fined rather
than an individual 3) cost should be kept down, which would encourage people to get permits 4)
violators should appear before Finance and 5) days/hours should be limited. He referred to the
Firework Permits spreadsheet within the packet, which showed 73% of people took permits out
rdth
for 3 days or less, usually between July 3 & the 5. Ald. Borgman also noted set up time could
be done much later in the evening. Ald. Harenda agreed the focus be on enforcement issues
possibly by assigning a squad to problem areas. Mayor Johnson noted the major enforcement
issue is not knowing who the shooter is, and added that type of patrol would be impossible. Ald.
Werner preferred to enforce with the rules on the books, was uncomfortable with limiting the
days/times to anything less than 7 days, supported keeping fees as low as possible and
expressed concern with the debris revision within the amended ordinance. He noted violations
are usually within early morning hours and that a more restricted ordinance would have an
impact of reducing the number of permits issued. He stressed it was better to encourage those
who follow the rules. Mayor Johnson clarified Chief Geiszler added the ‘debris’ revision to
address many complaints. Ald. Borgman did not feel 7 days was necessary and respect should
be given to those who did not support fireworks. Ald, Werner added the 7 days should be
allowed since people spend a significant amount of money on the fire works. Ald. Fiedler did
not agree with reducing the number of days and supported less government oversight. Mayor
Johnson clarified that paragraph A applies to those who do not have permits. Ald. Soltysiak
Committee of the Whole meeting page 2
January 11, 2011
supported annual review of permit holders who violate the ordinance. Mayor Johnson
summarized the consensus. The majority were in agreement with 3 (a), (e), (f) and that the
responsibility would be on the permit holder. Ald. Fiedler cautioned against review of complaints
due to neighbor disputes. Ald. Snead felt a review process should be treated the same way as
dog fancier complaint issues. She supported a compromise by amending the days to 3 or 4
rather than 7, which would agree with the Firework Permits spreadsheet. Ald. Harenda
addressed the audience explaining that the ordinance gives individuals with complaints a
mechanism to call their Alderman. Ald. Schaumberg suggested a fee of $15/day.
Consensus Regarding Amendments:
6 in favor of revisions to 3 (a), (e), and (f)
1 No: Ald Borgman noted more focus should be on the larger, aerial displays.
2. Non Rep salary plan – to be discussed following Common Council.
3. Conservation acquisition discussion – Borst property
Director Muenkel presented an overview of the acquisition, making note this item was within the
Conservation Plan for the past decade. Conserv. Coordinator Zagar then gave a power point
presentation, which is attached to the minutes. Director Muenkel summarized the Resolution of
Necessity explaining it would not bind the Council to a land purchase and that it was only the
first step in the process. He added any attorney fees would come out of the conservation
budget and that the seller had prepared a memo of understanding explaining the willingness to
engage in the sale, which was approved by Attorney Molter. Ald. Werner felt it was too soon to
proceed forward with the resolution. There were many questions and the resolution may give
the wrong message to the owners. Director Muenkel pointed out it was a cooperative effort and
that the resolution could certainly be deferred. Ald. Fiedler shared the concerns of Ald. Werner.
Mayor Johnson explained the property was a prime piece of land that would protect the water
shed. The seller’s legal council explained, due to financial pressures, the seller would like to
keep the process moving along. He noted the property was a high priority site and pointed out
the water quality issue. The seller agreed to take the property off the market for appraisal
purposes in this acquisition. Ald. Werner reiterated the need to discuss the issue further. Ald.
Fiedler questioned how long the property was on the market. The seller’s response was at least
3 months. Ms Borst’s legal council added there was minimal purchaser interest.
The COW meeting recessed at 7:32 PM and resumed following Common Council at 8:10 PM.
2. Non Rep salary plan.
Mayor discussed memo that he had distributed regarding the salary plan and the information
that Sharon was requested to bring back to the committee. He went over examples (see
attached) of the salary range and current pay of three current employees (two non represented
and one union). He feels the spreadsheet shows the inequities that are in the current plan.
Ald Snead asked what was the total number of employees that are non-presented? Director
Mueller stated that there are about 40 compared to approximately 80 that are represented by a
union.
Three options suggested by Mayor Johnson are:
1) PFP – continue with current plan and fund it at a constant rate.
Committee of the Whole meeting page 3
January 11, 2011
2) Step – move to a step plan designed to achieve a percentage of market mid point with a
set number of years.
3) Step/Merit – Modified step plan that incorporates a step plan with a merit/performance
component - this is the Mayor’s recommendation.
He discussed the projected annual cost of implementing his suggestion with four different
options (see attached).
Option plan -
1 - 3.07% annual merit increase – w/ cola could be 4 or 5%
2 – 2.55% annual merit increase reaching max in 12 years
3 – 2.65 % annual merit increase reaching max in 10 years
4 – 2.21% annual merit increase reaching max in 12 years
A step plan would be a permanent step – with a satisfactory evaluation. Could use our current
plan using this proposal to reach the end result.
Ald Snead asked about current evaluation method. Who is responsible for implementing?
Mayor stated that he and each department head perform the evaluations. He also stated that
the Council has adjusted the current plan over the years that created a wider range, which might
create a problem in retaining good employees. Employees came on board with certain
expectations and the city hasn’t kept up their agreement.
Ald Fiedler stated that there is never a guarantee of a raise here or elsewhere – employee pool
is greater than the demand. If employees have outgrown their position the city might need to let
those employees that we can’t afford to keep go. We need to find a reasonable time and way to
fund the wages through the budget. If we can afford it he agrees that employees who perform
well be compensated as such though he is not a supporter of step increases. Ald Snead we
need to make the city more efficient. Everyone, not only department heads, has stepped up
and taken on more responsibility. Ald Borgman stated that maybe the question is not are we
paying the top people too little but paying the bottom people too much?
Discussion followed on the current economy and budget limitations. There is surplus money in
2010 to cover the proposed. Option #4 maximum amount $51,000.
Ald Fiedler – if we do anything he would prefer option #4. Ald Soltysiak feels we need more time
to discuss, he is concerned about increase for 2012 and of impact on bond rating? Ald Borgman
suggests leaving at current plan with option #4 to fund it. Ald Harenda is in favor of waiting until
2012 and agrees with option #4. Ald Schaumberg in favor of option #4.
General consensus is that something needs to be done and it was agreed to bring forth a
resolution with option #4 and further debate the issue at that time.
ADJOURNMENT
Ald. Snead moved to adjourn at 8:53 PM. Seconded by Ald. Fiedler, motion carried
unanimously.
Minutes Transcribed by
Cindy Schweitzer