HomeMy WebLinkAbout15 - Fox Lawson Exec. Mgmt Class & Comp StudyQ SEW VoR�
CITY OF
p d
City Council Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 15
November 13, 2012
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: City Manager's Office
Dave Kiff, City Manager
949 - 644 -3001 dkiff(a)newportbeachca.gov
Human Resources Department
Terri L. Cassidy, Deputy City Manager /HR Director
949 - 644 - 3303, tcassidy(a)newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Terri L. Cassidy, Deputy City Manager /HR Director
APPROVED:
TITLE: Fox Lawson & Associates' Executive Management Classification
and Compensation Study
ABSTRACT:
Via Resolution 2011 -55, City Council adopted a compensation philosophy that seeks to
establish clear guidelines for compensating City of Newport Beach employees. In
August 2011, Fox Lawson and Associates, a Division of Gallagher Benefits, Inc., was
hired to review the City's classification and compensation structure, beginning with
Executive Management positions, due to significant turnover /anticipated recruitments
and the desire to retain key employees. The firm was also retained in July 2012, to
perform the first city -wide classification /compensation study of all full -time positions,
which is now in process.
The Fox Lawson study revealed that the City of Newport Beach does not have a
competitive or progressive Executive Management pay /benefits plan reflective of the
City's thinking regarding recruitment/retention with fair total compensation. This item
asks Council to set salary ranges with data compiled using "peer cities" as identified by
the City Council, looks at private /public market comparison factors and establishes a
framework to attract and retain high performing employees. The Executive Pay plan is
the first step in establishing a balanced comprehensive compensation structure.
Fox Lawson & Associates' Executive Management Classification and Compensation
Study
November 13, 2012
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION:
Review the results of Fox Lawson & Associates (FLA) classification and compensation
study and adopt Executive Compensation Plan ranges at either the FLA recommended
percentile (50% or 60 %) with or without an accompanying merit -based incentive
program for the specified 14 positions. This action will not result in any change in costs
at this time, but rather, would grant the authority to the Council or City Manager
(depending upon the supervisory chain of command) to adjust compensation at the
appropriate date via the appropriate mechanism (one -time bonus, etc) if earned on the
basis of merit.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no impact to the FY12 -13 budget. The proposed salary structure included in
this report does not impact current Executive Management employees since there is no
recommendation for individual pay increases.
DISCUSSION:
Classification and compensation structures are developed partly in response to state
labor laws and partly to stay competitive to the market. Classifications must be
organized in a logical, flexible manner to reflect the levels of qualifications required,
while creating career ladders for talented employees. The establishment of salary
structures of individual job classes should reflect the value of the particular function to
what the market bears.
The City of Newport Beach has an excessive number of classifications (250
classifications for 745 employees) compared to the labor market. In addition, salary
ranges have not been structured systematically, having some ranges with 5 salary
steps, some with 8 salary steps and some salaries being set as a position classification
is created or a vacancy occurs.
One of the initial findings of the Fox Lawson review of Executive Management
compensation was that salary ranges for these positions were too narrow (only a 22%
range between the lowest step and the highest) compared to the marketplace (more
commonly, the same range is 50 %). In addition, several ranges were not competitive
with the labor market including those positions appointed by the City Council (City
Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk). In order to review the Executive positions, the
consultants studied the top 14 positions (all department directors, Council appointees
and the Chief Information Officer) to determine a methodology consistent with the City
Council philosophy as expressed in Resolution No. 2011 -55 (Exhibit A).
z
Fox Lawson & Associates' Executive Management Classification and Compensation
Study
November 13, 2012
Page 3
Bruce Lawson reported to the City Council at the Study Session of September 25, 2012,
along with Deputy City Manager /Human Resources Director Terri Cassidy, the
preliminary findings of the review by the consultants. The City Council requested that
Fox Lawson & Associates provide a supplemental report with a proposed classification
structure using the Decision Band TM Methodology (DBM), Fox Lawson's proprietary job
evaluation methodology, make compensation recommendations and provide Council
options for incentive compensation based upon performance. This item and
presentation fulfill that request.
Key Findings
The City of Newport Beach has experienced a good deal of turnover at the Executive
level during the past three years. As part of a continuing effort to review the positions to
create a "smaller, faster, smarter" organization, job classifications and salary have been
reviewed with each vacancy. This has led to the combining of the Building and
Planning Departments into a Community Development Department, the promotions of
internal Deputy Directors to Directors of Finance and Public Works, promotion of the
Public Works Director and Human Resources Director to positions in the City Manager's
Office and consolidation of General Services and Utilities into the Municipal Operations
Department.
The study looked at the relative value of jobs (value & importance, decision making &
managerial responsibility) using the Decision Band TM Method. This is a highly effective
method of job evaluation originated by Professor Emeritus Thomas Paterson in the
1970s and refined by Ernst and Young and then Fox Lawson. The basic premise is that
the value of a job is based extensively on its decision - making requirements. Decision -
making is a logical and equitable basis for comparing jobs, because all jobs require the
incumbents to make decisions of some kind while performing their duties, whether they
are line or staff, supervisory or non - supervisory.
The DBM method distinguishes six levels of decision- making or Decision Bands ranging
from the most far - reaching decisions on organizational goals to the simplest decisions.
The six bands (A -F) are continuous, with each band derived from the one above it. The
decisions in the upper three bands (D, E, F) are "adaptive" decisions since they deal
with adapting the organization to new circumstances. The DBM process
accommodates all current Executive Management job classifications, with the City
Manager being the highest at the Band F level. (Please see Exhibit B).
Subcategories within each band reflect a more refined level of Decision Structure.
Based upon the DBM categories the positions below indicate the groupings of the City's
Executive Management structure (Exhibit C):
3
Fox Lawson & Associates' Executive Management Classification and Compensation
Study
November 13, 2012
Page 4
• Band F101 City Manager
• Band E 84 City Attorney
83 Asst City Mgr, Police Chief, Fire Chief
82 Public Works, CDD, Finance, Deputy City Manager
81 MOD, HR, Library, Recreation /Senior Services, CIO
• Band D 62 City Clerk
A salary review was conducted comparing Newport Beach to twelve public sector
agencies (if a comparison was a match using the job description and follow up
conversations with agencies), as well as the private sector, as appropriate. (Exhibit D)
Market data suggests that the salary ranges were too narrow (22% v. industry standard
of 50 %) and that the highest level positions were compensated below market. In
addition, some Directors /Chiefs were at the top of the current or outside the current
salary range. In order to meet CalPERS requirements for salaries to be within
published salary ranges, the City Council must adopt new ranges. Further, the
Compensation Philosophy states that salaries should be set to the median (50th
percentile or 2nd /3rd quartile) as well as requiring a total review of all ranges for internal
as well as external equity.
Developing the Compensation Structure will be discussed more in detail, but Exhibit E
displays the recommended approach, comparing current ranges with new ranges at the
market 50th percentile and utilizing a 50% range spread. Further, Exhibit F reflects both
the current Newport Beach structure (minimum, midpoint and maximum) as well as the
DBM recommended minimum, midpoint and maximum.
Council requested that the consultant also review the concept of performance incentive
pay as a method of both rewarding and holding Executives accountable for continued
excellence. There are two methods being presented for Council consideration:
1) Individual Target Approach; and
2) Total Cash Compensation Approach. These will be explained in more detail by
Bruce Lawson; however the option of achieving higher compensation based upon
merit could be accomplished through incentives or by expanding the ranges to the
60`h percentile, should the Council prefer that option.
In any event, the creation of a classification and compensation system that is modern,
flexible and reflective of private /public sector trends is an approach that should serve
the City well into the future, regardless of changes in the Executive staff. The plan will
continue to be reviewed for market comparability and viability as the City organization
continues to change.
4
Fox Lawson & Associates' Executive Management Classification and Compensation
Study
November 13, 2012
Page 5
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the City Council find this action is not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will
not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378)
of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it
has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or
indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting at which the City Council considers the item).
Submitted by:
) .n A
D e Kea i
City Manager
2
Terri L. Cassidy
Deputy City Manager /HR Director
Exhibits: A. City Council Compensation Philosophy
B. DBM Definitions
C. DBM Decision Structure
D. Survey Agencies
E. Comparison of Proposed Range to CNB Current
F. Proposed Salary Ranges at Market 50th Percentile
5
Exhibit A
RESOLUTION 2011 -55
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
RELATING TO A TOTAL COMPENSATION!
PHILOSOPHY
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of attracting, motivating, and retaining a highly
competent; efficient and effective workforce at all levels; and
WHEREAS, the City also seeks to maintain its fiscal condition by appropriately
compensating its employees as well as maintaining strong reserves, infrastructure,
programs and services; and
WHEREAS, the City appreciates the strong partnership it has had with its
employees and employee associations as employees and management have stepped
forward to address rising pension obligations through additional employee contributions
and a "2nd Tier" for new employees; and
WHEREAS, the City believes that its compensation should be measured and
compared in terms of "Total Compensation" (not salary alone) cost to the City, including
salaries, performance -based incentives and other short-term cash compensation,
deferred compensation, special incentive pays, and other benefits including but not
limited to medical, post- retirement medical and pension contributions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of adopting and following a Total
Compensation Philosophy and approach that would guide the Council and the City into
the future, an approach that should be regularly reviewed over time to ensure that it
meets the needs of the City, the employees; and residents; now, therefore be it:
RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that it adopt and
memorialize the following Total Compensation Philosophy:
1. Total Compensation for individual positions will be measured with respect to
market surveys, including both municipal and relevant private sector
comparisons as appropriate.
2. Total Compensation brackets for individual positions will be set with reference to
the median compensation for each position, generally falling within the second
and third quartiles.
3. The City will seek to establish and maintain compensation practices that are
comparable and consistent across all departments.
4. The City's goal is to limit annual increases in its compensation structure
(including its union contracts) to a maximum of the rate of consumer inflation.
5. The retirement benefits portion of Total Compensation will be structured over
time to achieve a 50/50 cost sharing between the City and the employees,
including the implementation of defined contribution programs in the event such
programs are authorized for the City's use.
6. The City will seek to simplify its job classifications and pay practices over time to
achieve greater flexibility in job assignment, better comparability to market
surveys, fewer and broader job classifications and minimal special pay
complexities.
7. Pay for individual employees will be established and maintained based on
qualifications, experience and job performance as reflected in regular and timely
performance evaluations.
8. The City's compensation structure will be reviewed and revised from time to time
to assure competitiveness versus the relevant market.
9. The City s Compensation Philosophy will be publicly reviewed from time to time,
to assure meaningful public input and maintain relevance as circumstances
change.
10.The City will aggressively advocate for legislative and regulatory changes
necessary to maximize the tools available to achieve the principles embodied
herein.
ADOPTED this 14`h day of June, 2011
ATTEST:
-A&-, -
LEILANI I. BROWN
City Clerk
)L, -
MICHAEL F. HENN
Mayor of Newport Beach
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH }
1, Leilani 1. Brown, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby
certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution,
being Resolution. No. 2011.55 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City
Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council, drily and regularly held on the 14th day of
June, 2011, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit:
Ayes: bill, Rosansky, Gardner, Selich, Curry, Daigle, !Mayor Kenn.
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the
official seal of said City this loth day of June, 2011.
�i'AKW Q � v�
City Clerk
Newport Beach, California
(Seal)
D
Exhibit B
DBM BAND DEFINITIONS
BAND F G POLICY
These are decisions that determine the scope, the direction, and the overall goals of the whole
enterprise. They are subject to few constraints other than those imposed by law and /or economic
conditions, and they take into consideration all the major functions of the enterprise. Such
decisions also set the goals of the major functions, the limits of the funds available to each, and
the scope of their programs. Band F decisions are the kind typically made by the Board /Council
or top executive level.
BAND E G PROGRAMMING
Band E decisions deal with the means of achieving the goals established at Band F. These
decisions are concerned with formulating or adjusting programs for the major functions,
specifying goals for the constituent functions of these major functions, and allocating resources
(facilities, people, money, materials) among these constituent functions. The executives at Band
E are typically in charge of or responsible for advising line executives heading up such major
functions as marketing, administration, production, finance in private sector organizations, and
major departments in public sector organizations.
BAND D G INTERPRETIVE
At Band D, the decisions interpret and carry out the programs of Band E. These decisions
specify what is to be done in lower Bands, and how the allocated resources are to be deployed.
If circumstances change, or if there is uncertainty about information or outcome, a Band D
decision is required to establish what is to be done in similar circumstances in the future. Band D
decisions are typically made by middle managers in various functions.
BAND C G PROCESS
Decisions in Band C involve the means or process of achieving the ends established by Band D
decisions. They are subject to the limits imposed by the available technology and resources, and
to the constraints set by Band D. Selecting the process is a decision that must precede the
carrying out of the operations that constitute the process. The process decision specifies what is
to be done at Band B. These are typically decisions made by "professionals" and functional
supervisors as defined by the Federal Government in the Fair Labor Standards Act.
BAND B G OPERATIONAL
These are decisions on the carrying out of the operations of a process specified by a Band C
decision. There is, within the limits set by the specific process, a choice as to how the operations
are carried out, but not as to what operations constitute the process.
BAND A G DEFINED
Band A decisions are confined to the manner and speed of performing the elements of an
operation. There is, within the limits set by the prescribed operation, a choice as to how the
elements are performed, but not as to what elements constitute the operations.
Fox Liwson &, Associates
F
E
U
C
3
/.1
Exhibit C
D13M DECISION STRUCTURE
Grade Sub -grade
Policy
11
Coordinating
2
1
3
10
Non - Coordinating
2
1
Programming
9
Coordinating or
2
(5)
(Technical)
1
(4)
3
8
Non - Coordinating
2
1
Interpretive
7
Coordinating or
2
(5)
(Technical)
1
(4)
3
6
Non - Coordinating
2
1
Process
5
Coordinating or
2
(5)
(Technical)
1
(4)
3
4
Non- Coordinating
2
1
Operational
3
Coordinating or
2
(5)
(Technical)
1
(4)
3
2
Non- Coordinating
2
1
Defined
1
Coordinating
3
2
3
0 Non - Coordinating 2
1
Fox Lawson t; Associates
a OIMO.. of Q113,1m kn tk &+vim. Inc. 10
Exhibit ID
City of Newport Beach
List of Comparison /Survey Agenices
Anaheim
Carlsbad
Costa Mesa
Fullerton
Huntington Beach
Irvine
Long Beach
Oceanside
Orange
Santa Ana
Torrance
OC Sheriff/OC Fire Authority
11
5700.000
$250.000
$900.000
3150.000
$IWWO
$50.800
Comparison of Proposed Ranges at 501h Percentile
with Current CNB Ranges
City of Newport Beach, CA
Executive and Administrative Staff - Market 501h Salary Structure
DBM Value
Exhibit E
o Newport Salary
—ll
em (Newport SaWryl
QCurtenl
Fangea
51 Maantl F.mrpof
12
Exhibit F
PROPOSED RANGES BASED ON DBM RATINGS - AT THE 50TH MARKET PERCENTILE
Job Title
DBM
Newport
Minimum
DBM
Minimum
Newport
Midpoint
DBM
Midpoint
Newport
Maximum
DBM
Maximum
CITY MANAGER
1`101
$185,390
$188,214
$208,572
$235,267
$231,754
$282,320
CITY ATTORNEY
E84
$173,035
$157,485
$194,667
$196,856
$216,299
$236,227
ASST CITY MANAGER
E83
$154,648
$149,814
$171,538
$187,267
$188,427
$224,721
FIRE CHIEF
E83
$168,230
$149,814
$186,607
$187,267
$204,984
$224,721
POLICE CHIEF
E83
$165,256
$149,814
$183,321
$187,267
$201,386
$224,721
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
E82
$147,160
$142,143
$163,249
$177,679
$179,338
$213,215
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER /HR DIRECTOR
E82
$151,417
$142,143
$167,921
$177,679
$184,425
$213,215
FINANCE DIRECTOR /TREASURER
E82
$147,160
$142,143
$163,249
$177,679
$179,338
$213,215
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
E82
$147,160
$142,143
$163,249
$177,679
$179,338
$213,215
CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER
E81
$133,349
$134,472
$147,888
$168,091
$162,427
$201,709
MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS DIRECTOR
E81
$143,562
$134,472
$159,256
$168,091
$174,949
$201,709
LIBRARY SERVICES DIRECTOR
E81
$133,349
$134,472
$147,888
$168,091
$162,427
$201,709
RECREATION & SENIOR SERVICE DIRECTOR
E81
$133,349
$134,472
$147,888
$168,091
$162,427
$201,709
CITY CLERK
D62
$91,333
$96,073
$102,742
$120,091
$114,150
$144,109
w
A5
GGallagher Benefit Services, Inc.
D chinking ahead
Newport
Beach,
Supplemental Management Report to City Council
Executive Management Classification and Compensation
a
Fox Lawson & Associates
a Division of Gallagher Benefit services, Inc.
Cnroprrnatinn oral Hum... Reswnra.Sperialiia
Decision Band MethodIm of Job Evaluation Provides:
✓ A fair and competitive salary structure that strikes a balance between internal
equity and market parity
✓ Market parity by benchmarking the competitive labor market and using the data to
anchor the salary structure
-' The flexibility of a City- defined pay philosophy for establishing the salary structure
(i.e. range widths, etc.) and its competitive position within the market (i.e. market
50th percentile)
Executive Level Positions Provide the Top Structure within the Organization
Band F — Highest level decision - making within the organization
Band E — Overall program responsibility for a major organizational function
Band D — Program interpretation and implementation
Within Each Band is a "Grade Assignment" and "Subgrade"
CWD fox Lawson n Associates
umuon ui (%Ilaaher &•nOit 4xdcv ;, Inc
Internal Equity Analysis
The first step in developing a classification structure is to evaluate the validity of the job evaluation ratings. In this
case, we have conducted a regression analysis of current City salaries using the proposed DBM Job Evaluation
ratings as the independent variable.
To confirm validity, we look for (1) a logical visual fit and progression of the data, and (2) an adjusted r- squared
value greater than 0.70. In this case, we confirm both the visual fit and an r- squared value exceeding 0.84.
Simply stated, these findings validate the salary structure from a statistical perspective and help to ensure
compliance with Pay Equity laws.
City of Newport Beach, CA
Executive and Administrative Staff - Internal Equity Analysis
-
I
i
i
a2w.aro 1 -- -- -- -- - • ---°
i R' = 0.84604
52oo,wo I-
EW
{tidi ' = 0.86233
Newport Salary
i V " — Lineor (Newport Salaryt
$ fryl
15o.OW �-- �F— ^— -- --Poly. (Newpod Salary)
M
0 0
SIWM +_ - - -- ---'- - - - - -- — '-- - -` - -- —"
D £ F
DBM Yalu.
rox Lawson K Associates
r Drv.iun u! Gllaa:mr 8crc!rt S,•:dccy Inc.
Market Salary Analysis
City salaries are indicated in blue, while the market 501h and 60th percentiles are in red and green, respectively.
Current City salaries are generally consistent with market values.
$700,000
$250.000
$200.000
$150.000
$100.000
$50.000
City of Newport Beach, CA
Executive and Administrative Staff - Market Salary Analysis
DBM Value
O Newport5alary
Linear (Newport Salary)
— Linear (Market 50th)
—Linear (Market 60th)
u Pox Lawson & Associates
a Drvisica of f Ilaybcr ticn:ni Somas, Inc.
Salary Structure Development
In order to balance both internal equity and market parity, salary ranges for each DBM rating are anchored
directly to the market trend line.
The ranges shown here approximate the market 50th percentile, and utilize a standard 50% range spread.
All current City salaries would tit within the new salary ranges, resulting in no implementation cost.
$250.000
$209.000
$150.009
$100.00'
City of Newport Beach, CA
Executive and Administrative Staff - Market 50th Salary Structure
$50.000 +
0
E F
DBM Value
Newport Salary
-- Linear (Ne pod Salary)
QConenl Ranges
Proposetl Fanger
Fox Lawson x Associates
a UNieian ul (GIIayLar Ikne!it &n -i.cs, Inc.
601h Percentile Salary Structure Comparisons
The following table provides comparisons between the City's current salary range minimums, midpoints and
maximums and that of the 601h percentile DBM -based market ranges.
All new range maximums exceed current maximums.
Newport DBM Newport
Job Title DBM Minimum Minimum Midpoint
DBM Newport DBM
dpoint Maximum Maximum
CITY MANAGER
F101
$185,390
$195,742
$208,572
$244,678
$231,754
$293,613
CITY ATTORNEY
E84
$173,035
$163,784
$194,667
$204,730
$216,299
$245,676
ASST CITY MANAGER
E83
$154,648
$155,806
$171,538
$194,758
$188,427
$233,710
FIRE CHIEF
E83
$168,230
$155,806
$186,607
$194,758
$204,984
$233,710
POLICE CHIEF
E83
$165,256
$155,806
$183,321
$194,758
$201,386
$233,710
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
E82
$147,160
$147,829
$163,249
$184,786
$179,338
$221,744
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER /HR DIRECTOR
E82
$151,417
$147,829
$167,921
$184,786
$184,425
$221,744
FINANCE DIRECTOR /TREASURER
E82
$147,160
$147,829
$163,249
$184,786
$179,338
$221,743
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
E82
$147,160
$147,829
$163,249
$184,786
$179,338
$221,743
CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER
E81
$133,349
$139,851
$147,888
$174,814
$162,427
$209,777
MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS DIRECTOR
E81
$143,562
$139,851
$159,256
$174,815
$174,949
$209,777
LIBRARY SERVICES DIRECTOR
E81
$133,349
$139,851
$147,888
$174,814
$162,427
$209,777
RECREATION & SENIOR SERVICE DIRECTOR
E81
$133,349
$139,851
$147,888
$174,814
$162,427
$209,777
CITY CLERK
D62
$91,333
$99,916
$102,742
$124,895
$114,150
$149,873
Fox Lawson & Associates
v Urvi.unul C. b,hx , Itcnfi, 4:nas�, Inc,
Option #1 - Individual Target approach
One of the most common approaches to developing incentive compensation targets against a desired
market percentile (60th in this case) is to identify the aggregate difference between the market 50th
and 60th percentile salaries.
For the City's defined labor market, this factor is approximately 4% for all job levels.
> For example, the City could apply a one -time 4% bonus target for all executive positions.
This bonus target would be above the current practice of a performance based increase
(average performance based increase is 5 %).
Another alternative to this model would be to vary the target percentage based on the level of the
position.
Specifically, when examining all market data, we generally find positions evaluated at higher DBM
levels (e.g. E and F) to have higher incentive targets than those at lower levels.
Following the level- dependent approach, we would recommend the following bonus targets for the
City:
Executive Directors: 3% - 5%
r Council Appointees: 5% - 6%
Considerations
b Target bonuses would be paid in accordance with each incumbent's current base salary
Bonuses would be treated as a one -time cash payment and not rolled into employee base pay
The City could chose to pay bonuses that exceed the target percentage for exceptional performance
jFox Lawson & Associates
a Ui•ldun of Ciiln;iScr Ikndii Scnicn, Inc.
Establish the proposed classification ®Bibs ratings and adopt new salary ranges for
Executive level positions:
Option 1 - Anchor ranges to the 50th percentile of the market
Option 2 - Anchor ranges to the 60th percentile of the market
Consider adopting an Executive level incentive pay plan:
•'
Establish the "Individual Target Approach" and provide bonus incentives of 3% -
5% for Executives and 5% - 6% for Council Appointees;
Establish a "Total Cash Compensation" approach and provide incentives
based on maximum and anchor at the 60th percentile
Request additional options or alternatives for Executive level compensation and /or
classification
Pox Lmi on n Associates
tihy�..� a C'allaEhcr L'cemdi $mac_., fnc.