060605 Worksession
Official File Copy
CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION MEETING
City Hall - Park & Rec Conference Room
4401 Xylon Avenue North
Monday, June 6, 2005
6:00 p.m. (dinner)
6:30 p.m. (work session)
Mayor Martin E. Opem Sr.
Council Member Mary Gwin-Lenth
Council Member Andy Hofte
Council Member Karen Nolte
Council Member Steve Sommer
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
11. UNFINISHED & ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS
11.1 Distribution of Request for Qualifications (RFQs) for the Bass Lake Road
Apartment area (improvement project no. 750)
11.2 Projected 2005-2006 timeline for community development projects
11.3 Discussion and direction regarding proposed purchase of 4415 Nevada
Avenue North
11.4 Continued discussion regarding development of city manager's
compensation policy
11.5 Letter of support for North Memorial hospital in Maple Grove
12. OTHER BUSINESS
13. ADJOURNMENT
Memorandum
To;
New Hope City Council .~
Dan Donahue, City Managk,iJ
June 2, 2005
Agenda Items for Work Session Monday, June 6, 2005
From;
Date:
Subject:
Item 11.1
Staff will give you on Monday night the qualifications of the three developers that responded to
our request for the development of the Bass Lake Road apartment area. We will not ask you to
respond to the RFQs at this meeting. We will provide them this Monday so you will have time
to study and review their qualifications for the June 20th Council workshop. The Request for
Action in your packet should fairly well lay out other pertinent information regarding this item.
Item 11.2
Staff would like to present to Council a preliminary timeline and schedule for the remainder of
the year regarding our community development projects. Council had asked that staff put
together a summary plan that provides them with a good idea of general timelines,
benchmarks, and critical dates. Kirk and his staff will have a short presentation and discuss
with you the specifics.
Item 11.3
This item pertains to a single-family residence property where the resident approached the city
about possible purchase of their property at 4415 Nevada A venue North. This has been
discussed with the Council in the past and we are bringing it back on the agenda for direction.
The property is attractive in the sense that it would finish off the upgrading of the
neighborhood around 44th and Nevada. At this time, staff sees that there are perhaps three
options to present to you for your consideration. Those options are outlined on page 3 of the
Request for Action.
Item 11.4
This is a continuing discussion regarding development of a City Manager compensation policy
and plan. I am providing you with some additional information in this packet. This new
information includes new data that further defines and clarifies survey data from this
metropolitan area, the state, and national. I am also providing you with a copy of my original
contract with the city and all subsequent yearly adjustments set forth in Council-adopted
resolutions. I have summarized those adjustments in a spreadsheet, which should show you
compensation on a yearly basis. This compensation includes wages, percentage increases, any
deferred income, auto allowances, and any other adjustments such as personal leave changes or
performance pay. Hopefully, Sherry Draper and I can clarify for you what all this background
information means regarding the setting of a salary range for the City of New Hope. I am also
going to ask the Council to please consider the city's 2005 Comprehensive Pay Plan for all non-
union employees. This has been developed by myself, city staff, and the Personnel Board. I
would like the Council to review that plan and policy so we can discuss any concerns or
questions you might have regarding that document. At the heart of how we compensate our
employees is this plan and policy. Its development has taken many years with considerable
input by staff and the Personnel Board. If you have concerns or if you have questions we
should try and get those resolved as soon as possible as it does impact the development of the
City Manager's compensation plan as well as all the non-union employees' compensation. It
would be nice to get everything cleared up and have a common agreement as to what the plan
is as we go into the 2006 budgeting year. If there is anything you would like additionally for
Monday night, please let me know by email over the weekend or give me a call Monday
morning.
Item 11.5
The Mayor asked that I put this item on the agenda to update the Council on the efforts by
Maple Grove to locate a hospital in their city. The Mayor has indicated that he would like the
City Council to consider the passing of a resolution, which supports the application of North
Memorial Hospital as a builder of that hospital in Maple Grove.
. Page 2
COUNCIL
REQUEST FOR ACTION
Originating Department
Approved for Agenda
Agenda Section
Community Development
6-06-05
Work Session
Item No.
By: Kirk McDonald, Director
Kim Green, CD Assistant
Shawn Siders, CD S ecialist
11.1
DISTRIBUTION OF REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR THE BASS LAKE ROAD APARTMENT
AREA (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 750)
REOUESTED ACTION
Staff is distributing the Request for Qualifications (RFQs) for the Bass Lake Road Apartment Area to the City
Council.
POLICY PAST PRACTICE
Priority goal number two emphasizes the maintenance and redevelopment of commercial and residential
properties. The City Council has the authority to establish whatever timeframe it feels appropriate regarding
the solicitation of development proposals. In the past, timeframes have been expanded and deadlines
extended in order to allow an adequate amount of time for developers to respond regarding their interest in
development projects.
BACKGROUND
The potential redevelopment of the Bass Lake Road Apartment area has been identified as a top priority for
the city. When the previously selected "preferred developer" withdrew their proposal in February 2005, the
City Council directed, and staff recommended, that the developer solicitation process be opened up for other
proposals. The following steps in the process have occurred:
. First week of March - Invitation letter mailed out to 70 development contacts and/or companies
inviting them to developers' round table presentation on the project.
. March 28 - Developers round table conducted with 19 developers/company representatives attending
and four others not attendin but re uestin information ackets.
MOTION BY
SECOND BY
TO:
T: RFA
Request for Action
6-06-05
.
April 18 - Request for Qualifications deadline, with only one proposal received from Ryland Homes.
Mav 6 - Staff informed the Council that other developers were interested in the Bass Lake Road project,
however, the developers did not have time to complete RFQs by the April 18 deadline. Staff
recommended extending the deadline. Council extended the deadline to May 31, 2005.
Mid-May - Staff sent letters to developers indicating that the deadline was extended and encouraging
them to submit RFQs. Staff met with several development companies to discuss the Bass Lake Road
project. Staff also made phone calls to developers that attended the round table or expressed interest in
the project to encourage them to submit a RFQ.
M~Yh 31 - The following development companies submitted RFQs by the May 31 deadline:
. Ryland Homes (submitted before the first deadline on April 18 -- RFQ previously distributed)
. PariPassu Development Corp. and Trio Development
. Insignia Development
.
.
.
NEXT STEPS
Staff recommends that the City Council review the RFQs. Staff will develop a recommendation regarding
which developers to invite to participate in the Request for Proposals process. That recommendation will be
submitted to the Council at its work session on June 20, following the Parks and Community Development
tour. Please keep the RFQ packets for that meeting.
A IT ACHMENTS
. RFQs
COUNCIL
REQUEST FOR ACTION
Originating Department
Approved for Agenda
Agenda Section
Community Development
6-06-05
Work Session
Item No.
By: Kirk McDonald, CD Director
Shawn Siders, CD S ecialist
11.2
PROJECTED 2005-2006 TIMELINE F
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
REOUESTED ACTION
Per direction given by the city manager and City Council, Community Development staff has prepared the
attached draft projected 2005-2006 timeline for development and redevelopment projects in the city. Staff
requests to review the projected timeline with the Council and revise or modify as necessary. It is intended
that this is a working document only, recognizing that there are a number of factors that are not within the
control of the city, making it probable that the document will need modification as projects proceed.
POLICY PAST PRACTICE
Every department establishes goals and objectives on an annual basis and the Community Development
Department prepared a detailed list of goals and objectives for 2005 that was submitted to the city manager.
The attached projected timeline is intended to identify in greater detail the associated steps involved with the
major projects taking place in the city at this time or expected to take place in the future.
BACKGROUND
At the April 4, 2005, City Council work session, the City Council discussed goal setting and specifically
requested that a detailed timeline be prepared for the major projects currently underway or expected to take
place in the city in the near future. The Council requested that milestones be identified and that some of the
associated activities be listed. In response to that request, Community Development staff has prepared the
attached draft timeline in a list and graphic format for major projects in the city. The document is intended as
a draft and can be revised per the direction of the City Council and new projects can be added as they are
approved and old projects deleted as they are completed. There are many factors related to a development or
redevelopment project that are not in the control of the city, so staff requests that this be kept in mind as the
timeline is reviewed and that it be considered a "working document" that is subject to ongoing modification.
Staff has inserted several "public comment" opportunities for the more significant projects, such as the Bass
Lake Road A artments and Ci Center redevelo ment ro.ects.
MOTION
BY
SECOND BY
TO:
I: \rfa \
Projected 2005-06 Timeline for Community Development Projects:
Winnetka Green Redevelopment:
May 2005 - Approve 2005 infrastructure project which included curbing, trail, dry pond and
parking lot at St. Raphael's Church for the Winnetka Green project
May 2005 - Quote for play equipment approved by City Council
May-July 2005 - Ryland Homes to begin general grading in park area
May-June 2005 - Existing park play equipment removal
May-June 2005 - Begin sanitary and storm sewer improvements in park area
May-June 2005 - Begin St. Raphael Parking lot reconstruct
May-June 2005 - Sidewalk installation along Winnetka and Bass Lake Road completed
June-July 2005 - Outlot A Public Hearing and land transfer
June 2005 - Building permit application filed for final 4 buildings
June 2005 - Building permit applications approved and construction initiated
July 2005 - Complete parking lot reconstruction and park grading
June 2005-September 2005 - Construction of final 4 buildings completed
August 2005 - Play equipment to be installed
September 2005 - Final restoration of the park to be completed
September-October 2005 - Landscaping within Winnetka Green project area installed
October 2005 - Final certification of occupancy permits issued
November 2005 - Winnetka Green project area work concluded
May 2006 - Grand re-opening of Elm Grove Park
Winnetka Townhomes:
May-December 2005 - Work on building construction continues
May 2005 - City Council approved proposal from Xcel Energy to bury overhead utilities from
Bass Lake Road to 58th Avenue
June-July 2005 - Overhead utility burial initiated (depends on Xcel scheduling)
June 2005 - Storm sewer work initiated
July 2005 - Sidewalk installation along Winnetka A venue to be completed
August 2005 - Meet with owner of Wincrest Apartments regarding stormwater management
pond improvements
September-November 2005 - City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications for pond
improvements
December 2005 - City Council approve plans and specifications regarding stormwater
management pond improvements and direct staff to solicit bids
February 2006 - Review pond plans and specifications with owner of Wincrest Apartments
September 2005 - 22 Certificate of Occupancy permits issued
September 2005 - First TIP payment of $400,000 due upon issuance of 22 Certificate of
Occupancy permits
December 2005 - Final 22 Certification of Occupancy permits issued
December 2005 - Final TIP payment of $400,000 due upon issuance of final 22 Certificate of
Occupancy permits
January-February 2006 - Solicit bids for pond improvements
March 2006 - A ward bid to lowest responsible bidder
April-June 2006 - Pond improvement construction initiated
Bass Lake Road Apartments:
May 2005 - Request for Qualifications submitted by May 31, 2005
June 2005- City Council will review submitted Request for Qualifications and invite qualified
developers to submit Request for Proposal
August 2005 - City Council will review submitted Request for Proposals and select the
preferred developer of the Bass Lake Road Apartment Site
August-September 2005 - City engineer, city staff and Hennepin County staff will initiate plans
to make improvements to Bass Lake Road and realign Yukon and Xylon Avenue
August-September 2005 - Collect soil borings, request appraisals of the site, update relocation
benefits study, complete blight analysis for potential TIP District
August-September 2005 - Negotiate development terms and finalize concept plans
October-November 2005 - Finalize redevelopment concept plan and unit count
October-November 2005 - Consider all financial options including but not limited to creation of
TIP District
November 2005 - Conduct neighborhood open house to present redevelopment concept plans
December 2005 - City staff will present proposed redevelopment agreement and financial
package to City Council for its consideration
January-April 2006 - Preferred developer and city staff will initiate the process of land
acquisition and negotiating proposed financial terms of the redevelopment project
January 2006 - Redevelopment plans and financial package will be finalized and proposed
"term sheet" will be presented to the City Council for its consideration
February 2006 - Conditional Use Permit, site and building plan review to be submitted to
Planning Commission for recommendation to City Council
February 2006 - Planning Commission recommendation forwarded to City Council for
consideration
March-June 2006 - Demolition plans and specifications completed and site demolished
May 2006 - Property acquisition completed and specifications are developed for demolition of
buildings
May 2006 - Building permit applications filed with city inspections department
June 2006 - Building permits applications approved, park dedication fees paid, stormwater
management fees paid (if applicable)
July 2006 - Site preparation work begins and footings and foundations begin to be dug
November 2007 - Redevelopment complete
CVS:
May 2005 - Building construction and site preparation work continues
July 2005 - Sidewalk installation complete
August 2005 - Building complete and site landscaped
August 2005 - Certificate of Occupancy permit issued
August 2005 - Grand opening
City Center:
June 2005 - Finish business and property owner interviews.
June 2005 - Summarize meetings with business and property owners and present those
findings to the City Council.
July 2005 - City Council to provide further direction on redevelopment goals and objectives
August-October 2005 - Reconvene City Center Task Force to refine the original City Center
plan to reflect City Council direction
November 2005 - Conduct Community Open House to present Task Force recommendations
December 2005 - Finalize City Center Task Force recommendations and present those to the
City Council
January-February 2006 - Develop Requests for Qualification and Request for Proposals based
on City Center Task-Force and City Council input to distribute to interested developers
March 2006 - Distribute RFQ to interested developers and conduct "developer's roundtable"
April 2006- Evaluate Request for Qualifications and select developers to submit a Request for
Proposal
May 2006 - Invite qualified developers to submit RFP
May-June 2006 - Evaluate Request for Proposals and select "preferred" developer for City
Center Phase 1 area (to be determined by City Council)
May 2006 - Initiate proposed development terms negotiation and finalize what if any financial
assistance will be required of the city
May-July 2006 - Review and finalize concept redevelopment plans as submitted by preferred
developer
June 2006-July 2006 -Request appraisals of the selected redevelopment area(s), complete
relocation benefit study, conduct blight analysis for potential TIP District
August-December 2006 - Partner with preferred developer to initiate the acquisition of the
designated land in City Center Phase 1 redevelopment
August-December 2006 - Work with existing businesses located within Phase 1 area to
potentially relocate to other facility within City Center area, or relocate once new construction is
complete
December 2006 - Initiate redevelopment of Phase 1 of the City Center area (demolition, site
preparation, new construction)
Navarre Corporation
June 2005 - Minor site correction work completed
July-August 2005 - Final bond reduction request forwarded to City Council
Master Transfer
May 2005 - Submit building permit application for review
June 2005 - Site improvement agreement executed, building permit application approved and
site improvement bond submitted
July-November 2005 - Site improvements completed and building constructed
December 2005 - Bond reduction request forwarded to City Council
Northland Mechanical
June-July 2005 - Finish site work
July 2005 - Final bond reduction request forwarded to City Council
42n' & Quebec Avenue:
May 2005 - Soil borings conducted to determine appropriate location of proposed buildings
June 2005 - New Hope EDA to conduct public hearing regarding proposed land transfer to
Frey Development and Manley Land Development
June 2005 - Redevelopment plans to be submitted to the city for processing
July 2005 - Proposed purchase agreement to be considered by EDA
July 2005 - Redevelopment plans to be submitted to Planning Commission
August 2005 - Redevelopment plans submitted to City Council for consideration
September 2005 - Once plans are approved, property will be transferred to Manley Land
Development and Frey Development
September 2005 - Redevelopment agreement executed and building permit applications
submitted
September 2005 - Building permit issued and site preparation work initiated
October 2005-July 2006 - Buildings under construction
July 2006 - Grand opening of Viva Italia and office condominium development
A.C. Carlson
June-July 2005 - Finish site work
July 2005 - Final bond reduction request forwarded to City Council
Sinclair Development
June 2005 - Building permit application and plans expected to be filed
July-November 2005 - Demolition of existing site and redevelopment of new convenience
station and gas island
December 2005 - Bond reduction request forwarded to City Council
Woodbridge Senior Cooperative
June-August 2005 - Final site work completed
September 2005 - Final bond reduction request forwarded to City Council
5501 Boone Avenue North:
May 2005 - Stormwater management pond is excavated
May 2005 - Framing of the 35 unit apartment complex continues
June 2005 - Final storm sewer piping is installed on site
July 2005 - Building permit application made for 41 unit condominium building
July/August 2005 - Building permit for 41 unit condominium building is issued
August 2005 - Final TIP payment of $650,000 due at time building permit is issued for 41 unit
condominium project
September-October 2005 - Piling installation begins for condominium building
August 2005 - Work on 35 unit apartment building completed
August/September 2005 - Certificate of Occupancy permits issued for 35 unit apartment
building
September 2005 - Piling installation complete and foundation poured
October 2005-July 2006 - Framing and building construction on 41 unit condominium building
August 2006 - Final Certificate of Occupancy permits issued for condominium building
4301-17 Nevada Avenue North
May 2005 - City Council approved redevelopment plans for the construction of 6 twinhome
units
June 2005 - Once redevelopment plans approved, city will transfer 4317 Nevada A venue to
NCRC
June 2005 - City Police Department to conduct SWAT training at 4301 Nevada Avenue North
July 2005 - NCRC to demolish house at 4301 Nevada Avenue North
June-August 2005 - NCRC to develop bidding documents to solicit bids from redevelopment
contractors
August 2005 - Submit building permit application
August 2005 - Approve building permit application
September 2005 - Initiate redevelopment of the site
April 2006 - Complete redevelopment of the site
April 2006 - Obtain final Certificate of Occupancy permits
5207 Pennsylvania Avenue North
May 2005 - Preferred developer of the site selected
June 2005 - Conduct public hearing to transfer property to preferred developer
June 2005 - Transfer property to preferred developer
June 2005 - Building permit application submitted
July 2005 - Building permit application approved
July-November 2005 - Construction of new single family home
December 2005 - Certificate of Occupancy permit issued
Hillside Terrace and Regional Stormwater Pond:
June 2005 - Pond and boulevard restoration complete
June 2005 - Wear course paving installed
June-August 2005 - Review building permit applications as submitted for construction of 7
single family homes
June 2006 - Project complete with final Certificate of Occupancy permits issued
Projected 2005-06 TimeIine for Community Development Projects
Winnetka Green Redevelopment
Task Name Duration Start Finish May-OS Jun-OS Jul-OS Aug-OS Sep-05 Oct-OS Nov-05 Dee-OS Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06
Approve 2005 infrastructure project 1 month May-OS May-OS .
Approve quote for play equipment 1 month May-OS May-05
Ryland Homes general grading in park area 3 months May..(lS Jul-OS
Existing park play equipment removed 1 month May-05 Jun-05
Begin sa.l"!-itary' & storm sewer improvement in park 2 months May-OS Jun-OS
Begin St. Raphael parking lot reconstruction 2 months May-OS Jun..{}S
Sidewalk installation along Wtka & BLR complete 2 months May-OS Jun-OS .
Outlot A public hearing & land transfer 2 months Jun..(lS Jul-OS
B.P. application filed for final 4 buildings 1 month Jun-05 Jun-OS
B.P. application approved & construction begins 1 month Jun-05 Jun..{l5
Complete parking lot reconstruction & park grading 1 month Jul-05 Jul-OS
Construction of final 4 buildings complete 4 months Jun-OS Sep-05
Install play equipment 1 month Aug-OS Aug-OS
Final restoration of park complete 1 month Sep..(l5 Sep-os
Landscaping w/in Wtka Green project area complete 2 months Sep--os Oct-OS
Final e.O. permits issued 1 month Oct-OS Oct-OS . I
Winnetka Green project area work completed 1 month Nov-OS Nov..(lS
Grand re-opening of Elm Grove Park 1 month May-06 May-06 I ---=
Winnetka Townbomes Redevelopment
Task Name Duration Start Finish
Work on building construction continues 8 months May-OS Dec-OS
City Council approved Xcel utility burial proposal 1 month May-OS May-OS
Overhead utility burial 2 months Jun-OS Jul-OS
Storm sewer work initiated 1 month Jnn-OS Jun-OS
Sidewalk installation along Wtka complete 1 month Jul-OS Jul-OS
Meet wJWincrest Apt. re: stormwater pond imp 1 month Aug-OS Aug-DS
Prep & approve specs, mtg wI apt owner to finalize & bid 6 months Sep-OS Feb-06
Issue 22 Certificate of Occupancy permits 1 month Sep-05 Sep-OS
First TIF pmt due $400,000 1 month Sep-OS Sep-05
Issue final 22 Cert of Occupancy permits 1 month Dee-OS Dec-DS
Final TIF pmt due $400,000 1 months Dee-OS Dec-OS
Award pond imp bid & construct pond improvement 4 months Mar-06 Jun..Q6
CVS Development
Task Name Duration Start Finish
Work on building construction continues 4 months May-OS Aug-OS
Sidewalk installation complete 1 month Jul-OS Jul-OS'
Landscaping installed & Cert of Occupancy issued 1 month Aug-OS Aug-OS
Grand opening 1 month Aug-05 Aug-05
Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06
Oct-OS Nov-OS Dee-OS Jan-06 Feb..Q6 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06
Bass Lake Road Apartments
Task Name Duration Start Finish May~OS jun-D51 Jut-OS Aug~OS Sep-os Oct-DS Nov~OS Dee-OS Jan~06 Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr~06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul~06
Request for Qualifications submitted 1 month May-OS May-OS .
City Council review RFQ invitation for RFP 1 month Jun-OS Jun-DS'
Developers draft RFP for consideration 1.S months Jun-OS Jul-05
City Council select preferred developer 1 month Aug-OS Aug-05 .
Negotiate development terms & finalize concept plan 2 months Aug-OS Sep-D5
Initiate plans to improve BLR & realign Yukon & Xylon 2 months Aug-05 Sep-05
Collect soil borings and request appraisal 2 months Aug~OS Sep-OS
Update reloe. study & blight anal for potential TIF Disl. 2 months Aug-OS Sep"05
Finalize redevelopment concept & unit count 2 months Oct-DS Nov-DS
Consider all financial options induding TIF District 2 months Oct-OS Nav-OS
Conduct neighborhood open house 1 month Nov-OS Nov-DS
Present rede~ agreement & financial package to council 1 month Dec-05 Dee-OS
Initiate land acquisition process 4 months Jan-06 Apr-D6
Plans finalized & term sheet submitted to council 1 month Jan-06 Jan-06
CUP, site & bldg plan to P.c. for recommendation 1 month Feb-06 Feb-06
p,c. recommendation to City Council for consideration 1 month Feb-D6 Feb-D6
Property acquisition eomple~e 1 month May-D6 May-06
Demo specs drafted & demolition completed 4 months Mar-06 Jun-06 . -
Building permit application filed 1 month May-06 May~06
B.P. application dev. fees paid, site agreement executed 1 month JUn-06 Jun-06
Site preparation work begins & footings dug 1 month Jul-06 Jul-06
Redevelopment complete 17 months Jul-06 Nov~07 I
City Center Phase 1 N Winnetka Shopping Center Assumed to be Phase 1 (Phase 1 to be detennined by City Council, staff offering Phase 1 to begin wI Winnetka Shopping Center)
Task Name Duration Start Finish Jun-05 Jul~05 Aug~05 Sep-05 Oct-05 Nov~05 Dec-05 Jan-06 Feb~06 Mar~06 Apr-06 May.06 Jun~06 Jul~06 Aug-Q6 Deo.06
Complete business & property owner int 1 month Jun~05 Jun-05
Business mtg findings presented to Council 1 month Jun-OS Jun..()S
City Council redefine goals direct staff to procee 1 month Jul-OS Jul-OS
City Center T. F. meet to refine plan 3 months Aug~05 Oct-OS
Community open house to review new plans 1 month Nov~05 Nov-OS .
Present City Center T.F. findings to City Council 1 month Dec~05 Dec-OS
Draft RFQ & RFP specs based revised plans 2 months Jan~06 Feb-06
Distribute RFQ to interested developers 1 month Mar~06 Mar-06
City Council to evaluate RFQ 1 month Apr~06 Apr-06
Invite qualified developers to submit RFP 1 month May~06 May-06
Council to evaluate RFP & select pref dev 2 months May~06 Jun-06
Negotiate financial terms 3 months May~06 Jul-06
Finalize concept plans of pref developer 1 month Jul~06 Jul-06
Request appraisals of redev area 2 months Jun~06 Jul-06
Reloe study & blight anal. for possible TIF Dist. 2 months Jun~06 Jul-06
Initiate land acquisition of phase 1 redev 5 months Aug-06 Dee-06
Reloc Phase 1 bus to new dev, if interested S month Aug~06 Dec-06
Initiate redev (demo, site prep., new canst) 1 month Dec-06 Dec-06
Navarre Corporation
Task Name
Minor site correction work completed
Final hond reduction request to City Council
Master Transfer
Task Name
Submit building permit application
Site agreement executed, bond submitted
Building permit issued
Site improvements & building completed
Bond reduction request to city council
Duration Start Finish
1 month Jun~05 Jun-OS
2 months Jul-05 Aug-OS
Duration Start Finish
1 month May~OS May~05
1 month Jun-05 Jun~05
1 month Jun~OS Jun-OS
S months Jul~05 Nov-OS
1 month Dec~05 Dee-OS
Oct-05 Nov-05 Dee-OS Jan-06 Feb~06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May~06 Jun-06
Jul~OS Aug-OS Sep-os Oct~OS Nov~Os Dec-OS Jan~06 Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May.06 Jun~06
Northland Mechanical
Task Name
Complete site work
Final bond reduction request to City Council
Duration
2 months
1 month
42nd & Quebec Aveuue
5'm
}un-OS
Jul-05
Finish
]an-06
Feb--06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06
Jul-06
Oct~05 Nav-OS Dee-OS
Jul-05
Jut-Os
Task Name Duration Start Finish May-OS Jun-OSI JuWS Aug-05 Sep-05 Oct-OS Nov..o5 Dec-05 ]an-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06
Collect soil borings to locate buildings 1 month May-OS May-OS
Conduct public hearing regarding sale of proper 1 month Jun-05 Jun-OS
Redevelopment plans expected to be submitted 1 month Jun-OS Jun-OS
EDA consider purchase agreement 1 month Jul-05 Jut-OS
Redevelopment plans forwarded to P .C. 1 month lu1-05 }ul-05
City Council review redevelopment plans 1 month Aug-05 Aug-05
Transfer property to redevelopment team 1 month Sep-05 Sep-05
Redev. agreement signed 1 month Sep-05 Sep-05
B.P. application submitted 1 month Sep-05 Sep-05
B.P. application approved & dev fees paid 1 month Sep-05 Sep-05
Site work started & buildings constructed 10 months Oct~05 Jul-06 .
Grand opening of Viva Italia & office condos 1 month Jul-06 Jul-06
A.C. Carlson Appliances
Task Name
Complete site work
Final bond reduction request to City Council
Duration
2 months
1 month
Sinclair Redevelopment
Task Name Duration
Building permit application expected to be filed 1 month
Site demo & Redevelopment 5 months
Bond reduction request forwarded to City Counc 1 month
Start
Oct~05 Nov-D5 Dec-05
Feb.06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06
Jan-06
Jul-06
Finish
Jun-05
Jul-05
Jul-05
Jul-05
Start
Jun-OS
Jul-05
Dec-D5
Finish
Jun-OS
Nov-05
Dec-D5
Ju1-06
Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr~06 May-06 Jun-06
Jan-06
Woodbridge Senior Cooperative
Task Name
Complete site work
Final bond reduction request to City COllilcil
Duration
3 months
1 month
5501 Boone Avenue North
Task Name Duration
Excavate stormwater pond 1 month
Framing & building of 35 unit apt building 4 months
Final storm sewer piping installed on site 1 month
B.P. application for 41 unit condo bldg submitted 1 month
B.P. issued for 41 unit condo bldg 2 months
Final TIF pmt of $650,000 due at b.p. issuance 1 month
Piling installation for 41 unit condo bIdg 2 months
e.O. permits issued for 35 unit apt. building 1 month
41 unit condo framing & building 10 months
e.O. permits issued for 41 unit condo building 1 month
Start
Finish
Feb-06 Mar-06
Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06
}ul-06 Aug-06
}un-OS
Sep-os
Start Finish
May-OS
May-OS
Jun-OS
Jul-OS.
}ul-OS.
Aug-OS
Sep-05
Sep-Os
Oct-OS
Aug-06
Oct-OS Nov-OS Dec-OS
Jan-06
Aug-OS
Sep-os
Oct-OS Nov-OS Dee-OS
Feb-06 Mar-06. Apr-06 May-06 J11n-06
Jul-06 Aug-06
Jan-06
May-OS
Aug-OS
Jun-OS
Jul-05
Aug-05
Aug-OS
Oct-OS
Sep.j)S
Jul-06
Aug-06
4301-17 Nevada Avenue North
Task Name Duration Start Finish
Redevelopment plans approved 1 month May-05 May-OS
Transfer property to NCRC 1 month Jun-05 Jun-OS
Construction documents prepared for bids 3 months Jun-OS Aug-OS
4301 demolished 1 month Jul-OS Jul-OS
Building permit application submitted 1 month Aug-OS Aug.OS
Building permit application approved 1 month Aug-OS Aug-OS
Site redeveloped 8 months Sep-os Apr-06
e.O. permits issued for 6 twinhome units 1 month Sep-os Sep-os
JuWS Aug-OS Sep-OS Oct-OS Nav-OS Dec-OS Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06
5207 Pennsylvania Avenue North
Task Name
Preferred developer selected
Conduct public hearing regarding transfer
Transfer property to preferred developer
Building permit application submitted
Building permit application approved
Construct new single family home
e.O. permit issued
Duration
1 month
1 month
1 month
1 month
1 month
5 months
1 month
Start
May-OS
Jun..QS
Jun~OS
}un-OS
}ul-OS
}ul.05
Dee-OS
Finish
May-OS
Tun-OS
}uo-OS
}un~OS
}ul-OS
Nov-OS
Dee-OS
Jul-OS Aug:OS Sep.OS
Oct-OS Nov~OS Dee-OS
Jan-06
Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 JUn~06
Jul~06 Aug-06
Hillside Tenace and Regional Stormwater Pond
Task Name Duration Start Finish Jul-OS Aug-OS Sep-Os Oct-OS Nov-OS Dec-OS Jan-06 Feb~06 Mar.06 Apr-06 May.06 JUn.06 }uJ.06 Aug~06
Pond & boulevard restoration complete 1 month Jun-OS }un.OS
Wear course paving installed 1 month Jun-OS }un.05
Review B,P. applications as submitted 3 months Jun-OS Aug-05
Single family homes constructed'" 13 months Jun-OS Jun-06
c.o. permits issued as completed 1 month }un-06 Jun~06
* Individual builders will submit building plans for each home separately. Staff cannot commit as to the ultimate timing of the house construction on this development.
Request for Action
June 6, 2005
Page 2
the EDA indicated the asking price was too great and directed staff to discuss a potential joint acquisition of
the property with NCRC.
On May 25, 2005, city staff was advised by a representative of the property owner that they are willing to sell
the property for $150,000. City staff is seeking further discussion and direction from the City Council
regarding the potential acquisition of this property. The following is a proposed budget for the potential
acquisition and redevelopment of this property under the city's scattered site housing program:
Expenditures:
Acquisition
Environmental Hazard Survey
Demolition
Legal
Total:
$150,000
$ 600
$ 12,500 (estimated)
$ 2.500
$165,600
City staff has contacted Mike A very with A very Homes, the selected developer of the city owned property at
5207 Pennsylvania A venue North. Mr. A very has indicated that the city could reasonably expect to sell two
single family lots in the Nevada A venue neighborhood for approximately $68,000 per lot or $136,000 for both
lots. Mr. A very also indicated that the city could expect redeveloped properties that have a finished
assessable value of approximately $290,000 to $305,000 per unit. If the EDA were to acquire the property
under this proposal, there would be an approximate deficiency of $14,300 per lot or $29,600 total. However,
the additional tax revenue generated on the site would eventually recapture this initial capital investment.
Currently, the 4415 Nevada Avenue North property generates approximately $444 in annual city tax revenue.
If the property were subdivided into two single family residential housing units with an assessable value of
$295,000 per site, the combined sites would generate approximately $2,826 in annual city tax revenue.
If the City Council directed staff to acquire the property using EDA funds, city staff would initiate the process
to acquire the property and make the necessary applications to subdivide and grant minor variances for the
redevelopment of the property into two single family residential units. City staff would solicit redevelopment
proposals using similar redevelopment specifications that were used during the proposed transfer of 5207
Pennsylvania Avenue (3 bedroom, 2 bathroom units with approximately 1,800-1,900 square feet of finished
living space).
At its meeting of March 28, 2005, the EDA directed staff to contact NCRC to determine their interest in
acquiring the property for inclusion in the Nevada Avenue Twinhome project, if the EDA were to provide
limited financial assistance to the acquisition. City staff has discussed that proposal with NCRC and they
have indicated that Hennepin County and HUD will allow them to expend up to $120,000 for the purchase of
4415 Nevada A venue North. If the city were interested in partnering with NCRC in that manner, there would
need to be a capital investment of approximately $30,000 by the EDA. If the property were acquired, NCRC
would propose including the property in the Nevada Avenue Twinhome project and constructing a
twinhome structure (2 owner occupied units).
Based on the preliminary cost estimates provided by NCRC, the homes will have an assessable value of
$225,000 per unit. The combined sites would generate approximately $2,092 in annual tax revenue.
COUNCIL
REQUEST FOR ACTION
Originating Department
Approved for Agenda
Agenda Section
Community Development
6-6-05
Work Session
Item No.
B:
11.3
DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION RE
NG PROPOSED PURCHASE OF 4415 NEVADA AVENUE N.
REOUESTED ACTION
Staff requests Council discussion and direction regarding the proposed purchase of the property located at
4415 Nevada Avenue North.
POLICY/P AST PRACTICE
City goal #2 is to pursue the maintenance and redevelopment of commercial and residential properties within
the city. The City Council has been addressing the residential portion of this goal through the city's many
housing activities, including acquiring properties from willing sellers in designated redevelopment areas.
BACKGROUND
On May 23, 2005, the New Hope City Council approved the rezoning, variance, preliminary plat and site and
building plan requests made by Northwest Community Revitalization Corporation (NCRC) to redevelop the
properties located at 4301-17 Nevada Avenue North. The plans propose the construction of a 6 unit
twinhome development. All of the units will be owner occupied.
The owner of 4415 Nevada Avenue North has contacted the city and NCRC on numerous occasions to
determine their interest in acquiring the property at 4415 Nevada Avenue North for inclusion in the
redevelopment. As a result, NCRC commissioned an appraisal of the property in November 2004 which
estimated the value of the property at $105,000. In February 2005, the owner of 4415 Nevada A venue North
commissioned their own appraisal which estimated the market value of the property at $124,000.
In March 2005, city staff presented this information to the EDA and indicated that the property owner
forwarded a letter to the city that it would be interested in selling the property to the city or NCRC in the
$160,000 price range. Staff indicated that NCRC had attempted to acquire the property; however, due to
funding constraints imposed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, it could not meet
the seller's asking price. Staff advised the EDA that if it were to acquire the property, staff would recommend
that the house on the property be demolished and the property subdivided into two single family residential
lots which would be sold to a private developer under the city's scattered site housing program. At that time,
MOTION BY
SECOND BY
TO:
I:\RFA \PLANNING\Housin \ 4415 \ Q-Discussion and Direction Work Session.doc
Request for Action
June 6, 2005
Page 3
.
If the City Council were interested in partnering with NCRC, city staff would advise them as such and
schedule closing with NCRC as soon as possible. City staff will assist in obtaining the necessary approvals to
redevelop the property into two twinhome units.
REOUEST FOR ACTION
City staff offers three options for the City Council to consider at this time.
1. The City Council could elect not to acquire the property at 4415 Nevada Avenue North and not
partner with NCRC and have the property remain in its current condition. City staff will continue
to monitor the property and if the owner proposes a lower cost, it will forward that information to
the City Council at that time.
2. The EDA could elect to acquire the property under its scattered site housing program. If that were
the direction of the EDA, city staff would propose the 16,866 square foot lot could be subdivided
into two parcels for redevelopment into single family owner occupied units. As illustrated above,
the EDA would make an initial capital investment of approximately $29,600. If the City Council
directs staff to acquire this property under this option, city staff will present a resolution
scheduling a public hearing regarding the potential acquisition to the EDA at its meeting of June
13, 2005. At that meeting, staff will also seek authorization to prepare a purchase agreement that
will be considered by the EDA at its meeting of July 11, 2005.
3. The EDA could elect to partner with NCRC to acquire the property. NCRC is able to fund $120,000
of the acquisition under the guidelines set forth by Hennepin County and the U.s. Department of
Housing and Urban Development. The remaining $30,000 capital investment could be funded by
the EDA.
The initial capital investment made by the EDA under option Nos. 2 or 3 would be recovered through the
increase in property taxes due to a much greater assessable value. Further, the potential redevelopment of
this property would be beneficial to the surrounding neighborhood as this is the last property in the
neighborhood that is in a substandard condition and a candidate for redevelopment.
City staff seeks discussion and direction regarding the three options listed above.
FUNDING
If the EDA were interested in acquiring the property or partnering with NCRC, EDA funds are available to
fund the acquisition.
ATTACHMENTS
o Letter from Amy Biegert (granddaughter of Agnes Olson, property owner) - May 25, 2005
JUN-25-2005 10:16
P.02/02
Td- C}rW\ ~ ~a-.\\-SO n
\=(0C C~5\) ~~'6'- )011
lO w'0()l'J ~+ \('(\~ C2DVlCQYn:,
1'\~'0Q."::> alson ~\- L\l\\~ \\\e\JCl.d ~
\~ D\-~\ \ \y\\-~eS+e~ \~ S0.\'\05
'rmr Y'fo~\\~ l\oh) \ D \~-eW
~?-e l m'fU fo~ $ \50) OOD
y~e U:>'0~& ~'(~~
6-~'u~~ AYv'L) (Q;)~/d) l\qO' C;d:d~
.~\~ C{ye<s\\(J~ D'f' \JJ<c\C>ks-
--'0r\(~;i'f\ \~ ~ "--\ OLL
TOTAL P.02
COUNCIL
REQUEST FOR ACTION
Originating Department
Approved for Agenda
Agenda Section
City Manager
June 6, 2005
Unfinished & Org. Business
Item No.
By: Daniel J. Donahue
11.4
CONTINUED DISCUSSION REGARDING DEVELOPMENT OF A CITY MANAGER COMPENSATION POLICY
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of April 4, 2005, the council initiated discussion regarding city goals and city manager's performance for 2005.
At that time, the Council discussed the possibility of developing a compensation program for the city manager. The discussion
continued at its meeting of May 16, 2005. At that time, staff was directed to draft a city manager compensation policy and
report back at a future meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
New materials:
City Manager contract and adjustments, 1982 through 2005
The Consequences of Compensation Limits
Salary Cap for MN city managers effective August 1, 2005
2004 ICMA City Manager compensation survey cut of comparable cities, all states
City of New Hope 2005 Compensation Plan for Non-Union Employees
City of New Hope HAY job evaluation points
Draft City of New Hope City Manager Compensation Policy
From 5/16/05 agenda packet:
Background material from 2000
Draft City Manager Compensation Program
City Managers' Average Salaries by State (2000)
Response to Council's questions (4/14/05)
Health insurance premium rates (1/1/05)
Travel Allowances for department directors
Salary surveys of department directors (marketplace and neighbor cities)
MOTION BY
SECOND BY
TO:
l:rfa\Admin\q-CM comp policy.doc
City Manager Wage, Benefit, and Contract History -
tsase
Wage Deferred IRS & PERA Aulo Resolution
Year Wage Increase Income Income Allowance Total Number Notes
1982 $36,000 $36,000 Car Provided $36,000 Contract
1983 $38,520 7.00% $38,520 Car Provided $38,520 83-202
1984 $41,600 8.00% $41,600 Car Provided $41,600 84-207
1985 $45,763 10.01% $45,763 Car Provided $45,763 85- ???
1986 $50,338 10.00% $50,336 Car Provided $50,338 86-30
$55,330 $55,330 Car Provided $55,330 -
1987 9.92% 86-165
1988 $60,863 10.00% $60,863 Car Provided $60,863 88-35
1989 $67,000 10.08% $67,000 Car Provided $67,000 89-23
1990 $70,685 5.50% $70,685 Car Provided $70,685 90-85
1991 $75,406 6.68% $75,406 Car Provided $75,406 91-23
1992 $77 ,480 2.75% $77,480 Car Provided $77,480 92-122
1993 $79,611 2.75% $79,611 Car Provided $79,611 93-99
1994 $81 ,800 2.75% $81,800 Car Provided $81,800 94-133
$84,458 $84,458 Car Provided $84,458 -
1995 3.25% 95-92
1996 $86,907 2.90% $86,907 $7,200 $94,107 96-72
1997 $89,427 2.90% $89,427 $7,200 $96,627 97-16
1998 $92,439 3.37% $92,439 $7,200 $99,639 98-12 Waae increase of 2.25% on base + $1,000 Deriormamce
1999 $94,182 3.00% $94,182 $7,800 $101,982 98-206
2000 $97,222 3.25% $97,222 $7,800 $105,022 00-47
2001 $99,900 2.75% $2,500 $102,400 $8,100 $110,500 01-31
2002 $101,899 2.00% $3,750 $105,649 $8,100 $113,749 02-76 PL increased from five to six weeks + $1,250 added to deferred
2003 $101,899 0.00% $3,750 $105,649 $8,100 $113,749 03-119 PL= to 3% of waae or 62 hrs added to bank. PL max increased to 840 hrs
2004 $107,987 2.00% $3,750 $111,737 $4,050 $115,787 04-32 One half of auto allowance converted to base waae.
2005 $110,535 2.36% $3,750 $114,285 $4,050 $118,335 04-216 13.25 PL
2006 $0 $0 -
2007 $0 $0
2008 $0 $0
2009 $0 $0
2010 $0 $0
$1,847,251
Fi\IPLOY~IENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this .LL day of January, 1982,
by and between the City of New Fope, State of Minnesota, a municipal corpor-
ation, hereinafter called the "City," as party of the first part, and Daniel J.
Donahue, hereinafter called "Employee," as party of the second part, both of
whom understand as follows:
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City desires to employ the services of said Daniel J.
Donahue as City Jllanager of the City of New Hope, as provided by Minnesota
Statutes 412.601 to 412.751; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to provide certain benefits,
establish certain conditions of employment, and tc! set working conditions of
said Employee; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to (1) secure and retain
the services of Employee and to provide inducement for him to remain in such
employment, (2) to make possible full work productivity by assuring Employee's
morale and peace of mind with respect to future security, (3) to act as a deter-
rent against malfeasance or dishonesty for personal gain on the Part of the Employee,
and (4) to provide a just means for terminating Employee's services at such time
as he may desire or when he may be unable fully to discharge his duties due to
age or disability or when City may desire to otherwise terminate his employ; and
City;
WHEREAS, Employee desires to accept employment as City !I~anager of said
NOW, THEREEORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained,
the parties hereto agree as follows:
SECTION I - DUTIES
City hereby agrees to employ said Daniel J. Donahue as City Manager of said
City to perform the functions and duties specified in Sections 412.601 to 412.751
of the Statutes, State of Minnesota and to perform such other legally permissible
and proper duties and functions as the City Council shall from time to time assign.
SECTION II - TERM
A. Nothing in this agreement shall prevent, limit, or otherwise interfere
with the right of the City Council to terminate the services of Employee
at any time, subject only to the provisions set forth in Section III,
paragraph A, of this agreement, and Minnesota Statutes 412.641 which
provides for the right of the Employee to a hearing after employment as
manager for one year.
B. Nothing in this agreement shall prevent, limit, or otherwise interfere
.with the right of the Employee to resign at any time from his position with
the City, subject only to the provision set forth in Section III, paragraph
C. of this agreement.
C. Employee agrees to remain in the exclusive employ of City until December
31, 1983 and neither to seek, to accept, nor to become employed by any
other employer until said termination date, unless said termination date is
effected as hereinafter provided. The term "employed" shall not be construed
to include occasional teaching. writing, or consulting performed on Employee's
time off.
D. In the event written notice is not given by either party to this contract
to the other 90 days prior to the termination date as hereinabove provided,
this contract shall be extended on the same terms and conditions as herein
provided. all for an additional period of one year ~ Said contract shall
continue thereafter for one-year periods unless 90 days written notice is
given prior to time of expiration by either party.
SECTION III - TERMINATION AND SEVERANCE PAY
A. In the event Employee is terminated by the City Council on or before
April 30, 1983 while able and willing to perform the duties of the City
Manager, or if within the same time period Employee, at his option,
decides to resign from the position of City Manager, he shall, at his option,
have the right to return to a position of Inspector with no loss of seniority
with the New Hope Police Department. If, after April 30. 1983 Employee
is terminated by the Council as City Manager while able and willing to
perform as City Manager, then in that event the City agrees to pay him a
lump sum cash payment equal to three months then current aggregate salary;
provided. however, that in the event Employee is terminated because of
his conviction of any illegal act involving personal gain or attempted gain
to him, then in that event, the City shall have no obligation to pay the
aggregate sum designated in this paragraph. All of the above severance
pay provisions become null and void if Employee returns to Police
Department.
B. In the event the City at any time refuses, following written notice, to
comply with any provision benefitting the Employee herein. or the Employee
resigns following a vote by the City Council demanding he resign, then,
in that event, Employee may, at his option, be deemed to be "terminated"
at the date of such refusal to comply, or vote. within the meaning and
context of the herein severance pay provision.
- 2 -
C. In the event Employee voluntarily resigns his position with the City
before expiration of the aforesaid term of employment, then Employee
shall give the City three (3) months notice in advance, and no three-
month cash payment for such separation shall be due or payable.
D. l\othing in this Section III shall be construed to abrogate or limit the
provisions of Section X herein, entitled Vacation and Sick Leave/Holidays,
or XIn C, "Other Terms and Conditions of Employment".
SECTION IV - SALARY
City agrees to pay Employee for his services rendered pursuant hereto an
annual base salary of $36,000, payable in installments at the same time as
other employees of the City are paid.
In addition, City agrees to increase said base salary and/or other benefits of
Employee in such amounts and to such an extent as the City Council may determine
that it is desirable to do so on the basis of an annual salary review of said
employee made at the same time as similar consideration is given other employees
generally. The first review and possible adjustment shall be considered for
January I, 1983. _.__n_. -----
SECTION V - HOURS OF WORK
The minimum work week of Employee shall average forty (40) hours over a
given 30-day period plus any additional work time reasonably required to
discharge the executive and administrative duties and responsibilities of the
Office of City Manager. It is recognized that Employee must devote a great deal
of his time outside normal office hours to business of the City, including City
Council meetings, Planning Commission meetings, League meetings, citizen
groups, etc. Compensatory time off or overtime pay shall not accrue to the
benefit of the Employee due to the nature of his duties as City Manager.
SECTION VI - AUTOMOBILE
Employee's duties require that he shall have the exclusive but restricted use
at all times during his employment with the City of an automobile suitable to
his position provided to him by the City. City shall be responsible for paying
for liability, property damage, and comprehensive insurance and for the purchase,
operation, maintenance, repair, and regular replacement of said automobile. Use
of said automobile shall be restricted to business purposes only including trips
from and to home and limited to the exclusive use by Employee or other
appropriate City employees as designated by the Employee.
- 3 -
SECTION VII - DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
The City agrees to budget and to pay the professional dues and subscriptions
of the Employee. necessary for his continuation and full participation in
national, regionals, state and local associations and organizations necessary and
desirable for his oontinued professional participation. growth and advancement
and for the good of the City. These shall include membership in the ICMA,
Minnesota 1\1anager's Association, HAMA and such other memberships as may be
approved in the adoption of the Annual City Budget.
SECTION VIll - PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPl\lENT
A. City hereby agrees to budget and to pay the travel and subsidized
expenses of Employee for professional and official travel, meetings and
occasions adequately to continue the professional development of Employee
and to adequately pursue necessary official and other functions for the
City, including but not limited to. the Annual Conference of ICMA, the
State League of Municipalities and such other national, regional, state
and local governmental groups and committees thereof, which Employee
serves as a member pursuant to statutory authorization. Employee shall
be able to choose meetings to attend each year within budget limits as
established by the City Council. The Employee shall be authorized
attendance at only two annual ICMA Conferences during the four year
period July 15, 1982 and July 15, 1986.
B. City also agrees to consider in its annual budget the travel and sub:-
sistence expenses of Employee for short courses, institutes. and seminars
that are necessary for his professional development as a City J\"anager and
for the good of the City.
SECTION IX - GENERAL EXPENSES
City recognizes that certain expenses of a nonpersonal and generally job-affiliated
nature are incurred by Employee, and hereby agrees to reimburse or to pay said
general expenses, and the Finance Director is hereby authorized to disburse
such monies upon receipt of duly executed expense or petty cash vouchers,
receipts, statements, or personal affidavits, and include in monthly disbursement
statement for City Council approval.
SECTION X - VACATION AND SICK LEAVE/HOLIDAYS
All provisions of the City Code and Personnel Rules and Regulations relating
to vacation and sick leave, holidays, working conditions and other fringe
benefits as they now exist or hereinafter may be amended, for department heads,
including provisions governing accrued vacation and sick leave and payment
therefore on termination of employment, shall apply to Employee. All prior
service as an employee of the City shall be included in calculating the above
benefits for the Employee.
- 4 -
SECTION XI - HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE
City agrees to provide life and hospitalization, surgical and comprehensive
medical insurance for Employee and his dependents and to pay the premium
thereon equal to that which is provided for department heads in the City.
SECTION XII - RETIREMFNT
A. Employee shall be covered by the normal City retirement system (colT'bined
Social Security and PERA) , except as provided in Band C below.
B. The City shall provide the Employee an opportunity to participate in
the City Manager election of Deferred Compensation Plan as provided
by Chapter 254, Section 1, rTinnesota Laws of 1981, at his option, as a
substitute for PERA coverage.
C. The City shall provide Employee. if he does not select option "B," an
oppcrtunity to participate in a qualified Deferred Compensation Plan with
all contributions to this plan paid from Employee's regularly established
annual salary.
SECTION XIII - OTHER TERr"S AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMFNT
A. The City Council shall fix any such other terms and condition of employ-
ment, as it may deterlT'ine from time to time, relating to the perforlT'ance
of Employee, provided such terlT'S and conditions are not inconsistent with
or in conflict with the provisions of this agreement, or State law.
B. All provisions of the City Code, and regulations and rules of City
relating to vacation and sick leave, retirement and pension system
contributions, holidays, and other fringe benefits and working conditions
as they now exist or hereafter may be amended, also shall apply to
Employee as they would to other employees of City, in addition to said
benefits enumerated specifically for the benefit of Employee, except as
herein provided.
C. Employee shall be entitled to receive the same vacation and sick leave
benefits as are accorded department heads, including provisions governing
accrual and payment therefor on termination of employment.
SECTION YJV - GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. The text herein shall constitute the entire agreelT'ent betwe.en the
parties.
- 5 -
B. This agreement shall be binding upon end blure to the benefit of the
heirs at law and personal representative.
C. This agreement shall become binding upon the parties cocrnencing
January 11, 1982, but the employment of the Employee and all terms and
conditions relating thereto shall not be effective until P,!ay I, 1982.
D. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this agreement is
held to be unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable, the remainder of
this agreement, or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall
not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEPEOF, the City of New Hope has caused this agreement
to be signed and executed in its behalf by its Mayor, and lI'anager, and the
Employee has signed and executed this agreement, the day and year first
above written.
CITY OF NEW HOPE
ByCdW~~~GJv/
/ Edw. . Ericksolt, Mayor
/! '
.7/'1",1
/ I.
By ,'i
-Rarlyn
~.~
Da~ahue, Employee
- 6 -
_.'';' 2--
RESOLUTION
REGARDING 1983 SALARIES AND BENEFITS
WHEREAS, the 1983 Budget has been adopted, and
WHEREAS, the bu~aet anticipates the establishment of new salary levels for
the city's employees,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of New Hope
that the following policy be adopted effective January 1, 1983:
1.
The City Manaqer and all full time clerical positions shall
ceive a 7% salary adjustment for 1983 on January 1, 1983.
cal positions shall have a 1983 pay range of:
re-
Cleri-
Start 6 Mos. 12 Mos. 24 Mos.
Special Assessment Clerk $7.06 $7.26 $7.68 $8.07
Clerk/Sec. and Acct.Clerk 6.08 6.27 6.59 6.94
Departmental Clerk 5.82 6.00 6.33 6.66
Clerk 5.08 5.26 5.55 5.83
36 Mos.
$8.45
7.38
7.06
6.15
2. The City Manager may at his discretion authorize any merit salary
increase he decides is appropriate to incumbents in technical,
professional, administrative and all other positions not covered
by union or professional contracts for 1983, effective January 1,
1983 except as noted below:
a) The Police Inspector shall receive a $lOO/month increase
commencing at the end of the probationary period during
1983 and shall receive the same insurance contribution for
1983 as provided in the Police Officer Labor Agreement.
3. 'Parttime, seasonal and temporary employees, other than members of
the Fire Department, shall be paid based on budget appropriations,
pay for comparable full time positions and as required by the labor
market within the regulations of the State and Federal pay laws.
4. The 1983 city contribution toward group health and hospital and
life insurance shall be $125/month per employee having family co-
verage. The city will pay the entire cost of single coverage
for the current insurance package.
5. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to transfer
funds as necessary from the working capital or surplus to COver
the costs of these new salaries and benefits. The City Manager is
authorized to make merit adjustments or adjustments or changes in
duty assignments in accord with personnel rules.
Adopted this 27th day of December, 1982.
ATTEST:
~~
~lerk/Treasurer
/ c:J
c5wg1A-(~C c-/
t/ Mayor
c
:2~ 1
-"'"
RESOLUTION
REGARDING 1984 SALARIES AND BENEFITS
WHEREAS, the 1984 budget has been adopted, and
WHEREAS, the budget anticipates the establishment of new salary levels
for the city's employees,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City,Council of the City of New
Hope that the following policy be adopted effective January
1, 1984:
1. The City Manager shall receive a 8% salary adjustment on Jan-
uary 1, 1984
2. Full-time clerical positions shall receive a 6% salary adjust-
ment on January 1, 1984 with a pay range of:
Start 6 Mo. 12 Mo. 24 Mo. 36 Mo.
Special Assessment Clerk $7.48 $7.69 $8.14 $8.55 $8.95
'Clerk/Sec. & Acct. Clerk 6.44 6.64 6.98 7.35 7.82
Department Clerk 6.16 6.36 6.70 7.05 7.48
Clerk 5.39 5.57 5.88 6.17 6.51
3. Incumbents in technica~ professional, administrative and all
positions not covered by union or professional contracts shall
receive salary and benefit increases at the discretion of the
City Manager. Such wages and benefits will be based upon per-
formance in f~lfilling job responsibilities and duties assigned.
Further, such ~ages and benefits will in total conform to and
shall not exceed, the adopted 1984 budget.
4. The 1984 city contribution toward group health, hospital and
life insurance shall remain at $125/Mo. per employee having
family coverage unti16-30-84, at which time an increase in the
city's contribution will be considered. This consideration
will be based upon actual changes in rates that will go into
effect on 7-1-84.
5. Part-time, seasonal and temporary employees, other than members
of the Fire Department, shall be paid based on budget appropria-
tion, pay for comparable full-time positions, and as required
by the labor market within the regulations of the state and
federal pay laws.
6. The City Manager is hereby authorized to establish an incentive
pay program for full-time employees. :'Me is further authorized
to approve incentive pay to a maximum of $500 in wages, bene-
fits, or a combination of both to those employees who have
fulfilled their individual incentive performance plans pre-
?-f 1 ~ I
,
(
-
viously agreed upon by the City Manager and that employee's
department head.
6. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to transfer
funds as necessary from the working capital or surplus to
cover the costs of these new salaries and benefits. The City
Manager is authorized to make merit adjustments or adjust-
ments and changes in duty assignments in accord with personnel
rules.
Adopted this 27th Day of December, 1983
/~J~~'
...
~ '<It". /
Mayor
ATTEST:
4J~~
lerk/Treasurer
RESOLUTION
REGARDING 1985 SALARIES AND BENEFITS
\YHEREAS, the 1985 Budget has been adopted, and
~~HEREAS, the budget anticipates the establishment of a new salary level
for city employees,
~m\f, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council oE the City of ~Jew
Hope that the following policies be adopted effective January 1,
1985:
1. The City Manager shall receive a 10% salary adjustment on
January 1, 1985.
2. Full-time clerical positions shall receive a 4.75% salary adjust-
ment on January 1,_ 1985. The pay range of:
Start 6 Months l2 Months 24 Months 36 ~1onths
Assessment Clerk $ 7.73 $ 7.97 $ 8.44 $ 8.90 $ 9.69
Administrative Clerk 7.30 7.52 7.86 8.22 8.48
Clerical Assistant 6.86 7.07 7.48 7.79 8.l9
Department Clerk 6.46 6.66 7.05 7.45 7.84
Clerk 5.63 5.79 6.l4 6.47 6.82
3. Encumbants in technical, professional, administrative and all posi-
tions not covered by union or profession~l contracts shall receive
salary and benefit increases at the discretion of the City Manager.
Such wages and benefits will be based upon performance, fulfilling
job responsibilities and duties assigned. Further, such wages and
benefits will. in total conform to and shall not exceed the adopted
1985 Budget.
4. The 1985 city contribution toward Group Health, hospital and life
insurance shall increase by $5, to $150 per employee having family
coverage, until June 30, 1985, at which time a further increase in
the city's contribution will be considered. This consideration
will be based on actual changes in rates that will go into effect
on July 1, 1985 and shall not exceed the adopted 1985 Budget.
5. Part-time, seasonal, and temporary employees, other than members
of the Fire Department, shall be paid based upon budget appropria-
tion, pay for comparable full-time positions, and as required by
the labor market within t~e regulations of the State and Federal
pay laws.
6. The Fire Department personnel will receive a 4.75% increase of
total 1984 dollars set aside. The City Manager is authorized to
set 1985 alarm response, training, public education, regular pay
for Assistant Chief, Engineer II, Engineer I, custodian, clerical,
stand-by pay and miscellaneous costs.
- 2 -
7. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to transfer
funds as necessary from the working capital or surplus to co;:er
the costs of these new salaries and benefits. The City ~dnager
is also authorized to make merit adjustments or adjustments d.nd
'::hanges in duty assignments in accord '....ith. personnel ['-.lIes.
Adopted this 28th day of December 1984.
./
~
\...---- "{! ,-
/
/
-,x--.
/! -
; (~1'
~Mayor
,
I J
m",,/-~y/,~L/AL(
Acting Clerk
./
/'
>
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor Erickson
City Manager
9/25/86
Manager's Salary
As requested, I am providing you with my salary history. I am also
presenting data on salaries paid to other managers in the area.
Year Annual Salary Hourly Rate
1982 $ 36,000 $ 17 .1429
1983 $ 38,668 $ 18.5192
1984 $ 41,600 $ 19.9241
1985 $ 45,763 $ 21. 917
1986 $ 50,338 $ 24.1083
Sa laries of managers in the area for 1986 are:
% Increase
Start
8.0%
7.6%
10.0%
10.0%
Maple Grove $ 55,500
Crystal $ 64,500
Golden Valley $ 54,000
Brooklyn Center $ 64,000
Brooklyn Park $ 68,640
Robbinsdale $ ',2,700
Plymouth $ 70,000
The average salary for managers and administrators in cities in size from
Minnetonka to Andover is $55,000.
I had requested an
effective July 1,
be $52,169 for the
increase to a rate that is equivalent to $54,000
1986." If this was made then my total 1986 salary 'Nould
year, or a total increase of 14% over my 1985 salary.
I am requesting consideration of an increase to $58,000 for 1987. If I
was given the mid-year adjustment (July 1, 1986) as stated above, then my
increase would be 7.4%. If there was no mid-year increase, then to arrive
at $58,000 in 1987 would require a 15.2% increase over 1986.
As I have previously stated, I am not asking for parity or to be paid
equivalent to other managers in this area. However, I believe I have
earned the consideration through experiences and performance to be
somewhat close and very close to the overall metropolitan average for
cities between 10,000 - 50,000 in population.
Last year I asked the City Council to consider an allowance over three
years in order that I might sell my howe and move to the city. ~fter
discussion with the Council it was agreed that I would withdraw my request
and that the Council would consider increasing my wages over an 18 month
period with a performance review every six months. The purpose, as I
understood it, was to bring my wage and benefit package up to a level that
was closer to the other managers in the area if performance on my part was
good. Tnus, I could afford to move to the city.
-2-
I have rrade a corrmi ttment to my future and to the city by buying a home
and moving to the city. This was at my own expense and I have not asked
the Council to compensate me in any way, except for good job performance.
If the review recently completed was good, then I respectfully request
that the Council increase my wage to $58,000 effective January 1, 1987.
Thank you for considering this request. If any additional information is
needed, please let me know.
~L/~~~,-
Daniel J. Donahue
City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 86-30
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CITY MANAGER'S
1986 WAGE AND BENEFIT PACKAGE AND
ESTABLISHING PERFORMANCE REVIEW SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, Daniel Donahue was appointed New Hope City Manager on
May 1, 1982, and has served in that capacity to the
l?resent; ,md
WHEREAS, an employment agreement between the city and Daniel
Donahue was entered into on January 11, 1982, which
specifies certain services of Daniel Donahue as City
Manager and provides for certain benefits and
conditions of employment; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to (1) secure and
retain the services of Daniel Donahue, and l?rovide
inducement for him to remain in such employment, (2) to
make l?ossible full work productivity by assuring
employee's morale and peace of mind with respect to
future security, (3) to act as a deterrent against
malfeasance or dishonesty for personal gain on the l?art
of Daniel Donahue, and (4) to coml?ensate Daniel Donahue
for l?erformance in the position of City Manager as
judg-ed-by-per-i-od ic-performance-revrew:,.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the New Hope City Council
desires to:
1. Compensate Daniel Donahue for performance in the
position of City Manager during 1985 by increasing
his salary $4,576.20, retroactive to January 1,
1986.
2.
Continue to provide an automobile as outlined in
Section VI of the Eml?loyment Agreement and change
that section of the agreement to allow for
in-state personal use of the automobile if the
city is compensated at the rate of $.205 per
mile. This compensation is to be paid once, at
the end of each calendar year.
>
3. Adopt City Manager's Goals and Objectives as found
in Appendix A, for both six month periOdS in 1986.
Adopted by the City Council this 24th day of February, 1986.
c;;J;:Jczt;~ur/ /
/ Mayor /
/
Attest:
(i .j:;J. .
,_ " (e ~ LV'. ( it.l, Gut-l.<~
City Clerk
APPENDIX "All
1986 CITY MANAGER'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
MISSION OF CITY MANAGER'S POSITION
The City Manager is to serve the City Council and the citizens of New Hope to
the best of his ability and with all necessary resources and in a manner that
is consistent with policies and goals of the City Council, State Statutes,
City Code, and Ethics and Moral Code of City Managers, as adopted by the Inter-
national City Managers Association.
GOALS
1. Effectively obtain and utilize the resources of people, time, money and
energy to deliver all approved services to property Owners and residents.
2. To manage resources through effective staff and minimize direct program
administration.
3. Emp~asize the management of programs rather than activities.
4. Promote decision making at the level of service delivery.
5. Increase job specialty biases of department heads and increase cooperation
anasnar1.ng.
6. Deliver services more effectively and efficiently through goals and Objec-
tives that are more clearly defined.
7. Where possible, organize city staff by function rather than individual acti-
vities.
8. Foster system and conceptual thinking among staff.
9. Treat individuals as adults, in a manner that is fair and consistent.
10. Where possible, promote group thinking instead of individual in decision
making.
11. Where possible, seek concensus among staff in decision making process.
- 2 -
OBJECTIVES
During 1986 the following specific and measurable objectives will be required of
the City Manager. Performance reviews will be based upon these objectives and
whether they were achievd or not.
A. :~OUTINE SERVICE DELIVERY
Objectives
1. The delivery of routine day in and day out
services to the City of New Hope. This is a
very broad category but it is the most impor-
tant objective of the City Manager. These
routine services are outlined in over 100 pro-
grams. Each program has stated objectives
for the delivery of that service. Programs
are grouped under the six major departments.
The services that are delivered through the
programs are basic, normal services that are
considered routine.
B. ROUTINE YEARLY PRQJECTS AFFECTING. RESIPENTS
The objectives here are
throughout the year and
organization at certain
How Measured
Quarterly reports, complaints
received, personal observa-
tion, review of Department
Head performance, Budget.
routine objectives that occur at certain times
have major impacts on both the community and the
times throughout the year.
Objectives
1. Street Projects during 1986
- Boone Avenue, 42nd to Medicine Lake Road
- 36th Avenue, Winnetka to Louisiana
- Industrial Center
2. Capital Improvement Program
All activities and projects outlined in the
1986 Capital Improvement Program will be
completed.
How Measured
First Period - all street
projects will be planned
and developed. Appropriate
hearings will be held, specs
written and bidding conducted.
Second Period - street pro-
jects will be implemented and
completed.
First Period - all items
planned, developed and
implementation 'begun.
Second Period - all projects
implemented and completed~
- 3 -
C. BUDGET
Objectives
How Measured
A new budgeting process will be developed,
existing format will be planned, developed,
and implemented.
1st Period - plan, develop,
and implement budget process.
2nd Period - budget approved
and certified to County~
D. SPECIAL ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNITY PROJECTS
These Objectives are neither routine nor are they normally done at some time
throughout the normal year. They are objectives concerning projects and
programs that really impact the community and/or the organization.
Objectives
How Measured
1. Plufka Development Prcject
First Period - finish
planning and implement
program for construction
and development of project.
Second period - continue
development with the build-
ing and closing of half of
Lhe-..lots.
2. Medicine Lake Road Improvements
First Period - plan project
and obtain agreements among
three cities.
Second Period - hold neces-
sary hearings and develop
implementation schedule.
3. 42nd Avenue Redevelopment
First Period - define pro-
jects, feasibility $tudIes~
for each project, select and
prioritize projects, develop
implementation schedule,
initiate financing studies.
Second Period - begin im-
plementing selected project.
5. Continue implementing computer systems.
First Period - complete study
and hold hearings with Plan-
ning Commission/Council.
Second Period - develop pro-
gram for achieving selected
Objectives approved in study.
First Period - complete 85%
of program development as
outlined in or~ginal contract.
Second Period - complete
100% program development and
implement all financial and
accounting programs.
4. Complete Vacant Land Study
- 4 -
6. Overhaul city records system.
7. Evaluate and Make Necessary Changes
in Planning and Zoning Process.
8. Evaluate insurance and risk management
programs.
9. Make necessary changes in emergency manage-
ment/civil defense programs.
D. PERSONNEL
First Period - complete
upgrade of central files,
police files, park and ree,
and manager.
Second Period - complete
upgrade in all other city
department s .
First Period - study pro-
blems and needs, develop
options, develop plans for
change.
Second Period - implement
changes and use new process.
First Period - review in-
insurance needs of city,
evaluate current insurance
program, review specifica-
tions, make necessary changes.
First Period - update and
reformat emergency plan,
evaluate.
There are a considerable number of changes that must be made in our personnel
administration areas. Several are required by State Law and the others in
order to promote efficient, fair administration of Personnel Rules and Regu-
lations.
Objectives
1. Complete and begin planning for implementa-
tion of Comparable Worth Study.
2. Implement laws and rules concerning Fair
Labor Standards Act.
3. Review and update Personnel Rules and Regula-
tions.
How Measured
First Period - complete
study, receive input from
staff, personnel board on
ways to implement.
Second Period - develop
specific plans for imple-
mentation in 1987.
First Period - review city
policies for conflict,
develop plan for implemen-
tation and implement.
First Period - change in
order to implement Fair
Labor Standards Act.
Second Period - change and
plan for implementation
according to Comparable
Worth Study findings.
- 5 -
D. 4.
Update administrative and procedural manual
5. Upgrade personnel administration.
6. Plan and implement team building program.
E. PERSONAL
First and Second Period -
Changes and manual closely
tied to implementation of
computer system. As computer
programs are implemented and
used! a corresponding change
will be made in the adminis-
trative manual.
First period - implement new
filing system for personnel
folders, collect all personn~l
records from departments and
put in central filing.
Second period - upgrade rules
and regulations pertaining to
part-time employees.
First Period - identify team
building needs, identify
resources available, layout
program, hold at least one
initial formal team building
seminar.
Second Period - continue team
building activities identi-
fied in First Period.
Throughout the year, I will strive to achieve the following personal objectives4
They are basically objectives that will help me to achieve the objectives stated
above.
14 Improve relations between employee groups.
24 Continue to assess general management skills
3. Upgrade skills and abilities by:
a) Attending League of cities Washington DC
Conference 4
b) Attending City Managers Convention
c) Locate and attend seminars in:
- emergency management
- insurance
redevelopment
listening and/or conflict management
- evaluation
First and Second Periods -
Monitor and evaluate re-
tionships between groups4
Meet with groups to ,identify
strengths and weaknesses in
relationships.
First Period - monitor skills
through input of staff, read
one book on general management
Second Period - staff and I
do an assessment on manage-
ment skills, read one manage-
ment book,
.J
First Period.
;.:: ,
Second Period
First Period
First Period
Second Period
First and Second Period
First Period
RESOLUTION NO. 86-165
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING -1987 COMPENSATION
FOR CITY MANAGER
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
New Hope adopts, effective January 5, 1987,
compensation for the City Manager at a yearly rate of
$55,330.
'Adopted this 22nd day of December, 1986.
~-U.J~-//~~ ~/
~~r /1'
Attest:
!!cUccu t.
City Clerk
If, I i /" L
L.tA./'7..L-1,L _Lv
(
,(,
L
"
"
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESQLUTION NO. 88-35
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY
MANAGER'S 1988 WAGES AND BENEFITS;
AND AMENDING THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE
CITY AND THE CITY MANAGER
WHEREAS, The city has previously entered into a contract with
the City Manager which specifies the terms and conditions of his
employment in that capacity; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has recently completed an evaluation
City Manager's performance during 1987 and found that performance
to be ; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of retaining the services
of the city manager by amending certain conditions and terms of
both the contract and the compensation for these services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council establishes
the following:
1. The contract adopted by the city on January 11, 1982 is
hereby amended to read:
SECTION III - TERMINATION AND SEVERANCE PAY
A. rft--'t-he--eV'eft-e---'t-he--emp l-eyee--4:s---e-ermi-lta:-e-eer- -by---e-fte
ei--e-Y--~~--elt-~~~re-:1I-fli:'i-i--3-0-,--%ge5-"iYft:H-e--a:bJ:.e
a:M-w:i:%%:i:l'\~- 'l:.e--pefi~-'t-he--dut.-i-es--o-f'-.-t-he--€-i-'e:r-Ma:ft~r7
er-~~--w:i:~fi:i:1'\--t-he--~6~-~~-~~-Bmpl-eyeeT-~--fti-~
ep~l:-eltT--t:leci1:1es--'ee-~-EJft'"-~rem--'t-he--pes-i--e-l:-elt--01:--ei--e-y
Ma:ft~rT--he--S-fta-:r-:r-T-~--ft-i-s---~i~"'j --hfrve--~fie-fi~---e-e
re-e-l:trlt--t;Q--6--pes-i--e-l:-eft--o-f'-- -ii'l~~e'l!.=--wi--e-ft-"ilo---i &.3~--e'f
s-eltl:-eri--e-y-- 'W'i-'t-h---e-fte--New--Hope-~-i-ee--eepa:r-e-lIlelt-e-;--- If,
a:~'eer-~i-l:---3-&;~~- Employee is terminated by the
Council as City Manager while able and willing to
perform as City Manager, then in that event the City
agrees to pay him a lump sum cash payment equal to .9.
minimum of three months or 1 week for everv complete or
partial vear of service. whichever is qreater, then
current aggregate salary; provided, however, that in
the event Employee is terminated because of his
conviction of any illegal act involving personal gain
or attempted gain to him, then in that event, the city
shall have no obligation to pay the aggregate sum
designated in this paragraph. All the above severance
pay provisions become null and void if Employee returns
to Police Department.
(
{
L
2. compensation for the services of the city Manager for
the calender year 1988 is hereby increased effective January 1,
1988 from a yearly base salary of $55,330 to $60,863. All other
benefits previously awarded including those established upon a
base wage will remain in effect and will be in addition to this
base wage.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope this 14th day
of March, 1988.
~hlJ#4~~,J
/ Mayor
Attest:
(~UvU ~ . (!gjdA_IJ-.~U
City Clerk
-\J-IL
/ .
\ "/-1
- ~l4L
J7l?1---h.
/1 ,( ~
l:/ ~1~
~
/990
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. ~ () () -
~ ~ ~SOLUTION AMENDI~G THE CITY MANAGER'S
/-,196 C::-1989..:lvAGES AND BENEFITS AND REAFFIRMING THE
CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY
WHEREAS, the city has on January 11, 1982, entered into a contract
with Daniel J. Donahue, city Manager which specifies the
terms, conditions and compensation of his employment;
and,
WHEREAS,
The New Hope City Council reviews the City Manager's
performance every year and basis compensation of this
performance and other relevant factors such as
compensation of city managers in the metro area and the
city's Comparable Worth Plan; and,
WHEREAS,
{Lp0 16/17u
the City Council met in special session on J3Raarj ~,
~ to evaluate the city manager's performance during
1991~and found his performance to be satisfactory in the
achievement of goals and objectives.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the New Hope City Council
reaffirms the contract with the city manager dated
January II, 1982 and all subsequent resolutions relating
to that contract passed by the city council; and further
resolves that:
/9'10
1. Compensation for the services of the city
manager for calendar year ~ i~(.)hereby
increased effective January I, 19M from a _
yearly base salary of S6Q,d3~ $67,000.-10 10bJj-
-- I .
2. Since the city manager is the only public
employee of the city not covered by any
retirement plan, the city shall continue (as
it has since 1982) to put into the ICMA
Retirement Corporation Deferred Income Plan 5.5
percent of the city manager's salary towards
retirement benefits.
Adopted by the City Council of
County, Minnesota, this~ day
;.2:3.rtR
the City of New Hope, Hennepin
of J~,_~.
{~/i9q6
~ .J
.~-J41'?-:~, ,~~ ~ J
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CITY MANAGER 1990
WAGES AND BENEFITS; AND AMENDING AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY AND CITY MANAGER
WHEREAS, On January II, 1982, the city of New Hope and Daniel J.
Donahue entered into an employment contract which
specified terms and conditions of employment in his
capacity as City manager; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has recently completed an evaluation of
the City manager's performance during 1989 and found that
performance to be satisfactory; and,
WHEREAS, the city Council is desirous of retaining the services of
the City Manager by amending the compensation for these
services during 1990.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council agrees to
increase wages and benefits of the City Manager by a
total not to exceed 5.5% and the apportion of that 5.5%
between wages and benefits to be determined by the city
manager.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all
subsequent agreed to amendments between Mr. Donahue and
the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the city Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, this 23rd day of April, 1990.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 91-23
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CITY MANAGER'S 1991
WAGES AND BENEFITS; AND AMENDING AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY AND CITY MANAGER
WHEREAS,
on January 11, 1982, the Ci ty of New Hope and Dan i el J. Donahue
entered into an employment contract which specified terms and
conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
the City Council on January 22,1991, completed an evaluation of the
City Manager's performance during 1990 and found that performance to
be above average and all requirements of the position are being met;
and .
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City
Manager by amending the compensation for these services during 1991;
and
WHEREAS,
the City Council agrees to provide a sal ary of $75,406 per year
which is in conformance with the City's established comparable worth
plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent
agreed to amendments including benefits between Mr. Donahue and the
City Council shall remain in effect.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council may give consideration to a wage
freeze for 1992 depending on the state/local economy, the City's
financial conaition, and cutbacks of tax levies and state aids.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
this 28th day of January, 1991.
Ai~~I~J
ayor
Attest: ~Jm{fL~~-
lty er
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 92-122
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CITY MANAGER'S 1992
WAGES AND BENEFITS; AND AMENDING AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY AND CITY MANAGER
WHEREAS,
on January 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue
entered into an employment contract which specified terms and
conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
the City Council in January, 1992, completed an evaluation of the
City Manager's performance during 1991 and found that performance to
be above average and all requirements of the position are being met;
and
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City
Manager by amending the compensation for these services during 1992;
and
-
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council agrees to provide a salary
of $77,480 for calendar year 1992 which is in conformance with the
City's established comparable worth plan and agrees to amend Section
IX of the existing employment agreement to include the folloWing:
"included but not limited to the above, the City Manager shall be
../\ientitled to $2,000 annually for miscellaneous City business expenses
./ . to be used at his sole discretion."
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent
agreed to amendments including benefits between Mr. Donahue and the
City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
this 22nd day of June, 1992.
~~~~.'r~'
,/ ayor
Attest: ?(/{</A("ft 4(J7lp
C,ty er
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 93-99
-RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CITY MANAGER'S 1993
WAGES AND BENEFITS; AND AMENDING AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY AND CITY MANAGER
WHEREAS,
on January II, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue
entered into an employment contract whi ch speci fi ed terms and
conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
in February, 1993, the City Council completed an evaluation of the
City Manager's performance during 1992 and found his performance
to be above average and that all requirements of the position are
being met; and
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City
Manager by amending the compensation for these services during
1993.
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to increase the
City Manager's salary by 2.75% for calendar year 1993, which is
the same increase provided to union and non-union city employees.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, th~t the employment agreement and all subsequent
agreed to amendments including benefits between Mr. Donahue and
the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, this 28th day of June, 1993.
cL~~* J 'r J
/ Mayor
Attest:~ ll){ j P ~ L
Clty Clerk
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 94-133
RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENT
TO CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION
WHEREAS,
on January 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Dan i e 1 J. Donahue
entered into an employment contract wh i ch spec ifi ed terms and
conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
in January, 1994, the City Council completed an evaluation of the
City Manager's performance during 1993 and found his performance
to be above average and that all requirements of the position are
being met; and
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City
Manager by amending the compensation for these services during
1994.
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to increase the
City Manager's salary by 2.75% for calendar year 1994, which is
the same increase provided to union and non-union city employees.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent
agreed to amendments including benefits between Mr. Donahue and
the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City C01Jncil of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, this 12th day of September, 1994.
du,~~
/ Mayor /
Attest:
'/2IJ.t;w 4~ g
City Clerk
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 95-92
RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENT
TO CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION
WHEREAS,
on January 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue
entered into an employment contract wh i ch speci fi ed terms and
conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
in February, 1995, the City Council completed an evaluation of the
City Manager's performance during 1994 and found his performance
to be excellent and that all requirements of the position are
being met; and
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City
Manager by amending the compensation for these services during
1995.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to increase the
City Manager's salary by 3.25% for calendar year 1995, which is
the same increase provided to union and non-union city employees;
and to provide a Key Person Universal Life Insurance package of
$100,000. The details of the insurance package are yet to be
worked out and will be considered in a future resolution.
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent
agreed to amendments including benefits between Mr. Donahue and
the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, this 12th day of June, 1995.
~'I
/ Mayor '-/~
Attest: ':bIlJU~c#,DrJ'p
City Clerk
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 96-72
RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENT
TO CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION
WHEREAS, on January 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel 1. Donahue entered into
an employment contract which specified terms and conditions of employment
in his capacity as City Manager; and
WHEREAS, in February, 1996, the City Council completed an evaluation of the City
Manager's performance during 1995 and found his performance to be excellent
and that all requirements of the position are being met; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City Manager by
amending the compensation for these services during 1996.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to increase the
City Manager's salary by 2.9% for calendar year 1996, which is the same
increase provided to union and non-union city employees; and to increase his
monthly car allowance to $600.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent agreed to
amendments including benefits between Mr. Donahue and the City Council shall
remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 25th
day of March, 1996.
~.
,#~
/ ayor
Attest:
,-/;;j/kj;, ~
City Clerk
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 97-16
RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENT
TO CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION
WHEREAS, on January II, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue entered into
an employment contract which specified terms and conditions of employment
in his capacity as City Manager; and
WHEREAS, in December, 1996, the City Council completed an evaluation of the City
Manager's performance during 1996 and found his performance to be excellent
and that all requirements of the position are being met; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City Manager by
amending the compensation for these services during 1997.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to increase the
City Manager's salary by 2.9% for calendar year 1997.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent agreed to
amendments including benefits between Mr. Donahue and the City Council shall
remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 13th
day of January, 1997.
%:~?
Mayor
~~
Attest:
City Clerk
'"
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENT
TO CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION
WHEREAS,
on January 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue
entered into an employment contract which specified terms and
conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
WHEREAS,
on January 13, 1998, the City Council completed an evaluation of
the City Manager's performance during 1997 and found his
performance to be excellent and that all requirements of the
position are being meti and
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the
City Manager by amending the compensa!=ion for these services
during 1998.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to increase the
City Manager's salary by 2.25% for calendar year 1998 and provide
$1,000 in performance pay to be used at the City Manager's
discretion for either salary or retirement account.
WHEREAS,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the emplo1'ffient agreement and all subsequent
agreed to 'amendments including benefits between Mr. Donahue and
the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, this 13th day of January, 1998.
C/~
Mayor .
t
(~ .
. lJ.1UA)( I _
City ClerK
Attest:
/795-- /I 1~ ~/C
-I- // n-o
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 98- 206
RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENT
TO CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION
'V'JHEREAS,
on January 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J, Donahue
entered into an employment contract which specified terms and
conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
WHEREAS,
on December 15, 1998, the City Council completed an evaluation of
the City Manager's performance during 1998 and round his
performance to be excellent and that all requirements of the
position are being met; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the
Ci ty Manager by amending the compensation for these services
during 1999.
NOW,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to increase the
City Manager's salary by 3% for calendar year 1999 and provide a
monthly car allowance of $650.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent
agreed to amendments including benefits between Mr. Donahue and
the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, this 28th day of December, 1998.
;;, 4
/ tLuLU, t~~]k
City ClerK
rI~~~'-
Mayo
At~est:
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-~
RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENT
TO CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of New Hope as follows:
WHEREAS, on January 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue
entered into an employment contract which specified terms and conditions of employment in
his capacity as City Manager; and
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2000, the City Council completed an evaluation of the
City Manager's performance during 1999 and found his performance to be excellent and that
all requirements of the position are being met; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City Manager
by amending the compensation for these services during 2000; and
WHEREAS, during the February 22"" review, the City Council also discussed changes
to the October 9, 1995 Split Dollar Life Insurance Agreement purchased for the benefit and as
additional compensation for the City Manager; and
WHEREAS, it was intended by the City Council that the City Manager's key person
life insurance policy should stay in effect for the entire period of the City Manager's
employment with the City; and
WHEREAS, it was further intended that upon normal retirement by the City Manager,
ownership of the key person life insurance policy should be assigned to the City Manager at no
cost; and
WHEREAS, consideration for the assignment of the policy shall be the City Manager's
continued employment until normal retirement; and
WHEREAS, the existing Split Dollar Life Insurance Agreement between the City and
City Manager does not provide for its ownership assignment to the City Manager upon normal
retirement; and
WHEREAS, the policy agreement also permits the unintended ability of the City to
terminate the agreement prior to the City Manager's normal retirement; and
-1-
WHEREAS, the City Council and City Manager now desire to amend the policy
agreement to provide for its assignment to the City Manager upon his normal retirement and
eliminate the City's power to terminate the agreement prior to said assignment; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment to the policy agreement necessary to implement
the proposed changes to the policy agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the City Council agrees to increase the City Manager's salary by 3.25%
for calendar year 2000.
2. The proposed changes to the City Manager's Split Dollar Life Insurance
Agreement as set out in Exhibit A hereto are hereby approved.
3. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed on behalf of
the City to sign the Amendment to Split Dollar Life Insurance Agreement.
4. The employment agreement and all previous amendments to said agreement
relating to and including all existing benefits previously agreed to by the City Council and Mr.
Donahue shall remain in effect.
Dated the 13th day of March, 2000.
~A
W. Peter Enck, Mayor
Attest:
k/AJ'~'~~
Valerie Leone, City Clerk
P:\AlIlII1ICY\CnhRewuhllionslRauAdj~lLwpd
-2-
EXHIBIT A
AMENDMENT TO SPLIT DOLLAR
LIFE INSURANCE AGREEMENT
1. Parties. The parties to this Amendment are the City of New Hope (hereafter
"Employer") and Daniel J. Donahue (hereafter "Employee").
2. Puroose. The purpose of this amendment is to amend that certain October 9, 1995 Split
Dollar Life Insurance Agreement between Employer and Employee as follows:
a. Paragraph 8 "Termination of Agreement" is hereby amended to read as follows:
8. Termination of Agreement
This Agreement will terminate when the first of any of the following
events occurs:
(a) Normal retirement by the Employee;
(b) Termination of the Employee's employment with the Employer for
reasons other than death; and
(c) Performance of the Agreement's terms following the death of the
Employee.
b. Paragraph 9 "Disposition of policy upon termination of agreement" is hereby
amended to read as follows:
9. Disposition of policy upon termination of agreement
Upon normal retirement of Employee, Employer shall assign the
ownership of the Policy to Employee without cost to Employee. It is
intended that Employee shall receive the entire benefit of the Policy's
cash surrender value at no cost to the Employee upon his normal
retirement. Upon death of the Employee during his employment with
Employer, the Policy shall be paid in accordance with paragraph 5 of
this Agreement. If the Employee's employment shall terminate for any
other reason other than by death or retirement, the Employee shall have
a thirty (30) day option to purchase the Policy from the Employer. The
purchase price of the Policy shall be an amount equal to the cash
surrender value, including dividend accumulations and the cash value of
-3-
dividend additions existing in the Policy at the end of the period for
which premiums have been paia. If the Policy shall then be encumbered
by assignment, policy loan, or other means, the Employer shall either
remove such encumbrance, or reduce the sale price to the Employee by
the total amount of indebtedness outstanding against the Policy. If the
Policy is assigned to Employee at retirement or the Employee exercises
an option to purchase, the Employer shall execute all necessary
documents required by the Insurer to effect a transfer of ownership or
absolute assignment of the Policy over to and in favor of the Employee.
If the Employee does not exercise his right to acquire the Policy,
continued ownership by the Employer shall constitute satisfaction of any
obligation the Employee has to the Employer with respect to the policy
and arising out of its purchase and premium payments.
Employer agrees it shall continue to pay the premiums on the Policy at
ail times during Employee's employment with the City. Further,
Employer agrees it shall not encumber the Policy in any way without the
consent of employee.
3. Any provisions of the October 5, 1995 Agreement inconsistent with the terms of this
Amendment shall be controlled by this Amendment. Further, all other provisions of
the Agreement not amended herein shall remain in force and effect.
Dated:
March 13
,2000
EMPLO~~~ jd
~~A o'f
Daniel J. onahue
EMPLOYER~77Y JF" IfEW HOPE
By: ,q:YJ.ttf~
Its Mayor
By: 4~Jd~
Its City Manager
P:\Attomey\Cnh Rcsohllions\Reso Adj Compensalion.wpd
-4-
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 2001- 3 I
RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMEN"T
TO CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION
WHEREAS,
on January 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue entered into an employment
contract which specified tel1US and conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
WHEREAS,
on January 23,2001, the City Council completed an evaluation of the City Manager's perfonnance
during 2000 and found his perfonnance to be at a superior level and that all requirements of the
position are being met; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council is desirous of retaining the. services of the City Manager by amending the
compensation for these services during the next year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to the following compensation changes for
the City Manager for the calendar year 2001:
II /o!, <;,9 '7. <L.O
..,-
increase his saiary by 2.75%
increase his car allowance to $675/month
provide an additional $2,500 lump sum contribution into his retirement account, payable
immediately ,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent agreed to amendments including
benefits between Mr. Donahue and the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 12th day of February,
2001.
c-
:;flUtf4
Mayor
Attestu;U(~
City Clerk
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 76
RESOLT.ITION APPROVING ADmSTMENT
TO CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION
WHEREAS,
on January II, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue entered into an employment
contract which specified terms and conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
WHEREAS,
on April I, 2002, the City Council completed an evaluation of the City Manager's performance
during 2001 and found his performance to be at a superior level and that all requirements of the
position are being met; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City Manager by amending the
compensation for these services during the next year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to the following compensation changes for
the City Manager for the calendar year 2002:
. Five additional personal leave days
. Total compensation increase of $3,250 (up to 2% to be paid as salary and balance
contnbuted to his deferred compensation retirement plan)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent agreed to amendments including
benefits between Mr. Donahue and the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 8th day of April, 2002.
("
~~~
Mayor
Attest: t.L(A /.~
' .
City Clerk
~~\
~
~
/0/ J- 9"7'. Z- 0
,
s?So,co
lr / cro, 60
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 00. II 'I
RESOLUTION APPROVING ADJUSTMENT
TO CITY MANAGERS COMPENSATION
WHEREAS, On January 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue entered into an
employment contract which specified terms and conditions of employment in his capacity as City
Manager; and
WHEREAS, On April 21, 2003, the City Council completed an evaluation of the' City Manager's
performance during 2002 and found his performance to be at a superior level and that all requirements of
the position are being met; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City Manager by amending the
compensation for these services during the next year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to the following compensation
changes and amendments to the contract for the City Manager for the calendar year 2003:
1. No changes to the 2002 agreement regarding salary, deferred compensation, car allowance, and
personal leave accrual. Health insurance benefits will be the same as that received by all other
non-union employees.
2. Deferred compensation paid out in lump sum upon approval of resolution
3. Additional personal leave hours equivalent to 3.0% of salary added to accumulation.
4. Increase maximum accumulation allowed to 3 times annual accrual or 840 hours
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager:
1. Use at least 50% of annual accrual of personal leave or 140 hours.
2. May sell back to the City up to 24 hours of Personal Leave annually if balance exceeds 200 hours.
3. Seek Council approval on all leaves of greater than two weeks at anyone time.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent agreed to amendments
including benefits between Mr. Donahue and the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 28th day of
July 2003.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 2004- ~
RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY MANAGER'S EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT
FOR 2004
WHEREAS,
on Jannary 11, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue entered into an employment
contract which specified terms and conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
WHEREAS,
on Februlll)' 2,2004, the City Council completed an evaluation of the City Manager's
performance during 2003 and found his performance to be at a superior level and that all
requirements of the position are being met; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services of the City Manager by amending the
compensation for these services during the next year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council agrees to the following compensation changes and
amendments to the contract for the City Manager for the calendar year 2004:
1. 2% increase in base wages
2. shift of one-half of current and existing auto allowance to base wage.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the employment agreement and all subsequent agreed to amendments including
benefits between Mr. Donahue and the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 9th day ofFebfUlll)',
2004.
11~~
Mayor
Attest:
~~
City Clerk
CITY OF NEW HOPE
RESOLUTION NO. 2004- .2.l...Q
RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY MANAGER'S EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT
FOR 2005
WHEREAS,
on January II, 1982, the City of New Hope and Daniel J. Donahue entered into an employment
contract which specified tenns and conditions of employment in his capacity as City Manager; and
WHEREAS,
on December 20, 2004, the City Council completed an evaluation ofthe City Manager's
performance during 2004 and found his performance to be at a superior level and that all
requirements of the position are being met; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council is desirous of retaining the services ofthe City Manager" and amending the
compensation terms of the employment contract for 2005.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL YED that the City Council agrees to the following compensation changes and
amendments to the contract for the City Manager for the calendar year 2005:
1. 2.36% increase in base wages.
2. Add an additional 13.25 hours to annual Personnel Leave award.
3. Allow the conversion of the insurance policy held by the city to a similar policy that wiII
allow for the continuation of the policy at the City Manager's election if all terms as
previously established by the City Council are met; and there is no adverse or additional
fiscal impact on the city that would be greater than in the current approved plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOL YED, that the employment agreement and all previous agreed to amendments including
benefits between Mr. Donahue and the City Council shall remain in effect.
Adopted by tbe City Council of the City of New Hope, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 20th d
2004.
Attest: ~~
City Clerk
4()
of December,
ICMA Sample Employee Agreement
State of
as a party of the first, and
both of who understand as follows:
WITNESSETH:
Whereas, Employer desires to employ the services of said [name] as
[here recite appropriate charter, statute, or ordinance sections];
and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the governing board, hereafter called "Council," to
provide certain benefits, to establish certain conditions of employment, and to set
working conditions of said Employee; and
WHEREAS, Employee desires to accept employment as
of said [local government]; and
WHEREAS, The parties acknowledge that Employee is a member of the International
City/County Management Association (ICMA) and that Employee is subject to the
ICMA Code of Ethics;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the
parties agree as follows:
This Agreement, made and entered into this day of
,20-, by and between the [local government] of
, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called, "Employer,"
[name], as party of the second part,
Section 1: Duties
Employer hereby agrees to employ said [name]
as of said Employer to perform functions and duties specified
in said [legal reference] of the [local government]
charter and by said [legal reference] of said [local government] code
and to perform other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the Council
shall from time to time assign.
Section 2: Term
A. Employee agrees to remain in the exclusive employ of employer until
,20_, and neither to accept other employment nor to become
employed by any other employer until said termination date, unless said termination date
is affected as hereinafter provided.
B. In the event written notice is not given by either party to this agreement to the
other [minimmn of90 days is recommended] prior to the termination
date as hereinabove provided, this agreement shall be extended on the same terms and
conditions as herein provided, all for an additional period of two years. Said agreement
shall continue thereafter for two-year periods unless either party hereto gives days
[minimmn of 90 days is recommended] written notice to the other party that the party
does not wish to extend this agreement.
Section 9: Hours of Work
It is recognized that Employee must devote a great deal of time outside the normal office
hours to business of the Employer, and to that end Employee will be allowed to take
compensatory time off as he/she shall deem appropriate during said normal office hours.
Sectiou 10: Outside Activities
Employee shall not spend more than 10 hours per week in teaching, consulting or other
non-Employer-connected business without the prior approval of the CounciL
Section 11: Moving and Relocation Expenses
Employee shall be reimbursed, or Employer may pay directly, for the expenses of
packing and moving Employee, Employee's family, and Employee's personal property
from to [local government] with said payment or reimbursement not to
exceed the sum of $ , which shall include unpacking, any storage costs necessary,
and insurance charges.
Section 12: Home Sale and Purchase Expenses
A. Employee shall be reimbursed for the direct costs associated with the sale of his /her
existing personal residence, said reimbursement being limited to real estate agents' fees,
and other closing costs that are directly associated with the sale ofthe house. Said
reimbursement should not exceed the sum of $
B. Employee shall also be reimbursed for the costs incidental to buying a house within
the [local government], including legal services, title insurance, and other costs directly
associated with the purchase of the house, said reimbursement not to exceed the sum of
$
C. Employer shall provide Employee with a [fixed-interest, variable-interest,
interest-only] loan to purchase a house. The amount of the loan shall not exceed
$
D. Employer shall provide for temporary housing for Employee, including house-
hunting trips as additional compensation, not to exceed $
Section 13: Automobile
Employee's duties require that he/she shall have the exclusive and unrestricted use at all
times during his/her employment with Employer of an automobile provided to him!her by
the Employer. Employer shall be responsible for paying for liability, property damage,
and comprehensive insurance, and for the purchase, operation, maintenance, repair, and
regular replacement of said automobile.
4
Section 14: Vacation, Sick, and Military Leave
A. As an inducement to Employee to become [job title], at
signature hereof. Employee shall be credited with _ days [number of days granted
other employees in one year is recommended] of vacation leave and _ days [number
of days granted other employees in one year is recommended] of sick leave. Thereafter,
Employee shall accrue, and have credited to his/her personal account, vacation and sick
leave at the same rate as other general employees of Employer.
B. Employee shall be entitled to military reserve leave time pursuant to state law and
[local government] policy.
Section 15: Disability, Health, and Life Insurance
A. Employer agrees to put into force and to make required premium payments for
Employee for insurance policies for life, accident, sickness, disability income benefits,
major medical, and dependent's coverage group insurance covering Employee and his
dependents.
B. Employer agrees to purchase and to pay the required premiums on whole life
insurance policies equal in amount to times the annual gross salary of Employee,
with the beneficiary named by Employee to receive one-half of any benefits paid,
Employer the other one-half.
C. Employer agrees to provide hospitalization, surgical and comprehensive medical
insurance for Employee and his dependents and to pay the premiums thereon equal to that
which is provided all other employees of Employer or, in the event no such plan exists, to
provide same for Employee.
D. Employer shall provide travel insurance for Employee while he/she is traveling on
Employer's business, with Employee to name beneficiary thereof.
E. Employee agrees to submit once per calendar year to a complete physical examination
by a qualified physician selected by the Employer, the cost of which shall be paid by the
Employer.
Section 16: Retirement
Employer agrees to execute all necessary agreements provided by lCMA Retirement
Corporation [lCMA-RC] for Employer's [continued] participation in said lCMA-RC
retirement plan and, in addition to the base salary paid by the Employer to Employee,
Employer agrees to pay an amount equal to _ percent of Employee's base salary into
the lCMA-RC on Employee's behalf, in equal proportionate amount each pay period, and
to transfer ownership to succeeding employers upon Employee's resignation or
termination.. The parties shall fully disclose to each other the financial impact of any
amendment to the terms of Employee's retirement benefit.
5
Section 17: Dues and Subscriptions
Employer agrees to budget for and to pay for professional dues and subscriptions of
Employee necessary for his/her continuation and full participation in national, regional,
state, and local associations, and organizations necessary and desirable for his/her
continued professional participation growth, and advancement, and for the good of the
Employer.
Section 18: ProCessional Development
A. Employer hereby agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses
of Employee for professional and official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to
continue the professional development of Employee and to adequately pursue necessary
official functions for Employer, including but not limited to the ICMA Annual
Conference, the state league of municipalities, and such other national, regional, state,
and local govermnental groups and committees thereof which Employee serves as a
member.
B. Employer also agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of
Employee for short courses, institutes, and seminars that are necessary for his/her
professional development and for the good of the Employer.
Section 19: Personal Computer Purchase
Employer hereby agrees to purchase a personal computer and software at a cost not to
exceed $ . The Employer provides the money for the total cost and the
Employee reimburses the amount in excess of $ over a one-year period.
Employee must work for the Employer for one full year to qualify for the $
subsidy.
Section 20: General Expenses
Employer recognizes that certain expenses of a non-personal and generally job-affiliate
nature are incurred by Employee, and hereby agrees to reimburse or to pay said general
expenses, up to an amount not to exceed $ _ per month, and the finance director is
hereby authorized to disburse such moneys upon receipt of duly executed expense or
petty cash vouchers, receipts, statements or personal affidavits.
Section 21: Civic Club Membership
Employer recognizes the desirability ofrepresentation in and before local civic and other
organizations, and Employee is authorized to become a member of
such civic clubs or organizations, for which Employer shall pay all expenses. Employee
shall report to the Employer on each membership that he has taken out at Employer's
expense.
6
Section 22: Indemnification
In addition to that required under state and local law, Employer shall defend, save
harmless, and indemnify Employee against any tort, professional liability claim or
demand or other legal action, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged
act or omission occurring in the performance of Employee's duties as [job title].
Employer will compromise and settle any such claim or suit and pay the amount of any
settlement or judgment rendered thereon.
Section 23: Bonding
Employer shall bear the full cost of any fidelity or other bonds required of the Employee
under any law or ordinance.
Section 24: Other Terms imd Conditions of Employment
A. The Council, in consultation with the manager, shall fix any such other terms and
conditions of employment, as it may determine from time to time, relating to the
performance of Employee, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with
or in conflict with the provisions of this agreement, the [local government] charter or any
otherlaw.
B. All provisions of the [local government] charter and code, and regulations and rules
of the Employer relating to vacation and sick leave, retirement and pension system
contributions, holidays, and other benefits and working conditions as they now exist or
hereafter may be amended, also shall apply to Employee as they would to other
employees of Employer, in addition to said benefits enumerated specifically for the
benefit of Employee except as herein provided.
C. Employee shall be entitled to receive the same vacation and sick leave benefits as are
accorded department heads, including provisions governing accrual and payment therefor
on termination of employment.
Section 25: No Reduction of Benefits
Employer shall not at any time during the term ofthis agreement reduce the salary,
compensation or other fmancial benefits of Employee, except to the degree of such a
reduction across-the-board for all employees ofthe Employer.
Section 26: Notices
Notices pursuant to this agreement shall be given by deposit in the custody of the United
States Postal Service, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
(1) EMPLOYER: [Title and address of relevant official (mayor, clerk, etc.)]
(2) EMPLOYEE: [Name and address of Employee]
7
Alternatively, notices required pursuant to this agreement may be personally served in the
same manner as is applicable to civil judicial practice. Notice shall be deemed given as
of the date of personal service or as of the date of deposit of such written notice in the
course of transmission in the United States Postal Service.
Section 27: General Provisions
A. The text herein shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties.
B. This agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and
executors of Employee.
C. This agreement shall become effective commencing
,20 .
D. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this agreement is held
unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this agreement, or portion
thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force
and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the [local government] of has
caused this agreement to be signed and executed in its behalf by its [chief elected officer],
and duly attested by its [local government] clerk, and the Employee has signed and
executed this agreement, both in duplicate, the day and year first above written.
[chief elected officer] of
State of
ATTEST:
[local government] Clerk
(Seal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM
[local government] Attorney
Employee
8
The Consequences of Compensation Limits
By Laura Kushner and Laura Offerdahl
Minnesota is the only state in the nation that imposes a limit on local government
compensation and in recent years, our one-of-a-kind law has come under increasing
scrutiny by city officials and some state legislators. The law establishes a "cap" on the
compensation oflocal government officials by limiting it to no more than 95% of the
Governor's salary. The anecdotal evidence is mounting that the compensation limit has
had a negative effect on employee recruitment and retention at the local level. Some city
officials fear that the long-term effects could substantially change Minnesota's current
role as a national leader in quality public administration.
Minnesota's local government compensation limit
State law limits the compensation of employees of a political subdivision to 95 percent of
the governor's salary. While the definition of "compensation" for political subdivision
employees includes salary and certain benefits defmed in statute, it is compared only to
the salary ofthe governor with all of his or her job-related benefits excluded. The limit
applies to employees of statutory and home rule charter cities, counties, towns, regional
agencies, and other political subdivisions but not to school districts, medical doctors or
osteopathic doctors.
The governor's annual salary is currently set at $120,303, which results in a cap for local
government officials of $114,288. The salary of the governor (and therefore the
compensation limit) has not been increased in six years.
History of the compensation limit
The Minnesota Legislature passed a bill in 1977 that prohibited political subdivision
employees from being paid more than the commissioner of the Department of Finance.
In 1980, the legislature repealed the salary cap, but three years later the legislature
enacted the current compensation limit.
In 1993, the legislature clarified what qualifies as compensation for the purpose ofthe
compensation limit. The legislature determined that all forms of direct and indirect
compensation are included, but provided certain exceptions in law. Deferred
compensation benefits are included in the limit but vacation, sick leave, health insurance,
pension benefits, and other benefits provided to a majority of all other employees of the
local government are excluded from the cap.
In 1998, the legislature exempted school district employees from the compensation limit
and in 2002 specifically excluded medical and osteopathic doctors.
Waiver process
State law provides a process for seeking a waiver to the compensation limit through the
Department of Employee Relations (DOER). The commissioner of DOER may grant a
waiver for a position that "requires special expertise necessitating a higher salary to
attract or retain a qualified person." Before granting a waiver, the commissioner must
seek advice from the Legislative Coordinating Commission Subcommittee on Employee
Relations.
The waiver process was not widely used until recently because the governor's salary was
adjusted periodically, thereby automatically increasing the local government
compensation limit. The governor's salary has not increased since 1998, however, so a
growing number of cities have employees at or close to the limit. This situation has
triggered an increase in the number of waiver requests, but it's difficult to gauge the
number oftop administrators who do not pursue a waiver because of the publicity and
controversy it might cause in their communities.
Of the 53 waiver requests submitted to DOER, less than 20% (9 total) have been granted
at the amount requested and more than 30% (17 total) were not given a waiver in any
amount. About half (27 total) of the 53 waiver requests were granted at an amount lower
than that requested by the jurisdiction - in some cases very significantly lower. Also,
there does not seem to be a consistent pattern to the way in which waivers are granted or
denied. For example, some smaller counties have been given waivers for their County
Administrators while the second largest county in the state, Ramsey County, was denied
any waiver for its County Manager.
Recruiting and retention challenges
In the past several years, a number of City Managers and Administrators have chosen to
leave Minnesota, at least in part because of the salary cap issue. Tom Melena, former
City Administrator of Oak Park Heights, MN is one example. Tom is now the City
Manager of Rolling Meadows, illinois. When Melena left Oak Park Heights (population
4,329), his compensation package was valued at approximately $99,000. "1 found it
ludicrous at the time that 1 had colleagues working in much larger communities that were
within $5,000 or so of what 1 was making," Melena stated in a recent interview.
When Melena decided the time was right for a career move to a larger community, he did
not spend much time looking in Minnesota knowing there was no room for salary growth
due to the cap. Since moving to Rolling Meadows, a Chicago suburb with a population
of about 25,000, he now makes in excess of $135,000 annually.
Similar stories are told by Roger Fraser, former City Manager of Blaine, Steve Sarkozy,
former City Manager ofRoseville, and Charlie Meyer, former City Manager of St. Louis
Park. All three have left Minnesota in recent years for significantly higher compensation
packages in other states. In some cases, there were additional reasons for the increases in
compensation -- factors such as higher housing costs or increased responsibility
associated with the new position -- but all three admit that the salary cap was definitely a
factor in their decision to leave Minnesota.
Fraser describes himself as being "very comfortable" in Minnesota prior to taking the job
offer in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The time was right for a career move, but because of the
salary cap, Minnesota was not a realistic possibility. He could take on more
responsibility, but he couldn't get compensated for it.
Charlie Meyer, now Chief Operating Officer in Virginia Beach, Virginia (pop.
425,000+), says that until he came up against the salary cap, "the last thing I ever worried
about in my job was the salary. I love what I do, I love the work, but for the fIrst time, I
had to think about salary. There you are, mid-career, at the height of your earning
potential with 10 or 15 years to go until retirement and the only way to get a raise is if the
legislature increases the governor's salary."
The salary cap, says Meyer, left him "vulnerable" to recruiters. "The recruiters know that
Minnesota is a good state in which to look for potential candidates right now. That's
more or less how it worked with me. With the salary cap in the back of my mind, when
the right opportunity came up, I took it."
Recruitment, too, appears to have suffered since the compensation limit caught up with .
the national market for city managers. Elected offIcials in cities such as Plymouth and
Woodbury have seen the effects of the salary cap fIrsthand. In its recent recruitment for a
City Administrator, Woodbury received far fewer applications than expected. The
competition (e.g., similarly-sized suburbs of cities like Chicago, Kansas City, and
Denver) is now often paying salaries of$125,000 and up.
The city of Plymouth lost their only out-of-state fInalist when he dropped out of the
running because of the salary cap limitation combined with housing costs. Recruiters
have told cities in recent years that applicants are declining opportunities in Minnesota
specifIcally because of the salary cap.
Councihnember Mike Madigan of Woodbury testifIed in opposition to the salary cap at a
hearing earlier this year and emphasized that cities are operating in an environment of
increasing expectations but decreasing resources. "We need to be able to pay a
competitive salary to our top appointed offIcials in order to attract the 'best and the
brightest,''' Madigan stated.
Melena describes himself as being passionate on this issue because of his prior position
on the Minnesota City/County Managers' Association Board of Directors. "My concern
is that Minnesota is losing very good managers and will only be able to attract younger,
less experienced managers in the future. These young people will have to learn "on-the-
job" because they won't have any mentors around to teach them the ropes. I'm proud of
my profession and I know those young people will ultimately make it, but it's a hard,
hard way to go."
Steve Sarkozy, now City Manager of Belle vue, Washington (pop. 117,000), has a similar
viewpoint. He believes that the salary cap will ultimately be "a long-term drain" on the
talent pool for Minnesota. "It really appears that Minnesota has put itself at a huge
disadvantage to every other state in the nation."
Recent legislative action
Over the last several years, legislators have attempted to modify or repeal the local
government compensation limit. In 2001, a bill increasing the limit to 125% of the
governor's salary passed the full Senate; however, the House failed to pass the bill.
This session, the League of Minnesota Cities and other local government organizations
are supporting legislation to repeal the compensation limit. Representative Ron Erhardt
(R-Edina) introduced the House bill, HF 1759, and Senator Steve Kelley (DFL-Hopkins)
is carrying the companion bill, SF 2713.
The League provided testimony in support of these bills in the House and Senate local
government committees. League staff argued that local governments should have the
ability to make decisions on the terms and conditions of employment for local
govemment employees. The League also testified that this limit has put many Minnesota
cities at a competitive disadvantage in recruiting and retaining top-level employees.
The Senate State and Local Government committee passed the bill and sent it to the floor,
but the House Local Government committee voted it down. During committee
discussions on the bill several House members offered support for repealing the cap.
However, they also expressed concerns about removing salary limits in the current
economic environment.
The lack of support in the House, coupled with the Senate's position on salary limits for
certain state government employees, will make it difficult to repeal the local government
compensation limit this year. However, the League is pursuing legislation this session
that, at a minimum, will help set the stage for changes to the local government salary cap
in 2005.
What does the future hold?
With the salary cap likely to be in place for the time being, the future is uncertain. Jim
Brimeyer, a local govemment recruiter in Minnesota sums it up this way, "While there
continues to be a strong interest to work in Minnesota because of our reputation for good
government - an image we should be proud of - we are finding more and more
individuals expressing concern about Minnesota as the 'state with the salary cap.'"
MN local government salary cap was amended 5/23/05.
Local government compensation cap was increased to 110% percent of the governor's
salary. It adjusts annually by the Consumer Price Index plus 2% beginning in January,
2006.
The new cap, effective August 1,2005, is $132,333.
2004 ICMA Custom Report. Results
Jobs Selected for this report
Chief Administrative Officer/City or County Manager
Cities covered in this report - 10,000 to 24,999
States covered in this report
Alabama
California
DC
Idaho
Kansas
Maryland
Mississippi
Nevada
New York
Oklahoma
South Carolina
Utah
West Virginia
Minimum Salary
Maximum Salary
Alaska
Colorado
Florida
Illinois
Kentucky
Massachusetts
Missouri
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Oregon
South Dakota
Vermont
Wisconsin
Arizona
Connecticut
Georgia
Indiana
Louisiana
Michigan
Montana
New Jersey
North Dakota
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Virginia
Wyoming
Arkansas
Delaware
Hawaii
Iowa
Maine
Minnesota
Nebraska
New Mexico
Ohio
Rhode Island
Texas
Washington
No minimum salary specified
No maximum salary specified
Average actual salary = $96,633
Chief Administrative Officer/City or County Manager
2004
MinImum Salary Maximum Salary
County/City State Population SIze Annual Salary Range RAnge
City of Anniston AL 10,000 - 24,999 $78,780.00
City of Enterprise AL 10,000 - 24,999 $75,503.00
City of Mountain Brook AL 10,000 - 24,999 $116,100.00
City of Northport AL 10,000 - 24,999 $89,190.00
City of Bentonville AR 10,000 - 24,999 $89,572.00 $55,971.00 $89,554.00
City of Camden AR 10,000 - 24,999 $40,070.00
City of Mountain Home AR 10,000 - 24,999 $46,467.00 $44,117.00 $52,707.00
City of Bullhead City AZ. 10,000 - 24,999 $154,508.38
City of Goodyear AZ. 10,000 - 24,999 $150,680.00
City of Kingman AZ. 10,000 - 24,999 $100,912.00 $77,451.00 $112,304.00
City of Marana AZ. 10,000 - 24,999 $112,500.00
City of Paradise Valley AZ. 10,000 - 24,999 $153,670.00
City of Sedona AZ. 10,000 - 24,999 $104,000.00
City of Agoura Hiils CA 10,000 - 24,999 $130,000.00
City of Arcata CA 10,000 - 24,999 $94,764.00
City of Banning CA 10,000 - 24,999 $130,000.00 $130,000.00 $150,000.00
City of Brentwood CA 10,000 - 24,999 $180,509.00 $148,538.00 $180,509.00
City of Calabasas CA 10,000 - 24,999 $150,000.00
City of Clearlake CA 10,000 - 24,999 $101,972.00
City of Coalinga CA 10,000 - 24,999 $100,170.00 $88,700.00 $100,170.00
City of Dixon CA 10,000 - 24,999 $128,299.00
City of EI Cerrito CA 10,000 - 24,999 $147,948.00
City of Elk Grove CA 10,000 - 24,999 $205,000.00
City of Grand Terrace CA 10,000 - 24,999 $117,000.00 $88,000.00 $117,000.00
City of La Paima CA 10,000 - 24,999 $127,000.00
City of Lathrop CA 10,000 - 24,999 $132,840.00
City of Lemoore CA 10,000 - 24,999 $89,448.00 $76,992.00 $98,844.00
City of Los Alamitos CA 10,000 - 24,999 $117,420.00
City of Miilbrae CA 10,000 - 24,999 $145,000.00 $119,292.00 $145,000.00
City of Morro Bay CA 10,000 - 24,999 $133,812.00
City of Pacific Grove CA 10,000 - 24,999 $147,912.00
City of San Anselmo CA 10,000 - 24,999 $113,856.00
City of Selma CA 10,000 - 24,999 $98,748.00
City of Shafter CA 10,000 - 24,999 $125,304.00 $103,080.00 $125,304.00
City of Truckee CA 10,000 - 24,999 $133,152.00 $98,616.00 $133,152.00
City of Twentynine Palms CA 10,000 - 24,999 $110,000.00
City of Yucca Valley CA 10,000 - 24,999 $120,000.00
City of Durango CO 10,000 - 24,999 $124,000.00
City of Federai Heights CO 10,000 - 24,999 $95,400.00 $91,000.00 $109,000.00
City of Golden CO 10,000 - 24,999 $126,326.00
City of Greenwood Village CO 10,000 - 24,999 $121,368.00
City of Montrose CO 10,000 - 24,999 $89,426.00
City of Parker CO 10,000 - 24,999 $116,004.00 $84,917.00 $127,378.00
City of Sterling CO 10,000 - 24,999 $81,000.00
City of Avon CT 10,000 - 24,999 $141,365.00
City of Bloomfield CT 10,000 - 24,999 $122,500.00
City of Coventry CT 10,000 - 24,999 $96,662.00
City of Darien CT 10,000 - 24,999 $129,200.00
City of Granby CT 10,000 - 24,999 $111,170.00
City of South Windsor CT 10,000 - 24,999 $110,000.00
City of Mansfield CT 10,000 - 24,999 $121,668.00
City of Tolland CT 10,000 - 24,999 $96,500.00 $88,000.,00 $111,000.00
City of Atlantic Beach FL 10,000 - 24,999 $106,165.00
City of Aventura FL 10,000 - 24,999 $165,939.00
City of Bartow FL 10,000 - 24,999 $103,001.60
City of Casselberry FL 10,000 - 24,999 $114,400.00
City of Cocoa Beach FL 10,000 - 24,999 $89,502.00
City of Crestview FL 10,000 - 24,999 $60,713.00
City of Oania Beach FL 10,000 - 24,999 $107,619.20
City of De Bary FL 10,000 - 24,999 $93,340.00 $60,000.00 $93,340.00
City of De Land FL 10,000 - 24,999 $107,000.00 $88,000.00 $120,000.00
City of Dorai FL 10,000 - 24,999 $150,000.00
City of Eustis FL 10,000 - 24,999 $101,340.00
City of Fort Walton Beach FL 10,000 - 24,999 $95,000.00
City of Guifport . FL 10,000 - 24,999 $90,000.00 $74,675.00 $106,605.00
City of Haines City FL 10,000 - 24,999 $107,597.00 $84,432.00 $118,205.00
City of Holly Hili FL 10,000 - 24,999 $92,524.00
City of Jacksonville Beach FL 10,000 - 24,999 $123,552.00
City of Pinecrest FL 10,000 - 24,999 $143,091.00
City of Miami Lakes FL 10,000 - 24,999 $142,663.00
City of Miami Springs FL 10,000 - 24,999 $103,626.00
City of Ocoee FL 10,000 - 24,999 $107,500.00 $74,501.00 $117,104.00
City of Oidsmar FL 10,000 - 24,999 $100,327.76 $80,818.14 $109,105.10
City of Paiatka FL 10,000 - 24,999 $92,795.00 $69,245.00 $102,306.00
City of Palm Beach FL 10,000 - 24,999 $140,291.00
City of Palm Springs FL 10,000 - 24,999 $101,504.00 $96,493.00 $101,504.00
City of Callaway FL 10,000 - 24,999 $92,272.00
City of Punta Gorda FL 10,000 - 24,999 $115,759.00 $79,040.00 $118,560.00
City of Sebastian FL 10,000 - 24,999 $90,839.00
City of Seminole FL 10,000 - 24,999 $109,109.00 $81 ,337.33 $117,939.13
City of South Daytona FL 10,000 - 24,999 $110,853.00
City of Venice FL 10,000 - 24,999 $118,000.00 $84,845.00 $118,000.00
City of Vero Beach FL 10,000 - 24,999 $130,000.00 $96,444.00 $130,217.00
City of Winter Park FL 10,000 - 24,999 $145,870.00 $94,754.00 $145,870.00
City of Zephyrhilis FL 10,000 - 24,999 $76,554.00 $60,674.00 $91,010.00
City of Acworth GA 10,000 - 24,999 $90,000.00
City of Americus GA 10,000 - 24,999 $76,000.00
City of Carrollton GA 10,000 - 24,999 $111,540.00
City of Douglas GA 10,000 - 24,999 $84,782.00 $71,324.00 $108,528.00
City of Dubiin GA 10,000 - 24,999 $90,015.00
City of Fayettevilie GA 10,000 - 24,999 $94,000.00
City of Lilburn GA 10,000 - 24,999 $84,573.00
City of Moultrie GA 10,000 - 24,999 $92,000.00
City of Newnan GA 10,000 - 24,999 $132,457.00 $125,000.00 $150,000.00
City of Powder Springs GA 10,000 - 24,999 $82,400.00
City of SI. Marys GA 10,000 - 24,999 $81,993.60
City of Snellvilie GA 10,000 - 24,999 $78,000.00 $70,000.00 $125,000.00
City of Sugar Hili GA 10,000 - 24,999 $74,500.00 $60,000.00 $79,000.00
City ofTifton GA 10,000 - 24,999 $113,890.40
City of Union City GA 10,000 - 24,999 $80,000.00
City of Boone IA 10,000 - 24,999 $75,555.00
City of Algonquin IL 10,000 - 24,999 $124,000.00
City of Bloomingdale IL 10,000 - 24,999 $110,570.00
City of Bourbonnais IL 10,000 - 24,999 $67,013.00
City of Cary IL 10.000 - 24,999 $92,000.00
City of Centralia IL 10,000 - 24,999 $75,000.00
City of Charleston IL 10,000 - 24,999 $81,370.00 $72,000.00 $90,000.00
City of Collinsvilie IL 10,000 - 24,999 $81,993.00
City of Darien IL 10,000 - 24,999 $108,000.00
City of East Moline IL 10,000 - 24,999 $83,516.00 $66,104.00 $92,445.00
City of East Peoria IL 10,000 - 24,999 $82,900.00
City of Edwardsville IL 10,000 - 24,999 $80,205.00
City of Frankfort IL 10,000 - 24,999 $99,750.00
City of Grayslake iL 10,000 - 24,999 $150,000.00
City of Hazel Crest IL 10,000 - 24,999 $96,329.00
City of Hinsdale IL 10,000 - 24,999 $137,361.00
City of Homer Glen IL 10,000 - 24,999 $98.000.00
City of La Grange Park IL 10,000 - 24,999 $114,420.00
City of Lake Forest IL 10,000 - 24,999 $149,600.00
City of Lake In the Hills IL 10,000 - 24,999 $109,824.00
City of Lake Zurich IL 10,000 - 24,999 $122,000.00
City of Libertyville IL 10,000 - 24,999 $140,600.00 $106,651.00 $159,977,00
City of Lincolnwood IL 10,000 - 24,999 $119,000,00
City of Lisle IL 10,000 - 24,999 $113,547.00
City of Mattoon IL 10,000 - 24,999 $87,000.00 $85,000.00 $88,000,00
City of Me Henry IL 10,000 - 24,999 $93,507,00 $81,750.00 $110,607.00
City of New Lenox IL 10,000 - 24,999 $113,508.00
City of North Aurora IL 10,000 - 24,999 $72,000.00 $71,252.00 $98,941,00
City of O'Fallon IL 10,000 - 24,999 $87,340,00
City of Park Forest IL 10,000 - 24,999 $102,342,00
City of Plainfield IL 10,000 - 24,999 $101,227.00
City of Prospect Heights IL 10,000 - 24,999 $100,000.00
City of Rantoul IL 10,000 - 24,999 $80,000.00 $69,888,00 $106,404.00
City of River Forest IL 10,000 - 24,999 $97,800.00
City of Riverdale IL 10,000 - 24,999 $71,400.00 $85.00 $70,000.00
City of Roselle IL 10,000 - 24,999 $114,324.00 $88,174.00 $114,324,00
City of South Elgin IL 10,000 - 24,999 $101,816.00 $83,971.00 $105,090.00
City of Sterling IL 10,000 - 24,999 $89,250.00
City of Streator IL 10,000 - 24,999 $80,000.00
City of Vernon Hills IL 10,000 - 24,999 $129,820,00
City of Warrenville IL 10,000 - 24,999 $77,830,00
City of Washington IL 10,000 - 24,999 $85,000.00
City of Western Springs IL 10,000 - 24,999 $110,071.00
City of Westmont IL 10,000 - 24,999 $97,500.00 $102,184.00 $143,058.00
City of Woodstock IL 10,000 - 24,999 $147,000,00
City of Munster IN 10,000 - 24,999 $91,507.00 $91,507.00 $105,000.00
City of Arkansas City KS 10,000 - 24,999 $87,059.00
City of Hays KS 10,000 - 24,999 $91,740,00
City of Ottawa KS 10,000 - 24,999 $86,000.00
City of Pittsburg KS 10,000 - 24,999 $88,004.80
City of Danville KY 10,000 - 24,999 $86,500.00 $79,290.00 $126,865,00
City of Fort Thomas KY 10,000 - 24,999 $94,068.00 $75,569.00 $101,856.00
City of Madisonville KY 10,000 - 24,999 $79,658.00 $56,430,00 $84,646.00
City of Winchester KY 10,000 - 24,999 $70,499.65 $48,786.11 $71,916.70
City of Eunice LA 10,000 - 24,999 $39,996.00
City of Mandeville LA 10,000 - 24,999 $81,000.00
City of Thibodaux LA 10,000 - 24,999 $37,308.00
City of Zachary LA 10,000 - 24,999 $53,352.00
City of Bedford MA 10,000 - 24,999 $110,600.00
City of Charlton MA 10,000 - 24,999 $72,100.00
City of Dudley MA 10,000 - 24,999 $59,500.00
City of Duxbury MA 10,000 - 24,999 $107,000.00
City of Fairhaven MA 10,000 - 24,999 $87,607,00
City of Kingston MA 10,000 - 24,999 $87,498.00
City of Norfolk MA 10,000 - 24,999 $94,953.00
City of Northborou9h MA 10,000 - 24,999 $110,824.00
City of Raynham MA 10,000 - 24,999 $66,000.00
City of Reading MA 10,000 - 24,999 $106,600.00
City of Seekonk MA 10,000 - 24,999 $85,490.00
City of Sharon MA 10,000 - 24,999 $130,686.00
City of Sudbury MA 10,000 - 24,999 $118,246.00
City of Waipole MA 10,000 - 24,999 $101,800.00 $91,310.00 $120,482.00
City of Weston MA 10,000 - 24,999 $121,000.00
City of Bel Air MD 10,000 - 24,999 $85,689.00 $55,239.00 $85,689.00
City of Cumberland MD 10,000 - 24,999 $81,203.00
City of Elkton MD 10,000 - 24,999 $83,000.00 $50,000.00 $90,000.00
City of Laurel MD 10,000 - 24,999 $88,116.57
City of Brunswick ME 10,000 - 24,999 $100,196.00
City of Falmouth ME 10,000 - 24,999 $96,616.00
City of Sanford ME 10,000 - 24,999 $87,500.00 $60,462.00 $90,694.00
City of Scarborough ME 10,000 - 24,999 $97,000.00
City of South Portland ME 10,000 - 24,999 $93,555.00
City of Westbrook ME 10,000 - 24,999 $85,486.00 $79,945.00 $95,483.00
City of Adrian MI 10,000 - 24,999 $102,707.00
City of Alpena MI 10,000 - 24,999 $80,769.00
City of Auburn Hills MI 10,000 - 24,999 $94,760.00 $94,760.00 $105,000.00
City of Beverly Hills MI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,767.00
City of Birmingham MI 10,000 - 24,999 $120,201.00
City of Genoa MI 10,000 - 24,999 $75,000.00
City of Brighton MI 10,000 - 24,999 $72,928.00
City of Coldwater MI 10,000 - 24,999 $87,360.00
City of Escanaba MI 10,000 - 24,999 $75,462.00
City of Fraser MI 10,000 - 24,999 $88,556.00
City of Grandville MI 10,000 - 24,999 $84,240.00
City of Hazel Park MI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,900.00
City of lonia MI 10,000 - 24,999 $77,500.00
City of Marquette MI 10,000 - 24,999 $92,770.00
City of Norton Shores MI 10,000 - 24,999 $88,150.00 $77,439.00 $93,676.00
City of Riverview MI 10,000 - 24,999 $97,000.00
City of Rochester MI 10,000 - 24,999 $97,982.00
City of Buena Vista MI 10,000 - 24,999 $85,188.00
City of South Lyon MI 10,000 - 24,999 $93,421.00
City of Wixom MI 10,000 - 24,999 $91,616.00 $70,474.00 $91,616.00
City of Austin MN 10,000 - 24,999 $85,000.00 $71,292.00 $85,000.00
City of Bemidji MN 10,000 - 24,999 $72,100.00
City of Brainerd MN 10,000 - 24,999 $86,292.00 $73,348.00 $86,292.00
City of Chanhassen MN 10,000 - 24,999 $94,000.00 $79,900.00 $108,100.00
City of Farmington MN 10,000 - 24,999 $89,000.00 $78,502,00 $98,127.00
City of Hutchinson MN 10,000 - 24,999 $96,682.00 $73,663.00 $101,287.00
City of New Brighton MN 10,000 - 24,999 $101,352.00 $88,980.00 $111,204.00
City of New Hope MN 10,000 - 24,999 $107,987.00
City of New Ulm MN 10,000 - 24,999 $96,033.60
City of Northfield MN 10,000 - 24,999 $91,800.00 $66,633.00 $94,151.00
City of Robbinsdale MN 10,000 - 24,999 $99,999.00 $82,618.00 $108,701.00
City of Savage MN 10,000 - 24,999 $94,899.00 $79,755.00 $100,956.00
City of South st. Paul MN 10,000 - 24,999 $95,000.00
City of Stillwater MN 10,000 - 24,999 $89,301.00
City of Carthage MO 10,000 - 24,999 $62,000.00
City of Clayton MO 10,000 - 24,999 $110,000.00
City of Excelsior Springs MO 10,000 - 24,999 $87,720.00
City of Grandview MO 10,000 - 24,999 $96,856.00
City of Klrksville MO 10,000 - 24,999 $78,280.00
City of Lake SI. Louis MO 10,000 - 24,999 $85,284.00 $79,900.00 $125,100.00
City of Lebanon MO 10,000 - 24,999 $52,530.00 $52,530.00 $57,780.00
City of Raymore MO 10,000 - 24,999 $82,079.00 $57,490.00 $91,990.00
City of Rolla MO 10,000 - 24,999 $89,761.00 $70,000.00 $92,000.00
City of West Plains MO 10,000 - 24,999 $81,994.00 $60,000.00 $81,994.00
City of Mc Comb MS 10,000 - 24,999 $63,798.00
City of Picayune MS 10,000 - 24,999 $51,500.00
City of Clemmons NC 10,000 - 24,999 $79,900.00 $56,448.00 $83,399.00
City of Cornelius NC 10,000 - 24,999 $85,000.00
City of Elizabeth City NC 10,000 - 24,999 $96,914.00
City of Garner NC 10,000 - 24,999 $102,500.00
City of Graham NC 10,000 - 24,999 $110,537.00
City of Havelock NC 10,000 - 24,999 $80,553.00
City of Huntersville NC 10,000 - 24,999 $112,257.60
City of Kernersville NC 10,000 - 24,999 $96,094.00
City of Lenoir NC 10,000 - 24,999 $83,000.00
City of Lexin9ton NC 10,000 - 24,999 $98,927.00 $78,844.00 $127,490.00
City of Statesville NC 10,000 - 24,999 $104,898.00
City of Dickinson ND 10,000 - 24,999 $70,000.00
City of Mandan ND 10,000 - 24,999 $77,500.00
City of Beatrice NE 10,000 - 24,999 $95,038.00
City of Norfoik NE 10,000 - 24,999 $93,108.00
City of Papiliion NE 10,000 - 24,999 $80,499.00
City of Scotlsbiuff NE 10,000 - 24,999 $91 ,570.00
City of South Sioux City NE 10,000 - 24,999 $82,791.00
City of Claremont NH 10,000 - 24,999 $90,000.00
City of Durham NH 10,000 - 24,999 $81,314.00 $74,213.00 $88,854.00
City of Exeter NH 10,000 - 24,999 $81,037.00 $65,873.00 $88,545.00
City of Hudson NH 10,000 - 24,999 $79,123.00
City of Keene NH 10,000 - 24,999 $106,978.00 $87,094.00 $106,978.00
City of Laconia NH 10,000 - 24,999 $94,600.00
City of Londonderry NH 10,000 - 24,999 $97,260.00
City of Milford NH 10,000 - 24,999 $76,162.00 $59,259.00 $82,534.00
City of Bernards NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $130,800.00 $86,998.00 $144,997.00
City of Mont90mery NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $108,605.00 $83,907.00 $111,427.00
City of Brigantine NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $88,500.00
City of Denville NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $120,500.00 $95,000.00 $125,500.00
City of Glassboro NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $84,000.00 $60,000.00 $84,000.00
City of Haddonfield NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $112,091.20
City of Hazlet NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $104,033.00 $65,000.00 $115,000.00
City of Howell NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $52,836.00 $35,000.00 $95,000.00
City of Lodi NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $113,500.00
City of Maplewood NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $111,000.00
City of Montville NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $120,896.00 $105,955.00 $120,896.00
City of Moorestown NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $129,558.00
City of Morristown NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $112,609.00
City of New Milford NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $40,000.00
City of Ocean City NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $127,300.00
City of Princeton NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $123,000.00 $93,000.00 $135,000.00
City of West Windsor NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $98,000.00 $90,000.00 $110,679.00
City of Secaucus NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $90,099.00 $50,000.00 $119,257.00
City of South River NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $73,000.00
City of Sparta NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $134,079.00 $89,307.00 $120,827.00
City of Summit NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $107,000.00 $98,508.00 $137,548.00
City of Tenafly NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $113,233.00
City of Verona NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $135,000.00
City of Warren NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $115,421.00
City of West Paterson NJ 10,000 - 24,999 $100,648.00
City of Silver City NM 10,000 - 24,999 $67,000.00 $49,898.00 $80,071.00
City of Boulder City NV 10,000 - 24,999 $129,315.00
City of Canandaigua NY 10,000 - 24,999 $80,565.00
City of Garden City NY 10,000 - 24,999 $190,000.00
City of Geneva NY 10,000 - 24,999 $82,425.00
City of Hambur9 NY 10,000 - 24,999 $62,000.00 $55,000.00 $70,000.00
City of Harrison NY 10,000 - 24,999 $127,305.00
City of Ogdensburg NY 10,000 - 24,999 $83,430.00
City of Rye NY 10,000 - 24,999 $140,000.00
City of Tarrytown NY 10,000 - 24,999 $102,194.00
City of Bedford OH 10,000 - 24,999 $93,000.00
City of North College Hiii OH 10,000 - 24,999 $70,018.00
City of Springfield OH 10,000 - 24,999 $103,453.00
City of Clayton OH 10,000 - 24,999 $82,000.00
City of Conneaut OH 10,000 - 24,999 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $66,500.00
City of Greenville OH 10,000 - 24,999 $37,500.00
City of Loveland OH 10,000 - 24,999 $95,000.00
City of Marysviiie OH 10,000 - 24,999 $72,367.00 $77,735.00 $97,227.00
City of Montgomery OH 10,000 - 24,999 $108,804.80
City of Norton OH 10,000 - 24,999 $54,292.00
City of PainesvilJe OH 10,000 - 24,999 $96,714.38
City ofTroy OH 10,000 - 24,999 $109,793.00 $94,108.00 $109,793.00
City of Xenia OH 10,000 - 24,999 $90,000.00
City of Bethany OK 10,000 - 24,999 $89,600.00 $60,000.00 $89,600.00
City of Chickasha OK 10,000 - 24,999 $95,000.00
City of Durant OK 10,000 - 24,999 $89,000.00 $77,229.00 $103,864.00
City of Mustang OK 10,000 - 24,999 $84,968.00
City of Del City OK 10,000 - 24,999 $68,016.00
City ofTahlequah OK 10,000 - 24,999 $48,100.00
City of Yukon OK 10,000 - 24,999 $104,297.00
City of Ashland OR 10,000 - 24,999 $121,428.00 $102,816.00 $121,428.00
City of Forest Grove OR 10,000 - 24,999 $86,700.00 $86,700.00 $102,000.00
City of Grants Pass OR 10,000 - 24,999 $89,980.00
City of Hermiston OR 10,000 - 24,999 $89,289.00
City of Newberg OR 10,000 - 24,999 $104,148.00
City of Ontario OR 10,000 - 24,999 $92,285.00 $73,416.00 $92,285.00
City of SI. Helens OR 10,000 - 24,999 $94,776.00 $77,988.00 $94,776.00
City of The Dalles OR 10,000 - 24,999 $81,984.00
City of West Linn OR 10,000 - 24,999 $97,008.00
City of Woodburn OR 10,000 - 24,999 $112,558.00
City of New Britain PA 10,000 - 24,999 $75,000.00
City of Chambers burg PA 10,000 - 24,999 $100,235.00 $86,471.00 $112,519.00
City of Cranberry PA 10,000 - 24,999 $106,605.00
City of Doylestown PA 10,000 - 24,999 $74,800.00
City of Elizabethtown PA 10,000 - 24,999 $87,000.00
City of West Whiteland PA 10,000 - 24,999 $105,937.00
City of Darby PA 10,000 - 24,999 $72,532.00
City of Greensburg PA 10,000 - 24,999 $59,470.00
City of Hanover PA 10,000 - 24,999 $72,000.00 $72,000.00 $79,000.00
City of Penn PA 10,000 - 24,999 $75,600.00
City of Whitemarsh PA 10,000 - 24,999 $99,444.00
City of Lancaster PA 10,000 - 24,999 $60,475.00
City of Middletown PA 10,000 - 24,999 $93,536.00 $77,065.00 $93,676.00
City of Warwick PA 10,000 - 24,999 $86,528.00
City of Hampden PA 10,000 - 24,999 $76,710.00
City of Plymouth PA 10,000 - 24,999 $95,000.00
City of Pottstown PA 10,000 - 24,999 $77,000.00 $72,500.00 $77,000.00
City of Pottsviiie PA 10,000 - 24,999 $75,823.00
City of Exeter PA 10,000 - 24,999 $68,000.00
City of Limerick PA 10,000 - 24,999 $81,900.00
City of West Deer PA 10,000 - 24,999 $63,000.00
City of Nether Providence PA 10,000 - 24,999 $80,200.00
City of West Chester PA 10,000 - 24,999 $97,810.00
City of East Goshen PA 10,000 - 24,999 $101,461.00 $77,625.00 $105,482.00
City of Spring Garden PA 10,000 - 24,999 $83,200.00
City of West Manchester PA 10,000 - 24,999 $83,830.00
City of Narragansett RI 10,000 - 24,999 $77,437.00
City of Portsmouth RI 10,000 - 24,999 $81,732.00
City of Smithfield RI 10,000 - 24,999 $99,756.00
City of Beaufort SC 10,000 - 24,999 $110,219.00
City of Clemson SC 10,000 - 24,999 $85,456.00
City of Hanahan SC 10,000 - 24,999 $69,014.00 $57,134.00 $72,915.00
City of Newberry SC 10,000 - 24,999 $95,067.00 $79,351.00 $119,026.00
City of North Augusta SC 10,000 - 24,999 $90,092,00 $74,201.00 $130,881.00
City of North Myrtle Beach SC 10,000 - 24,999 $96,500.00
City of Brookings SO 10,000 - 24,999 $88,000.00
City of Yankton SO 10,000 - 24,999 $80,577.00 $69,193.00 $93,613.00
City of Brentwood TN 10,000 - 24,999 $127,025.00
City of Bristol TN 10,000 - 24,999 $107,000.00
City of Farragut TN 10,000 - 24,999 $100,256.00
City of Martin TN 10,000 - 24,999 $45,000.00
City of Morristown TN 10,000 - 24,999 $93,614.00
City of Mount Juliet TN 10,000 - 24,999 $86,964.80 $67,849.60 $86,964.80
City of Sevierville TN 10,000 - 24,999 $96,900.00 $87,616.00 $118,753.00
City of Addison TX 10,000 - 24,999 $153,930.00
City of Athens TX 10,000 - 24,999 $83,661.00
City of Balch Springs TX 10,000 - 24,999 $67,000.00
City of Bellaire TX 10,000 - 24,999 $120,880.00
City of Benbrook TX 10,000 - 24,999 $112,476.00
City of Borger TX 10,000 - 24,999 $78,400.00
City of Brenham TX 10,000 - 24,999 $97,920.00
City of Brownwood TX 10,000 - 24,999 $95,004.00
City of Burkbumett TX 10,000 - 24,999 $74,239.00
City of Burleson TX 10,000 - 24,999 $144,499.00
City of Canyon TX 10,000 - 24,999 $90,000.00
City of Clute TX 10,000 - 24,999 $74,700.00
City of COlleyville TX 10,000 - 24,999 $112,372.00
City of Corsicana TX 10,000 - 24,999 $50,796.00 $50,796.00 $84,552.00
City of Denison TX 10,000 - 24,999 $105,497.00
City of Dickinson TX 10,000 - 24,999 $83,000.00
City of Eagle Pass TX 10,000 - 24,999 $110,000.00
City of Ennis TX 10,000 - 24,999 $121,196.00
City of White Settlement TX 10,000 - 24,999 $80,000.00
City of Gainesville TX 10,000 - 24,999 $87,364.00
City of Galena Park TX 10,000 - 24,999 $79,669.00
City of Greenville TX 10,000 - 24,999 $108,149.00
City of Henderson TX 10,000 - 24,999 $59,000.00
City of Hereford TX 10,000 - 24,999 $89,508.00
City of Hewitt TX 10,000 - 24,999 $85,700.00
City of Highland Village TX 10,000 - 24,999 $115,000.00
City of Jacksonville TX 10,000 - 24,999 $83,616.00
City of Kerrville TX 10,000 - 24,999 $123,362.67
City of Kilgore TX 10,000 - 24,999 $75,000.00
City of La Marque TX 10,000 - 24,999 $80,000.00
City of Mercedes TX 10,000 - 24,999 $66,950.00
City of Mineral Wells TX 10,000 - 24,999 $84,000.00
City of Mount Pleasant TX 10,000 - 24,999 $90,000.00
City of Nederland TX 10,000 - 24,999 $102,379.00 $73,036.00 $102,379.00
City of Orange TX 10,000 - 24,999 $96,900.00
City of Palestine TX 10,000 - 24,999 $97,080,00
City of Pampa TX 10,000 - 24,999 $72,000.00
City of Pflugerviile TX 10,000 - 24,999 $85,238.00
City of Port Lavaca TX 10,000 - 24,999 $64,000.00
City of Portland TX 10,000 - 24,999 $84,240.00
City of Richmond TX 10,000 - 24,999 $67,788,00
City of Rio Grande City TX 10,000 - 24,999 $80,000.00
City of Rockwall TX 10,000 - 24,999' $113,300.00
City of Schertz TX 10,000 - 24,999 $92,500.00
City of Snyder TX 10,000 - 24,999 $83,640,00
City of South lake TX 10,000 - 24,999 $140,000.00
City of Slephenviile TX 10,000 - 24,999 $73,788.00
City of Sulphur Springs TX 10,000 - 24,999 $89,880,00
City of Sweetwater TX 10,000 - 24,999 $93,836.00
City of Tayior TX 10,000 - 24,999 $97,603.00
City of Universal City TX 10,000 - 24,999 $82,714.06 $82,714.06 $116,872.87
City of Uvalde TX 10,000 - 24,999 $66,000.00
City of Vernon TX 10,000 - 24,999 $72,908.40
City of Vidor TX 10,000 - 24,999 $62,000.00
City of Watauga TX 10,000 - 24,999 $110,310.72
City of Waxahachie TX 10,000 - 24,999 $141,120.00
City of Weatherford TX 10,000 - 24,999 $126,000.00
City of West University Place TX 10,000 - 24,999 $120,796.00
City of Farmington UT 10,000 - 24,999 $83,616,00 $65,853.00 $93,475.00
City of Christiansburg VA 10,000 - 24,999 $87,550.00
City of Colonial Heights VA 10,000 - 24,999 $101,000.00
City of Fairfax VA 10,000 - 24,999 $142,202,00
City of Front Royai VA 10,000 - 24,999 $96,600.00
City of Herndon VA 10,000 - 24,999 $126,000,00
City of Martinsville VA 10,000 - 24,999 $99,880.00 .
City of Radford VA 10,000 - 24,999 $100,000.00
City of Vienna VA 10,000 - 24,999 $135,219.00
City of Wiiliamsburg VA 10,000 - 24,999 $119,184.00 $84,578.00 $126,864.00
City of Winchester VA 10,000 - 24,999 $118,820.00
City of Bennington VT 10,000 - 24,999 $76,400.00
City af Brattleboro VT 10,000 - 24,999 $76,983.50
City of Hartford VT 10,000 - 24,999 $93,063.00
City of Covington WA 10,000 - 24,999 $102,579.00 $91,140.00 $115,453.00
City of Issaquah WA 10,000 - 24,999 $126,804,00 $94,632,00 $126,804,00
City of Kenmore WA 10,000 - 24,999 $118,500,00
City of Monroe WA 10,000 - 24,999 $95,805.00
City of Mountlake Terrace WA 10,000 - 24,999 $100,110.00
City of Pullman WA 10,000 - 24,999 $93,936.00 $77,088.00 $93,936.00
City of Sunnyside WA 10,000 - 24,999 $87,500.00
City of Grand Chute WI 10,000 - 24,999 $84,470.00 $65,125.00 $84,470.00
City of Baraboo WI 10,000 - 24,999 $76,400.00
City of De Pere WI 10,000 - 24,999 $83,272.00 $76,205.00 $99,430.00
City of Germantown WI 10,000 - 24,999 $80,580,00 $70,981.00 $86,955.00
City of Grafton WI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,453.00
City of Howard WI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,994.00 $78,294.00 $95,693,00
City of Greendale WI 10,000 - 24,999 $85,316.00 $71,499,00 $87,392.00
City of Mequon Wi 10,000 - 24,999 $91,369.00 $79,994.00 $108,227.00
City of Middieton Wi 10,000 - 24,999 $81,059.00
City of Mount Pleasant WI 10,000 - 24,999 $78,795.00
City of Menasha WI 10,000 - 24,999 $69,910.00 $66,252.00 $88,721.00
City of Oconomowoc WI 10,000 - 24,999 $91,758.00 $89,116.00 $100,169.00
City of Plover WI 10,000 - 24,999 $67,500.00 $66,000.00 $69,000.00
City of Port Washin9ton WI 10,000 - 24,999 $83,010.00 $76,961.00 $89,060.00
City of River Falls WI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,699.00 $77,687.00 $103,007.00
City of Sun Prairie WI 10,000 - 24,999 $101,213.00 $68,121.00 $95,369.00
City of Green River WY 10,000 - 24,999 $84,000.00
Average $96,632.63
2004 ICMA Custom Report - Results
Jobs Selected for this report
Chief Administrative Officer/City or County Manager
Cities covered in this report - 10,000 to 24.999
Regional States covered in this report
Illinois
Indiana
Missouri
Nebraska
North Dakota
Ohio
South Dakota
Wisconsin
Kansas
Michigan
Minnesota
Iowa - did not report
Minimum Salary
Maximum Salary
No minimum salary specified
No maximum salary specified
Average actual salary = $91,581
Chief Administrative Officer/City or County Manager
2004
, MInimum Salary Maximum Salary
County/City Slate I Population Size Annual Salary Range RAnge
City of Algonquin IL 10,000 - 24,999 $124,000.00
City of Bloomingdale IL 10,000 - 24,999 $110,570.00
City of Bourbonnais IL 10,000 - 24,999 $67,013.00
City of Cary IL 10,000 - 24,999 $92,000.00
City of Centralia IL 10,000 - 24,999 $75,000.00
City of Charleston IL 10,000 - 24,999 $81,370.00 $72,000.00 $90,000.00
City of Collinsville IL 10,000 - 24,999 $81,993.00
City of Darien IL 10,000 - 24,999 $108,000.00
City of East Moline IL 10,000 - 24,999 $83,516.00 $66,104.00 $92,445.00
City of East Peoria IL 10,000 - 24,999 $82,900.00
City of Edwardsville IL 10,000 - 24,999 $80,205.00
City of Frankfort IL 10,000 - 24,999 $99,750.00
City of Grayslake IL 10,000 - 24,999 $150,000.00
City of Hazel Crest IL 10,000 - 24,999 $96,329.00
City of Hinsdale IL 10,000 - 24,999 $137,361.00
City of Homer Glen IL 10,000 - 24,999 $98,000.00
City of La Grange Park IL 10,000 - 24,999 $114,420.00
City of Lake Forest IL 10,000 - 24,999 $149,600.00
City of Lake In the Hills IL 10,000 - 24,999 $109,824.00
City of Lake Zurich IL 10,000 - 24,999 $122,000.00
City of Libertyville IL 10,000 - 24,999 $140,600.00 $106,651.00 $159,977.00
City of Lincolnwood IL 10,000 - 24,999 $119,000.00
City of Lisle IL 10,000 - 24,999 $113,547.00
City of Mattoon IL 10,000 - 24,999 $87,000.00 $85,000.00 $88,000.00
City of Me Henry IL 10,000 - 24,999 $93,507.00 $81,750.00 $110,607.00
City of New Lenox IL 10,000 - 24,999 $113,508.00
City of North Aurora IL 10,000 - 24,999 $72,000.00 $71,252.00 $98,941.00
City of O'Fallon IL 10,000 - 24,999 $87,340.00
City of Park Forest IL 10,000 - 24,999 $102,342.00
City of Plainfield IL 10,000 - 24,999 $101,227.00
City of Prospect Heights IL 10,000 - 24,999 $100,000.00
City of Rantoul IL 10,000 - 24,999 $80,000.00 $69,888.00 $106,404.00
City of River Forest IL 10,000 - 24,999 $97,800.00
City of Riverdale IL 10,000 - 24,999 $71,400.00 $85.00 $70,000.00
City of Roselle IL 10,000 - 24,999 $114,324.00 $88,174.00 $114,324.00
City of South Elgin IL 10,000 - 24,999 $101,816.00 $83,971.00 $105,090.00
City of Sterling IL 10,000 - 24,999 $89,250.00
City of Streator IL 10,000 - 24,999 $80,000.00
City of Vernon Hills IL 10,000 - 24,999 $129,820.00
City of Warrenville IL 10,000 - 24,999 $77,830.00
City of Washington IL 10,000 - 24,999 $85,000.00
City of Western Springs IL 10,000 - 24,999 $110,071.00
City of Westmont IL 10,000 - 24,999 $97,500.00 $102,184.00 $143,058.00
City of Woodstock IL 10,000 - 24,999 $147,000.00
City of Munster IN 10,000 - 24,999 $91,507.00 $91,507.00 $105,000.00
City of Arkansas City KS 10,000 - 24,999 $87,059.00
City of Hays KS 10,000 - 24,999 $91,740.00
City of Ottawa KS 10,000 - 24,999 $86,000.00
City of Pittsburg KS 10,000 - 24,999 $88,004.80
City of Adrian MI 10,000 - 24,999 $102,707.00
City of Alpena MI 10,000 - 24,999 $80,769.00
City of Auburn Hills MI 10,000 - 24,999 $94,760.00 $94,760.00 $105,000.00
City of Beverly Hills MI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,767.00
City of Birmingham MI 10,000 - 24,999 $120,201.00
City of Genoa MI 10,000 - 24,999 $75,000.00
City of Brighton MI 10,000 - 24,999 $72,928.00
City of Coldwater MI 10,000 - 24,999 $87,360.00
City of Escanaba MI 10,000 - 24,999 $75,462.00
City of Fraser MI 10,000 - 24,999 $88,556.00
City of Grandville MI 10,000 - 24,999 $84,240.00
City of Hazel Park MI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,900.00
City of lonla MI 10,000 - 24,999 $77 ,500.00
City of Marquette MI 10,000 - 24,999 $92,770.00
City of Norton Shores MI 10,000 - 24,999 $88,150.00 $77,439.00 $93,676.00
City of Riverview MI 10,000 - 24,999 $97,000.00
City of Rochester MI 10,000 - 24,999 $97,982.00
City of Buena Vista MI 10,000 - 24,999 $85,188.00
City of South Lyon MI 10,000 - 24,999 $93,421.00
City of Wixom MI 10,000 - 24,999 $91,616.00 $70,474.00 $91,616.00
City of Austin MN 10,000 - 24,999 $85,000.00 $71,292.00 $85,000.00
City of Bemldji MN 10,000 - 24,999 $72,100.00
City of Brainerd MN 10,000 - 24,999 $86,292.00 $73,348.00 $86,292.00
City of Chanhassen MN 10,000 - 24,999 $94,000.00 $79,900.00 $108,100.00
City of Farmington MN 10,000 - 24,999 $89,000.00 $78,502.00 $98,127.00
City of Hutchinson MN 10,000 - 24,999 $96,682.00 $73,663.00 $101,287.00
City of New Brighton MN 10,000 - 24,999 $101,352.00 $88,980.00 $111,204.00
City of New Hope MN 10,000 - 24,999 $107,987.00
City of New Ulm MN 10,000 - 24,999 $96,033.60
City of Northfield MN 10,000 - 24,999 $91,800.00 $66,633.00 $94,151.00
City of Robbinsdale MN 10,000 - 24,999 $99,999.00 $82,618.00 $108,701.00
City of Savage MN 10,000 - 24,999 $94,899.00 $79,755.00 $100,956.00
City of South St. Paul MN 10,000 - 24,999 $95,000.00
City of Stillwater MN 10,000 - 24,999 $89,301.00
City of Carthage MO 10,000 - 24,999 $62,000.00
City of Clayton MO 10,000 - 24,999 $110,000.00
City of Excelsior Springs MO 10,000 - 24,999 $87,720.00
City of Grandview MO 10,000 - 24,999 $96,856.00
City of Kirksville MO 10,000 - 24,999 $78,280.00
City of Lake St. Louis MO 10,000 - 24,999 $85,284.00 $79,900.00 $125,100.00
City of Lebanon MO 10,000 - 24,999 $52,530.00 $52,530.00 $57,780.00
City of Raymore MO 10,000 - 24,999 $82,079.00 $57,490.00 $91,990.00
City of Rolla MO 10,000 - 24,999 $89,761.00 $70,000.00 $92,000.00
City of West Plains MO 10,000 - 24,999 $81,994.00 $60,000.00 $81,994.00
City of Dickinson ND 10,000 - 24,999 $70,000.00
City of Mandan ND 10,000 - 24,999 $77,500.00
City of Beatrice NE 10,000 - 24,999 $95,038.00
City of Norfolk NE 10,000 - 24,999 $93,108.00
City of Papillion NE 10,000 - 24,999 $80,499.00
City of Scottsbluff NE 10,000 - 24,999 $91,570.00
City of South Sioux City NE 10,000 - 24,999 $82,791.00
City of Bedford OH 10,000 - 24,999 $93,000.00
City of North College Hill OH 10,000 - 24,999 $70,018.00
City of Springfield OH 10,000 - 24,999 $103,453.00
City of Clayton OH 10,000 - 24,999 $82,000.00
City of Conneaut OH 10,000 - 24,999 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $66,500.00
City of Greenville OH 10,000 - 24,999 $37,500.00
City of Loveland OH 10,000 - 24,999 $95,000.00
City of Marysville OH 10,000 - 24,999 $72,367.00 $77,735.00 $97,227.00
City of Montgomery OH 10,000 - 24,999 $108,804.80
City of Norton OH 10,000 - 24,999 $54,292.00
City of Painesville OH 10,000 - 24,999 $96,714.38
City ofTroy OH 10,000 - 24,999 $109,793.00 $94,108.00 $109,793.00
City of Xenia OH 10,000 - 24,999 $90,000.00
City of Brookings SD 10,000 - 24,999 $88,000.00
City of Yankton SD 10,000 - 24,999 $80,577.00 $69,193.00 $93,613.00
City of Grand Chute Wi 10,000 - 24,999 $84,470.00 . $65,125.00 $84,470.00
City of Baraboo WI 10,000 - 24,999 $76,400.00
City of De Pere WI 10,000 - 24,999 $83,272.00 $76,205.00 $99,430.00
City of Germantown Wi 10,000 - 24,999 $80,580.00 $70,981.00 $86,955.00
City of Grafton WI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,453.00
City of Howard WI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,994.00 $78,294.00 $95,693.00
City of Greendale WI 10,000 - 24,999 $85,316.00 $71,499.00 $87,392.00
City of Mequon WI 10,000 - 24,999 $91,369.00 $79,994.00 $108,227.00
City of Middleton WI 10,000 - 24,999 $81,059.00
City of Mount Pleasant WI 10,000 - 24,999 $78,795.00
City of Menasha WI 10,000 - 24,999 $69,910.00 $66,252.00 $88,721.00
City of Oconomowoc WI 10,000 - 24,999 $91,758.00 $89,116.00 $100,169.00
City of Plover WI 10,000 - 24,999 $67,500.00 $66,000.00 $69,000.00
City of Port Washin9ton WI 10,000 - 24,999 $83,010.00 $76,961.00 $89,060.00
City of River Falls WI 10,000 - 24,999 $86,699.00 $77,687.00 $103,007.00
City of Sun Prairie WI 10,000 - 24,999 $101,213.00 $68,121.00 $95,369.00
Average $91,580.87
City of New Hope
2005 COMPENSATION PLAN
FOR NON-UNION EMPLOYEES
Authorized December 13, 2004
By
Resolution 2004-212
City of New Hope Non-Union Compensation Plan
Movement through the steps is bas.ed upon length of service AND performance as follows:
From Start to Step 1, if performance is
Good or above, employee will receive 100% of step movement.
Satisfactory, employee will receive 50% of step movement.
Unsatisfactory, employee will not pass probation.
From Step 1 through Step 6, if performance is
Exceptional, employee will receive 125% of step movement (from
current step to next). it may take employee fewer than 5 years
to move through all steps.
Good to Very Good, employee will receive 100% of step movement
Satisfactory, employee will receive 50% of step movement (from
current step to next). It will take employee longer than 5 years
to move through all steps.
Unsatisfactory, employee will not receive an increase.
Performance will be reviewed at 6 months and then each anniversary date until employee moves
through all six steps.
All step increases will become effective the first day of the pay period following the anniversary
date (or other appropriate event).
Eligibility for Annual Increases after Step 6
Once an employee moves through all progression steps, he/she is eligible for an annual increase,
based upon performance, as follows:
If performance is
Very good to Exceptional, employee will receive new base (annual range adjustment) plus 1 %.
Satisfactory to Good, employee will receive new base (annual range adjustment).
Unsatisfactory, employee will not receive a wage increase.
After an employee meets all requirements for Step 6, his/her performance will be reviewed annually, on
a calendar year basis.
All base increases will become effective the first day of the first full pay period in the following year.
The 1 % merit adjustment will be paid as a lump sum on the last payday in April of the following year.
An employee who leaves City employment prior to the April date for receiving a lump sum payment,
mayor may not receive that payment or a portion thereof. Each situation will be individually
considered.
Pers\comp\non-union plan\step movement.doc
City of New Hope
Non-union Positions
Regular Full-Time and Part-Time
January, 2005
De artment Position FLSA Status
Administration Administrative Support Specialist Non-exempt 8
City Clerk Exempt 8
Communications Coordinator Exempt 3
Customer Service Representative Non-exempt 3
Director of Administration Exempt 15
Human Resources Coordinator Exempt 2
Community Administrative Support Specialist Non-exempt 8
Development Building Official Exempt 8
Code Enforcement Officer Non-exempt 5
Community Development Assistant Exempt 1
Community Development Specialist Exempt 6
Director of Community Development Exempt 15
General Inspector Exempt 6
Office Support Specialist Non-exempt 5
Section 8 Housing Coordinator Non-exempt 8
Finance Accountant Exempt 4
Accounting Technician Non-exempt 11
Director of Finance Exempt 17
Information Technology Coordinator Exempt 13
Office Support Specialist Non-exempt 5
Special Assess/Utility Billing Clerk Non-exempt 7
Police Administrative Support Specialist Non-exempt 8
Animal Control Officer Non-exempt 4
Community Service Officer Non-exempt 3
Director of Police Exempt 18
Office Supervisor Exempt 3
Police Clerk, Full-Time Non-exempt 6
Police Clerk, Part-Time Non-exempt 4
Park & Rec Administrative Support Specialist Non-exempt 8
Assistant Golf Course Superintendent Exempt 1
Athletic Supervisor Exempt 7
Director of Parks & Recreation Exempt 15
Golf Course Superintendent Exempt 7
Office Support Specialist Non-exempt 5
Recreation Facilities Manager Exempt 11
Recreation Supervisor Exempt 7
De artment
Public Works
Position
Administrative Support Specialist
Central Garage Supervisor
Contract Manager
Director of Public Works
Office Support Specialist
Operations Manager
Parks/Street Maintenance Supervisor
Utilities Maintenance Supervisor
\pers\comp\non-union plan\ positions. doc
FLSA Status
Non-exempt
Exempt
Exempt
Exempt
Non-exempt
Exempt
Exempt
Exempt
8
7
6
17
5
11
7
7
2005 Non-Exempt Salary Structure - 1
Effective the beginning of the first full pay period, January 10, 2005
Job
Grade
Start
Step 1
6 mos
Step 2
1yr
Step 3
2 yrs
Step 4
3 yrs
Step 5
4yrs
Step 6
5 yrs
1 Hour 12.54 13.05 13.54 14.06 14.56 15.05 15.57
Month 2173.60 2262.00 2346.93 2437.07 2523.73 2608.67 2698.80
Year 26083.20 27144.00 28163.20 29244.80 30284.80 31304.00 32385.60
2 Hour 12.86 13.39 13.94 14.47 14.98 15.56 16.09
Month 2229.07 2320.93 2416.27 2508.13 2596.53 2697.07 2788.93
Year 26748.80 27851.20 28995.20 30097.60 31158.40 32364.80 33467.20
3 Hour 13.18 13.75 14.32 14.89 15.46 16.05 16.63
Month 2284.53 2383.33 2482.13 2580.93 2679.73 2782.00 2882.53
Year 27414.40 28600.00 29785.60 30971.20 32156.80 33384.00 34590.40
4 Hour 13.49 14.11 14.70 15.33 15.94 16.56 17.17
Month 2338.27 2445.73 2548.00 2657.20 2762.93 2870.40 2976.13
Year 28059.20 29348.80 30576.00 31886.40 33155.20 34444.80 35713.60
5 Hour 13.81 14.46 15.10 15.74 16.39 17.05 17.69
Month 2393.73 2506.40 2617.33 2728.27 2840.93 2955.33 3066.27
Year 28724.80 30076.80 31408.00 32739.20 34091.20 35464.00 36795.20
6 Hour 14.13 14.82 15.49 16.18 16.86 17.55 18.22
Month 2449.20 2568.80 2684.93 2804.53 2922.40 3042.00 3158.13
Year 29390.40 30825.60 32219.20 33654.40 35068.80 36504.00 37897.60
7 Hour 14.46 15.18 15.87 16.61 17.31 18.02 18.76
Month 2506.40 2631.20 2750.80 2879.07 3000.40 3123.47 3251.73
Year 30076.80 31574.40 33009.60 34548.80 36004.80 37481.60 39020.80
8 Hour 14.77 15.51 16.26 17.02 17.78 18.53 19.27
Month 2560.13 2688.40 2818.40 2950.13 3081 .87 3211.87 3340.13
Year 30721.60 32260.80 33820.80 35401.60 36982.40 38542.40 40081.60
9 Hour 15.09 15.87 16.67 17.45 18.24 19.04 19.83
Month 2615.60 2750.80 2889.47 3024.67 3161.60 3300.27 3437.20
Year 31387.20 33009.60 34673.60 36296.00 37939.20 39603.20 41246.40
10 Hour 15.41 16.24 17.05 17.87 18.72 19.51 20.36
Month 2671.07 2814.93 2955.33 3097.47 3244.80 3381.73 3529.07
Year 32052.80 33779.20 35464.00 37169.60 38937.60 40580.80 42348.80
11 Hour 15.73 16.60 17 .45 18.30 19.17 ' 20.02 20.88
Month 2726.53 2877.33 3024.67 3172.00 3322.80 3470.13 3619.20
Year 32718.40 34528.00 36296.00 38064.00 39873.60 41641.60 43430.40
pers\comp\non-union plan\non exempt 2005.xls
2005 Non-Exempt Salary Structure - 2
Effective the beginning of the first full pay period, July 11, 2005
Job
Grade
Start
Step 1
6 mos
Step 2
1 yr
Step 3
2 yrs
Step 4
3 yrs
Step 5
4yrs
Step 6
5yrs
1 Hour 12.79 13.31 13.81 14.34 14.85 15.35 15.88
Month 2216.93 2307.07 2393.73 2485.60 2574.00 2660.67 2752.53
Year 26603.20 27684.80 28724.80 29827.20 30888.00 31928.00 33030.40
2 Hour 13.12 13.66 14.22 14.76 15.28 15.87 16.41
Month 2274.13 2367.73 2464.80 2558.40 2648.53 2750.80 2844.40
Year 27289.60 28412.80 29577.60 30700.80 31782.40 33009.60 34132.80
3 Hour 13.44 14.03 14.61 15.19 15.77 16.37 16.96
Month 2329.60 2431.87 2532.40 2632.93 2733.47 2837.47 2939.73
Year 27955.20 29182.40 30388.80 31595.20 32801.60 34049.60 35276.80
4 Hour 13.76 14.39 14.99 15.64 16.26 16.89 17.51
Month 2385.07 2494.27 2598.27 2710.93 2818.40 2927.60 3035.07
Year 28620.80 29931.20 31179.20 32531.20 33820.80 35131.20 36420.80
5 Hour 14.09 14.75 15.40 16.05 16.72 17.39 18.04
Month 2442.27 2556.67 2669.33 2782.00 2898.13 3014.27 3126.93
Year 29307.20 30680.00 32032.00 33384.00 34777.60 36171.20 37523.20
6 Hour 14.41 15.12 15.80 16.50 17.20 17.90 18.58
Month 2497.73 2620.80 2738.67 2860.00 2981 .33 3102.67 3220.53
Year 29972.80 31449.60 .32864.00 34320.00 35776.00 37232.00 38646.40
7 Hour 14.75 15.48 16.19 16.94 17.66 18.38 19.14
Month 2556.67 2683.20 2806.27 2936.27 3061 .07 3185.87 3317.60
Year 30680.00 32198.40 33675.20 35235.20 36732.80 38230.40 39811.20
8 Hour 15.07 15.82 16.59 17.36 18.14 18.90 19.66
Month 2612.13 2742.13 2875.60 3009.07 3144.27 3276.00 3407.73
Year 31345.60 32905.60 34507.20 36108.80 37731.20 39312.00 40892.80
9 Hour 15.39 16.19 17.00 17.80 18.60 19.42 20.23
Month 2667.60 2806.27 2946.67 3085.33 3224.00 3366.13 3506.53
Year 32011.20 33675.20 35360.00 37024.00 38688.00 40393.60 42078.40
10 Hour 15.72 16.56 17.39 18.23 19.09 19.90 20.77
Month 2724.80 2870.40 3014.27 3159.87 3308.93 3449.33 3600.13
Year 32697.60 34444.80 36171.20 37918.40 39707.20 41392.00 43201.60
11 Hour 16.04 16.93 17.80 18.67 19.55 20.42 21.30
Month 2780.27 2934.53 3085.33 3236.13 3388.67 3539.47 3692.00
Year 33363.20 35214.40 37024.00 38833.60 40664.00 42473.60 44304.00
pers\comp\non-union plan \non exempt July 2005.xls
2005 Exempt Salary Structure - 1
Effective the beginning of the first full pay period, January 10, 2005
Job
Grade
Start
Step 1
6 mos
Step 2
1 yr
Step 3
2yrs
Step 4
3 yrs
Step 5
4yrs
Step 6
5yrs
Hour 19.44 20.35 21.27 22.16 23.08 24.02 24.94
Month 3369.54 3526.89 3686.06 3841.60 4000.76 4163.54 4322.71
1 Year 40434.49 42322.74 44232.69 46099.23 48009.18 49962.54 51872.49
Hour 20.17 21.10 22.05 23.02 23.97 24.92 25.85
Month 3496.15 3657.12 3821.71 3989.91 4154.50 4319.09 4480.06
2 Year 41953.77 43885.42 45860.49 47878.95 49854.01 51829.08 53760.73
Hour 20.88 21.87 22.86 23.84 24.81 25.80 26.80
Month 3619.14 3790.96 3962.78 4132.80 4301.00 4472.83 4644.65
3 Year 43429.64 45491.52 47553.39 49593.56 51612.04 53673.91 55735.79
Hour 21.60 22.62 23.64 24.62 25.69 26.72 27.74
Month 3743.93 3921.18 4098.43 4267.75 4452.93 4631.99 4807.43
4 Year 44927.22 47054.20 49181.19 51213.04 53435.17 55583.86 57689.15
Hour 22.33 23.38 24.46 25.50 26.55 27.64 28.68
Month 3870.54 4053.22 4239.51 4420.37 4601 .24 4791.15 4972.02
5 Year 46446.50 48638.59 50874.10 53044.50 55214.90 57493.81 59664.21
Hour 23.05 24.14 25.24 26.32 27.41 28.52 29.61
Month 3995.34 4183.44 4375.16 4561 .45 4751.36 4943.08 5132.99
6 Year 47944.07 50201.28 52501.90 54737.40 57016.33 59316.95 61595.86
Hour 23.76 24.91 26.03 27.16 28.30 29.42 30.55
Month 4118.33 4317.28 4512.62 4707.95 4904.67 5098.62 5295.77
7 Year 49419.94 51807.37 54151.40 56495.43 58856.06 61183.49 63549.22
Hour 24.50 25.66 26.83 27.99 29.14 30.32 31.49
Month 4246.74 4447.51 4650.08 4850.84 5051.60 5255.98 5458.55
8 Year 50960.91 53370.06 55800.91 58210.04 60619.18 63071.73 65502.57
Hour 25.22 26.42 27.61 28.81 30.01 31.22 32.44
Month 4371.54 4579.54 4785.73 4993.72 5201.72 5411.52 5623.14
9 Year 52458.49 54954.45 57428.70 59924.65 62420.61 64938.27 67477.64
Hour 25.94 27.18 28.40 29.64 30.91 32.13 33.36
Month 4496.34 4711.57 4923.18 5138.41 5357.26 5568.88 5782.30
10 Year 53956.06 56538.83 59078.20 61660.97 64287.15 66826.51 69387.58
Hour 26.65 27.91 29.22 30.47 31.75 33.03 34.30
Month 4619.33 4838.18 5064.26 5281.30 5503.76 5724.42 5945.08
11 Year 55431.93 58058.11 60771.11 63375.59 66045.17 68693.06 71340.94
2005 Exempt Salary Structure - 1
Effective the beginning of the first full pay period, January 10, 2005
Job
Grade
Start
Step 1
6mos
Step 2
1 yr
Step 3
2yrs
Step 4
3 yrs
Step 5
4yrs
Step 6
5yrs
Hour 27.38 28.70 30.00 31.32 32.62 33.92 35.24
Month 4745.93 4973.83 5199.91 5429.61 5653.88 5879.97 6107.86
12 Year 56951.21 59685.91 62398.91 65155.32 67846.61 70559.59 73294.30
Hour 28.11 29.45 30.79 32.14 33.48 34.84 36.18
Month 4872.54 5104.05 5337.37 5570.68 . 5804.00 6039.13 6270.64
13 Year 58470.49 61248.59 64048.41 66848.22 69648.04 72469.55 75247.65
Hour 28.82 30.22 31.59 32.97 34.36 35.74 37.12
Month 4995.53 5237.89 5474.83 5715.38 5955.93 6194.67 6433.42
14 Year 59946.36 62854.70 65697.91 68584.53 71471.17 74336.09 77201.02
Hour 29.55 30.97 32.38 33.81 35.22 36.64 38.05
Month 5122.14 5368.11 5612.28 5860.07 6104.24 6350.22 6596.20
15 Year 61465.64 64417.38 67347.42 70320.86 73250.89 76202.63 79154.37
Hour 30.28 31.73 33.16 34.62 36.08 37.54 39.00
Month 5248.74 5500.15 5747.93 6001.15 6254.36 6507.57 6760.79
16 Year 62984.92 66001.76 68975.22 72013.80 75052.32 78090.87 81129.43
Hour 30.99 32.48 33.99 35.46 36.95 38.44 39.93
Month 5371.73 5630.37 5890.82 6145.84 6404.48 6663.12 6921.76
17 Year 64460.79 67564.45 70689.83 73750.08 76853.75 79957.42 83061.09
Hour 32.33 33.85 35.38 36.92 38.44 39.97 41.51
Month 5603.24 5867.31 6133.18 6399.05 6663.12 6928.99 7194.87
18 Year 67238.89 70407.67 73598.15 76788.64 79957.42 83147.90 86338.39
pers\comp\non-union plan\exempt 2005.xls
2005 Exempt Salary Structure - 2
Effective the beginning of the first full pay period, July 11, 2005
Job
Grade
Start
Step 1
6 mos
Step 2
1yr
Step 3
2yrs
Step 4
3 yrs
Step 5
4yrs
Step 6
5yrs
Hour 19.83 20.75 21.69 22.61 23.54 24.50 25.44
Month 3436.93 3597.43 3759.78 3918.43 4080.78 4246.82 4409.16
1 Year 41243.18 43169.19 45117.34 47021.21 48969.36 50961.79 52909.94
Hour 20.57 21.52 22.49 23.48 24.45 25.42 26.36
Month 3566.07 3730.26 3898.14 4069.71 4237.59 4405.47 4569.66
2 Year 42792.85 44763.13 46777.69 48836.53 50851.09 52865.66 54835.95
Hour 21.30 22.31 23.32 24.32 25.31 26.32 27.33
Month 3691.52 3866.78 4042.04 4215.45 4387.02 4562.28 4737.54
3 Year 44298.23 46401.35 48504.46 50585.43 52644.28 54747.39 56850.50
Hour 22.03 23.07 24.12 25.11 26.20 27.26 28.29
Month 3818.81 3999.61 4180.40 4353.11 4541 .99 4724.63 4903.58
4 Year 45825.76 47995.29 50164.81 52237.30 54503.87 56695.54 58842.93
Hour 22.78 23.85 24.95 26.01 27.08 28.19 29.26
Month 3947.95 4134.28 4324.30 4508.78 4693.27 4886.97 5071.46
5 Year 47375.43 49611.36 51891.58 54105.39 56319.19 58643.69 60857.49
Hour 23.51 24.62 25.75 26.84 27.96 29.09 30.21
Month 4075.25 4267.11 4462.66 4652.68 4846.39 5041.94 5235.65
6 Year 48902.95 51205.30 53551.94 55832.15 58156.65 60503.29 62827.78
Hour 24.23 25.41 26.56 27.70 28.86 30.00 31.16
Month 4200.69 4403.63 4602.87 4802.11 5002.77 5200.60 5401.68
7 Year 50408.34 52843.52 55234.43 57625.34 60033.18 62407.16 64820.21
Hour 24.99 26.17 27.36 28.55 29.73 30.93 32.12
Month 4331 .68 4536.46 4743.08 4947.85 5152.63 5361.10 5567.72
8 Year 51980.13 54437.46 56916.92 59374.24 61831.57 64333.17 66812.63
Hour 25.72 26.95 28.16 29.39 30.61 31.84 33.09
Month 4458.97 4671.13 4881 .44 5093.60 5305.75 5519.75 5735.60
9 Year 53507.66 56053.54 58577.28 61123.15 63669.03 66237.03 68827.19
Hour 26.46 27.73 28.97 30.24 31.53 32.77 34.03
Month 4586.27 4805.80 5021.65 5241.18 5464.41 5680.25 5897.94
10 Year 55035.18 57669.61 60259.76 62894.19 65572.90 68163.04 70775.33
Hour 27.18 28.47 29.80 31.08 32.39 33.69 34.98
Month 4711.71 4934.94 5165.54 5386.93 5613.84 5838.91 6063.98
11 Year 56540.57 59219.28 61986.53 64643.10 67366.08 70066.92 72767.76
2005 Exempt Salary Structure - 2
Effective the beginning of the first full pay period, July 11, 2005
Job
Grade
Start
Step 1
6mos
Step 2
1 yr
Step 3
2yrs
Step 4
3 yrs
Step 5
4yrs
Step 6
5yrs
Hour 27.93 29.27 30.60 31.95 33.27 34.60 35.94
Month 4840.85 5073.30 5303.91 5538.20 5766.96 5997.57 6230.02
12 Year 58090.23 60879.63 63646.89 66458.42 69203.54 71970.78 74760.19
Hour 28.67 30.04 31.41 32.78 34.15 35.54 36.90
Month 4969.99 5206.13 5444.11 5682.10 5920.08 6159.91 6396.05
13 Year 59639.90 62473.56 65329.38 681B5.18 71041.00 73918.94 76752.61
Hour 29.40 30.82 32.22 33.63 35.05 36.45 37.86
Month 5095.44 5342.65 5584.32 5829.69 6075.05 6318.57 6562.09
14 Year 61145.29 64111.79 67011.87 69956.23 72900.59 75822.81 78745.04
Hour 30.14 31.59 33.03 34.48 35.92 37.37 38.82
Month 5224.58 5475.48 5724.53 5977 .27 6226.33 6477.22 6728.12
15 Year 62694.95 65705.72 68694.37 71727.2B 74715.91 77726.6B 80737.45
Hour 30.89 32.37 33.82 35.31 36.80 38.29 39.78
Month 5353.72 5610.15 5862.89 6121.17 6379.45 6637.72 6896.00
16 Year 64244.62 67321.BO 70354.72 73454.07 76553.37 79652.69 82752.02
Hour 31.61 33.13 34.67 36.17 37.69 39.21 40.73
Month 5479.17 5742.98 6008.64 6268.76 6532.57 6796.38 7060.19
17 Year 65750.00 6B915.74 72103.62 75225.08 78390.82 81556.57 B4722.31
Hour 32.97 34.53 36.09 37.66 39.21 40.77 42.34
Month 5715.31 5984.65 6255.84 6527.03 6796.38 7067.57 7338.76
1B Year 685B3.67 71B15.B3 75070.11 78324.41 81556.57 B4B10.86 BB065.16
pers\comp\non-union plan\exempt July 2005.xJ5
HAY
Points
141
141
144
144
151
151
161
169
177
177
181
197
197
197
203
245
262
280
282
320
320
332
342
352
353
362
366
366
366
366
366
366
372
382
389
393
496
525
560
588
611
611
611
677
677
739
1040
"Tilie Changes
mgrlpers\comp\hlerachy.xIS
City of New Hope
HAY Point Hierachy
Revised 2/4/04
Job Title
Community Service Officer
Police Cadet
Customer Service Representative
Office Support Specialist"
Animal Control Officer
Police Clerk
Code Enforcement Officer
Accounting Clerk
Utility BiUing/Special Assessment Clerk
Administrative Support Specialist*'
Payroll Clerk
Arena Maintenance Operator
Maintenance Worker
Mechanic
Section 8 Housing Coordinator*
Accounting Technician
Assistant Golf Course Superintendent
Police Officer
Human Resources Coordinator*'
Communications Coordinator
Office Supervisor
Accountant
Facilities Supervisor
Contract Manager
Community Development Specialist
General Inspector
Athletic Supervisor
Central Garage Supervisor
Golf Superintendent
Parks/Streets Maintenance Supervisor
Recreation Supervisor
Utilities Maintena'nce Supervisor
Community Oriented Services Supervisor
Pollce Sergeant
Buiiding Official
City Clerk
Recreation Facilities Manager
Operations Manager
Police Captain
IT Coordinator
Director of Administration
Director of Community Development
Director of Parks & Recreation
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Director of Police
City Manager
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
City of New Hope
City Manager Compensation Policy
Total compensation shall be a balance of salary and benefits that meet both the needs of
the city and the manager, within the confines of available resources.
Employee benefits shall be equivalent to, or slightly modified from, those offered to other
city employees.
The city manager's salary
. will be determined by personal and organizational performance, length of service,
market forces, and other specific criteria that is valued by the city council.
. must be in compliance with state laws, such as the local government salary cap
and pay equity compliance.
. will be reviewed annually.
. should be competitive to attract and retain a qualified manager.
. should be responsive to taxpayer concerns.
Survey data will be based on city size (population between 10,000 - 24,999) in four
markets: national (ICMA), regional (ICMA), state metro area (Stanton Group VI), and
New Hope marketplace (eight metro area cities most like New Hope that are used for
other city job comparisons).
A minimum and maximum salary range will be set at _ to _% ofthe average of
the survey data. For 2005, the salary range is $ to $
. (The 2005 MN local governinent salary cap is $132,333.)
A city manager may be hired at any place within the range, based upon education,
experience, or other criteria valued by the city council. Movement through the range is
determined by length of service and performance.
Performance will be evaluated annually through a formal, written process.
The following material comes from some background material I put together in 2000
when the New Hope City Council was exploring the idea of coming up with an overall
plan for compensating the City Manager. No plan was ever adopted. I am providing the
material as your discussion on the topic makes this very relevant.
Ideas regarding a Compensation Plan
In reviewing what is happening in this metro area, the Stanton Survey says a lot but says more for what is not
included. First, it is base data for a wage only. Most managers/administrators have contracts and those contracts
have a wide range of compensation language. Not included is everything from healtblinsursnce plans, 457
deferred Income, cars, leave time, special allowances, etc. For example, I am aware of the compensation packages
of several managers in this area. What is included in the Survey is a far cry to what is the real compensation. I have
to include myself in this scenario as you have provided me with several items nctmentioned in the survey.
Regarding salary ranges, fully a third of the Cities reporting in the survey do not have an established range for their
top administrator even though they all have such plans for their employees. Historically, the manager position has
been free of constraints usually found in employee wage plans. The elected body then can do what they believe is
in the best interest of their organization and not have to contend with a plan which directs them to take a certain
direction or make certain decisions. The downside of this is that the elected body can be criticized for not putting
in constraints and taking hberties to compensate the top administrators outside of accepted boundaries.
The article I have provided contains some good gems regarding the establishing a compensation plan. Though the
article is not geared specifically to the top administrator, the ideas do apply. As I understand the article, it says:
. First develop a philosophy, vision, goal, etc. Use this language to generally guide the elected body as it
considers a compensation package.
. Do not rely on the traditional "range" concept with steps. Don't box yourself in with such language.
Perhaps set a range with . minimum and a maximum base wage and nothing more.
. Look at market forces.
. Rely more on merit or performance pay and less on automatic increases or anoual adjustments just
because everyone else is doing it.
. Look at the "tearn" performance not just the individual's performance. It's the organization's
performance that's really important
. Compensate for what the elected body "values" in the top administrator.
Regarding the establishment of a philosophy, there are several factors that should be included in the statements.
This includes such items as: personal and organizatioual performance, executive presence, length of service,
market place, and what is valued by the organization. Some thought may be and should be given to this statement
as it is probably the most important guide to what should be done. And, it answers the public's need for assurances
that the elected body is following an objective process that is debberative, thought OUt and fair.
Comments of salary ranges
I said that a third of the metro managers/administrators do have established ranges. I nete crystal who has a City
Manager with a one year tenure has a salary range of $7267 to $8720 (as of 2000). This is somewhat close to the
average when looking at developed first riog suburban cities. In Crystal's case, no language exists as to what is
included in this range,just base wage, deferred income, car, insurance, etc. I find this common among my peers.
Nobody arncng my peers has a compensation plan spelling out all of the compensation items that fall within the
range.
Some comparables
Here are some wage and compensation comparables of semi-public top administrator positions in the metro (as of
2000). These are not city/county or other governmental positions but they do represent organizations using and
directing public monies:
. Greater Metro Housing Corp. $111,000, up to a $10,000 bonus, $4500 insurance package, and a car.
. Family Housing Fund. $110,000, $5500 benefits and insurance package, car.
. LOGIS. $112,000, $5000 benefit package, $5400 auto.
. NW Cable Commission. $90,000, $7.000 auto, $11,600 benefit package.
Hopefully the information I bave provided gives yeu enough to work with regardingestablisbing a plan for New
Hope. PeIhaps we can talk about the development and a date for this and the performance review at the Council
meeting ofJanuary 14th.
b~ fr ;::'7
---
City of New Hope
City Manager Compensation Program
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
· To establish and maintain pay opportunities that enable New Hope to attract and
retain a qualified, reliable and motivated City Manager who is committed to
quality and excellence for those served.
· To ensure, subject to the financial condition of the organization, that the City
Manager receives a fair and equitable compensation package in relation to
contributions made toward the organizations success.
. To follow the principles of "equal pay for equal work and comparable worth" in
establishing and maintaining pay relationships among all City positions based on
skill, effort, responsibility and working conditions.
. To ensure flexibility necessary to meet changing economic, competitive,
technological and regulatory conditions.
. To establish, manage and communicate the compensation and performance
program in a manner that strengthens internal relationships among related and
unrelated functions of the City, and emphasizes the service expectations of our
community.
. To balance compensation and benefit needs with available resources.
SALARY STRUCTURE
The Compensation Plan specifies a salary range's minimums and maximums, as well as a
midpoint. The intent for the salary range is to fall within 90-110% of the Metro average
for Cities with City Managers/Administrators taking into consideration such factors as
length of service, education, and experience.
The City Council has the discretion to hire a City Manager at any point within the salary
range if necessary, based on market conditions and qualifications, to secure the best
candidate for the position.
PLAN COMPONENTS
There are three components to the compensation system. All, some, or none may be
considered by the City Council based on Program Objectives explained above. The
components are: annual cost of living adjustment, Annual merit increase and exceptional
performance awards.
1. Annual Cost of Living Adjustment: An annual cost of living adjustment,
expressed as a percentage increase.
2. Annual Merit Increase: Increases will be determined, based on the results of a
performance evaluation conducted annually. Such awards will be directly
correlated to the final score on the employee's performance evaluation. Awards
are not added to the employee's base pay.
Increase levels will correlate to fmal scores as described below. All increases will
be calculated on base wages. Employees with scores that correlate to an increase,
but, who are at the maximum of their pay range will receive a lump sum award*
equal to the correlating percent of their base pay. Increases will be awarded on the
anniversary date.
*
A final score between... Merit Increase of...
7-6 $xx
6-4 $xx
4-2 $xx
1 0
The City Council has final approval of all Merit Increases. The City, as fiscally
possible, will budget an annual amount for Merit Increases. The Increase levels
available will be based on this annual budget amount. There is no obligation on
the part of the City to award merit increases even though an amount is budgeted.
Because this program is designed to reward specific behaviors and performance
levels, the City is obligated to only approve increases, which, in their professional
judgment, are truly merited and meet the program purpose and guidelines.
3. Exceptional Performance Awards. The City Council has the right and authority to
compensate the City Manager for exceptional performance. Such an award shall
not be added to the base wage.
· Substantially improved quality and/or increased productivity.
. Overcame adverse obstacles or worked under unusual circumstances.
· Demonstrated exceptional creativity.
· Increased process, department, or City effectiveness or cost savings.
· Demonstrated exceptional customer service.
CONTRACT
The City of New Hope is formed under provisions of Minnesota State and is known as a
Statutory Plan B City. Employment rights and privileges given to public employees under
this form of governance do not apply to the City Manager position. All conditions of
employment of the City Manager including the Compensation Plan shall be governed
either by Minnesota Statutes covering a Statujitory Plan B City or by a cont~ct between
the City of New Hope and the City Manager
City Managers' Average Salaries by State
From leMA's 2000 Salary Survey
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
$96, I 20
77,677
89,982
81,764
11 1,877
84,993
92,311
73,975
81,870
75,679
80,892
93,342
56,009
67,162
65,276
69,395
55,356
79,191
90,401
66,488
73,257
57,961
75,567
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
70,294
59,586
102,756
69,755
96,107
68,348
85,958
71,290
71,030
75,597
64,068
72,989
61,109
82,052
76,275
59,370
64,826
80,564
75,323
51,405
85,360
91,405
54,834
66,000
70,257
Salary information was not provided to leMA from the states afHawaii and Louisiana.
Source: Information from ICMA's 2000 State of the Profession-Fringe Benefits Survey and
compiled for Compensation 2001: An Annual Report on Local Government Executive
Salaries and Fringe Benefits, published by ICMA, Washington, D.C. Copyright 2001. Also,
visit the Association's Web site at icma.org.
leMA Salary Survey Goes Online!
Each year, local governments complete a survey that provides the names and
salaries of key personnel. The names of key personnel are published in The
Municipal Year Book directories. The salary information is used to produce
Compensation and the salary articles in The Municipal Year Book. Local govern-
ments now can complete and submit this survey on ICM~s Web site, icma.org.
You will be able to update information as it changes throughout the year!
All HR directors should have received a postcard that provides information
about the online survey. The postcard gives all of the instructions for complet-
ing the survey online. Completing the survey online saves time and improves
accuracy. ICMA mailed the standard survey in July to those local governments
that had not responded on the Web site. .
Local governments that complete the survey on the Web site will be able to
see summary salary results collected to date as soon as they submit their surveys!
Monday, December 17, 2001.max
Response to Council member questions (4/14/05)
I. Do you (city manager) pay the same as the other employees for health care? And
what would that amount be?
Yes, city manager receives same city contribution as all other employees. 2005
city contribution and insurance premium rates are attached.
2. You noted that other cities have assistant city managers. Have you found out yet
which ones and how much they are paid and their duties and if they are in cities
comparable to New Hope?
There are 12 cities in Stanton Group VI (suburbs from 10,000 - 25,000) that
reported assistant managers in 2004. Weighted mean was $69,659. (Weighted
mean is the average of salary rates weighted by the number of employees at each
rate.) Maximum of salary ranges was $74,693. The Stanton survey data is
attached.
Also attached are two listings of our marketplace and neighboring cities. One
shows salary and duties of assistant city managers. The other shows positions that
directly support thecity manager.
3. Can I please have the salaries of the department heads, their benefits and how
their salaries compare to those in similar positions and in similar cities?
Attached is a spreadsheet comparing our department director 2004 salaries to
Stanton VI, our marketplace, and neighboring cities.
Except for life insurance and items identified in #4, benefits are the same as all
other employees. Life insurance is $30,000 for department directors and $15,000
for others.
4. Do they (department heads) have restrictions regarding their carryover vacation?
If you could include that, along with vehicle allowances, I would appreciate it.
Attached are: Resolution Approving Increase in Maximum Personal Leave
Accumulation for Department Directors
Personnel Policy - Travel Allowances for Department Directors
City of New Hope Health Insurance Premium Rates
Effective January 1, 2005
Health Partners 10734-1 10734-3 10734-5 10734-6
Network Open Open Classic . Classic
Co-Pay 15 25 25 25
Deductible* 0 300/900 300/900 500/1500
Out-of-Pocket* 1200/5000 1500/3000 1500/3000 1500/3000
SinQle per month 348.96 297.56 282.68 276.21
Family oer month 978.48 835.19 793.44 775.26
161.06 137.34 130.47
451.60 385.47 366.20
**26 pay periods in 2005 (there were 27 in 2004)
127.48
357.81
Delta Dental Millenium Choice without Orthodontics
Delta Preferred Option or Comprehensive Standard (Premier Network)
Delta SinQle One + One Family
Per Month 28.28 54.61 74.51
Per Pay** 13.05 25.20 34.39
**26 pay periods in 2005 (there were 27 in 2004)
City Contribution
Full 90%
Per Month 550.00 495.00
Per Pay 253.85 . 228.46
**26 pay periods in 2005 (there were 27 in 2004)
mgrJins/2005 renewals/premJum rates.xls
City of New Hope
Personnel Policy
Travel Allowances for DeJ?artment Directors
Effective January 1, 2001
The following monthly travel allowance amounts were established based upon the nature
of the position and the need to use a vehicle for business travel:
Director ofPolice*
Director of Public Works*
Director of Community Development
Director of Parks & Recreation
Director of Administration
Director of Finance
$375.00
$375.00
$375.00
$375.00
$225.00
$225.00
Travel allowances cover all mileage within the seven-county metropolitan area. When
traveling outside this area, Department Directors may request the use of a city vehicle.
Department Directors are not eligible for mileage reimbursement.
Travel allowances do not cover parking. Department Directors may turn in parking
receipts for reimbursement using the city's standard expense reimbursement form.
All other provisions of the "Use of City-Owned and Personal Vehicles" Administrative
Procedure apply to Department Directors.
Travel allowances are paid through the payroll system. One-half of the monthly
allowance is paid in each of the first and second payrolls. These payments are not PERA
eligible wages, but they are taxable income. The tax liability may be reduced by
submitting a detailed accounting of actual miles driven on official city business.
*Subject to approval by the City Manager, Directors of Police and Public Works may
request a take-home city vehicle in lieu of a travel allowance.
Pers\Policy\TravelAllow.doc
Revised 1/1/2001
Dept. Dir. Survey - 2004 Salary Range Max- from 2004 Stanton Survey & Calls to cities
Stanton Group VI
Admin
77,189
Comm Dev
80,434
Finance
85,010
Park & Rec
83,117
Police Public Works
86,424 86,174
Marketplace Admin Comm Dev Finance Park & Rec Police Public Works
Brooklyn Center 77,917 82,056 97,585 81,058 96,616 96,616
Crystal 87,069 87,069 71,448 89,149 87,069
Fridley 76,253 86,258 92,248 83,075 92,248 92,248
Hopkins 81,708 81,702 90,106 90,106
New Brighton 90,230 94,390 90,230 94,390
New Hope 77 ,605 77 ,605 81,432 77,605 84,635 81,432
South St Paul 94,848 99,371 98,280 98,592
West St Paul 81,120 . 82,493 84,115 82,014
White Bear Lake 89,190 89,190 92,810
Average 77,258 84,405 88,995 83,798 90,736 90,586
New Hope with
car allowance
added in 80,305 82,105 84,132 82,105 89,135 85,932
Neighbors Admin Comm Dev Finance Park & Rec Police Public Works
Golden Valley 82,618 92,248 103,022 97,760 88,254 101,587
Plymouth 88,067 107,952 107,952 107,952 107,952 107,952
Robbinsdale 65,666 87,110 76,274 92,352 88,712
Comments
Administration - is not a "benchmark" position. Human Resources Director was used as closest comparable.
Golden Valley is Sr. HR Representative. Admin includes City Clerk & Communications.
Community Development - South St Paul does not have this position.
Finance -- Brooklyn Center is Director of Fiscal & Support Services
Parks & Recreation - Crystal is Recreation only. Hopkins contracts with Minnetonka. White Bear Lake is
community ed, West St. Paul position was vacant.
Police - New Brighton has Dept of Public Safety, White Bear Lake Chief position was vacant.
Public Works - some directors are engineers
4/29/2005
mgr\pers\comp\dept head survey.xls
Citv Mana er Wage, Benefit, and Contract History
tsase
Wage Deferred IRS & PERA Auto Resolution
Year Wage Increase Income Income Allowance Total Number Notes
1982 $36,000 $36,000 Car Provided $36,000 Contract
1983 $38,520 7.00% $38,520 Car Provided $38,520 83-202
1984 $41 ,600 8.00% $41 ,600 Car Provided $41,600 84-207
1985 $45,763 10.01% $45,763 Car Provided $45,763 85- ???
1986 $50,338 10.00% $50,338 Car Provided $50,338 86-30
1987 $55,330 9.92% $55,330 Car Provided $55,330 86-165
1988 $60,863 10.00%, $60,863 Car Provided $60,863 88-35
1989 $67,000 10.08% $67,000 Car Provided $67,000 89-23
1990 $70,685 5.50% $70,685 Car Provided $70,665 90-85
1991 $75,406 6.68% $75,406 Car Provided $75,406 91-23
1992 $77 ,480 2.75% $77,480 Car Provided $77,480 92-122
1993 $79,611 2.75% $79,611 Car Provided $79,611 93-99
1994 $81,800 2.75% $81,800 Car Provided $81,800 94-133 .
1995 $84,458 3.25% $84,458 Car Provided $84,458 95-92
1996 $66,907 2.90% $86,907 $7,200 $94,107 96-72
1997 . $89,427 2.90% $89,427 $7,200 $96,627 97-16
1998 $92,439 3.37% $92,439 $7,200 $99,639 98-12 Wage increase of 2.25% on base + $1,000 performamce
1999 $94,182 3.00% $94,182 $7,800 $101,982 98-206
2000 $97,222 3.25% $97,222 $7,800 $105,022 00-47
2001 $99,900 2.75% $2,500 $102,400 $8,100 $110,500 01-31
2002 $101,899 2.00% $3,750 $105,649 $8,100 $113,749 02-76 PL increased from five to six weeks + $1,250 added to deferred
2003 $101,899 0.00% $3,750 $105,649 $8,100 $113,749 03-119 PL:;: to 3% of waae or 62 hrs added to bank. PL max increased to 840 hrs
2004 $107,987 2.00% $3,750 $111,737 $4,050 $115,787 04-32 One half of auto allowance converted to base wage.
2005 $110,535 2.36% $3,750 $114,285 $4,050 $118,335 04-216 13.25 hrs PL
2006 $0 $0
2007 $0 $0
2008 $0 $0
2009 $0 $0
2010 $0 $0
$1,847,251
City Manager Compensation Survey Notes
2004 Stanton Salary Survey
Captures pay ranges and actual salary
Average overall (all reporting agencies) increase in pay ranges = 2.7%
Weighted mean is actual salary (does not address time in position)
Group V - Suburbs over 25,000
21 cities reported, weighted mean = $52.60
Includes 3 cities who reported 2003 salmes; 2004 not yet settled
Of cities with ranges, high = $63.20
Group VI - Suburbs from 10,000 - 25,000
19 cities reported, weighted mean = $44.91
Includes 5 cities who reported 2003 salaries; 2004 not yet settled
New Hope = $51.92
Of cities with ranges, high = $53.47
2005 survey not yet available.
New Hope Marke1;place
8 cities most like New Hope based upon following determinates:
1" or 2nd ring suburb
Fully developed
Population
Per capita tax base
Net tax capacity per household
Full-time employees per 1,000 residents
Last reviewed in 2002 - cities are:
Brooklyn Center
Crystal
Fridley
Hopkins
New Brighton
South St. Paul
West St. Paul
White Bear Lake
H:\compensation \ CM Camp Notes
3/30105
, .
gg94 Twin Gilie~ !Mlr\lP\lIiI~n Ar~~ pOrJ1pen~a!ion SUl"(ey
Survey Title: City Manager/Administrator/County Administrator
Job Number: 175
level: Top administrator in municipality. county or related government uni!.
Minimum Qualifications: Requires managerial, administrative, and educational experience necessary for the management of a
governmental uni!.
Typical Duties: Carries out the policies established by the Board, Councilor Commission for the efficient administration of the
county's or municipality's business. Duties include coordinating the administration of all county or municipal
departments. developing the annual budget, preparing for and attending board or council meetings, providing
information to the public concerning government business, supervising the maintenance of records and maldng
recommendations for the improliement of efficient administration of the affairs of the governmental unl!.
Base Percenllles Ranae Data
#Of #Of Weighted Unweighted Excluding longevity longevity
Breakout Bv Oras Empl Mean Mean ..f1!!.. .ell n.!! P75 P90 ...MilL Max ~
2 2 64.86 54.95
2 2 58.28 55.33 59.82
5 5 55.75 51.28 52.06 54.95 58.18 62.26 43.40 61.56
21 21 52.60 47.04 51.08 54.04 54.95 55.03 44.78 54.67 48.81 [1]
19 19 44.91 37.03 40.32 45.52 48.52 51.93 37.25 47.02 49.84 [2]
34 35 34.90 26.44 31.53 35.96 38.13 42,81 28.45 36.82 37.07 [2]
OVERALL 83 84 44.24 44.21 31.53 36.59 45.22 52.65 54.95 35.91 45.43 44.52 (51
9?J, fl ~
. The number in brackets after "Longevity Max" Indicates the number of jurisdIctIons used to calculate Ihe longevity maxin~um.
All Rates Quoted Hourly
Analyses nil Not Include Pending Data 2]7
i
I:
,
Survey TItle: City Manager/Administrator/County Administrator Job Number: 175
Range Data
It Of Excluding Longevity Including Longevity
It Of Weighted Empl It Of Vrs to It Of Vrs to
Breakout Bv Empl Mean OIT Supv Degree Title Min Max Steps Max Max Steps Max
GROUP 2
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 54,95 NO J,D, REGIONAL ADMIN 54,95
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION 74.76 529 M,P,A EXEC DIR
GROUP 3
HENNEPIN COUNTY 77.89 P NO 11515 CNTY ADMN 54,95 79,33
RAMSEY COUNTY 54,95 NO 3500 M.P,A COUNTY MANAGER 52,14 54,95 15
MINNEAPOLIS 61,60 NO 4000 CITY COORDINATOR 58,52 64,68 4 6,0
GROUP 4
DAKOTA COUNTY 62,26 NO 1785 ADMINISTRATOR 42,15
ANOKA COUNTY 82,50 P NO 1793 M.A. ADMINISTRATOR 43,75 63,72 65.45 14.0
WASHINGTON COUNTY 54,95 NO 1110 M.A. COUNTY ADMN 49,35 65,14
OLMSTED COUNTY 58.18 NO 1170 M.A. COUNTY ADM
SCOTT COUNTY 51.28 NO 687 M.A. CO ADMINISTRAT 38,69 57,98
DULUTH 52.06 NO 882 B,S, ADMIN ASST
GROUP 5
BLOOMINGTON 1 57,69 NO 556 M,P,A CITY MGR
BROOKLYN PARK 1 51,9~ NO 330 M,P,A CITY MANAGER
PLYMOUTH 1 54.95 NO 260 M.A. CITY MGR
EAGAN 1 54,95 NO 245 M.P,A CITY ADMIN 48,99 57,65 10 9,0
ST, CLOUD 1 49.53 NO 414 M.A. ADMIN/STRA TOR 41,23 49,53 5 5,0
COON RAPIDS 1 54,37 NO 322 M.A. CITY MANAGER 40,59 62,18
BURNSVILLE 1 51.44E) NO 312 B.A. CITY MANAGER 51.44
MAPLE GROVE 1 55,57 NO 222 M.A, CITY ADMIN 44.46 55,57 6 5,0
BLAINE 1 52,06 NO 163 B.A. CITY MGR 47,68 54,95
EDEN PRAIRIE 1 52,60 NO 209 M,P,A CITY MANAGER 43,20 60.48
WOODBURY 1 54,95 NO 189 M.A. C/TY ADMIN 42:79 54,95 5 4.0
'MIIllNETONKA 1 55.03 NO 222 M,P,A CITY MGR 55,03
APPLE VALLEY 1 46,84 NO 218 M.A, ADMINISTRATOR 44,00 49,99
LAKEVILLE 1 54,94 NO 200 NONE CITY ADMINISTRA 44,60
EDINA 1 54,04 NO 262 B,S, CITY MGR 54,04 54,04
All Rates Quoted Hourly STANTON I
P After ''Weighted Mean" Indicates Pending Rata 276 . GROUP
. After NMaxN Indicafes MulUple Salary Ranges
~~,~;;::a;~~,~~~~~~:~~~~~~:::::,ia:~=-3::'_::::~:;-~~;r<t:"",~7~""~":"';;";''''2_::::':::''7.",-"",;i,I~~~''~-,-,,,_,
...",.".,_."=,'."",'""<";"'''..,".__'-'''T'''''.~.~'-'''''
~oq4 TWi~ Ci\ie~ I'Mln'pqlil~n (\rell CO!TIp,ens~lion ~Hl'1/ey
Survey Tille: City Manager/Administrator/County Administrator Job Number: 175
Range Data
#Of Excluding Longevity Including Longevity
# O! Weighted Empl #Of Yrs to IIO! Yrs to
Breakout Bv Emili rlli!!. orr .sUIlV Depree !ill!.. Min Max Stells ..M!l!.. ..M!l!.. Stells ..M!l!..
ST. LOUIS PARK 1 54.61 NO 250 M.A. CITY MANAGER 53.72 @:;9 5.0
RICHFIELD 1 54.12 NO 240 M.A. CITY MANAGER
ROSEVILLE 1 52.66 NO 192 J.D. CITY MANAGER
COTTAGE GROVE 1 46.50 NO 122 M.A. CITY ADMIN
INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 1 49.9e(V NO 127 M.A. CITY ADMIN
BROOKLYN CENTER 1 51.06 NO 151 J.D. CITY MANAGER
SHAKOPEE 1 46.66 NO 121 M.P.A CITY AOM 39.13 46.66 7 6.0
FRIDLEY 1 51.56 NO 136 PH.D. CITY MANAGER 51.56
ANDOVER 1 47.04 NO 56 M.P.A ADMINISTRATOR 37.43 47.36 7 6.5 46.61 3 20.0
GROUP 6
SAVAGE 1 45.62 NO 104 M.A. ADMINISTRATOR 36.34 46.54 6 6.5
WHITE BEAR LAKE 1 47.4~ NO 110 MA CITY MANAGER
CRYSTAL 1 46.2Bl!9 NO 66 M.P.A ADMINISTRATOR 44.32 53.16
CHANHASSEN 1 43.22 NO 64 M.P.A CITY MGR
NEW BRIGHTON 1 46.61@ NO 70 M.P.A CITY MGR 42.79~ 9 6.0
CHASKA 1 51.93 NO 107 M.A. ADMINISTRATOR 40.49 52.59
('NEW HOPE..) 1 (5T92) NO 96 M.P.A CITY MGR 51.92
GOLDEN VALLEY 1 52.49 NO 126 M.A. CITY MANAGER
SOUTH ST. PAUL 1 44.71~ NO 135 J.D. ADMINISTRATOR
HASTINGS 1 49.22 NO 106 M.P.A ADMINISTRATOR 36.22 47.79 7 6.0 49.22 3 15.0
RAMSEY 1 46.51 NO 66 M.P.A CITY ADMIN 36.61 46.51 6 6.0
PRIOR LAKE 1 45.52 NO 79 MA CITY MANAGER 36.62 46.05 12 10.0
ROSEMOUNT 1 44.56 NO 73 M.P.A CITY ADMIN 36.65 46.52 6 5.0 50.46 4 16.0
ANOKA 1 44.3~ NO 206 M.P.A CITY MANAGER 36.93 46.16 6 5.0
FARMINGTON 1 42.79 NO 61 CITY ADMIN 37.37 46.71
L1NO LAKES 1 44.91 NO 67 M.A. CITY ADMIN 37.36 46.70 6 4.0
HOPKINS 1 46.52 NO 106 B.S. CITY MANAGER 39.11 . 52.74
FOREST LAKE 1 46.37 NO 46 M.P.A CITY AOMINISTRT
ROBBINSDALE 1 46.07 NO 61 M.P.A CITY MGR 39.72 52.26 6 0:0
HAM LAKE 1 40.32 NO 17 NONE ADMINISTRATOR 32.25 40.32 5 3.0
VADNAIS HEIGHTS 1 36.91 NO 24 B.S. ADMINISTRATOR 32.43 36.91 6 5.0
All Rates Quoted Hourly
P After .Welghted Mean" Indicates Pending Rale
.. After "MaX" Indicates Multiple Salary Ranges 279
Survey Tille: City ManagerJAdministr~torJCounty Administrator Job Number: 175
Ran!le Data
flOf Excluding Longevity Including Longevity
fI Of Weighted Empl flOf Yrsto flOf Vrs to
Breakout Bv Empl Mean 011 Supv De!lree Tille Mln ~ Steps ~ ~ Steps ~
-
MOUNDS VIEW 1 37.03 NO 52 MA CITY ADMIN 34.85 43.58 5 3.0
EAST BETHEL 1 35.07 YES 15 NONE DIR FIN ADMIN
. MENDOT A HEIGHTS 1 38.25 NO 44 B.S. CITY ADMIN 38.25
GROUP 7
LITTLE CANADA 42.81 NO 14 M.P.A CITY 38,18 42.81 5 5.0
ADMINISTRATOR
ARDEN HillS 1 37.86 NO 21 M.P.A CITY ADMIN 32.52 42.78 7 5.0
MOUND 1 45.05 P NO 52 M.A. CITY MANAGER 38.20 45.24 8 7.0
WACoNIA 1 36.82 NO 97 M.A. CITY ADMIN 32.10 37.77 7 5.0
ST. ANTHONY 1 42.47 NO 55 M.A. CITY MANAGER 42.47
MAHTOMEDI 1 33.79 NO 15 M.P.A ADMINISTRATOR
HUGO 1 48.77 NO 15 MA CITY ADMIN 35.92 46.77 6 8.0
SHoREWooD 1 36,52 NO 23 M.P.A ADMINISTRATOR 31.38 37.84 7 5.0 39,38 3 20,0
ORONO 1 44.61 ND 40 M,P.A CITY ADM 37.91 44.61 4 4.0
SPRING lAKE PARK 1 38.31 P NO 10 NONE ADMINISTRATOR 29.88 38.31 6 5.0
CORCORAN 1 33.09 NO 12 NONE CITY ADMINISTR 29,83 36,37 7 5.0
FALCON HEIGHTS 1 29.07 NO 7 BA ADMINISTRATOR 25.74 10.0
ST. PAUL PARK 1 39.33 NO 19 M.P.A ADMINISTRATOR
. VICTORIA 1 36.66 NO 19 B.S. CITY ADMIN 29.00 36.73 10
NEW PRAGUE 1 35.57 P NO B.S. CITY ADMIN 27.01 36.47 9 1.0
ROGERS 1 42.26 NO 39 NONE ADMINISTRATOR 34.65 42.26
ST. FRANCIS 1 32.91 NO 0 B,S. CITY PLANNER 24.59 32.91 6 4.0
JORDAN 1 35,96 NO 24 M.P.A CITY ADMINISTRA 29.07 38.25 9 9.0
DAYTON 1 35.81 NO 10 NONE CITY ADMIN 26.66 '37.10 8
MINNETRISTA 1 34.62 NO 25 MA ADMINISTRATOR 29.27 36.58 5.0
CIRCLE PINES 2 46.54 NO 13 M.P.A CITY ADMIN 28,98 36.13
OAK PARK HEIGHTS 1 37.52 NO 19 M.P.A ADMINISTRATOR
MEDINA 1 32.68 NO 17 M.P.A ADMINISTRATOR 27.95 36.17 8 8.0
WAYZATA 1 37.20 NO 41 BA CITY MANAGER
DEEPHAVEN 1 36.04 NO 19 B,A. CITY ADMN 29.77 39.18 7
WATERTOWN 1 31.53 NO 12 MA CITY MANAGER 25.44 35.62 7 6.0
All Rates QUoted Hourly STANTON I
P After "Weighted Mean" Indicates Pending Rale GROUP
,. After "Max" Indicates Mulliple Salary Ranges 280
;!'.}
City Manager Compensation Survey
2004 2005
Car Perf TOT Perf TOT Org Length of
Cit Salary Allow DC Comp CaMP Sala Car Allow DC Comp CaMP # FT EE Chart Service
Brooklyn Center 112,707 0 0 112,707 pending 150 9 yrs
Crystal 99,800 6000 0 105,800 105,000 6000 0 111,000 80 5 yrs
Fridle 107,286 3674 3219 114,179 107,286 3674 3219 114,179 137 16 rs
Ho kins 100,922 5400 106,322 93,000 5400 0 98,400 105
New Bri hton 101,352 4800 6500 112,652 pending 100
New Ho e 107,987 4050 3750 115,787 110,538 4050 3750 118,338 86
South St Paul 95,000 4200 0 99,200 pending 104
West St Paul nfa nfa 97,989 5400 6859 110,248 100
White Bear Lake 98,600 3900 6240 5274 114,014 98,600 3900 6240 5274 114,014 106
Data obtained from Stanton and phone calls to cities
3/30/2005
mgr \ pers \ camp \ mgr camp survey
COUNCIL
REQUEST FOR ACTION
Originating Department
Approved for Agenda
Agenda Section
City Manager
June 6, 2005
Work Session
Item No.
B : Dan Donahue
11.5
DISCUSSION REGARDING LETTER 0 SUPPORT FOR NORTH MEMORIAL HEALTH CARE FOR A
HOSPITAL IN MAPLE GROVE
REOUESTED ACTION
The Council may direct staff to prepare a letter of support.
BACKGROUND
North Memorial Health Care has sent a letter to Mayor Opem requesting New Hope City Council's support
for construction of a new hospital in Maple Grove.
As noted in the May 27 correspondence, North Memorial had hoped to receive approval to build a new Maple
Grove hospital during the 2005 Minnesota Legislature's regular session. Unfortunately that did not occur and
the discussion is occurring during the special session. North Memorial is seeking the city's support and urges
the council to express its support to members of the legislature.
ATTACHMENT
Letter dated May 27, 2005, from North Memorial Health Care
MOTION BY
SECOND BY
TO:
I:\RFA\ADMIN\Q-NM hosp support. doc
North Memorial
Health Care
May 27,2005
Martin Opem, Sr.
Mayor of New Hope
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Ave N
New Hope, Martin 55428
Dear Martin Opem, Sr.,
We would first like to thank you for the suppor! and encouragement you have given to North
Memorial as we have worked to gain approval for a new hospital to serve Maple Grove and it's
surrounding communities. Although events at the legislature are still changing during the special
session called by Govemor Pawlenty, I wanted to share this update on the hospital issue as we
know it today.
We hoped to receive approval to build a new Maple Grove hospital during the 2005 Minnesota
Legislature's regular session. As the debate continued during the last days of the session, we
supported a compromise offered by Maple Grove Mayor Mark Steffenson and accepted by the
Conference Committee Chair, Representative Kurt Zellers, which merged the language from the
existing Senate and House bills. Their proposal would have chosen North Memorial, but also allow
the Minnesota Commissioner of Health an opportunity to review North Memorial's proposal against
a set of criteria based on what Senate had developed. This seemed like a perfect compromise and
acknowledged the wishes of both legislative bodies.
'"
'"
'"
=>
a
~
,.,.
=
In the final hours, four of the six conference committee members, including two Republicans and
two Democrats, supported the compromise. However, in order for a Maple Grove hospital to be
approved, one of the two remaining senators needed to agree to the compromise, this did not
happen.
3
CD
3
a
~
'"
:-
n
o
3
As the debate continues, North Memorial will remain committed to serving the northwest metro, as
we have for more than 50 years. We are hopeful a decision about a new Maple Grove hospital will
be discussed 'during the current special session. Your support is still needed! Please continue to
contact members of the Minnesota House and Senate and ui\;Je them to support the compromise
offered by Mayor Steffenson - designating North Memorial as the hospital for Maple Grove if they
meet criteria - to resolve this issue during the speciai legislative session. Please visit our website if
you need more information on our proposal or help in contacting your legislator.
North Memorial has the physicians, nurses, financial stability and community support needed to
begin building a new hospital immediately. It is our goal to provide Maple Grove and the
surrounding communities with a state-of-the-art hospital that serves your needs and makes you
proud.
Please feel free to call Dave at 763-520-5450 or Jerry at 763-520-5300 with any questions you
may have. Thank you for your support
Sincereiy,
~U.~
David W. Cress
President and COO
~~
Jerr;y, edlar
Dir clor of Property & Facilities
3300 Oakdale Avenue North. Robbinsdale, MN 55422 . Phone: (763) 520~5200