To order the time is 7 02 p.m.

Um and um uh Angie, would you please call the role sure Dela Cruz Virgil, please unmute present uh Theo Rose uh Winton Hill?

I do not see him.

I don't see him.

Okay, no.

Oh, yeah, I don't Bobby Pavia.

I and GM present.

Okay, Maureen Pollock present Ricardo Sallas.

Okay, you can okay.

And Carl Weinberg.

Present, thank you.

Uh six members of the committee being present, I declare a quorum.

Um, in addition to um the members of the uh the voting members of the committee, uh may the record show that the following representatives are also in attendance.

Uh Phil Bradford online, Karen Camparalli online, Laurie Hyatt online.

And um I think that's it.

Did I miss anyone?

Oh, and Michael McCallan online.

Michael, let me sign you in.

And who is MJ Gluck 11?

Member of the public.

Okay.

Um may the record also show that um invited guests who are here include uh director of HR, Dr.

Paula Russell, uh Rosemary Frager.

Hello, Rosemary, good to see you from our HR department, Lou Castleow, the city engineer, uh David Pilva from City from Risk Management, um and Al Cava consultant uh to the city and uh our retired direct the city's retired director of HR.

Uh may the record also show that we have a special uh guest, uh Bonnie Kim Campbell, uh, who served um with distinction on the 31st Board of Representatives.

Welcome, Bonnie.

Um okay, and with that, we'll start with the agenda.

Uh the first agenda item is P32.004 approval of an employment contract for assistant chief of police Silas Red.

And with that, I will turn uh the uh the uh microphone over to uh Dr.

Russell who will uh take us through the employment contract.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, board members.

Um there we go.

I think you're better now.

You can hear you.

Am I better now?

Can you hear me?

Yes, much better.

Okay.

Um so just to give you a summary of the employment contract for assistant chief of police, Silas Red.

Um for the term and termination.

The contract is an initial term of two years.

It can be extended for a one additional two-year option period.

Um, in terms of the compensation, the annual salary is set according to the current pay plan.

Currently at grade six, step four, which is approximately 173,529.

Um, in terms of benefits, the employee is entitled to leave health and life insurance benefits consistent with the pay plan.

Holiday benefits follow the applicable collective bargaining bargaining agreement in accordance to the police pension um police plan.

Um he does participate with the police pension plan, and he's not eligible for the divine contribution plan for the appointed and unclassified employees.

In terms of his work schedule and expectations, it is a full-time exempt position.

It does require availability during nights and weekends, um, outside activities.

He does we expect him to be main exclusively employed by the city.

Um limited outside activities such as teaching, writing, or consulting may be permitted only with prior approval, um, and as long as it does not interfere with official duties.

In terms of additional benefits and protections, uh the city does provide a city vehicle for emergency and work-related use.

So that's a brief summary of the employment contract for this for assistant chief police silus read.

Okay, thank you very much.

Just like the record to reflect that the mayor's chief of staff, Bridget Fox has also joined at the meeting on online.

Thank you.

Welcome, Bridget.

With that, with that presentation, I will be glad to open it up to uh questions.

First from voting members of the committee, and then following those questions, uh questions from uh ex officio members of the committee.

Uh who has the first question?

Anybody on the road from the room?

I don't want to uh it's the chair uh the chair calls on representative Polly.

Thank you.

Um I'm gonna start with I I know you're probably gonna ask a similar question.

I was looking through this before, and um can you please clarify why uh this is a different contract than what we're gonna be talking about later with um with where his contract began to with how it's where we're at now?

We're staying on the same plan, correct?

Well should yes correct uh Ms.

Russell?

I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.

That's okay.

I didn't understand the way I asked it either.

It it sounds like you're asking it does this contract differ in any way from his presumably he had a previous employment contract.

Correct.

And does this contract differ in any way from his previous employment contract?

Is that the is that question?

Thank you.

That's my first question.

Does it differ?

Um not tremendously so.

I mean, obviously the dates, the term length, um, the salary did change just because of the the years that we're in, but everything else stayed the same.

Thank you.

Um my second question is uh does the employee assistant chief police silence read, is he happy with this contract?

Yes, this this goes through a rigorous process of negotiations before we appear before all the boards.

So there's there's a lot of talks behind the scenes with legal, the employees themselves, um, the department head and the employee, just to make sure everyone's on the same page, and also it allows the employee to have an opportunity to enter into negotiations with their own contract.

So, yes, um, assistant police chief definitely saw the contract, he was satisfied with it before we appeared before you.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

He is uh phenomenal, so I wanted to make sure that he was happy with it.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Um, other questions from voting members of the committee.

Anyone in the room?

Anyone online?

You can raise your hand or unmute and let us know you have a question.

Okay, seeing none, I have I have some uh I have some questions.

Um Dr.

Russell, can you explain?

Um in what ways, if any, does this contract differ from the standard and employment contract for a pay plan employee, other than obviously the term, the salary, and you know, and things and things like that.

Are there other differences?

So that's that's the unique, I would say the uniqueness part of being a pay plan employee.

Everyone's contract can differ depending on the title, depending on the person.

Um, so everyone has the opportunity to negotiate various things.

I would say that the standard though is um the sections in the employment contract, so the sections that are there, um duties, the term, the work week, all of that is standardized, but the actual context of each um the content of each section can vary depending on the person that's in the actual contract.

So what I understand is that the parts of the contract that deal with sort of the rules are the same as in as in all other um pay plan of employee contract.

It can yes, it can vary.

What I will say, what I have been exposed to over the three years that I have seen things.

Um the employees that are in the public safety, some of them have the statutes where they're allowed to um participate in their collective bargaining agreements with either it's the police pension fund or the fire pension fund as opposed to participating with a defined contribution plan with under pay plan.

So there are some nuances there.

Um and that's like a common thread I've seen with public safety um pay plan members.

Right.

I would I would I would expect that otherwise be very difficult for someone to move up the ranks and into an executive position within within the within the department.

Um I want to I want to just emphasize I'll do it through a question.

Uh please please make sure we understand that he cannot both earn um credit under the collective bargaining agreement pension and the pay plan to find contribution uh retirement benefit.

He's on just the one, not not the other.

Right.

We had that underlined um in the contract that since he's participating in the police pension plan, he is not eligible.

He's not entitled to the benefits under the defined contribution plan.

There is no double dipping.

Okay, thank you.

I think that uh that concludes my questions.

Uh yeah, please.

Uh representative, I recognize representative.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, yeah, uh, I'm just wondering, um, so how many current assistant police chiefs uh are employed?

I believe just the one, if I'm not mistaken.

Okay.

There are two?

Or two.

There's two, yes.

But this is just the one that's up for his his term is up, his contract is up now.

Yes.

Thank thank you, Rosemary.

I see.

Um, and then second question, um, what number of contracts uh, I guess is this for him as a simply chief.

Um for that I would have to check, and I she can do that right now because I'm on the share drive.

Let me just pull it up.

Contract.

This is looking like this would be his second one.

This is second.

So he finished the two-year contract, and so this is the renewal of another two-year.

Yes.

Well, the first one looks like it was um signed in 2021.

And so if this one was extended, let's see.

Just scrolling down here.

So 2021, fourth anniversary.

So yeah, five.

Yeah.

So this um the first contract was five years.

So just just for clarification, uh the the previous contract was for three years and with a two-year potential extension, which took which took place.

Yes.

And this one is two, and rather than three and two, it is two and two.

And presumably that was that um length of length length of time was was negotiated.

Yes.

So three and two is by the way, is the longest that it can be is three years.

Okay, with two-year extension, and that's the max.

Okay.

So the terms in this contract are different then from that.

Yes, this is two and two.

So two years are the possible two-year extension.

Yes.

I see.

Okay.

Is there is there a reason for the difference?

Or it was just negotiated between the department head and the employee.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Other questions from uh voting members?

Okay.

Uh so the chair will entertain questions, if any from ex officio members.

Chair.

Ah, Bobby.

Uh the chair recognizes representative Fabian.

I was a little late getting my uh hand up there.

Got to move fast, Bobby.

I know, I know.

Trigger finger.

Um Director Russell, just uh so we can just for the record to find um what do you say the uh option of an additional two years?

Uh what would um what would that look like?

Like how does that circumstances for that?

Um so it says upon the expiration of the initial term, which is the two years, the agreement may be extended for one additional consecutive period of two years, which is um deemed an option year.

And the city may exercise the option in its sole discretion by giving the employee notice not later than six months prior to the end of the initial term, if it's going to extend the option for the option year, which is the two years.

Gotcha.

Okay, so there's no like performance um qualifications or anything like that.

It's just up to the question of the department end.

Right.

It's it well in the sole discretion of the city.

I get with you know, talks with the department.

Yes.

Gotcha.

Okay, thank you.

That's all I got.

Uh Chair.

Okay.

Thank you, Representative Pavia.

Uh questions from uh members that have any other members of the board.

Okay.

Uh seeing none, um I move uh I'll entertain a motion to its uh to um uh accept this contract.

Um by representative Pollock, seconded by Representative Pavia.

Um Angie, will you please uh sure uh Weinhart?

Uh yes.

Tavia, yes.

Taylor Cruz, yes.

Gross.

Yes.

Yes.

And Sallas?

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh the uh thank you very much.

And now we will move on to our next agenda item.

Uh P32.006.

Uh and that is the approval of a clerk of the works two contract with Michael Cepeda.

Um we have uh two guests to speak uh uh and answer questions on this agenda item.

Uh Rosemary Frager from uh the city's human resources department and Lou Castleau, the city engineer.

Um and I would appreciate it uh as you take us uh through the of your presentation of the of the uh the proposed agreement for Mr.

Cepeda.

Uh can you first uh for uh for the benefit of the committee and the public, can you explain, Lou?

This is best for you to uh explain briefly, just what a uh what a clerk of the works position does, um, because I know it's not an easy one to understand, and then uh Rosemary, if you could explain some of the uniquenesses, particularly regarding benefits and and and over time in uh in clerk of the work that are standard in clerk of the works contract.

Uh so with that, Lou, if you can help us, that'd be great.

Uh good evening, everybody.

Uh happy new year.

Um my name is Lou Castleau, the city engineer, and to address upon representative questions originally, the clerk of the works uh title is uh a contract position, as you probably know, and it's a contract that basically links to capital projects.

And so the contract uh includes the various capital projects that this individual will be working on.

And essentially a clerk uh is a supporting staff member uh who is a contract employee to help um other project managers administrate capital projects.

Uh this starts with um having familiarity with construction, um design and construction.

So uh when the projects are put out to bid, uh clerks typically get familiar with plans and specifications.

Those are the contract documents uh that are used to uh execute uh construction activities.

Those documents are prepared by engineers.

Um so for all of our projects uh we use these individuals to help us uh in our day-to-day work.

They're generally eyes and ears in the field that can help alert project managers who do make job visits, but they're not on job sites as long as the clerks will be.

They document uh personnel that's on the site, they photograph the site, they report back problems and and do daily reports.

So the projects uh get administrated as best as possible.

They provide a lot of key information along the way.

Uh they can also support um bill payments when when requisitions come in and there's a schedule of values, and we can look to the clerks to help support whether uh the activities are at the state of completion that they're at.

Uh so they're very invaluable to to the work.

Uh currently I have five clerk of the works.

Um, and uh I am requesting your approval tonight of an employment contract with uh Michael Sapita.

Um he is um I'm basically focusing on my workload and staffing, and that's why I'm requesting your approval of this contract that supports the construction management and oversight of um city and board of education projects.

Uh the candidate Michael has a bachelor of science degree in mechanical engineering and has construction management experience, and as a bonus, he's pretty close to the office uh in Stanford.

Um he's been assigned uh appropriate projects to support the workload in the department and his experience.

As far as the contract conditions, um his rate of pay is indicated, his compensation is indicated.

He accepted the position at uh $46.23 per hour, which is the minimum.

Um as far as the um form of contract, uh they they do not come with benefits.

That's with clerk of the work two contracts, they don't come with benefits.

Um he knows that um he has other means of uh dealing with that.

Um so we're really looking forward to putting him to work on on the projects listed in the contract.

If I if you have any further questions, I'd be happy to answer them, or if Rose has anything she'd like to say, I'll uh turn it over to her.

So good evening, members of the board.

I am actually commuting home, so I'm sorry for not being on camera.

Um of the works um are a part of the uh pay plan for salary, however, they're not eligible to receive medical benefits, and that's according to city the um city ordinance.

Um so they're not they get no medical medical benefits, no pay time off except for the Connecticut paid leave where they get um they have five days of sick leave time per um year.

Um that's the only thing that they're entitled to.

The other thing that the representative was asking was the uh hours of work.

So they're eligible for overtime uh when they exceed 40 hours per work, 40 hours per week.

Um so that has to be approved by myself.

Typically, overtime um hours are not abused, uh, they're carefully monitored because the budgets are tight.

But when we are doing work that uh occurs in the summer, particularly at school projects, when there's a big demand to be completed by the fall, uh there is opportunity for some overtime at that period of the year.

If there's a uh working uh off hours or dual shifts, that's another opportunity for um approval of overtime.

But it's it is sparingly used because our budgets are tight, but that's how that works.

So once once the individual exceeds 40 hours per week or anticipates that, that would have to be approved by me before um the charges are incurred.

Thank you.

Thank you both.

Um so uh questions from voting members of the committee for either Lou or for Rose Rosemary.

Uh Representative Cross.

Hi.

Um I'm sure I'm just wondering what's the difference between the clerk of the works two versus clerk of the works one or three or three, I guess.

So go ahead, Louis.

Yep.

So um the difference between clerk of the works one and two is basically experience.

Um they're generally more seasoned individuals that have uh either a good degree in the field that I'm looking for, and also have real world experience.

Uh Michael has done a fair amount of construction management, and he did he's a degreed engineer, so he he fits that role perfectly as opposed to one, which is a bit more junior.

And there's uh a level three as well.

There is a level three, and the level three uh from my understanding comes with benefits, but clerk of the works does not.

Clerk of the works one and two do not.

I see.

I think one of you mentioned that um them not being in tiles of benefits is due to uh an ordinance.

That's yes, that's correct.

What is what is the content of the ordinance or which numbers?

Yeah, I do.

It's ordinance.

Um I just had it.

Give me one second, I'll get information.

Okay, so it's ordinance uh uh 1082.

Or 10, yeah, 1082.

Um you could summarize the ordinance.

I mean, is it applying particularly to the to the clerk of the works possession?

So um on the second paragraph on the section 4742, it says all employees covered by the city of Stanford pay plan for non-union appointed and elected official except clerk of the works one and clerk of the works two shall receive medical benefit consistent with those offered as part of the MEA contract as amended, including employee contribution at any time after the employee has terminated from city employment, provided the employee or from employee.

Okay, so it's so the I'm not it goes a little bit more into I think has nothing to do with Clerk of the Works, but it's specifically say that they shall um they they would not receive medical benefits.

So all employees covered by the pay plan receive medical benefits except for clerk of the works one and clerk of the works two.

Representative Weinberg, are you still there?

It looks like they were kicked off, but uh, I believe Sammy is in the room, so maybe they'll be back on a minute.

I'll text them now to see.

Oh, I see.

Um do we need to accept Virgil or is he open?

Hey Angela, can you hear me?

Yes, I can hear you.

Virgil, I see your hand, so just just hang in there for a moment, okay?

Okay, sure.

Um, I just want to double check to see if we lost any problem.

Okay.

So Phil Radford's on, Karen's on everybody's okay.

Um, is Laurie's line?

No, yes, she's on.

Everybody's on the okay, great.

All right, yeah.

Uh Representative Gross, you have the floor again.

Um yeah, sorry for the interruption.

Um so yeah, so I think I see the ordinance and so I guess is the idea of them not getting benefits, is that because it's a sort of, I guess a temporary sort of contracts.

Um, and so I guess keep keep costs down.

So uh Rose Rose or or Lou, can you answer that question?

Um so I think because the ordinance dictated that they did not, um I'm not sure what the um rationale behind it behind it is.

I'm trying to look at the pay plan document while we're talking.

There's a pay plan document that addressed Clerk of the Works.

So I'm trying to review that while we're talking so that I can give you um the correct answer.

I okay.

I Luke, correct me if I'm mistaken.

I I I'm just remembering back to my personal permission days uh with this position.

Um that at least in the past, um many of the people in this in in the these in this role um were often um retired engineers who have retired who had retiree medical benefits, and therefore it was uh you know having medical benefits through the city would have been superfluous.

Um and that it's the lack of medical benefits is reflect is reflected in the um in the salary level.

Do I remember correctly?

There that could be a case where there are there are some individuals that fit that um uh profile.

Uh there may be others where the spouse has benefits.

Um so it really varies depending on the person, but they're during the uh advertisement of the position and during the interview, these things are covered in in detail, so the candidates are well aware of it uh before we move them forward.

If I if I can add to that, um the clerk of the works also pay uh they're paid out of capital projects, um, which doesn't allow to cover the cost for benefits.

So they're they're paid out of the capital of the projects?

Yes.

Rather than being paid out of the operating budget, I think they're paid out of the capital budget.

Yes, I see because they're assigned to capital projects.

Yeah, okay.

Does that help?

Yeah, okay.

Thank you.

Um Representative Taylor Cruz, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair Weinberg.

Uh some of the questions I had have been answered uh by the substantive prior discussion.

Uh is the uh uh for for reason of uh of reference.

What is the ordinance that uh uh excludes clerks or clerks of the works from uh medical benefits?

Uh does someone know the ordinance?

Is it I can look it up, but if somebody knows it, yeah.

I I believe that uh Rose said it was ordinance 1082.

Yes.

One zero eight two.

Yeah, and that's the and and and that's correct me if I'm mistaken, Rodamir.

And that's the ordinance from which you read that paragraph.

Yes, it is, yes.

Oh, I see.

Okay, thank you much.

Uh it might be worth looking into that ordinance and it might hinder up tracting uh candidates.

And uh for someone to be paid out of the copy of the budgets for a specific project.

Uh seems to be a tenuous uh decision to have once that project is finished.

Uh but anyhow that's subject of uh future discussion.

Thank you so much.

Um there by uh representative Pavy, you have the floor.

Oh, it's quick that time, girl.

Um hi Lou.

Uh thanks for being here.

Just uh quick thing that I'm a little confused about.

$40 a week, uh 40 hours a week, sorry.

Um is and only um five uh six days.

Is this um kind of going to Representative Gross's uh question before?

Is this sort of like is this a nine to five thing?

I mean uh five days a week, or is it um like a per project?

So um the contract um specifies the number of hours which ties to the pay rate.

Um so it is a full-time position, which is essentially you know, nine to five is conventional full time.

The clerk of the works, we try to offer them flexibility, so if they need to do you know do something, have to go to the doctors, have to, you know, we give them flexibility because they're hourly employees.

Um but for the projects you know that we're doing, um, you know, it's my hope that we're getting we're getting full-time coverage on these projects, but I am flexible if people have to take some time off to take care of something.

That's one of the sort of one of the benefits we can give an hourly employee, a little bit of flexibility, but for the most part, they work a regular work week.

Cool.

Okay, thank you.

That was it.

Uh thank you.

Uh other question?

Uh questions from uh exapicio members.

Okay.

Uh I a question for uh uh I guess for both Lou and for Rose.

Um have you had um have you had unusual difficulties recruiting for uh clerk of the works one and two positions?

Um we do get okay.

I would say so.

We have not been recruiting for Clerk of the Works One Clerk of the Work One, because I guess of the level of the project that Lou needs support on, but no, we've not had any difficulty.

We've had uh we have quite a response when we are recruiting.

Um we have a large pool of candidates um to select from the job posting explains the benefits situation, is that correct?

It does.

It yeah, it indicates that there's no benefits, yes.

Okay, benefits, yes.

Okay, so that would suggest that the that the lack of benefits is not an impediment to uh uh to uh receiving inquiries from qualified candidates.

Would you agree?

I agree, and I just and just be I um because I just logged into our recruiting website so you're aware.

Um we currently have 65 applications um that needs to be reviewed um in the time that we've posted.

So we do get a large pool of candidates.

Okay, thank you.

Other questions.

Okay, with that, um the chair will entertain a motion to approve these clerk of the works agreement for Mr.

Sada.

I make a motion to approve.

Thank you.

You want to make a motion, you gotta speak up next time.

Okay, uh with that, um any additional any discussion.

Um representative Pavia.

Sorry, um, real quick question.

Um, did you might have already covered this?

I just want to um re-ask this.

Does that does this require like workman's compensation?

If um something God forbid were to happen.

Yeah, I'm gonna turn that one to over to Rose.

Rose, are you able to respond to representative's question?

Um, yeah, so all this all employees whether contract or uh permanent full time are covered on our workers' comp policy.

And David is on the call, so he can verify that case.

No, I believe you're thank you.

Your your confidence is noted, Bob.

I know it means so much.

Uh okay, thank you.

Any further discussion?

Okay.

With that, Angie, can you uh can you call uh take the the vote, please?

Sure.

Lyme bird?

Yes.

Tabia.

Yep.

Dela Cruz.

Yes.

Gross.

Yes.

Pollock.

Yes.

And Sallas.

Yes.

600.

Thank you.

Thank you for your time.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Lou.

Thank you, Rowe.

Great to see you.

And we'll move on.

The next item on our agenda.

The heroic assumption that I can find the agenda is P32.007.

Approval of a contract with Corvell Enterprise Claims for RFP 2026.0069.

Workers Compassion and Heart and Hypertension Claims Administration.

And with that we have two and possibly three invitees.

Are you on the line?

Are you online?

If so, raise your hand or a mute.

Not there, not there.

Okay, very good.

Okay.

With that, I will turn it over to the floor to uh David and uh Dr.

Russell for uh to take us through this um this approval request.

Sure, thank you, uh Chair Weinberg and members of the board.

So before you is the approval of a contract with Corvell.

Uh this is for the administration of uh workers' compensation claims covering both the city and the board of ed.

Uh this particular contract is a uh a three-year contract with one year um with two one-year extensions uh that may be option at the you know either by us or by the city or by Corvell.

Uh there's a fixed cost component of this.

So for year one, it's uh 326,740.

For year two, it's 321,092, and for year three, 332,330.

Uh, to give this board a scope of of what this company does for us, it's the administration of of all workers' compensation claims.

Um we we average currently about 500 claims a year uh at a total cost or cash outlay uh by the risk fund of about $8 million.

Um so this this contract and the administrative uh the expense portion of it uh and and all workers comp as well is is paid out of the risk management operating fund.

Um yeah, so if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.

Uh Dr.

Russell, anything to add no sir, I deferred entirely to to David on this one.

Uh when it comes to sounds like you're doing your own risk management, thank you.

Um with that, I will open the floor to questions from voting members of the committee.

Representative Pollack.

Forgive me, I I don't see anything submitted here, and I'm not really familiar yet.

This is my second meeting on personnel.

Did you say that can you explain what this is?

I don't see anything on there.

It's 326,000 for administrative work.

So based on the flames.

If I'm if I might.

But yeah, go ahead.

Go ahead.

That's okay.

Yeah.

I David.

Perhaps you can explain what for the for the benefit of the committee and the public, what a third-party administrator of a benefits program does, and why an entity would engage a third-party administrator.

Sure, certainly.

So you can say that there's Maureen, does that get too yes?

That's this my question, my first question got the question.

Sure.

So I'll take you through the process here.

So let's say an employee is injured while performing their duties in the line of work.

Think of them like an insurance adjuster.

And what they will do is obviously investigate the conditions of the accident, and then guide the injured employees through care, uh medical treatment prescriptions, uh any follow-up physical therapy, uh, and simultaneously as well, um, manage any paperwork that we might have with the with the state's workers' compensation uh commission in case the employees out for a significant amount of time where they need uh wage replacement benefits through workers' comp.

So they manage all of that.

They manage uh their their medical care as well, pay all medical bills um, and pay wage replacements if it's if it's applicable under the claim.

So that's what a third-party administrator generally does.

Uh they also have a risk management information system, which is uh quite an important thing.

It helps us track uh the uh the details of every claim financially and and other aspects of it aspects of it as well, which are important for our insurance carriers when it comes time for the city to renew its uh uh its its insurance policies for for workers' comp.

So that's generally the nature of the work that they do, and it is quite nuanced.

Every every every claim is assigned uh an adjuster, and they immediately get investigated within 24 hours.

Uh, an initial point of contact is made with the employee, with the supervisor, and with the risk management team, so that we can understand what happened and more importantly, see how the employee is and try to get them back uh uh back to work as quickly as possible.

Thank you.

So on average you said it was around eight million dollars in claims a year.

Yes, yes, yeah.

So that includes indemnity, which is again like a wage replacement for a workers' comp for for uh employees that are out.

Uh medical bills are are quite quite expensive, as you might know.

Um for workers' comp, there is a separate medical plan that's outside of the city's uh medical plan, and that's a plan that that that is approved by the workers' compensation commission.

Um of the challenges there is I mean, with obviously with with rising medical costs, is just trying to maintain everyone within uh care within the the um uh the the network.

Uh it's a challenge because uh a workers' comp benefit extends whether you're you're employed or not.

So we do have a population of retirees, especially under the uh police and fire hardened hypertension claims that are you know residing in in in states outside of Connecticut, such as Florida, where obviously uh we don't have a medical plan uh that extends to to that many different states.

Uh so it's just a challenge of of sort of managing and negotiating uh rates um when someone goes outside of the medical plan.

But yeah, it's about eight million dollars in total uh annually that we see out of the risk fund.

Thank you.

Um last question.

Would you say an added benefit to having this contract with an outside firm helps the employees access or benefits?

I know that sometimes when people are injured, they have a very difficult time navigating.

Would you say that's one of the added benefits here?

Uh well, that's that's a very good question because one of the highlights of of this particular contract with Corvell and a differentiator for them is we're going to be launching uh uh an application, an app on a phone uh to allow an injured employee easy access to their adjuster, easy access to uh medic upcoming medical appointments and things of that nature.

So, yeah, Corvell uh proposed a technology solution that we thought was ahead of all of the other uh respondents to the RFP of which there were of which there were four of them, including Corvell.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

Thank you.

Uh other questions from voting members.

Uh Representative Taylor Bruce, you have the floor.

Thank you, Sheryl Weinberg.

Uh I was wondering, uh spot of the service that Corvell provides.

Is it possible to get compared to statistics on how Stanford compares with other similar municipalities?

Yeah, we'll be able to do that.

Uh so with with Corvell, we are we are the largest Connecticut-based municipality uh that they can have that they currently have under the account under the assumption that this contract gets approved by them.

They do serve other entities.

The biggest one in the state would be the Yale New Haven uh system uh that they currently serve.

But yeah, that's something uh our our old third party administrator previously was able to provide information um uh uh on how we compare to other municipalities, and that's something that we can push Corvell to offer as well.

Uh yes, I think that would be helpful to us.

Uh thank you.

Uh I yield.

Uh thank you, uh Representative Taylor Cruz.

Uh other questions from voting members of the committee.

Yes, Representative Sallas, thank you.

If the person can disabled, actually Corvell is in charge for anything uh further in that if the person can't work anymore.

Uh I'm sorry, can you repeat that question?

Is the person getting to an accident and uh he get disabled is Corvell in charge for the regular, you know, whatever comes after that.

Uh yeah, they're yeah, they're the ones that they investigate those things and in case there are any complexities to it.

Uh we also engage uh uh third party workers' compensation lawyers uh that represent the cities on cities on uh uh on behalf of the city, of course.

Um usually cases like that are presented in front of the state workers' compensation uh commission.

So we we have legal representation along with the employee that that that might need it.

But that being said, with all of them, there are specific uh formulas that are already governed by the state in terms of if you're injured and you have a certain body part that is either temporary or permanently disabled.

There are mathematical calculations to figure out uh what percentage of a wage replacement is due to that employee.

Um generally for something that isn't a a permanent and total disability, um the wage replacement is around the 75% range of what the employee was pre previously making, including overtime.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Uh questions.

Uh Representative Grouse.

Um, does this uh third party administrator can they like deny workers' comp claims?

Uh yes, that's it's in their purview to uh to do that.

Um and obviously an employee has a right to appeal that through the workers' comp commission.

So that's what an adjuster does.

They're they're they're they're all experienced.

Um the team here has several years of experience, just like our our old uh third party administrator did.

Um, and that's part of uh that's part of what they do.

They're all licensed to to do this type of work and make decisions on compatibility of a claim.

Sure.

All right, do we have any statistics of like how many claims are accepted versus denied?

Uh not off the top of my head.

It's something I could I could ask for.

Uh I will tell you the the vast majority are are accepted.

They're not denied because they're they're pretty straightforward in terms of they happened uh you know during the course of work, uh and it's for reasons that are the you know the injuries are covered.

It's not like you know, let's say someone comes down with a flu.

That's probably something that would be denied, of course.

But uh if a police officer gets injured while executing an arrest, that obviously is it's is is accepted.

So um in in from that sense, we don't get too many denials because we don't see too many of those claims that are sort of iffy.

They're pretty they're pretty straightforward in terms of the injury happened at work.

So I I don't have the statistics, but I could tell you anecdotally the vast majority of the claims submitted are are accepted.

So you'd say I mean it's a pretty objective process and an objective investigation.

Yes, yep.

Every claim is investigated by the adjuster.

And then um secondly, um, I guess like what's the reason for uh a new third party administrator, right?

Because I guess this is our first time doing business with Corvell.

So like what you know, why the change?

Yeah, so again, it was just put out for to RFP, and just in addition to the total cost, it's just uh what Corvell was able to offer compared to the others.

Uh like I said, there were four other ones.

Unfortunately, the the the previous incumbent uh company called PMA, uh, they had been with the city for 20 years consecutively.

And unfortunately, their price proposal just wasn't wasn't competitive compared to Corvell's, and uh their their investment in technology isn't where Corvell Corvell is.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Yeah, I I just like the record to reflect that uh Representative Walston uh has joined the meeting online.

Welcome, Contra.

Um questions from uh tax officio members of the committee, Representative Morrison.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Screw you to Mr.

Olava.

The TPA we have been using, we've been satisfied with their rate of approval of claims.

We haven't had any difficulty with them in the past denying any more than would be appropriate during the circumstances.

Right.

No, we were we were we were certainly satisfied with them.

I would tell you one of the things that's important to the to the risk management team is just a continuation of the adjusters that are assigned to the account.

So an industry practice is uh an adjuster is is able to handle uh between 100 and 125 claims uh in their portfolio, if you will.

So we it what was important to us is to have a a team of adjusters of a comparable size that we had with PMA because they were able to manage that uh pretty well in terms of not having too much of a workload per adjuster.

So that's something that we're that that we're certainly satisfied with.

But no, there were we I we we didn't experience real uh any any issues with them denying or accepting a claim.

Uh they were open about it, same as Corvell would be in their transparent and and would would inform us of of their decisions uh of denial or or or or or otherwise.

And and that was exactly the point I was getting at with our with our satisfaction with uh the previous per the previous company.

Do we expect is one of the reasons that we're going with Corvell uh that you're satisfied that they're gonna be as uh efficient and fair and reasonable as as our uh history has been with prior?

Uh yes, most yeah, most certainly more certainly.

Okay, thank you.

I yield okay.

Uh other questions from the board.

Seeing none, I have a few questions.

Um what challenges do you anticipate um in the transition from the uh you know from the historical TPA to Corvell.

And um what challenges do you anticipate in that transition?

And how are you preparing to um to mitigate those those challenges?

Sure.

So the biggest challenge is you know, with this team of adjusters, it's their uh lack of familiarity with the city of Stanford, um, the departments, uh the the department heads and supervisors and directors.

And we've already taken steps to mitigate with that.

Um we've met uh the Corvell team has met with the police department, uh the fire department, um, we'll be meeting with Board of Ed as well, uh, just so that they understand who the players are, the nature of their work.

Uh we have provided Corvell with job descriptions for over 90% of the jobs that we have we've had historically.

I had uh workers comp claim adjust uh uh uh uh claims for um so we put them in good shape to try to mitigate their they're just like having to come at the speed basically uh to understand all the players within the city.

Um in terms of uh I've in terms of their subject matter expertise, that they're they're there as just just as well as any other company would be because these are these are certified adjusters.

Uh they are they're trained to do uh what they do.

Uh but I would say that would be the biggest one.

It's just their lack of familiarity with the city itself.

And we've been taking steps, you know, over the past month or so to mitigate that as they've as they come on board.

Okay, thank you.

Um next question.

Uh can you explain the uh the $99,000 cap uh the reason for it?

Is it an annual cap or a life of the contract cap?

Can you just can you walk us through what that is?

Sure.

This came about just due to the timing of of the approval of getting this contract to you to to this board uh for consideration and for approval.

Um our uh our previous contract with PMA uh had exhausted all of its side uh you know renewal options.

So uh we needed Corvell or a company to come on board to start managing claims uh starting January 1st uh of this year.

So that cap is in there so that they can commence their services but not exceed $99,000 in order to satisfy the purchasing ordinance until uh we get approvals from the boards, in which case they can they can proceed with with the rest of their uh annual fees.

So do I think that's in there?

Okay.

So do I understand correctly that if um if the board on February 2nd um approved votes to approve this contract, the board reps, um the cap is the 99,000 dollar cap is is moved.

ordinance on until uh we get approvals from the boards in which case they can they can proceed with with the rest of their uh annual fees so that's the reason that's in there okay so do I understand correctly that if um if the board on February 2nd um approved votes to approve this contract the board reps um then the cap is the 99 thousand dollar cap is is moved correct yes and then we give them specific uh in order to proceed further yeah beyond that correct thanks um and then one more question um does the do the terms of the contract uh deviate in any way from Stanford's uh standard service contract of this type uh in any material way other than obviously the the fees and things like that no that no the nature of the work and the fees are comparable to what we've had with t with with previous TPAs is specifically uh PMA so nothing nothing unusual about that um the contract is quite lengthy in terms of uh they put in as one of their exhibits uh in terms of their response to the RFP like their own version of a draft contract so by default because that was part of their RFP reply it's included as part of uh one of the exhibits of of this current contract but other than that it's just additional pages of of a sample contract that they put in there uh nothing unusual for the type and nature of services uh it's it's common and I would say that was the same for all of the other RFP respondents as well okay all right thank you um other questions from uh from the board okay then with that I will um entertain a motion to approve uh representative waltzon has a question oh I'm sorry I'm sorry I did not see your hand I see it now uh representative walson you have the floor okay I was just looking over um the contract that it's supposed to commence on uh January 1st 2026 right correct okay okay so you guys already started or you're waiting to for the approval before you start business uh yes so they already started but again they're not to they're not to perform services that go beyond 99000 worth of fees until it gets approval from the board in which case we would uh then give them a notice to proceed okay and one more question do you guys have like uh a local office here whereas one could go in to drop paperwork off or anything like that or would they have to solely deal with you with the app uh no it wouldn't be through the app so uh the the the initial process is to fill out a first report of injury um which the employee can do that through his his or her supervisor um if they need to file any paperwith with the workers comp commission is usually starts with something called a form 30 C by Connecticut statute they have to that has to be served and presented to the town clerk's office for record keeping and then it gets distributed to the risk management team who in turn passes it on to uh Corvell so that they can respond accordingly okay and from that point the employee would deal solely with Corval yes yep a claim adjuster would get assigned to Corvell and they make that initial communication with the employee within a 24 hour time window of of when the claim is reported to Corvell.

Okay so there's basically no face-to-face no human interaction uh generally generally no it's mostly done on on on phone or teams meeting if it needs to be uh but there the the adjusters are are quite active in in in staying in touch and managing uh in an injured employees care okay all right thank you I yield thank you other questions seeing none uh I'll entertain a motion to approve uh the contract with Corvell Enterprise Claims so it's taken thank you representative gross thank you representative collin uh uh discussion seeing no hands um we'll take this to a vote angie can you execute the vote please sure uh weinberg yes Tavia yep Taylor Cruz yes Gross yes palek yes and Sallas yes 600 okay thank you the item is approved uh thank you David um and thank you for your very thorough uh explanations very helpful thank you very much thank you okay uh the final item on our agenda is p32.005 approval of the revised pay plan based on the recently completed pay plan compensation study um we have the invited guests

And for your very thorough explanations.

Very helpful.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Okay.

The final item on our agenda is P32.005.

Approval of the revised pay plan based on the recently completed pay plan compensation study.

We have the invited guests, Dr.

Russell again.

And Al Cava consultant to uh to the city on this matter.

So I will turn it over and give the floor to Dr.

Russell and Mr.

Kava to walk us through this.

A point of information.

Please go ahead, Representative Dale Cruz.

Has the Board of Finance active on this?

The transmitter letter from Corporation Council says the Board of Finance acts than we uh is usually done.

Do you know if the Board of Finance has acted on the on the item?

I can address that.

Um both the personnel commission and the Board of Finance have approved the recommendations in the report.

Oh, I see.

Okay, that's that was not reflected in the documentation.

Okay, thank you so much for that clarification.

Um so just as a brief summary before I turn it over to Mr.

Al Kava.

Um, so I drafted this summary prior to meeting with all the boards, but at the end of the summary, as it is noted, being that I am a member of the pay plan, there is a conflict of interest.

So I did not perform the study.

Um Al did, so I will turn over to him at this time.

Okay, thank you, uh Dr.

Russell.

Um, I just want to check.

Um, Bridget, did you have any introductory remarks you wanted to make?

Hi, Al, sure.

I will just share that we hired Al a year ago, actually a year ago to almost to the date.

Um, and we asked Al to conduct this study because we were challenged as an administration in continuously recruiting and filling positions.

How long do I have?

Um Representative Havey, can you mute yourself, please?

Thank you.

No problem.

Um we had just we had just been challenged on some retention issues as it related to the positions that we were um hiring for and retaining, and we again in some of our anecdotal information, we had been doing some recruitment to attract talent to some key positions in the city, and through that process, found out that our market in this area for municipal employees at some of the senior level positions, Stamford was not in line with other municipalities.

So we wanted to make sure that that was in fact the case, and Al conducted the study starting a year ago.

So with that, I will turn it over to Al.

Just very briefly, uh just so everyone knows.

For most of the nine years that I served on the personnel commission, um, I uh I clamored for uh the city to conduct such a study, and I'm just delighted that it's finally that it's finally taken place.

With that, go ahead, Al.

Okay, thank you, Cole.

So as I was indicated, excuse me.

Indicator, I was retained by the city in January of 2025 to conduct a study of the pay plan salary structure and salaries, both from the perspective of looking at internal equity as well as mark municipal market issues.

Um, as Bridget had mentioned, um, and during my you know almost five-year term as a joint director with the city, we've had a lot of challenges with pay plan positions and recruiting uh the talented folks for our positions, um, and it was primarily due to market issues that we we you know that we had to deal with.

Um we also lost a number of key people over I know over the time I was there and even more recently, recently Ben Barnes moved on, what two director of transportations um left the city to move to other other positions regarding salary issues as well as our former 911 communications director left for um another employment.

So we were having these types of issues, and as I get into the study, we also had some serious issues regarding compression between the department heads, the pay plan department heads and their immediate reports were mostly represented by the MAA.

And you'll see if you when you read the report, you'll see how narrow the compression is.

And it's even been worse now than it was when I drafted the report in in June of 2025, because on July 1 of 2025, the MAA employees received the 3% increase, while the pay plan employees received the 2.2% increase, thereby furthering narrowing the compression issue.

So just a little background.

The uh pay plan was at first adopted um in its present form in January of 1998.

And it was reapproved in 20 in 2004 and 2008, and in the 2008 period, the present uh salary grid was put into effect with the four-step plans for each grade, uh, eight grades, four steps.

Um the pay plan provides um for certain objectives, and those objectives include looking at internal equity issues and looking at the competitiveness with municipal markets.

Those are the so those are the two things that I've I keyed in on and I focused on.

Um it also does provide as Carl mentioned, he was eager to get this study out when he was there.

The pay plan itself provides, and let me just get the language out.

It provides that uh in paragraph K of the pay plan, maintenance of salary objectives.

Uh it it says in order to maintain the salary plan objectives, the personnel commission shall review the salary ranges, which they've done routinely, and then a formal review should be done every two years, and the results should be reported to the Board of Finance, Board of Reps, and a personnel commission to see if the ranges need to be adjusted.

So when the pay plan was adopted, it contemplated a review every two years to make sure we maintained our competitiveness in the market as well as looking at issues of internal uh equity.

So when we uh decided uh what positions we were going to look at, we don't look at all the positions in in the group.

We look at what we call benchmark positions, and those would be positions that we can pretty much define, not just here in Stanford, they're pretty well recognized in other municipalities, such as director of finance, uh director of legal affairs, director of HR, director of budget, those types of positions where we had pretty close matches.

So we wanted to always try to match apples with apples on on positions.

Um we did find is that the um breadth and scope of the jobs in Stanford, even though the titles were the same and the function was generally the same, seemed to be have a wider portfolio of responsibility than some of the other municipalities.

And I detailed some of those differences in the report.

The other thing I looked at, we included four MAA positions, director of parks, controller, city engineer, and the land use bureau chief in the study.

And the reason I included the pay uh the MAA positions, I wanted to test the hypothesis as to whether or not the problem with the internal compression, was it really due to the pay plan salaries not being sufficiently set, or was it due to the MAA salaries maybe being overpaid?

And we found, as you see in the study, that those positions were were not that we didn't find that.

Those positions were pretty well set to market, maybe slightly under the 75 percentile.

So there was no issue there with the MAA positions.

Um we then surveyed municipalities in Westchester County and Fairfield County, that's our recruitment area, and they have similar costs of living.

Uh and we went out and we um attempted to get as much information we could from these municipalities that were all listed in the report.

Some municipalities were more eager to participate than others, but we did the best we could to try to get exact salaries, and when we couldn't get exact salaries, we had uh we were provided with copies of their salary structures that had the minimum of the maximum in the uh you know in the salary structure.

So those were included in the report.

Um so as you can see in the report, uh we have the uh various benchmark positions listed, what their actuals are, where they were available, the minimums, the maximums, the percentile rank as compared to the market.

And you can see our our percentile rank is I think it averaged about 33 and a third percent.

Um I would think we should be closer with the scope of work that we have in Stanford in the 75 percentile, and we're at the 33 percentile.

So I think that that is a major issue, and one of the contributing issues for our issues with recruitment and retention.

But just equally important, and maybe even more so is the internal equity problem that we're having.

And in the report, I do some graphs and some charts comparing the pay plan positions with the MAA positions, and as you can see, they're basically the rec reports, city engineer, director of parks and rec, let's say to the director of operations, they almost have the same salary.

I'm talking about a thousand twelve hundred dollar difference, but over time you'll see that that's going to narrow over time.

And generally in in in HR in the business, when you have the when you at the lower level end of supervision, so let's say your first level of supervision, a foreman, let's say, maybe there should be about a 10% differential between a foreman salary and a direct report.

But when you get up to the higher ranks at the top of an organization, the differential between a director and their direct report should be more in the area around a 15 to 20 percent differential.

And here we're talking about a differential less than 1%.

So that needs to be corrected.

Um, I also included just to have a complete report some comparisons with the with two positions on the board of edge site here in Stanford, um, the chief financial function and the HR function, but I will point out and acknowledge that the board of ed tends to pay as a general rule higher than municipalities, so that's understandable, but I put that data in the report just to have it complete all in one all on one spot.

Um so with that, um I'll be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

And I did mention I made this presentation to the personnel commission uh a couple of months ago, and they unanimously approved the recommendations in the report, which by the way are um two four percent increases, one in April of 2026 and one in April of 2027.

So I recommended an 8% increase, but I split it up in two 4% uh increments, giving consideration to the to the budget.

And the idea behind the two, 4% adjustments was not to have a windfall for the employees, but mainly to put them in a position to deal so we can deal with the compression issue and begin to retract and retain um pay plan employees.

Uh so I think with that, um at least at the beginning, and then if we're did if we're diligent and every two years we continue to do a review of market, then we can make further adjustments if warranted, may not be, but we'll see.

We'll see how the recruitment goes, how the uh retention goes, and if we need to make adjustments every two years, or study could market study could be done, maybe not as um comprehensive as this, but at least look at the the market to get a sense as to where we are and make that report to the personnel commission.

Um so I think um let's see if they've left anything out that's noteworthy.

Um no, I think that's it.

So I'll be happy to respond to any questions that you may have.

Thank you, Al.

Um, who has the first question from uh voting members of the board.

I guess it's me.

Uh Al, I I want to congratulate you on the thoroughness of the um of the data collection.

Um, and uh the job matching that you did, uh the selection of the uh of the peer group, um I think all of that was um you know was really really well done, very well executed.

So I I really I really thank you for that.

Um the one there were two things that I in the there were two analytical decisions that you made um that I'm struggling to understand.

Okay.

Uh so hopefully you can you can help me help me understand them.

Um the first is uh when you had um when you re in your data collection, if you collected the actual salary of the uh peer position in the marketplace, for comparison purposes, you use that person's actual salary.

So for example, uh for the uh director of administration for the um you know for white planes, you you collected the actual salary of the director of finance for um uh for for white planes, and you use that that as one of the data points.

Um when you had only the salary structure, the minimum and the maximum for the salary range, you used the maximum as the data point uh as the competitive data point.

Right.

Um when you had both the actual as well as the min and max, you again used the maximum.

Can you explain to me why you used why you you used the maximum as the data point, the maximum of the salary range as the competitive data point, as opposed to, for example, the actual if it was available or uh or the midpoint of the range, sure uh if the actual was not available.

Sure.

So if you if I only look at those jurisdictions that had actual salaries, we would be um reducing the number of data points for each of the of each of the titles, correct?

Because we didn't have actual salaries for all of those.

So it happens to be that all the pay plan employees are all at the maximum of their salary grade.

So even though it doesn't maybe explain it that well here, I am matching maxes to maxes in all cases.

Because if you look at the actuals for the Stanford positions, those are all the maxes.

So had I not put the actual in there and just had the max column, I would still be looking at maxes versus maxes.

So I didn't, you know, go you know, mix apples and oranges there.

They're all the maxes, including the Stanford positions, if you understand what I'm trying to get at.

Well, I understand the math that you used, but I don't frankly understand the rationale if the purpose was to, you know, ideally you would use the actuals for all the all the peers.

Um and compare that to the actuals for uh for the city of Stanford.

Um so when the actual is not available, even when it is, when the actual is not available, you're using uh you're looking for a surrogate for that actual.

But why wouldn't the midpoint of the range of the competitive of the the peer of the peer city's range?

Why wouldn't that be a better surrogate, especially since if you look at um if you look at the situations, the data points where you have both the actual as well as the min and max of the range?

The actuals are all over the place, they're not clustered, they're not clustered in the apologies for getting so technical, everybody.

Um the actuals are not clustered at the maximums.

Some of them are at or near the max at or near the maximum, some are at or near the minimum, some are in in the middle, you know, near the midpoint.

Uh, there's no real pattern that I could discern.

So if we're looking for a surrogate for actuals, why wouldn't we use say the midpoint?

And in particular, when we have both the min and max of the ranges of the range and the actual, why wouldn't we use the actual?

Well, I had to have I wanted to have only one calculation done for all the jurisdictions for each of the titles, and as we said, some had actual, some did not, but they all have ranges.

And in each and every case, the employee will move through the range to the maximum.

So I'm thinking of when you're out there recruiting and you're showing the maximum salary, um that's that's a recruiting tool, and we wanted to show how that looked compared to other municipalities, because the employees now, maybe somebody who reported an actual just hired a month before the it was reported, and they're at the lower end of the range.

Maybe somebody was with that jurisdiction for five years, 10 years, 15 years, they were at the upper end of the range.

So to your point, a lot of these positions were all over the lot of the range.

So I wanted to have one standard to look at.

I could have picked the minimum, and I could have picked at the midpoint and done some math and come up with the midpoint, but I elected to go with the maximum, and my thought process was looking at the maximum.

And my thought process was looking at the maximum, it was standard for each municipality.

They all reported a maximum.

So I thought that would be a more consistent um salary to look at in doing that.

I mean, you could argue that you, as you do, maybe the midpoint, but I looked at it from that perspective.

Okay.

Um another another question.

Um you very accurately stated that for several, not all, but for several of the pay of these pay plan positions.

Um the director of administration, the director of health and public safety, uh, the director of operations, that pick on three, that the scope of those of those positions' responsibilities here in Stanford City government is much broader and much more complex than the peers.

Um which are more narrowly where they're where they're more narrowly focused.

Um another approach you could have taken is to in essence use a multiplier on the peer group uh salaries to ref to in effect reflect the difference between their job responsibilities and the much greater job responsibilities of the city of Stanford position.

Um something magical about taking that approach, and you certainly acknowledge you know the wider scope.

Um is there a reason why you chose not to take that approach?

Well, I think had I done that, what I think what you're suggesting is is that the multiplier then would be um added to the um well, let's say subtracted maybe from the peer group salaries being posted because their scope of of responsibility was less than that of the Stanford job.

So maybe take the just as an example, let's just say director of administration, take New Rochelle at 264,000, and maybe reduce that by 10 or 15 percent.

Um because their scope of activity is less, or increase the other one.

And I'm not just sure so sure how I would do that and what what multiplier I would use.

I think that's doing it the other way around, actually, where you bump out the uh the peer, the peer data point.

Right, right.

Sort of adjust it to right to this to the Stanford scope of service.

Right.

Yeah, so I wasn't sure if I would do something like that, what multiply I would use, what weight would I give to each of the individual activities over and above what somebody in the peer group wasn't doing.

How much do I say?

Let's say director of administration director of operations, for instance, has responsibility over refuse collection highway, parks and recreation, the facilities, and a lot of those jobs in and of themselves are department heads reporting to the mayor or first selectman.

How much of a multiply do I give to each one of those functions?

Um, and I think that was a little, I frankly think it's it's it's a very good idea, and it's something that would even give you more data to to work with.

But when I looked at that, when I looked at what I had, and then I looked at the other issue that that was a paramount importance as well, the internal equity issue with the compression.

I just just think at that point I didn't need to go there to make the point and the recommendations that I did in the report.

Okay.

Um, you know, the the mayor position is also in the pay plan.

Uh was was the scope of your assignment not to include that position?

It wasn't not to include it because it is part of the pay plan, so it is included because in the pay plan, the mayor's position is listed to be paid at a certain percent of a certain grade, and I don't have it exactly in front of me, but I can pull it up.

Just get to it.

And I didn't include the mayor's position as a benchmark position because when I, you know, we have some mayors are full-time, some are part-time, some selectmen.

I mean, they're all over the place, and in and how each municipality handles those positions, and as elected officials, some have other jobs, some don't, some put in a lot of time over and make a part-time job into a full-time job, others don't.

So it was very difficult to uh get true comparisons there.

But just getting back in the pay plan itself, the mayor is slotted in at 115% of step three of grade eight.

So the mayor's salary is defined directly in the pay plan.

Okay.

Um I recognize um the different the different the difficulty and comparability because particularly with first selectmen there all but not full-time.

Right.

Um, and that's just a different capital fish.

I I I get that.

Um of your recommendations is to target the 75th percentile of competitive practice.

Um my understanding of the rationale for that recommendation is that this is um you know, in particular, because with the exception of Yonkers and certain positions at County of Westchester, um Stanford is a much bigger municipality, uh, certainly in terms of population, workforce, and so forth, uh, than the other peers.

Not criticizing the peers that you selected.

I think you did a great job of uh you know uh in in terms of peer peer selection, but my understanding is that's that's a big part of what drove your recommendation to target the competitive 75th percentile.

So do I understand that correctly?

That's correct.

Okay, great.

And uh by the way, I I support that recommendation.

Um so the directorate of administration position is currently vacant.

Um it's being filled on an interim basis um by the city's director of economic development.

Um you included that position in the recommended um these recommended four percent increases.

Um that can I was just confused.

Can you explain how that would actually get administered once a person once person was hired?

Well, so they be talking they'd be hired based on a four percent step up in the um in the min and the max.

So what so if this gets approved, the first four percent will take effect April 1st, and it's very unlikely you'll have a candidate um on board by April 1st, uh, by the time you finish recruitment and so on and so forth and vetting that type of thing.

So the new schedule would then let's assume it's approved.

The new schedule will be in effect on April 1st, and everyone in the pay plan will get paid under the new schedule.

Then on July 1, you get your normal uh increase under the formulas in the pay plan.

And so you'll have a new schedule there, and then April of 2017, the schedule will change by the second four percent, and that increase will go into effect.

So the entire schedule it'll go up by the four percent, the July 1 increase, and then the April 17 uh second four percent increase.

Okay, so if if I understand you correctly, um let's say the new director of administration starts April 15th, um, and they're brought in at step two, then it would be step two on this four correct is this structure with a that it already experienced a four percent bump up.

Correct.

And I think if this would get approved, hopefully this month by the full board, then that schedule would be effective, and the city could begin using that higher salary in its recruitment for that replacement.

Which would be advantageous.

Yep.

Okay.

Um I'm gonna pause there.

Um I've been monopolizing the meeting, exercising my the my chair chairperson prerogative, I suppose.

Uh to the intense boredom of everyone else.

Um so I'll open it up to questions from uh members of the uh committee, either voting or ex officio.

Uh representative growth.

Um thank you for the presentation, very clear.

Um I just have a quick question on table one for in like for the uh percentile um for the percentile rank, I'm sure it says it's you know, based on I guess like market data.

I'm just wondering like what is the full range, I guess, of the market.

Um, because like for some of them, like you know, the percentile goes up to your 91%, but like what is above that, for instance.

So the way the way that percentile is is functioning, you look the percentile will tell you let's just take, I'm just looking at um let's go to director of administration.

So we've got uh how many one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve.

You've got 13 municipalities on in that one.

So the top one in Greenwich, the 91.67 percentile, that would mean that there this position is has a higher salary than 12 other data points in that group.

And then if you go to New Rochelle, that 83% is the second highest salary over those 12 those 12, 13 data points, rather, and so on and so forth down the line.

You never have a hundred percent in percentiles because you can't have 13 out of 13.

It's the number of that data points below the targeted data point.

Okay, okay.

Yeah, okay, that makes sense.

Um, so yeah, so it's just based on the municipalities that are serving the UK report.

Okay, that makes sense.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Who has the next question?

And Al, anything else?

Anything else you you'd like to add?

Um no, I think you can't minimize the problem with the the um internal compression, it's a very serious issue.

It's built up over many years, it didn't happen overnight.

And that's why I think it's important.

I mean, one thing that's in the pay plan now is every July 1, there's an automatic formula for an adjustment.

And it comes from is a formula that is published in the work, the world of work and their annual uh budget uh uh publication.

It's tense tends to be a conservative number, but I didn't make any recommendation to adjust it.

I think sometimes conservative is good.

And on if you have that in place every July 1, you still have the every two-year review that's that's embodied in the pay plan that should take place.

So if there's if the two if that annual adjustment tends to be too conservative, then in two years you do you do a market survey to see if you should make another adjustment or not, if it's warranted.

So I didn't I didn't think that needed to be changed at all.

I think it's a it's a good number.

Um, and you know, other unions may look at that increase too when they negotiate their contract.

So I think all in all, it's uh it's a conservative number, but I think it makes sense, it protects the pay plan employees to a certain degree from you know cost of living issues, and uh again, you have the other language in the pay plan that suggests every two years you do a market analyst to make sure that the salaries are still competitive.

Okay, thank you.

Al, I I do have another question.

Um can you when you talk about internal equity, and you you you've done a really good job of explaining you know the mathematically uh what internal equity, you know, and comp what compression is.

Um but can you explain um to the to the board and to the public um the problems from you know from it from it from a people standpoint, from a people management standpoint, the problems that compression create, you know, in particular making it difficult to promote from within and um and other and other problems that it that it may create.

So there's more of uh management understanding of the issues are related to compression rather than just the mathematical.

Right.

Well, it I think there's two concerns.

One concern you mentioned promotion.

So if you have a uh a number two in a department who's a stand-out employee, very productive, it's got the full skill set, and you're looking to promote the director into for that department, and for that person to come out of a bargaining unit that's negotiating um salary for that position that has only could be terminated for just cause because they're in the bargaining unit, you know, has a whole collective bargaining group of benefits to say to that employer, we want you to come out and um stick your head up above the fence line, so to speak, and become the director of the entire department.

And oh, by the way, you're gonna get a $750, $1,000 increase.

That's not going to happen.

You're not gonna you're gonna have trouble recruiting from uh uh promoting from within.

So you're gonna be forced to go to the outside because those employees simply are not going to take that position.

And yeah, sure, sometimes it's good to go outside, but it's also good to promote from within.

And there should be a good balance to that, you know.

So you'd really want to be able to have employees say, look, I want to make a career working for the city of Stanford.

I'm gonna I get hired at this middle level management position.

One day I would like to become director of the department, I work really hard, I get a master's degree, I I take some certification courses, you know, I do a good job for the city, and then that when that point comes to um to replace a director, that employee says, Well, I would love to do it, but I can't afford to, I can't afford to take the promotion.

You know, so that's kind of self-defeating for the city, and that doesn't make any sense.

So that's one problem.

The other problem is you have a director who's only earning a thousand dollars, let's use that as an example, over his direct reports or her direct reports.

How does that feel for that employee coming in doing the work and having the responsibility over all the various functions and all those direct reports that report to that to that director when when they're set when the compensation is not sufficiently um differential between the two of them?

So, you know, you have those you have those those two management issues, and I think there's serious internal issues that need to be corrected.

Okay, thank you.

Very helpful.

Okay.

One more one more question.

Uh can you identify specifically um the positions if you're if you if the board um uh uh approves your uh your recommendations, the specific positions that will be eligible for the two four percent adjustments?

Yes.

Well, that would be all the positions in the pay plan that are on that on that pay schedule.

Um one thing I know before I got on, you were talking about clerk of the works.

They have a schedule in the pay plan, but they're not affected by any of this.

This is just the full-time city employees uh in the pay plan.

And there's an appendix in the pay phase.

Does everyone is everyone first of all familiar with the pay plan?

Um I think some members are not.

Okay.

I mean, if I is it possible to share my screen?

Because I can bring up that appendix and that'll and that'll directly answer your question.

Is this is this exhibit B?

No, it's it's no, it's not my in my report.

Um, is it on my report?

Yes, maybe it is.

Well, exhibit B is cost of recommended adjustments to pay plan.

Yes, that would be it.

That would be those are the positions eyeballing about 20 positions.

Yes, that's correct.

Exhibit V would be the positions, you are correct.

Okay, because there might seem any it's towards the back end.

Um the so are you confident that the the positions that you benchmarked and um are primarily positions of most primarily positions at the top of the house.

Correct.

Um are you confident that as you move through the um the salary grades that the same gaps between um Stanford's pay levels, salary levels, and uh the peer market.

Um are you are you confident that that's same relationship will will hold?

And and if yes, what's the rationale for your confidence?

I am confident, and the reason being is when you when you create a salary schedule, you normally would come up with a differential between between grade one, grade two, grade three, all the way up.

It wouldn't be haphazard.

Same thing with the minimums to the maximum.

There would be the same percentage range between each.

So the same issues when you have similar employees in a lower graded position in other municipalities in a highest in a higher salary grid, that that would be that would be pretty close to the same differential or percentiles that you have in the report that I I've shown.

So yeah, I'm pretty confident that that would be the case.

Okay.

Okay.

Um I realize these positions might be more difficult to benchmark to find you know sufficient comparables.

Correct.

In the marketplace.

I think I think it would be helpful if uh you know, if a similar study is done again in as you suggesting two years or uh for whenever that um that whoever's doing that study um look for um positions that can be benchmarked uh that have a sufficiently well identified labor market um in the lower salary grades in the in the pay plan uh so that um there's some um data to you know to test the hypothesis that you uh you know that you that you presented okay are there other questions thank you very much Alan and again um and again oh I'm sorry please um sorry one more question but I'm just uh I'm just curious so um you know this proposes uh uh I guess increase the schedule by eight percent um and I guess in terms of addressing the compression issue like how does that compare with how the MN MA MAA positions will increase over that same time right so the contract expires it I believe June 30th of this year so we don't know what the increases are going to be but um um as I indicated in the report the uh negotiations the bargaining negotiations in the union environment is quite different than it is with non-union employees in the bargaining unit environment you look at what other similar municipalities are negotiating and uh even if you don't if you go to impasse and end up in arbitration an arbitrator is going to pretty much award what everyone else is getting in the general area so for instance this is last July one MAA received three percent pay plan 2.2 percent I suspect come next july one pay plan will probably be in that 2.2 percent range again MAA will probably be in the 3% range again so there's still gonna there's still gonna be more of a difference to be made up so that's why in two years when you do the market study again you take a look at it it's very difficult I know we've had in some of the with some of the other boards that I've made this presentation um there have been some comments made about in labor negotiations with the unions we should take into consideration the um how the increase that you agree to affects compression issues with the with the department has and that is a good point and it should be taken into com in in consideration I'm sure the negotiators do um but at the end of the day um they're gonna get what other municipalities are receiving and um in similar in for similar positions on so you know you gotta have some sort of variance there I can't say with any degree of certainty that the spreads not is going to further worsen over the next couple of years but it's with without the 4% the 8% um it's not going to get any better at the 8% might be somewhat eroded by again let's say if it's a 3% for MAA in the two or 2.5 for pay plan that 8% I'm uh proposing is going to be eroded to a little degree but you know over time it'll be it'll be small amounts and then you'll have the opportunity every two years to make adjustments if warranted thank you.

But but it at least the once the two uh four percent increases are baked into the into the pay plan structure that will at least create some headroom that had might get eroded uh over time but it'll at least create some headroom for some time going forward exactly correct okay thank you other questions okay um seeing none um is um is there a motion on this item motion to move zero zero five second motion to approve I move to approve zero five okay motion has been uh made and seconded uh is there discussion uh anyone on on the online

Motion to approve.

I move to approve 05.

Okay, motion has been uh made and seconded.

Is there discussion?

Anyone on on the online who wishes to make a comment in the room.

So I I'm still um concerned about the comparisons to the to the maximums.

I'm somewhat um my concerns are somewhat alleviated um by the um the fact that at least for some of these positions, particularly um some of the mayor's cabinet positions that the job the scope of the Stanford jobs is significantly greater than um then the than um then the then the peers.

Um but that still is a bit of a sticking point too for me.

Um you know some of it would get you know if if we adjusted the data the competitive data points uh to reflect that that wider scope that might make up for some of the difference essentially bringing the midpoints up to the up to the to the maximum.

So maybe it's a um maybe it all comes out in the wash.

I I just you know to be honest with the I that I would have preferred that the uh with that that the study had done both those things, but you might have arrived at the same conclusions.

Well I think I think at the end of the I think you're right, but I think at the end of the day the problems the city is having in recruitment and retention because of salary, um suggests that those ranges need to be adjusted.

Um and don't challenge that whatsoever.

And you could you know we could go to the midpoint max, whatever, but I think but I think the 8% adjustment is still a reasonable um uh response to the problem that we're having on the recruitment and retention side and also on the compression side as well.

Yeah, no, I I I get that, and uh you know, and it you know this may all be you know distinction without a difference and you know different methodologies that actually get you to more or less the same, you know, this the same conclusions.

But in two years, when the study's done in two years, we can make sure you know have the city take a look at that when they do the study.

Uh the the other concern I have is um and I don't have a solution for this other concern, is um what is you know is the assumption that what's created that the problems at the top of the house pervade the entire pay pay plan.

I I don't know a better assumption to make uh again I think that that's something that needs to be um put on the list for uh you know for the next for the next study understood to test that hypothesis.

Maureen the whole time to what you're saying, and I agree about the minimum actual and maximum, and I do know that when I've looked at job searches, usually people's eyes, if you're trying to retain or get new hires, they look at the maximum and it's a range, but I always come back to the percentile in the rank.

Stanford is the second largest city.

I have trained with officers in Norwalk for Jiu-Jitsu for six years, and uh I cannot tell you how many people came in, and I know it's anecdotal, but the number one thing when I asked that they were going to be officers in Stanford, it's hard because Stanford's the second largest city, it's very diverse.

There's a lot more work in their eyes.

So I'm surprised at the second largest city that we're not ranked at a higher percentile, and we do need to be more competitive.

So even if you know it's a mid-range or mean me or mode using the maximum, we should be even more competitive at the maximum.

I no, I I agree that that that is a that has been an ongoing problem for the city.

city it's very diverse there's a lot more work in their eyes so I'm surprised with the second largest city that we're not ranked at a higher percentile and we do need to be more competitive so even if you know it's a mid-range or mean me or mode using the maximum we should be even more competitive at the maximum i no i i i agree that that that is a that has been an ongoing problem for the city um and yeah i guess i guess my point is um i like where this study ended up i not it's it's it's not in some respects it's some respects it's very much the route I would would have taken um in some respects it's not I would have taken a different route but I think taking a different that different route pretty would have ended up pretty much the same place um if anything I you know given the you know given the 0.8 percent annual erosion um i it can it makes me even wonder if if the the two fours is enough um well that that comments would made before it went before another commission they they questioned whether we were too conservative but let's let's find out in two years uh it should help over the next it should help significantly over the next over the next few years okay further discussion if not we'll take this to a vote um uh and if you I'd like to vote last okay uh pavia is talking yeah I'm sorry I apologize uh is it yes oh okay they La Cruz yes gross yes palek yes yes and Weinberg yes six zero zero thank you uh Dr.

Russell thank you for hanging in there um and uh and Al thank you for a really really excellent piece of work thank you good evening everyone everybody even thank you with that I adjourn the I will adjourn the meeting we need a motion to adjourn to adjourn a committee meeting motion to adjourn you can do