2018, 12-06 meeting summary SCITYokanepOFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
Valle Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk
10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206
Phone: (509)720-5102 •Fax:(509)720-5075 •www.spokanevalley.org
cbainbridge @ spokaneval ley.org
SPOKANE VALLEY INDEPENDENT SALARY COMMISSION
Spokane Valley City Hall, Conference Room N212
December 6, 2018 Meeting Summary
Commission Members Present: Staff Present:
Bill Gothmann, Chair Staff Liaison: Cary Driskell,City Attorney
Tes Sturges,Vice-chair John Whitehead,Human Resources Manager
Steve Robertson Chris Bainbridge,City Clerk
Chuck Simpson
Kathe Williams
Alternate Commissioner: Mike Moore
Others Present: three citizens
Meeting Summary: The meeting was convened at 4:00 p.m.
Mr. Whitehead distributed and explained copies of an updated version of the compensation data he had
provided at an earlier meeting as a few more cities responded, but said the data substantially remains the
same; he noted this group previously discussed benefits; and explained that he compiled the data on this as
shown;he mentioned that in looking at this in terms of the cost to the city,the word `cost' could be changed
to `benefits' of the individual councilmember.Mr.Whitehead explained that in response to our request about
having a range of costs,Mr. Whitehead distributed copies of`Council Benefits Costs' which shows a range
of city costs for years 2016,2017, and 2018 for just the councilmember,for the councilmember and spouse,
and for the full family(which is the councilmember, a spouse and two or more additional dependents), and
also included on that handout, is the average actual monthly costs; he explained that the lower figure is the
least costly benefit plan, and then the highest costly benefit plan for each noted year; and noted these figures
are from the budget showing what was actually spent in covering councilmembers, so the average spent for
benefits per councilmember was$1,478 in 2016,$1,778 in 2017,and$1,490 in 2018,which figures included
the last month for 2018.Mr. Whitehead noted the average is higher in 2017 as compared with 2018,because
we had one more councilmember who covered their full family; and the plans the council was on in 2017
sunsetted, so they took a step down in coverage beginning January 2018, and because of that,the City also
paid less, so all in all, it's about $1500 per month per councilmember, which includes health, dental, and
vision; and they can choose which plan they want and the City picks up the difference in cost. There was
some discussion about the cost of benefits, and what the councilmember pays and what the city pays, and
Mr. Driskell noted that is a council choice and is not determined by staff, and explained that these costs will
vary from year to year,for the councilmember and for the city.Mr. Simpson said personally he likes to take
the budget figure and divided it by the number of councilmembers.Mr.Whitehead also noted on that handout,
there is a `health reimbursement account' which was implemented to help pay for medical benefits, and that
amount is determined by a resolution passed by Council. Mr. Whitehead further explained that number
reflects the deductible for that particular plan,so the City decided to cover the deductible,which is an annual
cost,and which can only be used for certain medical expenses as determined by the IRS.
Salary Commission Meeting Summary 12-06-2018 Page 1 of 3
Mr. Gothmann said he feels that the benefits should be irrelevant to this commissions' decision,as the charge
for this commission is salary and not benefits,also that the benefits are determined by a resolution passed by
council, and that council could decide at any time,not to offer any health insurance benefits; hence he said
this commission should focus on the salary, and use comparative salaries of other places. Mr. Gothmann
added that any salary figure that this commission decides on could be increased or decreased based on other
factors, such as benefits,or analysis of their workload,or citizen comments. Mr.Driskell said he thinks this
answers the question of what is a round number for benefits for council; he brought attention to the sheet
showing compensation of other jurisdictions, and said Mr. Whitehead continues to gather additional data.
Mr. Driskell said we continue to collect data, and once we get the survey questions from council, that will
give us important data, and from there we will be able to draft a survey to be placed among other places,on
the city's website.
Ms. Williams distributed a handout showing Moody's ratings; she suggested that the city of Shoreline is no
longer very similar to our city; and that growth rate and financial health might be something else to consider
in addition to benefits. Mr. Simpson said he simply took the salaries of the mayor of mayor cities, then
divided that by ten,and took out the high and the low,and the larger cities as well as the smaller cities came
out to between $1300 and $1400 a month; and for councilmembers it was $1,000 to $1,200.Mr. Gothmann
also distributed copies of his updated linear regressions showing only the council-manager cities, and he
briefly went over some of those figures on the two graphs; he noted the `bonus' for being a mayor averaged
to about 30%,and that is what our city has been paying.
Concerning the list of committees our Councilmembers are associated with,Ms. Bainbridge explained that
this is just informational to let this commission know the various committees; and she mentioned that
different committees have different workloads,that STA would represent a large commitment,where Visit
Spokane would not,and committees like Wastewater Policy only meet annually.Mr.Driskell stated that this
helps the commission have a little better understanding of some of the council's commitments,but there is a
lot of variation.
Ms. Williams asked about the idea of having an escalation clause or have a salary tied to some index and
Mr.Driskell explained that we are not precluded by state statute,but it is not something we have done before;
he said staff members don't have an automatic escalator or COLA (cost of living adjustment), and part of
that is reflective of council's desire. Mr. Simpson suggested that once the salary is established to put in a
percentage the same as given to the city administrator, which suggestion prompted discussion about who
determines the city manager's salary. Mr. Driskell stated that Council determines the city manager's salary
so tying council's salary to the city manager's increase, would be tying their own raises into the city
administrator's raises,which does not fall into the state statues procedure for changing council's salary.Mr.
Driskell also noted that at any time, any citizen or councilmember could reconvene this commission. Mr.
Whitehead added that if there was a decline in the economy and the council automatically received a raise,
when most citizens would not due to economic decline, that could cause concern among citizens. Mr.
Gothmann remarked that he feels councilmembers aren't here for the pay, but they are here because they
want to serve the citizens and do something for the city,while Mr.Driskell said he agreed,he also noted that
if we don't offer a fair wage,we won't attract good candidates.
Going back to the data from Mr.Whitehead,Ms.Williams asked how often those other cities change salaries
and could we get that data; said if we are comparing salaries to those set five years ago, some of those cities
might be on the verge of changing. Mr. Whitehead said he would have to research that and Mr. Driskell
suggested waiting until we have as much information on that blue sheet as possible, then determine which
cities this commission wants to use for comparative purposes, and then get the most recent updated figures
just from the cities to use in our comparisons.Mr.Whitehead also noted the historical average annual inflation
rate is 2.5%. Concerning comparing other cities,Mr. Simpson suggested not comparing cities in the Puget
Sound area since home values are twice the value of our homes,therefore,those cities and our cities are not
equal.
Salary Commission Meeting Summary 12-06-2018 Page 2 of 3
Mr.Driskell said that at the last meeting,Mr. Simpson asked him to check state law about considerations on
being on this commission, in that Mr. Gothmann works for the Current magazine which is owned by
Councilmember Wick.Mr.Driskell said he researched the statutes,and having Mr.Gothmann in his capacity
as working for the Current,is not precluded by state law;that his employment status was known by Council
and the Mayor at the time of recommending him for this commission, and there is no legal reason why he
can't be on this commission. Mr. Simpson thanked Mr.Driskell and said he brought up the issue because he
thought some citizens might bring up that concern.
Public Comments were solicited. Ms. Barb Howard, Spokane Valley: said she saw an article when Diana
Wilhite was mayor that she spent 30 hours a week or better on committees and other things; said they put in
a lot of time promoting our city; she also asked if any councilmember makes an insurance claim, does that
cause the insurance rates to increase. Mr.Whitehead explained that we are part of an insurance pool through
AWC (Association of Washington Cities), and we are part of thousands in their trust; said claims or lack of
claims can impact our rates as insurance rates are based on claim rates;with having seven people with typical
medical expenses, there will probably not be any noticeable rate change as they access their benefits. Ms.
Howard said she also likes the idea of putting money aside for them, and Mr.Whitehead explained that each
plan has an out-of-pocket maximum,and those funds are usually used to cover deductibles and out-of-pocket
expenses; and he added that preventive care usually has no out-of-pocket expenses. Mr. Bruce Foreman,
Spokane Valley: said he feels most people look for citizen servants as councilmembers; said it is good to
look at data but most isn't relevant; said it seems we have a market full of people who want to become
councilmembers; and said he wants people on the council who don't have to work,perhaps retired folks; and
concerning benefits, said it is a lot of money when you add in all the benefits.
Mr.Driskell said that while it is true that retired people might have more time,we also want a broad view of
what the community should look and feel like, and someone with a young family could give that view on
needs like parks and walking paths,and again stated that having a broader view of what the community needs
are is probably better addressed having younger people and retired people.
Concerning the task of this commission,Mr. Robertson said that this commission should only be concerned
with salaries and not benefits,and Mr. Driskell agreed,adding that this commission's task is to identify what
an appropriate salary would be,taking into account different activities councilmembers have to do,and when
the commission was active in 2006,they also had that task but they at least had benefits in mind, but didn't
base the salary on the benefits;and said the figures came in roughly comparable to similar jurisdictions at the
time, and again stated that yes, the primary focus is salary. Mr. Robertson also asked if that state statute
default amount when first forming a city is still the same as it was in 2006, and after checking,Mr.Driskell
said it has not changed: $400 for councilmembers and$500 for the mayor. Mr.Driskell noted that once we
get the information back from the brief survey of councilmember's time,then we can work on salary ranges
for the citizen survey,with one question for the council, and one for the mayor.
It was determined that this commission will meet again December 13 at 4 p.m. and December 20 at 4 p.m.
Mr. Simpson said he will be out of town December 23 through January 11, and said he has no problems if
this commission meets while he is gone.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Salary Commission Meeting Summary 12-06-2018 Page 3 of 3