1965/05/058627
C%ty Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MIN~IES - May 4, 1965, 1:30
9. ?h al[ g=a ng sh il conform to--ordi an 19 0.
10. That the alignment of the south tract boundaTy and any points of access
be approved by the State Division of Highways.
11. That the Sasta Ana River levee shall be revetted in the location and
in a manner*meeting the_approval of the Orange County Flood Control
District, add including aftve (5) foot chain link fence along that
portion of the tract adjacent to the Santa Aha River.
12. That the easement for the "drainage facility." shall be given in fee
· o the Orange County Flood Control District of adequate wtdth to be
improved as required by the Orange County Flood Control District and
including a maintenance road and a five (5) foot chain link fence on
all sides and gates on all streets.
MOTION CARRIED.
AD3OUR~ENT..~. Councilman Dutton moved to adjourn to May 5, 1965, 7:00 P.M., and
also moved Waiver of further notice of said adjournment. Councilman Schutte
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNED: 8:15 P.M.
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - May 5, 1965, 7:00
The City Council of the City',o~ Anahet~'met in adjourned regular meeting.
PRESENI: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Schutte, Chandler and Pebley.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Krein.
PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Mu~doch.
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY: 3er~y Brody.
CITY CLERK: Dene M. Williams.
PERSONNEL DIRECTOR~ Roy E. Heissner.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Pebley.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Schutte led the Assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
The Mayor Pro /em announced that the meeting was scheduled to
receive recommendations and comments concerning pending salary adjustments.
from City employees and City employee organizations.
Mr. Edward M. Hartnel, President of Anaheim Police Association,
addressed the Council recommending the following: ·
1. Seven and one half percent salary increase for Patrolmen.
2. Payroll deduction for police ltfe insurance.
3. Clothing allowance adjustment for Warrant Officers..
In briefing the contents of written material submitted,
reported that a Patrolman salary has been out of line for the last four years~
and that upon ch~cking the formula used in deriving the recommended salary,
it was found that the figures used were those contained in the League of
California ~ities Survey of the precedt~gyear, as a result, by the first
of tbs year 196~,Anahetm's patrolmen salary ranked ninth in the County.
He called attention to the training and'education required and
the apparent competition between cities for qualified patrolmen.
With reference to recommendation concerning patrolmen on warrant
duty, Mr. Hartnel referred to his written comments justifying said re-
commendations.
8628
GXtv'H&ll, Anaheim., CalXfornta.-"COONCIL MINUTES - ~ay 5, 1965~ 7=00 P.~. .......
........... C°Unc{lma~. Ch~ndier advised that tt was his understanding-that
a ~lotht~g allowance'was Justtf~ed..bgly~_when a particular job ~e~uired
special type clothing not ordinarily worn.
Mr. Hart~el reported that it was his understanding the five
percent differential between patrolmen assigned to detective duty, was
because ~erformance of said duties require wbacin~ ti'qilian ~l~5iog.
In answer to further inqqiry of Councilman Chandler, ~r. ~urdoch
reported that the ftve percent differential in salary was because of the
fact that these patrolmen were assigned to detective type duties, which
is considered to carry greater respons!btltty, further, their hours and
services are considerably different; it is a duty differential and has
nothing to do with a clothing 911owance.
Mr. A. 3. Coughltn, 2316 East Romneya Drtv~, Anaheim, Business
Manager Of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local ~7,
addressed the Counci~ ~n]~at, f of the City Electrical Workers.
In summart~in9 written comments and recommendations filed, ~r.
Coughl~n adqi.se~t~at thel9 bas~ disagreement was due to the fact that
Construction Ltnemah and Constr.uc~on Electrician rates were not included
in the survey. Further, in his opinion, the Line Crew Foreman, Sub-station
Electrician Foreman and Apprentice ~tapman alassifications should move
.five percent in relation to the ben.~h mark indications for Journeyman
Lineman.
Mr. Coughlin ~eported that a request has been made for re-
evaluation and study of Senior EIectrical Meter Tester, as their findings
indicate thi~ position to he as high or.higher than Journeyman;.tineman ,and
Electrician, arid also r. equested a study made on the present City Insurance
Program.
Ot~er suggestions made and briefly explained were:
e~
· :t. Voluntary payroll dedUctions of Union dues.
2A Compensation for unused sick leave.
:;3. Establishment of an up-grade rate f~,r emp~lOyqes assigned to a higher
classification on ~ %~mporary basis. ' ''
'~r, Murdoch in explaining his position and that of the Personnel
'Director in axrSving at the recommended salary adjustments, and in answer
~o potnt~ raised, advised that rega~ding the obsolescence of survey data
~se~ in ~.~iving at the recommended salaries for the position of Patrolman,
"thi$~.~as the data current at ~the time,of collection, generally prior to
March 1st. of the current year, and-.~he time lag i~ due somewhst' to the
period of time between th~ presentation of the recomm~ndatione and action
hy the City Coun~iiiJ Th~ time lag ~s recognized and f~.r that reason a
mid-year reanalysts for posmihl~ additional adJustmen~ has been ~ecommended.
Discussion was"he%.d concerning arriving at th~. "m~an" and the
Personnel Direo~o~ wac requested-.,to supply data hywhtch tk~ recommended
salary for ~Patre~m~n" was arrtv~d.
Rega.rdtn~ Rayroll deductions for life insurance an~ dues, Mr.
Murdoch reporte~'t~{~ with the'.new equipment this would pr~Seht no m6Chanic.al
problem, that his co'~o~rn would he the n~her of such requests as the~. '
limitation becomes ~ne'of space:on the cards, this in finality wot~l~be.
in accordance with Co~mctl poli~.y.
,. Regarding ~ra~ing'~"Mr~ Murdoch reported that' it was' found
t.hat appro-Xim$%ely on~:third of the time of Line Crew Forema~,.,is relieving
the HeavyCr~"~'~O'~n~)~i~S a ~ntinuing situation:, and~'S'~e~Uft ~he
recommendat%a~.%fo~,~fin~,~ew Foreman is a five percent'i.ncr~ase.
Mr..~rd°cJO j~viewed: the current Pr.o~)lem concerning the [oss:
el' L~en to .~,~'¢o~s~u~tien~:tra'da, i~nd e~lained s~t~.~:t'ak&6' in,
ef'fo~t tO~re%at~ cthe-:~e~v~c-es"~ J~orn~n Linemen.
8629
C.ity Hall, Anaheim, California -'COUNCIL MINUTES - May 5, 1965, 7:00 P.M,_
..... Regarding UnuSed sick leave Mr. Murdoch-reported that a i°t Of
study has been done in this area, however at the present time he was.not
prepared to ~ake a recommendation.
Regarding the Insurance Program, the City Manager advised that
the analysis has been completed and recommendations will be submitted soon
after action on the wage and salaries has been taken.
Mr. Frederick H. Ward~ appearing on behalffof th'~ Anaheim ~Munitipal
Employees Association, referred to written material previously submitted~.
advising that their analysis of the salary.surve~.~us~d b~ %h~'City indicates
a 4.36 percent increase movement during the last year, and for this reason,
have recommended a five percent increase for most employees. He explained
the basis and reasons for this recommendation and advised that the City of
Anaheim could not afford to ignore the gravitational pull of the Los Angeles
Metropolitan Labor Market on the ~alary structure, and noted that their
recommendations take into consideration this impact.
Mr. Ward called attention to specific classifications included in
their written material explaining the problems involved and requested further
consideration be given.
Briefly'reviewed was the position of the Anaheim Municipal Employees
Association concerning the following:
1. Partial payment for unused sick leave.
2. Payroll deductions for employee organization dues.
3. Improvement in the City's life insurance plan.
4. Employee orgagizatton membership rights.
In conclusion Mr. Ward recommended that the AGC Rates, or a
percentage thereof, be included in the survey data used to arrive at salary
recommendations in order to reflect a more realistic situation.
Mr. Murdoch advised with reference to the presentation and remarks
made by Mr. Ward, that one of the exceptional things taken into consideration
on any classification in the recommended salary adjustment, is the availabili-
t~,~or the ease of recruitment.. Further, with reference to the use of the
Los Angeles Labor Market, in his opinion, .since the industrial survey is
used, the effect of the Los Angeles Market is automatically considered.
Mr. Roy Heissner, Personnel Director, advised that most of the
points have been covered by the City Manager, however regarding payroll
deductions, another factor to be considered is the fact that we must work
within the frame work of State law as it pertains to employee organizations.
Regarding the AC~ Rates, these rates were not considered in the
salary recommendations. However the measures of central tendency which are
the basis for the bench mark positions are from private industry, and in
selecting the bench marks, the areas from which recruitment would be obtained,
are the areas considered.
There being no further evidence either oral or written presented,
Mayor Pro Tem Pebley thanked those present and announced that the matter
would be taken u~der advisement for further consideration.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Chandler moved to adjourn, Councilman Dutton seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNED: 9:35 P.M.
SIGNED __~._c_~, ~ City Clerk