Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Read Before Packet - 12/17/2019 - Memorandum From Jamie Heckman Re: Annual Salary Review Process - Supporting MaterialsϭϬƚŚ ϮϱƚŚ ϱϬƚŚ ϳϱƚŚ ϵϬƚŚ Ψϭϱϯ͕ϱϯϱ Ψϭϱϱ͕ϯϱϵ ΨϭϲϬ͕ϬϬϬ ΨϭϲϮ͕ϬϮϵ Ψϭϲϳ͕ϬϮϵ KƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶ ϮϬϭϴ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚ WŽƉƵůĂƚŝŽŶ ŶŶƵĂů ^ĂůĂƌLJ ŶŶƵĂů ŽŶƵƐ ŶŶƵĂů ZĞƚŝƌĞŵĞŶƚ ŶŶƵĂůĂƌ ůůŽǁĂŶĐĞ dKd>Ύ ĂƚĞŽĨ,ŝƌĞ ;LJĞĂƌͿ ĂƚĞŽĨ>ĂƐƚ ^ĂůĂƌLJ/ŶĐƌĞĂƐĞ dŚŽƌŶƚŽŶ ϭϯϵ͕ϰϯϲ ΨϭϲϮ͕ϬϮϵ Ψϱ͕ϬϬϬ Ψϭϲ͕ϮϬϯ Eͬ Ψϭϴϯ͕ϮϯϮ ϭϵϴϴ ĞĐͲϭϴ &ŽƌƚŽůůŝŶƐ ϭϲϳ͕ϴϯϬ Ψϭϱϱ͕ϯϱϵ Eͬ ΨϮϬ͕ϭϵϳ Eͬ Ψϭϳϱ͕ϱϱϲ ϭϵϴϵ :ĂŶͲϭϵ >ĂŬĞǁŽŽĚ ϭϱϲ͕ϳϵϴ Ψϭϲϴ͕ϲϴϱ Eͬ ΨϮϳ͕ϯϮϳ Ψϯ͕ϬϬϬ Ψϭϵϵ͕ϬϭϮ ϮϬϬϴ DĂƌͲϭϵ ƌǀĂĚĂ ϭϮϬ͕ϰϵϮ ΨϭϲϬ͕ϬϬϬ Eͬ ΨϮϬ͕ϴϯϮ Eͬ ΨϭϴϬ͕ϴϯϮ ϮϬϭϯ :ƵŶͲϭϴ >ŽǀĞůĂŶĚ ϳϳ͕ϰϰϲ Ψϭϰϴ͕ϲϯϳ Eͬ Ψϳ͕ϰϯϮ Eͬ Ψϭϱϲ͕Ϭϲϵ ϮϬϭϱ &ĞďͲϭϵ ƵƌŽƌĂ ϯϳϰ͕ϭϭϰ Ψϭϲϭ͕ϵϳϱ Eͬ ΨϭϮ͕ϬϬϬ Ψϱ͕ϳϰϮ Ψϭϳϵ͕ϳϭϳ ϮϬϭϲ ĞĐͲϭϴ >ŽŶŐŵŽŶƚ ϵϲ͕ϱϳϳ Ψϭϱϲ͕Ϯϳϴ Eͬ ΨϮϬ͕ϳϭϲ Eͬ Ψϭϳϲ͕ϵϵϰ ϮϬϭϲ :ĂŶͲϭϵ tĞƐƚŵŝŶƐƚĞƌ ϭϭϯ͕ϰϳϵ Ψϭϲϲ͕ϲϭϱ Eͬ Ψϭϳ͕Ϭϳϴ Ψϲ͕ϬϬϬ Ψϭϴϵ͕ϲϵϯ ϮϬϭϳ :ĂŶͲϭϵ 'ƌĞĞůĞLJ ϭϬϳ͕ϯϰϴ Ψϭϱϰ͕ϳϲϬ Eͬ Ψϵ͕Ϯϴϲ Eͬ Ψϭϲϰ͕Ϭϰϲ ϮϬϭϴ DĂƌͲϭϵ ŽƵůĚĞƌ ϭϬϳ͕ϯϱϯ ŚŝĞĨ:ƵĚŐĞ ĞŶĐŚŵĂƌŬŝƚŝĞƐDĂƌŬĞƚ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ĞĐĞŵďĞƌϭϳ͕ϮϬϭϵ ΎdŽƚĂůсŶŶƵĂů^ĂůĂƌLJнŶŶƵĂůŽŶƵƐнŶŶƵĂůZĞƚŝƌĞŵĞŶƚнŶŶƵĂůĂƌůůŽǁĂŶĐĞ ^ĂůĂƌLJWĞƌĐĞŶƚŝůĞƐ City Manager / City Attorney 2019 National Benchmark Cities Detail CITY, STATE POPULATION 2018 ACS Estimate POP LIKENESS SERVICE LIKENESS % COLLEGE STUDENTS COLLEGE STUDENTS LIKENESS SQUARE MILES S.M. LIKENESS DEMOGRAPHIC LIKENESS SCORE 2019 MEI Index** Credit Rating Moody and S&P Credit Rating Score High Performing Open Space / Land Use Cities*** High Performing Social Equity Cities**** University cities.org Baldridge Cities Bloomberg Mayors Challenge Winners Forbes Best Cities 2019 APPA Awards ICMA Excellence Award High Performing Total COMBINED LIKENESS SCORE Fort Collins, CO 167,830 0.00 0.00 21% 0.00 57 0.00 0 95 Aaa 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 0 Durham, NC 274,291 0.39 0.25 11% 0.90 108 0.47 0.50 69 Aaa 11 11 4 0.75 Austin, TX 964,254 0.83 0.00 10% 1.03 305 0.81 0.67 100 Aaa 11 1140.83 Tallahassee, FL 193,551 0.13 0.17 28% 0.26 104 0.45 0.26 99 Aa2 0 11130.96 Boulder, CO* 107,353 0.56 0.67 30% 0.32 26 1.19 0.69 96 Aaa 11 1 31.18 Sacramento, CA 508,529 0.67 0.00 9% 1.34 100 0.43 0.61 100 Aa2 01 12 1.81 Ann Arbor, MI 121,890 0.38 0.67 35% 0.41 28 1.04 0.61 100 Aa1 01 1 2 1.81 Naperville, IL 148,304 0.13 0.25 8% 1.66 39 0.45 0.61 65 Aaa 1 12 1.81 Asheville, NC 92,452 0.82 0.25 8% 1.51 41 0.39 0.73 N/A Aaa 11 2 1.87 Irving, TX 242,242 0.31 0.25 6% 2.23 68 0.16 0.74 36 Aaa 112 1.87 Plano, TX 288,061 0.42 0.25 6% 2.47 72 0.20 0.84 69 Aaa 1 12 1.92 Mesa, AZ 508,958 0.67 0.25 7% 1.93 439 0.87 0.93 56 Aa2 0 11 2 1.96 Oklahoma City, OK 649,021 0.74 0.25 6% 2.26 620 0.91 1.04 44 Aaa 1 12 2.02 Palo Alto, CA 66,666 1.00 0.67 6% 2.35 26 1.19 1.40 N/A Aaa 1 12 2.20 Santa Monica, CA 91,411 0.84 0.25 7% 1.82 8 5.77 2.14 100 Aaa 11 2 2.57 Eugene, OR* 171,245 0.02 0.67 17% 0.24 44 0.30 0.31 100 Aa1 01 1 3.65 Hayward, CA 159,620 0.05 0.00 9% 1.31 64 0.11 0.36 79 Aa2 01 1 3.68 Savannah, GA 145,862 0.15 0.67 14% 0.51 109 0.48 0.44 40 Aa1 0 11 3.72 Wilmington, NC 122,607 0.37 0.67 15% 0.38 42 0.37 0.48 15 Aa2 0 11 3.74 Greensboro, NC 294,722 0.43 0.25 12% 0.72 132 0.57 0.49 79 Aa1 01 1 3.75 Anaheim, CA* 352,005 0.52 0.00 9% 1.42 51 0.12 0.52 85 Aa2 0 11 3.76 *Previous peer cities **Provided as informational only; not included in Likeness Scores ***Cities considered to be high performing in open space and land use were provided by Natural Areas Staff. Some of these considerations include open space by acres or cites that are employing distinguishable programs and/or studies around open‐green space usage. DEMOGRAPHIC ELEMENTS ****Cities considered to be high performing in Social Equity were provided by Sustainability Staff. High performing elements include cities with a focus on equity that have an emphasis around dissolving disparities created through identity and socioeconomic status, as well as supplemental services to vulnerable immigrant and undocumented community members. HIGH PERFORMING ELEMENTS