HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 05 20 Regular Item A
COMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM A
REGULAR X
CONSENT
INFORMATIONAL
May 20. 1996
Executive Session/Special Meeting
MGR /(WIl1. !DEPT
Authorization
REQUEST: The City Manager requesting the City Commission to elect alternative
compensation methods for the FY 97.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agenda item is to provide the Commission with alternatives
for improving the City's Compensation System for FY 97 and to provide the
Commission with the City Manager's recommendation.
NOTE 1: Several errors have been corrected that occurred in the Cody Report distributed
earlier,
NOTE 2: The Cody Report distributed earlier estimated implementation costs on the basis
of the implementation being completed the date of the report.
The City has recalculated these costs on the basis of the Cody Plan being
implemented on October 1, 1996. As shown below this method substantially
reduced the implementation cost.
.DU
Alternative A
Alternative B
Alternative C
Cody Report Cost
196,000.00
108,000,00
69,000,00
City Recalculated Cost
116,000.00
62,000.00
34,000.00
By%
Alternative A
Alternative B
Alternative C
3,8%
2,1%
1.3%
2,3%
1.2%
,7%
Page 1
NOTE 3:
See attachment 2-1 for a detailed analysis of the cost of implementing the Cody
Plan Alternatives.
NOTE 4:
In the preparation of the Agenda Item Report a not to exceed 5% cost target was
established for pay plan improvements in order to limit pay plan improvements to
the overall increase in revenues for FY 97,
CONSIDERATIONS:
In FY 95 the Commission began a program through Cody and Associates for
making the City pay plan market competitive for recruiting and retaining city
employees, The City adopted recommended pay raises and introduced a merit pay
plan, This report recommends replacement of the current Merit Plan for a plan
this is less complicated and easier to administer.
On 2/12/96 the City Commission authorized Cody & Associates to update the
plan for consideration in the FY 97 budget. Cody has completed that study and
presented three alternative plans for consideration.
On 4/30/96 the City Commission adopted a plan for improving the City's
Pension Plan. This plan indicated a mandatory 2% employee contribution. At
the time of adoption the City Manager advised the Commission that the
employees contribution could be offset by improvements to the pay plan if the
Commission desired.
ISSUE ANALYSIS:
There are three basic issues to be considered by the Commission relative
to pay plan policy for FY 97 as follows:
Issue I - Pension Plan Offset
Does the Commission desire to offset the cost of the recent mandatory
contribution to the retirement system with a 1 % across the board increase
for all employees with one or more years?
The benefit of this alternative is obvious, A 1 % across the board increase for all
employees with one or more years of service would fully offset the mandatory
pension contribution regardless of merit evaluation. Therefore, every employee
would at least be insured of getting enough pay increase to off set the mandatory
contribution for FY 97.
The downside to this option is that it takes away funds that could be utilized for
updating salary ranges or merit increases
Issue II - Cody Pay Plan Recommendations (Range Updates)
Page 2
Which alternatives if any recommended by the Cody Study does the
Commission desire to implement?
It is important to remember that the Cody Study deals exclusively with pay
ranges not salary increases for employees, The cost for implementing the
recommended pay ranges involves only the cost of getting every employee
to the minimum of recommended pay range. It does not attempt to
maintain relative pay differentials resulting from tenure or past merit increases.
Pay studies of this type almost always present three problems as follows:
a) Newer employees often get pay increases in order to get them to the minimum
of the proper range. Older employees do not usually require these adjustments
because they are already making enough money to be assigned to the new
ranges without a pay increase. This phenomenon usually causes what is known
as front end salary compression. This means that the employee with longer
service and new employees tend to get bunched up near the front end of the
new range, This can and usually does cause significant levels of
discontent among employees with advanced years of service. This is
unavoidable unless policy makers are willing to give additional adjustments to
employees with longer service. For example, policy makers could establish a
policy to get every employee to the minimum of the new range and to give an
extra 2 or 3% to every employee with more than one year of service. The
problem with this strategy is that it usually increases the cost of
implementation beyond the means of the client to implement.
b) Often times City's simply don't have the money to implement the new ranges
in their entirety. Therefore a phasing approach is needed to implement the
plan, As shown in Table II to stay within the 5% cost target full
implementation of the Cody recommendation (Cody Alternative
"A") would require the Commission to choose between a scaled down merit
plan and a 1 % across the board offset of the Mandatory Pension Contribution.
However, election of Cody Pan "B" would provide for both a scaled down
merit plan and a 1 % mandatory pension offset.
c) As indicated in Table I a disproportionate share of the benefit for
implementing the plan in its entirety (Cody Alternative "A") occurs in the
Police Department.
Thus, keeping pay plan improvements at or below the 5% target,
implementation of the Cody Plan in its entirety (Cody Alternative "A") would
cause four problems:
1) inequitable distribution of pay plan improvements to the Police Department.
2) substantial salary compression in the Police Department
3) scaling back of the current Merit Plan
Page 3
4) eliminating the alternative of including a Merit Plan and 1 % mandatory
pension offset in one package.
As indicated in Table I, to lessen the effects of Alternative "A", Cody has
presented two additional alternatives, Alternative "B" reduces fire and police
ranges by 5%. Alternative "c" reduces fire and police ranges by 10%.
Alternative C most equitably distributes plan improvement
benefits, has the least salary compression, and is most affordable. However,
Alternative C would result in the pay plan for fire and police being substantially
below market rates. This could be overcome by increasing fire and police ranges
again in FY 98 while holding others constant.
As shown in Table II, Alternative "B" provides an excellent compromise between
Alternate "A" and "C". Alternative "B" moderates benefit distribution inequities
and salary compression. It brings salaries close to market rates while allowing the
inclusion of a scaled down but sound Merit Plan and the 1 % mandatory pension
plan offset.
Issue ill - Merit Increases
How much money does the Commission desire to appropriate for merit
increases?
The current merit plan is troublesome in three ways:
1) Its increases are benchmarked against the minimum of the range rather than
against current pay. As such pay increases are stated as an increase over range
minimum rather than current pay. An employee scoring a perfect score over a
4 year period would get a 10% increase in year one, a 8.3% increase in year
two, a 7.7% increase in year three and a 7.1% increase in year four, rather than
getting a 10% increase each year.
2) The current plan is designed to get employees to the top of the range in four
years, A very short period of time when compared to most pay plans, An
accellerated pay plan obviously costs more money to implement.
3) The Plan cost whatever it cost. In other words, there is no gross limit placed
upon it. Therefore if all employees scored outstanding, it could result in an
overall 7,1 % increase in payroll cost in FY 97,
The current merit plan by the Commission will cost an estimated $301,000 in FY
96 representing a 5.8% increase in salaries,
Considering that City revenue grows at an average rate of approximately 5%
annually, a 5.8 increase in salaries is not affordable, To leave room for other
needs, normal pay increases should be held between 3 & 4 % each year. This
Page 4
does not take into consideration years when extra funds are needed to update the
plan, Ideally, considering the growth of revenues, increases should be held to
around 5% in years the plan is updated.
There are two alternatives for reducing the annual cost of the current Merit Plan
costs as follows:
1) Add two additional steps to the current merit plan. Based upon experience to
date this would reduce merit increases to an estimated 3.8% per year.
2) Replace the current model with the more conventional open range model. This
model provides a non-incremented pay range expressed as a minimum and
maximum. The range is established by market studies. This model allows
policy makers to establish each year the gross amount they are willing to
appropriate for merit increases stated as a per cent of current salary.
For example based upon current experience an appropriation of 2.8% for merit
increases would provide for the following merit increases in FY 97:
average or standard
above standard
outstanding
2% increase over current pay
4% increase over current pay
6% increase over current pay
Under this plan a person making outstanding could reach the top
of the range in seven years if the plan remained at current pay levels,
This alternative is much simpler to administer and provides policy members with
more operating flexibility in balancing pay increases with other needs.
The Step Plan Alternative
Another alternative merit plan exists. This plan is the traditional incremental
step plan. This plan has fallen out of favor in recent years. This plan provides for
incremental step increases based upon merit. The merit increases are usually
provided in 2 1\2% or 5% "increments".
The benefit of the incremental Step Plan is the element of certainty it provides for
increases and a small decrease in payroll accounting. Conversely its drawbacks
are its inflexibility and higher cost of maintenance. This has resulted in many
governmental organizations abandoning them in favor of annual across the board
Increases,
Examples of the incremental step plan and open range pay plan are provided
below.
Page 5
Step Plan Example
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Range 20
$100 $105 $110 $115 $120 $125 $130
Open Range Examples
Range 20
Minimum $100
Maximum $130
FUNDING:
Approximately 80% of the funding will come from the General Fund and 20%
from the Utility Enterprise Fund, Funding requirements will be based upon the
Alternatives chosen by the Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
I am recommending the Commission consider the following pay policies for FY
97:
a) Adoption of Cody Plan B.
b) Adoption of a non-incremental open range Merit Plan Model in lieu of the
current model.
c) Appropriation of2.8% gross payroll for merit increases allowing a 2%,4% 6%
spread based upon level of merit.
c) 1% across the board for all employees with one or more years of service.
These recommendations provide a balanced approach to the pay plan improvements and
can be implemented for an overall 5.0% increase in payroll. This compares ideally
with the 5% goal.
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE:
It is recommended that the pay plan be implemented as follows:
Cody Plan improvements
October 1, 1996
Merit Pay
On position anniversary dates beginning October 1,
1996.
Page 6
1 % Mandatory Pension Offset
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1
Attachment 2-A
Attachment 2-B
Attachment 2-C
Attachment 2-D
COMMISSION ACTION:
October 1, 1996 for all persons with one or more
years servIce,
On the first employment anniversary date
following October 1, 1996 for all employees with
less than one year of service on October 1, 1996.
Cody Plan
City Calculated Cost of Implementation
Current Merit Plan
Revised Merit Plan with Cody Revisions
Revised Merit Plan with Cody Revisions
Adding 2 steps
Page 7
TABLE I
Alternative "A"
$ I %
Cost By Dept.
# OF PERSONS
GETTING INCREASE
AVERAGE
INCREASE
Police
Fire
All Other
TOTAL
75,849
23,514
17,019
116,382
65.2%
20,2%
14,6%
100%
40
18
21
1,896
1,306
810
Alternative "B"
Police
Fire
All Other
TOTAL
38,456
6,044
17,019
61,519
62,5%
9.8%
27.7%
100%
29
12
21
1,326
504
810
Alternative "C"
Police 15,613 46.4% 15 1,041
Fire 1,009 3,0% 1 1,009
All Other 17,019 50.6% 21 810
33,641 100%
(1) In Alternative "8" Police and Fire Salary Ranges are reduced 5% below Alternative "A".
(2) In Alternative "e" Police and Fire Salary Ranges are reduced 1 0% below Alternative "A".
Page 8
TABLE II
Optional Payroll Scenarios
Manager Recommendation
Adoption of Cody Plan "B"
Adoption of 2%/4%/6% Open Range Merit Plan
1 % Across the Board Mandatory Retirement Offset
TOTAL
1.2%
2.8%
1.0%
5.0%
Alternative 1
Adoption of Cody Plan "C"
Adoption of 2%/4%/6% Open Range Merit Plan
1 % Across the Board for all Employees
TOTAL
Alternative 2
Adoption of Cody Plan "B"
Adoption of 2%/4%/6% Open Range Merit Plan
TOTAL
Alternative 3
Adoption of Cody Plan "A"
Adoption of 1 % Across the Board for all Employees
TOTAL
Alternative 4
Adoption of Cody Plan "A"
Adoption of 2%/4%/6% Open Ranage Merit Plan
TOTAL
Alternative 5
Adoption of Cody Plan "C"
Amend Current Merit Model to Six Steps
TOTAL
Alternative 6
Adoption of Cody Plan "B"
Amend Current Merit Model to Six Steps
TOTAL
,7%
2,8%
~
4.5%
1,2%
~
4.0%
2.3%
~
3.7%
2.3%
~
5,1%
,7%
U.%
4.4%
1.2%
U.%
4.9%
Page 9
ATTACHMENT
I
CODY PLAN
SALARY STUDY
CI1Y OF WINTER SPRINGS
APRIL, 1996
~
Cody & .9lssociates} 1:nc.
MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS
305 Jack Drive, Cocoa Beach, FL 32931
(407) 783-3720
Cody & cl!1.1.oeiate;1., [] ne.
~~NAGEMENTCONSULTANTS
, 305 Jack Drive
Cocoa Beach, FL 32931
(407) 783-3720.
April 19, 1996
Mr. Ronald Mclemore
City Manager
City of Winter Springs
1126 East State Road 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708
Dear Mr. Mclemore:
We have completed our assignment and are submitting the final report of our Salary
Study for all positions in the service of the City of Winter Springs.
This report has been prepared as an accounting of our assignment and to record our
approach. The recommendations and comments in the report reflect our objective
appraisal based on analysis and discussion to the extent possible within the scope of
the assignment.
Our objective was to maintain the Pay Plan that is equitable to both the employees
and to the taxpayers of the City.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you and express our thanks for the
cooperation and courtesy which was extended to us.
Respectfully submitted,
?tz t t2
N. E. Pellegrin
Senior Partner,
SALARY STUDY
FOR
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
Table of Contents
SECTION
PAGE
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
STUDY ASSIGNMENT AND OBJECTIVES
2
II
SALARY PHASE ..................................
4
A.
SALARY SURVEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
1 . Selection of Survey Classes .................. 4
2. Identification of Labor Market . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Secondary Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Survey Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
B.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE SALARY SCHEDULES .........
6
C.
SALARY FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS ................
7
D.
OTHER SALARY SURVEY CONSIDERATIONS
8
III IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS ................. 9
ENCLOSURE
1 - RECOMMENDED SALARY PLAN (Alternative A)
ENCLOSURE
2 - RECOMMENDED SALARY PLAN (Alternative B)
ENCLOSURE
3 - RECOMMENDED SALARY PLAN (Alternative C)
ENCLOSURE
4 - RECOMMENDED SALARY SCHEDULE
Cody & A.uoc:iata, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
This report, on the study of the Salaries for the City of Winter Springs, contains details
of all elements of the Study. In preparing this report, Cody & Associates, Inc. has
used its best efforts and has taken reasonable care. To an extent, the Report relies
on information and data received from third parties in which Cody & Associates, Inc.
has assumed the accuracy and completeness there of.
Cody & Associates, Inc. cannot guarantee that any particular result will follow from
any action taken on the basis of this Report. The information and opinions expressed
in this Report have significance only within the context of the entire Report. No parts
of this report should be used or relied upon outside of that context.
This Study is not an end in itself, but a vital element in a sound personnel manage-
ment program for the City of Winter Springs. A good overall pay plan requires
continuous work and polishing, once the plan is implemented.
Adjustments will continually have to be made to reflect changes in the labor market
place in order to maintain a current and equitable compensation plan and system.
Cody & AssociaJa, Inc.
1-1
I
STUDY ASSIGNMENT AND OBJECTIVES
The City retained the services of Cody & Associates, Inc. to conduct a Salary Study
Update for all positions under the jurisdiction of the City.
In our approach to updating the Pay Plan, we were concerned with the following basic
obiectives:
A. Formulating a Pay Plan that will assist in reducina turnover costs and oromote
careers with the City.
B. Designing a Pay Plan that will attract aualified oersonnel to render the services
that the City provides.
C. Establishing objective, standardized, methods for evaluating jobs, establishing
salary ranges, and determining individual salary levels.
D. Establishing equitable relationships of one job to another within the work force
(equal pay for equal work).
E. To insure fair and equal compensation opportunities for equal contributions to
the effective operations of the City.
F. Maintain current Salarv Ranqes which are competitive with reasonably similar
positions in the labor market where the City recruits for employees and which
are consistent with the economic conditions in Seminole County and surround-
ing counties.
Cody & A.uociDta, flU:.,
1-2
To achieve these objectives, we divided the assignment into two (2) major segments:
A. Wage Survey.
B. Report Preparation and Presentation.
Cody & ~ flU:.
1-3
II
SAlARY PRASE
The Salary Phase of the Study included the following:
A. SALARY SURVEY
The objective of this survey was to determine what must be provided in terms
of salaries in order to obtain or retain personnel; in other words, to be
competitive with other employers recruiting from the same labor market. The
steps included:
1. SELECTION OF SURVEY CLASSES (Bench Marks)
We tried to utilized all of the present classes in the salary survey in order
to get the best possible data. These classes represented all of the
occupations and levels in the City's organization and those occupations
which could be compared with other employers.
2. IDENTIFICATION OF LABOR MARKET
The relevant labor markets to be surveyed were identified. One market
was the local operating area of Seminole and surrounding counties for
the positions which are recruited from this geographical location. The
agencies surveyed were:
Cody & A.uocitJJa, Inc.
1-4
LOCAL
City of Orlando
City of Maitland
City of A Itamonte Springs
City of Winter Park
City of Casselberry
City of Ocoee
City of Oviedo
City of Sanford
City of Lake Mary
City of Longwood
City of Apopka
Orange County
Seminole County
Orange County School District
REGIONAL/STA TE (Manaaerial/Professional)
City of A Itamonte Springs
City of Apopka
City of Casselberry
City of Cooper City
City of Fort Walton Beach
City of Jacksonville Beach
City of Leesberg
City of Longwood
City of New Port Richey
City of New Smyrna Beach
City of Ocoee
City of Oviedo
City of Temple Terrace
City of Venice
City of Greenacres
City of Edgewater
City of Coconut Creek
Cody & AuociaJa, In&..
1-5
3. ' SECONDARY INFORMATION
Secondary salary data included regional surveys recently completed by
our company and information from our data base.' This information was
used as a guide in developing the salary schedule recommendations.
4. SURVEY METHOD
In compiling this data, we not only obtained their minimum and maximum
salaries but the number of positions in each classification. This
separates the larger agencies from the smaller ones and equitably
indicates what the market is.
Another step we use in our calculations, in order to provide the most
accurate data possible, is to apply the standard deviation principle. The
standard deviation is the most commonly used indicator of variability of
a distribution of data. The usual and most accepted interpretation is in
terms of the percentage of cases included within one standard deviation
below the mean to one standard deviation above the mean. This range
on the scale includes about two-thirds (2/3) of the cases in the distribu-
tion. Data was entered into our data base and then edited to ensure that
the data was reasonable and representative and had been accurately
reported and recorded. Responses were eliminated when they appeared
atypical or exhibited extreme values in wages.
Cody & Auociata, Inc.
1-6
B. DEVELOPMENT OF THE SALARY SCHEDULES
The. objective of this aspect of the Study was to compile the results of the
salary survey and to update appropriate salary ranges for all the positions
covered.
C. SALARY FINDINGS AND ANAL YSIS
In analyzing the City's current salary ranges, we determined how these ranges
compare with the labor market where the City recruits for applicants.
We found that most of the present salary ranges are below the survey averages
recommended (Enclosure 1).
VVe are also recommending adjusting the maximum rates (5%) to reflect market
trends and in consideration of the retention aspect of the pay plan.
D. OTHER SALARY SURVEY CONSIDERA TIONS
The salaries in Seminole County and the surrounding counties have seen
consistent increases over the past few years. Seminole County is ranked as the
twelfth (12th out of 67 counties) cost of living area in the State, according to
the recent Florida Price Level Index Study. This means that Seminole County
is .32% below the State-wide average cost of living. This was considered in
the overall analysis when using State-wide salary data collected for certain jobs
and'drawing appropriate comparisons.
Cody & As.JociaJes, 1nc.
1-7
The salary considerations for the next fiscal year throughout the region of the
public and private sector agencies range from approximately three to five
percent (3%-5%) on an average.
G1dy & Auot:ioJa, Inc.
1-8
III
IMPLEMENTATION
To implement the proposed Salary Plan, we recommend a number of alternatives and
will discuss the relative equity and effect of each.
AL TERNA TIVE A
1. Adopt the Classification Salary Ranges and Salary Schedule as recom-
mended in this report.
2. Adjust the salaries of employees who fall below the minimum recom-
mended to the minimum rate.
3. Any employee presently being paid above the maximum for their pay
range, should be "frozen" at their present pay rate.
:rffls-eest-4ef-imfHe-A1eA-'8Rtr~t&I=-f-la.'8\J8-A-.is-~ate.Lv-~e-l::f.undI.e.d..Nioe.t~=slx
:r~8-9ffi1ar~-aA~J.y--t.$.:1-99,..ooo..o.ot .
This cost of implementing Alternative "A" is approximately One Hundred Sixteen
Thousand Dollars annually (116,000.00).
Cody & AuociJlJes, Inc..
1-9
j
-
I
I
I
Ai TERNA TIVE B
1. Adopt the Classification Salary Ranges and Salary Schedule as recom-
mended in this report.
2. Adjust the salaries of employees who fall below the minimum recom-
mended to the minimum rate.
i
3.
Any employee presently being paid above the maximum for their pay
range, should be "frozen" at their present pay rate.
Ii
!
4.
Decrease the recommended pay ranges of the Police and Fire classifica-
tions by five percent (5 %). The Police and the Fire classifications were
targeted since the majority of the implementation cost is in these two
departments.
1=f:te-eo5t-fflr-fffif:)feffiefrftflg--Attefmrtfve-B-i5-apprcrximatety-Efrre-Hurrdred-Etght-=riTa05Clmi
~e~aT&~A~~~~~~,~~8t.
The Cost for implementing Alternative "B" is approximately Sixty Two Thousand
Dollars annually (62,000.00).
AL TERNA TIVE C
1. Adopt the Classification Salary Ranges and Salary Schedule as recom-
mended in this report.
2. Adjust the salaries of employees who fall below the minimum recom-
mended to the minimum rate.
Cody & AuociaJD, lru:..
1-10
~
....
3.
Any employee presently being paid above the maximum for their pay
range, should be "frozen" at their present pay rate.
Ml
=
4.
Decrease the recommended pay ranges of the Police and Fire classifica-
tions by ten percent (10%1.
rh~-~oont-Te5DtL-rrr-a-~rcnt-c~-~-Sbct1r-nTI1e-49Tao5arrrt-~~~nDrcrt~
(..$..69TOoo..OO .
This wo~ilid result in a overall cost of Thirty Four Thousand Dollars annually
($3~,OOO.OO).
Cody & A.uociate:J, Inc.
1-11
l'lAY 15 '96 09: 59 CODY & ASSOCIATES 407/783-3720
P.2/12
"
,
;~
i,
1,
RECOMMENDED
SALARY PLAN
.
~
AL TERNA riVE A
ENCLOSURE 1
1/1 '. ~ . ',~!4 . t, :;""lr' .': q~'" r.....~'.::.,'.t .~ . ,",~:.j.'. )'" II". '. '. 11:'\1" '," ,f '. ..... ',. "..~'~
05-15-96 10:02 AM P02
ALTERNATIVE A
RECOMMENDED SAlARY RANGES
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE
CrTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENT
CITY MANAGER 50,000 - 67.000 NeootiatDd
SECRETARY TO CITY MANAGER 20.167 - 28.234 20 21,176 - 29.646
GENERAL SERVICES
GENERAL SERVICES DtRECTOR 39,930 - 55.902 33 41.926 - 60.793
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 17.421 - 24,390 16 18.292 - 26.523
HEAD CUSTODfAN 15,049 - 21,069 12 15.049 - 21,821
CUSTODIAN 14,333 - 20,066 11 14,333 - 20,783
RECEPTION IST/CASHIElVTYPlST 13,650 - 19.110 12 15,049 - 21,821
DATA PROCESSING MANAGER 27.026 - 37,836 24 27.026 - 39.188
0 DIRECTOR OF PURCHASING 32.850 - 45,990 27 31,286 - 45,365
U1
I
- MAlNTENANCE WORKER 14,333 - 20,066 13 15,802 - 22,913
U1
I ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 17.421 - 24,390 16 18.292 - 26.523
(Q
(1)
-
0 EMPlOYEE RELATIONS COORDINATOR 32,850 - 45.990 28 32.850 - 47.633
..
0
l\'
;t>
;;::
'U
0
w
1-12
3:
:0
-<
~
(J]
.
U)
(J'l
~
lSl
lSl
lSl
n
o
o
-<
QO
:0
(J1
(J1
o
n
H
:0
-l
fTl
(J1
./:>.
lSl
~
"-
~
m
w
I
W
~
f\)
lSl
1
-0
W
"-
~
f\)
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE 3:
J)
-<
p
(j]
CITY ClERK'S DEPARTMENT ~
UJ
(J)
p
CITY ClERK 32.850 - 45.990 28 32,850 - 47.633 (S)
..
DEPUTY CITY ClERK 23,346 - 32.685 21 23.346 - 33.852 (S)
(S)
RECEPTIONIST/CASHIER 13.650 - 19,110 11 14.333 - 20.783 (j
0
lJ
-<
QO
J)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPM9.1T (J)
(J)
0
(j
H
J)
COMMUNITY DEVaOPMENT DIRECTOR 35 46,224 - 67.025 -j
fTl
(J)
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COORDINATOR 32.850 - 45.990 29 34,493 - 50.015 h
(S)
LAND DEVElOPMENT COORDlNA TOR 29.796 - 41.715 26 29.796 - 43.204 --J
"-
--J
CD
tJJ
Site OeveloDmentJEnaineerina I
w
--J
f\)
(S)
CITY ENGINEER 32.850 - 45,990 32 39.930 - 57,899
ENGINEER 25,739 - 36.035 24 27.026 - 39.188
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR 20,167 - 28.234 19 21.176 - 30,705
0 Buikfjna DeDartment
U1
I
-
U1
I BUllDfNG OFACIAL 32.850 - 45.900 29 34,493 - 50.015
<D
m
RESIDENTIAl/COMMERClAllNSPECTOR 25,.739 - 36.035 23 25.739 - 37,322
-
0 RESIDENTIAL INSPECTOR 21,176 - 29.646 21 23,346 - 33,852
..
0
l\l PERMIT SPECIALIST 17,421 - 24,390 16 18,292 - 26,523
)> PER MIT a...ERK 1 5,049 - 21.069 13 15,802 - 22,913
;,;: LJ
h
"-
p
." 2 f\)
0
....
1-13
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE :3
J)
-<
I-"
fJl
,
~o
FJNANCE DEPARTMENT u.,
I-"
IS)
..
ANANCE DIRECTOR 39,930 ~ 55,902 33 41,926 - 60.793 IS)
IS)
ASSISTANT RNANCE DIRECTOR 2B.377 - 39,728 2B 32.850 ~ 47,633 n
0
IJ
SENIOR ACCOlRllTlNG CLERK 22,234 - 31, 12B 20 22.234 - 32,239 -<
QO
OFF'CE SUPERVISOR 18,292 - 25.609 17 19.207 - 27.650 J)
lr)
SERVICE TECHNICIAN 16,292 - 25,609 17 19,207 - 27,850 lJ)
0
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE a...ERK 16.592 - 23,22B 15 17.421 - 25,260 n
H
J)
ACCOUNTING CLERK 16.592 - 23,22B 15 17.421 - 25,260 -i
fT1
lJ)
METER READER 16,592 - 23.228 14 16,592 - 24,05B ~
IS)
BilliNG CLERK 14,333 - 20,066 13 15,802 - 22.913 --J
"-
--J
BUDGET ANALYST 21 23.346 - 33,852 co
III
I
W
--J
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT f'lJ
IS)
PARKS & RECREATION DIRECTOR 39,930 - 55,902 33 41,926 - 60,793
SENIOR CENTER MANAGER 24,513 - 34,319 23 25,739 - 37,322
SPORTS COORDINATOR 19,207 - 26.890 18 20,167 - 29,243
0 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 17.421 - 24,390 16 18.292 - 26,523
tJ1
I 22,234 - 32,239
.- SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS & GROUNDS 21. 176 - 29,646 20
U1
I MAINTENANCE FOREMAN 18,292 - 25,609 17 19,207 - 27,850
'0
(n
CONCESSION MANAGER 17,421 - 24,390 15 17.421 - 25,260
0 MAINTENANCE WORKER (Lead Worker) 15,802 - 22,122 14 16,592 - 24,058
..
0
f\' RECREATION ASSlSTANT 17.421 - 24,390 15 17.421 - 25.260
:>> 15,802 - 22,913
2': MAINTENANCE WORKER 14,333 - 20,066 13 L1
MECHANIC I 19,207 - 26,890 18 20,167 - 29,243 fJ1
"-
CREW CHIEF 16,592 - 23,228 15 17,421 - 25,260 I-"
'1:) f\)
0
U1
1-14 I
PRESENT
SALARY RANGE
PROPOSED
PA Y GRADE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/UTILITIES
PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT
FIELD FOREMAN
HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
LIGHT EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
MECHANIC II
MECHANIC I
CARPENTER/ELECTRICIAN
CREW CHIEF
SIGN MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN
MAINTENANCE WORKER
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR
OFFICE SUPERVISOR
39,930 - 55,902
29,796 - 41,715
19,207 - 26,890
18,292 - 25,609
15,802 - 22,122
28,377 - 39,728
19,207 - 26,890
19,207 - 26,890
16,592 - 23,228
16,592 - 23,228
14,333 - 20,066
17,421 - 24,390
20,167 - 28,234
18,292 - 25,609
35
29
18
17
14
25
18
18
15
15
13
16
19
17
1-15
PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE
46,224 - 67,025
34,493 - 50,015
20,167 - 29,243
19,207 - 27,850
16,592 - 24.058
28,377 - 41,147
20,167 - 29,243
20,167 - 29,243
17,421 - 25,260
17,421 - 25,260
15,802 - 22,913
18,292 - 26,523
21,176 - 30,705
19,207 - 27,850
4
PRESENT
SALARY RANGE
PROPOSED
PA Y GRADE
UTILITY DEPARTMENT
UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT
STORMWATER UTILITY MANAGER
CAPITAL PROJECT COORDINATOR
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
LEAD WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR
WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR-
LEAD WATER PLANT OPERATOR
WATER PLANT OPERATOR-
CHIEF ELECTRICAL EFFLUENT TECHNICIAN
LIFT STATION FOREMAN
FIELD FOREMAN II
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC II
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC I
MAINTENANCE WORKER
REUSE TECHNICIAN
UTILITY INSPECTOR/BACK FLOW COORDINATOR
SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION TECHNICIAN
WASTEWATER PLANT OPER/LABORATORY COORD
32,850 - 45,990
29
31
30
16
22
18
22
18
22
22
22
20
18
13
18
22
18
22
17,421 - 24,390
23,346 - 32,685
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,685
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,685
23,346 - 32,685
23,346 - 32,685
21,176 - 29,646
19,207 - 26,890
14,333 - 20,066
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,685
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,885
. 5% tot' "8" Certification. 5% tot' "A" Certification
1-16
PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE
34,493 - 50,015
38,028 - 55,141
36,218 - 52,516
18,292 - 26,523
24,513 - 35,544
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
24,513 - 35,544
24,513 - 35,544
22,234 - 32,239
20,167 - 29,243
15,802 - 22,913
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
I
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE 3:
D
-<
,....,.
(Jl
~
POLICE DEPARTMENT UJ
(J)
,....,.
,....,.
..
POUCE .CHIEF 41.926 - 58,697 35 46.224 - 67,025 IS)
w
CAPTAIN 32.850 - 45,990 30 36,218 - 52,516 n
0
t:;I
LIEUTENANT 29,796 - 41,715 27 31,286 - 45,365 -<
QO
SERGEANT 23,346 - 32.685 25 28.377 - 41.147 D
DETECTIVE 21.176 - 29,646 22 24.513 - 35,544 (J)
(J)
0
PROPERTYJEVIDENCE TECHNICIAN 21,176 - 29.646 22 24,513 - 35,544 n
H
D
POLICE OffiCER 21.176 - 29,646 22 24.513 - 35,544 -j
fTl
(J)
COMMUNICATIONS SUPERVISOR 17.421 - 24,390 17 19.207 - 27,850 .f;.
IS)
COMMUNJCATIONS OPERATOR 16.592 - 23,228 16 18.292 - 26,523 -'\l
"-
ADMrNISTRATIVE SECRETARY -'\l
17,421 - 24.390 16 18.292 - 26,523 OJ
w
COMPUTER SYSTEMS MANAGER 18,292 - 25;609 17 19,207 - 27,850 1
w
-'\l
COMPUTER SYSTEMS MANAGER ASSISfANT 16,592 - 23,220 14 16.592 - 24,058 N
IS)
RECORDS a.ERK 17,421 - 24,390 16 18,292 - 26,523
CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAUST 20,167 - 28.234 19 21.176 - 30,705
DATA ENTRY CLERK 15.049 - 21,069 12 15,049 - 21,821
SENJOR RECORDS CLERK 19.207 - 26,890 18 20,167 - 29,243
0 TRAINING SPECIALIST 17,421 - 24,390 16 18.292 - 26,523
01
I
~
01
I
(0
OJ
..
0
01
)>
;;: -u
w
"-
-'\l
"" 6
0
e<'
1-17
PRESENT
SALARY RANGE
PROPOSED
PAY GRADE
FIRE DEPARTMENT
FIRE CHIEF
DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
FIFEFIGHTER/EMT
FIREFIGHTER/APPARATUS OPERATOR
LIEUTENANT
CAPTAIN
EMS COORDINATOR/CAPTAIN
FIRE MARSHAL
TRAINING OFFICER/CAPTAIN
39,930 - 55,902
32,850 - 45,990
17,421 - 24,390
20,167 - 28,234
22.234 - 31.128
24,513 - 34.319
28.377 - 39,728
28.377 - 39,728
28,377 - 39,728
28,377 - 39,728
33
29
16
21
23
25
27
27
27
27
1-18
PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE
41,926 - 60,793
34,493 - 50,015
18,292 - 26,523
23,346 - 33,852
25,739 - 37.322
28,377 - 41,147
31,286 - 45,365
31,286 - 45,365
31,286 - 45,365
31,286 - 45,365
z
MAY 15 '96 10:01 CODY & ASSOCIATES 407/783-3720
P.7/12
..
(~
')
"
1
~.
~
;.,
RECOMMENDED
SALARY PLAN
"
f
, 'j,
:r
"
AL TERNA rIVE B
.,
.;,t
t,
:J
"
!
.}
ENCLOSURE 2
, '.', I,. ,: ,~':ll>I~r,..;:~'tli"" 1.;."., '.~.I . t.l~'~\'d.~;l1"', .,\~>...,~.t~(~..~::(< ~"~l.t ~'t.r" .~~
05-15-96 10:02 AM PO?
ALTERNAllVE B
3:
D
-<
......
RECOMMENDED SAlARY HANCB Ul
~
I.J)
(J)
......
(Sl
..
(Sl
I\l
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED (')
0
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE t:)
-<
CITY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENT QO
D
(J)
(J)
0
CITY MANAGER 50,000 - 67,000 NegotiatDd (')
H
20,167 - 28,234 20 21,176 - 29,646 D
SECRETARY TO CITY MANAGER --j
fTl
(J)
.c.
(Sl
,]
"-
GENERAL SERVICES -.J
co
lJJ
I
W
-.J
GENERAL SERVICES DJRECTOR 39.930 - 55,902 33 41.926 - 60,793 [\)
(Sl
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 17.421 - 24,390 16 18,292 - 26,523
HEAD CUSTODIAN 15,049 - 21,069 12 15,049 - 21,621
CUSTODIAN 14.333 - 20,066 11 14,333 - 20.783
RECEPTIONIST/CASHIERfTYPlST 13,650 - 19,110 12 15,049 - 21,821
0 DATA PROCESSING MANAGER 27,026 - 37,836 24 27.026 - 39,188
tn
I
-
i.n DIRECTOR OF PURCHASING 32.850 - 45,990 27 31,286 - 45,365
I
ill
en MAINTENANCE WORKER 14,333 - 20,066 13 15,602 - 22,913
- AOMINISTRA nVE SECRETARY 11.421 - 24.390 16 18.292 - 26,523
0
..
0
N
)> EMPLOYEE RELA nONS COORDINATOR 32,850 - 45,990 28 32,850 - 47.633
E': ""0.
co
"-
......
'U 1 I\l
0
(l)
1-19
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PA Y GRADE SALARY RANGE I
-<
l-
v
CITY ClERK'S DEPARTMENT
\.f
u
I-
CITY CLERK 32,850 - 45,990 28 32,850 - 47,633 IS
"
DEPUTY CITY CLERK 23,346 - 32,685 21 23,346 - 33,852 (S
(S
RECEPTIONIST/CASHIER 13,650-19,110 11 14,333 - 20,783 ('"
c
t:
--<
7-
I
(f
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMalT (J
c
('"
l-
I
COMMUNITY DEVaOPMENT DIRECTOR 35 46,224 - 67,025 -
rr
(f
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COORDINATOR 32,850 - 45,99{) 29 34,493 - 50,015 L
IS
LAND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR 29,796 - 41,715 26 29,796 - 43,204 "
"
"
((
lr~
Site DeveloDmentJEnJJineering I
(Jj
-;J
f\J
ISI
CITY ENGINEER 32,850 - 45,990 32 39,930 - 57,899
ENGINEER 25,739 - 36,035 24 27,026 - 39,188
CONSTRUCTION IN SPECTOR 20,167 - 28,234 19 21,176 - 30,705
0 Buikfino DeDartment
U1
I
.-
U1
I BUILDtNG OFACIAl 32,850 - 45,99{) 29 34,493 - 50,015
(0
(J)
RESIDENTIAl/COMMEHClAlINSPECTOR 25,739 - 36,035 23 25,739 - 37,322
,-
a RESIDENTIAL INSPECTOR 21,176 - 29,646 21 23,346 - 33,852
,.
0 PERMIT SPECIALIST
N 17,421 - 24,390 16 18.292 - 26,523
:~ PERMIT a..ERK 15,049 - 21,069 13 15,802 - 22,913
;~ lJ
.to.
"
I--"
'1J 2 N
0
....
1-20
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE 3:
J)
-<
f--"
Vl
,
Ij)
FINANCE DEPARTMENT 0"',
f--"
0
'.
ANANCE DIRECTOR 39,930 - 55,902 33 41,926 - 60,793 0
0
ASSISTANT RNANCE DIRECTOR 28,377 - 39,728 28 32,850 - 47,633 n
0
0
SENIOR ACCOUNTING CLERK 22,234 - 31,128 20 22,234 - 32,239 -<
QO
OFFICE SUPERVISOR 18,292 - 25,609 17 19,207 - 27,650 J)
19,207 - 27,850 U)
SERVICE TECHNICIAN 18,292 - 25.609 17 U)
0
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE O-ERK 16.592 - 23,228 15 17,421 - 25,260 n
H
J)
ACCOUNTING CLERK . 16,592 - 23,228 15 17.421 - 25,260 --l
fTl
U)
METER READER 16,592 - 23,228 14 16.592 - 24,058 b.
0
BlUING CLERK 14,333 - 20.066 13 15,802 - 22,913 --J
"-
--J
BUDGET ANALYST 21 23,346 - 33,852 co
w
I
W
--J
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT I"J
0
PARKS & RECREATION DIRECTOR 39,930 - 55,902 33 41,926 - 60,793
SENIOR CENTER MANAGER 24,513 - 34,319 23 25,739 - 37,322
SPORTS COORDINATOR 19,207 - 26.890 16 20,167 - 29,243
0 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 17.421 - 24,390 16 16,292 - 26,523
Ul
I
,- SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS & GROUNDS 21,176 - 29,646 20 22,234 - 32,239
'.11
I MAINTENANCE FOREMAN 18,292 - 25,609 17 19,207 - 27,850
'0
'-51
CONCESSION MANAGER 17,421 - 24,390 15 17,421 - 25,260
Q MAINTENANCE WORKER (Lead Worker) 15,802 - 22,122 14 16,592 - 24,058
0
'" RECREATION ASSISTANT 17.421-24,390 15 17.421 - 25,260
;t> 15,802 - 22,913
3: MAINTENANCE WORKER 14,333 - 20,066 13
-u
MECHANIC I 19,207 - 26,890 18 20,167 - 29,243 Vl
"-
CREW CHIEF 16,592 - 23,228 15 17,421 - 25,260 f--"
.." N
0
In
1-21 }
PRESENT
SALARY RANGE
PROPOSED
PA Y GRADE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/UTILITIES
PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT
FIELD FOREMAN
HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
LIGHT EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
MECHANIC II
MECHANIC I
CARPENTER/ELECTRICIAN
CREW CHIEF
SIGN MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN
MAINTENANCE WORKER
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR
OFFICE SUPERVISOR
39,930 - 55,902
29,796 - 41,715
19,207 - 26,899
18,292 - 25,609
15,802 - 22,122
28,377 - 39,728
19,207 - 26,890
19,207 - 26,890
16,592 - 23,228
16,592 - 23,228
14,333 - 20,066
17,421 - 24,390
20,167 - 28,234
18,292 - 25,609
35
29
18
17
14
25
18
18
15
15
13
16
19
17
1-22
PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE
46,224 - 67,025
34,493 - 50,015
20,167 - 29,243
19,207 - 27,850
16,592 - 24,058
28,377 - 41,147
20,167 - 29,243
20,167 - 29,243
17,421 - 25,260
17,421 - 25,260
15,802 - 22,913
18,292 - 26,523
21,176 - 30,705
19,207 - 27,850
4
PRESENT
SALARY RANGE
PROPOSED
PA Y GRADE
UTILITY DEPARTMENT
UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT
STORMWA TER UTILITY MANAGER
CAPITAL PROJECT COORDINATOR
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
LEAD WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR
WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR-
LEAD WATER PLANT OPERATOR
WATER PLANT OPERATOR-
CHIEF ELECTRICAL EFFLUENT TECHNICIAN
LIFT STATION FOREMAN
FIELD FOREMAN II
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC II
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC I
MAINTENANCE WORKER
REUSE TECHNICIAN
UTILITY INSPECTOR/BACK FLOW COORDINATOR
SEWER SYSTEM EV ALUA TION TECHNICIAN
WASTEWATER PLANT OPER/LABORATORY COORD
32,850 - 45,990
29
31
30
16
22
18
22
18
22
22
22
20
18
13
18
22
18
22
17,421 - 24,390
23,346 - 32,685
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,685
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,685
23,346 - 32,685
23,346 - 32,685
21,176 - 29,646
19,207 - 26,890
14,333 - 20,066
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,685
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,885
. 5% for "B" Certification. 5% for "A" Certification
1-23
PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE
34,493 - 50,015
38,028 - 55,141
36,218 - 52,516
18,292 - 26,523
24,513 - 35,544
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
24,513 - 35,544
24,513 - 35,544
22,234 - 32,239
20,167 - 29,243
15,802 - 22,913
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
I
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE 3:
])
-<
~
lJ1
,
POLICE DEPARTMENT w
en
~
~
..
POUCE a-JIEF 41,926 - 58,697 35 46,224 - 67,025 IS)
w
CAPTAIN 32,850 - 45,990 29 34,493 - 50,015 n
0
'='
UEUTENANT . 29,796 - 41,71 5 29 29,796 - 43,204 -<
9.0
SERGEANT 23,346 - 32,685 24 27,026 - 39,188 ])
DETECTlVE 21,176 - 29,646 21 23,346 - 33,852 U)
U)
0
PROPERTYJEVIDENCE TECHNfCIAN 21,176 - 29,646 21 23,346 - 33,852 n
H
])
roUCE OmCER 21.176 - 29,646 21 23.346 - 33,852 -l
[Tl
U)
COMMUNICATIONS SUPERVISOR 17,421 - 24.390 16 18,292 - 26,523 A
IS)
COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR 16,592 - 23.228 15 17,421 - 25,260 >l
"-
>l
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 17,421 - 24,390 16 18,292 - 26.523 m
w
COMPUTER SYSTEMS MANAGER 18.292 - 25.609 16 18,292 - 26.523 I
w
>l
'COMPUTER SYSTEMS MANAGER ASSISTANT 16,592 - 23.220 14 16,592 - 24,058 N
IS)
RECORDS ClERK 17,421 - 24,390 15 17,421 - 25.260
CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECiAliST 20.167 - 28.234 18 20,167 - 29,243
DATA ENTRY CLERK 15.049 - 21.069 12 15,049 - 21,821
SENIOR RECOROS CLERK 19,207 - 26,890 17 19.207 - 27,850
0 TRAINJNG SPECIALIST 17.421 - 24,390 15 17.421 - 25,260
(J1
I
-
(J1
I
<D
rn
o
(JI
)>
;;::
'0
o
(J1
-0
lJ1
"-
>l
6
1-24
PRESENT
SALARY RANGE
PROPOSED
PAY GRADE
FIRE DEPARTMENT
FIRE CHIEF
DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
FIFEFIGHTER/EMT
FIREFIGHTER/APPARATUS OPERATOR
LIEUTENANT
CAPTAIN
EMS COORDINATOR/CAPTAIN
FIRE MARSHAL
TRAINING OFFICER/CAPTAIN
39,930 - 55,902
32,850 - 45,990
,17,421 - 24,390
20,167 - 28,234
22,234 - 31,128
24,513 - 34,319
28,377 - 39,728
28,377 - 39,728
28,377 - 39,728
28,377 - 39,728
33
28
16
20
22
24
26
26
26
26
1-25
PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE
41,926 - 60,793
32,850 - 47,633
18,292 - 26,523
22,234 - 32,239
24,513 - 35,544
27,026 - 39,188
29,796 - 43,204
29,796 - 43,204
29,796 - 43,204
29,796 - 43,204
z
1"1AY 15 '96 10: 02 CODY & ASSOCIATES 407/783-3720
P. 10/12
'it
RECOMMENDED
SALARY PLAN
-'
.~ .~
AL TERNA TIVE C
ENCLOSURE 3
~ . j I.f. '; ".1 r~' ',. ~.'-'" r'I~J~"",,\\': '1I~1~' "I' '1,;-'" _, .l;~,'. l_ 0"." rl#, : .' ~ '\. .,,) ....l .. : ~
05-15-96 iO:02 AM PIO
ALTERNATIVE C
RECOMMENDffi SAlARY RANGES
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE
CITY MANAGER"S DEPARTMENT
crrv MANAGER 50,000 - 67.000 UegotiiltBd
SECRET MY TO CITY MANAGER 20.167 - 28,234 20 21,176 - 29.646
GENERAL SERVICES
GENERAL SERVICES DlRECTOR 39.930 - 55,902 33 41.926 - 60.793
ADMINISTRA TlVE SECRETARY 17.421 ~ 24.390 16 16,292 - 26,523
HEAD CUSTODIAN 15,049 - 21,069 12 15.049 - 21.821
CUSTODIAN 14.333 - 20.066 11 14.333 - 20,783
RECEPTlON I ST/CASHI ffilTYPIST 13,650 - 19.110 12 15,049 - 21,821
0 OAT A PROCESSING MANAGER 27.026 - 37,836 24 27.026 - 39.168
U1
I
~
U1 DIRECTOR OF PURCHASING 32.850 - 45.990 31,286 - 45,365
I 27
<D
Q) MAINTENANCE WORKER 14,333 - 20,066 13 . 15,802 - 22,913
~ ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 17.421 - 24.390 16 18.292 - 26.523
0
..
0
N
:>> EMPlOYEE RELA nONS COORDINATOR 32,850 - 45.990 28 32.850 - 47,633
s:
'1j
~
1-26
3:
J)
-<
I-"
(J1
~
U)
(J)
I-"
IS)
IS)
w
(")
o
o
-<
QO
J)
U1
U1
o
(")
H
J)
--j
fTI
U1
~
IS)
""\J
"-
""\J
CD
W
I
uJ
'--.J
r\l
IS)
LJ
1
I-"
I-"
"-
I-"
r\l
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE "<
I
-<
I-'
lJ
CITY ClERK'S DEPARTMENT
u:
(J'
32,850 - 41,633 I-'
CITY CLERK 32,850 - 45,990 28 (S
..
DEPUTY CITY CLERK 23,346 - 32,685 21 23,346 - 33,852 (S
(S
RECEPTIONIST/CASHIER 13,650-19,110 11 14,333 - 20,783 r
c
e
-<
R<
I
lr
COMMUNITY DeVELOPMENT (J
c
C
l-
I
COMMUNITY OEVaOPMENT DIRECTOR 35 46,224 - 67,025 -
IT
lr
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COORDINATOR 32,850 - 45,990 29 34,493 - 50.015 !>
(S
LAND DEVElOPMENT COOROINA TOR 29,796 - 41,715 26 29,796 - 43,204 "
"-
"
0:
ll~
I
Site DeveloDmentJEnlJineerina ll~
-,,;
fie
IS
CllY ENGINEER 32,850 - 45,990 32 39,930 - 57,899
ENGINEER 25,739 - 36,035 24 27,026 - 39,188
CONSTRUcnONINSPECTOR 20,167 - 28,234 19 21,176 - 30,705
0 Buiklina OeDartment
111
I
,-
111
I BUILDCNG OFACIAL 32,650 - 45,990 29 34,493 - 50,015
<0
l11
RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL INSPECTOR 25,739 - 36,035 23 25,739 - 37,322
,-
0 RESIDENTIAL INSPECTOR 21,176 - 29,646 21 23,346 - 33,852
..
0 PERMIT SPECIALIST 18,292 - 26,523
N 17.421 - 24,390 16
;.. PER MIT ctERK 15,049 - 21,069 13 15,802 - 22,913
;?: LI
~
"-
I-'
'U 2 f\J
0
""
1-27
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PAY GRADE SALARY RANGE 3:
])
-<
I-"-
(Jl
~
oj)
FINANCE DEPARTMENT (n
I-"-
(S)
..
ANANCE DIRECTOR 39,930 - 55,902 33 41,926 - 60.793 (S)
(S)
ASSISTANT RNANCE DIRECTOR 28.377 - 39,728 28 32,850 - 47.633 ()
0
CJ
SENIOR ACCOUNTING CLERK 22,234 - 31,128 20 22,234 - 32.239 -<
QO
OFF.CE SUPERVISOR 18.292 - 25,609 17 19,207 - 27.850 ])
(.f)
SERVICE TECHNICIAN 18.292 - 25.609 17 19,207 - 27,850 (.f)
0
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE a.ERK 16,592 - 23,228 15 17.421 - 25,260 ()
H
])
ACCOUNTING ClERK 16,592 - 23,228 15 17.421 - 25,260 -l
fTl
(.f)
METER READER 16,592 - 23,228 14 16,592 - 24,058 .c-
IS)
BilliNG CLERK 14,333 - 20,066 13 15.802 - 22.913 -..j
"-
-..j
BUDGET ANALYST 21 23,346 - 33,B52 CD
w
I
W
-..j
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT f'lJ
(S)
PARKS & RECREATION DIRECTOR 39.930 - 55,902 33 41,926 - 60,793
SENIOR CENTER MANAGER 24,513 - 34,319 23 25,739 - 37,322
SPORTS COORDJNA TOR 19,207 - 26,890 18 20.167 - 29,243
0 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 17 .421 - 24,390 16 18.292 - 26,523
U1
I SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS & GROUNDS
- 21,176 - 29,646 20 22,234 - 32.239
01
I MAINTENANCE FOREMAN 18,292 - 25,609 17 19,207 - 27,850
ill
(J)
CONCESSION MANAGER 17,421 - 24,390 15 17.421 - 25,260
,-
0 MAINTENANCE WORKER (Lead Worker) 15.802 - 22,122 14 16,592 - 24.058
..
0
f\) RECREATION ASSJSTANT 17.421 - 24,390 15 17.421 - 25.260
)>
;;:: MAINTENANCE WORKER 14.333 - 20,066 13 15,802 - 22.913
"'U
MECHANIC I 19,207 - 26.890 18 20,167 - 29,243 (J]
"-
CREW CHIEF 16,592 - 23.228 15 17.421 - 25,260 I-"-
'-oj f\)
0
U1
1-28 I
PRESENT
SALARY RANGE
PROPOSED
PAY GRADE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/UTILITIES
PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT
FIELD FOREMAN
HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
LIGHT EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
MECHANIC II
MECHANIC I
CARPENTER/ELECTRICIAN
CREW CHIEF
SIGN MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN
MAINTENANCE WORKER
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR
OFFICE SUPERVISOR
39,930 - 55.902
29,796 - 41,715
19,207 - 26,890
18,292 - 25,609
15,802 - 22,122
28,377 - 39,728
19,207 - 26,890
19,207 - 26,890
16,592 - 23,228
16,592 - 23.228
14,333 - 20,066
17,421 - 24,390
20,167 - 28,234
18,292 - 25,609
35
29
18
17
14
25
18
18
15
15
13
16
19
17
1-29
PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE
46,224 - 67.025
34,493 - 50,015
20,167 - 29,243
19.207 - 27,850
16,592 - 24,058
28,377 - 41,147
20,167 - 29,243
20,167 - 29,243
17,421 - 25,260
17,421 - 25.260
15,802 - 22,913
18,292 - 26,523
21,176 - 30,705
19,207 - 27,850
4
PRESENT
SALARY RANGE
PROPOSED
PAY GRADE
UTILITY DEPARTMENT
UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT
STORMWA TER UTILITY MANAGER
CAPITAL PROJECT COORDINATOR
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
LEAD WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR
WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR.
LEAD WATER PLANT OPERATOR
WATER PLANT OPERATOR.
CHIEF ELECTRICAL EFFLUENT TECHNICIAN
LIFT STATION FOREMAN
FIELD FOREMAN II
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC II
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC I
MAINTENANCE WORKER
REUSE TECHNICIAN
UTILITY INSPECTOR/BACK FLOW COORDINATOR
SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION TECHNICIAN
WASTEWATER PLANT OPER/LABORATORY COORD
32,850 - 45,990
29
31
30
16
22
18
22
18
22
22
22
20
18
13
18
22
18
22
17,421 - 24,390
23,346 - 32,685
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,685
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,685
23,346 - 32,685
23,346 - 32,685
21,176 - 29,646
19,207 - 26,890
14,333 - 20,066
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,685
19,207 - 26,890
23,346 - 32,885
. 6% for -8- Certification, 6% for -A- Certification
1-30
PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE
34,493 - 50,015
38,028 - 55,141
36,218 - 52,516
18,292 - 26,523
24,513 - 35,544
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
24,513 - 35,544
24,513 - 35,544
22,234 - 32,239
20,167 - 29,243
15,802 - 22,913
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
20,167 - 29,243
24,513 - 35,544
I
PRESENT PROPOSED PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE PA V GRADE SALARY RANGE 3:
D
-<
I-""
(J]
~
POUCE DEPARlMENT ill
(J)
I-""
I-""
..
POLICE CHJEF 41,926 - 58,697 35 46,224 - 67,025 ISl
.t>.
CAPTAIN 32,850 - 45,990 28 32,850 - 47,633 ()
0
t:!
UEUTENANT 29,796 - 41,715 25 28,377 - 41,147 -<
QO
SERGEANT 23,346 - 32,685 23 25,739 - 37,322 D
DETECTJVE 22,234 - 32,239 01
21,176 - 29,646 20 U1
0
PROPERTYJEVIDENCE TEQ-INICIAN 21,176 - 29,646 20 22,234 - 32,239 ()
H
D
POLICE OFfICER 21,176 - 29,646 20 22,234 - 32,239 -j
fTl
U1
COMMUNICA nONS SUPERVISOR 17.421 - 24,390 15 17.421 - 25.260 .t>.
ISl
COMMUNICATIONS OPERA TOR 16,592 - 23,228 14 16,592 - 24,058 ""\I
"-
""\I
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 17.421 - 24,390 16 18,292 - 26,523 OJ
uJ
COMPUTER SYSTEMS MANAGER 17,42t - 25,260 I
18,292 - 25,609 15 w
""\I
COMPUTER SYSTEMS MANAGER ASSISTANT 16.592 - 23,220 14 16,592 - 24,058 J'>J
ISl
RECORDS a..ERK 17.421 - 24,390 14 16,592 - 24,058
CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIALIST 20,167 - 28,234 17 19,207 - 27,850
DATA ENTRY CLERK 15,049 - 21,069 12 15,049 ~ 21.821
SENIOR RECORDS CLERK 19,207 - 26,890 16 18,292 - 26,523
0 TRAINING SPECIAUST 17.421 - 24,390 14 16,592 - 24,058
(J1
I
~
(J1
I
(0
m
o
U1
'D
i<:
'11
o
-J
lJ
""\I
"-
""\I
6
1-31
PRESENT
SALARY RANGE
PROPOSED
PA Y GRADE
FIRE DEPARTMENT
FIRE CHIEF
DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF
ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
FIFEFIGHTER/EMT
FIREFIGHTER/APPARATUS OPERATOR
LIEUTENANT
CAPTAIN
EMS COORDINATOR/CAPTAIN
FIRE MARSHAL
TRAINING OFFICER/CAPTAIN
39,930 - 55,902
32,850 - 45,990
17,421 - 24,390
20,167 - 28,234
22,234 - 31,128
24,513 - 34,319
28,377 - 39,728
28,377 - 39,728
28,377 - 39,728
28,377 - 39,728
33
27
16
19
21
23
25
25
25
25
1;32
PROPOSED
SALARY RANGE
41,926 - 60,793
31,286 - 45,365
18,292 - 26,523
21,176 - 307052
23,346 - 33,852
25,739 - 37,322
28,377 - 41,147
28,377 - 41,147
28,377 - 41,147
28,377 - 41,147
z
ATTACHMENT 2-A
CITY
CALCULATED COST
OF
IMPLEMENTATION
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS PROPOSED SALARY STUDY RECOMMENDAll0NS
TO BE IMPlEMENTED OCTOBER 1,1996
ALTERNATIVE 'A' AL TERNAllVE '8" ALTERNATIVE 'C'
PROJEClED LENGTH PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT
PAY 10-01-96 OF OCT.96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPLEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE
NAME JOB TIll.E GRADE SALARY SERVICE SALARIES SruDY SALARIES STUDY SAl.ARIES SruDY
RONALD W. MclEMORE CITY MANAGER $75,000.00
JANCIE PALLADINO ADMIN SEC 19 $21,983.00 7
JOANNE DALKA MANAGEMENT Ir-.FR/TECH 22 $23,346.00 9
MARGO HOPKINS CITY CLERK 29 $34,493.00 11
MARTHA JENKINS DEPUTY CITY CLERK 22 $25,097.00 5
HARRY MARllN FINANCE DIRECTOR 33 $49,122.00 12
CAROLE PEARSON ASST. FINANCE DIRECTOR 26 $34,528.85 10
BARBARA LANDRESS OFFICE SUPERV 16 $25,609.00 12
DORATHEAPATTERSON CUSTOMER SERV REP. 11 $19,191.59 11
KATHERINE BRUNO CUSTOMER SERV REP. 11 $14,333.00 1 $15,802.00 $1,469.00 10.25% $15,802.00 $1,469.00 10.25% $15,802,00 $1,469.00 10.25%
MICHELLE ruRNER CUSTOMER SERV REP. 11 $14,333.00 1 $15,802.00 $1,469.00 10.25% $15,802.00 $1,469.00 10,25% $15,802,00 $1,469.00 10.25%
CARLOS MORALES SERVICE TECHNICIAN 16 $21,817.75 6
CHARLES ATKINSON, JR METER READER 14 $19,971.94 4
MICHAEL WILLIAMS METER READER 14 $19,390.23 2
PATRICIA BEST ACCTS. PAYABLE CLERK 14 $19,080.60 2
YVONNE PETERS ACCOUNllNG CLERK I 14 $16,592.00 2 $17.421.00 $829.00 5,00% $17.421.00 $829.00 5.00% $17.421.00 $829.00 5.00%
MARY WILSON PERSONNEL COORD. 29 $36,235.27 22
JOHN KETTERINGHAM GEN SERVICE DIRECTOR 33 $43,524.00 2
SHIRLEY FRANKHOUSER ADMIN SECRETARY 15 $19,195.70 5
RALPH HOSFORD MAIN LABOR PI 11 $10,933.00 4
ROBERT CZIRAI<I HEAD CUSTODIAN 12 $17,592.93 4
E. ELAINE AVILES RECEPTIONIST 10 $14,674.00 2 $15,049,00 $375.00 2,56% $15,049,00 $375,00 2.56",(, $15,049.00 $375.00 2.56%
J.P. PETRENCSlK PURCHASING DIRECTOR 29 $35,845.30 17
NANCY VOBORNIK ADMIN SECRETARY 15 $21,150,84 10
THOMAS GRIMES COMM DEVEL COORD 29 $36,285.00 2
DONALD LEBLANC LAND MANGMNT SPEC 27 $36,590.75 2
DONALD HOUCK BUILDING OFFICAL 29 $38,053,50 2
DAVID ALAMlNA SR BLDG INSP 24 $29,240,68 8
MICHAEL SCHERALDI BUILDING INSPECTOR 20 $22.978.00 6 $23,559.00 $581.00 2.53% $23,559.00 $581.00 2.53% $23,559.00 $581.00 2,53%
ANDREA LORENZO-LUACESPERMIT SPECIALIST 15 $17,421.00 2 $18,292,00 $871.00 5.00% $18,292,00 $871.00 5.00% $18,292.00 $871,00 5.00%
SYLVIA DENSON PERMIT CLERK 11 $18,535.43 6
2A-l
15-May-96
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS PROPOSED SALARY STIJDY RECOMMENDATIONS
TO BE IMPLEMENTED OCTOBER 1, 1996
Al..TERNATlVE "A" AI.. TERNATlVE "8" AI.. TERNATlVE 'C"
PROJEClED LENGTH PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT
PAY 10-01-96 OF OCT.96 IMPLEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPLEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPLEMENT INCREASE
NAME JOB nl1.E GRADE SALARY SERVICE SALARIES STUDY SALARIES STUDY SALARIES STUDY
DONALD WILSON PARKS/REC DIRECTOR 33 $43,724.00 2
LINDA GODKIN ADMIN. SECRETARY 15 $19,076.52 4
ROBBIE HILLERY SPORTS COORDINATOR 18 $19,921.14 5 $20,167.00 $245.86 1.23% $20,167.00 $245.86 1.23% $20,167.00 $245.86 1.23%
GARTH BOLTON SPORTSFIELD MAlNT, 15 $19,956.76 4
JAMES KENNEDY LEAD MAINT. WORKER 13 $23,380.45 9
RONNIE ESTEP CREW CHIEF 14 $20,558.52 5
CHRIS WARGO SUPT PARKS/GROUNDS 20 $21.176.00 4 $22,234.00 $1,058.00 5.00% $22,234,00 $1,058.00 5.00% $22,234.00 $1.058.00 5.00%
BRIAN YEAGER MECHANIC I 18 $20,648.00 1
JAMES HERRING CREW CHIEF 14 $18,658.00 3
KEVIN BLAGG MAlNT. WORKER 11 $16,110.33 2
PAULA NUNNERY MAlNT. WORKER 11 $16,110,33 2
TINA MARIE KIMBALL CREW CHIEF 14 $18,658.00 3
GIANLUCAGRAY MAlNT, WORKER 11 $15,952.38 2
BRIAN J. KOSIBOSKI MAlN.WORKER 11 $15,408.00 1 $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56%
RUBEN A. MORALES MAlNT. WORKER 11 $15,408.00 1 $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56%
BONITA HERSHELMAN CONCESSION MGR 15 $22,837,25 5
SUE COFFMAN SENIOR CENTER MGR. 23 $27,359.15 7
JOHN CROOKE MAlNT. WORKER 11 $17,587.67 5
ALAN G, HILL OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 27 $32,031.00 1 $34.496.00 $2,465.00 7.70% $34,496.00 $2,465.00 7.70% $34,496.00 $2,465.00 7.70%
JOSEPH MCGAUGH MECHANIC II 26 $33,917.64 15
JAMES MORRIS MECHANIC I 18 $23,038.55 10
WILLIAM NELSON MECHANIC 1 18 $19,207.00 1 $20.167.00 $960.00 5.00% $20,167.00 $960.00 5.00% $20,167,00 $960.00 5.00%
LEONARD HADDEN HEAVY EQPT OP 16 $25,609.00 13
RICHARD BROOKOVER CREW CHIEF 14 $23,384.05 11
ELlCE ESTEP CREW CHIEF 14 $23,228.08 9
BRUCE SCHNEIDER MAl NT LABOR 11 $20,066.00 8
LAVON WIGGINS LIGHT EQUIP 13 $19,608.40 9
CHRISTOPHER LASSITER L T EQUIP OPR 13 $16,987.00 1
ROBERT ECKMAN SIGN MAlNT. TECHICIAN 14 $19,619,74 5
NATHANIEL WILLIAMS MAl NT LABOR 11 $17,587.66 4
MICHAEL LINGARD MAl NT LABOR 11 $18,595.51 5
THOMAS I LANDRESS MAl NT LABOR 11 $17,420.45 4
TRACY BAKER MAl NT LABOR 11 $15,408.00 2 $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802,00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56%
GORDON J PEYTON MAl NT LABOR 11 $15,408.00 1 $15,802,00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802,00 $394,00 2.58"~ $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56%
SAMMY RIGGS MAl NT LABOR 11 $15,408.00 1 $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394,00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56%
ROBERTEHRENTRAUT CARPENTER ELECTRICIAN 18 $19,207,00 1 $20,167.00 $960.00 5.00% $20,167.00 $960.00 5.00% $20,167.00 $960.00 5,00%
MARY ANNE WlLLElT ADMIN SECRETARY 15 $21,295,58 12
MARK JENKINS CITY ENGINEER 29 $39,380.43 6 $39,930.00 $549.57 1.40% $39,930.00 $549,57 1.40% $39,930.00 $549.57 1.40%
ZANKA P. PEREZ CONST INSPECTOR 19 $21,680.00 1
2A-2
15-May-96
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS PROPOSED SALARY STIJDY RECOMMENDA110NS
TO BE IMPlEMENTED OCTOBER 1,1996
ALTEFlNATlVE 'A' AI.. TERNAllVE 'B. AL TEFlNATlVE 'C'
PROJEClED LENGTli PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT
PAY 10-01-96 OF OCT.96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE
NAME JOB 1T11.E GRADE SALARY SERVICE SALARIES SruDY SALARIES SlUDY SALARIES SruDY
KlPTON LOCKCUFF LmUTY DIRECTOR 33 $55,902.00 5
DOUG TAYLOR ASST. LmUTY DIR. 29 $45,990.00 12
THOMAS WISE LEAD WWTP OPR. 22 $36,451.51 12
STEPHEN BAGGS LEAD WTP OPR. 22 $33,221.34 6
RALPH FUCCILLO LEAD WNP OPR 22 $32,685,00 12
JAMES REID FIELD FOREMAN 22 $26,951.24 6
DONALD CHENEY INSPIBAC~LOW COORD. 22 $27,823.74 9
WAYNE GRAY MAl NT. MECH 1 18 $26,890.00 10
MIGUEL SANCHEZ MAlNT MECH I 18 $26,342.95 6
BILL MORRIS MAl NT. MECH I 18 $23,985.43 6
JAMES KING MAl NT. MECH I 18 $23,421.61 6
ROBERT CARRIERE MAl NT, MECH 1 18 $19,207.00 1 $20,167.00 $960.00 5.00% $20,167.00 $960.00 5,OOOA. $20,167.00 $960.00 5.00%
JUSTlNO ROLON' lAB COORDM'WTP OPR.II 22 $32,685.00 10
FORREST ASKEW WWTP OPR. II 18 $29,525.05 9
STEVE AlFORD WWTP OPR. II 18 $26,889.82 8
RORY STONE WWTP OPR. I 18 $25,140.74 9
ROGER PAYNTER WWTP OPR. I 18 $24,080.01 4
DOMENlC GENTlLUCCI REUSE TECH 18 $23,523.26 5
WM SCHAEFFER, SR. EFFLUENT TECH 22 $36,322.37 6
MICHAEL GOODALL MAlNT. MECHANIC I 18 $22,945.75 8
Je=FREY JESKE MAlNT, MECHANIC I 18 $19,207.00 1
TIMOTHY HILLERY MAlNT. WORKER I 11 $17,587.51 3
DAVID KERR MAlNT.WORKER I 11 $15,408.00 1 $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394,00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56%
GARY COFFMAN WTP OPR. 18 $21,069.31 4
CARL ZUBEK WWTP OPR. 18 $20,648.00 1
JOHN BOOTH REUSE TECH 18 $20,648.00 2
ROEBERT SCHOLTEN MAlNT. WORKER I 11 $18,304.51 2
DAlE WRIGHT MAlNT. WORKER I 18 $20,167,00 2
RICHARD LONG MAINT. WORKER I 11 $15,408.00 2 $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56% $15,802,00 $394,00 2.56% $15,802.00 $394.00 2.56%
BRIAN WILSON MAINT. WORKER I 11 $19,207.00 1
JAMES C. MILLER MAINT. WORKER I 11 $14,333.00 1 $15,802,00 $1,469.00 10.25% $15,802.00 $1,469.00 10.25% $15,802.00 $1,469.00 10.25%
BEVERL Y COLE ADMIN. SECRETARY 15 $23,195.19 11
$17,019,43 94.04% $17,019.43 94.04% $17,019.43 94.04%
$810.45 4.48% $810.45 4.48% $810.45 4.48%
21 21 21
2A-3
15-May-96
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS PROPOSED SALARY STIJDY RECOMMENDATIONS
TO BE IMPLEMENTED OC1OBER 1, 1996
ALTERNATlVE "A" ALTERNATIVE "S" AL TERNA11VE "C"
PROJECTED LENGTH PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST 10 PERCENT
PAY 10-01-96 OF OCT.96 IMPLEMENT INCREASE OCT. 96 IMPLEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPLEMENT INCREASE
NAME JOB TllLE GRADE SALARY SERVICE SALARIES SlUDY SALARIES SlUDY SALARIES SlUDY
CHARLES SEXTON POLICE CHIEF 33 $49,963.87 21
ROBERT PIEPER CAPTAIN 29 $39,621.05 17
GLENN TOLLESON CAPTAIN 29 $35,643,00 10 $36,218.00 $575.00 1.61%
EDMUND TAYLOR LIEUTENANT 27 $38,599.88 21
RONALD COX LIEUTENANT 27 $31,286.00 10
MICHAEL NOLAND INTERNAL INY. 20 $28,867.50 11
ROBERT CABLE DETECTIVE 20 $26,363.64 9
JAMES WILKINS SERGEANT 22 $29,n4.03 12
JOSEPH RIDDICK SERGEANT 22 $29,910.00 9
GARY BARll.ETT SERGEANT 22 $26.423.64 9 $28.3n.00 $1,953,36 7.39% $27,026.00 $602.36 2.28%
KEVIN BRUNELLE OFFICER 20 $23,676.90 8 $24,513.00 $836.10 3.53%
FRED GOLD LIEUTENANT 27 $31,286.00 6
THOMAS BROXTON OFFICER 20 $26,001.00 8
WILLIAM MAXWELL SERGEANT 22 $28,803.00 8
MARK POTTER COMM RELATOFFICER 20 $25,170.38 8
JAMES FLANNIGAN DETECTIVE S.I.U. 20 $25,761.59 7
JOSE' ROMERO OFFICER 20 $25,170.00 7
GREGG TISCHLER DETECTIVE 20 $24,823.00 6
ERIC FARON DETECTIVE 20 $23,725.64 6 $24,513.00 $787,36 3.32%
ROBERT MUNSHOWER SERGEANT 22 $26,367.00 6 $28,3n.00 $2.010.00 7.62% $27,026,00 $659.00 2.50%
DOUGLASS SEELY RESOURCE OFFICER 20 $23,502.40 5 $24,513.00 $1,010.60 4.30%
CHRISTOPHER DEISLER OFFICER 20 $23,921.00 4 $24.513.00 $592.00 2.47%
RICHARD ROBINSON OFFICER 20 $23.921.00 4 $24,513.00 $592,00 2.47%
CAROLYN TRUHAN OFFICER 20 $22,870.00 2 $24,513.00 $1.643.00 7.18% $23,346,00 $476.00 2.08%
CONSTANCE OLDHAM OFFICER 20 $22,976.00 3 $24,513.00 $1,537.00 6.69% $23,346.00 $370.00 1.61%
WILLIAM GROVE PROPERTY~DENCE 20 $22,870.00 2 $24,513.00 $1,643,00 7,18% $23,346.00 $476.00 2.08%
JASON CULVER OFFICER 20 $22,764.00 2 $24,513.00 $1,749.00 7.68% $23,346.00 $582.00 2.56%
MARK MESSEGUER OFFICER 20 $22,235.00 1 $24,513.00 $2,278.00 10.25% $23,346.00 $1,111.00 5.00%
LOWELL WILLIAMS OFFICER 20 $22,235.00 1 $24,513.00 $2,278.00 10.25% $23,346.00 $1,111,00 5,00%
KENNETH FREIN OFFICER 20 $22,764.00 1 $24,513.00 $1.749,00 7.68% $23,346.00 $582.00 2.56%
DARIUS BROWN OFFICER 20 $22.764,00 1 $24,513.00 $1.749.00 7.68% $23,346.00 $582.00 2.56%
PASCUAL HERRERA, JR OFFICER 20 $22,764,00 1 $24.513.00 $1.749.00 7.68% $23,346.00 $582.00 2.56%
ALAN SMITH OFFICER 20 $21.176.00 1 $24,513.00 $3,337.00 15.76% $23,346.00 $2,170.00 10.25% $22,231.00 $1,055,00 4,98%
JACK MORGAN OFFICER 20 $21,176.00 1 $24,513.00 $3,337,00 15.76% $23,346,00 $2.170.00 10.25% $22,231.00 $1,055.00 4.98%
GARY A NELSON OFFICER 20 $21,176.00 1 $24,513.00 $3,337.00 15.76% $23,346.00 $2,170.00 10.25% $22,231,00 $1.055,00 4.98%
MICHAEL ROBBINS OFFICER 20 $21.176.00 1 $24,513.00 $3,337.00 15.76% $23,346.00 $2,170,00 10.25% $22,231,00 $1,055.00 4.98%
TRACY LYNN EGAN OFFICER 20 $21,176,00 1 $24,513.00 $3,337.00 15.76% $23,346.00 $2,170.00 10.25% $22,231.00 $1,055.00 4.98%
KEVIN L PRESLEY OFFICER 20 $21,176.00 1 $24,513.00 $3.337.00 15.76% $23,346.00 $2,170.00 10.25% $22,231.00 $1,055.00 4.98%
JAMES WICKMAN OFFICER 20 $21.176,00 1 $24,513.00 $3,337,00 15,76% $23,346.00 $2,170.00 10.25% $22,231.00 $1,055.00 4.98%
MARK PADGETT OFFICER 20 $21,176.00 1 $24,513.00 $3,337.00 15,76% $23,346.00 $2,170.00 10.25% $22,231.00 $1,055.00 4.98%
ROBERT HEATWOLE OFFICER 20 $21,176.00 1 $24,513.00 $3,337.00 15,76% $23,346.00 $2.170.00 10.25% $22,231.00 $1.055.00 4.98%
ROBIN BERNOSKY OFFICER 20 $21,176.00 1 $24,513.00 $3,337,00 15.76% $23,346.00 $2,170.00 10.25% $22,231.00 $1,055.00 4.98%
2A-4
15-May-96
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS PROPOSED SALARY STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS
TO BE IMPlEMENTED OCTOBER 1, 1996
ALTERNATIVE "A" AI.. TERNATIVE "8" AI.. TERNATIVE "C"
PROJECTED LENGTH PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT
PAY 10-01-96 OF OCT. 96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE
NAME JOB 1111.E GRADE SAlARY SERVICE SAlARIES SruDY SAlARIES SruDY SAlARIES SruDY
LEEANN HAVlRD DISPATCHER 14 $16,674.96 2 $18,292.00 $1,617.04 9.70% $17,421.00 $746.04 4,47%
SHANNON HERMAN DISPATCHER 14 $16,592.00 3 $18,292.00 $1,700.00 10.25% $17,421,00 $829.00 5,00%
CHARLOTTE WILLIAMS DISPATCHER 14 $15,762.40 1 $18,292.00 $2,529.60 16.05% $17,421,00 $1,658.60 10,52% $16,592.00 $829.60 5.26%
EDllH FARNAM COMM. SUPERVISOR 15 $20,046.66 10
TAMMY COLLAZO DISPATCHER 14 $18,002.00 2 $18,292.00 $290.00 1.61%
JASON KERLEY DISPATCHER 14 $17,836.00 1 $18,292.00 $456.00 2.56%
TERRI LYNN KESSLER DISPATCHER 14 $17,707.00 1 $18,292.00 $585.00 3.30%
ANGELA JO KENNARD DISPATCHER 14 $16,923.00 1 $18,292.00 $1,369.00 8.09% $17,421,00 $498.00 2.94%
CONSTANCE FIFELSKI DISPATCHER 14 $14,932.80 1 $18,292.00 $3,359,20 22.50% $17,421,00 $2,488.20 16.66% $16,592.00 $1.659.20 11.11%
SHIRLEY A SMITH DISPATCHER 14 $14,932,80 1 $18,292,00 $3,359.20 22,50% $17,421.00 $2,488.20 16.66% $16,592.00 $1,659.20 11.11%
ELLEN SIMPSON SECRETARY 15 $23.417.38 11
MARY HESS RECORDS CLERK 15 $20,174.03 9
LENA TITUS RECORDS CLERK 15 $17,508.19 5 $18,292.00 $783.81 4.48%
MARY WATSON COMPUTER SYSTEM MGR 14 $18,292.00 6 $19,207.00 $915.00 5.00% $19,207.00 $915,00 5.00",(, $19,207,00 $915.00 5.00%
KRISTAL CHUZAS ASST COMPUTER MGR 14 $16,757.82 3
SHARON MILLER TRAINING SPECIAUST 15 $17,508.19 4 $18,292.00 $783.81 4.48%
SHARON BANNINGA DATA ENTRY CLERK 12 $18,750.30 9
VIVIAN ANN GOULD DATA ENTRY CLERK 12 $16,2n.61 3
ALLEN WHITE CODE INSPECTOR 19 $22,705.96 4
$75,849.08 373.09% $38,456.40 194,51% $15,613.00 82.31%
$1,896.23 9.33% $1,326.08 6.71% $1,040.87 5,49%
40 29 15
2A-5
15-May-96
CITY a= WINTER SPRINGS PROPOSED SALARY STUDY RECOMMENDATlONS
TO BE IMPlEMENTED OCTOBER 1, 1996
ALTERNATIVE 'A' AL TERNATlVE 'a- AL TERNAllVE 'C'
PROJECTED LENGTH PROPOSED COSTTO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT PROPOSED COST TO PERCENT
PAY 10-01-96 OF OCT. 96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE OCT.96 IMPlEMENT INCREASE
NAME JOB TlTLE GRADE SALARY SERVICE SALARIES STUDY SALARIES STUDY SALARIES STUDY
TIMOTHY LALLATHIN FIRE CHIEF/EMT 33 $53.510.94 20
DAVID O'BRIEN DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF/EMT 29 $44,103.90 16
WILLIAM MEYER FF/APPARATUS OPER 21 $31,707.80 21
RONALD THOMPSON FF/APPARATUS OPER/EMT 21 $29,878.97 19
DAVID TRYON L1EUTENANT/EMT 23 $31,080.83 18
KEITH GUGIELMELLO BATTALION CHIEF/EMT 26 $37,715,15 18
EDWARD FORREST BATTALION CHIEF/EMT 26 $35,159.34 12
DAVID MYERS BATTALION CHIEFIPM 26 $31,022.55 10 $31,286.00 $263.45 0.85%
ROBERT DALLAS FIRE MARSHAL/EMT 26 $35,319.60 16
STANLEY LAZLO L1EUTENANT/EMT 23 $31,480.62 15
COREY GREEN L1EUTENANT/PM 23 $30,318.79 11
WILLIAM RIVERA LIEUTENANT/EMT 23 $29,875.93 16
BRIAN MERVIN FF/APPARATUS OPER/EMT 21 $25.454.34 7 $25,739.00 $284.66 1,12%
JEFFERY BRETHOUWER FF/RESCUE TECH/PM 19 $24,297.00 7
MATHEW HOOL FF/APPARATUS OPER/EMT 21 $25,089.00 6 $25,739.00 $650.00 2.59%
THOMAS GREY FF/APPARATUS OPER./EMT 21 $24,438.n 5 $25,739.00 $1,300.23 5.32% $24,513.00 $74.23 0,30%
MARC BAUMGART FF/APPARATUS OPER/PM 21 $25,184.13 6 $25,739,00 $554.87 2.20%
RICHARD RIGGLE FF/APPARATUS OPER/PM 21 $24,325.47 5 $25,739.00 $1,413.53 5.81% $24,513,00 $187.53 o.n%
PAUL ANDERSON FF/APPARATUS OPER/PM 19 $24,067.00 5 $25,739.00 $1,672.00 6.95% $24,513,00 $446.00 1.85%
STEPHEN KEEFER FF/APPARATUS OPER/EMT 21 $25,747.00 5
MICHAEL HOHNHORST FF/RESCUE TECH/pM 19 $22,744.72 4 $23,346.00 $601.28 2.64%
JEFFREY MCCALL FF/RESCUE TECH/PM 19 $22,257.84 4 $23,346.00 $1,088.36 4.89%
JEFFREY J FORTUNE FF/RESCUE TECH/EMT 19 $23,902.00 4
JOHN BAILES FF/APPARATUS OPER/EMT 21 $24,458.00 4 $25,739,00 $1,281.00 5.24% $24,513,00 $55.00 0,22%
JAMES REILLEY FF/APPARATUS OPER/EMT 21 $24,458.00 4 $25,739.00 $1,281.00 5.24% $24,513.00 $55.00 0.22%
SHANE N MASSARI FF/RESCUE TECH/EMT 19 $21,882.00 2 $23,346.00 $1,464.00 6.69% $22,234.00 $352.00 1.61%
JEREMY L MYERS FF/RESCUE TECH/EMT 19 $21,882.00 2 $23,346.00 $1,464.00 6,69% $22,234.00 $352.00 1,61%
PATRICK AUSTIN FF/RESCUE TECH/EMT 19 $22,184,00 1 $23,346.00 $1,162.00 5.24% $22,234.00 $50.00 0.23%
ROBERT BECK TRAINING CHIEFIPM 26 $35,197.78 14
HENRY SCHNEIDER LIEUTENANT/PM 23 $29,556.68 11
DONALD FARNUM LIEUTENANT/PM 23 $31,959.00 14
CARL PILCHER EMS DIV CHIEF 26 $33,013.67 13
STEVEN MOLNAR FF/APPARATUS OPER/PM 21 $26,856.42 7
JOSEPH BORDONARO FF/APPARATUS OPER/PM 21 $26,298.00 7
JOHN QUINTEROS FF/APPARATUS OPER/PM 21 $24,124.34 4 $25,739.00 $1,614.66 6.69% $24,513.00 $388.66 1,61%
EDWARD HINCHEY FF/RESCUE TECHIEMT 19 $21,275.84 2 $23,346.00 $2,070.16 9.73% $22,234.00 $958.16 4.50%
JOHN BERGER, II FF/RESCUE TECH/EMT 19 $21,176,00 2 $23,346.00 $2,170.00 10.25% $22,234.00 $1,058.00 5,00%
KEVIN SIMS FF/RESCUE TECH/PM 19 $20,167.00 1 $23,346.00 $3,179.00 15.76% $22,234,00 $2,067.00 10.25% $21,176.00 $1,009.00 5.00%
PATRICIA SCHRAFF ADMIN SECRETARY 15 $24,390.00 12
$23,514.20 103.90% $6,043.58 28.18% $1,009.00 5.00%
$1,306.34 5,n% $503.63 2.35% $1,009.00 5.00%
18 12 1
5012873.15
$116,382.71 571.04%
$1,473.20 7.23%
79
$61,519,41 316,73%
$992,25 5,11%
62
$33,641.43 181.35%
$909.23 4.900A.
37
2A-6
15-May-96
ATTACHMENTS
2-B CURRENT MERIT
PLAN
2-C REVISED MERIT
PLAN WITH CODY
REVISIONS
2-D REVISED MERIT
PLAN ADDING 2
STEPS
CURRENT MERIT PLAN
SALARY SCHEDULE
PAY STEP MINIMUM MAXIMUM
GRADE AMOUNT EL 1 2 3 4
10 $1,365 $13,650 $15,015 $16,380 $17,745 $19,110
11 $1 ,433 $14,333 $15,766 $17,200 $18,633 $20,066
12 $1 ,505 $15,049 $16,554 $18,059 $19,564 $21 ,069
13 $1 ,580 $15,802 $17,382 $18,962 $20,542 $22,122
14 $1 ,659 $16,592 $18,251 $19,910 $21,569 $23,228
15 $1 ,742 $17,421 $19,163 $20,906 $22,648 $24,390
16 $1,829 $18,292 $20,121 $21,951 $23,780 $25,609
17 $0
18 $1,921 $19,207 $21 ,128 $23,049 $24,969 $26,890
19 $2,017 $20,167 $22,184 $24,201 $26,217 $28,234
20 $2,118 $21 ,176 $23,294 $25,411 $27,529 $29,646
21 $2,224 $22,234 $24,458 $26,681 $28,905 $31,128
22 $2,335 $23,346 $25,681 $28,016 $30,350 $32,685
23 $2,452 $24,513 $26,965 $29,416 $31,868 $34,319
24 $2,574 $25,739 $28,313 $30,887 $33,461 $36,035
25 $2,703 $27,026 $29,729 $32,431 $35,134 $37,836
26 $2,838 $28,377 $31,215 $34,053 $36,890 $39,728
27 $3,005 $29,796 $32,801 $35,806 $38,810 $41,815
28 $3,129 $31,286 $34,41 5 $37,543 $40,672 $43,800
29 $3,285 $32,850 $36,135 $39,420 $42,705 $45,990
30 $3,449 $34,493 $37,942 $41,392 $44,841 $48,290
31 $3,622 $36,218 $39,840 $43,462 $47,083 $50,705
32 $3,803 $38,028 $41,831 $45,634 $49,437 $53,240
33 $3,993 $39,930 $43,923 $47,916 $51,909 $55,902
34 $4,193 $41,926 $46,11 9 $50,312 $54,504 $58,697
35 $4,402 $44,023 $48,425 $52,828 $57,230 $61,632
36 $4,622 $46,224 $50,846 $55,469 $60,091 $64,713
37 $4,854 $48,535 $53,389 $58,242 $63,096 $67,949
38 $5,096 $50,962 $56,058 $61,154 $66,250 $71,346
8.78% 10.00% 9.09% 8.33% 7.69%
2-B
15-May-96
REVISED MERIT PLAN
INCLUDING CODY REVISIONS
SALARY SCHEDULE
PAY STEP MINIMUM MAXIMUM
GRADE AMOUNT EL 1 2 3 4
10 $1,536 $13,650 $15,186 $16,722 $18,257 $19,793
11 $1,613 $14,333 $15,946 $17,558 $19,171 $20,783
12 $1 ,693 $15,049 $16,742 $18,436 $20,129 $21,822
13 $1,778 $15,802 $17,580 $19,358 $21 ,136 $22,914
14 $1 ,867 $16,592 $18,459 $20,326 $22,192 $24,059
15 $1,960 $17,421 $19,381 $21,341 $23,301 $25,261
16 $2,058 $18,292 $20,350 $22,408 $24,466 $26,524
17 $2,161 $19,207 $21,368 $23,529 $25,690 $27,851
18 $2,269 $20,167 $22,436 $24,705 $26,974 $29,243
19 $2,383 $21 ,176 $23,559 $25,941 $28,324 $30,706
20 $2,502 $22,234 $24,736 $27,237 $29,739 $32,240
21 $2,627 $23,346 $25,973 $28,600 $31,226 $33,853
22 $2,758 $24,513 $27,271 $30,029 $32,787 $35,545
23 $2,896 $25,739 $28,635 $31,531 $34,427 $37,323
24 $3,041 $27,026 $30,067 $33,108 $36,148 $39,189
25 $3,193 $28,377 $31,570 $34,763 $37,955 $41,148
26 $3,352 $29,796 $33,148 $36,501 $39,853 $43,205
27 $3,520 $31,286 $34,806 $38,326 $41,846 $45,366
28 $3,696 $32,850 $36,546 $40,242 $43,938 $47,634
29 $3,881 $34,493 $38,374 $42,255 $46,135 $50,01 6
30 $4,075 $36,218 $40,293 $44,368 $48,443 $52,518
31 $4,279 $38,028 $42,307 $46,585 $50,864 $55,142
32 $4,493 $39,930 $44,423 $48,915 $53,408 $57,900
33 $4,717 $41,926 $46,643 $51,360 $56,077 $60,794
34 $4,953 $44,023 $48,976 $53,929 $58,882 $63,835
35 $5,201 $46,224 $51,425 $56,626 $61,826 $67,027
36 $5,461 $48,535 $53,996 $59,457 $64,917 $70,378
37 $5,734 $50,962 $56,696 $62,430 $68,163 $73,897
38 $6,097 $53,510 $59,607 $65,704 $71 ,800 $77,897
39 $6,322 $56,186 $62,508 $68,829 $75,151 $81,472
40 $6,638 $58,995 $65,633 $72,270 $78,908 $85,545
9.85% 11.39% 10.23% 9.28% 8.49%
2-C
15-May-96
REVISED MERIT PLAN
INCLUDING CODY REVISIONS
AND ADDING TWO ADDITION STEPS
SALARY SCHEDULE
PAY STEP MINIMUM MAXIMUM
GRADE AMOUNT EL 1 2 3 4 5 6
10 $1,024 $13,650 $14,674 $15,698 $16,722 $17,745 $18,769 $19,793
11 $1,075 $14,333 $15,408 $16,483 $17,558 $18,633 $19,708 $20,783
12 $1,129 $15,049 $16,178 $17,307 $18,436 $19,564 $20,693 $21,822
13 $1,185 $15,802 $16,987 $18,173 $19,358 $20,543 $21,729 $22,914
14 $1,245 $16,592 $17,837 $19,081 $20,326 $21,570 $22,815 $24,059
15 $1,307 $17,421 $18,728 $20,034 $21,341 $22,648 $23,954 $25,261
16 $1,372 $18,292 $19,664 $21,036 $22,408 $23,780 $25,152 $26,524
17 $1,441 $19,207 $20,648 $22,088 $23,529 $24,970 $26,410 $27,851
18 $1,513 $20,167 $21,680 $23,192 $24,705 $26,218 $27,730 $29,243
19 $1,588 $21,176 $22,764 $24,353 $25,941 $27,529 $29,118 $30,706
20 $1,668 $22,234 $23,902 $25,569 $27,237 $28,905 $30,572 $32,240
21 $1,751 $23,346 $25,097 $26,848 $28,600 $30,351 $32,102 $33,853
22 $1,839 $24,513 $26,352 $28,190 $30,029 $31,868 $33,706 $35,545
23 $1 ,931 $25,739 $27,670 $29,600 $31,531 $33,462 $35,392 $37,323
24 $2,027 $27,026 $29,053 $31,080 $33,108 $35,135 $37,162 $39,189
25 $2,129 $28,377 $30,506 $32,634 $34,763 $36,891 $39,020 $41,148
26 $2,235 $29,796 $32,031 $34,266 $36,501 $38,735 $40,970 $43,205
27 $2,347 $31,286 $33,633 $35,979 $38,326 $40,673 $43,019 $45,366
28 $2,464 $32,850 $35,314 $37,778 $40,242 $42,706 $45,170 $47,634
29 $2,587 $34,493 $37,080 $39,667 $42,255 $44,842 $47,429 $50,016
30 $2,717 $36,218 $38,935 $41,651 $44,368 $47,085 $49,801 $52,518
31 $2,852 $38,028 $40,880 $43,,733 $46,585 $49,437 $52,290 $55,142
32 $2,995 $39,930 $42,925 $45,920 $48,915 $51,910 $54,905 $57,900
33 $3,145 $41,926 $45,071 $48,215 $51,360 $54,505 $57,649 $60,794
34 $3,302 $44,023 $47,325 $50,627 $53,929 $57,231 $60,533 $63,835
35 $3,467 $46,224 $49,691 $53,158 $56,626 $60,093 $63,560 $67,027
36 $3,641 $48,535 $52,176 $55,816 $59,457 $63,097 $66,738 $70,378
37 $3,823 $50,962 $54,785 $58,607 $62,430 $66,252 $70,075 $73,897
38 $4,014 $53,510 $57,524 $61,537 $65,551 $69,565 $73,578 $77,592
39 $4,214 $56,186 $60,400 $64,615 $68,829 $73,043 $77,258 $81,472
40 $4,425 $58,995 $63,420 $67,845 $72,270 $76,695 $81,120 $85,545
6.39% 7.50% 6.98% 6.52% 6.12% 5.77% 5.45%
2-D
15-May-96