Newszap Forums Home
 Search       Members   Calendar   Help   Home 
Search by username
Not logged in - Login | Register 

New "Chief of Staff" position
 
 New Topic   Reply   Print 
AuthorPost
rvukanovich
Member
 

Joined: Wed May 17th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 286
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue May 13th, 2008 05:49 pm
 Quote  Reply 
How did the title of Mayor and Council Division Manager get in the job roster without the approval of the Council, has staff been changing the way we are conducting business.

rvukanovich
Member
 

Joined: Wed May 17th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 286
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun May 11th, 2008 06:05 pm
 Quote  Reply 

Executive Assistant to $55K,  

Surprise, AZ News

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun May 11th, 2008 04:00 pm
 Quote  Reply 
spin wrote...

Well, you haven't answered my question (after asking numerous times) about what the "assistant" has done. So, NO, I'm not going to share any info with you. Remember, "Loose lips sink ships." :shock::shock::shock::shock:

But we aren't talking about the "assistant" position.  And I did and have answered the question about what has she done....I DON'T CARE WHAT SHE HAS DONE, IT IS NONE OF MY CONCERN AND ITS NONE OF YOURS EITHER.  The only people who need to be concerned is her boss, the CM who we pay good money to oversee the employees.  How many times do I have to say that before you actually hear it??  Enough on her already.  Get over it, you are sounding like a very jealous person.

We are talking about your obvious dislike, and again an almost jealousy of this lady Ms Archibald and all I am asking is what is your relationship with her that you know so much about her?  Loose lips?  Are we talking military secrets here?  Aside from being able to send you over the edge, what is the big deal?  :cool:

 

spincycle
Member
 

Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 157
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun May 11th, 2008 06:58 am
 Quote  Reply 
razenkn wrote: Spin, you do a very good job in spinning but you didn't answer my question.  What is your personal agenda with Ms Archibald? Why does she make you so mad, it's obvious you know her at a personal level.  Is she even in the picture anymore? She is being paid to do what, by who?  You seem to know a lot about what's going on here, please share. :cool:


 


 



Well, you haven't answered my question (after asking numerous times) about what the "assistant" has done. So, NO, I'm not going to share any info with you. Remember, "Loose lips sink ships." :shock::shock::shock::shock:

Enjoy your evening..

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun May 11th, 2008 05:09 am
 Quote  Reply 
 

Yeah, screaming off the board...get over myself, perhaps you should follow that advice....spin wrote....

Last time I checked that would be the job MARIANNE ARCHIBALD is supposed to be doing.

SHE IS BEING PAID TO DO, SO LET'S SEE
HER DO IT!!!


When you write in bold huge fonts that is the same as SCREAMING! In this case, screeching!!!!:shock: 

Spin, you do a very good job in spinning but you didn't answer my question.  What is your personal agenda with Ms Archibald? Why does she make you so mad, it's obvious you know her at a personal level.  Is she even in the picture anymore? She is being paid to do what, by who?  You seem to know a lot about what's going on here, please share. :cool:


 


 

Last edited on Sun May 11th, 2008 05:16 am by razenkn

spincycle
Member
 

Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 157
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 10:20 pm
 Quote  Reply 
razenkn wrote:
Spin wrote..

Between the "assistant" issue, issues regarding the museum/Marianne Archibald, etc, many are beginning to see Truitt as a Republican/salesman, in a non-partisian position. Take that any way you want. That's MY opinion.


 

First of all, there is no "assistant" issue, that is a overblown hype to undermine the new council.  (WRONG!) Second, what does being a Republican have anything to do with anything?  That is just your partisan hatred bias showing. (Oh, don't play dumb. You know what it has to do with. By the way, I've never stated my party affiliation-or lack thereof). 

But third, this one is the most intriguing to me.  You seem to have an inordinate amount of angst with the museum/Marianne Archibald "issue".  You bring her name up often and usually end up coming unglued practically screaming off the board when you speak about her.  Now I wouldn't know Ms Archibald if I ran into her face to face, but you on the other hand appear to have a real personal vendetta against this woman.  What is up with you and this Ms Archibald lady? (Intriguing to you, huh? "Screaming off the board"? Get over yourself. You wouldn't know Ms. Archibald if you ran into her face to face? Is that right? Not what I heard...).

 

Last edited on Sat May 10th, 2008 10:24 pm by spincycle

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 09:20 pm
 Quote  Reply 

Spin wrote..

Between the "assistant" issue, issues regarding the museum/Marianne Archibald, etc, many are beginning to see Truitt as a Republican/salesman, in a non-partisian position. Take that any way you want. That's MY opinion.


 

First of all, there is no "assistant" issue, that is a overblown hype to undermine the new council.  Second, what does being a Republican have anything to do with anything?  That is just your partisan hatred bias showing. 

But third, this one is the most intriguing to me.  You seem to have an inordinate amount of angst with the museum/Marianne Archibald "issue".  You bring her name up often and usually end up coming unglued practically screaming off the board when you speak about her.  Now I wouldn't know Ms Archibald if I ran into her face to face, but you on the other hand appear to have a real personal vendetta against this woman.  What is up with you and this Ms Archibald lady?

 

spincycle
Member
 

Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 157
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 09:06 pm
 Quote  Reply 
razenkn wrote:  

You are wrong Spin, I don't protect Mayor Truitt, because he doesn't need protecting.  However, he is the ultimate professional and what you observe from me is respect.  I completely respect him for how he conducts his professional and personal life.  All you have to do is watch him during the meetings and what you observe is knowledgeable professionalism.  Until I see something different, I will continue to support him and be proud he is our Mayor.


 

 

 

 


His "personal life"? Tell us about his personal life.

Between the "assistant" issue, issues regarding the museum/Marianne Archibald, etc, many are beginning to see Truitt as a Republican/salesman, in a non-partisian position. Take that any way you want. That's MY opinion.

I will say, there are some on the council who are quickly gaining my respect and I hope they keep up the good work for the citizens of this city. :cool:

foxtrotlady
Member
 

Joined: Sun Mar 9th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 4
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 09:01 pm
 Quote  Reply 
razenkn wrote: Reactr wrote: Razenkn: Mike does not need you to tell him what to say or do. Take care of your own posts and let others worry about their own. You have repeatedly chastised people whom have commented about current council as losers whom supported council members ousted in  the 2007 election. That is simply not the truth. There are at least several that simply want the rancor to end. We have the opinion writing up a job spec sheet full of fluff, redundant statements, delegations of authority not permitted by Surprise law and resolutions etc. should not be permitted to go unchallenged. IT appears a majority of the council is willing to support  a pig in a poke. The interim city manager and HR director seem to be willing associates.Of course, what choice do they have?

I  originally thought an assistant to the mayor and council might be viable . The piece of distortion presented Thursday night revealed severe manipulation. No one should appreciate being manipulated by elected officials and their subordinates.

Mike and others can speak for themselves. IN my subsequent comments on this subject , I will not be contacting you for approval.

I've not attempted to speak for either one of you so that doesn't make sense, I just state my opinion like it or not.  Apparently that would be a not. :)

Perhaps I hit a nerve there reactr?  If you were on the ballots last election, you didn't win, so you are NOT an elected official and as far as I can tell from your comments you are NOT on the City payroll.  I will state this again, we pay an extraordinary amount of money( as in our tax dollars?) to specialists and professionals to handle the City's personnel matters and it is my opinion that we should leave the decision making up to them.  If our City is to be run by ordinary citizens like you and me then we would have 100,000 different opinions on how to do so.   I don't know how else to state that any clearer. Allow them to do their jobs.

Of course you are free to criticize how the job description is written or if it's necessary at all but that doesn't make your thoughts and opinions better than those who are actually on the payroll doing the job they were hired to do.  But to come on here and take potshots at these professionals just trying to do their jobs is insulting as well as detrimental to staff morale. 

I'm having a hard time understanding your desire to micromanage the City officials ( they are elected officials and once again it is our tax dollars) and staff, and what do you expect to gain from that?  Why would I want you to contact me for my approval?  Half the time, and I don't mean this in a bad way but I don't have a clue what you are trying to say.  I can only state my own opinion and that is for the last time, people should back off and let the professionals and elected officials do their jobs.  End of discussion for me. :cool: 


 


I find it amusing that you stump for Truitt in every post you make...you seem to want to let him do anything he wants.  Well, as long as they are using my tax dollars, whether you like it or not, I have a say in how they are used.

Truitt has not done anything professional since he took office, he has been the king of back door deals and under the table agreements. 

This new position sounds like he wants another puppet in office to get done whatever he wants without any input from the citizens or the council...he must really think he is the king of Surprise.

 

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 08:26 pm
 Quote  Reply 
 

You are wrong Spin, I don't protect Mayor Truitt, because he doesn't need protecting.  However, he is the ultimate professional and what you observe from me is respect.  I completely respect him for how he conducts his professional and personal life.  All you have to do is watch him during the meetings and what you observe is knowledgeable professionalism.  Until I see something different, I will continue to support him and be proud he is our Mayor.

It is very important for our City officials to conduct themselves in a professional manner and to respect our City staff members for their professional knowledge.  Why shouldn't we expect that?  I'm not getting your point (if there is one other than taking another opportunity to bash). :cool:

 

 

 

 

Last edited on Sat May 10th, 2008 08:33 pm by razenkn

spincycle
Member
 

Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 157
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 07:57 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Reactr wrote: Anyone that wrote up the job spec sheet is simply impersonating a professional.

Exactly! And from what I understand, THAT IS A FACT!

Let me tell you something "Cane Raiser", you keep bringing up professional this and professional that, if the Mayor was a professional, he would step the hell back and let human resources do their job!

Truitt is not human resources!

Your protection of Truitt is amusing. The real fun is about to begin... You can take that to the bank! 

Reactr
Member
 

Joined: Wed Mar 12th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 50
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 07:25 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Anyone that wrote up the job spec sheet is simply impersonating a professional.

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 07:15 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Reactr wrote: Razenkn: Mike does not need you to tell him what to say or do. Take care of your own posts and let others worry about their own. You have repeatedly chastised people whom have commented about current council as losers whom supported council members ousted in  the 2007 election. That is simply not the truth. There are at least several that simply want the rancor to end. We have the opinion writing up a job spec sheet full of fluff, redundant statements, delegations of authority not permitted by Surprise law and resolutions etc. should not be permitted to go unchallenged. IT appears a majority of the council is willing to support  a pig in a poke. The interim city manager and HR director seem to be willing associates.Of course, what choice do they have?

I  originally thought an assistant to the mayor and council might be viable . The piece of distortion presented Thursday night revealed severe manipulation. No one should appreciate being manipulated by elected officials and their subordinates.

Mike and others can speak for themselves. IN my subsequent comments on this subject , I will not be contacting you for approval.

I've not attempted to speak for either one of you so that doesn't make sense, I just state my opinion like it or not.  Apparently that would be a not. :)

Perhaps I hit a nerve there reactr?  If you were on the ballots last election, you didn't win, so you are NOT an elected official and as far as I can tell from your comments you are NOT on the City payroll.  I will state this again, we pay an extraordinary amount of money to specialists and professionals to handle the City's personnel matters and it is my opinion that we should leave the decision making up to them.  If our City is to be run by ordinary citizens like you and me then we would have 100,000 different opinions on how to do so.   I don't know how else to state that any clearer. Allow them to do their jobs.

Of course you are free to criticize how the job description is written or if it's necessary at all but that doesn't make your thoughts and opinions better than those who are actually on the payroll doing the job they were hired to do.  But to come on here and take potshots at these professionals just trying to do their jobs is insulting as well as detrimental to staff morale. 

I'm having a hard time understanding your desire to micromanage the City officials and staff, and what do you expect to gain from that?  Why would I want you to contact me for my approval?  Half the time, and I don't mean this in a bad way but I don't have a clue what you are trying to say.  I can only state my own opinion and that is for the last time, people should back off and let the professionals and elected officials do their jobs.  End of discussion for me. :cool: 


 

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 06:37 pm
 Quote  Reply 
 

I completely agree Mike, we will just have to disagree on this one.  Speaking of Mayor Shafer, I watched the memorial service this a.m. and found it to be a really nice tribute to her.  It was very well done.  Were you able to attend?  She was such an intrical part of our City and she will definitely be missed.

If anyone was unable to attend and would like to view the ceremony, go to http://www.surpriseaz.com for times they will be broadcasting it on channel 11, I believe they will only be running it this weekend.

 

mike woodard
Member


Joined: Wed Sep 28th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 344
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 05:36 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Razenkn~

I appreciate your opinion and your right to express it, just as I have expressed mine. That's one of the great things about this country, we all have the right to make our voices heard. So I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Former Mayor Shafer and I had to do that often, but without rancor.  

Reactr
Member
 

Joined: Wed Mar 12th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 50
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 05:11 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Razenkn: Mike does not need you to tell him what to say or do. Take care of your own posts and let others worry about their own. You have repeatedly chastised people whom have commented about current council as losers whom supported council members ousted in  the 2007 election. That is simply not the truth. There are at least several that simply want the rancor to end. We have the opinion writing up a job spec sheet full of fluff, redundant statements, delegations of authority not permitted by Surprise law and resolutions etc. should not be permitted to go unchallenged. IT appears a majority of the council is willing to support  a pig in a poke. The interim city manager and HR director seem to be willing associates.Of course, what choice do they have?

I  originally thought an assistant to the mayor and council might be viable . The piece of distortion presented Thursday night revealed severe manipulation. No one should appreciate being manipulated by elected officials and their subordinates.

Mike and others can speak for themselves. IN my subsequent comments on this subject , I will not be contacting you for approval.

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 03:59 pm
 Quote  Reply 
 

Mike, I have to say this again.  It is simply a personnel matter and we have no business involving ourselves in it.  We pay big salaries for people to take care of these issues and for the life of me I don't know what is so important here that you feel the need to dissect this position.  If you wanted to be fair, then pull all the upper management job descriptions and see if they match up with the person in place and salary.  But this obsession with one proposed position as though its very prospect is some sort of monumental detriment or threat to our City is completely unreasonable.

It's an employment issue.  It's a commonplace job.  Nothing sinister about it.

If this is the standard that is to be set for future positions and possible hires, we are going to be in big trouble.  Who in their right mind would want to apply for a job here that has anything going for them at all? 

We will never progress if this is how we continue to do business in our City.  Allow the experts we pay to do their jobs and we need to stay out of it.  This council deserves better than this and unless they start lining their own pockets we need to back off a little and let them do the job we elected them to do.  It's called respect.

 

 

Last edited on Sat May 10th, 2008 05:07 pm by razenkn

spincycle
Member
 

Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 157
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 03:58 pm
 Quote  Reply 
The blue highlighted areas are MAJOR concerns. From the surface it looks as though Truitt is trying to get this position approved before the permanent city manager is in place.

I would like to know how we can slow this train down before it derails and flys off the track. After all the years I have worked in local government I have never seen or heard of the things that have/are being done in this city. :?

jbhait
Member
 

Joined: Wed Mar 29th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 41
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 03:42 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Folks I need your enlightened assistance to form a meaningful opinion on this issue.  Since a new City Manager is likely to take place in the near future - should not this issue be deferred until the new CM has an input into this issue.

Why the rush? - Tight budget year - this is a major cost - very little documentation or explanation why this is needed.

I look forward to being educated on this issue.  Thanks.

 

 

mike woodard
Member


Joined: Wed Sep 28th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 344
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 02:33 pm
 Quote  Reply 


Blue highlighted areas are of concern to me, you would have to decide if it's a concern to you. example: Supervision of staff ~ what staff, where did staff come from?

Red highlighted appear to be repetitive

 

FULL JOB  DESCRIPTION

 

Job Title:


MAYOR AND COUNCIL DIVISION MANAGER



Class Title:


Division Manager



Department:


City Manager



Reports To:


City Manager



FLSA Status:


Exempt



Job Status:


Full-time; Non-classified



Salary Grade:


D-6-2



Salary:


$76,689.68 - $99,696.67 - $122,703.90

 

SUMMARY
Incumbents coordinate the activities of the Mayor and City Council with other divisions and departments.  In addition, this position represents the Mayor and City Council’s office at meetings when required and appropriate; advises the Mayor and City Council, providing extensive professional assistance, project management, and recommendations on City issues and performs highly responsible management work covering a broad range of municipal activities, including the supervision of staff assigned to the Mayor and City Council offices and budget administration.  This is a professional position requiring extensive experience with policy development, legislation, intergovernmental relations, and lobbying, with exceptional analytical and communication skills.

 

ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
This list of duties and responsibilities is illustrative only, and is not a comprehensive listing of all the duties and responsibilities performed by positions in this class.

 

  • Supervises staff to include: prioritizing and assigning work; conducting performance evaluations; ensuring staff are trained; ensuring that employees follow policies and procedures; maintaining a healthy and safe working environment; and, making hiring, termination, and disciplinary recommendations
  • Provides a visible link between elected officials and the public, acting as a representative of the Mayor and City Council in dealings with constituents, city departments, and committees
  • Directs the activities of assigned division to include overseeing the development and administration of policies, procedures, programs, goals and objectives
  • Represents the Mayor and City Council and/or division at/on a variety of meetings, advisory groups, committees, agencies, councils, and/or other related groups
  • Administers and monitors the division budget including allocating resources and approving expenditures
  • Reviews, prepares and presents reports on Division programs and activities
  • Responds to and resolves sensitive questions or concerns from the general public, partners, the business community, and staff
  • Performs other duties of a similar nature or level
 

SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES
Exercises supervision of personnel in related area of responsibility

 

QUALIFICATIONS

To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily.  The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required.  Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.

 

 

Knowledge of:
  • Municipal management, administration, and operational functions
  • Budgeting principles
  • Management research and evaluation techniques, methods, and procedures
  • Public relations principles
  • Project management principles and practices
  • Public administration and governmental operations
  • Applicable local, state and federal laws, codes, rules, policies, procedures and regulations
  • Program development and administration principles and practices
  • Project management principles
  • Community and public relations principles
 
Skill in:
  • Using a computer and related software applications
 

Ability to:
  • Monitor and evaluate employees
  • Prioritize and assign work
  • Manage division operations
  • Manage multiple priorities simultaneously
  • Analyze and develop policies and procedures
  • Ensure compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations
  • Interpret and apply applicable laws, rules, and regulations
  • Analyze problems, identifying alternative solutions, projecting consequences of proposed actions, and implementing recommendations in support of goals
  • Analyze, interpret, and understand technical and statistical information
  • Conduct negotiations and mediations
  • Prepare and give presentations
  • Speak in public
  • Write technical procedures, policies, contracts, and/or other related detailed materials;
  • Apply program practices to complex situations
  • Communicate, interpersonal skills as applied to interaction with coworkers, supervisor, the general public, etc. sufficient to exchange or convey information and to receive work direction
 

 

EDUCATION and/or EXPERIENCE
Bachelor’s Degree in a related field, seven years technical experience, and three years of progressively responsible supervisory experience directly related to the area assigned; or, an equivalent combination of education and experience sufficient to successfully perform the essential duties of the job such as those listed above.

 
CERTIFICATES, LICENSES, REGISTRATIONS
Must have at the time of hire and be able to maintain a valid Arizona driver license

 

PHYSICAL DEMANDS

The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.

 

Sedentary Work: Exerting up to 10 pounds of force occasionally and/or a negligible amount of force frequently or constantly to lift, carry, push, pull or otherwise move objects, including the human body.  Sedentary work involves sitting most of the time.  Jobs are sedentary if walking and standing are required only occasionally and all other sedentary criteria are met.

 

WORK ENVIRONMENT

The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job.  Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. 

 

Position is typically office or administrative work and is not substantially exposed to adverse environmental conditions

 

 

I HAVE REVIEWED AND UNDERSTAND THE DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND REQUIREMENTS OF MY JOB DESCRIPTION.

 

 

 

 

                                                                       

Employee Name (Printed)

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                   

Employee Signature                                                      Date

 

Last edited on Sat May 10th, 2008 03:12 pm by mike woodard

cindisue_g
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 979
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 08:34 pm
 Quote  Reply 
mike woodard wrote: cindisue_g wrote: mike woodard wrote: The council funded the yet to be created position at 100,000, my understanding is that included total cost to the city if this position is created.

I will ask my questions again.

So Mike, am I correct that if they are talking about $125,000, the actual salary would have been $87,500 and at $100,000 would be $70,000.

 The comment was made:  I have checked out other salaries for the Surprise city employees and they do not make what this so called assistant is going to be making.  Not even the city clerk who has been here 17 years and in is worth every penny she makes.  Since this job's salary without benefits would be approximately $70,000, is this more than the City Clerk makes?  Are there any city employees that would make as much or more than this position? 

Point being, if it is true what Surprisedstacy said and she checked out salaries for city employees and none of them make what this positions is going to be making, including the City Clerk, then I feel we have a real problem. 

 Thanks,

Cindisue



Cindisue~

The answer to your first question about the 100/125,000 is that the numbers you state are in the general ballpark range

Regarding the other employees yes some make less and some make more, I believe the City Clerk's range is above that of either of the above numbers. Again, I am looking at total cost to employ a person. Unfortunately this particular position (in my opinion~and not shared by others) is that this position has nothing of a comparative nature to other positions.

I hope this answers your question, and you know what, fish does sound good for dinner tonight ...mmm 
Yes you did Mike, I'm glad to know that the City Clerk's salary is higher than this proposed new position.  I don't believe there is a comparison as well, but since Surprisedstacy seemed positive that the city clerk did not make as much as the proposed position, I wanted to check my facts before I sent an email to the Mayor and my council person.  Thanks again and I don't eat fish, going for a good steak dinner tonight..

mike woodard
Member


Joined: Wed Sep 28th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 344
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 08:11 pm
 Quote  Reply 
cindisue_g wrote: mike woodard wrote: The council funded the yet to be created position at 100,000, my understanding is that included total cost to the city if this position is created.

I will ask my questions again.

So Mike, am I correct that if they are talking about $125,000, the actual salary would have been $87,500 and at $100,000 would be $70,000.

 The comment was made:  I have checked out other salaries for the Surprise city employees and they do not make what this so called assistant is going to be making.  Not even the city clerk who has been here 17 years and in is worth every penny she makes.  Since this job's salary without benefits would be approximately $70,000, is this more than the City Clerk makes?  Are there any city employees that would make as much or more than this position? 

Point being, if it is true what Surprisedstacy said and she checked out salaries for city employees and none of them make what this positions is going to be making, including the City Clerk, then I feel we have a real problem. 

 Thanks,

Cindisue



Cindisue~

The answer to your first question about the 100/125,000 is that the numbers you state are in the general ballpark range

Regarding the other employees yes some make less and some make more, I believe the City Clerk's range is above that of either of the above numbers. Again, I am looking at total cost to employ a person. Unfortunately this particular position (in my opinion~and not shared by others) is that this position has nothing of a comparative nature to other positions.

I hope this answers your question, and you know what, fish does sound good for dinner tonight ...mmm 

cindisue_g
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 979
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 07:51 pm
 Quote  Reply 
mike woodard wrote: The council funded the yet to be created position at 100,000, my understanding is that included total cost to the city if this position is created.

I will ask my questions again.

So Mike, am I correct that if they are talking about $125,000, the actual salary would have been $87,500 and at $100,000 would be $70,000.

 The comment was made:  I have checked out other salaries for the Surprise city employees and they do not make what this so called assistant is going to be making.  Not even the city clerk who has been here 17 years and in is worth every penny she makes.  Since this job's salary without benefits would be approximately $70,000, is this more than the City Clerk makes?  Are there any city employees that would make as much or more than this position? 

Point being, if it is true what Surprisedstacy said and she checked out salaries for city employees and none of them make what this positions is going to be making, including the City Clerk, then I feel we have a real problem. 

 Thanks,

Cindisue

mike woodard
Member


Joined: Wed Sep 28th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 344
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 07:49 pm
 Quote  Reply 
The council funded the yet to be created position at 100,000, my understanding is that included total cost to the city if this position is created.

In addition to the compensation there are many other extremly important issues to be contended with. The functionality of the position under the current municipal code and ethics policy, Councilman Johnson touched on this last night and there are several other areas they will have to deal with.

Last edited on Fri May 9th, 2008 07:57 pm by mike woodard

cindisue_g
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 979
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 05:18 pm
 Quote  Reply 
rvukanovich wrote: When you say the salary is $100,000 unless they say other wise, it is $100,000 plus the 30% approximately.

Sorry I must have misunderstood what Mike was saying.  So Bob you are saying that the salary would have been $162,500 and is now $130,000 including benefits?

Last edited on Fri May 9th, 2008 05:36 pm by cindisue_g

rvukanovich
Member
 

Joined: Wed May 17th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 286
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 04:32 pm
 Quote  Reply 
When you say the salary is $100,000 unless they say other wise, it is $100,000 plus the 30% approximately.

spincycle
Member
 

Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 157
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 03:59 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Reactr wrote: To speak of compensation for a contrived position in the same sentence with the pay of our City Clerk-who has a defined list of essential duties- is nonsense.

Exactly.

And the two key words here are: CONTRIVED AND NONSENSE! 

cindisue_g
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 979
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 03:03 pm
 Quote  Reply 
mike woodard wrote: A rule of thumb guide is 30% of the base wage would be the employers additional cost for benefits and other expenses.


So Mike, am I correct that if they are talking about $125,000, the actual salary would have been $87,500 and at $100,000 would be $70,000.

 The comment was made:  I have checked out other salaries for the Surprise city employees and they do not make what this so called assistant is going to be making.  Not even the city clerk who has been here 17 years and in is worth every penny she makes.  Since this job's salary without benefits would be approximately $70,000, is this more than the City Clerk makes?  Are there any city employees that would make as much or more than this position? 

Point being, if it is true what Surprisedstacy said and she checked out salaries for city employees and none of them make what this positions is going to be making, including the City Clerk, then I feel we have a real problem. 

 Thanks,

Cindisue

Reactr
Member
 

Joined: Wed Mar 12th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 50
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 02:50 pm
 Quote  Reply 
To speak of compensation for a contrived position in the same sentence with the pay of our City Clerk-who has a defined list of essential duties- is nonsense.

mike woodard
Member


Joined: Wed Sep 28th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 344
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 02:23 pm
 Quote  Reply 
A rule of thumb guide is 30% of the base wage would be the employers additional cost for benefits and other expenses.

cindisue_g
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 979
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 02:02 pm
 Quote  Reply 
mike woodard wrote: razenkn wrote: .

I also believe the amount stated on this blog is incorrect.  I think the salary is at a much lower rate for this position, somewhere around $83,000 which is right in line with other communities. 

On an earlier posting I used a figure of I believe 150,700, at the time I posted that number it was the latest number available, tonight that number changed to 125,572 then 100,000. These numbers  would reflect the budgeted total cost to the city; salary + benefits + other expenses depending on which is adopted. In the accounting world one looks at the total cost, not partial costs. If I misled some people I apologize, but habits over 40 years are hard to break, and total is still total.

The other interesting feature is the name changes, Assistant to the Council and Mayor, then Chief of Staff, tonight it was Mayor and Council Division Manager.
Mike, I wonder if you would clarify a little.  If the salary + benefits are $100.000 for this position what would the actual take home salary possibly be?  Also, what is the take home salary of the city clerk and what is salary + benefits for the city clerk.  I'm not implying that this jobs be compared, but just wondering what the salary vs benefits would be for a city employee.  Thanks.

mike woodard
Member


Joined: Wed Sep 28th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 344
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 05:42 am
 Quote  Reply 
razenkn wrote: .

I also believe the amount stated on this blog is incorrect.  I think the salary is at a much lower rate for this position, somewhere around $83,000 which is right in line with other communities. 

On an earlier posting I used a figure of I believe 150,700, at the time I posted that number it was the latest number available, tonight that number changed to 125,572 then 100,000. These numbers  would reflect the budgeted total cost to the city; salary + benefits + other expenses depending on which is adopted. In the accounting world one looks at the total cost, not partial costs. If I misled some people I apologize, but habits over 40 years are hard to break, and total is still total.

The other interesting feature is the name changes, Assistant to the Council and Mayor, then Chief of Staff, tonight it was Mayor and Council Division Manager.

Last edited on Fri May 9th, 2008 05:50 am by mike woodard

Mamazoyd
Member


Joined: Sun Jul 9th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 947
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 05:17 am
 Quote  Reply 
razenkn wrote:  

That's a fairly sad statement.  I watched the same meeting as you and I didn't see any such thing as Mayor Truitt sticking it to anyone.  In fact, he was by far the most professional and even handed one in the group.  I think you are imagining things.  If he wants this position, nothing earthshaking about that.  If he gets it fine, if he doesn't fine.  Why make more of it than what it is? 

You are just kidding about the past council not doing any thing this brazen, I have to tell you Mama, I laughed out loud when I read that.  Just kidding right?  If you want, I will be happy to reiterate the last council's transgressions, but I don't think anyone really wants to hear about them for the 150th time.  But will be happy to accommodate if you want to go there.  :cool:


 
Brazen just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  To me, this is just throwing one's "power" into the faces of one's constitutents by not following a normal protocol and the claimed supposed "transparency" in the creation of staff.  I don't think we need to go into the entire background again here raz.  People are beginning to write about Truitt's ruse already.  I imagine we'll have to see if it continues or if the ol' boy settles down now that the six month time frame is getting really, really close.

spincycle
Member
 

Joined: Wed Oct 17th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 157
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 05:17 am
 Quote  Reply 
razenkn wrote:  

Sunny, I think you misunderstood the meeting.  The vote tonight was to establish funding for such a position.  The position can't be posted until there is established funding.  I think your comments are really undeserved other than we agree that there is nothing wrong with requesting such a position.  You people only want to make a big mountain out of a mole hill because Mayor Truitt is in office and not who you voted for.  Well, can't help that, it's called democracy and the people spoke.

I also believe the amount stated on this blog is incorrect.  I think the salary is at a much lower rate for this position, somewhere around $83,000 which is right in line with other communities. 

How many more times do you need to be told that this has NOTHING to do with the former council members?

Since you're the big cheerleader for Truitt, I'm going to ask you again, WHAT HAS THE ASSISTANT DONE???


The assistant's position does not even come close to commanding a $150,000 a year salary, no matter who gets the job. Completely and utterly ludicrous!!!

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 04:23 am
 Quote  Reply 
 

Sunny, I think you misunderstood the meeting.  The vote tonight was to establish funding for such a position.  The position can't be posted until there is established funding.  I think your comments are really undeserved other than we agree that there is nothing wrong with requesting such a position.  You people only want to make a big mountain out of a mole hill because Mayor Truitt is in office and not who you voted for.  Well, can't help that, it's called democracy and the people spoke.

I also believe the amount stated on this blog is incorrect.  I think the salary is at a much lower rate for this position, somewhere around $83,000 which is right in line with other communities. 

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 04:13 am
 Quote  Reply 
 

That's a fairly sad statement.  I watched the same meeting as you and I didn't see any such thing as Mayor Truitt sticking it to anyone.  In fact, he was by far the most professional and even handed one in the group.  I think you are imagining things.  If he wants this position, nothing earthshaking about that.  If he gets it fine, if he doesn't fine.  Why make more of it than what it is? 

You are just kidding about the past council not doing any thing this brazen, I have to tell you Mama, I laughed out loud when I read that.  Just kidding right?  If you want, I will be happy to reiterate the last council's transgressions, but I don't think anyone really wants to hear about them for the 150th time.  But will be happy to accommodate if you want to go there.  :cool:


 

Last edited on Fri May 9th, 2008 04:18 am by razenkn

Mamazoyd
Member


Joined: Sun Jul 9th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 947
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 03:53 am
 Quote  Reply 
Sunny Surprise wrote: Is this true?

How sweet it is to be ... Truitt's pal


Looks like Surprise Mayor Lyn Truitt isn't backing off plans to hire a Chief of Staff for the City Council. And there isn't anything wrong with Surprise having that post. Most cities do.

But what doesn't feel right is that there was no public selection process. No cast of candidates applying for the job. Nope. It wasn't even advertised. Instead, Truitt handpicked Miryam Gutier.

And she happens to be someone who was hired to do work on this campaign. A political pal, if you will. Given the political climate in Surprise, where residents are still feeling fleeced and have high expectations, Truitt should have taken a far different approach.

At his first council meeting, Truitt and the council locked in a $53,670 six-month contract for Gutier.
Tonight (Thursday) the City Council will consider making the position permanent. The pay range for this thus-far non-advertised position is between $76,689.68 and $122,703.90.

Nice chunk of change. By comparison, the previous Surprise city manager was pulling down $180,000.

I think that Truitt needs a new strategy. He campaigned on a philosophy of a transparent, open government. And yet without public discussion or even open dialog with his council, he pulls the job and Gutier out of his hat.

You can't blame residents for believing that they're just getting more of the same.

I don't know Sunny, I don't think the past Council did anything quite this brazen.  This is like Truitt pushing it into our faces right in the open.  Talk about balls!

Sunny Surprise
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 11th, 2006
Location: Surprise, Arizona USA
Posts: 92
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 03:37 am
 Quote  Reply 
Is this true?

How sweet it is to be ... Truitt's pal


Looks like Surprise Mayor Lyn Truitt isn't backing off plans to hire a Chief of Staff for the City Council. And there isn't anything wrong with Surprise having that post. Most cities do.

But what doesn't feel right is that there was no public selection process. No cast of candidates applying for the job. Nope. It wasn't even advertised. Instead, Truitt handpicked Miryam Gutier.

And she happens to be someone who was hired to do work on this campaign. A political pal, if you will. Given the political climate in Surprise, where residents are still feeling fleeced and have high expectations, Truitt should have taken a far different approach.

At his first council meeting, Truitt and the council locked in a $53,670 six-month contract for Gutier.
Tonight (Thursday) the City Council will consider making the position permanent. The pay range for this thus-far non-advertised position is between $76,689.68 and $122,703.90.

Nice chunk of change. By comparison, the previous Surprise city manager was pulling down $180,000.

I think that Truitt needs a new strategy. He campaigned on a philosophy of a transparent, open government. And yet without public discussion or even open dialog with his council, he pulls the job and Gutier out of his hat.

You can't blame residents for believing that they're just getting more of the same.

razenkn
Member
 

Joined: Thu Aug 31st, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1764
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 02:27 am
 Quote  Reply 
 

The City staff gets a 3.5% (or at least a 3. something) cost of living increase.  The raises they recieved last year were quite good so as in years past, they have times when they receive a hefty raise and in some years they receive a COL.  Pretty much like all employers.  I don't think any of them are in financial straits however.  It's my understanding they get compensated very well on average.

 

Craig
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 21st, 2006
Location: Surprise, Arizona USA
Posts: 1606
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Thu May 8th, 2008 05:27 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Wondering what the pay increases if any do the hard working city employees get?

mike woodard
Member


Joined: Wed Sep 28th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 344
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Thu May 8th, 2008 01:08 pm
 Quote  Reply 
No it was increased by another 15,000.00 to 150,000.00 total cost for the position. It started in January at 100,00; on a contractual basis that expires June 30th, then at the budget retreat a proposed new employee position "Chief of Staff", went to 135,000 and is now budgeted for 150,000. It has NOT been approved at that rate and the creation of the position has NOT been approved yet so citizens seeking to present input to the decsion still have an opportunity.

Last edited on Thu May 8th, 2008 04:31 pm by mike woodard