Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Chief Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs revised police‑chief pay range and refers schedule to full council
Summary
City Manager Chris proposed folding prior longevity and an expected 4% increase into base pay to set a police‑chief range of $150,816–$185,000; the committee recommended referring a revised schedule (4% step increase without rolling in longevity) to full council for approval and inclusion in recruitment materials.
Get email alerts on the Police Chief Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City Manager Chris presented a proposed revision to the chief of police salary schedule, explaining that prior contract items (3% longevity and a planned 4% annual increase) could be folded into base pay to create a consistent advertised range to aid recruitment. "My request and recommendation is to take that 7% total, build it into base, take it out of the contract moving forward," he said, proposing a beginning step of $150,816 and a high step of $185,000.
Committee members questioned whether longevity should be folded into base or preserved as a retention tool. One member argued longevity payments are meant to incentivize retention and that folding them into base pay would immediately pay the benefit to a successor; that member recommended increasing steps by 4% and leaving longevity separate until the applicant pool is known. Chris said longevity and post‑certificate pay remain negotiating levers and that staff would include clear salary ranges in recruitment materials.
Staff described the recruitment timeline: advertise for six weeks after full council approval of the schedule, interview in late April, and expect a hire potentially by mid‑July depending on candidate timing. Public comment asked about benefit burden and comparability; staff estimated a typical benefit load of about 25% and explained that some nearby jurisdictions (for example Moraga) were not comparable because of different pension (PERS) status.
Outcome: The committee recommended forwarding the revised salary schedule to the full council with a 4% step increase and without folding longevity into base pay; staff will include the approved schedule in the recruitment brochure and retain discretionary levers (longevity, sign‑on, post‑certificate pay) for negotiation as needed.
