HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20110726 THE CITY OF ASPEN
Memorandum
DATE: July 11, 2011
TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
FROM: Barry Crook, Assistant City Manager, Alissa Farrell, Human Resources
Director, Don Taylor, Finance and Administrative Director, Kathryn
Koch, City Clerk, and Scott Miller, Capital Asset Director
SUBJECT: Total Compensation Goal Report
Attached is the 2010 -2011 Total Compensation Report and Employee Housing Plan. The
committee's recommendations are listed on pages 11 and 31 -32. Appendix A is a summary of
employee satisfaction and engagement from 2010 and begins on page 33.
At the 2010 council retreat, the above employees were assigned a goal to review total
compensation and to provide recommendations. This BYY goal requested the defined
committee to analyze the current total compensation package for city employees. The team
was also tasked with recommending a total compensation plan based on the compensation
elements seen by employees as conveying the most benefit and are most effective in attracting
and retaining a highly skilled workforce.
To determine recommendations, the team sent out a city -wide benefit survey in 2011 and city
wide housing survey in 2010. The results of the surveys are summarized within the reports.
The compensation report contains historical and current compensation information, turnover
and exit interview data, and total compensation metrics which assisted the committee to
determine comprehensive recommendations. The employee housing report contains a history
of city employee housing, the current housing need, retirement in city -owned units, and
recommendations for other ways to meet housing needs.
1
THE CITY OF ASPEN
2010 -2011 Total Compensation Report
I. Background
The purpose of this report is to analyze the current total compensation package for city
employees in order to develop a comprehensive total compensation plan based on the
compensation elements seen by employees as conveying the most benefit and are most
effective in attracting and retaining a highly skilled workforce. The total compensation plan for
city employees includes wages, benefits, medical /dental coverage and housing benefits.
Housing recommendations and information follow on page 14.
A. Current Total Compensation Package
When assessing and providing recommendations on the city's total compensation package, the
first step is to review the 2011 total compensation package.
The City of Aspen benefits for 2011 include:
Health Insurance and Benefits
For 2011, employees are offered the following coverage: medical, dental, vision, prescription and
life insurance. Mid -term disability (MTD), long -term disability (LTD) and accidental death &
dismemberment (AD &D) are provided at no cost to city employees. Supplemental life insurance
for over the amount paid by the city (lx the annual salary up to $50,000) for employee, spouse
and child coverage is offered on a voluntary payroll - deduction basis along with additional AD &D
options.
The city has established a high deductible health plan (HDHP) with a health savings account (H5A)
option to combat the significant annual increases in health care costs. The HDHP is a consumer
driven option. The consumer driven theory is that if consumers are more exposed to the costs of
health care, they will be 'driven' to use only what they need and shop for the best value, this uses
2
the same approach a consumer would use if they were to shop for a new car. This option saves
the city and employees money. Under the HDHP, employees have a higher deductible; however,
they have the option to use their HSA monies to help meet the deductible. Health savings
accounts are used in conjunction with an HDHP for qualified medical expenses and can be rolled
over from year to year. Presently, the city contributes annually $500 for employee only coverage
or $1,000 for all other tiers to an employee's HSA. Additionally, the city offers employees the
option to choose the Preferred Provider Option (PPO). The city continues to offer two health plan
options for 2011, consistent with employee benefit survey results indicating employees would
prefer health plan options.
Wellness Program
The City also offers a wellness program that includes an on -site wellness nutritionist, annual
wellness fair and wellness educational meetings. This wellness program is designed to keep
employees the healthiest they can be, which has a direct impact on the rising costs of health care.
Retirement Plans
The City offers a deferred compensation (457) and a 401(a) retirement plan through ICMA -RC.
The City contributes 5.5% of the employee's gross salary to the 401(a) plan, which is fully vested
after 5 years of employment. Vesting requirements are in increments of 20% annually.
Therefore, if an employee leaves the city after one year of employment, they would receive
20% of the employer matching contribution. Furthermore, if an employee were to leave after
five years of employment, they would receive the entire amount of the employer contribution.
This contribution level increases to 6.5% at five years and 7.5% at 10 years. Employee
contributions to the 457 plan are optional.
Police officers are required to contribute 9% of their gross monthly salary to a State approved
retirement plan through ICMA -RC. The City matches the police contribution of 9% and adds an
additional .5 %. Officers are fully vested after 5 years of employment, in increments of 20 %. After
five years the City will contribute 10.5 %, and after 10 years, 11.5 %. The City also contributes 2.65%
to a 457 deferred compensation plan for police officers employed prior to April 1986, and 2.20%
for those employed after that date.
Cafeteria Option
The City of Aspen contributes an additional dollar amount which would include the fitness
wellness amount, for regular full time employees not on introductory status, and a pro -rated
amount for seasonal with benefits employees, to a health savings account (HSA), medical
spending account, dependent care flexible spending account and /or the fitness wellness bonus.
3
Additional Rewards
Three bonus programs are available for employees: the "Lookin' Good" reward program, the
Outstanding Employee Bonus Award Program and the Above and Beyond Award. The City also
offers a Goals and Outcome Measures Bonus for employees who achieve department goals, as
well as service awards and safety wellness bucks.
B. Total Compensation History
The following section offers a historical perspective of total compensation.
Prior total compensation from 2009 to current information is provided below:
For 2011, year -to -date, employee salaries remain frozen. The Fitness Wellness bonus is now
included in the 'cafeteria option'. For the first time, the fitness wellness bonus was offered in a
'cafeteria style option' where employees could choose how they would like a specific dollar
amount allocated. Employees could receive the money into a health savings account, a medical
savings account, dependent care account or fitness wellness. This option allows employees to
choose how they would prefer a designated dollar amount allocated. Health insurance
premiums for the high deductible health plan remain unchanged however health insurance
premiums for the Basic PPO plan have increased. In July 2011, a 0.5% increase was added to
the employer retirement contribution.
In 2010, salaries remained frozen, positions remain unfilled and further positions were
eliminated. Health insurance premiums for the high deductible health plan remain unchanged.
However health insurance for the Basic PPO plan increased employee premium ranges from
$16.00 to $79.00 per month.
In 2009, salaries were frozen, positions went unfilled and positions were eliminated while
health insurance costs increased. The retirement bonus program was revised and scheduled to
be phased out. Moreover, the service award bonus program, goals and outcomes, and fitness
wellness benefits were reduced by 42 %. The focus for total compensation dollars was
reassessed. In the past, the focus was geared towards employees at the end of their career;
since then, the philosophy was revised to assign dollars for recruitment and retention purposes
rather than towards length of service.
The chart below represents the change in total compensation as an overall reduction in pay,
excluding health insurance, for the average employee from 2008 -2011:
4
: ..:....:........:.....: ...... 2011 Change turn 2008-2011
I. Years Comp.
i:::::: of (exclu. Goals & Fitness/ Service Benefit
Service Health) Outcomes Wellness Awards Loss Loss% ,
Average 10 $75,000 ($450) ($690) ($200) .. ($1,340) (1 -8%)
;Sample 1 25 $100,000 ($450) ($690) ($1,500) ($2,640) (2- )
!Sample 2 2 $5.0 ( $450) ($690) ($50) ($1,190) (2.4%)
In June of 2011, a city wide survey was sent out requesting information from city employees on
how they value their benefits. The intent is to continue to refine and build the most meaningful
total compensation package possible to recruit and retain employees.
Employees were asked questions along the lines of:
"On a scale of one to ten, where 1 is the most valuable and 10 is the least valuable, indicate the
value of each of the compensation elements to you as a city employee."
The key point to take away from the survey is:
City employees overwhelming find wages the most valuable compensation element.
Health insurance is the second most valuable compensation element and vacation time
off is the third.
Themes within the comments section include:
➢ Employees voiced concern over rising health care costs.
➢ Employees perceive the value of employee housing as low because they do not have
access to it. Therefore, a large majority of employees did not value employee housing.
Employees felt that there is an inequity in terms of those that receive some form of city
housing benefit and those that do not.
Employees believe that an increase in wages is important in order to retain the current
workforce.
Some employees mentioned potential inequity with new employees who have been
frozen in salary since their arrival in 2009. Upon their arrival, their salary was
immediately frozen. The new employees now feel as if they contribute significantly but
continue to be compensated at the lower end of the range.
5
Compensation Methodology
The city's compensation plan is based on the principles of external and internal compensation
equity. The city annually reviews employers within its designated peer group and analyzes
positions common within similar employers which the city calls its 'peer group'. These
positions are called `benchmark' positions and would include positions such as an
Administrative Assistant, Finance Director or Maintenance Technician. The majority of the
duties for these types of positions are common within any of the city's peer group.
The city's goal is to effectively recruit and retain the best employees. In accordance with this
goal, the city pays at or around the 85 th percentile amongst its designated peer group however;
compensation is consistently evaluated and reviewed pending certain variables such as
turnover data.
The peer group is determined by employers with similar budget size and number of employees.
Presently, the city's peer group includes the Town of Vail, Town of Breckenridge and City of
Glenwood Springs. Within the city's entire peer group, although the entities are similar, the
City of Aspen has the highest cost of living component. Although the city is market driven (pay
is determined by the external peer group or `market'), all positions are also reviewed for
internal equity purposes on an annual basis. A sampling of the compensation plan and salary or
hourly ranges is below.
HOURLY
JOB TITLE Min 25th% Mid 75th% Max
BOX OFFICE REPRESENTATIVE 15.36 16.82 18.28 19.74 21.19
LIFEGUARD 15.36 16.82 18.28 19.74 21.19
C. Exit Interview Data
Below is a summary of why employees are leaving the city of Aspen. Information is gathered
from exit interviews from 2005 thru 2010.
Salary Housing Career Dissatisfaction Dissatisfaction Relocation Other
/Commute Change/ with Supervisor with Work
Retirement
2005 10% 10% 22% 0% 30% 10% 20%
(10)
2006 15% 15% 22% 8% 8% 8% 24%
(14)
2007 0% 25% 13% 38% 0% 0% 24%
(16)
2008 0% 23% 23% 23% 30% 15% 15%
6
2009 0% 22% 33% 44% 33% 0% 11%
I'1
2010 42% 17% 17% 34% 34% 0% 34%
12
*The percentages do not equal 100% because several employees stated more than one reason
for separation. The number in parenthesis is the number of employees that were interviewed.
Reviewing exit interview data is the first step in deciphering trends which may provide insight
into areas where the city may need to revisit its philosophies or practices. Trends may include
but are not limited to salary, housing circumstances, dissatisfaction with supervisor or work,
etc. This data is used to review compensation and benefits packages, supervisory and
department performances and to continuously gather feedback on how the city can improve its
overall organizational performance.
D. Turnover Information
In 2010, the city wide annual turnover rate for regular full time employees was approximately
4 %.
For 2011, year -to -date employee monthly turnover has ranged from 4% to 8% with a mean of
approximately 6.7 %.
2011 Monthly Turnover Rates:
------------------
Staff Turnover Rate (Rolling Average
20.0%
18.0%
16.0%
14.0% •
12.0% AcccptableTumoverRate
10.0%
8.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0% - —
Ite 4 444 ft° Ye
7
In 2010, according to a Mountain States Employers Council survey, the western slope
employer's average annual turnover rate for exempt and non - exempt employees was 11% and
for the resort community it was 15.9 %. Therefore, the city's target turnover rate of 10% to
16% is in line with the average turnover rate for similar entities.
Turnover research provides us with information on how to analyze and refine our turnover
data. For example, the city will focus on high - performance turnover by measuring the
percentage of turnover among the employees that contribute the most to the city. This will be
determined by correlating performance evaluations scores and supervisory feedback with
employees leaving the city. Although the target turnover rate is between 10 -16 %, the target
turnover rate for high performance employees is as close to zero as possible which would
continue to allow the city to provide exceptional services to the public.
Additionally, turnover by departments, involuntary versus voluntary turnover and exempt
versus non - exempt turnover will be analyzed and used to determine if additional supervisory
trainings need to occur or to assess the total compensation package. Exit interview data
regarding why an employee is leaving the city will be reviewed to further determine the most
productive action to retain the current workforce.
However, a degree of turnover has been shown to have positive consequences for
organizations, as well as for an individual (Abelson & Baysinger, 1984). For example, better
person -job matches, staffing flexibility, salary and fringe benefit savings, and infusion of new
ideas into the organization are among the potential benefits of positive turnover rates
(Abelson & Baysinger, 1984). The target turnover rate goals are to avoid lower productivity,
low morale and high costs associated with turnover while recognizing the value of having a
degree of turnover. Additionally, turnover data is used to keep an eye on our compensation
benefits and evaluate whether or not the city is on track with the benefits package offered.
References
Abelson, M. and B. Baysinger (1982). "Optimal and Dysfunctional Turnover: Toward an
Organizational Level Model." Academy of Management Review 9(2): 331.
II. Total Compensation Metrics
Metrics are important to include because they allow us to quantify, measure and track key
organizational performance indicators as they relate to total compensation philosophies and
objectives. We need to understand the total compensation philosophies and objectives while
taking into consideration employee feedback, then devise strategies to deliver the results and
measure through metrics how well the results are achieved or refine the goals.
8
Metric: Metric Calculation: Goal:
Turnover Rate # of employees exiting the job Target Annual Turnover Rate: 10 -16%
*Turnover rates will also be broken down
by exempt versus non - exempt, by
avg. actual # of employees departments, and voluntary versus
during the period involuntary.
x 12 *Turnover rates will be reviewed in
conjunction with exit interview data to
# mos. in period assess any potential themes that may need
to be addressed.
i ance # of high performing employees Target Rate: As close to 0% as possible
Turnover Rate exiting the job
*High performing employees are defined as
those employees that consistently receive
an overall score of 'Exceeds' on their
avg. actual # of employees performance evaluations and supervisor
during the period confirmation.
x12
# mos. in period
Employee Percentage of 'agree' or 'strongly Target Goals and Outcome Survey Score:
SatisfectioniAbility agree' received from specific Average score of 80 % 'agree' or 'strongly
toremanalemellent questions related to employee agree' (as stated in HR Goals and
PePkortliftee engagement on Goals and Outcomes) See Appendix A for Employee
Outcomes Survey. Satisfaction and Engagement Survey
Questions and 2010 Survey Results.
9
Measure Measure City of Aspen against Complete through annual compensation
Competition various peer groups. analysis.
Total Annual Total cost of compensation package Review annual goals with benchmark
Compensation Cost data.
per Employee
Total employees
10
III. Recommendations
Recommendations:
• Maintain competitiveness by continuing to strive to pay at or around the 85 percentile
within the city's various peer groups.
• Based on exit interview, the recent total compensation city -wide survey results, industry
and local standards, salary increases are recommended. A 1.5% cost of living increase is
recommended with an effective date of the next payroll after council approval. A 1.5%
cost of living increase for city employees with an effective date of approximately August
1, 2011 would cost $120,000 city -wide of which $60,000 comes from the general fund; for
the entire 2011 year the cost would be $310,000 city -wide, of which $155,000 comes from
the general fund.
• A merit increase of up to 4% is recommended for 2012 to be assessed on an employee's
anniversary date. A merit increase of up to 4% (after the 1.5% in 2011) would cost
$278,000 city wide of which $132,000 comes from the general fund.
• Continue to pursue consumer driven options for health care and continue to engage the
health team to find innovative health savings opportunities.
• Continue with the cafeteria option, employees appreciate the choices provided.
• Use high performance turnover, department turnover and non - exempt vs. exempt
turnover data in conjunction with exit interview and other methods as necessary to
annually assess the city's total compensation package. Track and evaluate the city
monthly turnover rate with the acceptable turnover rate.
• Currently, the City of Aspen does not have a compensation, management, recruitment or
benefits philosophy. In order to provide unified goals and direction, it is our
recommendation to develop and institute the below stated philosophies. Accordingly,
the city can then follow through on programs and methodologies that consistently
support the philosophies.
Suggested first draft philosophies are listed below.
A. Compensation Philosophv
A strategic compensation philosophy forms a visible link between organizational objectives,
strategies and business metrics with the overall compensation direction, while balancing the
expectations of its employees with the costs to the city.
The City of Aspen's compensation philosophy is to provide competitive total
compensation in order to recruit, retain, and motivate a qualified workforce
To ensure that employees are recognized and rewarded appropriately for their
contributions and that the City of Aspen resources are used efficiently and effectively,
the city supports a compensation system that:
11
➢ Provides comprehensive compensation that is competitive within the
appropriate labor market and is aligned with the availability of city resources.
➢ Attracts highly skilled and competent employees and retains them by providing
opportunities for learning and development.
➢ Encourages and rewards excellent performance by basing salary increases on
merit and performance.
➢ Complies with all applicable laws including equal pay laws, employment
opportunity laws, benefit regulations and the Fair Labor Standards Act.
➢ Balances the need for internal equity while recognizing the desire to be market
competitive subject to resource availability.
➢ Remains open to emerging compensation practices to address changes in the
workforce and the workplace over time.
➢ In the absence of market data, the city will continue to evaluate job worth
based on compensable factors in a fair and equitable manner.
B. Management Philosophy
Our management philosophy shall be ingrained into all of The City of Aspen's policies,
procedures and management systems. We will strive to create an environment that
embodies our Declaration of Values Statement:
We take pride in providing quality service with professionalism, integrity and honesty.
In fulfilling our responsibilities, we respect the dignity, diversity and uniqueness of each
other, the Aspen community and environment.
The principles of effectiveness, fiscal responsibility and safety guide us in enhancing the
well being of the community.
We value teamwork, a sense of humor, open communication and creativity. We actively
promote trust among ourselves and a partnership with the people we serve.
Our managers will define our values and beliefs in their everyday behavior. This shall be
apparent in everything they do, from their decision making to their communication. In
every situation, all managers of the City of Aspen should ask themselves: "Is this in the
best interest of the City of Aspen and does it support our beliefs and values ?"
C. Benefits Philosophy
The City of Aspen designs and delivers an array of comprehensive and competitive benefits to
provide employees with health, retirement, and other work - related benefits while cultivating
a culture of healthy lifestyles.
12
Guiding Principles:
➢ The city expects employees to be informed about their benefits and to make
educated benefit choices.
➢ Benefits offered are fiscally prudent.
➢ Deliver competitive benefits at a reasonable cost for the individual and city
designed to attract, retain and motivate employees.
➢ The city's retirement plan shall be a defined contribution retirement plan only.
D. Recruitment and Retention Philosophy
Our recruitment and retention philosophy is to attract and retain a highly skilled and
competent workforce that supports the city's values and beliefs.
The city will do its best to provide the following services:
➢ Support to managers at every stage of the recruitment and selection process.
➢ Require due diligence in the review of the applicant's background to ensure the
best hire possible.
➢ Provide fair and equal treatment of applicants in accordance with equal
opportunity laws.
➢ Provide a steady supply of suitable candidates that meet the organizations
objectives.
➢ Provide training and development opportunities to maximize our human
resources.
13
A Report to Council on a
Proposed Employee Housing Plan
I. Background
The purpose of this report is to examine the needs for City employee housing and to develop
and to provide a comprehensive, long term City housing and housing assistance plan to meet
those needs.
The City created the Employee Housing fund in 2008 to allocate the costs of providing its own
housing equitably to the many operating funds of the City. A calculation was initially made that
transferred $1,043,980 to the housing fund from the various funds, based on the number of
employees. This amount was intended to create a revenue stream that would allow the City to
gradually build /provide additional housing. Exhibit B shows the current adopted Employee
housing fund long range plan.
Due to the severe economic constraints of the last few years, it has been difficult to maintain
any consistency or inter -fund equity as it relates to the transfers to the Employee Housing fund.
Transfers to the fund are one of the first amounts to be reduced when budget adjustments are
being made. In 2011, the transfer into the fund is budgeted for $664,590. The long range plans
as currently adopted anticipate reinstating the amount of the various fund transfers to their
equitable shares in 2013 although it is not known if this will be realized.
A. History of City Employee Housing
The City started acquiring employee housing units in 1980 by building two duplex buildings on
Cemetery Lane. There was an imminent need to have emergency response positions such as
police officers, reside within the City of Aspen in order to provide fundamental and emergency
services to Aspen residents. Today there are 46 housing units under City control. Currently
there are twenty -one ownership units and twenty -four rental units. Most of the city's units are
"owned" by our internal service fund (Fund 505) with the exception of the rental units
controlled at Truscott 1. The City sold the housing site to APCHA and acquired a controlling
interest in 14 units there with a priority over persons on the APCHA rental waitlist. This interest
was paid for from 3 funding sources — 12 units for Parks & Recreation for mitigation associated
with the Aspen Recreation Center development, 1 for the Water Utility Fund and 1 for the
Transportation /Parking Fund. The City paid the subsidy amount to APCHA (total of $1.49
million) for the right to first refusal on 3 studio units, 8 one -BDRM units, and 3 two -BDRM units
(no higher that Category 3).
14
The current inventory is:
➢ Water Place: 23 total units (currently 4 rental, 19 ownership) — 17 townhomes and 6
single - family homes
➢ Cemetery Lane: 3 total units (1 rental, 2 ownership) — 3 duplex units
➢ Truscott: 14 total units (14 rental) — 3- studio, 8 one - bedroom units, and 3 two - bedroom
units
➢ Aspen Recreation Center: 1 rental apartment
➢ Marolt: 1 rental house
➢ Parks Department: 1 rental apartment
➢ Animal Shelter: 1 rental apartment (alternates between 1 and 2 bedroom unit with
County)
➢ Anderson Park: 1 rental apartment
➢ Burlingame Seasonal: 1 one - bedroom category 2 unit (not currently filled by a City
employee)
B. Why Be in the Housing Business?
It is important for the City organization to provide some level of employee housing as it is
impossible to live in non - subsidized housing in or near the City on a City of Aspen income. It is
important to the organization to have some portion of its employees living in or near the City in
order to insure effective delivery of services. This cannot be assured by depending on a free
market solution where our employees depend solely on their wages to participate in the local
housing market.
Prior to the City's initiative in this area, only 2 of our public safety officers lived in our
community; today there are 9 police officers (including the Chief of Police) who live at
WaterPlace alone. In addition critical water and electric utility staff are in our housing units, in
our community and readily available to respond to emergency or other critical needs.
If the average per square foot price for a condominium in Aspen today is around $900 per
square foot, and a "family sized" condominium is around 1200 square feet, that suggests a
family unit for an employee in today's Aspen free market would cost around $1.08 million. So
assuming you could get a 5% down loan, you would need $54,000 to put down on a mortgage
of $1.026 million loan. This would require approximately $5700 per month in mortgage and
household expenses and an annual income of some $250,000 (assuming an interest rate slightly
over 5 %). We believe that instead of trying to pay employees $250,000 per year to afford to
live in Aspen free market housing, it makes better sense to invest that money in housing that
can be used to house some portion of the workforce in our community and for which a long-
term return to the city organization can be had.
So like other large employers, the City has entered into the "housing business" in order to be
able to recruit and retain critical workers and have them live in the community they serve. We
do this in addition to the workforce housing efforts of the broader community and served
under the Aspen - Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) so that we can exercise greater
15
control over who is housed and when they are eligible for housing. While this option remains a
critical component to our workforce housing efforts, we feel it is a wise step to provide some
portion of workforce housing ONLY available to our employees and at the discretion of the City
Manager.
C. What is the Current Housing Need?
A survey was conducted to determine the need for employee housing among City employees.
The survey indicated a high interest in affordable housing. The following graph breaks down
employees' desire for affordable housing by their current housing situation. This is particularly
helpful in determining our priorities for providing additional housing.
In the 2009 Housing Assistance Survey the following question was asked:
Do you own or rent your residence? vs. Would you consider buying a City- controlled unit in
Aspen with current City deed restrictions?
The answers are reflected graphically below and are grouped by their current housing status.
[2. Do you own or rent your residence ?[ VS. [ .Wouldyou consider buying a city- controlled unit ...)
D 112 15 20 25 30 35
1
0 yes
own - deed restricted house
11E31 1 no
29
rent - deed restricted unit 28 1
30
own - free market house 7
2S
rent • free market rental uni... 19
}
other 61'
16
If the City Council were to decide to provide housing to all employees, the amount of housing
that we might expect to provide for each of these groups is as follows:
Employees Current Housing # desiring to Housing to Comments /Rationale
status purchase be
City Housing provided
The City would not assign high priority to providing
Own deed restricted housing 18 0 housing to an employee currently in affordable housing
The City would not assign high priority to providing
Rent deed restricted housing 28 3 housing to an employee currently in affordable housing
Own free market housing 7 7 High priority
Rent free market 19 19 High priority
Other 6 6 High priority
Total 78 35
• 35/119 (survey size) = 29.4 say 30%
• 30% x 270 average total employees = 81 additional housing units for existing employees.
In order to meet the needs of the existing workforce, without any regard to providing for a
"retiring into your unit" option we need to plan for an additional 81 units of employee
housing — for a total in the inventory of 127 units. This requires a concerted effort to plan for
and construct additional units over a reasonable time period.
D. The Issue of Retirement Into Employee Housing
Over the years there has been much discussion as to whether the City, as an employer, should
allow its employees to retire in the deed restricted units that they purchased or rent from the
City. Employees in APCHA housing are allowed to retire in their housing unit at the full benefit
Social Security eligibility age and after at least 4 years of employment in Pitkin County. There
are many factors to consider not the least of which is the ability of the City to pay for this level
of housing. For the purposes of evaluating this policy, it is assumed that elgibility would be
based on 25 years of service and attaining the age of 65 years old. Pros and cons of allowing
this are listed below.
Pros:
• 25 years of service is a significant commitment to the City. The cost of providing
the housing over employee's service and retirement can be amortized over the
25 years.
• Employees with long service are valuable contributors to the community through
the retirement.
17
Cons:
• The cost to provide this housing is very high. About $10 -12 million in housing
assets would be tied up in retirement housing.
• As an employer, our highest priority should be to providing housing to current
employees.
If the City was to consider providing housing for employees who wish to retire in their units the
number required has been calculated as follows.
There are approximately 50 employees eligible to retire at age 65 or higher with 25 years
service in the next 15 years. It is estimated that 90% of those employees will make it to the
tenure age /service. It is estimated that 65% of them would be in City owned affordable
housing which would infer 31 units would be required for retired employees within the 15
years.
In order to meet the needs of the current workforce and allow the option of retiring
employees to remain in their units, the total units required to meet both housing needs for
existing employees and those that would retire in these units would therefore be 158 units —
an increase of 31 units over that needed only to meet the needs of the current workforce.
E. What Did Our Employees Say About Retiring Into Employee Housing?
We sent a survey to the workforce asking them about a variety of opinions on retirement
options for City employee housing. We received 108 responses, half of whom were already in
deed - restricted housing of one sort or another.
➢ 63% replied that if given the opportunity they would like to live in City deed - restricted
housing (18.4% already were in either rental or owned City employee housing)
➢ 62% indicated they would take advantage of any opportunity to retire into that housing
➢ In response to the hypothetical eligibility requirement under consideration, the
responses were:
18
Different options for eligibility are under consideration, the one under heaviest
consideration is that you must be 65 years old and have been a city employee for
at least 25 years. How do you feel about this option?
Responses
0 10 20 30 40 50
24
This works for me 22.2% 1 I
' , 10
At the retirement eligibility age 9.2%
14
Age lower, years OK sinwkaimm
H' 14
Age OK, years less 12.996
H _
Something like the "rule of 85" Prf1t11111111111111111.11 24
No one should retire into city ammumnimmissimmummi,,isommimmiummum 40
housing d
Whatever SS full benefit retirement
age is
19
In response to a general question about the efficacy of the City allowing employees to retire
into City employee housing
Responses
0 10 20 30 40 50
39
Only if working employees get units
H. 22
OK regardless of impact on those working 2o.3% �
22
They can live in APCHA housing 1.{'1
0- 1•
Build more and accommodate all 11
0- 6
Shouldn't be in the business at all 11116
The survey indicates to us that there is a healthy skepticism amongst employees about
providing a retirement option into City employee housing — either because they don't think it is
a good idea or because of the desire to deal with working employee's housing needs first.
There were many comments that accompanied the survey questions and the underlying theme
is that a retirement option should come second to providing existing workers with housing
options, if at all. The benefit currently provided is viewed as a very nice benefit, but available to
only a small portion of the total workforce — and working employees should come before
retired employees until the supply of housing units can accommodate both.
1 One solution to ease the retirement transition, is to extend the length of time a City
employee would need to vacate their City -owned housing unit once they retiree. Currently, a
City employee is required to vacate their City -owned housing unit within six (6) months from
the date they leave employment with the City. A City employee that retires and has worked
for the City for a minimum of 15 years would now be eligible to stay in their housing unit for
up to one (1) year.
11. What Might We Do?
A. Pro -forma for scenarios to provide housing
There are four scenarios shown in the table below that illustrate the availability of funds and
projected housing to be provided under each fifteen year scenario. The four scenarios are:
Scenario 1. Current Funding Level; Constructed Housing. Exhibit B.
Scenario 2. Current Funding Level; Constructed Housing and Home Owner
Assistance Programs (HOAP). Exhibit C.
20
Scenario 3. Full funding; Constructed Housing and HOAP for current
employees Exhibit D.
Scenario 4. Full funding; Constructed Housing and HOAP current employees
and retirees. Exhibit E.
Scenario 1, Current Funding Level: Constructed Housing— Exhibit B
This is a scenario built on the assumption that the City will build housing for employees based
on the existing resources available (as shown in the adopted Long Range Plans (LRP)). The
financial cash flows of this scenario are shown in Exhibit B. At this resource level the City could
only expect to provide approximately 24 units of housing over the 15 year period. Most of this
housing would come in the second half of the fifteen year period as the Employee Housing
Fund returns to its historic funding levels.
Scenario 2, Current Funding Level: Constructed Housing and HOAP- Exhibit C
This is the same as Scenario 1 with the introduction of a Home Owner Assistance Program
(HOAP) to include down payment assistance and shared equity options. The HOAP uses about
$1,230,000 over the fifteen year period of the available cash flow to provide down payment
assistance to employees that may be interested. The funding level is the same as Scenario 1
and is currently what is built into the LRP's.
The HOAP could provide 25+ loans for employees to acquire free market housing over the 15
year period. This would be in addition to the 24 units of built housing. Using a HOAP would
allow us to provide employee housing in a manner that meets some of the workforce's desire,
and at a cost of subsidy much less than constructing the housing ourselves.
There are two forms of home owner assistance proposed in the program. A straight loan with
interest repaid over 15 years and a shared equity loan that is repaid upon sale of the residence
or 15 years whichever comes first. Both programs are described in detail beginning on page 25.
The employee survey conducted showed a clear interest in both forms of this assistance. It is
not known however how many would avail themselves of these programs given the down
payment requirements of each.
Scenario 3, Full Funding Level: Constructed Housing and HOAP Exhibit D
This is a scenario that reflects full funding of the employee housing need for all existing
employees desiring City housing. In order to meet the cash flow requirements of providing this
level of benefit the City would need to increase the amount of the transfers from the various
operating funds to the employee housing fund by approximately 80% from 2008 levels. 81
units would be provided in either the form of constructed housing or down payment assistance
Scenario 4. Full funding: Constructed Housing and HOAP current employees and retirees
Exhibit E.
This is a scenario that reflects full funding of the employee housing need for existing employees
and retirees. In order to meet the cash flow requirements of providing this level of benefit the
21
City would need to increase the amount of the transfers from the various operating funds to
the employee housing fund by approximately 200% from 2008 levels. 114 units would be
provided in either the form of constructed housing or down payment assistance.
Alternatives
There are alternatives to funding the cost of providing housing rather than tripling the amount
of the transfer from the City operating funds. Some of these options are as follows.
• Raise the price at which the City sells employee housing.
• Raise the criteria for retiring in City housing to 30 years of service.
• Charge a retirement premium for staying in the house after employment
ends.
• Reduce the cost /size of the housing that is built.
• Do not allow retirement in City Housing until current employee demand
is closer to being met.
B. Development Plans
There are several different methods for developing housing for City employees.
Method 1.
The approved budget for the 2010 City Employee Housing fund included a transfer from the
Employee Housing Fund to the Housing Development Fund In the amount of $2,300,000. This
was to provide cash for the design and engineering for Burlingame Phase II. The amount
transferred was an upfront payment for the number of units that it would buy. It is estimated
that this would be about 4 to 6 units. These units would go into the City housing pool and be
restricted for that purpose. It is anticipated that these units would be available sometime
beyond 2013.
Method 2.
The city owns or has an interest in many properties in various locations around Aspen. Many of
these properties were purchased for the sole purpose of ultimately being developed for
employee housing. Others have additional uses but could be redeveloped for housing. These
properties could be developed as either for -sale or rental housing. The table and location map
below list nineteen properties that have the best potential for development as housing. Of the
nineteen properties listed, the following are in some stage of planning or design:
Burlingame Phase 2- Phase 2 PUD amendments are currently under review by the
Community Development Department. Final Detail Design changes are on hold pending
final approval by Council. Construction Drawings will then be completed and the project
will await financing. A Pre -Sales effort is underway to gauge public demand for the
project. Financing for this project will likely be provided by public debt and the voter
approval of that debt will be sought in November 2011 at the earliest.
22
> BMC West- The parcel has been annexed into the City Limits. No land use planning has
been done.
➢ 802 W. Main St. and 517 Park Circle- the subject of an RFP process for a potential
Private- Public Partnership to develop these sites into employee housing.
The other sites in this table have only had conceptual planning done to identify, roughly, how
many units could be built there.
(P)ublic or (C)ity
Property Potential Units Potential Bedrooms Employee
Burlingame Phase 2 167 351 P
BMC West 185 270 P
488 Castle Creek 70 140 P
— ____.---------- ._ - -- - --
802W. Main St. 12 12 P
517 Park Circle 20 20 P
Red & Yellow Brick 30 60 P
Truscott 3 15 30 P
Subtotal Potential Public Affordable Housing 499 893
(P)ublic or (C)ity
Property Potential Units Potential Bedrooms Employee
Parks Shop 4 6 C
Water Place 50 100 C
Iselin Park / ARC 3 6 C
Ice Garden 2 4 C
ACES 2 4 C
Mill Street Parking Lot 30 45 C
Anderson Park (1101 East Cooper Ave.) 2 4 C
West Aspen Subdivision (Golf Course) 4 8 C
Subtotal Potential City of Aspen Employee Housing 97 177
Grand Totals 596 1060
23
Of these sites the city has already invested funding in the BG Phase 2 development and will
have $2.3 million worth of units available to it. The city could continue to spend funds to
acquire the rights to additional units at Burlingame. Participation in the possible partnerships
at the Main and Park Circle sites could yield additional opportunities for the city to acquire
employee units in ongoing development projects.
Of the sites listed, reasonable expectations for possible development might include only the
following sites:
Burlingame BMC West
Main St Park Circle
Parks Shop Water Place
ARC Ice Garden
Truscott 3
The other sites would likely involve neighbor opposition or present approval to develop
issues that preclude their being readily viable options. These sites still present ample
opportunity to develop additional units that would meet the need for the foreseeable future.
C. Build Housing for Sale
The average cost of subsidizing housing built for sale will vary depending on the land, the
condition of the site, the scale of the construction that the site permits and the design chosen
and the category mix of eventual buyers. In the immediate past, that has ranged from current
estimates of around $300,000 to $350,000 per unit for Burlingame Phase II (depending on the
start date and phasing option chosen) to $450,000 for the project designed for the AABC Old
Animal Shelter. For purposes of estimating costs going forward, this range of $300,000 to
$450,000 per unit is useful.
D. Build housing for rent
The construction costs, per unit, for rental housing would be very similar to the AABC costs,
depending on final design, amenities, and land costs. The subsidy is variable, depending on the
ownership and management structure of the project. The subsidy could not be calculated until
a project is identified, a conceptual design is completed, and the financial pro forma is
completed.
E. Home Owner Assistance Programs (HOAP)
Instead of bearing the total cost of providing housing, the City might wish to partner with
employees to help them find more market oriented solutions to their housing. While it is true
that this might mean more down - valley housed employees, we recognize that not all of our
workers view Aspen as their optimum housing solution — particularly if that means a trade -off
with deed - restricted solutions.
24
The following ideas are meant to offer another alternative to providing housing solutions to our
workforce that meets the spectrum of solutions they deem appropriate for their circumstances
and lets us meet the goal of recruiting and retaining a competitive workforce. These options
would still work in the Aspen area, but are more likely to be employed for more moderately
priced down valley housing opportunities. We have researched and proposed two
opportunities: (1) a down payment assistance program, and (2) a shared equity program.
➢ Down Payment Assistance Program •
In 2009, City employees were surveyed to determine their housing needs and interests. One
hundred and nineteen responses were received out of approximately three hundred
employees. Survey data indicated that 68% or 83 employees would be interested or very
interested in a down payment assistance program which would allow employees to purchase
deed restricted or free market housing in the Roaring Fork Valley.
Pros:
➢ The employee is provided monetary assistance with the option of free market or deed
restricted housing.
➢ Cost effective option with minimal risk when compared to building City units.
➢ Program promotes a sense of community ownership within the valley by providing a
creative option for home buyers.
➢ Allows the City to remain competitive with other organizations in the valley that already
offer a similar program including but not limited to: RFTA, City of Glenwood Springs,
Town of Vail, Eagle County and Pitkin County.
➢ Assists the City in recruiting and retaining a productive workforce. Reinforces retention
with one year eligibility requirement and five year loan forgiveness schedule.
➢ Provides employees with flexibility to live where they want within the boundaries of the
program.
Cons:
➢ City would be managing and handling employee loans. The City may explore the option
of outsourcing the loan process to mitigate additional workload and concerns.
25
EMPLOYEE DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Benefit Plan Description
All program terms subject to change.
Purpose: Provide a secured, subordinate loan to assist eligible employees
with the purchase of a primary residence. This benefit is offered on
a first -come, first - served basis.
Eligible Employees: Regular full -time employees of the City of Aspen with at least one
year of regular full time service with the City. One employee loan
per household.
Income Limitations: None.
Underwriting: Employee must qualify for a primary mortgage that conforms to
conventional mortgage underwriting criteria. Employee must
demonstrate reasonable capacity to assume all rights and
responsibilities associated with the primary mortgage, including,
but not limited to: payment of all taxes, insurances, HOA
management fees, property maintenance and repair.
Eligible Properties: Primary residence only. Real estate property must be located
within the Roaring Fork Valley. Eligible homes must be
permanently attached to a foundation and conform to all prevailing
building code standards.
Eligible Mortgage Employees and co- borrowers must qualify for primary mortgage
Programs financing through a reputable lending institution offering terms
acceptable to both the employee and the City. Subprime, Interest -
only, negative amortizing, balloon and short-term adjustable rate
mortgages not allowed.
Homeownership Homeownership counseling is strongly encouraged prior to loan
Counseling: closing from an approved provider.
Maximum Secured Employees may be eligible for up to 10% of the purchase price or
Loan Amount: $30,000, whichever is less for a loan amount of $800,000 or less.
Term: Maximum loan term is 15 years from the date of settlement.
26
Interest Rate: All employee loans will carry an implied interest rate established at
the time of the loan application equal to 10 year U.S. treasury rate
plus 1.0 %. Interest shall not accrue until event of repayment occurs
as described below. Upon event of repayment employee shall be
notified by the City of its assigned agent of the original principal
balance less any amounts forgiven, the Note interest rate, as
identified within the Promissory Note, monthly payment amount
and payment due date. Interest shall be retroactively applied from
the date of the loan origination upon unforgiven balance to the
date of the repayment plan. Thereafter, interest will accrue on the
unforgiven principal balance (outstanding principal balance). A
$350 application processing fee will also apply.
Repayment Terms: Loans may be repaid at any time through bi- weekly payroll
deductions. Any outstanding balance of the City loan must be paid
in full in the event of: sale; refinance of the primary mortgage
instrument; at the time the home no longer constitutes the
employee's primary residence; upon termination of employment
for any reason; or, the employee is in default of any terms or
conditions of the primary mortgage. Upon notification from the
City or its agent that the loan is due and payable, the employee will
have no more than 60 days to begin repayment of the outstanding
loan balance.
Upon termination of employment for any reason the principal and
accrued interest shall be payable monthly in an amount sufficient to
fully amortize the loan upon maturity of the Note. For example, an
employee who terminates at the 5 year term of the 15 year loan
has a repayment term of 10 years. An employee who terminates at
the 12 year term of the 15 year loan has a repayment term 3 years.
There are no pre - payment penalties.
Loan Forgiveness: Up to 10% of the original principal balance of the loan may be
forgiven by the City provided the employee maintains all conditions
for program eligibility. Employee must make a minimum
contribution towards the purchase price and related settlement
charges equal to 10% of the purchase price. Upon the 2 "
anniversary of the loan, 2% of the original principal balance will be
27
forgiven; an additional 2% is forgiven upon the 3` anniversary;
another 2% is forgiven on the 4th anniversary, and another 2% on
the 5th anniversary for a total of up to 10% to be forgiven. On the
5 anniversary of the loan, 90% of the original principal balance will
remain outstanding and must be paid upon maturity or other event
of early repayment described below. Any principal balance forgiven
by the City will be reported to the IRS as "other income" to the
employee in the year in which forgiveness is granted.
➢ Shared equity
A shared equity loan is a type of loan that allows an individual to purchase an open market unit
with assistance from its employer. The employer's assistance is in the form of a loan with no
repayment schedule, and is instead paid back when the unit sells. The employer then receives a
pro rata share of the appreciation that was realized on the unit. In the City -wide survey
completed in 2009, 65% of employees that completed the survey responded that they would be
very interested or interested in the shared equity program.
Pros:
➢ The employee and the employer both realize market appreciation. The lack of market
appreciation is one of the chief complaints about traditional employee housing
programs.
➢ The employee is motivated to maintain their property at a higher level than one where
they are not able to share in the appreciation.
➢ It requires far less capital to be committed by the employer to provide a unit of housing.
➢ It gives employees flexibility to live where they want with the boundaries of the
program.
➢ The employer gets a return on its investment that allows it to reinvest in another unit of
employee housing when it is paid off.
Cons:
➢ It is not for everyone. It would still require a significant down payment on the part of
the employee.
➢ Some care needs to be taken that the employee doesn't over pay at purchase or under
price at sale.
28
SHARED EQUITY DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Benefit Plan Description
All program terms subject to change.
Purpose: Provide a secured, subordinate loan to assist eligible employees
with the purchase of a primary residence. This benefit is offered
on a first -come, first - served basis.
Eligible Employees: Regular full -time employees of the City of Aspen with at least one
year of regular full time service. One employee loan per
household.
Income Limitations: None.
Underwriting: Employee must qualify for a primary mortgage that conforms to
conventional mortgage underwriting criteria. Employee must
demonstrate reasonable capacity to assume all rights and
responsibilities associated with the primary mortgage, including,
but not limited to: payment of all taxes, insurances, HOA
management fees, property maintenance and repair.
Eligible Properties: Primary residence only. Real property must be located within the
Aspen School District Boundaries. Eligible homes must be
permanently attached to a foundation and conform to all
prevailing building code standards.
Eligible Mortgage Employees and co- borrowers must qualify for primary mortgage
Programs financing through a reputable lending institution offering terms
acceptable to both the employee and the City. Subprime,
Interest -only, negative amortizing, balloon and adjustable rate
mortgages with resets of less than 5 years are not allowed.
Homeownership Homeownership counseling is strongly encouraged prior to loan
Counseling: closing from an approved provider.
Maximum Secured Employees may be eligible for up to 15% of the purchase price or
Loan Amount: $120,000, whichever is less for a loan amount of $800,000 or less.
29
Term: Maximum loan term is 15 years from the date of settlement.
Interest Rate: The interest rate on the amount borrowed would be in the form
of shared appreciation. If an employee received a shared
appreciation loan that was 10% of their purchase price, then the
employee housing fund would receive 10% of the appreciation in
the value of the house at the time that it is sold.
Repayment Terms: The City loan must be paid in full in the event of: sale; refinance
of the primary mortgage instrument; at the time the home no
longer constitutes the employee's primary residence; upon
termination of employment for any reason; or, the employee is in
default of any terms or conditions of the primary mortgage.
Upon notification from the City or its agent that the loan is due
and payable, the employee will have no more than 60 days to
begin repayment of the outstanding loan balance.
Other: Employer and Employee must agree on the sales price.
Minimum Employee must make a minimum contribution towards the
Investment: purchase price and related settlement charges equal to at least
10% of the purchase price. Employee payment must at least
equal the amount or the employers shared equity loan.
In summary, the committee recommends proceeding with the Home Owner Assistance
Programs (HOAP) based on employee demand reflected in the city -wide employee survey.
Annually, up to three down payment assistance loans and one shared equity loan may be
provided to City employees. The two components of the HOAPs stated above are included in
three out of four financial housing scenarios listed in the options section to provide which
begin on page six. Both HOAP options demonstrate cost effective and flexible alternatives for
the City to partake in with minimal financial risk in comparison to building City units.
30
F. Transitional Housing
Another potential element of a comprehensive employee housing program is the inclusion of
transitional units designed to let a new employee "get their bearings" and explore their housing
options in a more leisurely manner. This would require the City to designate one or more of its
unit inventory as a "transitional" unit that would be rented short-term to a new employee so
they can find and execute their preferred housing solution.
One City of Aspen employee housing unit would be designated as a transitional housing unit for
an employee new to the area or with temporary housing needs. There is a current unit — a
studio unit located at Water Place — that has been serving this purpose. This is a pilot program
and will be evaluated semi - annually to re- assess the number of unit(s) designated as
'transitional'.
Length of Stay:
An employee may live in transitional employee housing for up to one (1) year from the date of
their original lease and the lease will be non - renewable. During this time the employee must
make a good faith effort to secure permanent housing through the Housing Authority or free
market.
Pros:
➢ New employees are able to adjust to the Roaring Fork Valley and are allotted one (1)
year to define their individual housing needs
➢ Retains the employee within the Aspen area
➢ Helpful recruitment tool in attracting the most qualified applicants
Cons:
➢ Lack of demand for transitional housing needs. In a year of relatively low recruitment,
this has not been an issue.
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS
We recommend that the City begins planning for additional construction of housing units. We
also recommend that pilot efforts be undertaken to start on the Housing Assistance Program
elements described in this report.
We recommend no changes to the current policy to not allow employees to retire in their city -
provided housing units until substantial inventory additions are made to the existing housing
stock. This would result in an inordinate benefit being bestowed upon a small number of
employees (retired employees) while a significant need still exists for current employees.
We recognize that a minority of the city's employees will always benefit from the ability to
purchase or rent in City provided — and subsidized — housing. Nonetheless, this is a benefit that
is important for many reasons.
31
> It permits the recruitment and retention of critical staff members.
> It allows for a much larger presence in the community of police and emergency worker
staff than would happen without the ability to offer those employees a housing benefit.
> It lets the City hire workers who are not yet eligible for APCHA provided housing to live
in the community immediately — while they earn the years of worker eligibility that
permits them to be qualified for the broader workforce housing program, and hence be
able to move into those housing units and be able to qualify for units that they can
retire into.
Demand for Units
• Active workforce: 127 units
• Estimate for Retiring Employees: 31 units
• Total: 158 units
Current Units in Program: 46 units
Potential to build at various sites:
60 units on easily available sites
500 on sites also contemplated for public workforce housing
Cost to subsidize a typical unit is a range of $300,000 to $450,000
Other Options Available:
• Down Payment Assistance
• Shared Equity
• Acquisition of units through the City's Housing Mitigation Credit program
Recommendations:
• Retirement into Units: Not at this time, revisit as more units are added into inventory
• Shared Equity: pilot
• Down Payment Assistance: pilot
• Transitional Unit: continue if possible
• Target to Build: Add up to 81 units over the next 15 years as funding permits — from sites
identified and developed by the city itself, or through the Housing Mitigation Credit
program
• How to Fund: continue the annual contribution, increase to pre -2008 levels as economic
conditions permit
• Extend the length of time a City employee would need to vacate their City -owned housing
unit from six (6) months from the date they leave employment to one (1) year for a City
employee that retires and has worked for the City for a minimum of 15 years.
32
Appendix A
Goals and Outcomes city -wide Survey Results:
Employee Satisfaction and Engagement
CITY WORK CULTURE
Please tell us the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about the City's
work culture:
Strongly Strongly
Agree Disagree
Agree Disagree Response
Count
a. I believe the organization 13.9%
24.1% (33) 62.0% (85) 0.0% (0) 137
supports work/life balance. (
b. 1 am given the opportunity to 10.3%
25.0% (34) 64.7% (88) 0.0% (0) 136
do my best work. (14)
C. I am comfortable sharing my 16.1%
25.5% (35) 57.796 (79) 0.7% (1) 137
ideas and opinions. (
d. The various offices and 24.1%
10.996 (15) 63.596 (87) 1.5% (2) 137
departments work together well. (33)
e. Employees are united by a clear 23.0%
13.3% (18) 63.096 (85) 0.7% (1) 135
set of goals. (31)
f. Employees look for ways to help 11.1%
18.590 (25) 70.496 (95) 0.0% (0) 135
each other. (15)
g. Employees show respect for one 16.2%
another regardless of rank and 16.2% (22) 66.2% (90) (22) 1.596 (2) 136
title.
33
Please tell us the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about the City's
work culture:
7.6%
h. Employee productivity is high. 22.7% (30) 69.7% (92) (10) 0.0% (0) 132
i. Employees treat other 14.3% (19) 64.7% (86) 19.5% 1.5% (2) 133
employees like customers. (
24.6%
j. I trust upper management. 16.9% (22) 56.2% (73) (32) 2.3% (3) 130
k. The organization holds people 23.0%
10.4% (14) 64.4% (87) 2.2% (3) 135
accountable for results. (31)
1.1 am proud to work for the City. 36.1% (48) 60.9% (81) 2.3% (3) 0.8% (1) 133
m. I would recommend
employment with this 8.1%
31.1% (42) 59.3% (80) 1.5% (2) 135
organization to my family or (11)
friends.
n. 1 have the information I need to 9.9%
22.9% (30) 65.6% (86) 1.5% (2) 131
do my job well. (13)
0.1 feel that I am paid adequately 30.5%
given today's economic 13.0% (17) 51.1% (67) (40) 5.3% (7) 131
conditions.
12.0%
p. I am satisfied with my job. 21.8% (29) 63.9% (85) (16) 2.3% (3) 133
q. The benefits employees receive 20.6%
are competitive with those offered 21.4% (28) 54.2% (71) (27) 3.8% (5) 131
by other local employers.
r. The organization places an 30.9% (42) 60.3% (82) 8.8% 0.0% (0) 136
emphasis on wellness. (
34
OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OR PROMOTION
Strongly
Strongly Agree Disagree• 8 y
Agree Disagree Response
Count
a. Training is important to the 27.1% (36) 62.4% (83) 10.5% 0.0% (0) 133
organization. (14)
b. The training the City offers is 14.7% (19) 69.0% (89) 15.5% 0.8% (1) 129
valuable. (20)
c. I am provided with 17.1%
opportunities to grow and 14.7% (19) 66.7% (86) (22) 1.6% (2) 129
develop.
d. Through internal and /or
external opportunities, my 14.1% (18) 59.4% (76) 25.8% 0.8% (1) 128
training needs are being (33)
addressed.
e. My supervisor supports my 30.8% (40) 56.2% (73) 11.5% 1.5% (2) 130
training and development. (15)
SUPERVISORY EFFECTIVENESS
8. Plea ;e tell us the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about supervisory
effectiveness.
Strongly
Strongly Agree Disagree 8 y
Agree Disagree Response
Count
a. I feel empowered to make 31.8% (41) 59.7% (77) 6.2% (8) 2.3% (3) 129
35
8. Please tell us the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about supervisory
effectiveness.
decisions within the scope of my
job.
b. My supervisor treats me with 50.0% (65) 43.8% (57) 6.2% (8) 0.096 (0) 130
respect.
c. My supervisor thinks about the 12.7%
35.7% (45) 50.8% (64) 0.8% (1) 126
impact of his /her decisions. (16)
d. My supervisor addresses issues 34.4% (44) 57.8% (74) 7.0% (9) 0.8% (1) 128
when they arise.
e. My supervisor adequately 14.0%
31.0% (40) 54.3% (70) 0.8% (1) 129
resolves problems. (18)
f. My performance is evaluated 8.6%
32.8% (42) 58.6% (75) (11) 0.0% (0) 128
fairly.
g. My performance evaluation 24.0% (30) 59.2% (74) 12.8% 4.0% (5) 125
process is meaningful. (16)
h. Feedback from my supervisor 10.2%
helps me improve my 30.5% (39) 58.696 (75) (13) 0.896 (1) 128
performance.
i. Favoritism is not an issue in my 21.9% (28) 57.8% (74) 14.1% 6.3% (8) 128
department. (18)
j. My supervisor is consistent 9.5%
when administering policies and 30.2% (38) 58.7% (74) (12) 1.6% (2) 126
procedures.
k. My supervisor effectively 20.5%
addresses situations involving 20.5% (25) 56.696 (69) (25) 2.5% (3) 122
staff who are not performing well.
36
8. Please tell us the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about supervisory
effectiveness.
I. My supervisor values staff 11.8%
30.7% (39) 56.796 (72) (15) 0.8% (1) 127
opinions.
m. I receive adequate recognition 17.6 %,
22.4% (28) 60.0% (75) (22) 0.0% (0) 125
for my work.
FACTORS INFLUENCING DECISIONS TO REMAIN AS THE CITY'S EMPLOYER
10. Please tell us the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about factors
that may motivate staff to remain employed by the City or to leave employment.
Strongly
Strongly Agree Disagree 8 Y
Agree Disagree Response
Count
a. The benefits employees receive 15.1% 4.0% (5) 126
23.0% (29) 57.996 (73) (19)
help to retain me.
b. The City offers adequate 31.5%
10.8% (12) 52.3% (58) (35) 5.4% (6) 111
housing assistance.
c. The City's work culture is 15.3% (19) 75.096 (93) 8.9% 0.8% (1) 124
positive. (11)
d. My supervisor and I work well 45.3% (58) 48.496 (62) 5.5% (7) 0.8% (1) 128
together.
7.9% 0.0% (0) 127
e. The location is desirable. 37.8% (48) 54.396 (69) (10)
37
10. Please tell us the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about factors
that may motivate staff to remain employed by the City or to leave employment.
g. Opportunities for development 33.6% 8.0% 125
11.2% (14) 47.2% (59) (42) (10)
or promotion exist.
h. l enjoy the work I do. 48.8% (62) 45.7% (58) 3.9% (5) 1.6% (2) 127
11.5% 3.8% (5) 130
i. My commute is reasonable. 38.5% (50) 46.2% (60) (15)
j. I understand what is expected of 35.7% (46) 58.9% (76) 5.4% (7) 0.0% (0) 129
me in my job.
18.1% 2.4 %(3) 127
k. My workload is reasonable. 24.496 (31) 55.1% (70) (23)
I. My pay is competitive with other 27.1% 4.2% (5) 118
16.1% (19) 52.5% (62) (32)
similar jurisdictions.
38
n c C 4 41 n o C Er 1 2 p a c o n d ry C rp X» c d c c A m N m (la Fr
b m m 3 c at ' g a m o a» m ° a & m o to o m' > > N
..
<0 n -n m N d o , �^ o v N . o n. o m 6 o m
p b 3 c
c 2' . a R n o l o m W m ` � �� x o N c< m - ii
_ P o g 21 0 . b » Po T b
it C C = k u A a b N ? m T C q A
= m 9 p o n 3 a A T C <
o m 2 '" a co 2
c
< y 0- „' b d n '° C
R N ry 1 N
E Y 0Q
b 3
G m 'J'. T
co c
a 3
O.
n
c
m
c
v.
v.
C
in v,
Y r
H" - N {n 4n N N in O n 3
l0 V V 01 In W in WW O W
A 1. 1 N O l W V W J P 00 O T 1 V W p cm
to 1 N J l0 J b d M la in al CA LC) O LO CO W 0 0 0 W to A CO 01 O
A_
N
N in N N N M in in M NN C n 0. 0 V m W W P V W W 0 01 1 .4 ID w N N a " b Ca
CO J CO 0 - 0 N A b N o N j a d M
V W N m 01i t H A '+ 0 0 O 00 C
n
N
A
N W N Y N 0 y d
N A N O 00
in N 0 W 0 N O 6 2
en A 00 Y 0,m -J WS co o - CO LO ° a 5 L O N O 4 01 40 L A W p W CO
O CO C N O N V
co
N N C
8 m N W W p m
m NJ Y 8
In J 40 N 1 8 n ip a H W
O O O 0 O O 0 O O O O b W
_C
V N 01 A p . CO 01 1 p N 0 N
Cu LA V Ja 2 W W V N W A O N
$
Pa N 01 o 8 8 m CO m o 0 in
N t4 in
Y N N In An Y Y
O
VI J W A A
4j1 W 0
Y N N
N
W N N 9 0 01 1 W co W 0
N W
A A O 00 in In I n al O A a -4 NJ
V W a pp1
m on co ea
Y N NN N Y N
in - W N N in 4n In N N r"1 N
Y 01 0 0 V
N
on N W O 00 03 A O O O W Y 01 G
V 8 8 0 § O N V en A
Co A A A 01 O O O O OI N 01 i1 V m
N N N Y
N t0 W p N In y `.. N V) N
V A V A a -001 n Pa W co IA O N 1 8 1 P N
N
A V N A A N 0 V A ID to co V W A 0 O $ Q
A V J O
n
ti
W N 4a in.
A - W N „ N 01 F ' N N N O
Y Y Co 0
40 - 00 0 - 4 A 0 W 0 O A - 01 V
P P
N O N 0
co A on 40 W Y to tn. to to ID 0 0 01 01 A N , 4 A 0
A W V
N p A A tn. r N v. N
IA p
A a N 0 0 O O a 00 V N 00 V
Q 8 0 S a O P W N CO 4 Y O 0 O O m 8 J CO V N W O 40
N N N 41 in
N N 41 N Y Y N tn
10 O Y N N in V A W N N
V 411 01 01 Y N 4 A 8
N O A p N N N N Y W p
W P W N O 8 O 00 00 co O co In m 10 40 CO
4.4 in. N 4 N
N N A N N in Y 4n N N
01 N 9 Pa J J 00 A N {01 0
O 4 A o N J A A 40
0 N 01 N 01 W 40 W N
W Y 0 01 0 0 2 N N V c y a k
Y W A A C 4n N 4n Y " 4/! A N
V In N 01 01 N N V 01 N N O
NJ
N 9 40 O S In al al 0 al NJ VI 011 W m N W N
0 D a la O 8 o to p ia U d N A
8 In N N A 0 O A A 8 N N Y P
5"
in in N W N tn. V N
N in 41 41 Y N
N 0
'Al t m m 01 NI
0 I^ 0 0
N A 8 N Y
A a N a N co V O J 01 in CO N 0 I 0 ID D N J la A 40 0 N
W N A a N N
in IA W W N 8 N N N CO 01 pN {W4 O NA
W 01 V S p 8 V 8 V O Y A Ol p N
W 01 W 4 T O O . N 4 0 1 0 A W N
V 40 CO N
H
W ° n a m E ° F° Q° E. 3 n p c x o c n m m ofr
c n
2. > a m u m -R 3 C b it; a ti nA $ w 3 Q
» d a I"
m
E. m ?? 2 N a m N 0� ? a M j c S 'IS
n
n. a o „ -14 1' o A m N
Of T
'° w n ' n m
0
2 m N n N
t d V
o u' 3
m w
q C
R
7
n
n
C
M
7
re
C
Y N r r 7
b y V V q In N N N ln a A 0 b u ° N N m 01 0 N W O W N C 7 w
N b b W V 0f E m Y $ co 8 co
Y 0 co V b V Sr 6
b O b CO N W 0 0 0 W 0 N CFI IA
M b m m O
0
N
in. in le
10
0 N N
ca
N a
V W W •
at V b W T V A V V N V 00 b 8 C o
Of - W W 0 O .S
m V m n V N b 7
V CO N m m 0 Y V V N O 8 ` 6 -
A - O O O I Y C C
N V; 2
N N N tn.
N
W p y T N
0 W O O 0 W 0 `� O 6 0
V • W 01 V W A m V b CO N 0 g C
O '4 m O b b NN Vt CO 0 W Ot V n go N
FO O CO A A N O N N iw-i
V
N
N N In V " N Y N co
8 O I b w A V 0
y N 0 n
N V b 01 :01 `A T °� Y m N :14 p 0 g N O b O w N A OI `u
O 0 0 G 10 b y A
c o N
N V N w ti Y v. N N
M 0 N b W a v N ONt I/O N 0 n
Z - o p o W m 0 0 a c - e
N N Ct O O O O Ot m -6; - F` N
O
N
N P in in Y I
ON V V 0 N A Y N 0
00
r 10 N a O ID lei N W N N b 0 III
V CO 01 p 0 01 O N 04 : p M � W
A A W
0 1 0 in
A O G b V w W A
CO jn N
Y N in to
n W N N N N N N Y
- A N CO 00 N Y N N N 0
N !° W O O CO A a 0 0 j 0 01 m N 0
ti Ot W O p O p O ` - W N a N a
W A 01 N N O O O O 01 to N 0 L
N N
- y N N
N -CO P y W w N N W O W N C
b V
Y V N CO O A A m N 01 Y N
CO O A A O 8 .6 O A CO V W N A IV
la tn
m O
rn
N N q
N N
W b a W N N I/O y N N O
V N 1 W o N W N O w P, V W N 00 0 b 0 D O a ,01 N 01
°i 8 b
m V 0 N 0 0 O 0 t° b W b Y
N m W 0 1 co
V N in to
b N 01 0 °1
Y N A A G N in
A 0 0 N N P4 N 0 N 41. N
la VI N W O
W Sr N P O 8 O O 8 N N CO O b VO V
W N N 0 01 8 O O Y N b V Y W
A W V
N I/O
N N tn N Y Y
N
O N N W O Sr m t N N A N N
P N 00 PO A W N
W W 0 N 0 0 O 0 to t to 0 LO N
ID
N
W V N Y N te V ?I V N 01 V N al A N W 0
A w 0 O p O O Sc T V 0 - N
W N Co 01 0 0 O 0 r g A t W
°i O
V V yj
in N in N
N . A P G N N N tel N
W ID 0 01 in I/O a N
P O N i 8 8 " N 0 N N LO A N
N 00 N 8 8 b W m 01 N V O
00 b W m a a O O A A 0 a a ID V
O N y N
N N
N N N N r Y in
m (n b W H N to 0 in N
O W m Y l0 00 to V V A N 0
W 01 Vt w O w { V A V In
N
b O N 0 N V in t0 0 W
N A W w N I/O
N 01 A CO 000 a N N N yy N N N CO N
co
Sa 0 q Ass' V O b V O 01 A N 0 N tic PO A p O T S 0 O 0 V 01 A 01
` O
O 0 O to 01 t0 V a
s ~
S88a88,P8_ , ti8lp � Pk' "
m o84 8 !
, a mitts?: S „ „ „ „ H g a as a 2 N
°
,°, g gig $
5rPar51r�_aagaPag a 7 ”
6g441"Rrg%e"IA a 8 a R gal S A 4 .m
RR1ERERHEEEE7RR 8 R 8 88 54a m R 1 °
8 A 514.4a545ggam4kiggml5 a k 8 88 as y A g g
8 554 ass° 445amar g $ g g gag g g s .r
nanny wig- g s a d
a .,, g m a te: „ g"
.°mo$AaSar n� g^o a &am "SR9 7 A 8 88 ala A 5 o
a file 9"810 "87a3m E E § § gad 1 E a ...
aazAms e -ga a s s a a N a
„ g g " g a " a
a B aa'aa s, ^"°aaa,mz m a�a §a ala t e °'
,
1a5gaa 5 a a „ a 8N a $
asa:asEa 1EER E 4 a ga ala g e R
c a g g Ntg a &5„aar sa t 5 ? ga " g§
0
2W2$ ° k
R „
g akia,Mamaeg as g m xa Agg s- a.
oo S a aa as ag'^ g 'g A 8R g wig 9 ET R
° e 3 4 g g , 4a a r.
I 9 8 8 &sa8tiaim a & & gal. 2 g: y
2a1 ' g Iga 6 5..a gaga g 5 a al R a g » "
E 3
a 8 g8°BaSas rg& " $ § RE g aJa : R 6
71
VQ „g
—
g
;e
C
LL F -
_
2 Ltn3 Gallg.: 3 Z' i WI u _ tl -5
9 ! Y d=, .. a 1 is 0 r m illi
O • 2 9 I I !WIMP!!! ! I v !, �u
I E W a
.�s° d '' aq . - :
L i It-r1
s` ` `E= c = d [0 I - > tan 1 ;
xe i . 111;1 YY , i o o s Diu - W
W I!1 ,/'n YYY YYYYY
gigaggagggggagagaig g g R ge §ag R 5 s ¢
aIo g g g g gg g g g 2°
R „
ggagglagngagg5gagg
5gg5g1 r & „
$ R 444a44R1ERaEgRRgai4 a A ElA.
44RaR44444aR4644a g s 5 5 gg s a "s r„
„ „a „ „ „„ „ -, „ „ „ kg., a
E m U4l44 "smm'la a gs „
$R�m, r,e �Nm 5
8 o442 o 8 4 g ag „ S
. „ ...... .,. gga5g .. 4 88 3 - 44
- « „ „ ... .,, „ 55555 „ „ A .,. ... .,. „ „ a
E s4 ° massM m a Z.. g kg „ 2
G: S „ E°RE°» ^l.",. „ S S 41„ W
0
g „ „ „ „ „„ „r ^? „ s „ „ „ a
E k gigaggg4gRa4R44kak a 4 k q „ I ”
$ „„ „ „ „ as S 1 ti
E 5115 „ & g S ..,... „ 5 S
a e Fa g s a » ° s $ g 5 i g n „ ° . ° I S 5 x g g „ x x
EaagEREEkagakEE al4 . A ag R
o 3 R $ „ „ a „ .^. ...o „ „ „ _
a ¢
c
R gg4a44a44aRt4444, gig 5 R 44 & a�
Y a „ „„ „ „ s5 „ s „ „ „„ a, a „ „„ „ „ „ „ .,.
S
0
LL
g
.g
c C
j y �oCE:Cd`,`x Soa$ : YCC C B C
W 0 g tl? E EEEEEE ¢ p Y hr. 4 a? _m'=
1 w E .t x 82P ” _ E.E. 04 1 e $ F da=
W N % rgrr
%O0 . saiddn9 / s!eua ;en - 000£8
% 00t %000'3 � r r o - - _. - _ - - - saaAiag Ienpei ;uoo 00038
%00'3 1 %00'Z _ /000'[ - - - - - - - - �uiuie L Pue Iane)1_000l8
%00'9 1 %00'9 %00'1, - _ - --
61.0Z o�oz �? - coos
%00'9 %00 9 %00_9 i - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - 80 aouemsul - 9[009
_ - - - %005 - - - - - - - - - -_ - io9el - 00008
0
%04'3 %04Z - /°00'5- - - - - -. - - - - - - _- - - - - - - - -
61OZ - 9102 1- 41.03 - 1.1.0Z 01.03 - 600z uopegm sjsoo uogom ;suoo
- - %0'8 %00'S - - -
l# u1. is ;sued
■
%OTC %O5_E %OS'E _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ewo je;eaa ISaielul
- - - - - - OUI uese4
%09 3 %09 3 %09'9 + _ %05'E - - - - - - - - - - - -
3i —
6LOZ LOZ 140Z 140Z _ 01.03 _ __ 6002 __ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - 509 # punj
- - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - S319tlILIVA Wild 3DNtl21 ONOI Pun j Bu!snoN eaSoldw3 3!3
1
R
0
N n
O
n `..�
® (D N 0
Ca
; j r
C D CD CD
rJ
TT -Aew
O a TT -Jdy
r I Tt -aew
0 ► it
Aidig N II-uef
ra r
L 4 OT -Daa
P 0T -noN
.� �. OT -da
r
•� N 0T -2n
a) � OHM'
f B
73 G pT -unf CU i OT -Aew
.Q
r-I X • 0I-id y v)
Co ma S. hi 0 DT aew o o,
Ca MI 1 n�
ot-ciaA cc ,2
c 00 Q) OT -uef v
C
C :�= 60 -�aa )
� _ � a s
O G 3 60 noN A
C 6 0-30 E
N E o
W A 0 60 daS
0. V 60 -2ny Q co'
Q
1 � 60 of
4. o
_
t 60 unf CU c
to
. 60 Aew
2 60
w 60-MIN L
aA 60 -qaA
o
CU ea
v) lir' 60 -uef E
o
• MIMES
80 -AO a'
r 80 - ;) 0 v 0
CD r 80 -daS °°
(1) X d
0
80 -2ny v Q
80 -i o A
0 'gg*
o 0 o t U
O V 0 IN
N
a
1 N o
• `° <
i. M 7v v CD
o X (D -
73 < <
Q) (D rD ....•
D (D
C
CD
- i n ;
w
V
r
- r l y
C in
I °:C-‘°11
�' o
a
1
N
v
U�,
in o o
c/) O `0 ry n a cu
4J cu — gyp°
J U , d v
•-J I2 �.
O in 0
N cu r`
N cn m ° ° r '
> .- 0
O ro ° r
Q 'y
s ° °
T
C N
O -- S
U ° °C Q U i
O
(/) O V
1-41C —/\ I W - � p
Q
cm
o
o O D 0 °o 0 0 0 0
p� t Q
o ° ° ° ° 0 a n ?.
� ++ +'' 0 0 0 0 ° o 0 0 0 r- 5
C / N o 0 o a o °
"' N W O "--1 00 0O 0 / � �
n 0 C. 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 Q ( 1)
0 O 0 O 0 0 o 0 0 CD CITI
' O o O o O O O O o 0 � .
b � O 1
-w m V
0 2 .�' � X
x
O
° o ` to I
V)
c o
i f . 1 ° s a
CfQ CO
O
a.
7)0 x
° 6 N o o p
cm
X 0 = O
X W w
N 1 A
0 O O (D
W
N O
° °> _ i N (1)
O
N
v
irD' O en
I p O
° °' 1 0- 7+%
0)
et
Y O.
a: O
v � O
0 0 9 0
) 0 1 0 _
`
i i
f
rn
oc
O
- 01. m
` O�,
cu
r--1 ,' a) cc
c-1 -
CU
c
+-1 >
a
U 0 o
s v o
CD C1
u- o d
> >
N CU o 1' ° O
Z o N o
m o
1
CU C O N a'
N �.
M
GC
= - 9 cu
C E O
To
.,
,,, =
N 0 Q
CU
E .
(1)
C
CU
U X
(1.) l t tn
= o O O O o O o p o ° o�, 4 0
cu
O O O O O O O O E
W E O O O O O O O O
W O 0 p •-� r
�/ O O i11 p 0 0 � O a
I..L. U n. n n n.
y;
ili VI- 1.1* _ 70
N
oo O N p o o
NJ O • V
p O O c ( D
0 0 0 0 C
0 0 0 0 0 0 Of T
o ,) o o o a o o CI �/ -
D 00 - S -
rn
(1) --1
�o N
\
00
r
m
v co
SF. 1 0
9 00 6 - o ' 0
r 0
CD C W =
.— N
(
O cn
)00 N .
'0 70
A
t-h
N-)00 Q.
i n)o
3 0 _ 1
m
0
z
D
a.
c'0,10 -
n
c
co
i
NIIIIMENIMIlimiim
i
/ - c-'
r
o
a)
N
•
tO Ca
0
0
4J
cc
CU
u
O
O
H d O1 cu
o -a
CU v _ i
N 0c, a
ul
N u°
1
0
0
N
c
LL / X 0 0
c
0
V) ^ 4
f I
' i
CU Q
c
C n3
I-- Q
(� , to
�i/ X d , q
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00� O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
^1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M. �,
W N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 �,
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (U
00 lD Tf N O CO CID N
1/4 i!). in. {/} t.
PO
- ' E C cil or = n O 0 O ( <
D 0 D O- -< C n CD
N -s _{ a . N. N v
a+,
. < X I � ( .7 i O CD
_ - n
c v O co mrn (D `< O
"0 X r) -1 X 0 M
- O ( : X (D w
rD -< O 3
0) (D
X _-r
to O rt
C
0 -
(D
n
rr
0 T1 7)
D
O
0Z
0 ...I .i. ' N CD
e C
co F, < l V
n <
0)
(D
�)
cn
(D
o
O
0 V J
cs co
N W o C
NJ NJ -P -
0)
Cg 0 0 0 o N CfQ
r+
0
C
(D
el
0
m
- to -z
1 -<
n W 01 O NJ N (0 o
rt v Cn N I� (11 (./I U.) O
0 00 w cry 0 0 0 L 0
O O O O O O O O
C) O O O O O O O
rj
(J)
-1--+
-I-- 0:1) J
-
a)
aA N o
CT
: O o
00 N N Ni CO N N 1•
(1) .a...
CU a)
L
w
Q
'1"') a-
C >. O
ra W Q =
i
0.
�/ ) O
L1J 4-0
/� v) O CO c
no n U * co Q
a)
L_
0 = . � p o
LL
a J = O • —
i * aA LL -O +-I
O
c
O — t no aA
+ _ + O 4 -+ E QJ co ro
Q - co ca N C
a) O. w
*
w _ 0_ I O 0
• • • • • •
O (/' D ‘E" E L E - K O
n N
0 z P.+ c — ° 1---% K - � cm '< CD ' D NJ
o
CP
BrD 00 _
(D CD CM
-s N (3 OQ
O -! CD
3 r+
N (I) r m.,
COCO C (� - 0 CO CD
c C 0 (D 7:3 a) a
-0 -.< 0. <
0_ 0- c 5.. 0- --s CAI (I)
CM Cfg = (D %). -- a r";I : 0 m
CD
(D —
Q T O �G 3
O O cm ' (D
e-1- n 73 0 2, , ir D 1 2 , =
3 t-t, _. Ci) r+
O K n) -0 =
n et
n
a) n
CM v) a
(D „.........
--s .... =
v) 1 v)
-0
v)
........
,,
,,