9.10.26 Finance Committee — Agenda Packet

City of Fort Atkinson City Manager's Office 101 N. Main Street Fort Atkinson, WI 53538 FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING IN PERSON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2026 – 5:00 PM CITY HALL – SECOND FLOOR If you have special needs or circumstances which may make communication or accessibility difficult at the meeting, please call (920) 397-9901. Accommodations will, to the fullest extent possible, be made available on request by a person with a disability. AGENDA 1. Call meeting to order 2. Roll call 3. Public Comment a. The Finance Committee will receive public comments relating to matters on the agenda. Speakers must be City residents, property owners, or business representatives. Comments are generally limited to three minutes per individual. Anyone wishing to speak is required to sign up in advance or state the following items for the record when called upon: name, address, subject matter, and contact information. 4. New Business a. Review and possible recommendation to the City Council relating to the draft 2027 Schedule of Fees (Houseman, City Manager) b. Review and possible action relating to the City's Compensation Philosophy, an Appendix to the Employee Handbook (Houseman, City Manager) c. Review and possible action relating to a requested Cost of Living Adjustment to be included in the 2027 budget for full-time non-represented City employees (Houseman, City Manager) d. Review and possible action relating to requested wage adjustments to be included in the 2027 budget for part-time and seasonal City staff (Houseman, City Manager) 5. Adjournment Date Posted: September 8, 2026 Page 1 of 180 CC: Finance Committee Members; City Council; City Staff; City Attorney; News Media Notice is hereby given that a majority of the Fort Atkinson City Council will be present at this meeting at the location and time indicated above to gather information about any subject matters on this agenda over which they have decision-making responsibility. This may constitute a meeting of the City Council pursuant to State ex rel. Badke v. Greendale Village Bd., 173 Wis.2d. 553, 494 N.W.2d 408 (1993), and must be noticed as such although the City Council will not take any formal action at this meeting. Visit us online! City news and information can be found at www.fortatkinsonwi.gov, and be sure to follow us on Facebook @FortAtkinsonWI. Page 2 of 180 1 RESOLUTION NO. ____ A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE 2027 SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR THE CITY OF FORT ATKINSON, JEFFERSON COUNTY WHEREAS, the City of Fort Atkinson has the authority to establish reasonable fees for services provided or costs incurred in the administration of government; and WHEREAS, the City has been moving toward the goal of removing fees from the Municipal Code of Ordinances and establishing them by City Council resolution; and WHEREAS, establishing an annual Schedule of Fees will allow the City Council and staff to review fees annually in conjunction with the budget process; and WHEREAS, the fees established below represents the City’s fees as of January 1, 2027; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that all of the fees set forth hereinafter are reasonable, equitable, and necessary to cover the costs of various services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fort Atkinson hereby adopts and approved the Schedule of Fees as outlined below with an effective date of January 1, 2027. Adopted this _____ day of ___________ 2026. Effective the 1 st day of January 2027. CITY OF FORT ATKINSON Kyle Jaeckel, President ATTEST: Michelle Ebbert, City Clerk/Treasurer/Finance Director Page 3 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION Bicycle, E-Bicycle, E-Scooter: New Non-expiring $5.00 $5.00 Per Bicycle, E-Bicycle, E- Scooter Bicycle, E-Bicycle, E-Scooter: Replacement Non-expiring $1.00 $1.00 Per Bicycle, E-Bicycle, E- Scooter Room Tax – Per Quarter 5% 5% Based on gross receipts Room Tax – Penalty 10% of previous quarter 10% of previous quarter Per quarter Private Well Permit $200.00 $200.00 Per two-year permit Special Event Permit $25.00 $25.00 Per event + additional service charges Vehicle Registration Fee $20.00 $20.00 Per car per year (with registration) Special Charge on Property Tax Bill – Garbage and Recycling Collection $231.00 $239.09 Per unit receiving curbside collection services Dog – Altered $10.00 $10.00 Per dog per year Dog – Unaltered $15.00 $15.00 Per dog per year Cat – Altered $10.00 $10.00 Per cat per year Cat – Unaltered $15.00 $15.00 Per cat per year Late Fee - After April 1st $10.00 $10.00 Per dog/cat Class “A” Beer – $100.00 $100.00 Per year “Class A” Liquor $500.00 $500.00 Per year Class “B” Beer $100.00 $100.00 Per year “Class B” Liquor $500.00 $500.00 Per year Reserve License $10,000.00 $10,000.00 Initial application “Class C” Wine $100.00 $100.00 Per year Temporary Class “B” Beer $10.00 $10.00 Per event Temporary “Class C” Wine $10.00 $10.00 Per event Temporary Beer and Wine $10.00 $10.00 Per event Publication: New $100.00 $100.00 Per license Publication: Renewal $30.00 $30.00 Per renewal Operator (2 year) July 1st – June 30th Even Years $30.00 $30.00 Per 2 years Operator (1 year) July 1st – June 30th Odd Years $15.00 $15.00 Per 1 year ADMINISTRATIVE FEES ANIMAL ALCOHOL DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES 1 of 12 Page 4 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES Provisional Operator One per person $10.00 $10.00 For 60 days Temporary Operator One per person per year $10.00 $10.00 For 1-10 consecutive days Cigarettes $100.00 $100.00 Per year Door-to-Door Direct Seller $50.00 $50.00 Per year/person (max. 10 per business/year) Application Fee $25.00 $25.00 Per application Daily $5.00 $5.00 Per day Six Month $25.00 $25.00 Per six months Twelve Month $50.00 $50.00 Per twelve months Base Fee $35.00 $60.00 $85.00 min. fee per permit New Constructions $0.25 $0.35 Per square foot Addition/Alteration/Remodel $0.25 $0.35 Per square foot Kitchen Remodel $10.00 $10.00 Per project Plan Review $150.00 $150.00 Per plan Plan Review – Decks/Additions $25.00 $75.00 Per project UDC Stamp $40.00 $40.00 Per structure Erosion Control $100.00 $150.00 Per project Erosion Control – Addition with Foundation $25.00 $75.00 Per Project Occupancy $125.00 $125.00 Per unit Remodels, Repairs, or Alterations where area cannot be determined $7.00 $7.00 Per $1,000 of project value Moving Principal Building $100.00 $100.00 Per structure Moving Accessory Building $50.00 $50.00 Per structure Raze $50.00 $100.00 Per structure Re-inspect $50.00 $50.00 Per inspection Early Start $75.00 $300.00 Per project Failure to call for required inspection $50.00 $85.00 Failure to call for inspection charge Renewal/Extension of existing permit $50.00 $75.00 Per 3-month extension; limit 1/project Reroofing, residing, window and exterior $25.00 $25.00 Per project BUSINESS MOBILE MERCHANT BUILDING PERMIT FEES - SEE NOTE 1 One and Two Family Residential 2 of 12 Page 5 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES Base Fee $35.00 $60.00 $200.00 min. fee per permit New Construction $0.30 $0.30 Per square foot Additions/Alterations $0.30 $0.30 Per square foot Remodels, Repairs, or Alterations where area cannot be determined $6.00 $7.00 Per $1,000 of project value; Min. $200.00 Plan Review, not State approved $350.00 $350.00 Per plan Plan Review, State approved $150.00 $150.00 Per plan Erosion Control (new building) $0.05 $0.05 Per SF of area disturbed; min. $200 Erosion Control (addition) $0.05 $0.05 Per SF of area disturbed; min. $200 Occupancy $175.00 $175.00 Per unit building, plus $30.00 per unit Moving Principal Building $250.00 $250.00 Per structure Moving Accessory Building $100.00 $140.00 Per structure Raze $100.00 $200.00 Per structure Re-inspect $100.00 $100.00 Per inspection Renewal/Extension of existing permit $100.00 $200.00 Per 3-month extension; limit 2/project Reroofing, residing, window and exterior $65.00 $65.00 Per project Early Start $75.00 $450.00 Per project Commercial Specialty (Cell Towers, Solar, Windmills, etc.) $10.00 $12.00 Per $1,000 of project cost Base Fee $35.00 $60.00 $85.00 min. fee per permit Residential addition/remodels $0.05 $0.07 Per SF of project Commercial addition/remodels $0.05 $0.07 Per SF of project New Cons up to 1000 sq ft $0.00 $0.00 Base fee New Cons 1001 to 2000 sq ft $0.00 $0.00 Base fee New Cons 2001 to 3000 sq ft $0.00 $0.00 Base fee New Cons 3001 sq ft and up $0.00 $0.00 Base fee Minimum Fee $35.00 $60.00 $85.00 min. fee per permit 0-100 Amp $45.00 $45.00 Base fee Commercial / Industrial Electrical New Construction and Service Fees Existing Structures 3 of 12 Page 6 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES 101-200 Amp $55.00 $55.00 Base fee 201-400 Amp $65.00 $65.00 Base fee 401-600 Amp $75.00 $75.00 Base fee 600 Amp and up $75.00 $75.00 Plus $20/100 amps over 600 Feeder/Subfeeder $25.00 $45.00 Base fee Outlets/Fixtures $0.75 $0.75 Per outlet/fixture Direct Wired $5.00 $5.00 Per opening 220V $5.00 $5.00 Per opening Pole / Area Lighting and Signs $10.00 $10.00 Per unit Electric Heater $5.00 $5.00 Per unit Gas/Oil Heater $10.00 $10.00 Per unit Exhaust Fan $5.00 $5.00 Per unit Air Conditioning $10.00 $10.00 Per unit Motors/Controllers $10.00 $10.00 Per unit Miscellaneous $10.00 $10.00 Per unit Back-up Generator $50.00 $100.00 Per unit Swimming Pool $25.00 $50.00 Per unit Base Fee $35.00 $60.00 $85.00 min. fee per permit New residential and additions/remodels $0.05 $0.07 Per SF of project New commercial and additions/remodels $0.05 $0.07 Per SF of project Per Fixture $6.00 $8.00 Per fixture Per Air Admittance Valve $10.00 $10.00 Per valve Laterals $75.00 $125.00 Per lateral Grease Trap $50.00 $75.00 Per new grease trap; $150 per year without certified inspection Manhole/Catch Basins N/A $50.00 Per unit Misc. Specialty $30.00 $30.00 Per unit Base Fee $35.00 $60.00 $85.00 min. fee per permit New residential and additions/remodels $0.05 $0.07 Per SF of project New commercial and additions/remodels $0.05 $0.07 Per SF of project New Furnace $60.00 $60.00 Per unit Plumbing Heating, Venting, Air Conditioning (HVAC) 4 of 12 Page 7 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES New Air Conditioning $45.00 $45.00 Per unit Replace Furnace $35.00 $35.00 Per unit Replace Air Conditioning $35.00 $35.00 Per unit Air Handler $60.00 $60.00 Per unit Unit Heater $25.00 $25.00 Per unit Boiler $25.00 $25.00 Per unit Exhaust $25.00 $25.00 Per unit Fireplace $40.00 $40.00 Per unit Solid Fuel Stove $40.00 $40.00 Per unit Commercial Exhaust Hoods $50.00 $100.00 Per unit Roof Top Units $50.00 $60.00 Per unit Miscellaneous $25.00 $50.00 Per unit Base Fee $35.00 $60.00 Per structure Awnings $25.00 $25.00 Per awning Deck $0.25 $0.35 Per square foot Fence $0.00 $0.00 Base fee plus zoning Pool $35.00/$100.00 $50.00/$200.00 Above ground/in ground Signs $55.00 $55.00 Per sign Failure to obtain occupancy $250.00 $250.00 Per parcel Private Driveway $50.00 $100.00 Per project (no base fee; no charge w/ ROW permit) Foundation Repair $25.00 $25.00 Per project Alarm Fee/Fire Suppression $75.00/ $300.00 $0.07 Per SF plus Base fee Erosion Control Bond $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Bond, less fees accrued by City for maintaining the site. Returned when perennial cover of 70% is achieved Code Enforcement Reinspection Fee – 2nd $75.00 $100.00 Per Inspection Code Enforcement Reinspection Fee – 4th + $200.00 $300.00 Per Inspection Miscellaneous Building Permits Code Enforcement Reinspection Fee – 1st $50.00 $50.00 Per Inspection Code Enforcement Reinspection Fee – 3rd $100.00 $150.00 Per Inspection Zoning Review Fees 5 of 12 Page 8 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES Residential – New $100.00 $125.00 Per project Residential – Additions & Accessory Structures $50.00 $50.00 Per project Residential – Deck $25.00 $25.00 Per project Commercial – New $150.00 $175.00 Per project Commercial – Additions & Accessory Structures $100.00 $125.00 Per project Handicap Ramp – Temporary $50.00 $50.00 Per project Home Occupation Permit Fee $75.00 $75.00 Per HO $0.00 $0.00 Annually (0-1 years) $100.00 $150.00 Annually (2-5 years) $250.00 $350.00 Annually (6-10 years) $400.00 $750.00 Annually (11+ years) Zoning Letter $50.00 $50.00 Per letter Basic Life Support – Resident $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Per response BLS – Non City Resident $1,700.00 $1,700.00 Per response Advanced Life Support – Resident $1,700.00 $1,700.00 Per response ALS – Non City Resident $1,900.00 $1,900.00 Per response ALS2 – Resident $1,900.00 $1,900.00 Per response ALS2 – Non City Resident $2,100.00 $2,100.00 Per response BLS On Scene Care – Resident $600.00 $600.00 Per response BLS On Scene Care – Non City Resident $800.00 $800.00 Per response ALS On Scene Care – Resident $1,000.00 $1,000.00 Per response ALS On Scene Care – Non City Resident $1,200.00 $1,200.00 Per response Lift Assist – Resident (after 5th per calendar year) $300.00 $300.00 Per lift assist after 5 per calendar year Lift Assist – Non City Resident (after 5th per calendar year) $500.00 $500.00 Per lift assist after 5 per calendar year Mileage – Resident $26.00 $26.00 Per mile Mileage – Non City Resident $26.00 $26.00 Per mile Facility Charge for Service $500.00 $500.00 Per non-trauma-related lift assist or non-emergent transport; charged to facility Commercial Erosion and Sediment Control Permit Review $150.00 $200.00 Per project plus cost recovery agreement Right of Way Permit Review $50.00 $50.00 Per request Vacant Property Registration Zoning Fee EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES (EMS) FEES ENGINEERING FEES - SEE NOTE 2 6 of 12 Page 9 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES Boring in the Right of Way n/a $0.10 Per foot of boring Boring in the Street n/a $100.00 Per street crossing Storm Water Permit Review $200.00 $250.00 Per project plus cost recovery agreement Conditional Use Permit Review $250.00 $250.00 Per request 769 sf 769 sf Per single/dup. 577 sf 577 sf Per multifam unit 307 sf 307 sf Per senior unit $741 $741 Per single/dup. $556 $556 Per multifam unit $296 $296 Per senior unit $1,009 $1,009 Per single/dup. $757 $757 Per multifam unit $404 $404 Per senior unit Planned Unit Development Review $750.00 $750.00 Per project (includes zoning change) Plat Review $200.00 base plus $10.00 per lot; Maximum $750.00 $300.00 base plus $10.00 per lot; Maximum $1000.00 Per lot or maximum fee Certified Survey Review – Plan Commission Review $100.00 base plus $10.00 per lot; Maximum $150.00 $200.00 base plus $10.00 per lot; Maximum $250.00 Per lot or maximum fee Certified Survey Review – Staff Review N/A $75.00 per lot or $150.00 max Per lot or maximum fee Extraterritorial Certified Survey Map – Staff Review $25.00 per lot or $100.00 max $50.00 per lot or $150.00 max Per lot or maximum fee Sign Permit Review $75.00 $100.00 Per sign Site Plan Review $300.00 $300.00 Per project Special Area Design Review – Renovation Review $25.00 $25.00 Per request Special Area Design Review – Design Alteration Review $50.00 $50.00 Per request Special Area Design Review – Project Review $200.00 $200.00 Per request Payment in Lieu of Parkland Dedication LAND USE APPLICATION FEES - SEE NOTE 2 Parkland Dedication Park Impact Fees 7 of 12 Page 10 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES Temporary Use Permits $50.00 $50.00 Per request Variance $200.00 $200.00 Per request Zoning Ordinance Amendment $300.00 $400.00 Per request Zoning Map Amendment $300.00 $400.00 Per request Parking over the time permitted $10.00 $20.00 Per offense Parking from 2 AM to 5 AM $15.00 $20.00 Per offense Parking in a No Parking area $15.00 $20.00 Per offense Blocking a Driveway or Alley $15.00 $20.00 Per offense Parking over 48 hour limit $15.00 $30.00 Per offense Parking during a Snow Emergency $25.00 $30.00 Per offense Alternate Side/Winter Parking $10.00 $20.00 Per offense Parking on a through HWY from 2 AM to 5 AM $15.00 $20.00 Per offense Parking in a School Zone $20.00 $25.00 Per offense Parking next to Fire Hydrant $25.00 $30.00 Per offense Parking in a Handicap/Disabled $50.00 $50.00 Per offense Other $15.00 $20.00 Per offense Unattached Trailer Parking N/A $30.00 Per offense Overweight Parking N/A $30.00 Per offense $60.00 $60.00 Deposit: $50.00 Deposit: $50.00 $225.00 $225.00 Deposit: $100.00 Deposit: $100.00 $150.00 $150.00 Deposit: $50.00 Deposit: $50.00 Table Rentals $4.50 per table $4.50 per table Per weekend Table Rental – Replacement Fee $125.00 $125.00 Per table Chair Rentals $0.75 per chair $0.75 per chair Per weekend Chair Rental – Replacement Fee $30.00 $30.00 Per chair Aquatic Center Family Pass – Resident $100.00 $100.00 Per Annual Pass Aquatic Center Family Pass – Non Resident $115.00 $115.00 Per Annual Pass Aquatic Center Individual Pass – Resident $45.00 $45.00 Per Annual Pass Rotary Pavilion Per day; deposit refundable PARKING VIOLATION FEES AND FINES PARKS AND RECREATION FEES - SEE NOTES 3, 4, 5 Open Air Shelters Per day; deposit refundable Clubhouse Per day; deposit refundable 8 of 12 Page 11 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES Aquatic Center Individual Pass – Non Resident $55.00 $55.00 Per Annual Pass Aquatic Center Lost Pass – Replacement Fee $5.00 $5.00 Per pass Aquatic Center Daily Admission – Child $3.50 $3.50 Per Daily Pass Aquatic Center Daily Admission – Adult $4.50 $4.50 Per Daily Pass Aquatic Center Pool Party Rental $200.00 $200.00 Per hour (2 hour maximum) Municipal Building Gym Rental – Birthday Parties $30.00 $30.00 Per 2-hour rental Municipal Building Gym Rental – Resident/Recreational Use $5.00 $5.00 Per hour Municipal Building Gym Rental – Non-res./organized team $20.00 $20.00 Per hour (2 hour maximum) Municipal Building Gym Rental – Resident Special Events $50.00 $50.00 Per day Municipal Building Gym Rental – Non- resident Special Events $100.00 $100.00 Per day Brush collection in excess of 15 minutes $270.00 $300.00 Per hour - billed in 10 Min increments Front End Loader (use by PW Staff) $65.00 $86.00 Per hour – billed in 15 Min increments 12-Yard Dump Truck (use by PW Staff) $57.00 $75.00 Per hour – billed in 15 Min increments Residential Lot Mowing - in excess of 8” in height (code enforcement action required) $195.00 $225.00 Per hour – billed in minimum 1 hour increments (with 15 min increments thereafter) Large Vacant Lot Mowing - in excess of 24” in height (code enforcement action required) $220.00 $250.00 Per hour – billed in minimum 1 hour increments (with 15 min increments thereafter) Public Works Staff Labor $40.00 $72.00 Per hour – billed in 15 Min increments PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS FEES - SEE NOTE 6 PUBLIC WORKS SPECIAL EVENT FEES - SEE NOTE 5 9 of 12 Page 12 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES Traffic Barricades n/a $6.00 each; 1st 4 are free when more than 10 are requested/required for event Traffic Barricade w/ Flasher Replacement n/a $115.00 Each (when damaged, destroyed or not returned) Water-filled Jersey Barriers n/a $16.00 each; 1st 4 are free when more than 10 are requested/required for event Water-filled Jersey Barrier Replacement n/a $320.00 Each (when damaged, destroyed or not returned) Traffic Control Equipment Delivery n/a $150.00 per hour (2 workers, truck, and trailer) No Parking Signs n/a $1.00 each No Parking Sign Replacement n/a $3.00 Each (when damaged, destroyed or not returned) Staff Time n/a $72.00 Per hour (fully burdened wage rate) Equipment Time n/a Hourly Rate Hourly rate as defined in WIDOT Highway Maintenance Manual Screened compost for purchase $25.00 $25.00 Per cubic yard. Delivery fee extra based on actual labor & equip costs Unscreened/unturned Compost Free Free No loading and delivery available. Raw Leaves Free Free $70.00 load and delivery fee per truckload within City limits. Wood Mulch Free Free $70.00 load and delivery fee within City limits. $15.00 Free Compost site hand load only $10.00 Free Compost site hand load only $2.00 Free Compost site hand load only PUBLIC WORKS - COMPOST SITE FEES Screened compost partials Tube-style TV/Monitor E-Waste $25.00 $10.00 Per TV (flat screen, tube style, projection) and 10 of 12 Page 13 of 180 TYPE OF LICENSE OR PERMIT 2026 FEE AMOUNT 2027 FEE AMOUNT UNIT/DURATION DRAFT 2027 CITY OF FORT ATKINSON SCHEDULE OF FEES NOTE 7: When the fee is highlighted, it means there was a change from the previous year. When the type of license or permit is highlighted, it means that is a new fee. computer monitor NOTE 5: Field Rental Fees are incorporated at the end of this document. NOTE 6: Public Works Fees represent the actual labor and equipment costs associated with requested service. The City does not rent equipment nor provide labor for private purposes. NOTE 1: For any building permit application that requires state plan review, the City will invoice the applicant directly for any additional costs relating to state plan review by an employee, contractor, or consultant. NOTE 2: In addition to application fees, land use applicants shall bear all reasonable costs and expenses associated with third-party consultants necessary to review applications in any case where the City does not have the in-house expertise to perform such review (§15.10.32(7)(a)1.) NOTE 3: The Municipal Building is nto available for rent during Parks & Recreation sponsored programming. If there is a request to rent during Youth Center Programming, there may be additional fees to relocate the Youth Center. NOTE 4: The Municipal gym rental fee is in addition to the actual cost of any services requested to be performed by City Staff for the event (i.e. chairs, tables, mats, etc.) 11 of 12 Page 14 of 180 Park Facility Reservation & Use Fee Jones Park Game $100/1st game + $50/additional game Tournament* $100/1st game + $50/additional game Practice (2 hrs) $30/practice Prep Fee $50/1st game Lights $10/day *Tournaments: if there is a game on Friday, then a game on Saturday, the Saturday game would be considered "additional game" Memorial Park Game $40/game Tournament* $250/day/3 diamonds Practice (max 2 hrs) $15/practice Prep Fee $20/1st game Lights $10/day/3 diamonds Game $40/game Tournament* $250/day/3 diamonds Practice (max 2 hrs) $15/practice Prep Fee $20/1st game Lights $10/day/3 diamonds Game $40/game Tournament* $250/day/3 diamonds Practice (max 2 hrs) $15/practice Prep Fee $20/1st game Lights $10/day/3 diamonds Ralph Park Game $40/game Tournament* $250/day/2 diamonds (Fri 5:30-10:00 p.m. $100/2 diamonds) Practice (max 2 hrs) $15/practice Prep Fee $20/1st game Lights $10/day/2 diamonds Game $40/game Tournament* $250/day/2 diamonds (Fri 5:30-10:00 p.m. $100/2 diamonds) Practice (max 2 hrs) $15/practice Prep Fee $20/1st game Lights $10/day/2 diamonds Luther Elementary Game $40/game Practice (max 2 hrs) $10/practice Prep Fee $20/1st game Game $40/game Practice (max 2 hrs) $10/practice Prep Fee $20/1st game Rock River Park Game/Practice - no prep $10/hour Lights $10/day/3 fields Game/Practice - no prep $10/hour Lights $10/day/3 fields Game/Practice - no prep $10/hour Lights $10/day/3 fields If a resident team plays after a different resident team, the fee is $50/game 2027 Field Rental Fees 600 Janesville Avenue Baseball Field If a non-resident team plays after a resident team, the fee is $100/game All diamond preparations during the week (Mon-Fri) will be the responsibility of the City, unless otherwise All diamond preparations during the weekend (Sat-Sun) will be the sports organization's responsibility, unless otherwise 520 Bark River Drive Baseball Diamond #1 Baseball Diamond #2 Baseball Diamond #3 600 Jefferson Street Softball Diamond North Softball Diamond South 205 Park St Softball Diamond North Softball Diamond South Teams are required to perform pre and post game care of the field. No charge for Fort Atkinson City sponsored activities or Fort Atkinson School District activities. 1300 Lillian Street Football Field North Football Field South Practice Field *All tournaments require park shelter rental at 50% of the rental fee. Game/tourney fee includes use of dragging machine, 1 bag of chalk per 2 games, scoreboard (if operable), and up to 8 bags of diamond dry per day. $15/bag of diamond dry if more is needed. $10/bag of chalk if more is needed. Page 12 of 12 Page 15 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson City Manager’s Office 101 N. Main Street Fort Atkinson, WI 53538 City of Fort Atkinson Compensation Philosophy *To be included in the Employee Manual during next update Draft V.4 9.10.26 The City of Fort Atkinson engaged in a Classification and Compensation study in 2025. The final report and manual may be found on the City’s shared drive and are available through the City Manager’s Office. The final report and manual recommended changes to the City’s step pay plan to an open range merit plan. Efforts toward implementation of that plan were further described during the 2026 Performance Management Program. The new Performance Management Program includes new annual review forms, self-evaluation forms, leadership feedback forms, core competencies, and ratings explanations. These documents may be found on the City’s shared drive and are available through the City Manager’s Office. COMPENSATION PHILOSOPHY The City of Fort Atkinson considers its staff to be key assets. The salary and benefits program provided to the non-represented employees of the City is intended to attract, retain, and motivate highly qualified, enthusiastic, productive, and committed employees. The program is designed to assist the City in providing high quality services to the public. This objective is attained by providing compensation based on internal equity and external competitiveness within the City’s fiscal capabilities. The City Manager has the discretion when hiring new employees, to negotiate wages and benefits pursuant to existing wage schedules for the new hires, giving consideration to the employee’s qualifications and experience. COMPENSATION OBJECTIVES The objectives of the City’s compensation program are to: 1. Attract and retain highly qualified, enthusiastic, productive, and committed employees. 2. Maintain and motivate employees to help the City achieve its short- and long-term goals; and reward employees for their valued contributions. 3. Communicate the City’s expectations regarding different rates of pay. 4. Maintain appropriate controls for payroll costs. 5. Recognize the internal worth of jobs and pay accordingly. 6. Ensure internal equality among non-represented employees. 7. Meet competitive pay levels within the City’s chosen market and within the available resources. 8. Ensure consistent administration and application of pay policies. 9. Ensure that pay plan administration decisions are not based upon or influenced by an employee’s sex, race, color, age, religion, or any other legally protected personal characteristic. Page 16 of 180 PAY STRUCTURE To facilitate effective administration, an open range merit pay structure has been established for all non-represented positions. See Open Range Merit Plan for additional information on pay structure and compensation paid based on employment status and merit. OPEN RANGE MERIT PLAN To facilitate effective administration, an open range merit pay structure has been established for all non-represented positions. The framework of the pay structure includes 17 pay grades. Each non-represented position has been assigned to a pay grade through an objective process including a job factor analysis, job analysis questionnaire, and interview during the 2025 Classification and Compensation study as outlined in the final report. The framework also includes pay ranges within each grade. PAY GRADE AND RANGES The pay structure consists of a set range for each pay grade. The ranges were initially calculated by developing a midpoint for each pay grade based on comparable data through the 2025 Classification and Compensation report. The minimum for each pay grade was determined by calculating 80% of the midpoint, and the maximum was determined by calculating 120% of the midpoint. Pay ranges will change annually by the cost-of-living adjustment included in the annual budget, if applicable. Creating wide ranges for each pay grade allows for supervisor discretion in hiring and providing feedback and incentive during the performance review process. Pay range spread is intended to be sufficient to recognize and reward different levels of experience within each grade. IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW OPEN RANGE MERIT PLAN This pay structure has been established as part of the City’s 2025 Classification and Compensation Report. In order to move current employees onto the new pay structure, the following strategy was used: 1. Employees whose annual salary was below the minimum in the pay range, were increased to the minimum of the pay range. 2. The compensation of employees whose present compensation is within the range for their classification should be slotted into the new Compensation Plan at their current pay rate. All non-represented employees received at least a 4% increase to bring them into the pay structure when implemented in 2026. 3. Employees whose annual salary was between the minimum and the midpoint of the pay range will receive a systematic adjustment annually until such time that the employee reaches the midpoint, provided that employee receives a satisfactory performance evaluation. 4. Employees whose annual salary is between the midpoint and the maximum of the pay range will not receive an annual systematic adjustment, beyond the annual cost of living adjustment (COLA). Employees in this category will be eligible for merit pay increases through the performance evaluation process. Page 17 of 180 5. Employees whose annual salary is greater than the maximum of the pay range will not receive an annual adjustment beyond the COLA provided to all non-represented employees. If the employee receives merit pay through the performance evaluation process, the pay will be a lump sum and not added to the employee's base salary. COMPENSATION UPON PROMOTION Employees receiving a promotion on or after January 1, 2026, and who are being promoted to a new pay grade, will move to a location in that pay grade that provides a salary increase commensurate with the promotion, subject to the discretion of the Department Head and City Manager. Any other adjustments must be approved by the City Manager, provided substantial reasons exist. TRANSFER Employees who transfer to a new position within the same pay grade as their old position may receive a compensation adjustment if circumstances warrant. Any salary increase proposed must be approved by the City Manager. COMPENSATION UPON INTERIM ASSIGNMENT Employees who are assigned to an interim classification in a higher pay range for a planned period of at least 60 days, and who are expected to perform a majority of the higher classification’s duties and responsibilities, may move up to that pay grade or may receive additional compensation as a stipend, as determined by the City Manager. Upon return to the employee’s original position and/or classification, the employee’s pay will revert to their base compensation prior to receiving the interim assignment adjustment, plus any additional annual pay increases the employee would have received in the original classification. COMPENSATION UPON INVOLUNTARY DEMOTION Compensation for an employee who is demoted for involuntary reasons unrelated to performance will be determined on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the level of demotion and circumstances for the change as determined by the City Manager. COMPENSATION UPON VOLUNTARY DEMOTION An employee who requests and is granted a voluntary demotion will receive a decrease in pay, the amount of which is to be determined given the facts and individual circumstances as determined by the City Manager. PAY GRADE ASSIGNMENT NEW POSITION When a new position is created, the major duties, responsibilities, knowledge, skills, and ability requirements, reporting relationships, and working conditions of the proposed position should be outlined; and a draft job description that summarizes the information should be completed and approved by the City Manager. The City Manager shall use the methodology outlined in the Page 18 of 180 2025 Classification and Compensation Report and manual, including the job factor analysis, to determine the proper pay grade for the position. PAY GRADE ASSIGNMENT FOR RECLASSIFICATION OF CURRENT POSITION When a significant change is made in the duties and responsibilities of a position and that change has occurred for a minimum of six months, a department head or an employee may request that the classification of the position be reviewed for possible adjustment. To determine the appropriate placement of the position within the pay structure, the incumbent must review the most recent job description and indicate where the changes in major duties and responsibilities has occurred. The job description will then be forwarded to his/her Department Head for review and the Department Head must sign the job description confirming the accuracy of the information provided and, in turn, forward the review request to the City Manager. A letter will also be required, explaining what change is being sought, why the change in responsibilities occurred, and how long the change has occurred. If the Department Head agrees with the incumbent's job description change, the Department Head will indicate agreement and forward it to the City Manager. If the Department Head disagrees with the incumbent's job description change, he/she will discuss the contents of it with the incumbent and either reach agreement on its content or acknowledge disagreement on specific information prior to forwarding it to the City Manager. The City Manager shall use the methodology outlined in the 2025 Classification and Compensation Report and manual, including the job factor analysis, to determine if the changes in responsibility and job description warrant a change in the pay grade for the position. If a new pay grade is warranted, the City Manager shall determine where, within the pay range for that grade, the incumbent shall be placed. Generally, the incumbent will be placed between the start and the midpoint of the pay range; however, the City Manager may determine otherwise provided substantial reasons exist. POSITIONS REQUIRING A MARKET ADJUSTMENT The 2025 Classification and Compensation Report took into account internal equity and external market conditions to determine the pay grades and ranges. It is expected that the City will continue to provide annual cost of living adjustments to keep the pay plan competitive with external comparable communities. In the future, a circumstance could develop where a position in the City’s compensation plan could be considered for an increase within the existing pay grade. These are positions that may command higher pay within the range due to unusual market demands. Market adjustments should generally be considered in the future under only one or more of the following circumstances: Page 19 of 180 1. The City has documented problems recruiting and/or selecting employees between the minimum and the midpoint within the assigned pay range (for example, a position is advertised two or more times resulting in few or no qualified applicants). 2. The City has an unacceptable rate of turnover in the position, and exit interview information indicates pay as a significant issue. 3. In situations where the market demands higher pay rates, at the discretion of the City Manager, the position may be hired above the midpoint in the existing pay grade. The City recognizes that the allowance of market adjustments does disrupt some of the internal equity in its compensation plan because there are jobs that are of higher internal value that may be paid less than a job of lower internal value. This is why the City intends to utilize market adjustments sparingly. POSITIONS REQUIRING A COMPRESSION ADJUSTMENT Salary compression exists when there is an unacceptable difference in salary between a supervisor and a direct subordinate. Compression can exist under a base salary comparison, under a total gross earnings comparison, or both. There are several factors that may be contributing to compression. The City needs to determine if the compression issue is a concern or if there are valid, acceptable reasons for the compression to exist. If the City determines the compression issue is a concern, then the City must determine if the compression issue must be resolved through a pay increase or if alternative solutions need to be found to address the issue. Some examples of factors, other than pay, that may be contributing to the pay compressions issues include management/distribution of overtime within the department, insufficient staffing levels, delegation of workload, special projects causing a spike in overtime, special skills/knowledge possessed by a subordinate, market demands and/or difficulty in recruiting for a specific skill. Once the City has determined there is a compression issue and is confident the appropriate action to address the compression issue is a pay increase for the supervisor, the City should review the differences in total compensation (i.e., direct pay and benefits) between the supervisor and subordinate positions. If it is determined, the benefit package of the supervisor is determined not sufficient enough to compensate for the wage compression and the City has determined the best course of action is a pay raise for the supervisor, the City will calculate an acceptable base pay differential between the exempt supervisory position and the average gross earnings of the subordinates the supervisor supervises. An explanation is provided below on how to determine the “average” gross earnings of subordinate positions if it is determined this is how the City is going to remedy the situation. Calculating “Average Gross Earnings”: Review the gross pay for the prior year for the employee for which compression may be an issue. Review the average gross pay of the subordinate employees who are at the top of their pay range. When performing this calculation, be sure to remove the outliers from consideration. For example, if one particular employee has a much greater amount of overtime due to a special project, or if one employee is new to the position and not yet at the maximum of that pay grade, then they should be excluded from the analysis. Page 20 of 180 Using this average, calculate a rate that is 108% of the average gross pay for the subordinate employee and compare against the salary of the supervisor. If the supervisor is less than 8% higher, the supervisor’s salary may be adjusted. This may be done permanently or temporary while compression issues are causing the problem. Any compression problem and/or temporary or permanent solution shall be approved by the City Manager. The City recognizes that the allowance of compression adjustments disrupts some of the internal equity in the compensation plan. This is why the City intends to use compression adjustments sparingly and monitor these adjustments closely. All compression adjustments must be approved by the City Manager. DETERMINING PAY FOR NEW HIRES In general, new employees should be hired between the minimum and the midpoint of the pay range in the pay grade in which their position is located depending on the previous experience and particular skills of that new employee. The City Manager must approve any request to hire an employee above the midpoint of the pay range. DETERMINING ANNUAL COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS (COLA) The City will perform periodic (generally annual) adjustments to maintain the desired market position relating to employee compensation. If pay ranges are not adjusted to keep up with the labor market and inflation, eventually the City’s pay ranges will be out of line with the market and comparable communities which may lead to the need for another compensation study. Considerations for COLA adjustment should include several pieces of information: a survey of planned structure increases by comparable organizations, established economic indicators such as the Consumer Price Index (CPI), analysis of the across-the-board adjustments given to the City’s represented positions, and a current financial analysis of the City’s ability to pay. All employees who may be eligible for a COLA must have an annual performance review confirming that the employee is, at a minimum, meeting the expectations of the job. The Finance Committee and City Council will consider and determine any annual COLA through the annual budget process so that the City may maintain its competitive position. When a COLA occurs, all salary ranges will be adjusted by that COLA percentage. This compensation philosophy is intended to be a guideline, and sound management judgment should be used when administering it. Compensation decisions that do not meet these guidelines established herein require the approval of the City Manager. MERIT PAY INCREASES Employees who reach the midpoint of their pay range are eligible for merit pay increases associated with the annual performance evaluation process. For employees between the midpoint and the maximum of their range, any merit increase will be added to their base salary. For employees at the maximum of their range, any merit pay will be paid through a lump sum payment and not added to their base salary. Page 21 of 180 Typical merit pay increases will be in increments of between 1% and 3%, depending on their employee’s performance evaluation and goal attainment, and the City’s ability to pay. PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS The City values high-quality public service and is committed to supporting employee growth and accountability. Regular performance evaluations provide an opportunity to review accomplishments, identify areas for improvements, and align individual goals with the City’s mission and strategic objectives identified in planning documents. Evaluations help ensure that employees receive constructive feedback, recognition for strong performance, and guidance for professional development. They also allow the City to make informed decisions about training, promotions, and other personnel actions. Through this process, the City promotes fairness, transparency, and continuous improvement in the delivery of public services. The practices of Departments for the evaluation process may vary. However, all employees must be evaluated on an annual basis. The City recognizes that the implementation and use of a formal performance evaluation process for all staff members is a key component to the success of the open range merit pay plan it has adopted through the 2025 Classification and Compensation report. Furthermore, the City recognizes that it is equally, if not more important, that supervisors are adequately trained to perform the formal performance evaluation process. See the Performance Manager Program documents for more information about the annual performance review process adopted in 2026. Page 22 of 180 Submitted by: RACHEL KING PROJECT MANAGER 4320 WEST KENNEDY BLVD, SUITE 200 TAMPA, FLORIDA 33609 RKING@MGT.US Final Report NOVEMBER 2025 Classification and Compensation Study City of Fort Atkinson, WI Page 23 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT CITY OF FORT ATKINSON, WI NOVEMBER 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 2 Job Evaluation Analysis and Job Classification System .......................................................................... 2 Market Survey ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Draft and Final Report Preparation .......................................................................................................... 3 Future Administration of the Classification and Compensation Plan ....................................................... 3 JOB EVALUATION ........................................................................................................ 4 THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN ........................................................................................ 5 SALARY DATA ............................................................................................................. 6 Selection of Comparable Communities for Data Purposes ...................................................................... 6 Selection of Benchmark Positions for Survey Purposes .......................................................................... 7 Market Survey ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Appraisal and Use of Salary Data............................................................................................................. 8 COMPENSATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................ 9 Development of the Compensation Plan .................................................................................................. 9 Compensation Plan Options for the City’s Consideration ....................................................................... 10 Recommendation: Open Range Merit Plan ............................................................................................ 10 Proposed Compensation Plan and Structure ......................................................................................... 10 Implementation and Administration of the Compensation Plan ............................................................. 11 Employee Advancement through the Ranges ........................................................................................ 12 FUTURE ADMINISTRATION OF THE COMPENSATION PLAN ...................................... 13 FUTURE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN ..................................... 14 Appreciation .......................................................................................................................................... 14 1 Page 24 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MGT is pleased to have had the opportunity to work with the City of Fort Atkinson on this Classification and Compensation Study. Human resource management is a significant concern as governmental services continue to increase in cost and complexity, and the resources to fund local governments are constrained. Day-to-day operations present challenging administrative problems in planning, organizing, and directing human resource functions in order to achieve maximum efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of municipal services. A properly developed and administered Classification and Compensation Plan forms the foundation for meeting these challenges. It helps to ensure that the City can not only recruit the best and brightest employees but can also retain those employees, even in a competitive marketplace. By retaining qualified, experienced employees, the City avoids the costs of re- recruitments and lost productivity while maximizing the benefits of the investments it has made in employees and the institutional and community knowledge acquired by those employees over their tenures. MGT understands the high expectations established in Fort Atkinson for service delivery and competitiveness in recruiting and retaining excellent employees. These factors have been considered in the analysis and reflected in the Study results. A Classification and Compensation Study encompasses a significant amount of information that can be time-consuming to condense and organize into an abbreviated format. Therefore, MGT has compiled this Executive Summary in order to provide a quick synopsis regarding the major components, findings, and recommendations of this Study. The purpose of a well- designed Classification and Compensation Study is twofold. First, it establishes internal equity (ranking) among employees across Departments in the City. Second, it assures external equity/competitiveness by comparing the compensation of Fort Atkinson employees against market data. The following is a brief overview of the process: Job Evaluation Analysis and Job Classification System B elow is a list of tasks included in this component of the Study (listed in the order that the work was performed): ● Study preparation and project meetings . Met with City Administration to discuss Study methods and expectations, review the current Classification and Compensation Plan and organizational structure, answer questions, and review the scope and schedule of work. ● Material distribution. Prepared a memorandum of explanation, which was distributed to employees. Held meetings with employees to discuss the Job Analysis Questionnaire (JAQ) and to explain the scope and purpose of the Study. Employees were provided tim e t o complete the questionnaire. The JAQs were returned to MGT within approximately three (3) weeks of distribution. ● D etermined comparable communities and collected compensation data. MGT, along with the City, determined a logical survey sample of “like” communities that impact the compensation market of Fort Atkinson. Then, MGT designed, and Fort Atkinson sent out t he survey for the benchmark positions covered in the Study. 2 Page 25 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 3 ● Job Evaluation Analysis and Establishment of a Classification Plan . Upon return of the JAQs by the City, MGT performed the following: ▪ Read each JAQ and the corresponding Job Description in its entirety. ▪ C onducted virtual interviews with at least one (1) employee in each position covered by the Study to further understand the scope of duties and responsibilities of the position. ▪ Applied a measurement system of Job Evaluation Factors to all positions, which formed the basis for internal rankings (equity) of positions. ▪ Upon completion of the Job Evaluation measurements, a new Classification Plan was developed. Market Survey The following tasks were included in this component of the Study: ● Tabulated, summarized, and analyzed comparative compensation information obtained from the comparable communities. Prepared pay tabulations that compared the salary ranges of the City of Fort Atkinson to the salary ranges of its comparable communities. Prepared comparison calculations at the 50 th, 60th, 65th, 75th, and 80th p ercentiles. Displayed data for each community and for each position and summarized the data in table form . Based on discussions with the City and the gathered data, developed salary ranges that would establish Fort Atkinson as a payer at the 50th percentile of the salary data from the comparable communities. ● B ased on the above data, developed and recommended new salary schedules. Draft and Final Report Preparation ● A preliminary analysis of the data and recommended Classification and Compensation Plan was shared with the City. Feedback from City Administration was reviewed and incorporated into the recommendations. ● A draft report was prepared by MGT and sent electronically to the City. ● A presentation of these draft findings was conducted, as requested. ● Once the presentation was made and review comments were returned by the City, this final report was prepared and transmitted electronically. Future Administration of the Classification and Compensation Plan ● Within the body of this report, MGT has outlined how the City can maintain the Classification and Compensation Plan. MGT will supply the City with a User’s Manual and all associated documents to maintain the Classification and Compensation Plan and the steps to ensure the City remains competitive with the market in the years to come. Page 26 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 4 JOB EVALUATION MGT’s approach to Job Evaluation involves a quantitative point and factor comparison method, which cross-compares all positions in the organization against numerous factors such as educational requirements, experience, work conditions, etc. Therefore, all jobs in each organizational unit (e.g., Police, Administration, Finance, etc.) may be compared against each other based upon the same factors. In conducting the Job Evaluation, it must be emphasized that the position, and not the incumbent’s qualifications, performance, or years of service in the position, is evaluated. An incumbent employee may feel they should be placed in a higher level (i.e., receive more points) because the individual performs well, has a long tenure with the organization, and/or has additional education or skills not required to perform that job, or may feel they have a more significant workload than a similar employee in another Department; however, these are employee specific characteristics and not determinants for a position evaluation. Before reviewing the results of the evaluation of the positions, it is important to note that the purpose of a Job Evaluation is to identify whether a job is more or less advanced than, or equal to, other jobs in the organization based on nine (9) objective factors. While these factor definitions are guidelines, they are constructed to allow limited flexibility of interpretation while at the same time providing a strict framework and structure for comparison. The nine (9) factors used for the evaluation of Fort Atkinson’s positions are as follows: 1. Preparation and Training 2. Experience Required 3. Decision-Making and Independent Judgment 4. Responsibility for Policy Development 5. Planning of Work 6. Contact with Others 7. Work of Others (Supervision Exercised) 8. Working Conditions 9. Use of Technology/Specialized Equipment As part of the Job Evaluation process, the duties, responsibilities, and qualification requirements for each position were reviewed via a thorough reading of the incumbent’s current job description and a Job Analysis Questionnaire (JAQ) completed by each employee (Appendix A). In addition, MGT conducted interviews with at least one (1) employee in each of the positions covered by the Study. Points were then assigned to each factor by selecting the description that best fit the appropriate level for the position. In other words, a position that supervises ten (10) full-time staff members would receive more points under the “Work of Others” factor than positions that do not supervise. Points for each factor were then totaled for each position. Using this method, the positions were found to fall into distinguishable Skill Levels. Table 1 contains the Classification Plan, including the Position Title, Skill Level, and proposed Grade for the evaluated positions. Page 27 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 5 THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN A Classification Plan provides for a systematic arrangement of positions into classifications. A position, often referred to as a job (e.g., Office Assistant), contains a specific set of duties and responsibilities, and that is the objective of the classification process, not the person currently holding that job. A classification is a grouping of positions that have similar levels of knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to perform the job. The positions are also similar in nature of work, level of work difficulty, and responsibilities. Positions allocated to the same classification are sufficiently similar with respect to the types of factors enumerated above to permit them to be compensated at the same general level of pay. The positions do not have to be identical; they can be in different departments, dealing with different subject matters, and performing different duties. It is this arrangement of positions and resulting classification structure that forms the basis for the Classification Plan. As noted in the previous section, a Job Evaluation and Classification Plan is not intended to assess individual performance. To that end, a position that belongs in a certain classification is not entitled to be placed in a higher classification simply because the individual performs with a high degree of success and efficiency, nor is it placed in a lower classification simply because the incumbent performs with low competence or productivity. Variations in individual performance are not recognized by differences in classifications; instead, they are management issues. Similarly, there is a tendency in some workforces to use the Classification Plan to reward longevity, even though the duties and responsibilities of individual positions may not have changed over time. Longevity is not a classification factor, and the Classification Plan should not be used in this manner. As an assessment of duties performed and responsibilities exercised, a Classification Plan is an exceedingly useful managerial tool. It provides the fundamental rationale for the Compensation Plan and helps management identify positions that have taken on (or, in some cases, reduced) duties and responsibilities. Through proper maintenance of the Classification Plan, employees are assured of management’s continuing concern about the nature of the work that they conduct and its reward in the form of appropriate pay levels and relationships. The Classification Plan also provides the basis for recruitment, screening, and selection of employees in direct relationship to job content. Promotional ladders, as well as opportunities for lateral career development, are also evidenced by the logical grouping of allied occupational classifications and hierarchies. Page 28 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 6 SALARY DATA The City initiated this Study with the objective of assuring that its Compensation Plan is both internally equitable and externally competitive. The Job Evaluation System (outlined above) is performed to address the issue of internal equity. To achieve external competitiveness, a market survey of comparable communities was conducted. The following explains the labor market review and the collection of salary data. Selection of Comparable Communities for Data Purposes Selecting communities for the comparison group is an important element in a Classification and Compensation Study. When selecting communities to serve as comparables, it is important to use particular criteria to evaluate the other communities to ensure that those chosen as comparables will be the most similar to Fort Atkinson. To determine which communities should be used for survey purposes, MGT first considered all cities and villages in Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Green, Jefferson, Rock, Walworth, Washington, and Waukesha Counties with populations between 6,200 and 26,000. Criteria Total Possible Points 1. Population 20 2. Total Equalized Value (million) 15 3. Property Tax Levy Per Capita 15 4. Basic Spending Per Capita 15 5. Total Shared Revenue (thousand) 15 6. Per Capita Debt 10 7. Proximity to Fort Atkinson 10 100 The seven (7) categories listed above were selected to mirror important criteria such as similar financial conditions, population, and proximity. Within each of the seven (7) categories, ranges of compatibility were established. For example, the closer a community was to matching Fort Atkinson’s estimated population, the closer the community would be to receiving the maximum of twenty (20) points. A community whose population was significantly larger or smaller than the City’s population would receive fewer or even zero (0) points. Thus, a community achieving a total of one hundred (100) points would be considered most comparable to the City of Fort Atkinson. A community with zero (0) points was therefore determined to be the least comparable to Fort Atkinson. A more detailed explanation of the methodology used to determine the comparable communities is included in Appendix B. Page 29 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 7 A cutoff of sixty-five (65) points was established to select the communities most similar to Fort Atkinson across the seven (7) categories. After applying the sixty-five (65) criteria, thirty (30) communities achieved sixty-five (65) or more compatibility points on the comparison scale with Fort Atkinson. The full list of the thirty (30) comparables is below: Hartford DeForest Slinger Delavan Hartland Delafield Stoughton Lake Mills Jackson Beaver Dam Oregon McFarland Monroe Watertown Waunakee Portage Monona Oconomowoc Whitewater Waupun Pewaukee (V) Jefferson Windsor Sussex Cottage Grove Mount Horeb Verona Elkhorn Pewaukee (C) Burlington Bolded peers indicate that the community responded to the survey or supplied MGT with a copy of their compensation plan or union contracts. Selection of Benchmark Positions for Survey Purposes When developing the market survey, it is important to select positions that are likely to have data available from the surveyed communities. These positions are referred to as benchmark positions. Based on the size of the Study and the number of positions in Fort Atkinson, MGT recommended limiting the benchmark positions in the survey to approximately forty (40) positions. This is because, as the number of positions surveyed increases, there tends to be a decline in the number of communities responding to the survey. This decline in response rates is thought to be due to the amount of work communities need to devote to completing a lengthier survey. Positions recommended as benchmarks are those that: 1) Are representative of each occupational grouping (e.g., Administration, Finance, Police, etc.). 2) Include multiple numbers of City employees when possible. 3) Can be described in a concise manner that accurately identifies the nature of work and level of difficulty. 4) Are known to commonly exist in other communities. After discussion with City Administration, forty (40) positions were selected as benchmark positions for the survey. The benchmark positions are represented in Appendix C. Market Survey After identifying the benchmark positions, the Consultants then prepared and distributed a market survey to the thirty (30) comparable communities. Table 1 is a summary of the benchmark market survey data. The detailed market survey data for each position is contained in Appendix C. It is important to make a few observations regarding Table 1 and Appendix C. Page 30 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 8 1) The salary data is information that was available as of June 2025 – July 2025. The new recommended salary ranges for the City were developed using this salary data from the comparable communities. 2) Some of the comparable communities provided salary range minimums and maximums for comparison purposes, while others (those that don’t utilize salary ranges as part of their pay plans) provided actual salaries for surveyed positions. The salary range minimums and maximums were analyzed to determine the 50 th, 60th, 65th, 75th, and 80th percentiles to identify wage ranges for “average” and “above average” payers. Any actual salaries provided by the comparable communities were only analyzed in a few instances when there was not enough salary range information. Salary ranges are a better gauge of market salaries than an actual salary and are thus preferred to conduct analysis. 3) Data contained within Appendix C has been thoroughly reviewed. If the Consultants determined the data was not relevant, it was removed to ensure accuracy and relevance. Appraisal and Use of Salary Data While comparing Fort Atkinson’s current salaries to those paid by other employers in the comparable communities, it must be noted that variations in compensation may be due to several factors, including: 1) Organizational size and economic conditions can have an impact on positions. In smaller communities, employees are often asked to "wear many hats" and, therefore, take on more duties and responsibilities than would normally be required of a certain position. In addition, the economic downturn forced communities to "do more with less", compelling staff to take on more duties and responsibilities than they had in the past. Therefore, it becomes increasingly harder to compare “like” positions within communities. 2) Some employers place different relative worth on certain groups of employees. For example, some employers are forced to place a higher value on certain employees or groups of employees because of the market and, therefore, pay them more. Overall, the policies and value judgments of different employers in compensating for the same kind of work can vary widely. There is rarely a single prevailing rate for any particular kind of work, even within the same labor market. 3) It can be difficult to make exact comparisons among the different employers of the duties and responsibilities of ostensibly similar jobs. Nevertheless, comparative salary data is widely considered a reliable indicator of appropriate compensation levels in relation to the prevailing market. This data is also useful as an indication of prevailing opinions concerning the compensation relationships that should exist among different classifications of work. Of equal importance, however, are the internal relationships for the various positions that were accomplished in the Job Evaluation portion of this Study. Page 31 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 9 In addition to the salary data, a comprehensive review of regional salary data was incorporated to provide a broader understanding of compensation trends. MGT maintains a subscription to Salary.com’s CompAnalyst online database, which offers real-time access to the most current and reliable market data. To ensure the analysis reflects relevant and accurate benchmarks, the following employment market area was utilized for this assessment: 1) Fort Atkinson, WI (City) 2) Government & Public Administration 3) 50 - 100 FTEs & All FTEs The industry scopes that were applied to the data were as follows: 1) August 2025 2) Minimum/Maximum COMPENSATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Development of the Compensation Plan A basic element in any human resources management program is adequate and equitable employee compensation. A Compensation Plan of this nature is essential if qualified employees are to be recruited and retained. To achieve this goal, there must be a reasonable and widely accepted model of Job Factors upon which the Compensation Plan rests. Application of this model was the purpose of the Job Evaluation aspect of this Study. The Plan presented in this report is designed to accomplish the Study goals by: 1) Providing for equal compensation for work of equivalent job content and responsibility. 2) Facilitating adjustments to compensation levels based on changing economic and employment conditions that impact these interrelationships. 3) Establishing compensation ranges that compare favorably with those of other equivalent communities within the appropriate labor market. In preparing this Plan, the Study only looked at base compensation. The compensation associated with longevity or other fringe benefits was not analyzed or factored into the Compensation Plan. Page 32 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 10 Compensation Plan Options for the City’s Consideration One of the purposes of this Study was to provide an updated Compensation Plan that relates to the external market and is internally equitable. Below is a detailed explanation of three (3) different Compensation Plans: 1) Defined Increment Plan: This is a Compensation Plan that has salary ranges with a minimum and a maximum with defined percentage increments (e.g., 3%) in between. If an employee has a satisfactory performance evaluation, they systematically advance through the compensation range. The performance evaluation and resulting salary increment increase occur annually. 2) Open Range Merit Plan: This is a Compensation Plan that also has salary ranges with minimums and maximums, but without defined percentage increments in between. Employees are advanced through the compensation range based on an annual satisfactory performance evaluation, with the percentage of their increase determined annually by City Administration. 3) Blended Merit Plan: This is a Compensation Plan that uses techniques from both a Defined Increment Plan and an Open Range Merit Plan. In considering which Plan to use, it is important to understand that employees at various levels of responsibility may react differently toward and be motivated differently by the Compensation Plan they work under. Management personnel who are goal-oriented may have a higher acceptance of the Open Range Merit Plan, and thus tend to be more comfortable with this method of compensation. Mid to lower-level positions may want the assurance of a defined salary increase based on satisfactory performance. Each system provides advantages and disadvantages, which should be evaluated by the community to determine the most appropriate system to be established. Recommendation: Open Range Merit Plan MGT typically recommends the adoption of an Open Range Merit Plan. An Open Range Merit Plan has salary ranges with minimums, midpoints, and maximums, but without defined percentage increments in between. Employees are advanced through the ranges based on an annual satisfactory performance evaluation, with the percentage of their increase determined by their supervisor and City Administration. The Open Range Merit Plan also allows maximum flexibility for the City relative to recruitment and funding, as employees can be hired within the range, and the increases provided annually for meritorious performance can fluctuate based on available funding. Given Fort Atkinson’s goal to recruit, reward, and retain motivated, high-performing employees, the Open Range Merit Plan has been selected for recommendation. Proposed Compensation Plan and Structure Within the market analysis, MGT refers to “percentiles” (for example: 50th, 60th, 65th, 75th, and 80th percentiles). Percentiles indicate where salaries or salary ranges fall in comparison to the other salaries or salary ranges from the comparable communities. The 50th percentile is the median (or middle) of the data set. When a community is considering which percentile to compensate employees at, they are deciding where they want their employee salaries and salary ranges to fall within the market of comparable communities. For example, if a community selects the 50th percentile, that means they would be paying a fair market rate at the 50th Page 33 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 11 percentile or the middle of the comparable communities. If a community selects the 60th percentile, then the salary ranges would be 10% higher than the middle of the market. An important component in the process of developing a Compensation Plan is understanding and applying the pay philosophy of the City. For the purposes of this study, the City is considering a pay philosophy of compensating employees at the 50th percentile. The next step in this process is to combine the Skill Levels included in Table 1 with the proposed salary ranges in Table 2. The Classification and Compensation Plan consists of seventeen (17) pay grades; one (1) being the lowest and number seventeen (17) being the highest. All proposed pay ranges include a minimum, midpoint, and maximum. Grades 1 – 16 have a 50% range spread from minimum to maximum, and Grade 17 has a 44% range spread from minimum to maximum. Table 1 combines all of the classification and compensation data at the 50th percentile. Implementation and Administration of the Compensation Plan Implementation of the Compensation Plan, as it affects individual employees, should be under the following pattern of adjustments: 1) Employees whose present compensation is below the minimum compensation of the range for their classification should be raised to the minimum of the range. 2) The compensation of employees whose present compensation is within the range for their classification should be slotted into the new Compensation Plan at their current pay rate. 3) Employees who are between the minimum and the midpoint of the range will receive an annual systematic pay increase to move them through the range, subject to budget availability. 4) Employees who are at or beyond the midpoint of the range are eligible for merit increases to continue to move through the range, subject to budget availability. 5) The compensation of employees whose present compensation is above the maximum compensation of the range should be held at their present rate, without a reduction in compensation, until such time that further market analysis indicates commensurate alignment with the marketplace. However, the City can consider lump sum increases for these employees, which does not impact base compensation levels, until the ranges adjust to include the individual employee compensation rates. In other studies, MGT has been asked for ideas on how to address the situation of long-term employees whose current compensation falls near the bottom (within 5 - 10%) of the proposed range. If this occurs, it illustrates that the position has been compensated at less than the market rate for someone with similar tenure. Thus, some communities elect to make additional adjustments for those employees at implementation. This decision is discretionary for the City to adopt and only occurs one time at the implementation of the new Classification and Compensation Plan. If the City wishes to consider implementation adjustments, MGT can provide examples of implementation options. Page 34 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 12 Employee Advancement through the Ranges To implement the new Compensation Plan, MGT recommends that the starting salary of the range (minimum) is the normal hiring/promoting rate. Exceptions to this starting point should be limited to hiring situations involving: 1) Applicants with an exceptional background and qualifications. 2) A promotion in which the employee’s current compensation is higher than the minimum of the new range. 3) In the case of a labor market situation where it is impossible to recruit qualified candidates at the minimum. In these cases, employees may be appointed to their positions anywhere within the defined range (generally up to the midpoint), depending on their experience and qualifications, and based on the provisions of the City’s policies (if applicable). Employees should not be hired below the minimum of their compensation range. Salary advancement between the hiring rate and the top-of-the-range (maximum) is done throughout the employee’s tenure with the organization. Advancement through the range would be done on an annual basis and would be dependent on a satisfactory performance evaluation. Incumbents progressing through the range should understand that standards of performance would become more exacting or controlling as compensation levels advance. Typical movement through the range could be in increments of 1% to 3%, depending on the employee’s performance evaluation and goal attainment, as well as the financial resources of the City. The City may also wish to provide a merit bonus for exemplary performance after an employee reaches the maximum compensation for the range. If this option is exercised, then an employee would be eligible to receive a payment after a successful performance evaluation each year. This payment should not be worked into the base salary but should be in the form of a lump sum payment that is a set amount calculated each year and is consistent for all affected employees. It is recommended that the City set aside funding for a performance-based increase for employees in this Plan. This funding would then serve as the pool for merit payments, knowing that some employees will be high performers, getting a higher percentage, and some employees will be lower performers, getting a lower percentage. Again, it should also be noted that the implementation and use of a formal performance evaluation process for all staff members is a key component to the success of this Plan. Equally, if not more important, is that supervisors are adequately trained to perform the formal performance evaluation process. Page 35 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 13 FUTURE ADMINISTRATION OF THE COMPENSATION PLAN To maintain competitive salary levels, there should be an annual review of the City’s salary ranges. The communities used in the survey group for this Study have been determined to be comparable to the City. Therefore, Fort Atkinson can continue to use these communities as a comparable market survey group for annual salary comparison purposes until it is determined that they should be reevaluated. It is MGT’s recommendation that an annual survey of these communities be conducted to determine the percentage increase each community in the comparable group is granting, either as an annual across-the-board increase to their employees or as a general adjustment to their compensation ranges. The City may wish to provide an across-the-board increase to all employees based on the information received from the comparable communities. If this is the case, then the increases would be granted separately from any merit increase that would be awarded as a result of a successful performance evaluation. It is the further recommendation of MGT that the compensation ranges for each grade be increased by the average percentage increase of the comparable group, even if an across-the- board increase is not given to all employees. Employees would continue to advance through the compensation ranges (provided that the employee is not at the maximum of the compensation range) by virtue of a merit increase granted for satisfactory or above-satisfactory performance of their job duties. Page 36 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI | November 2025 CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION REPORT 14 FUTURE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN The administration of a Classification Plan is an ongoing process. It must be recognized that it is not static and is not intended to affix positions permanently into classifications. Instead, the Plan must be administered continually to adapt it to changing conditions. Three (3) specific types of changes in the Plan itself are possible: elimination of a position, creation of a position, or revision of a position. 1) When a position in a classification is eliminated or when a position has significantly changed work duties and responsibilities to the extent that the position becomes inappropriate or inaccurate, the position should be abolished. 2) New positions should be created when new work situations arise that are not covered by the established positions. However, caution should be exercised in this respect, particularly to ensure that new positions are justified, are not merely duplicating established positions, cannot be accommodated through changes in existing positions, and reflect substantially permanent rather than temporary situations. 3) The adjustment or revision of a position should be done when there are substantial changes to the requirements of the position or to the nature and complexities of the duties being performed. In this instance, a position may need to be re-scored and move up or down into a new classification. All changes should be thoroughly evaluated to maintain the integrity of the classification relationships established in the Classification and Compensation Plan. City Administration has been provided with the Job Analysis Questionnaire as well as the Job Factor Scoring Sheet, enabling the City to grade a newly created or revised position. MGT provides scoring assistance in such cases in accordance with the Study contract. Appreciation MGT has appreciated the opportunity to work with the City of Fort Atkinson on this Classification and Compensation Study. A special thank you to the employees for all of the information provided to allow for the analysis, and to the City Manager, Clerk/Treasurer/Finance Director, and Public Relations Executive Assistant for the significant amount of work and support dedicated to the project. Page 37 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Table 1 - Comprehensive Table Position: New Grade 790 + 17 Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum Midpoint Maximum City Manager 17 116,938 155,659 108,300 176,700 119,394 136,835 125,000 150,000 180,000 755 - 785 16 Chief of Police 16 100,568 130,062 97,100 147,900 100,981 111,331 96,000 120,000 144,000 Director of Public Works 16 99,490 131,966 107,100 174,900 104,010 114,671 96,000 120,000 144,000 720 - 750 15 Clerk/Treasurer/Finance Director 15 94,370 117,257 98,200 161,900 89,233 99,417 89,600 112,000 134,400 Fire Chief/EM Director 15 94,848 119,808 69,100 112,000 96,828 107,878 89,600 112,000 134,400 685 - 715 14 City Engineer 14 91,582 125,236 72,100 101,600 86,567 95,919 84,000 105,000 126,000 Director of Building and Neighborhood Services 14 na na 84,200 132,300 84,000 105,000 126,000 Police Captain 14 93,907 117,052 na na 86,567 95,919 84,000 105,000 126,000 Recreation Director 14 79,425 104,510 94,700 162,500 84,628 90,881 84,000 105,000 126,000 650 - 680 13 Library Director 13 79,976 109,678 80,000 141,300 84,628 90,881 76,000 95,000 114,000 Police Lieutenant 13 92,000 115,190 98,400 134,500 81,945 87,359 76,000 95,000 114,000 Superintendent (PW) 13 84,488 114,056 na na 84,628 90,881 76,000 95,000 114,000 Superintendent (W) 13 78,939 106,209 na na 84,628 90,881 76,000 95,000 114,000 Superintendent (WW) 13 78,939 106,209 68,400 105,900 84,628 90,881 76,000 95,000 114,000 615 - 645 12 Building & Facilities Manager 12 na na 72,400 119,500 72,000 90,000 108,000 Building Inspector 12 73,382 98,450 64,300 98,100 71,959 80,172 72,000 90,000 108,000 Electrician 12 na na 50,400 81,600 71,959 80,172 72,000 90,000 108,000 Fire Division Chief 12 82,430 113,048 61,800 104,400 67,471 74,387 72,000 90,000 108,000 580 - 610 11 Assistant City Engineer 11 73,278 100,526 62,000 87,100 70,516 78,564 68,000 85,000 102,000 Museum Director 11 na na 64,700 103,200 70,516 78,564 68,000 85,000 102,000 545 - 575 10 Foreperson (W) 10 61,537 77,761 62,900 102,600 58,145 64,780 60,000 75,000 90,000 Foreperson (WW) 10 61,537 77,761 62,900 102,600 58,145 64,780 60,000 75,000 90,000 Park & Rec Maintenance Supervisor 10 67,581 91,235 61,600 100,300 58,145 64,780 60,000 75,000 90,000 Recreation Supervisor 10 61,214 84,713 64,100 106,500 58,145 64,780 60,000 75,000 90,000 Supervisor (PW) 10 69,650 91,661 82,100 120,400 65,551 73,032 60,000 75,000 90,000 510 - 540 9 Head Mechanic 9 56,395 80,879 48,700 76,600 57,084 63,598 58,400 73,000 87,600 Reference Librarian 9 na na 52,300 87,600 55,683 62,038 58,400 73,000 87,600 Youth Services Librarian 9 na na 55,300 90,900 55,683 62,038 58,400 73,000 87,600 485 - 505 8 Crewleader (Parks) 8 57,605 78,586 48,200 70,500 52,861 58,893 57,200 71,500 85,800 Crewleader (PW) 8 59,197 78,957 46,100 71,900 52,861 58,893 57,200 71,500 85,800 PR/Executive Assistant 8 56,196 75,865 63,400 95,400 58,145 64,780 57,200 71,500 85,800 Technician (WW) 8 56,368 73,549 40,600 68,200 53,646 59,768 57,200 71,500 85,800 460 - 480 7 Senior Center Director 7 na na na na 50,335 56,080 56,000 70,000 84,000 435 - 455 6 Assistant Museum Director 6 na na 58,400 94,300 50,335 56,080 54,000 67,500 81,000 410 - 430 5 Mechanic 5 58,531 74,077 48,700 76,600 52,861 58,893 52,000 65,000 78,000 Operations Specialist 5 52,262 70,554 na na 53,646 59,768 52,000 65,000 78,000 385 - 405 4 Aquatics Specialist 4 na na na na 50,335 56,080 48,000 60,000 72,000 Building Maintenance 4 49,712 69,826 33,800 50,000 47,937 53,408 48,000 60,000 72,000 Crewperson (PW) 4 51,958 69,931 39,000 63,000 52,861 58,893 48,000 60,000 72,000 Crewperson (W) 4 51,958 69,931 39,000 63,000 48,659 54,212 48,000 60,000 72,000 Crewperson (WW) 4 51,958 69,931 39,000 63,000 48,659 54,212 48,000 60,000 72,000 Parks Forestry & Facilities 4 48,797 66,290 41,000 58,900 48,659 54,212 48,000 60,000 72,000 Sweeper Operator 4 54,776 69,140 38,000 60,800 50,335 56,080 48,000 60,000 72,000 360 - 380 3 Telecommunicator 3 51,282 62,820 37,200 57,500 46,473 51,777 46,000 57,500 69,000 335 - 355 2 Admin Asstnt - Program Coordinator 2 na na 41,200 64,400 45,844 51,076 44,000 55,000 66,000 Administrative Assistant (PW) 2 43,659 59,259 40,600 59,100 41,753 46,518 44,000 55,000 66,000 Deputy Clerk 2 50,600 68,051 45,300 68,800 44,935 50,063 44,000 55,000 66,000 Deputy Treasurer 2 50,544 69,118 67,700 106,400 44,935 50,063 44,000 55,000 66,000 Municipal Court Clerk/Admin Assist. 2 45,614 61,865 42,600 65,000 44,935 50,063 44,000 55,000 66,000 Records Clerk 2 na na 42,000 66,400 46,473 51,777 44,000 55,000 66,000 Utility Billing Specialist 2 46,966 62,754 36,200 53,800 44,935 50,063 44,000 55,000 66,000 Up to 330 1 Library Assistant II 1 na na 36,800 59,100 44,935 50,063 40,000 50,000 60,000 Skill Level 50th Percentile Salary Survey Data CompAnalyst Data Current Salary Range Proposed Salary Range 50th Percentile 15 Page 38 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Table 2 - Proposed Pay Ranges Grade Minimum Midpoint Maximum 17 125,000 150,000 180,000 16 96,000 120,000 144,000 15 89,600 112,000 134,400 14 84,000 105,000 126,000 13 76,000 95,000 114,000 12 72,000 90,000 108,000 11 68,000 85,000 102,000 10 60,000 75,000 90,000 9 58,400 73,000 87,600 8 57,200 71,500 85,800 7 56,000 70,000 84,000 6 54,000 67,500 81,000 5 52,000 65,000 78,000 4 48,000 60,000 72,000 3 46,000 57,500 69,000 2 44,000 55,000 66,000 1 40,000 50,000 60,000 50th Percentile - Proposed Pay Ranges Annual 16 Page 39 of 180 AP PENDIX A Page 40 of 180 EMPLOYEE JOB ANALYSIS QUESTIONNAIRE (JAQ) City of Fort Atkinson, WI NAME: DATE: YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WITH EMPLOYER: JOB TITLE: YEARS OF EXPERIENCE ON THIS JOB: YOUR JOB IS: FULL TIME PART TIME Y OUR YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THIS FIELD: DEPARTMENT: NAME OF IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR: THEIR TITLE: INSTRUCTIONS The purpose of this questionnaire is to obtain additional information about your job that may not be included in your current job description. Please answer each question thoughtfully and frankly. After you have finished your portion of the questionnaire, give it to your immediate supervisor, who will complete their section. General Summary: In three or four sentences, please summarize the major purpose or primary function of your job. Please indicate if you have reviewed your current job description. If you have any changes to your current job description, please mark them on the JD and attach it to this JAQ, or indicate changes here: If you do not have a job description available to review, please list your job duties. Try to place your duties in order of importance and group “like” tasks together (e.g., “clerical duties including word processing, opening mail, filing, etc.” or “front desk responsibilities including greeting visitors, answering telephones and routing calls, etc.”). Job duties: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 18 Page 41 of 180 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Feel free to add more numbers/duties if necessary. FACTOR 1. Education & Training: In your opinion, what kind of education and training is necessary to perform your job? LEVEL 1: Level of knowledge that is below what is normally attained through high school graduation. LEVEL 2: High school diploma (GED) or equivalent. LEVEL 3: High school, plus elementary technical training, acquired on the job or through one year or less of technical or business school. LEVEL 4: Extensive technical or specialized training such as would be acquired by an Associate’s Degree or two years of technical or business school. LEVEL 5: Completion of four-year college degree program. LEVEL 6: Additional professional level of education beyond a four-year college program, such as a CPA or Professional Engineer (P.E.) training. LEVEL 7: Completion of graduate coursework equal to a Master’s Degree or higher. W hat specific degree/coursework is NECESSARY? What specific degree/coursework is PREFERRED? If a specific certificate or license is mandated by an outside agency to perform your duties, name the certificate or license: What special skills, knowledge, and abilities are required to perform your job? Please list: FACTOR 2. Years of Experience: How much previous work experience do you feel is necessary to perform your job? LEVEL 1: LEVEL 2: LEVEL 3: LEVEL 4: LEVEL 5: Less Than 1 Year 1 to 3 Years 4 to 6 Years 7 to 10 Years More than 10 Years W hat is the minimum number of years required? What specific experience is necessary? 19 Page 42 of 180 F ACTOR 3. Independent Judgment and Decision Making Pa rt 1: How much discretion do you have in making decisions with or without the input or direction of your supervisor? L ITTLE: Little discretion or independent judgment exercised. S OME: Some discretion or judgment exercised, but supervisor is normally available. O FTEN: Job often requires making decisions in absence of specific policies and/or guidance from supervisors, but some direct guidance is received from supervisors. HI GH: High level of discretion with decisions restricted only by Departmental policies and little direct guidance from supervisors. VERY HIGH: Very high level of discretion with decisions only restricted by the broadest policies of the Organization. Part 2: If you make an erroneous decision, what impact would this decision have on your work unit, department, and/or the Organization? M INOR : Some inconvenience and delays but minor costs in terms of time, money, or public/employee good will. M ODERATE : Moderate costs in time, money, or public/employee good will would be incurred. Delays in important projects/schedules likely. SE RIOUS: Important goals would not be achieved and the financial, employee, or public relations posture of the Organization would be seriously affected. CR ITICAL : Critical goals and objectives of the Organization would be adversely and very seriously affected. Error could likely result in critical financial loss, property damage, or bodily harm/loss of life. FA CTOR 4. Responsibility for Policy Development: Does your job require you to participate in the development of policies for your unit/division/department/the Organization? L EVEL 1: Position involves only the execution of policies or use of existing procedures. L EVEL 2: May provide some input to supervisor when policies and procedures are updated. L EVEL 3: Position involves some development of policies/procedures for the Department and/or the interpretation or explanation of departmental policies for others in the organization or residents. L EVEL 4: Position involves significant or primary responsibility for the development of policies and procedures for a division or organizational component of a department, as well as the interpretation, execution and recommendation of changes to department policies. L EVEL 5: Position involves significant or primary responsibility for the developmen t of policies and procedures for an entire department, plus occasional participation in the development of policies which affect other departments in the organization. L EVEL 6: Position involves the primary responsibility for the development of departmental policies and procedures and regular participation in the development of policies that affect other departments and occasionally involves participation in the development of organization-wide policies. Gi ve some examples of the types of policies you’ve written or been a part of creating: 20 Page 43 of 180 FACTOR 5. Planning: How much latitude do you have to set your own daily work schedule and priorities for a given workday? LEVEL 1: Position requires that my daily work load and activities are assigned to me by my supervisor. LEVEL 2: Position requires that I plan my own daily work load and work independently according to established procedures or standards. LEVEL 3: Position requires that I plan my own daily work load and those of others in the department (first- level supervision). LEVEL 4: Position requires an above average ability to analyze data and develop departmental plans, including plans where a number of difficult, technical and/or administrative problems must be addressed (Manager/Division level planning). LEVEL 5: Position requires a high level of analytical ability to develop plans for a department or complex situation, including plans that involve integrating/involving/impacting other departments (Department Head level planning). F ACTOR 6. Contacts with Others : In the course of performing your job, what contacts with people in your department, other departments within the organization, and/or people from outside the organization are you required to make? LEVEL 1: Position involves interaction with fellow workers on routine matters with relatively little public contact. LEVEL 2: Position involves frequent internal and external contact, but generally on routine matters such as furnishing or obtaining information. LEVEL 3: Position involves frequent internal contact and regular contact with outsiders generally on routine matters, including contacts with irate outsiders which require some public relations skill for taking complaints for others to follow up upon. LEVEL 4: Position involves frequent internal and external contacts which require public relations skills in handling complaints. Contacts involve non -routine problems and require in-depth discussion and/or persuasion in order to resolve the problem. Handles more difficult contacts that are referred by front line employees. LEVEL 5: Position involves frequent internal and external contacts which require skill in dealing with, and influencing others, and initiating changes in policy/procedures to address the issue so as to avoid having to deal with the issue again in the future. LEVEL 6: Position involves frequent internal and external contacts in which I act as the spokesperson for the department and am authorized to make commitments of significant resources on behalf of the department. LEVEL 7: Position involves frequent internal and external contacts where I represent the entire organization and am authorized to make commitments in matters of broad or critical interest to the entire organization. W ith which internal individuals or groups do you have the most contact? With which external individuals or groups do you have the most contact? 21 Page 44 of 180 F ACTOR 7. Supervision Given: D o you supervise or assign work to other employees? Yes No Ac tual number of full-time employees supervised: I f yes: L EVEL 1: Position is regularly responsible for assigning work to an employee or employees, without acting in a supervisory role. To whom does this position assign work? L EVEL 2: Position is responsible for the supervision of one full time or several part time employees. L EVEL 3: Position is responsible for the direct and/or indirect supervision of two to five full time (or full time equivalent) employees. L EVEL 4: Position is responsible for the direct and/or indirect supervision of six to 15 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. L EVEL 5: Position is responsible for direct and /or indirect supervision of 16 to 29 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. L EVEL 6: Position is responsible for direct and /or indirect supervision of 30 to 50 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. L EVEL 7: Position is responsible for direct and /or indirect supervision of more than 51 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. Ac tual number of full-time (or full-time equivalent) employees supervised: F ACTOR 8. Physical Demands: Please describe any physical demands required to perform your job. D emand No Yes How often? (Rarely, Occasionally or Daily) Lifting to 20 pounds L ifting 20-50 poun ds Li fting 50+ pounds C limbing W alking K neeling C rouching C rawling B ending S itting Pr olonged Standing P rolonged Visual Concentration Un pleasant or Hazardous Conditions : Please describe any unpleasant or hazardous conditions you are exposed to in performing your job and how often you are exposed to those conditions. Include only those conditions which are directly related to your work rather than specific work area conditions. C ondition No Yes How Often? (Rarely, Occasionally or Daily) Lighting-dimness or brightness D ust H eat C old O dors N oise V ibration 22 Page 45 of 180 Wetness/Humidity T oxic Agents E lectrical Currents H eavy Machinery V iolence D isease S moke ` O ther FA CTOR 9. Use of Technology/Specialized Equipment: Please check the level of technology or specialized equipment use needed for you to perform your job. LEVEL 1: Position has no responsibility for, or use of, technology. LEVEL 2: Position has some basic use of computers for data entry and some use of the telephone, copier, etc. LEVEL 3: Position has daily use of computers for data entry and use of the telephone, fax machine, copier, etc. Position has daily use of light equipment such as push mowers, weed whackers, pole saws, custodial equipment, etc. LEVEL 4: Position has daily use of computers, the Internet, Smartphones, etc. to create databases, spreadsheets, or reports. Position designs and creates customized reports, presentations, and/or documents using advanced software skills. LEVEL 5A: Position provides routine consultation and technology support fo r everyday computer programming and/or software requests/questions to others in the organization ; is an applications super user; or uses specialized software such as GIS , SCADA or telecommunications software. LEVEL 5B: Position uses, troubleshoots, and/or repairs various pieces of specialized equipment such as HVAC, lighting, gas flares, blowers, engines, heavy equipment, diagnostic equipment, large vehicles (vacuum trucks, street sweepers, fire apparatus) and/or medical or public safety equipment. L EVEL 6 : Position is responsible for advance d computer programming, system security, maintenance, training, and purchasing of items such as computers, printers, scanners, etc., for the computer system for the organization (IT personnel). L EVEL 7 : Position is responsible for the overall direction and supervision of the staff that are responsible for the computer and technology needs of the organization , including responsibility for developing technology policies for the organization (IT personnel). 23 Page 46 of 180 10. FLSA EXEMPT OR NON-EXEMPT DETERMINATION Do you r eceive overtime or comp time for hours worked beyond your normal work week? Yes No I s your position considered any one of the following: Executive, Administrative, Professional, or Computer? If so, please answer the questions in the applicable sections below. If not, please skip to Question 11. Please answer for only one category: A. Executive No Yes Unsure Are you paid the equivalent of at least $684 per week on a salary basis? Is your primary duty managing the department or unit of a local g overnment? Percent of time spent managing Do you customarily direct the work of two or more other employees (or the equivalent of two or more, e.g., 4 part-t imers)? Do you have the ability to hire and fire, or do your recommendations c arry significant weight even if you are unauthorized to make the f inal decision? B. Administrative No Yes Unsure Are you paid the equivalent of at least $684 per week on a salary basis? Is this a “staff” position where your primary duty is performing office or n on-manual work directly related to the management or general operations of the organization, division or unit? Do you exercise discretion and independent judgment with respect to m atters of significance, have the authority to formulate/interpret policy, and have a high level of operational responsibility? C. Professional No Yes Unsure Are you paid the equivalent of at least $684 per week on a salary basis? Does your primary duty include the performance of work that requires advanced knowledge in a field of science or learning that is customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized instruction? Is a specialized advanced degree a prerequisite for your job? If yes, what is the degree or certification? 24 Page 47 of 180 D. Co mputer No Yes Unsure Are you paid the equivalent of at least $684 pe r week on a salary basis? D o your primary duties involve: Th e application of systems analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine hardware, software or system functional specifications; OR The design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, te sting or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on or related to user or system d esign specifications; OR The design, documentation, testing, creation or modification o f computer programs related to organizational operating systems; OR A combination of the aforementioned duties, the performance of which requires the same level of skills? 25 Page 48 of 180 11. C omments/Additional Information: Feel free to add additional information below. If using a printed copy of this form, use the back of the form to add your comments. Typ e your name and the date below, then save this form as a Word document with the file name of “JobTitle.LastName.FirstName” and email it to your supervisor. If using a printed copy of this form, sign and date it and then deliver to your supervisor. EM PLOYEE’S SIGNATURE OR TYPED NAME DATE 26 Page 49 of 180 T HIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED BY IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR AND/OR DEPARTMENT HEAD AND USED BY MGT ONLY. P lease provide your comments below. If using a printed copy of the form and additional space is needed, please use the back of this form or attach an additional sheet. Please do not mark in employee’s portion of the questionnaire. The intent of this section is informational for MGT use only and not intended for distribution. 1 . D o you agree with the employee’s answers to all of the above questions? If not, please explain. 2. Li st any job duties or assignments which the employee performs which are in addition to those listed on the job description or this form. 3 . How long has this employee worked for you? 4 . A dditional comments from the employee’s immediate supervisor: T ype your name and the date below, then email this form to your Department Head (if applicable) or to the City Administration. If using a printed copy of this form, sign and date it before forwarding. S UPERVISOR’S SIGNATURE OR TYPED NAME DATE I f Supervisor isn’t Department Head, Department Head should review this form as well. I have read the above and substantially concur. I have read the above and have the following comments: Typ e your name and the date below, and then email this form to the City Administration. If using a printed copy of this form, sign and date it before forwarding. D EPARTMENT HEAD SIGNATURE OR TYPED NAME DATE 27 Page 50 of 180 IM PORTANT DATES: T uesday, June 24th: Employees complete and submit the JAQs to their Supervisors. Please save file as follows: JobTitle.LastName.FirstName. T uesday, June 30th: Supervisors and Department Heads review and then submit the JAQs to Human Resources. T uesday, July 1st: City Administration reviews and then submits the JAQs to MGT. W eeks of July 7th & July 28th: MGT conducts virtual interviews with employees. 28 Page 51 of 180 AP PENDIX B Page 52 of 180 Appendix B Fort Atkinson, WI Scoring Key 12,583 Factor Points 1.50 8,389 12,583 12,583 18,875 20 2.00 6,292 8,388 18,876 25,166 15 2.50 5,033 6,291 25,167 31,458 10 3.00 4,194 5,032 31,459 37,749 5 All Others 0 1,352 Factor Points 1.50 901 1,352 1,352 2,028 15 2.00 676 900 2,029 2,704 11 2.50 541 675 2,705 3,380 7 3.00 451 540 3,381 4,056 3 All Others 0 701 Factor Points 1.50 467 701 701 1,052 15 2.00 351 466 1,053 1,402 11 2.50 280 350 1,403 1,753 7 3.00 234 279 1,754 2,103 3 All Others 0 370 Factor Points 1.50 247 370 370 555 15 2.00 185 246 556 740 11 2.50 148 184 741 925 7 3.00 123 147 926 1,110 3 All Others 0 1,285 Thousand Factor Points 1.50 857 1,285 1,285 1,928 15 2.00 643 856 1,929 2,570 11 2.50 514 642 2,571 3,213 7 3.00 428 513 3,214 3,855 3 All Others 0 2. Total Equalized Value: Maximum 15 Points Million Minimum Range Maximum Range 1. Population: Maximum 20 Points 3. Property Tax Levy Per Capita: Maximum 15 Points Maximum RangeMinimum Range Minimum Range Maximum Range 4. Basic Spending Per Capita : Maximum: 15 Points 5. Shared Revenues: Maximum 15 Points Minimum Range Maximum Range Minimum Range Maximum Range 30 Page 53 of 180 Appendix B Fort Atkinson, WI Scoring Key 1,320 Factor Points 1.50 880 1,320 1,320 1,980 10 2.00 660 879 1,981 2,640 7 2.50 528 659 2,641 3,300 4 3.00 440 527 3,301 3,960 2 All Others 0 Points 0.00 to 19.90 Miles 10 20.00 to 39.90 Miles 7 40.00 to 59.90 Miles 4 All Others 2 Initial screen: Sources: (2) Google Maps: Proximity (1) Wisconsin Policy Forum's Municipal Data Tool: https://wispolicyforum.org/research/municipal-datatool-examining-and-comparing-wisconsin- cities-and-villages/. Minimum Range Maximum Range All cities and villages in Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Green, Jefferson, Rock, Walworth, Washington and Waukesha Counties with Populations between 6,200 and 26,000. 7. Proximity to Fort Atkinson: Maximum 10 Points 6. Per Capita Debt: Maximum 10 Points 31 Page 54 of 180 Appendix B Fort Atkinson, WI Criteria Comparisons - Sorted By Name Municipality County Population Max. Points Total Equalized Value (million) Max. Points Property Tax Levy Per Capita Max. Points Basic Spending Per Capita Max Points Total Shared Revenue (thousand) Max. Points Per Capita Debt Max. Points Proximity (miles) Max. Points Total Points Fort Atkinson Jeff 12,583 20 1,352 15 701 15 370 15 1285 15 1320 10 0 10 100 Beaver Dam Dodge 16,727 20 1,717 15 905 15 669 11 1866 15 2133 7 43 4 87 Burlington Racine 11,166 20 1,402 15 753 15 755 7 59 0 655 4 42 4 65 Cottage Grove Dane 8,854 20 1,242 15 595 15 437 15 161 0 2623 7 24 7 79 DeForest Dane 11,388 20 2,085 11 786 15 477 15 647 11 3656 2 41 4 78 Delafield Waukesha 7,172 15 2,308 11 920 15 714 11 159 0 1957 10 30 7 69 Delavan Walworth 8,527 20 992 15 718 15 544 15 671 11 1422 10 26 7 93 Elkhorn Walworth 10,317 20 1,195 15 776 15 520 15 429 3 3207 4 29 7 79 Elm Grove Waukesha 6,676 15 1,612 15 1,174 11 853 7 224 0 736 7 47 4 59 Germantown Washington 21,040 15 3,939 3 757 15 632 11 1209 15 4003 0 57 4 63 Hartford Washington 15,805 20 2,015 15 555 15 452 15 882 15 1448 10 50 4 94 Hartland Waukesha 9,946 20 1,995 15 710 15 597 11 431 3 1991 7 36 7 78 Jackson Washington 7,844 15 1,182 15 738 15 517 15 398 0 2528 7 61 2 69 Jefferson Jefferson 7,747 15 815 11 664 15 567 11 812 11 1338 10 6 10 83 Lake Geneva Walworth 8,542 20 2,261 11 1,110 11 1,053 3 179 0 2121 7 38 7 59 Lake Mills Jefferson 6,452 15 900 11 745 15 548 15 534 7 3172 4 12 10 77 McFarland Dane 9,537 20 1,618 15 917 15 580 11 275 0 4381 0 27 7 68 Middleton Dane 23,031 15 5,137 0 893 15 622 11 2000 11 1636 10 42 4 66 Monona Dane 8,869 20 1,874 15 1,104 11 672 11 794 11 6482 0 29 7 75 Monroe Green 10,691 20 1,143 15 752 15 656 11 1845 15 2171 7 58 4 87 Mount Horeb Dane 7,871 15 1,180 15 716 15 528 15 337 0 2403 7 52 4 71 Mukwonago Waukesha 8,384 15 1,437 15 902 15 601 11 415 0 4449 0 30 7 63 Muskego Waukesha 25,343 10 4,789 0 549 15 480 15 576 7 1360 10 39 7 64 Oconomowoc Waukesha 18,485 20 3,745 3 843 15 531 15 390 0 2386 7 27 7 67 Oregon Dane 11,815 20 1,821 15 763 15 460 15 248 0 2970 4 32 7 76 Pewaukee (C) Waukesha 16,127 20 4,856 0 718 15 728 11 869 15 3527 2 39 7 70 Pewaukee (V) Waukesha 8,215 15 1,362 15 565 15 622 11 280 0 2735 4 39 7 67 Portage Columbia 10,325 20 964 15 710 15 633 11 1942 11 1754 10 63 2 84 Richfield Washington 11,866 20 2,558 11 302 7 204 11 181 0 30 0 51 4 53 Slinger Washington 6,401 15 987 15 663 15 648 11 128 0 1493 10 56 4 70 Stoughton Dane 13,204 20 1,788 15 844 15 531 15 990 15 2777 4 23 7 91 Sussex Waukesha 11,750 20 2,260 11 797 15 449 15 247 0 3514 2 46 4 67 Vernon Waukesha 7,486 15 1,332 15 263 3 314 15 143 0 373 0 34 7 55 Verona Dane 14,889 20 3,988 3 1,008 15 631 11 521 7 2561 7 40 4 67 Watertown Jefferson 23,018 15 2,270 11 671 15 525 15 3280 3 1399 10 21 7 76 Waukesha (V) Waukesha 8,489 20 1,589 15 207 0 289 15 147 0 0 0 35 7 57 Waunakee Dane 15,426 20 3,067 7 826 15 457 15 406 0 2100 7 42 4 68 Waupun Dodge 11,117 20 683 11 322 7 485 15 2803 7 1092 10 57 4 74 Whitewater Walworth 15,773 20 976 15 370 11 437 15 3361 3 1462 10 10 10 84 Windsor Dane 9,305 20 1,571 15 597 15 274 15 187 0 3336 2 39 7 74 32 Page 55 of 180 Appendix B Fort Atkinson, WI Criteria Comparisons - Sorted By Rank Municipality County Population Max. Points Total Equalized Value (million) Max. Points Property Tax Levy Per Capita Max. Points Basic Spending Per Capita Max Points Total Shared Revenue (thousand) Max. Points Per Capita Debt Max. Points Proximity (miles) Max. Points Total Points Fort Atkinson Jeff 12,583 20 1,352 15 701 15 370 15 1285 15 1320 10 0 10 100 Hartford Washington 15,805 20 2,015 15 555 15 452 15 882 15 1448 10 50 4 94 Delavan Walworth 8,527 20 992 15 718 15 544 15 671 11 1422 10 26 7 93 Stoughton Dane 13,204 20 1,788 15 844 15 531 15 990 15 2777 4 23 7 91 Beaver Dam Dodge 16,727 20 1,717 15 905 15 669 11 1866 15 2133 7 43 4 87 Monroe Green 10,691 20 1,143 15 752 15 656 11 1845 15 2171 7 58 4 87 Portage Columbia 10,325 20 964 15 710 15 633 11 1942 11 1754 10 63 2 84 Whitewater Walworth 15,773 20 976 15 370 11 437 15 3361 3 1462 10 10 10 84 Jefferson Jefferson 7,747 15 815 11 664 15 567 11 812 11 1338 10 6 10 83 Cottage Grove Dane 8,854 20 1,242 15 595 15 437 15 161 0 2623 7 24 7 79 Elkhorn Walworth 10,317 20 1,195 15 776 15 520 15 429 3 3207 4 29 7 79 DeForest Dane 11,388 20 2,085 11 786 15 477 15 647 11 3656 2 41 4 78 Hartland Waukesha 9,946 20 1,995 15 710 15 597 11 431 3 1991 7 36 7 78 Lake Mills Jefferson 6,452 15 900 11 745 15 548 15 534 7 3172 4 12 10 77 Oregon Dane 11,815 20 1,821 15 763 15 460 15 248 0 2970 4 32 7 76 Watertown Jefferson 23,018 15 2,270 11 671 15 525 15 3280 3 1399 10 21 7 76 Monona Dane 8,869 20 1,874 15 1,104 11 672 11 794 11 6482 0 29 7 75 Waupun Dodge 11,117 20 683 11 322 7 485 15 2803 7 1092 10 57 4 74 Windsor Dane 9,305 20 1,571 15 597 15 274 15 187 0 3336 2 39 7 74 Mount Horeb Dane 7,871 15 1,180 15 716 15 528 15 337 0 2403 7 52 4 71 Pewaukee (C) Waukesha 16,127 20 4,856 0 718 15 728 11 869 15 3527 2 39 7 70 Slinger Washington 6,401 15 987 15 663 15 648 11 128 0 1493 10 56 4 70 Delafield Waukesha 7,172 15 2,308 11 920 15 714 11 159 0 1957 10 30 7 69 Jackson Washington 7,844 15 1,182 15 738 15 517 15 398 0 2528 7 61 2 69 McFarland Dane 9,537 20 1,618 15 917 15 580 11 275 0 4381 0 27 7 68 Waunakee Dane 15,426 20 3,067 7 826 15 457 15 406 0 2100 7 42 4 68 Oconomowoc Waukesha 18,485 20 3,745 3 843 15 531 15 390 0 2386 7 27 7 67 Pewaukee (V) Waukesha 8,215 15 1,362 15 565 15 622 11 280 0 2735 4 39 7 67 Sussex Waukesha 11,750 20 2,260 11 797 15 449 15 247 0 3514 2 46 4 67 Verona Dane 14,889 20 3,988 3 1,008 15 631 11 521 7 2561 7 40 4 67 Middleton Dane 23,031 15 5,137 0 893 15 622 11 2000 11 1636 10 42 4 66 Burlington Racine 11,166 20 1,402 15 753 15 755 7 59 0 655 4 42 4 65 Muskego Waukesha 25,343 10 4,789 0 549 15 480 15 576 7 1360 10 39 7 64 Germantown Washington 21,040 15 3,939 3 757 15 632 11 1209 15 4003 0 57 4 63 Mukwonago Waukesha 8,384 15 1,437 15 902 15 601 11 415 0 4449 0 30 7 63 Elm Grove Waukesha 6,676 15 1,612 15 1,174 11 853 7 224 0 736 7 47 4 59 Lake Geneva Walworth 8,542 20 2,261 11 1,110 11 1,053 3 179 0 2121 7 38 7 59 Waukesha (V) Waukesha 8,489 20 1,589 15 207 0 289 15 147 0 0 0 35 7 57 Vernon Waukesha 7,486 15 1,332 15 263 3 314 15 143 0 373 0 34 7 55 Richfield Washington 11,866 20 2,558 11 302 7 204 11 181 0 30 0 51 4 53 33 Page 56 of 180 Appendix B Fort Atkinson, WI Top Comparables 65+ Points Municipality County Population Max. Points Total Equalized Value (million) Max. Points Property Tax Levy Per Capita Max. Points Basic Spending Per Capita Max Points Total Shared Revenue (thousand) Max. Points Per Capita Debt Max. Points Proximity (miles) Max. Points Total Points Fort Atkinson Jeff 12,583 20 1,352 15 701 15 370 15 1285 15 1320 10 0 10 100 Hartford Washington 15,805 20 2,015 15 555 15 452 15 882 15 1448 10 50 4 94 Delavan Walworth 8,527 20 992 15 718 15 544 15 671 11 1422 10 26 7 93 Stoughton Dane 13,204 20 1,788 15 844 15 531 15 990 15 2777 4 23 7 91 Beaver Dam Dodge 16,727 20 1,717 15 905 15 669 11 1866 15 2133 7 43 4 87 Monroe Green 10,691 20 1,143 15 752 15 656 11 1845 15 2171 7 58 4 87 Portage Columbia 10,325 20 964 15 710 15 633 11 1942 11 1754 10 63 2 84 Whitewater Walworth 15,773 20 976 15 370 11 437 15 3361 3 1462 10 10 10 84 Jefferson Jefferson 7,747 15 815 11 664 15 567 11 812 11 1338 10 6 10 83 Cottage Grove Dane 8,854 20 1,242 15 595 15 437 15 161 0 2623 7 24 7 79 Elkhorn Walworth 10,317 20 1,195 15 776 15 520 15 429 3 3207 4 29 7 79 DeForest Dane 11,388 20 2,085 11 786 15 477 15 647 11 3656 2 41 4 78 Hartland Waukesha 9,946 20 1,995 15 710 15 597 11 431 3 1991 7 36 7 78 Lake Mills Jefferson 6,452 15 900 11 745 15 548 15 534 7 3172 4 12 10 77 Oregon Dane 11,815 20 1,821 15 763 15 460 15 248 0 2970 4 32 7 76 Watertown Jefferson 23,018 15 2,270 11 671 15 525 15 3280 3 1399 10 21 7 76 Monona Dane 8,869 20 1,874 15 1,104 11 672 11 794 11 6482 0 29 7 75 Waupun Dodge 11,117 20 683 11 322 7 485 15 2803 7 1092 10 57 4 74 Windsor Dane 9,305 20 1,571 15 597 15 274 15 187 0 3336 2 39 7 74 Mount Horeb Dane 7,871 15 1,180 15 716 15 528 15 337 0 2403 7 52 4 71 Pewaukee (C) Waukesha 16,127 20 4,856 0 718 15 728 11 869 15 3527 2 39 7 70 Slinger Washington 6,401 15 987 15 663 15 648 11 128 0 1493 10 56 4 70 Delafield Waukesha 7,172 15 2,308 11 920 15 714 11 159 0 1957 10 30 7 69 Jackson Washington 7,844 15 1,182 15 738 15 517 15 398 0 2528 7 61 2 69 McFarland Dane 9,537 20 1,618 15 917 15 580 11 275 0 4381 0 27 7 68 Waunakee Dane 15,426 20 3,067 7 826 15 457 15 406 0 2100 7 42 4 68 Oconomowoc Waukesha 18,485 20 3,745 3 843 15 531 15 390 0 2386 7 27 7 67 Pewaukee (V) Waukesha 8,215 15 1,362 15 565 15 622 11 280 0 2735 4 39 7 67 Sussex Waukesha 11,750 20 2,260 11 797 15 449 15 247 0 3514 2 46 4 67 Verona Dane 14,889 20 3,988 3 1,008 15 631 11 521 7 2561 7 40 4 67 Burlington Racine 11,166 20 1,402 15 753 15 755 7 59 0 655 4 42 4 65 34 Page 57 of 180 AP PENDIX C Page 58 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Administrative Assistant (various departments) Municipality: Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: City of Jefferson Administrative Assistant 45,614 62,566 City of Hartford Administrative Assistant 58,616 City of Watertown Administrative Assistant II 46,093 59,259 Village of Hartland Administrative Assistant 50,411 City of Portage Administrative Assistant 39,771 59,669 Village of Slinger na City of Waupun na City of Elkhorn Administrative Assistant 39,374 56,181 47,570 City of Lake Mills Admin Assist/Recep. (Clerk) 43,659 52,416 City of Pewaukee Administrative Assistant 44,678 61,277 Village of Pewaukee Secretary 41,031 55,392 Village of Sussex Administrative Assistant 38,250 61,640 46,700 Village of Cottage Grove Administrative Assistant 61,912 City of Delafield Administrative Assistant 51,168 Village of DeForest Administrative Assistant 47,133 Village of McFarland Administrative Assistant 46,717 59,197 51,584 City of Monona na Village of Mount Horeb na Village of Oregon Administrative Assistant 41,662 53,560 City of Stoughton Administrative Assistant 45,885 Village of Windsor Deputy Clerk 50,960 City of Beaver Dam na City of Oconomowoc na City of Verona Administrative Assistant 46,000 61,865 Village of Waunakee Admin. Asst. 47,923 61,381 54,246 City of Whitewater Administrative Assistant I 42,038 56,751 City of Delavan na City of Monroe na Village of Jackson na City of Burlington na Fort Atkinson s) 41,753Administrative Assistant (various departments) 46,518 Range Data Average 43,293 58,550 51,471 50th Percentile 43,659 59,259 50,960 60th Percentile 44,866 59,991 51,168 65th Percentile 45,427 60,955 51,376 70th Percentile 45,769 61,318 51,584 75th Percentile 46,000 61,381 52,915 80th Percentile 46,056 61,536 54,246 36 Page 59 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Municipal Court Clerk/Administrative Assistant Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Municipal Court Clerk 45,614 62,566 Admin. Asst. (Law Enforcement) 61,080 Court Clerk (Municipal) 46,093 59,259 does not have Municipal Court Clerk 43,618 65,428 na na Municipal Court Clerk 46,904 63,107 54,954 Admin Assist/Recep. (Clerk) 43,659 52,416 Court Clerk 44,678 61,277 Secretary/Clerk of Court 41,031 55,392 na Admin. Svcs. Mgr./Court Clerk 67,531 na Court Clerk 54,912 na Mun. Court Clerk / Deputy Clerk 55,120 na Court Clerk 53,414 68,682 Court Clerk 53,560 na na na Court Clerk 46,000 61,865 Muni Court Clerk/CSR 51,355 65,728 61,048 Court Clerk 45,201 61,022 34,121 na na na na Municipal Court Clerk/Administrative Asst. 44,935 50,063 46,143 61,522 55,291 45,614 61,865 55,037 46,000 62,566 56,306 46,046 62,837 58,380 46,093 63,107 60,455 46,498 64,268 61,056 46,904 65,428 61,067 37 Page 60 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Deputy Clerk Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Deputy Clerk 65,104 89,294 Deputy City Clerk 53,019 Deputy Treasurer/Clerk 62,878 80,829 Deputy Clerk 50,527 Deputy Clerk 43,618 65,428 Deputy Clerk 51,287 69,698 51,292 Clerk Secretary/Office Asst. 40,082 51,522 Deputy Clerk 44,242 59,550 45,136 Deputy Clerk 47,694 57,242 Dep Clerk/Comm Dev Coord. 54,995 75,421 Deputy Clerk 45,198 61,018 na Deputy Clerk 61,104 Deputy Clerk 65,239 Deputy Village Clerk 72,446 na Mun. Court Clerk / Deputy Clerk 55,120 na Deputy Clerk 53,414 68,682 Deputy Clerk 59,987 na na na Deputy City Clerk 50,600 68,051 Dep Clerk/Citizen Svcs. Supv. 58,198 74,485 64,251 Deputy Clerk  45,201 61,022 47,987 na na na na Deputy Clerk 44,935 50,063 50,063 50,962 67,865 56,919 50,600 68,051 55,120 51,712 68,885 59,987 52,989 69,495 60,546 54,047 71,613 61,104 54,995 74,485 62,678 56,917 75,046 64,251 38 Page 61 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Utility Billing Specialist Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na Utility Billing Specialist 54,567 Utility Billing Coordinator 50,294 64,646 Fiscal, Recreational, PW Clerk 54,357 Utility Billing Specialist 39,771 59,669 Utility Clerk 44,770 58,157 44,782 Finance Accounting Spec. 48,818 62,754 Utility Billing Account Clerk 44,242 59,550 50,814 Utility Bookkeeper 49,026 58,885 Utility Billing Specialist 46,966 64,418 na Account Clerk/Finance Asst 42,500 61,640 55,000 Utility Clerk 60,442 na Utility Billing Clerk 59,197 na na Account Clerk/Finance Asst 48,797 73,195 67,163 Utility Clerk Coordinator 53,414 68,682 Accounting Specialist 54,496 Accountant 43,343 65,027 63,142 Account Clerk II 41,787 54,309 48,464 Finance Clerk 51,334 Account Clerk/Finance Asst 50,600 68,051 Account Clerk II 54,787 70,138 62,005 Water Utility Clerk 45,201 61,022 50,024 na na na na Utility Billing Specialist 44,935 50,063 47,430 46,954 63,343 55,413 46,966 62,754 54,531 48,805 64,509 54,913 48,838 64,684 56,889 48,984 64,951 59,321 49,660 66,539 60,131 50,356 68,177 61,067 39 Page 62 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Deputy Treasurer Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: City Clerk/Deputy Treasurer 72,550 99,486 Account Clerk 63,482 na Deputy Treasurer 69,461 Deputy Treasurer 43,618 65,428 Deputy Treasurer 46,379 59,545 46,384 na na Deputy Treasurer 50,544 60,674 Deputy Treasurer-Accountant 50,440 69,118 Deputy Treasurer 45,198 61,018 Accountant 65,450 94,926 81,200 Comptroller 90,000 na Accountant/Deputy Treasurer 63,100 Deputy Treasurer 58,157 Deputy Clerk/Treasurer 55,000 na Deputy Clerk Village Accountant 56,888 73,154 Asst Finance Director 103,002 Deputy Treasurer 47,953 63,938 50,960 na na na Accounting Supervisor 68,536 87,734 Comptroller 69,865 94,317 na na na na Deputy Treasurer 44,935 50,063 50,063 56,129 75,394 68,074 50,544 69,118 63,291 56,888 73,154 65,873 61,169 80,444 68,564 65,450 87,734 72,982 66,993 91,026 78,265 68,536 94,317 82,960 40 Page 63 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Clerk/Treasurer/Finance Director Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Finance Director/Treasurer 94,848 130,062 Finance Director 73,424 Finance Director 96,387 123,926 Village Clerk 85,748 Clerk/Treasurer/Finance Director 78,121 117,183 Treasurer 67,317 86,617 67,392 Finance Director/Asst. Admin. 96,699 124,322 Finance Director 94,370 127,005 100,131 Finance Director/Treasurer 78,395 101,899 Clerk/Treasurer 82,430 113,048 Village Treasurer 69,321 93,584 Finance Director 96,929 113,415 106,526 Assit Admin/Finance Director 142,956 na Finance Director 127,000 Finance Manager/Treasurer 75,629 102,086 93,101 Finance Director 97,777 132,000 125,000 Finance Director 76,794 115,190 113,006 Finance Director / Village Treas. 110,573 142,147 Finance Director/Comptroller 148,554 na na Dir. of Fin. and Admin. Svcs. 126,651 162,822 Finance Director 110,400 148,476 Finance Director 116,646 149,344 145,704 Director of Finance 86,857 117,257 105,097 na na Clerk 65,000 75,000 na Clerk/Treasurer/Finance Director 89,233 99,417 99,417 90,587 119,757 110,280 94,370 117,257 106,526 96,079 124,243 115,405 96,606 126,200 122,601 96,837 128,839 125,800 97,353 131,031 127,000 102,826 136,059 136,574 41 Page 64 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Public Relations/Executive Assistant Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na na Media Productions Manager 50,294 64,646 na na na na na na Office Coordinator 54,995 75,421 na Communications Coordinator 45,050 65,338 46,772 na na Comms Coord/Manager 65,200 Communications Manager 67,267 85,259 69,306 na na na na na na na Business Office Mgr./Executive Admin Asst. 71,500 96,160 Communications Manager 82,264 105,290 90,792 Communication Coordinator 56,196 75,865 na na na na PR/Executive Assistant 58,145 64,780 64,780 61,081 81,140 68,017 56,196 75,865 67,253 62,839 81,501 68,484 66,160 84,320 69,100 68,114 87,439 71,454 69,384 90,709 74,677 70,653 93,979 77,900 42 Page 65 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile City Manager Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na City Administrator 144,912 na Village Manager 150,346 City Administrator 99,195 148,794 132,500 Village Administrator 122,500 Administrator/Econ. Dev. 105,373 135,491 City Administrator 119,122 160,326 136,843 na City Administrator 128,190 146,494 na Village Administrator 109,402 139,000 138,500 Administrator 183,209 City Administrator/PW Director 156,109 Village Administrator 154,800 Village Administrator 116,938 157,872 145,642 City Administrator 121,473 163,988 124,125 Village Administrator 96,325 144,498 128,835 Village Administrator 126,776 163,010 na Village Administrator 112,933 147,867 124,200 City Manager 160,000 175,000 na City Administrator 146,004 196,359 Village Administrator 177,174 City Manager 115,303 155,659 144,231 na na na na City Manager 119,394 136,835 146,413 119,772 156,489 144,262 116,938 155,659 144,231 119,592 158,363 145,204 121,003 159,836 146,112 123,594 161,400 149,405 126,776 163,010 152,573 127,625 163,597 155,062 43 Page 66 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Library Director Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Library Director 79,976 109,678 Library Director 81,775 Library Director 83,803 107,765 Library Director 80,765 Library Director 74,274 111,424 Library Director 72,000 Library Director 77,272 96,595 Library Director 79,227 106,642 84,074 Library Director 65,836 85,587 na na Library is a separate entity Library Director 104,646 Library Director 90,013 Library Director 97,500 Library Director 92,331 124,654 114,192 Library Director 91,381 123,364 97,750 Library Director 61,214 91,832 83,324 Library Director 90,334 116,126 Library Director 97,115 na na na Library Director 96,000 129,109 Library Director 89,128 114,088 111,301 Library Director 75,748 93,158 na na na na Library Director 84,628 90,881 87,245 81,271 108,463 92,871 79,976 109,678 93,564 84,868 111,957 97,346 88,063 113,555 97,538 89,611 114,903 97,675 90,334 116,126 99,474 90,962 120,469 103,267 44 Page 67 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Electrician Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Contracted Only has Journeyman Lineman na Contracted na Contracted Contracted see notes Only has Journeyman Lineman na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na Electrician 71,959 80,172 75,955 45 Page 68 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Building and Facilities Manager Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na na Building And Grounds Maint. Supv. 41,891 53,851 na na na na na na na na na na na na Facilities Maintenance Mgr 60,882 77,147 70,782 Public Works Project Manager 67,581 91,235 80,000 na Parks and Facilities Manager 73,902 95,035 Parks Maintenance Supervisor 80,725 na na na Building Facilities Manager 65,000 87,418 Buildings & Facilities Manager 75,379 96,512 89,627 Streets, Parks & Forestry Supt. 75,123 101,416 na na na na Park & Rec Maintenance Supervisor 58,145 64,780 64,780 65,680 86,088 80,284 67,581 91,235 80,362 71,374 93,515 80,580 73,270 94,655 80,689 74,147 95,331 81,615 74,513 95,774 82,950 74,879 96,217 84,286 46 Page 69 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Building Inspector/Zoning Administrator Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na Building Inspector 95,230 Zoning Administrator 75,421 96,970 na Economic Development/Zoning 66,604 99,930 na na Contract Positions Bldg Insp/Zoning Admin 73,965 96,138 Building Inspector 64,147 87,984 na Contracted na na na na na na na Building Inspector 100,090 na na na Building Inspector 86,515 116,353 na na na na Assistant Building Inspector 72,800 104,000 na Building Inspector 71,959 80,172 75,955 73,242 100,229 73,382 98,450 73,965 99,930 74,329 100,948 74,693 101,965 75,057 102,983 75,421 104,000 47 Page 70 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Assistant City Engineer Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na Only has Engineering Aide II Assistant City Engineer 94,712 119,429 na Engineering Tech 51,288 76,921 na na na na Civil Engineer 73,278 100,526 na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na Assistant City Engineer 73,093 98,959 73,278 100,526 77,565 104,307 79,708 106,197 81,852 108,087 83,995 109,978 86,139 111,868 48 Page 71 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile City Engineer Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: City Engineer 98,550 135,138 Only has Senior Engineering Technician Civil Staff Engineer 71,240 91,582 na na Village Engineer/Director of PW 102,142 128,314 118,518 na na na Chief Engineer - Streets & Dev. 91,582 125,590 Engineer/Dir. Of PW 98,952 125,236 na na na na na na na Civil Engineer 84,448 108,576 na na na na Construction Engineer 86,515 116,353 na na na na na na City Engineer 90,490 118,684 91,582 125,236 95,763 125,449 97,854 125,555 98,631 126,135 98,751 126,952 98,872 127,769 49 Page 72 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Parks, Forestry, and Facilities Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na Maintenance III 42,120 na Maintenance Technician Parks Crewperson 47,441 71,162 na na na na Parks Laborer 44,678 61,277 na Parks Crew Member 45,050 65,338 53,500 Parks Maintenance Technician 54,080 na Parks Crew Member 52,021 75,005 Parks Crew Member 52,312 66,290 56,888 Parks Crew Member 55,167 74,475 63,000 Public Services Arborist 48,797 73,195 65,187 Parks Crew Person 50,170 64,501 Facilities Maintenance Specialist 72,114 Parks Crew Member 47,316 59,380 60,278 na Only has seasonal positions Parks Maintenance Worker 55,660 74,857 na Laborer II 45,202 61,022 na na na na Parks Forestry & Facilities 48,659 54,212 51,361 49,438 67,864 58,396 48,797 66,290 58,583 50,170 71,162 60,822 51,095 72,179 61,775 52,021 73,195 62,728 52,166 73,835 63,547 52,312 74,475 64,312 50 Page 73 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Parks & Recreation Foreperson Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Lead Crew Person-Parks 53,976 74,027 Parks/Cemetery Crew Leader 67,954 na na Parks Crew Foreman 55,111 82,655 Parks & Forestry Working Supv. 59,838 78,215 74,297 na na Park/Forestry II 53,539 Parks Foreman 59,550 81,682 na na Parks Maintenance Supervisor 70,517 na Foremen 75,504 na na na na na na na na Maintenance Worker 55,660 74,857 PW/Parks Crew Lead 61,672 78,957 na na na na na Crewleader (Parks) 52,861 58,893 58,893 57,635 78,399 68,362 57,605 78,586 70,517 59,550 78,957 72,029 59,622 79,638 72,785 59,694 80,319 73,541 59,766 81,000 74,297 59,838 81,682 74,538 51 Page 74 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Recreation Supervisor Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Recreation Supervisor 65,104 89,294 Recreation Supervisor 55,078 Recreation Program Manager 58,656 75,400 na Rec Coordinator 47,441 71,162 Recreation Supervisor 52,209 70,163 61,505 na Recreation Supervisor 55,848 75,171 61,672 na Recreation Supervisor 68,723 94,224 na Recreation Supervisor 55,250 80,132 67,684 na na Recreation Supervisor 62,100 na Recreation Supervisor 67,581 91,235 73,500 Recreation Director 61,214 91,832 77,522 Recreation & Programming Coord. 53,414 68,682 Recreation Supervisor 86,112 na na na Recreation Director 78,650 105,776 Rec. Supervisor 75,379 96,512 94,162 na na na na na Recreation Supervisor 58,145 64,780 64,780 61,659 84,132 72,154 61,214 84,713 70,592 62,701 90,459 74,304 64,503 91,325 75,712 66,095 91,653 77,119 67,581 92,430 79,669 68,266 93,746 82,676 52 Page 75 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Parks & Recreation Director Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Dir. of Parks, Recreation, & Forestry 87,381 119,850 Parks & Recreation Director 92,894 Recreation & Parks Director 79,622 102,378 Recreation Director 91,160 Parks & Recreation Director 66,604 99,930 Parks, Recreation, & Forestry Dir. 72,463 93,394 90,708 Recreation Program Director 53,165 68,349 Recreation Director 79,227 106,642 84,074 Grounds & Facilities Director 65,836 85,587 Director of Parks & Recreation 87,027 119,350 na Parks & Recreation Director 80,750 117,116 94,560 Director of Parks & Recreation 87,753 na Parks & Recreation Director 80,500 Parks Superintendent 75,629 102,086 81,474 Parks & Recreation Director 97,777 132,000 122,000 na Parks and Facilities Manager 73,902 95,035 Director Public Works Dept 134,077 Parks & Conservancy Manager 70,583 98,586 73,497 na na Director of Parks and Urban Forestry 86,515 116,353 Community Services Director 109,803 140,566 Director of Parks, Rec., and Forestry 80,777 109,049 95,750 na na na na Recreation Director 84,628 90,881 87,245 79,191 106,642 94,037 79,425 104,510 90,934 80,750 109,049 92,201 80,770 114,527 93,144 83,646 116,735 94,060 86,643 117,675 94,858 87,027 119,350 95,512 53 Page 76 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Mechanic Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Mechanic 53,976 74,027 Equipment Operator/Mechanic 68,064 Mechanic 54,475 70,034 na Mechanic 47,441 71,162 DPW Operator- Mechanic 59,812 73,782 61,276 Public Works Mechanic 57,512 73,944 na Fleet Mechanic 65,541 78,749 Mechanic 59,550 81,682 Mechanic 54,909 74,127 na na na Mechanic 74,006 Mechanic 60,882 77,147 70,782 Mechanic 63,161 85,266 79,700 Mechanic 48,797 73,195 70,512 Mechanic 69,202 88,962 Mechanic 73,882 na na Mechanic 66,602 na Fleet Maint Tech/Crew Mbr 65,104 83,325 70,096 Parks Mechanic/Maintenance 52,262 70,554 62,651 na na na na Mechanic 52,861 58,893 58,893 58,045 76,854 69,757 58,531 74,077 70,304 59,760 76,543 70,620 60,293 77,868 70,742 61,110 79,042 71,712 62,591 80,948 73,107 63,938 82,339 73,907 54 Page 77 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Head Mechanic Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Chief Mechanic 57,678 79,102 na na na na 55,111 82,655 na Lead Mechanic 64,465 na na na Leadman (Street) 54,909 74,127 na na na na na na na na na na na na Lead Mechanic/Fleet Manager 65,000 87,418 na na na na na na Head Mechanic 57,084 63,598 63,598 58,175 80,826 56,395 80,879 57,165 81,944 57,550 82,477 58,411 83,131 59,509 83,846 60,607 84,560 55 Page 78 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Crewperson (various departments) Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Public Works & Parks Crewperson 47,466 65,083 Equipment Operator 63,865 Mechanic/Parks Maint./Pool Operator 50,294 64,646 DPW Crew 66,465 Crewperson 43,618 65,428 na na DPW Crew Member II 52,686 70,907 Street Maintenance Level 1 51,958 62,400 na Utility Operator 51,801 69,931 Public Works Crew Member 55,250 80,132 67,253 na na Public Works Crew Member 60,008 75,005 Public Works Crew Member 55,099 69,826 60,278 Public Works Crew Member 55,167 74,475 58,400 Public Works Crew Member 48,797 73,195 63,794 Crew Person 50,170 64,501 na Public Works Crew Member 47,316 59,380 57,408 na DPW Crewperson 54,766 70,408 na Public Works Crew Member 54,787 70,138 na na na na na Crewperson (various departments) 52,861 58,893 51,946 69,030 62,495 51,958 69,931 63,794 53,518 70,246 63,836 54,768 70,458 63,858 54,783 70,807 64,385 54,943 72,051 65,165 55,113 73,451 65,945 56 Page 79 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Public Works Laborer Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na Recycling Laborer PT 31,815 General Laborer-Streets 46,093 59,259 DPW Crew 66,465 na DPW Operator 57,983 71,953 58,271 Public Works Light Equip. Op. 48,818 62,754 DPW Crew Member I 49,712 66,893 53,227 na na PW Laborer 41,031 55,392 Public Works Crew Member 55,250 80,132 67,253 na Laborer 66,464 Public Works Crew Member 60,008 75,005 Public Works Crew Member 55,099 69,826 60,278 Public Works Crew Member 55,167 74,475 58,400 Public Works Crew Member 48,797 73,195 63,794 Public Works Crew Person I 47,133 60,611 na Public Works Crew Member 47,316 59,380 57,408 na na Utility Worker 55,660 74,857 Public Works Crew Member 54,787 70,138 Laborer II 45,202 61,022 na na na na Building Maintenance 47,937 53,408 53,408 51,204 67,659 58,337 49,712 69,826 59,339 54,912 70,864 61,684 55,106 72,077 63,266 55,153 72,947 64,595 55,209 73,835 65,796 55,332 74,551 66,464 57 Page 80 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Public Works Superintendent Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na na na na Public Works Superintendent 66,604 99,930 na na na na Streets Superintendent 73,278 100,526 Public Works Superintendent 65,398 88,287 na Streets Superintendent 81,640 na Assistant PW Director 100,963 Streets & Utilities Supt 83,574 112,819 92,310 Deputy DPW Director 85,402 115,293 99,000 na Assistant Director of PW 90,334 116,126 Assistant PW Director 93,622 121,708 103,387 na na na Assistant Public Works Director 86,515 116,353 na na na na na na Superintendent (PW) 84,628 90,881 90,881 80,591 108,880 95,460 84,488 114,056 99,000 85,625 115,460 99,785 86,014 115,751 100,178 86,404 116,043 100,570 87,470 116,183 100,963 88,807 116,262 101,448 58 Page 81 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Equipment Operator Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na Equipment Operator 63,865 Heavy Equipment Operator 54,475 70,034 na na DPW Operator 57,983 71,953 58,271 Public Works Heavy Equip. Operator 53,165 68,349 na Water Operator 55,076 66,144 na Equipment Operator 51,801 69,931 na na na na na na na na Machine Operator 62,691 66,040 63,110 na na na na na na na na na na Sweeper Operator 50,335 56,080 56,080 55,865 68,742 61,749 54,776 69,140 63,110 55,076 69,931 63,261 55,803 69,957 63,336 56,529 69,982 63,412 57,256 70,008 63,487 57,983 70,034 63,563 59 Page 82 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Public Works Operations Crewleader Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Lead Crew Person-Public Works 53,976 74,027 Equipment Operator Crew Leader 69,671 WW Collections Crew Leader 62,878 80,829 DPW Lead 75,196 na na na DPW Lead - Streets OR Parks 59,197 79,685 65,395 na Streets Crew Leader 59,550 81,682 Leadman (Utility) 54,909 74,127 na na na na na na na W/WW Utility Operator III 56,888 73,154 na na na na PW Lead Worker 65,000 87,418 PW/Parks Crew Lead 61,672 78,957 Lead Laborer 56,196 75,865 74,833 na na na na Crewleader (PW) 52,861 58,893 58,919 78,416 71,274 59,197 78,957 72,252 59,480 79,539 73,801 59,975 79,914 74,575 60,823 80,371 74,869 61,672 80,829 74,924 62,155 81,170 74,978 60 Page 83 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Public Works Operations Foreperson Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Public Works Foreman 57,678 79,102 na Wastewater Operations Foreman 62,878 80,829 DPW Lead 75,196 PW Foreman 55,111 82,655 DPW Working Foreman 59,838 78,215 64,209 Public Works Working Foreman 57,512 73,944 na Water Foreman 63,752 76,565 na na na na Foreman 83,304 na na na na W/WW Utility Operator III 56,888 73,154 na na na na PW Lead Worker 65,000 87,418 na na na na na na Public Works Operations Foreperson 58,145 64,780 64,780 59,832 78,985 74,237 58,758 78,659 75,196 60,446 79,448 76,818 61,510 80,052 77,629 62,574 80,656 78,439 63,097 81,285 79,250 63,403 81,925 80,061 61 Page 84 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Public Works Operations Supervisor Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na na na PW Ops Supervisor 99,730 na na na na na Utility Superintendent 64,147 87,984 Utility Supervisor 65,398 88,287 na na na na na na na Wastewater Utility Manager 73,902 95,035 Streets Supervisor 91,499 na na na Has Utility Superintendent PW/Parks Supervisor 75,379 96,512 83,221 Has DPW Superintendent (Water) na na na na Supervisor (PW) 65,551 73,032 73,032 69,707 91,955 91,483 69,650 91,661 91,499 72,202 93,686 93,145 73,477 94,698 93,968 74,050 95,183 94,791 74,272 95,404 95,614 74,493 95,626 96,438 62 Page 85 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Public Works Director Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Dir. of Public Works 98,550 135,138 Director of Public Works 93,152 Director Of Public Works 100,568 129,314 DPW Director 92,374 Public Works Director 83,856 125,807 Village Engineer/Dir. of PW 102,142 128,314 118,518 Director Public Works 88,005 113,131 Public Works Director 100,027 134,618 108,264 PW Director 93,350 121,326 Public Works Dir/City Engineer 114,462 156,957 Engineer/Dir. Of PW 98,952 125,236 Public Works Director 93,500 135,600 120,259 PW & Utilities Director 135,000 na Public Works Director 131,250 Director of Public Works 102,045 137,758 115,752 Public Works Director 104,621 141,239 125,000 Public Works Director 76,794 115,190 102,045 Director of Public Works 110,573 142,147 Public Works Director 134,082 Public Works Director 96,922 125,079 96,922 na Director of Public Works 110,314 Public Works Director 110,400 148,476 143,190 Public Works Director 106,330 136,136 136,136 Director of Public Works 93,395 126,083 118,890 na na na na Director of Public Works 104,010 114,671 116,000 98,583 132,086 117,572 99,490 131,966 118,704 100,863 135,230 120,259 102,050 135,627 123,815 102,132 136,082 128,125 104,001 137,353 131,958 105,646 139,847 134,082 63 Page 86 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Water/Wastewater Operator Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Wastewater/Water Plant Op. 57,678 79,102 Collection System Operator 68,385 Water Systems Operator 58,656 75,400 DPW Crew 66,465 Water/Wastewater Operator 47,441 71,162 DPW Operator 57,983 71,953 58,271 PW Light Equipment Operator 53,165 68,349 Water Operator I 52,686 70,907 54,829 WWTP Operator 55,076 66,144 Utility Operator 59,550 81,682 Utility Operator 51,801 69,931 na na na Utility Crew Member 52,021 66,019 na na Wastewater Operator 61,214 91,832 78,270 W/WW Utility Operator I 47,133 60,611 Machine Operator 62,691 66,040 63,110 Utility Crew Member 52,993 62,994 57,049 Utility Worker 64,501 Water Utility Worker 69,834 94,340 81,313 Utility Worker 55,660 74,857 na Water/Wastewater Operator 56,196 75,865 na na na na Water/Wastewater Operator 55,987 73,364 65,799 55,660 71,162 64,501 57,085 73,695 66,072 57,800 75,074 66,849 58,118 75,493 67,617 58,656 75,865 68,385 59,372 78,455 72,339 64 Page 87 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Water/Wastewater Maintenance Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na na Water Sys. Maint. & Fac. Foreman 75,421 96,970 DPW Crew 66,465 na na Public Works Lead Maint. Tech. 57,512 73,944 na na na na na na na na Utilities Maintenance Worker 60,882 77,147 70,845 na na na na na na na Maintenance Worker 55,660 74,857 na na na na na na Water/Wastewater Maintenance 62,369 80,729 59,197 76,002 60,208 76,689 60,713 77,033 62,336 79,129 64,516 82,103 66,697 85,076 65 Page 88 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Water/Wastewater Technician Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Wastewater Plant Lab Tech. 47,466 65,083 WW Laboratory Technician 66,200 Water Utility Technician 46,093 59,259 DPW Crew 66,465 na na Public Works Lead Maint. Tech. 57,512 73,944 Water Operator II 55,848 75,171 66,747 na PW Senior Engineering Tech. 64,147 87,984 na na Utility Operations Technician 63,784 na na na na na Utility Technician 56,888 73,154 PW Engineering Technician 77,834 na na na na na Only has seasonal roles. na na na na Technician (WW) 53,646 59,768 54,659 72,433 68,206 56,368 73,549 66,465 56,888 73,944 66,578 57,044 74,251 66,634 57,200 74,558 66,691 57,356 74,864 66,747 57,512 75,171 68,964 66 Page 89 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Water/Wastewater Specialist Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na Wastewater Collection Sys. Op. 68,364 Wastewater Collections Spec. 50,294 64,646 DPW Crew 66,465 na na na Water Operator III 59,197 79,685 72,405 na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na Wastewater Specialist 52,262 70,554 na na na na Operations Specialist 53,646 59,768 59,768 53,918 71,628 69,078 52,262 70,554 68,364 53,649 72,380 69,172 54,343 73,293 69,576 55,036 74,206 69,980 55,730 75,120 70,384 56,423 76,033 70,788 67 Page 90 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Water/Wastewater Foreperson Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Chief Wastewater Plant Operator 61,402 84,198 Wastewater Crew Leader 73,682 Water Operations Foreman 62,878 80,829 DPW Leadman 85,717 Water/Wastewater Foreperson 58,240 74,880 na Public Works Working Foreman 57,512 73,944 Water Operator in Charge 66,518 89,523 76,419 Waste Water Foreman 63,752 76,565 na na na na Foreman 83,304 na na na na W/WW Utility Operator III 56,888 73,154 na na na na PW Lead Worker 65,000 87,418 PW/Parks Crew Lead 61,672 78,957 Lead Laborer 56,196 75,865 na na na na Foreperson (WW) 58,145 64,780 64,780 61,006 79,533 79,781 61,537 77,761 79,862 62,155 79,706 81,927 62,697 80,548 82,960 63,140 81,840 83,546 63,534 83,356 83,907 64,002 84,842 84,269 68 Page 91 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Water/Wastewater Superintendent Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: WWTP Superintendent 87,381 119,850 WWTP Superintendent 129,272 Water/Wastewater Utilities Mgr. 96,387 123,926 na Utility Superintendent 90,000 115,000 Utilities Superintendent 70,523 97,041 96,283 na W/WW Superintendent 79,227 106,642 92,830 na Utility Manager 82,430 113,048 na na Utility Superintendent 86,507 na na na na na Water Utility & Sewer Collections Mgr. 73,902 95,035 na Utility Manager 70,013 105,031 73,260 na na Utility Superintendent 78,650 105,776 na Water/Wastewater Superintendent 75,123 101,416 97,110 na na na na Superintendent (WW) 84,628 90,881 87,245 80,364 108,276 95,877 78,939 106,209 94,557 80,508 109,204 96,283 81,950 112,087 96,490 83,916 113,634 96,697 86,143 114,512 96,903 87,905 115,970 97,110 69 Page 92 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Telecommunicator Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Dispatchers 50,232 68,890 na 911 Dispatcher 54,475 70,034 na na na Dispatcher 39,520 49,920 na na na na na na na na na Police/Emergency Dispatcher 59,028 79,688 64,000 na na Dispatcher 52,333 56,597 na na na na na Dispatcher II 42,038 56,751 na na na na Telecommunicator 46,473 51,777 49,604 63,646 51,282 62,820 52,333 68,890 52,868 69,176 53,404 69,462 53,940 69,748 54,475 70,034 70 Page 93 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Police Lieutenant Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Police Lieutenant 76,274 104,582 na Has Police Sergeant Lieutenant 105,033 Police Lieutenant 66,604 99,930 Police Lieutenant 92,000 110,416 96,000 Police Lieutenant 88,005 113,131 na Police Lieutenant 115,000 na Has Police Sergeant Contracted Only has Sergeant 91,828 Police Lieutenant 107,830 Police Lieutenant 106,250 Police Lieutenant 92,331 124,654 Police Lieutenant 91,381 123,364 110,250 Police Lieutenant 76,794 115,190 101,920 Lieutenant 104,894 110,406 Police Lieutenant 115,000 119,000 na na na Police Lieutenant 96,000 129,109 Police Lieutenant 102,877 131,706 113,610 na na na Police Lieutenant 105,000 Police Lieutenant 112,570 Police Lieutenant 81,945 87,359 91,105 116,499 105,935 92,000 115,190 106,250 92,331 119,000 107,830 94,166 121,182 109,040 96,000 123,364 110,250 99,438 124,009 111,410 102,877 124,654 112,570 71 Page 94 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Police Captain Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Police Captain 83,678 114,774 Police Captain 112,320 117,104 Police Captain 83,803 107,765 Deputy Chief of Police 120,000 136,606 Police Captain 70,451 105,689 Police Captain 97,000 117,000 103,000 Deputy Police Chief 92,331 118,706 Police Captain 83,990 113,027 102,378 Has Lieutenant only na Deputy Chief 97,183 118,975 Contracted Deputy Chief 112,500 Has Lieutenant only Police Captain 117,300 na Police Captain 97,777 132,000 127,000 Deputy Chief 85,000 Has Lieutenant only Has Lieutenant only Contracted na Police Captain 110,531 142,376 Has Lieutenant only Has Lieutenant only Police Captain 80,778 109,050 na Police Captain 95,483 122,227 Has Lieutenant only Has Lieutenant only Police Captain 86,567 95,919 93,595 118,224 116,464 93,907 117,052 114,900 96,697 118,065 117,300 97,082 118,746 119,725 97,242 118,894 122,150 97,629 119,788 124,575 102,879 121,577 127,000 72 Page 95 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Police Chief Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Police Chief 94,848 130,062 na Police Chief 100,568 129,314 128,066 Chief 140,567 Police Chief 83,856 125,807 Police Chief 102,000 125,818 110,000 Police Chief 105,373 135,491 Police Chief 100,027 134,618 124,363 Police Chief 83,096 107,994 100,000 na Police Chief 98,952 125,236 Contracted Chief of Police 135,037 Police Chief 129,797 Police Chief 133,600 Police Chief 102,045 137,758 Police Chief 104,621 141,239 131,000 Police Chief 86,008 129,002 116,480 Chief of Police 118,373 152,194 135,283 Police Chief 134,534 Contracted na na Police Chief 110,400 148,476 143,190 Police Chief 120,058 153,670 142,688 Police Chief 93,395 126,084 122,000 na Police Chief 126,000 Police Chief 115,000 Police Chief 130,458 Chief of Police 100,981 111,331 111,331 100,241 133,517 127,670 100,568 130,062 130,127 102,018 134,967 131,520 102,302 135,718 133,647 104,106 137,305 134,441 104,997 139,499 134,912 106,378 142,686 135,185 73 Page 96 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Fire Division Chief Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: na na Deputy Chief-Fd 87,984 113,131 na Fire Captain/EMS 74,274 111,424 na na Assistant Fire Chief 74,734 100,589 77,771 na Division Chief - EMS 82,430 113,048 na na na na na na na na na Deputy Chief-EMS 97,386 Contracted na Assistant Chief 119,942 140,531 Battalion Chief 86,515 116,353 na Asst Chief-Fire 69,865 94,317 First Asst Chief-Fire na Assistant Chief 52,000 na Fire Division Chief 67,471 74,387 85,106 112,770 75,719 82,430 113,048 77,771 84,881 113,098 81,694 86,107 113,123 83,656 86,809 113,776 85,617 87,250 114,742 87,578 87,690 115,709 89,540 74 Page 97 of 180 City of Fort Atkinson, WI Appendix C - Market Survey Salary Data Municipality: City of Jefferson City of Hartford City of Watertown Village of Hartland City of Portage Village of Slinger City of Waupun City of Elkhorn City of Lake Mills City of Pewaukee Village of Pewaukee Village of Sussex Village of Cottage Grove City of Delafield Village of DeForest Village of McFarland City of Monona Village of Mount Horeb Village of Oregon City of Stoughton Village of Windsor City of Beaver Dam City of Oconomowoc City of Verona Village of Waunakee City of Whitewater City of Delavan City of Monroe Village of Jackson City of Burlington Fort Atkinson Range Data Average 50th Percentile 60th Percentile 65th Percentile 70th Percentile 75th Percentile 80th Percentile Fire Chief/Emergency Management Director Title & Position Comments Minimum Rate: Maximum Rate: Actual Salary: Fire Chief/EMS Director 94,848 130,062 Chief of Fire and Rescue 97,000 107,000 Chief Of Fire/Emergency Operations 100,568 129,314 Chief 103,576 Fire Chief/EMS Director 78,121 117,183 na Fire Chief/Emergency Gov. Dir. 88,005 113,131 Fire Chief/EMS Director 89,024 119,808 96,366 Fire Chief 83,096 107,994 Fire Chief 109,886 150,696 na Fire Chief 92,508 104,982 92,588 na na na Fire & Rescue Chief 102,045 137,758 134,264 Fire Chief 104,621 141,239 113,000 na Fire Chief 114,250 EMS/Fire Chief 117,853 Contracted na na Fire Chief 110,400 148,476 na Fire Chief 86,858 117,258 na na na na Fire Chief/EM Director 96,828 107,878 107,878 95,152 124,992 110,271 94,848 119,808 113,000 97,714 129,463 113,750 99,854 129,913 114,125 101,159 133,141 114,971 102,045 137,758 116,051 103,591 139,847 117,132 75 Page 98 of 180 Classification and Compensation Manual Page 99 of 180 Table of Contents: Intent and Purpose The Classification Plan Job Analysis Job Analysis Questionnaire Job Factor Analysis Explanation of Job Factory Analysis Tool Future Administration of the Classification Plan Future Administration of the Compensation Plan Appendices: Appendix A: Job Analysis Questionnaire Appendix B: Job Factor Analysis Tool – Short Version Appendix C: Job Factor Analysis Tool – Long Version Appendix D: Sample Scoring Inp ut Sheet Page 3 Page 3 Page 4 Page 6 Page 5 Page 8 Page 13 Page 14 Page 100 of 180 MGT Confidential 3 Intent and Purpose MGT has developed a Job Analysis System that will enable our Clients to evaluate positions within their organizations and maintain their Classification Plan into the future. The System can be used by public sector agencies including cities, towns, villages, special districts and non-profit organizations. The System has four (4) components: 1) The Classification Plan 2) Job Analysis 3) Job Analysis Questionnaire (JAQ) 4) Job Factor Analysis Each component will be explained thoroughly within this manual so the user will be able to effectively maintain the Classification Plan. The Classification Plan A Classification Plan provides for a systematic arrangement of positions into classifications. A position, often referred to as a job (e.g., Administrative Assistant), contains a specific set of duties and responsibilities and those are used as the basis guiding the classification process. A classification is a grouping of positions which have similar levels of knowledge, skills and abilities needed to perform the job. The positions are also similar in nature of work, level of work difficulty and impact on the organization. Positions allocated to the same classification are sufficiently similar with respect to the types of factors enumerated above to warrant them to be compensated at the same general level of pay. P ositions within a classification group do not have to be identical, they can be in different departments, dealing with different subject matters and performing different duties. A Classification Study (or the review or creation of a position once a Study is completed) is not intended to assess individual performance. To that end, a position that belongs in a certain classification is not entitled to be placed in a higher classification simply because the individual employee performs the work with a high degree of success and efficiency, nor is it placed in a lower classification simply because the incumbent performs the work with low competence or productivity. Variations in individual performance are not recognized by differences in classification, instead they are management issues. Similarly, there may be a tendency to use the Classification Plan to reward longevity, even though the duties and responsibilities of individual positions may not have changed over time. However, just because an individual Page 101 of 180 MGT Confidential 4 has been with an organization for a long time and is at the top of their pay range does not mean they should be moved to the next higher pay grade. Longevity is not a classification factor, and the Classification Plan should not be used in this manner. As an assessment of duties performed and of responsibilities exercised, a Classification Plan is an exceedingly useful managerial tool. It provides the fundamental rationale for the Compensation Plan and helps management identify positions which have expanded (or in some cases reduced) duties and responsibilities, thereby sustaining the principle of equal pay for equal work. Through proper maintenance of the Classification Plan, employees are assured of management’s continuing concern about the nature of work that they carry out and its compensation in the form of appropriate pay levels and relationships. T he Classification Plan provides the basis for recruitment, screening, and selection of employees in direct relationship to job content. Promotional ladders as well as opportunities for lateral career development are also supported by the logical grouping of positions. Job Analysis MGT’s approach to Job Analysis, also referred to as a Job Evaluation, involves a quantitative point and factor comparison method, which cross -compares all positions in the organization against numerous factors such as educational requirements, experience, work conditions, etc. Therefore, all positions in each organizational unit (e.g., Administration, Finance, Public Safety, Public Works, etc.) may be compared against each other, based upon the same factors. In conducting the Job Evaluation exercise, it must be emphasized that the position, a nd not the incumbent’s qualifications, performance, or years of service in the position, is evaluated. An incumbent employee may feel he/she should be placed in a higher level (i.e., receive more points) because the individual performs well, has a long t enure with the organization, and/or has additional education or skills not required to perform that job, or may feel he/she does more tasks than a similar employee in another Department, but these are not valid determinants for a position analysis. Before reviewing the results of the evaluation of the positions, it is important to note that the pur pose of a Job Evaluation is to identify whether a job is more or less advanced than, or equal to, other jobs in the organization, based on nine (9) objective factors. While these factor definitions are guidelines, they are constructed to allow limited flexibility of interpretation while Page 102 of 180 MGT Confidential 5 at the same time providing a strict framework and structure for comparison. The nine (9) factors used for the analysis of positions, with corresponding definitions are as follows: 1) Preparation and Training: The minimum level of education required by the job that is normally acquired through formal instruction. 2) Experience Required: The amount of work experience an employee would need to possess before assuming full responsibility for the position and performing the work effectively. Note: Preparation and Training and Experience Required should be considered together because when hiring for positions, multiple combinations of education, training and work experience can fulfill the job requirements for a position. 3) Decision Making and Independent Judgment: The level of discretion or judgment the individual exercises in making decisions and the potential impact of such decisions or judgments on the overall success of the organization and on the community. 4) Responsibility for Policy Development: The extent to which the position requires the employee to participate in the development of policies and procedures both within the department and between departments in the organization. This factor also considers the level of policy interpretation or explanation that a position may be required to perform through internal and external interactions. 5) Planning of Work: The degree to which the incumbent plans, either their own daily work or for the use of resources (personnel, equipment, supplies, etc.) in the attainment of departmental objectives and organization-wide goals. 6) Contact with Others: The extent to which the position requires meeting and dealing with the public and influencing other individuals, as well as the level of authority the employee has to make commitments on behalf of the organization. 7) Work of Others (Supervision Exercised): The extent to which the employee is responsible for determining work levels and work content for other employees. Page 103 of 180 MGT Confidential 6 8) Working Conditions: The physical conditions surrounding the job that are beyond the employee's control, but which may be physically demanding, unpleasant, strenuous, and/or hazardous, and may impact the employee's physical well-being. 9) Technology Used: The extent to which the employee utilizes and supports technology, enhancing efficiency and communication on behalf of the organization. Job Analysis Questionnaire To conduct the Job Analysis, a questionnaire is completed by the incumbent employee or by an appropriate party for a new position, which evaluates the nine (9) factors listed in the section above. It is important to understand that when a questionnaire is completed the position is evaluated, not the incumbent employee. Job Analysis focuses on the position, not the person. Thus, the questionnaire should be completed by the incum bent employee, if possible, and then reviewed by the supervisor and/or Human Resources Department to ensure that all perspectives are included in the Job Analysis. The Job Analysis Questionnaire (JAQ) is organized into five sections: 1) Employee Information: The incumbent employee should complete this section of the questionnaire so that the evaluator is supplied with some general information. This is the only section of the questionnaire that should include personal information about the incumbent employee. The remainder of the questionnaire should be completed by evaluating the position, not the person. 2) General Summary and Job Duties: A general summary of the work performed should be provided as it will serve as the job definition. It can be viewed as the “elevator” speech that someone may give if they meet a stranger and are asked what type of work they perform for their organization. The next step is to review the existing job description. There is a section included in the questionnaire to make minor edits to the current job description. If there are major changes to the job description or if it is a new position, it is recommended that those changes be listed so a job description can be developed or updated after the Job Analysis is completed. It is also helpful to list the duties in order of priority or those that the employee will be spending the most time completing. Page 104 of 180 MGT Confidential 7 3) Job Factors: The nine (9) Job Factors are listed as mentioned in the prior section. When assessing the level to which each factor is performed, the minimum requirement for the work to be completed should be checked. For example, under Factor 1, Preparation and Training, if the incumbent employee possesses a Bachelor’s Degree but a High School education is what is necessary to perform the work, then the level corresponding with a High School education should be checked. Conversely, if the incumbent possesses a High School education but the job has changed over time and now the minimum educational requirement to perform the work is a college degree, then that corresponding level should be checked. 4) *Optional: Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Review: This section of the questionnaire should be completed to assist in determining whether the position should be classified as Exempt or Nonexempt under the FLSA. *This section is only included in studies that have included an FLSA review in the study. 5) Signatures and Comments: The incumbent employee should sign off on the questionnaire and then forward it to their supervisor for review and comment. Supervisory review and comment, if warranted, is essential to the success of the analysis. Supervisors should be strongly encouraged to include their remarks, in the appropriate section of the JAQ, especially if they disagree with any section of the employee’s assessment of his/her job. The supervisor can then forward the questionnaire to Human Resources/Administration when their review is completed. Job Factor Analysis Once the JAQ is completed, points are then assigned to each factor by selecting the description that best fits the appropriate level of compliance. The Job Factor Analysis tool is used for this purpose. MGT supplies two (2) tools for evaluation. The “long” form which has all of the factors included on it with the corresponding explanations for each level. The “short” form which is a one (1) page document that has all of the factors, with the corresponding le vels and points. Both of these documents are attached to this Manual. It is not recommended that the short form be used until there is a good understanding of the Job Factor Analysis Tool so it is applied consistently throughout the organization. When using the Job Factor Analysis, it is important to keep in mind that the higher level checked Page 105 of 180 MGT Confidential 8 for each factor will result in a higher point value for that factor. In other words, a position that requires a Master’s Degree would receive more points under the “Preparation and Training” factor than a position that did not require this advanced degree. Once all of the factors are scored, then the total is calculated for the position being analyzed. Once the aggregate score is calculated from the JAQ, the skill level is known. Based on the total score, the position is assigned to the corresponding Grade on the Classification Plan. Thus, if the position scores four hundred (400) points as a result of the Job Analysis, then it will fall into the Grade that has the corresponding skill level that includes the four hundred (400) point score. E xplanation of Job Factor Analysis Tool When using the Job Factor Analysis tool, MGT has found that interpretations can vary. To help with maintaining consistency in the system, the following interpretations can be used as a guide: 1) Factor 1 Preparation and Training: The minimum level of education and training should be checked that is necessary to perform the work. Further, an extra ten (10) points can be assigned if certifications are required to perform the job duties or be hired into a position. For example, if a Wastewater Operator license is required, the position can receive extra points. 2) Factor 2 Experience: When considering the level of experience needed to perform the job, Level 3 should be the starting point. If a position requires supervisory responsibility, then the minimum should be four (4) to six (6) years. With that said, a technical job that does not require supervisory responsibility could also require four (4) to six (6) years or more experience, it just depends upon the job. Seven (7) years or over should be assigned to either highly technical jobs or division managers and department heads or directors. Jobs requiring no experience, which are very few, but examples may include a Library Page or Custodian, should be assigned to less than 1 year of experience. Other jobs that do not require supervisory experience and require only basic job knowledge should be assigned to the level of one (1) to three (3) years of experience. Page 106 of 180 MGT Confidential 9 3) Factor 3 Independent Judgement and Decision Making: This factor measures both independent judgement and decision making. Essentially this means how much discretion a position has when making decisions and what the ramifications are if an error is made. For Decision Making, if a position works independently or is a front -line supervisor, such as an Office Manager or Crew Leader, then “Often” is the appropriate level to be checked. If the position is supervised, meaning work is assigned daily, then “Some” sho uld be checked. If a position is truly entry level, then “Little” should b e c hecked. Examples of positions that have a “High” level of discretion are Division Managers or those that oversee a functional area of a Department, such as Risk Management. A “Very High” level of discretion is reserved for Department Heads or Directors. The next measure for this factor relates to errors in which the ramifications c ould be Minor, Moderate, Serious or Critical. Minor errors are usually caught easily or in a succeeding transaction, such as bank reconciliations that may be completed by one employee and then reviewed by another. On the other hand , a Critical error may result in a loss of life, significant financial loss or adverse public relations. The spectrum here is somewhat open to the discretion of the rater; however, when thinking about the ramification of a decision, ke ep in mind that the more complex and technical the position, the more likely an error would result in a Serious or Critical ramification. If a position scores less than fifty-five (55) points in this Factor, then it is likely to be a non- exempt position. 4) Factor 4 Policy Making: Positions may or may not have input or policy development responsibilities. Those that do not are likely to be non- exempt positions, usually up to Level 3 of this Factor. Level 4 or above denotes an element of policy making that can range from development of policy (meaning policies, procedures, guidelines, standard operating procedures, etc.) for a division or organizational component of a department, to policy making for a full department as well as policy making that affects other departments in the organization, for example, Finance, Human Resources and Safety Policies. There is a level of Policy Making that does not appear on the JAQ. This level is denoted with an “*” in the JFA Tool and is reserved for the Manager of the entire organization, such as a Town, Village or City Manager. Page 107 of 180 MGT Confidential 10 5) Factor 5 Planning of Work: Level 1 is for an entry level position or a position that is very closely supervised, meaning the position comes to work, receives assignments, completes the assignments, and then requests additional assignments. A position that comes to work and is aware of the day’s work and can “ get right to it” would be c onsidered a position that works independently and has control over how the work is prioritized each day; Level 2 is the appropriate level for this type of position. Level 3 is for front line supervisors, such as Office Manager, Crew Leaders or any position that oversees a small group of people. Level 4 is for Division Managers and Level 5 is for Department Heads. 6) Factor 6 Contact with Others: All positions in municipal government have contact with others. The question is how much contact. Thus, the spectrum of contact is narrow, meaning the contact is generally within the organization with co-workers all the way up to being a spokesperson for the organization or someone who has significant authority to bind the financial and/or staffing resources of the organization. This factor also takes into account the nature of public work, meaning the reality of working with the public or patrons, which may be unpleasant at times. If a position is required to have significant contact with the public either at a front counter or out in the field, where the interaction can get confrontational or escalated, then Level 3 is the appropriate level. Prior to that level, there is less interaction with the public, which ranges to only dealin g wit h staff internally to a few outside contacts such as dealings with vendors. Beyond Level 3, positions are expected to have more interaction with the public as follows: • Level 4: Handles complaints referred from lower level or subordinate positions and uses in-depth discussion and persuasion to resolve problems (for example, front line supervisors and Police Officers). • Level 5: Initiates solutions to dealing with issues that arise such as Division Mangers or those who oversee a functional area of a department that will be expected to resolve issues as they arise and not bring them to their Department Head or Director unless this issue is highly unusual. • Level 6: Authorized to commit resources, financial/staffing, on behalf of the organization and is a recognized spokesperson for the organization, such as a Police Chief or other Department Head. • Level 7: This level is generally reserved for the Town, Village or City Manager. However, in larger organizations, Department Heads and Directors may also be Page 108 of 180 MGT Confidential 11 assigned to Level 7 to accommodate the other senior managers in the organization, such as Deputies or Assistant Department Heads and so on. On the JAQ there is a section to give examples of with whom the position interacts regularly, both internal and external to the organization, which will help to assign the appropriate level. 7) Factor 7 Work of Others (Supervision Given): Our interpretation of this section is liberal; thus, the first question that should be asked is does this position supervise or assign work? If the answer is No, then the No box should be checked, and you can move on to Factor 8. If the answer is a definitive Yes, then the Yes b ox should be checked and the corresponding box for the number of employees should also be c hecked. We consider all employees: full-time, part- time and seasonal so the number of employees should be full time equivalents (FTEs). We have been asked if volunteers should also be counted as employees. The answer is generally no, unless the position is required to supervise a large number of volunteers that would translate into a number of FTEs. The gray area in this factor is whether a position “assigns” work. This is where the liberal interpretation is applied. If a position is responsible for the work of others in any capacity, such as overseeing volunteers stuffing envelopes, or assigning work to seasonal employees working a community event, then question should be responded to with a “Yes” and Level 1 should also be checked. We think a nominal number of points should be assigned for this responsibility as technically the position is responsible for a work product that is arrived at using other individuals. Additionally, po sitions that oversee and manage independent contracts should be given supervision points for the number of contractors they oversee and manage (ex: depending on the size of the contract, each contract may be equivalent to 1-3 FTEs). 8) Factor 8 Physical Requirements and Working Conditions: There are five (5) levels associated with this factor, even though the JAQ only lists individual requirements and working conditions and their exposure. The levels in the JFA tool are interpreted as follows: • Level 1: An office or very sedentary job, meaning the employee comes to work and the environment is pleasant, and the employee does not have to leave the office/building until the end of the day should the weather be inclement or otherwise undesirable. Page 109 of 180 MGT Confidential 12 • Level 2: The same as Level 1, relative to the sedentary nature of the job and the pleasant work environment. The difference is that employees assigned to Level 2 must leave the office during the day to go to other locations to perform the work, such as to meetings in different buildings, or in other geographic locations all together. If this is required to perform the work, then Level 2 is appropriate. If going outside can be avoided due to inclement weather or otherwise undesirable conditions, then Level 1 is the appropriate level. • Level 3: This level is assigned to someone who works out in the field most of the time and is exposed to hazards or inclement weather more than 50% of the time. Examples would be Inspectors or Assessors or others working in the field and having to navigate uneven terrain or construction sites and who may b e ex posed to the elements to perform the work. • Level 4: This level is assigned to public works employees who are out in the field and exposed to the elements and other unpleasant working conditions. The work is highly physical and can be hazardous depending upon the conditions under which the work is being performed. Mechanics are also assigned to this level as the working conditions can be very unpleasant. • Level 5: Front line public safety personnel are assigned to this level as the working conditions are unknown depending upon the situation and the risk of personal injury or death is present on a daily basis. Department Heads, Directors and other Management or Command staff in Public Works and Public Safety are generally assigned to Level 2 if the vast majority of their time is in the office. If they are out in the field regularly then they may be assigned to Level 3. If they are out in the field more than 50% of the time, then they should be assigned to Level 4 for Public Works and Level 5 for Public Safety. For working conditions, “odors” is a reference to those that may be found in a garage, treatment facility, etc. It does not refer to smells from a cafeteria. Disease refers to airborne illnesses or something related to public safety or public health conditions, not residents coming to the building with common colds requesting tissues. Violence relates to imminent death, not irate residents at the front counter (this interaction is covered under Factor 6 – Contact with Others). Page 110 of 180 MGT Confidential 13 9) F actor 9 Technology Used/Specialized Equipment: Technology is interpreted as technological proficiency, not just computers. Thus, when looking at the factor, use Level 4 as the starting point. Most employees will be using a computer, the Internet, a Smartphone and working with Microsoft Office and other job-related software in some capacity. If that is the case, then check Level 4. If the proficiency needed to perform the work is less, then check a lower level. Levels 5A and 5B carry the same weight. The difference is that level 5A does work related to computers. A position assigned to level 5A is one that works with highly technical software such as AutoCAD or is an applications superuser and has administrative rights or is able to configure software and develop customized reports or tables, etc. Level 5B is related to technological proficiency used in the field, such as operating large or medical equipment requiring a proficiency that is beyond what is expected of most employees, such as operating a backhoe, shoring up a trench, driving a fire truck or ambulance and using the related medical equipment, driving police vehicles, firing guns and using other related equipment. When interpreting the responses on the JAQ using the JFA Tool, keep in mind that there are many places on the JAQ to give examples of work performed that will help in the interpretation and assignment to the appropriate level. It is recommended that the Master Worksheets used by the MGT Consultant with the JFA scores assigned to each position at the time of the Study be maintained by the Human Resources Department so that consistency can be realized over time. Future Administration of the Classification Plan The administration of a Classification Plan is an ongoing process. It must be recognized that it is not static and is not intended to affix positions permanently into classifications. Instead, the Plan must be administered continually to adapt it to changing conditions. Three (3) specific types of changes in the Plan itself are possible: elimination of a position, creation of a position, or a revision of a position. 1) When a position in a classification is eliminated or when a position has significantly changed work duties and responsibilities to the extent that the position becomes inappropriate or inaccurate, the position should be eliminated. 2) New positions should be created when new work situations arise that are not covered by the established positions. However, caution should be exercised in this respect, Page 111 of 180 MGT Confidential 14 particularly to assure that new positions are justified, are not merely duplicating established positions, cannot be accommodated through changes in existing positions, and reflect substantially permanent rather than temporary situations. 3) The adjustment or revision of a position should be done when there are substantial changes to the requirements of the position or to the nature and complexities of the duties being performed. In this instance, a position may need to be re-scored and move up or down into a new classification. All changes should be thoroughly evaluated for their effect on the integrity of the classification relationships established in the Classification and Compensation Plan. Future Administration of the Compensation Plan To maintain a competitive compensation plan, which includes salary levels and salary ranges, there should be an annual review of the community’s salary ranges. The peer jurisdictions used in the survey group for the Study have been determined to be comparable by the Consultant and/or the organization. Therefore, the organization may continue to use these jurisdictions as a comparable salary survey group for annual salary comparison purposes, until it is determined that they are no longer valid. It is MGT’s recommendation that an annual “survey” of these jurisdictions be conducted to determine the percentage increase each organization in the comparable group is granting either as an annual “across -the-board increase” to their employees or as a general adjustment to their pay ranges. It is the further recommendation of MGT that the organization uses the survey result to consider increasing their salary ranges by the average percentage increase of the comparable group. This process should ensure that the organization’s salary ranges remain competitive with the comparable market. Page 112 of 180 E MPLOYEE JOB ANALYSIS QUESTIONNAIRE (JAQ) NA ME: DATE: Y EARS OF EXPERIENCE WITH EMPLOYER: JOB TITLE: YEARS OF EXPERIENCE ON THIS JOB: YOUR JOB IS: FULL TIME PART TIME Y OUR YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THIS FIELD: DEPARTMENT: NA ME OF IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR: THEIR TITLE: I NSTRUCTIONS The purpose of this questionnaire is to obtain additional information about your job that may not be included in your current job description. Please answer each question thoughtfully and frankly. After you have finished your portion of the questionnaire, give it to your immediate supervisor, who will complete their section. G eneral Summary: In three or four sentences, please summarize the major purpose or primary function of your job. P lease indicate if you have reviewed your current job description. I f you have any changes to your current job description, please mark them on the JD and attach it to this JAQ, or indicate changes here: I f you do not have a job description available to review, please list your job duties. Try to place your duties in order of importance and group “like” tasks together (e.g., “clerical duties including word processing, opening mail, filing, etc.” or “front desk responsibilities including greeting visitors, answering telephones and routing calls, etc.”). Job duties: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Page 113 of 180 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Feel free to add more numbers/duties if necessary. F ACTOR 1. Education & Training: In your opinion, what kind of education and training is necessary to perform your job? L EVEL 1: Level of knowledge that is below what is normally attained through high school graduation. L EVEL 2 : High school diploma (GED) or equivalent. LE VEL 3: High school, plus elementary technical training, acquired on the job or through one year or less of technical or business school. LE VEL 4: Extensive technical or specialized training such as would be acquired by an Associate’s Degree or two years of technical or business school. LE VEL 5: Completion of four-year college degree program. LE VEL 6: Additional professional level of education beyond a four-year college program, such as a CPA or Professional Engineer (P.E.) training. LE VEL 7: Completion of graduate coursework equal to a Master’s Degree or higher. Wh at specific degree/coursework is NECESSARY? W hat specific degree/coursework is PREFERRED? I f a specific certificate or license is mandated by an outside agency to perform your duties, name the certificate or license: Wh at special skills, knowledge, and abilities are required to perform your job? Please list: F ACTOR 2. Years of Experience: How much previous work experience do you feel is necessary to perform your job? LEVEL 1: LEVEL 2: LEVEL 3: LEVEL 4: LEVEL 5: Less Than 1 Year 1 to 3 Years 4 to 6 Years 7 to 10 Years More than 10 Years W hat is the minimum number of years required? W hat specific experience is necessary? Page 114 of 180 F ACTOR 3. Independent Judgment and Decision Making P art 1: How much discretion do you have in making decisions with or without the input or direction of your supervisor? LI TTLE: Little discretion or independent judgment exercised. S OME: Some discretion or judgment exercised, but supervisor is normally available. OF TEN: Job often requires making decisions in absence of specific policies and/or guidance from supervisors, but some direct guidance is received from supervisors. HI GH: High level of discretion with decisions restricted only by Departmental policies and little direct guidance from supervisors. VERY HIGH: Very high level of discretion with decisions only restricted by the broadest policies of the Organization. Part 2: If you make an erroneous decision, what impact would this decision have on your work unit, department, and/or the Organization? MI NOR: Some inconvenience and delays but minor costs in terms of time, money, or public/employee good will. MO DERATE : Moderate costs in time, money, or public/employee good will would be incurred. Delays in important projects/schedules likely. S ERIOUS: Important goals would not be achieved and the financial, employee, or public relations posture of the Organization would be seriously affected. C RITICAL : Critical goals and objectives of the Organization would be adversely and very seriously affected. Error could likely result in critical financial loss, property damage, or bodily harm/loss of life. F ACTOR 4. Responsibility for Policy Development: Does your job require you to participate in the development of policies for your unit/division/department/the Organization? LE VEL 1: Position involves only the execution of policies or use of existing procedures. LE VEL 2: May provide some input to supervisor when policies and procedures are updated. LE VEL 3: Position involves some development of policies/procedures for the Department and/or the interpretation or explanation of departmental policies for others in the organization or residents. LE VEL 4: Position involves significant or primary responsibility for the development of policies and procedures for a division or organizational component of a department, as well as the interpretation, execution and recommendation of changes to department policies. LE VEL 5: Position involves significant or primary responsibility for the developmen t of policies and procedures for an entire department, plus occasional participation in the development of policies which affect other departments in the organization. LE VEL 6: Position involves the primary responsibility for the development of departmental policies and procedures and regular participation in the development of policies that affect other departments and occasionally involves participation in the development of organization -wide policies. G ive some examples of the types of policies you’ve written or been a part of creating: Page 115 of 180 F ACTOR 5. Planning: How much latitude do you have to set your own daily work schedule and priorities for a given workday? LE VEL 1: Position requires that my daily work load and activities are assigned to me by my supervisor. LE VEL 2: Position requires that I plan my own daily work load and work independently according to established procedures or standards. L EVEL 3: Position requires that I plan my own daily work load and those of others in the department (first- level supervision). LE VEL 4: Position requires an above average ability to analyze data and develop departmental plans, including plans where a number of difficult, technical and/or administrative problems must be addressed (Manager/Division level planning). LE VEL 5: Position requires a high level of analytical ability to develop plans for a department or complex situation, including plans that involve integrating/involving/impacting other departments (Department Head level planning). F ACTOR 6. Contacts with Others : In the course of performing your job, what contacts with people in your department, other departments within the organization, and/or people from outside the organization are you required to make? LE VEL 1: Position involves interaction with fellow workers on routine matters with relatively little public contact. LE VEL 2: Position involves frequent internal and external contact, but generally on routine matters such as furnishing or obtaining information. LE VEL 3: Position involves frequent internal contact and regular contact with outsiders generally on routine matters, including contacts with irate outsiders which require some public relations skill for taking complaints for others to follow up upon. LE VEL 4: Position involves frequent internal and external contacts which require public relations skills in handling complaints. Contacts involve non -routine problems and require in-depth discussion and/or persuasion in order to resolve the problem. Handles more difficult contacts that are referred by front line employees. LE VEL 5: Position involves frequent internal and external contacts which require skill in dealing with, and influencing others, and initiating changes in policy/procedures to address the issue so as to avoid having to deal with the issue again in the future. LE VEL 6: Position involves frequent internal and external contacts in which I act as the spokesperson for the department and am authorized to make commitments of significant resources on behalf of the department. LE VEL 7: Position involves frequent internal and external contacts where I represent the entire organization and am authorized to make commitments in matters of broad or critical interest to the entire organization. Wi th which internal individuals or groups do you have the most contact? W ith which external individuals or groups do you have the most contact? Page 116 of 180 F ACTOR 7. Supervision Given: Do you supervise or assign work to other employees? Yes No I f yes: LE VEL 1: Position is regularly responsible for assigning work to an employee or employees, without acting in a supervisory role. To whom does this position assign work? LE VEL 2: Position is responsible for the supervision of one full time or several part time employees. LE VEL 3: Position is responsible for the direct and/or indirect supervision of two to five full time (or full time equivalent) employees. LE VEL 4: Position is responsible for the direct and/or indirect supervision of six to 15 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. LE VEL 5: Position is responsible for direct and/or indirect supervision of 16 to 29 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. LE VEL 6: Position is responsible for direct and/or indirect supervision of 30 to 50 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. LE VEL 7: Position is responsible for direct and/or indirect supervision of more than 51 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. Ac tual number of full-time (or full-time equivalent) employees supervised: F ACTOR 8. Physical Demands: Please describe any physical demands required to perform your job. D emand No Yes How often? (Rarely, Occasionally or Daily) Lifting t o 20 pounds L ifting 20-50 pounds Li fting 50+ pounds C limbing Wal king K neeling C rouching C rawling B ending S itting P rolonged Standing P rolonged Visual Concentration U npleasant or Hazardous Conditions: Please describe any unpleasant or hazardous conditions you are exposed to in performing your job and how often you are exposed to those conditions. Include only those conditions which are directly related to your work rather than specific work area conditions. C ondition No Yes How Often? (Rarely, Occasionally or Daily) Lighting-d imness or brightness D ust Hea t C old Od ors Noi se V ibration We tness/Humidity T oxic Agents Page 117 of 180 Electrical Currents Hea vy Machinery V iolence D isease S moke Ot her F ACTOR 9. Use of Technology/Specialized Equipment: Please check the level of technology or specialized equipment use needed for you to perform your job. LEVEL 1: Position has no responsibility for, or use of, technology. LEVEL 2: Position has some basic use of computers for data entry and some use of the telephone, copier, etc. LEVEL 3: Position has daily use of computers for data entry and use of the telephone, fax machine, copier, etc. Position has daily use of light equipment such as push mowers, weed whackers, pole saws, custodial equipment, etc. LEVEL 4: Position has daily use of computers, the Internet, Smartphones , etc. to create databases, spreadsheets, or reports. Position designs and creates customized reports, presentations, and/or documents using advanced software skills. LEVEL 5A: Position provides routine consultation and technology support for everyday computer programming and/or software requests/questions to others in the organization ; is an applications super user; or uses specialized software such as GIS , SCADA or telecommunications software. LEVEL 5B: Position uses, troubleshoots, and/or repairs various pieces of specialized equipment such as HVAC, lighting, gas flares, blowers, engines, heavy equipment, diagnostic equipment, large vehicles (vacuum trucks, street sweepers, fire apparatus) and/or medical or public safety equipment. L EVEL 6 : Position is responsible for advanced computer programming, system security, maintenance, training, and purchasing of items such as computers, printers, scanners, etc., for the computer system for the organization (IT personnel). L EVEL 7 : Position is responsible for the overall direction and supervision of the staff that are responsible for the computer and technology needs of the organization , including responsibility for developing technology policies for the organization (IT personnel). 1 0. Comments/Additional Information: Feel free to add additional information below. If using a printed copy of this form, use the back of the form to add your comments. Typ e your name and the date below, then save this form as a Word document with the file name of “JobTitle.LastName.FirstName” and email it to your supervisor. If using a printed copy of this form, sign and date it and then deliver to your supervisor. E MPLOYEE’S SIGNATURE OR TYPED NAME DATE Page 118 of 180 MGT Confidential 15 JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT SCORING SHEET Appendix B Factor 4: Policy Development 1 15 2 30 3 40 4 60 5 75 6 95 7* 105 * These responses reserved for the highest-level of organization-wide authority, i.e. the Administrator/Manager Factor 1: Education 1 20 2 40 3 50 4 60 5 80 6 90 7 100 License/ Certificate +10 Factor 2: Work Experience 1 25 2 50 3 75 4 100 5 125 Factor 3: Level of Discretion Minor Moderate Serious Critical Little 10 20 35 55 Some 15 25 45 70 Often 25 45 55 80 High 45 55 75 100 Very High 50 60 90 115 Factor 7: Work of Others No Supv 0 1 10 2 25 3 40 4 65 5 80 6 85 7 95 8 105* Factor 5: Planning 1 35 2 50 3 65 4 80 5 95 6* 110 Factor 6: Contact with Others 1 15 2 30 3 45 4 60 5 75 6 85 7 100 Factor 8: Working Conditions 1 Office work only. Good working conditions with almost complete ab- sence of physically demanding, unpleasant, strenuous, and/or hazard- ous elements. 15 2 Minimal external work or occasional exposure to physically demanding, unpleasant, strenuous, and/or hazardous situations. 30 3 Frequent exposure to physically demanding, unpleasant, strenuous, and/or hazardous elements. 45 4 Regular exposure to particularly physically demanding, unpleasant, strenuous, and/or hazardous elements, such as, dealing with inclement weather, operating heavy equipment, etc. 60 5 Continuous exposure to life threatening public safety situations which could jeopardize personal safety. 75 Factor 9: Technology 1 0 2 10 3 30 4 50 5A 65 5B 65 6 75 7 85 Page 119 of 180 Confidential 16 Appendix C JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FACTOR 1: EDUCATION This factor measures the minimum level of education required by the job that is normally acquired through formal instruction. Level Definition Point Value 1 Level of knowledge that is below what is normally attained through high school graduation. 20 2 High school degree or equivalent (GED). 40 3 High school, plus elementary technical training, acquired on the job or through one year or less of technical or business school. 50 4 Extensive technical or specialized training such as that which would be acquired by an Associates Degree or two years of technical or business school. 60 5 Completion of four-year college degree program. 80 6 Additional professional level of education beyond a four-year college program, such as a CPA or Professional Engineer (P.E.) training. 90 7 Completion of graduate coursework equal to a Master’s Degree or higher. 100 Add on to any level as needed License or certificate required to perform job duties 10 Page 120 of 180 Confidential 17 Level Definition Point Value 1 Less than one year experience is required. 25 2 Between one year and three years experience is required. 50 3 Between four to six years experience is required. 75 4 Between seven to ten years experience is required. 100 5 More than ten years experience is required. 125 JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FACTOR 2: WORK EXPERIENCE This factor measures the amount of work experience an employee would need to possess before assuming full responsibility for the position and performing the work effectively. Page 121 of 180 Confidential 18 This factor measures the level of discretion or judgment the individual exercises in making decisions and the potential impact of such decisions or judgments on the overall success of the organization and impact on the community. Potential Impact of Erroneous Decisions or Judgment Level Minor: Some inconvenience and delays but minor costs in terms of time, money, or public/employee good will. Moderate: Moderate costs in time, money, or public/employee good will would be incurred. Delays in important projects/schedules likely Serious: Important goals would not be achieved and the financial, employee, or public relations posture of the Organization would be seriously affected Critical: Critical goals and objectives of the Organization would be adversely and very seriously affected. Error could likely result in critical financial loss, property damage, or bodily harm/loss of life of Discretion LITTLE: Little discretion or independent judgment exercised 10 20 35 55 SOME: Some discretion or judgment exercised, but supervisor is normally available 15 25 45 70 OFTEN: Job often requires making decisions in absence of specific policies and/or guidance from supervisors, but some direct guidance is received from supervisors 25 45 55 80 HIGH: High level of discretion with decisions restricted only by Departmental policies and little direct guidance from supervisors 45 55 75 100 VERY HIGH: Very high level of discretion with decisions only restricted by the broadest policies of the Organization 50 60 90 115 JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FACTOR 3: INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT & DECISION Page 122 of 180 Confidential 19 This factor is a measure of the extent to which the position requires the employee to participate in the development of policies and procedures both within the department and between departments in the organization. Level Definition Point Value 1 Position involves only the execution of policies or existing standard operating procedures. 15 2 May provide some input to supervisor when policies or standard operating procedures are updated. 30 3 Position involves some development of policies/procedures for the Department and/or the interpretation or explanation of departmental policies for others in the organization or residents. 40 4 Position involves significant or primary responsibility for the development of policies and procedures for a division or organizational component of a department, as well as the interpretation, execution and recommendation of changes to department policies. 60 5 Position involves significant or primary responsibility for the development of policies and procedures for an entire department, plus occasional participation in the development of policies which affect other departments in the organization. 75 6 Position involves the primary responsibility for the development of departmental policies and procedures and regular participation in the development of policies that affect other departments and occasionally involves participation in the development of organization- wide policies. 95 7 Position involves primary responsibility for the overall development of organization-wide policies. 105 JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FACTOR 4: RESPONSIBILITY FOR POLICY DEVELOPMENT Page 123 of 180 Confidential 20 ‘ This factor measures the degree to which the incumbent plans, either their own daily work or for the use of resources (manpower, equipment, supplies, etc.) in the attainment of departmental objectives and organization-wide goals. Level Definition Point Value 1 Position requires that my daily work load and activities are assigned to me by my supervisor. 35 2 Position requires that I plan my own daily work load and work independently according to established procedures or standards. 50 3 Position requires that I plan my own daily work load and those of others in the department (first-level supervision). 65 4 Position requires an above average ability to analyze data and develop departmental plans, including plans where a number of difficult, technical and/or administrative problems must be addressed (Manager/Division level planning). 80 5 Position requires a high level of analytical ability to develop plans for a department or complex situation, including plans that involve integrating/involving/impacting other departments (Department Head level planning). 95 6 An extremely high level of planning and analysis is required for the entire organization. Work at this level often includes strategic planning for the organization, long range (five years or more) plans, etc (City Manager/Administrator level). 110 JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FACTOR 5: PLANNING Page 124 of 180 Confidential 21 This factor considers the extent to which the employee requires meeting and dealing with the public and influencing other persons, as well as the level of authority the employee has to make commitments on behalf of the organization. Level Definition Point Value 1 Position involves interaction with fellow workers on routine matters with relatively little public contact. 15 2 Position involves frequent internal and external contact, but generally on routine matters such as furnishing or obtaining information. 30 3 Position involves frequent internal contact and regular contact with outsiders generally on routine matters, including contacts with irate outsiders which require some public relations skill for taking complaints for others to follow up upon. 45 4 Position involves frequent internal and external contacts which require public relations skills in handling complaints. Contacts involve non-routine problems and require in-depth discussion and/or persuasion in order to resolve the problem. Handles more difficult contacts that are referred by front line employees. 60 5 Position involves frequent internal and external contacts which require skill in dealing with, and influencing others, and initiating changes in policy/procedures to address the issue so as to avoid having to deal with the issue again in the future. 75 6 Position involves frequent internal and external contacts in which position acts as the spokesperson for the department and is authorized to make commitments of significant resources on behalf of the department. 85 7 Position involves frequent internal and external contacts where position represents the entire organization and is authorized to make commitments in matters of broad or critical interest to the entire organization. 100 JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FACTOR 6: CONTACT WITH OTHERS Page 125 of 180 Confidential 22 This factor measures the extent to which the employee is responsible for determining work levels and work content for other employees. Level Size of Group Point Value 0 No responsibility for the work of others. 0 1 Responsible for assigning work to an employee or employees, without acting in a supervisory role. 10 2 Responsible for the supervision of one full time or several part time employees. 25 3 Responsible for the supervision of two to five full time (or full time equivalent) employees. 40 4 Responsible for the supervision of six to 15 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. 65 5 Responsible for direct and/or indirect supervision of 16 to 29 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. 80 6 Responsible for direct and/or indirect supervision of 30 to 50 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. 85 7 Responsible for direct and/or indirect supervision of more than 51 full time (or full time equivalent) employees. 95 8 Responsible for direct and indirect supervision of the entire organization. 105 JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FACTOR 7: WORK OF OTHERS Page 126 of 180 Confidential 23 This factor considers the physical conditions surrounding the job that are beyond the employee's control, but which may be physically demanding, unpleasant, strenuous, and/or hazardous, and may impact the employee's physical well-being. Level Definition Point Value 1 Office work only. Good working conditions with almost complete absence of physically demanding, unpleasant, 15 strenuous, and/or hazardous elements. 2 Minimal external work or occasional exposure to physically demanding, unpleasant, strenuous, and/or hazardous situations. 30 3 Frequent exposure to physically demanding, unpleasant, strenuous, and/or hazardous elements. 45 4 Regular exposure to particularly physically demanding, unpleasant, strenuous, and/or hazardous elements such as dealing 60 with inclement weather, operating heavy equipment, etc. 5 Continuous exposure to life threatening public safety situations which could jeopardize personal safety. 75 JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FACTOR 8: WORKING CONDITIONS Page 127 of 180 Confidential 24 This factor considers the extent to which the employee utilizes and supports technology, enhancing the efficiency and communication on behalf of the organization. Level Definition Point Value 1 Position has no responsibility for, or use of, technology. 0 2 Position has some basic use of computers for data entry, and some use of the telephone, copier, etc. 10 3 Position has daily use of computers for data entry and use of the telephone, radios, fax machine, copier, etc. Position has daily use of light equipment such as push mowers, weed whackers, pole saws, custodial equipment, etc. 30 4 Position has daily use of computers, the Internet, Smartphones, etc. to create databases, spreadsheets, or reports. Position designs and creates customized reports, presentations, and/or documents using advanced software skills. 50 5A Position provides routine consultation and technology support for everyday computer programming and/or software requests/questions to others in the organization; is an applications super user; or uses specialized software such as GIS, SCADA or telecommunications software. 65 5B Position uses, repairs, and/or troubleshoots specialized equipment such as HVAC, lighting, gas flares, blowers, engines, heavy equipment, diagnostic equipment, large vehicles (vacuum trucks, street sweepers, fire apparatus) and/or medical or public safety equipment. 65 6 Position is responsible for advanced computer programming, system security, maintenance, training, and purchasing of items such as computers, printers, scanners, etc., for the computer system for the organization (IT personnel). 75 7 Position is responsible for the overall direction and supervision of the staff that are responsible for the computer and technology needs of the organization, including responsibility for developing technology policies for the organization (IT personnel). 85 JOB EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FACTOR 9: USE OF TECHNOLOGY/SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT Page 128 of 180 Appendix D SAMPLE SCORING INPUT SHEET POSITION TITLE Prep. & Train. Certifications Experience Decision Making Policy Planning Contact Supervision Work Cond. Tech. Used TOTAL - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MGT Confidential Page 31 Page 129 of 180 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM INDEX 1. Performance Management Program – Page 1-3 2. Leadership Feedback – Annual Review Form Resource Guide – Page 4-14 3. Employee Self-Evaluation – Annual Review Form Resource Guide – Page 15-20 4. Leadership Feedback - Annual Review Form – Page 21-25 5. Employee Self-Evaluation – Annual Review Form – Page 26-30 6. Performance Improvement Plan PIP – Page 31-32 7. Performance Improvement Plan Reference Guide – Page 33 8. Performance Management Supplemental Form – Page 34-35 9. Competency Ratings Explanations – Blank Template – Page 35 10-1. All Employee Competency Ratings Explanations – Page 37-39 10-2. Leadership Competency Ratings Explanations – Page 40-41 10-3. Customer Service Competency Ratings Explanations – Page 42-43 Page 130 of 180 1 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Document Purpose: This is an internal document that details the full Performance Management Program. This document and the support documents will be maintained and updated by The City Manager’s Office as necessary. Communication and publishing of each document is specified below. Document contents: The Performance Management Program Contains the following elements • Pe rformance Management Program – Saved on the M:Drive and maintained by the City Manager’s Office as needed. • Leadership Feedback – Annual Review Form Resource Guide – This document will be available via SharePoint and provided annually and during the onboarding process to any leader with one more direct report. • Employee Self-Evaluation – Annual Review Form Resource Guide – This document will be available via SharePoint and provided annually and during the onboarding process to all eligible employees and leaders. • Leadership Training Video – This training will be available via SharePoint and provided annually and during the onboarding process to any leader with one more direct report. A PowerPoint presentation will accompany the video. • Employee Training Video – This training will be available via SharePoint and provided annually and during the onboarding process to all eligible employees and leaders. A PowerPoint presentation will accompany the video. • Leadership Feedback - Annual Review Form – This document will be available via SharePoint and provided annually to any leaders with a direct report and during the onboarding process. Completed forms are returned to the City Manager’s Office. • Employee Self-Evaluation - Annual Review Form – This document will be available via SharePoint and provided annually to eligible employees and during the onboarding process. Completed forms are returned to the employee’s leader and then provided to the City Manager’s Office. • Competency Ratings Explanations – This document is available via SharePoint, provided to leaders and employees as applicable. • Performance Management Supplemental Form – This form is available via SharePoint and is optional for Leaders to use as a semi-formal, consistent performance management tool. The planned use of this form should be communicated with the employee(s) upon hire or during the Annual Review Meeting, ensuring employees understand the planned use of this form. • Performance Improvement Plan – This form is optional for leaders to use at any time of the year. The leader may also utilize the form at the Annual Review time. El igibility: This program applies to all non-represented employees. Page 1 Page 131 of 180 2 Program Goal: To provide tools that support the needs of the organization and balances consistency and flexibility in consideration of each department's diverse needs. The intention is to help leaders build soft skills that contribute to effective performance management conversations. P reparation: Leaders and employees are encouraged to utilize the tools provided to prepare for Annual Review Meetings, semi-formal performance conversations, and Performance Improvement plans. However, the program highly recommends having conversations with employees regarding their performance in real time to ensure there are no surprises when having formal or semi-formal performance conversations. T iming: The following describes when each element of the program will occur. • August 2026 – The program will be rolled out to all eligible employees and leaders • September 2026 and all years after until otherwise specified. o Employees and leaders will be given a one-week time frame to complete their own Employee Self-Evaluation – Annual Review Form o Leaders will be given a 2–3-week time frame to complete a Leadership Feedback – Annual Review Form for all eligible employees that directly report to them, as well as schedule and complete each direct report’s Annual Review Meeting. Team size will d etermine the time allowed. The City Manager’s Office will communicate the exact d ates to leaders. • December – Any raises (Merit, COLA, midpoint adjustments) are communicated to employees for the following calendar year. • January following the review process – Any raises communicated to employees will be effective 1/1/xx each year. C ompensation Correlation: See Compensation Philosophy Draft for full details. Ratings in this program do not have a defined merit rate value. The City of Fort Atkinson may assign a certain value to the rating scale at any time in relation to their budget that may change year over year and be adjusted based on the market, compensation philosophy, and organizational budget. C ompetencies: These are maintained by the City Manager’s Office via an excel document and PDF. These may be reviewed and updated by the City Manager’s Office and communicated as it impacts the performance management program and employee expectations. R oles and Responsibilities: Role/Responsibilities Implementation Advocacy Participation Feedback Maintenance City Manager’s Office x x x x x Leaders x x x x Employees x x x If leaders use “Additional Competencies” in their Annual Review Forms, the City Manager’s Office intends to review these to ensure consistency based on Title and/or Department. Page 2 Page 132 of 180 3 Handbook: The handbook will include an abbreviated version of the Performance Management Program that provides information helpful to employees and leaders to ensure they understand an overview of the program and where to find additional resources. F eedback and Updates: Feedback about the program can be communicated and used to make updates to the program at any time. Feedback may occur formally or informally. Updates to the program may occur to support employees and leaders in alignment with the organization's business practices and compensation philosophy. The City Manager’s Office will communicate any program changes to employees and leaders as necessary. Page 3 Page 133 of 180 1 LEADERSHIP FEEDBACK – ANNUAL REVIEW FORM RESOURCE GUIDE Note: Items highlighted in yellow: Items that are additional or different from the Employee Self-Evaluation – Annual Review Form Resource Guide. Purpose: This document is provided to all leaders who have eligible (non-represented) employees as direct reports with the purpose of supporting the effective and consistent use of the performance management documents, specifically “Leadership Feedback – Annual Review Form” and any additional related support documents as noted in this document. Having constructive conversations about performance year-round builds confidence in leaderships performance management abilities and teaches effective leadership skills utilizing and communicating performance ratings. Leaders should avoid surprises and use the review as a coaching conversation rather than simply an evaluation. Note: Employees also receive a similar document that helps employees feel prepared and builds confidence in the performance management program’s consistency, flexibility, and transparency. T erminology: • Leader(s): Any manager or supervisor who has one or more direct reports. • Employee(s): Any individual who receives an annual review; leaders become the employee, when they are completing their own self-evaluation. • City Manager’s Office: Pertains to initiatives, directives, and content coming from individual(s) at the City Manager’s Office. • Annual Review Meeting: Discussion scheduled annually by the leader to utilize performance review documents that support formal performance conversations and documentation of those conversations. Pr eparation and Responsibilities: Each section will specify responsibilities for each party as well as specify which responsibilities will require preparation prior to the Annual Review Meeting. __________________________________________________________________________________________ TH E ANNUAL REVIEW FORM Information: • Leadership Feedback Annual Review Form: The leader fills out the entirety of the Information section at the top of the first page. • Employee-Self Evaluation Annual Review Form: The leader fills out the Employee Name and Title and provides the full document to that employee. Opening Conversation (1-2 Minutes) The leader will lead the conversation. Leader recommendations: Set a positive tone by explaining the purpose of the discussion. Example: "Today's conversation is an opportunity to reflect on your accomplishments, discuss growth areas, and align goals moving forward." Page 4 Page 134 of 180 2 S ection A: Job Description Review (2-3 Minutes) The employee receives a copy of their job description prior to review prior to the Annual Review Meeting. D uring the conversation, the leader and employee review the employee’s current job description together. The leader and employee document any suggested changes in their respective forms and check the box indicating their review has been completed. F AQ: Why did we build the job description review into the Annual Performance Review? • Answer 1: The benefits to the employee include: o Encourages Engagement -  Gives the employee a voice in validating the work they perform  Demonstrates the organization recognizes your contributions  Builds in an opportunity to provide feedback about changing role expectations o Supports Career Development -  Creates opportunities to discuss new skills, expanding responsibilities, and growth aspirations  Helps employees see how their role has evolved and what competencies they need to develop for future opportunities o Clarifies expectations –  Ensures employees understand their current responsibilities and expectations  Identifies any duties that have evolved since the job description was last updated  Reduces confusion, opening an opportunity to discuss any conflicting views of the role expectations • Answer 2: The benefits for leaders include: o Strengthens Coaching conversations  Creates a natural opportunity to discuss role effectiveness, future expectations, and developmental goals o Identifies Workload changes  Reveals when employees have taken on ore responsibilities and when duties have shifted  Provides insight into whether work should be redistributed or if additional resources are needed o Improves performance evaluations  Leaders can assess employees against accurate and current job expectations  Prevents evaluating performance based on outdated responsibilities • Answer 3: The benefits for the organization include: o Maintains Accurate Job Documentation  Keeps job descriptions current as business needs, technology and processes evolve  Ensures HR Records reflect actual work being performed  Lowers administrative burden and provides cost savings for the whole organization o Supports Compensation decisions  Helps identify roles that may have changed and could warrant compensation review  Improves consistency and internal equity across similar positions o Reduces Compliance Risk Page 5 Page 135 of 180 3  Ensures essential functions are documented appropriately  Supports FLSA classifications, ADA accommodations, and other employment related compliance requirements o Enhances recruiting and succession planning  Accurate job descriptions improve future hiring efforts  Helps identify critical skills, knowledge and competencies needed for organizational success S ection B: Performance Evaluation and Ratings (7-10 Minutes) Responsibilities: Both the leader and the employee complete this section prior to the Annual Review Meeting, and the content is used to facilitate a conversation between the leader and the employee. • Page one provides a chart that has a general explanation for the 1-5 ratings scale. For more specific explanations of each competency, please see the full “Competency Ratings Explanations” document. • Page two provides standard competencies for which all eligible employees will be rated. o Leader: Completes ratings for the employee on their “Leadership Feedback – Annual Review Form” for all provided standard competencies and provides details supporting their ratings. o Employee: Completes ratings for each competency and provides details supporting their ratings for themselves. • Page three (optional) represents any additional competencies for which an employee may be rated. o Leader: Selects additional competencies that align with the job description and apply them consistently by position and/or department.  Example: If three employees hold the same job title, they will be rated on the same competencies as their peers in the same role.  The leader fills out these additional competencies on the “Employee Self-Evaluation – Annual Review Form” and provides that to the employee.  The leader mirrors these selections on the “Leadership Feedback – Annual Review Form” and completes the ratings and comments section.  These additional competencies may change from year to year. If changes occur, the employee must receive communication about the change to the competencies at the beginning of the calendar year. o Employee: Completes ratings for each competency and provides details supporting their ratings for themselves. F AQ: Why did we create these charts? • Answer: We received feedback during our focus group discussions that employees want clear and consistent ratings explanations. F AQ: Why is there more than one chart? • Answer: The different charts have different benefits and purposes. See below for in-depth breakdown. Page 6 Page 136 of 180 4 General Rating Explanation Location On Annual Review Form provided annually and during onboarding; Sharepoint Benefit Provides a basic understanding of what any competency is rated on a five-point scale. Why add this to Annual Review Form Easy to read, small in size, quick reference on Annual Review Form Standard Competency Rating Explanation Location Provided annually and during onboarding; Sharepoint Benefit Provides detailed explanations of how to rate performance in each required competency. Provides additional guidance, includes behavioral examples. Why is it not included on the Annual Review Form? Large in size, extensive detail Additional Competency Rating Explanation - OPTIONAL Location As needed: Provided annually and during onboarding; Sharepoint Benefit Provides additional competency ratings explanations as an option for leaders to rate employees. Certain departments or positions may require more than the standard Competencies. This provides a flexible program with a structured format. Will all positions have additional competency ratings? No, not all positions will have additional competency ratings. Who decides if there are additional competencies? The leader - They base the decision on position and/or department needs. The City Manager’s Office reviews to ensure consistency. Things to consider • Before the conversation - o Review specific examples that support the rating. o Be prepared to use the chart to explain how the rating aligns with established criteria and expectations. o Anticipate questions and potential reactions. o Separate performance assessments from personal characteristics. • During the Conversation o Start with Appreciation  Acknowledge the employee's contributions before discussing the rating.  Example: "I want to start by recognizing the impact you've had this year, particularly your work on X and your support of the team." o Be Direct About the Rating. Page 7 Page 137 of 180 5  Example: "Based on your overall performance against expectations and goals, your final rating is a 'Meets Expectations'.”  Avoid creating confusion or suspense. o Explain the "Why"  Connect the rating to business outcomes, behaviors, and expectations.  Focus on: Results achieved, demonstrated competencies, areas where expectations were exceeded or not fully met, comparisons to rating definitions, not to other employees. • Use Specific Examples o Employees are more likely to accept feedback when it is supported by facts. o Example: "Your project delivery timelines consistently met expectations, and the community provided positive feedback. At the same time, there were opportunities to improve proactive communication during periods of change." • Avoid Surprises - The review discussion should reinforce feedback shared throughout the year, not introduce new concerns. o Leaders should utilize tools that work best for them to take notes on performance, and conversations had throughout the year. Reference those notes for accurate representation of a full year of performance. Examples tools: OneNote, Excel (tabs for each employee, include dates, etc.) • Listen Actively o Give the employee space to react and ask questions. o Helpful phrases to gain more insight into the employee’s thoughts:  "How does this align with your perspective?"  "What are your thoughts on this feedback?"  "What would you like to discuss further?" • Stay Calm if the Employee Disagrees - Acknowledge feelings without changing the discussion into an argument. o Example: "I understand this may not be the outcome you were expecting. Let's talk about the factors that were considered in reaching this rating." • Avoid Common Pitfalls o Don’t:  Compare employees to one another.  Focus only on recent events.  Debate every individual data point.  Overpromise future ratings or compensation outcomes.  Present personal opinions without examples.  Over generalize. o Do:  End with a forward-looking discussion.  Shift the conversation toward growth and development.  Ask questions like, “"What actions can we both take to help you be successful?"  Be specific. Employees may not always agree with their rating, but they should leave the conversation understanding the overall clear message from the leader to the employee: • What is the rating? • Why was the rating selected? Page 8 Page 138 of 180 6 • What did they do well? • What can they improve? • What does success look like moving forward? This helps keep the discussion balanced, transparent, and growth oriented. R atings Calculations: This section provides a summary that clearly states the employee’s total score, as well as the average score. The leader and employee will complete their own calculations on their respective forms, compare those scores during the Annual Review meeting, and discuss any differences in ratings. If the employee has an average score of 2 or less, consider utilizing the Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) form. The PIP form can be used at any time during the year; the leader does not need to wait until annual review time to create a PIP. S ection C: Key Accomplishments (2-3 minutes) • Leader: Leader shares employee’s individual and/or team accomplishments and strengths from the previous year. • Employee: Employee shares their own individual and/or team accomplishments and highlights strengths from the previous year. F AQ: Why is this section important? • Recalls employee accomplishments during the year. • Supports employee performance ratings. • Reviews accomplishments year after year to show growth and development. Things to consider: • Start with Recognition of the overall impact their accomplishments the employee has made to the team and organization. • Provide specific examples and discuss the meaningful business impact each example has made. • Focus on the outcome, not just the task. o "You successfully led the system implementation, which improved efficiency and reduced processing time for the team." • Highlight strengths and competencies related to accomplishments – tying Section B and C together, reinforcing the ratings. • Balance individual and Team contributions – recognize personal ownership while also acknowledging collaboration. • Link accomplishments to future growth. • Identify what patterns emerged throughout the year. Recognize Rate Explain Listen Develop Commit to Next Steps Page 9 Page 139 of 180 7 Suggested phrase example: "You delivered several important accomplishments this year, and those contributions were highly valued. When evaluating overall performance, we also consider consistency across all goals, competencies, and impact relative to expectations, which contributed to the final rating." Or "During the Q3 product launch (Situation), you coordinated cross-functional meetings and proactively addressed project risks (Behavior), which helped the team meet the launch deadline and avoid delays (Impact)." Or "You effectively managed multiple competing priorities during the systems transition, which helped the team maintain service levels and meet deadlines. Going forward, I'd like to see you continue leveraging this strength while increasing delegation opportunities to develop others." This framework creates reviews that are fair, developmental, and actionable while helping leaders build trust and accountability with their employees. Complete this section ensuring that employees understand: • What did they achieve? • Why did it matter? • How did it impact the organization? • What strengths did they demonstrate? • How do those accomplishments position them for future success? S ection D: Areas of Development (3-5 minutes) Leader: The leader shares feedback on what the employee can do to improve in the areas above. Leader’s response: • Listen fully before responding; avoid becoming defensive. • Acknowledge their feedback and validate their thoughts, concerns, and/or requests. • Discuss actions to address their feedback; ask questions to understand how to support them. • Be honest about what you can and cannot influence. • Identify shared ownership, focusing on success as a partnership. • Clarify commitments for both parties. • Thank the employee for their feedback. E mployee: The employee answers two questions in this section. • The employee shares the ways that leadership or organization can help them succeed. • The employee also shares which areas they want to improve as an employee. Celebrate Describe Quantify Impact Connect to Strengths Discuss Page 10 Page 140 of 180 8 Leader’s response: • Acknowledge the employee’s self-awareness and encourage their growth mindset. • Validate and build upon their perspective, offering positive ways to build their skills can help them move forward. • Dig into the motivation for building and developing in those stated areas. • Reinforce their existing strengths. • Guide desired development into action items and clear commitments. • Offer support; i.e. regular check-ins, feedback opportunities, etc. F AQ: Why is this section important? • Encourages Professional Growth • Demonstrates Self-Awareness • Supports Career Development • Creates Actionable Development Plan • Aligns individual and organizational needs Note: These may or may not align with the areas the employee would like to improve. S ection E: Goals and Objectives (5 minutes) Last Year’s Goals: Note – In 2026, “Last year’s goals” refer to any goals set in 2025’ review period for the calendar year 2026. Not all employees created and communicated formal goals for 2026. This section may be left blank or used to recall goals that were discussed throughout the year. • Employee: Writes and discusses last year’s goals/objectives and if they were accomplished. • Leader: Writes and discusses last year’s goals/objectives, and if they were accomplished. N ext Year’s Goals: • Employee: Employee leaves this section blank and waits for the Annual Review meeting to write and discuss goals for the following year. • Leader: Leader may complete this section for the employee pertaining to the following year, or they may wait to discuss with the employee during the Annual Review meeting. S etting SMART goals • Specific: The goal should be clear and highly defined. Answer the "W" questions: What do I want to accomplish? Why is this important? Who is involved? What is the business impact? What is the impact of personal development? • Measurable: Establish concrete criteria for tracking progress. You need a way to know exactly how much or how many. (Or how often) Listen Acknowledge Validate Explore Be Transparent Commit to Action Follow Through Page 11 Page 141 of 180 9 • A chievable: Your goal should be realistic and attainable. It stretches your abilities but remains possible with your current skills, resources, and timeline. • Relevant: The objective must matter to you and align with your broader, long-term ambitions as well as business needs. • Time-bound: Every goal needs a target date or deadline. This creates urgency and prevents everyday tasks from taking priority. FAQs provided for employees: FAQ: What if I don’t remember what my leader and I discussed as my goals for 2026? • Answer: Not all employees set formal goals for 2026. You may reach out to ask your leader about 2026 goals or wait until the annual review meeting to complete this section. F AQ: What if I am not sure about what I should set for goals for the following year? • Answer: The employee may choose to leave this section blank until this has been discussed during the Annual Review Meeting. When both parties have discussed and finalized these goals for the following year, these can be completed on the form. SMART goal examples: Performance Goal: Improve project delivery predictability by achieving 95% on-time completion of assigned projects during FY27. Development Goal: Complete executive presentation training and present quarterly updates to senior leadership by year-end. Section F: Employee Development (3-5 minutes) • Employee: The employee shares goals they have for themselves, i.e. other jobs they want to start preparing for, training to support their current role, or other ways to provide more value for themselves and/or the organization. • Leader: The leader asks questions and shares areas that the employee may want to focus on for professional development. i.e. training available, relevant certifications, skills to learn that can assist in development, etc. FAQs provided for employees: F AQ: What if I’m not sure what I want to focus on for professional development? • Answer: That’s completely ok. This is an opportunity to discuss this with the leader, and both can discuss how the leader can support employee development goals. In preparation for the conversation, the employee can consider the following areas of growth: o Technical/Functional - Industry certifications, process improvement methodologies, system training. o Leadership skills – Coaching and mentoring others, influencing without authority, strategic thinking, and being a change management champion. o Communication skills – Presentations, facilitation skills, written communications, conflict management. Page 12 Page 142 of 180 10 o B usiness acumen – Understanding company strategy, financial literacy (department budgeting), customer focus, cross-functional collaboration. F AQ: What if I like where I am and want to keep doing that? • Answer: That’s great information to share with your leader. There may be things you two can discuss to help you grow and develop in your current role based on your feedback. F AQ: What if I’m not sure about what opportunities are available to me at the City of Fort Atkinson? • Answer: That’s ok as well. Employees are encouraged to discuss professional interests openly and make plans based on realistic options and growth potential aligned with employee interests and the alignment of the business needs. Leader recommendations: • Ask Questions to understand the employee’s goals. Examples: o “What experiences, skills, or knowledge would help you be more successful as an employee?” o “What is a reasonable time frame for you to reach this goal?” o “Is there an existing role at the organization that you see yourself in?” • Focus on growth, not just performance. • Be specific and action-oriented – Avoid vague statements. • Balance strength and development areas – This is not just about addressing gaps, but also an opportunity to encourage growth in areas where the employee already excels. • Align development to career goals. • Include measurable outcomes. • 70-20-10 approach o 70% - On the job experience and stretch assignments. o 20% - Coaching mentoring, networking. o 10% - Formal training and courses. • Include diverse options for development – Suggested categories provided to employees in FAQs: o Technical/Functional - industry certifications, process improvement methodologies, system training. o Leadership skills – Coaching and mentoring others, influencing without authority, strategic thinking, change management champion. o Communication skills – Presentations, facilitation skills, written communications, conflict management. o Business acumen – Understanding company strategy, financial literacy (department budgeting), customer focus, cross-functional collaboration. Se ction G: Additional Comments This section provides a space to document any additional feedback from employees and leaders that may not have been represented in the other sections of the form. Wr ap-Up: The leader will wrap up the conversation and officially end the Annual Review Meeting. Page 13 Page 143 of 180 11 Leader Recommendations: End the conversation positively and collaboratively. • Summarize key agreements. • Confirm support and resources. Example: Closing Statement: "I appreciate your contributions this year. I'm confident in your ability to build on your strengths, and I am committed to supporting your development goals." Section H: Signature The leader’s signature confirms that the content on this form was completed by the leader, discussed during the Annual Review meeting, and returned to the City Manager’s Office along with the employee’s Self-Evaluation – Annual Review Form. The date generally represents the date of the completed Annual Review meeting. If the employee refuses to sign the review, reiterate that their signature confirms that the conversation took place, and not that they agree with the leader’s assessment. The content on the self-evaluation form conveys their perspective of their behavior in a formal document. Final Note: This guide is a helpful tool to navigate the formal Annual Review Meeting, however, this Performance Management Program highly recommends having conversations with employees regarding their performance in real time to ensure there are no surprises when having formal or semi-formal performance conversations. Page 14 Page 144 of 180 1 EMPLOYEE SELF-EV ALUATION – ANNUAL REVIEW FORM RESOURCE GUIDE Pur pose: This document is provided to all eligible (non-represented) employees with the purpose of supporting the effective and consistent use of the performance management documents, specifically “Employee Self- Evaluation – Annual Review Form”. The information in this document intends to help employees feel prepared and build confidence in the performance management program’s consistency, flexibility, and transparency. N ote: Leaders also receive a similar document that includes support and guidelines for a consistent, flexible, and transparent application of the program. T erminology: • Leader(s): Any manager or supervisor who has one or more direct reports. • Employee(s): Any individual who receives an annual review; leaders become the employee, when they are completing their own self-evaluation. • City Manager’s Office: Pertains to initiatives, directives, and content coming from individual(s) at the City Manager’s Office. • Annual Review Meeting: Discussion scheduled annually by the leader to utilize performance review documents that support formal performance conversations and documentation of those conversations. Preparation and Responsibilities: Each section will specify responsibilities for each party as well as specify which responsibilities will require preparation prior to the Annual Review Meeting. __________________________________________________________________________________________ TH E ANNUAL REVIEW FORM Information: • Leadership Feedback Annual Review Form: The leader fills out the entirety of the Information section at the top of the first page. • Employee-Self Evaluation Annual Review Form: The leader fills out the Employee Name and Title and provides the full document to that employee. O pening Conversation (1-2 Minutes): The leader will lead the conversation. Se ction A: Job Description Review (2-3 Minutes) The employee receives a copy of their job description prior to review prior to the Annual Review Meeting. During the conversation, the leader and employee review the employee’s current job description together. The leader and employee document any suggested changes in their respective forms and check the box indicating their review has been completed. F AQ: Why did we build the job description review into the Annual Performance Review? • Answer 1: The benefits for the employee include: o Encourages Engagement o Supports Career Development o Clarifies Expectations Page 15 Page 145 of 180 2 • Answ er 2: The benefits for leaders include: o Strengthens Coaching Conversations o Identifies Workload Changes o Improves Performance Evaluations • Answer 3: The benefits for the organization include: o Maintains Accurate Job Documentation o Supports Compensation Decisions o Reduces Compliance Risk o Enhances Recruiting and Succession Planning Sec tion B: Performance Evaluation and Ratings (7-10 Minutes) Responsibilities: Both the leader and the employee complete this section prior to the Annual Review Meeting, and the content is used to facilitate a conversation between the leader and the employee. • Page one provides a chart that has a general explanation for the 1-5 ratings scale. For more specific explanations of each competency, please see the full “Competency Ratings Explanations” document. • ο Leader: Completes ratings for the employee on their “Leadership Feedback – Annual Review Form” for all provided standard competencies and provides details supporting their ratings. ο Employee: Completes ratings for each competency and provides details supporting their ratings for themselves. • Page three (optional) represents any additional competencies for which an employee may be rated. ο Leader: Selects additional competencies that align with the job description and apply them consistently by position and/or department.  Example: If three employees hold the same job title, they will be rated on the same competencies as their peers in the same role.  The leader fills out these additional competencies on the “Employee Self-Evaluation – Annual Review Form” and provides that to the employee.  The leader mirrors these selections on the “Leadership Feedback – Annual Review Form” and completes the ratings and comments section.  These additional competencies may change from year to year. If changes occur, the employee must receive communication about the change to the competencies at the beginning of the calendar year. ο Employee: Completes ratings for each competency and provides details supporting their ratings for themselves. FAQ: Why did we create these charts? • Answer: We received feedback during our focus group discussions that employees want clear and consistent ratings explanations. FAQ: W hy is there more than one chart? • Answer: The different charts have different benefits and purposes. See below for in-depth breakdown. Page two provides standard competencies for which all employees will be rated. Page 16 Page 146 of 180 3 General Rating Explanation Location On Annual Review Form provided annually and during onboarding; Sharepoint Benefit Provides a basic understanding of what any competency is rated on a five-point scale. Why add this to Annual Review Form Easy to read, small in size, quick reference on Annual Review Form Standard Competency Rating Explanation Location Provided annually and during onboarding; Sharepoint Benefit Provides detailed explanations of how to rate performance in each required competency. Provides additional guidance, includes behavioral examples. Why is it not included on the Annual Review Form? Large in size, extensive detail Additional Competency Rating Explanation - OPTIONAL Location As needed: Provided annually and during onboarding; Sharepoint Benefit Provides additional competency ratings explanations as an option for leaders to rate employees. Certain departments or positions may require more than the standard Competencies. This provides a flexible program with a structured format. Will all positions have additional competency ratings? No, not all positions will have additional competency ratings. Who decides if there are additional competencies? The leader - They base the decision on position and/or department needs. The City Manager’s Office reviews to ensure consistency. R atings Calculations: This section provides a summary that clearly states the employee’s total score, as well as the average score. The leader and employee will complete their own calculations on their respective forms, compare those scores during the Annual Review meeting, and discuss any differences in ratings. Se ction C: Key Accomplishments (2-3 minutes) • Leader: Leader shares employee’s individual and/or team accomplishments and strengths from the previous year. • Employee: Employee shares their own individual and/or team accomplishments and highlights strengths from the previous year. Page 17 Page 147 of 180 4 F AQ: Why is this section important? • Recalls employee accomplishments during the year. • Supports employee performance ratings. • Reviews accomplishments year after year to show growth and development. S ection D: Areas of Development (3-5 minutes) Leader: The leader shares feedback on what the employee can do to improve in the areas above. Employee: The employee answers two questions in this section. • The employee shares the ways that leadership or the organization can help them succeed. • The employee also shares which areas they want to improve as an employee. F AQ: Why is this section important? • Encourages Professional Growth • Demonstrates Self-Awareness • Supports Career Development • Creates Actionable Development Plan • Aligns individual and organizational needs Se ction E: Goals and Objectives (5 minutes) Last Year’s Goals: Note – In 2026, “Last year’s goals” refer to any goals set in 2025’ review period for the calendar year 2026. Not all employees created and communicated formal goals for 2026. This section may be left blank or used to recall goals that were discussed throughout the year. • Employee: Writes and discusses last year’s goals/objectives and if they were accomplished. • Leader: Writes and discusses last year’s goals/objectives, and if they were accomplished. N ext Year’s Goals: • Employee: Employee leaves this section blank and waits for the Annual Review meeting to write and discuss goals for the following year. • Leader: Leader may complete this section for the employee pertaining to the following year, or they may wait to discuss with the employee during the Annual Review meeting. S etting SMART goals • Specific: The goal should be clear and highly defined. Answer the "W" questions: What do I want to accomplish? Why is this important? Who is involved? What is the business impact? What is the impact of personal development? • Measurable: Establish concrete criteria for tracking progress. You need a way to know exactly how much or how many. (Or how often) • Achievable: Your goal should be realistic and attainable. It stretches your abilities but remains possible with your current skills, resources, and timeline. Page 18 Page 148 of 180 5 • R elevant: The objective must matter to you and align with your broader, long-term ambitions as well as business needs. • Time-bound: Every goal needs a target date or deadline. This creates urgency and prevents everyday tasks from taking priority. F AQ: What if I don’t remember what my leader and I discussed as my goals for 2026? • Answer: Not all employees set formal goals for 2026. You may reach out to ask your leader about 2026 goals or wait until the annual review meeting to complete this section. F AQ: What if I am not sure about what I should set for goals for the following year? • Answer: The employee may choose to leave this section blank until this has been discussed during the Annual Review Meeting. When both parties have discussed and finalized these goals for the following year, these can be completed on the form. Se ction F: Employee Development (3-5 minutes) • Employee: The employee shares goals they have for themselves, i.e. other jobs they want to start preparing for, training to support their current role, or other ways to provide more value for themselves and/or the organization. • Leader: The leader asks questions and shares areas that the employee may want to focus on for professional development. i.e. training available, relevant certifications, skills to learn that can assist in development, etc. FAQ: What if I’m not sure what I want to focus on for professional development? • Answer: That’s completely ok. This is an opportunity to discuss this with the leader, and both can discuss how the leader can support employee development goals. In preparation for the conversation, the employee can consider the following areas of growth: o Technical/Functional - Industry certifications, process improvement methodologies, system training. o Leadership skills – Coaching and mentoring others, influencing without authority, strategic thinking, and being a change management champion. o Communication skills – Presentations, facilitation skills, written communications, conflict management. o Business acumen – Understanding company strategy, financial literacy (department budgeting), customer focus, cross-functional collaboration. F AQ: What if I like where I am and want to keep doing that? • Answer: That’s great information to share with your leader. There may be things you two can discuss to help you grow and develop in your current role based on your feedback. Page 19 Page 149 of 180 6 F AQ: What if I’m not sure about what opportunities are available to me at the City of Fort Atkinson? • Answer: That’s ok as well. Employees are encouraged to discuss professional interests openly and make plans based on realistic options and growth potential aligned with employee interests and the alignment of the business needs. Se ction G: Additional Comments This section provides a space to document any additional feedback from the employee and leader that may not have been represented in the other sections of the form. Wr ap-Up: The leader will wrap up the conversation and officially end the Annual Review Meeting. Se ction H: Signature The employee’s signature confirms that the content on the form was completed by the employee, discussed during the Annual Review meeting, and provided to their leader. The date generally represents the date of the completed Annual Review meeting. T he leader receives similar instructions in addition to requiring them to provide the completed Employee Self- Evaluation Annual Review Form to the City Manager’s Office. Page 20 Page 150 of 180 1 LEADERSHIP FEEDBACK - ANNUAL REVIEW FORM Employee Name Employee Title Leader Name Leader Title Employee Hire Date Review Year S ection A: Job Description Review Complete _______ The leader reviews job description prior to Annual Review Meeting and provides employee with a copy prior to meeting. The leader checks the box after reviewing the job description with the employee during the Annual Review Meeting. Comments: Se ction B: Performance Evaluation and Ratings: The leader fills out the ratings for the employee for all standard competencies provided. Provided is a General Ratings Explanations. For more specific explanations of each competency, please see the full “Competency Ratings Explanations” document. General Ratings Explanation 1 - Unsatisfactory 2 - Needs Improvement 3 - Meets Expectations 4 - Exceeds Expectations 5 - Exceptional The employee’s performance falls significantly below the expectations and requirements for this competency. Results and behaviors are consistently below the standard expected for the role. The employee does not consistently demonstrate the skills, knowledge, or behaviors associated with this competency, and substantial improvement is required. Immediate attention, coaching, and a focused development plan are needed. The employee’s performance in this competency is inconsistent and does not yet fully meet expectations for the role. The employee demonstrates some of the expected behaviors; however, there are noticeable gaps in effectiveness, consistency, or application. Additional coaching, support, and development are needed to help the employee achieve the expected level of proficiency. The employee consistently demonstrates this competency at the level expected for the role. Performance is reliable and satisfactory, and the employee effectively applies the associated skills and behaviors in day-to-day responsibilities. Contributions support team objectives and align with business needs, resulting in successful performance in this area. The employee frequently demonstrates this competency above the level expected for the role. Performance is consistently strong, and the employee often goes above and beyond standard requirements. The employee makes meaningful contributions to team success, proactively applies this competency in a variety of situations, and may occasionally support or guide others in developing their capabilities. The employee’s performance in this competency is consistently exceptional and serves as a model for others. The employee demonstrates outstanding expertise, anticipates challenges, and proactively identifies opportunities to improve outcomes. Their application of this com petency significantly enhances team, department, and/or organizational success. The employee is recognized as a trusted resource or subject matter expert and regularly contributes beyond the expectations of their role. Page 21 Page 151 of 180 2 Section B Continued: ALL EMPLOYEE COMPETENCIES (Rating 1-5) Employee Name Employee Title Competency Dependability and Reliability Rating: Comments Competency Quality of Work/Accuracy/Attention to Detail Rating: Comments Competency Productivity Rating: Comments Competency Teamwork and Collaboration Rating: Comments Competency Communication Rating: Comments Competency Initiative and Innovation Rating: Comments Competency Safety Focused Rating: Comments Competency Customer Focused Rating: Comments Competency Job Knowledge Rating: Comments Page 22 Page 152 of 180 3 Section B Continued: ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEE COMPETENCIES (Rating 1-5) The Competency Ratings Explanation Document is provided for leaders to select additional competencies, consistently applied by position or department. The employee completes ratings and comments for themselves. Employee Name Employee Title Competency Rating: Comments Competency Rating: Comments Competency Rating: Comments Competency Rating: Comments Competency Rating: Comments Competency Rating: Comments Competency Rating: Comments Competency Rating: Comments Page 23 Page 153 of 180 4 Ratings Calculations Employee Name: Total Score (a) # of Competencies Rated (b) Average Score (a) divided by (b) S ection C: Key Accomplishments: The leader shares individual and/or team accomplishments and strengths from the previous year. Discuss the employee’s individual and team accomplishments, highlighting strengths throughout the previous year S ection D: Areas of Development: The leader shares feedback on what the employee can do to improve in the areas above. Discuss ways the employee can improve for the following year S ection E: Goals and Objectives: The leader completes this section if applicable and works with the employee to create next year’ s goals using the SMART Goal definitions and examples on the Resource Guide. Discuss last year’s goals and objectives; provide details regarding complete or incomplete goals Discuss next year’s goals and objectives Page 24 Page 154 of 180 5 Employee Name: Se ction F: Employee Development: The leader may complete this section prior to or during the Annual Review meeting. Discuss the employee’s professional development goals for the following year Se ction G: Additional Comments: The leader may complete this section prior to or during the Annual Review meeting. All other items to discuss can be summarized below Se ction H: Signature: The leader’ s signature confirms that the content on this form was completed by the leader, discussed during the Annual Review meeting, and returned to the City Manager’s Office along with the employee’ s Self- Evaluation – Annual Review Form. The date generally represents the date of the completed Annual Review meeting. ____ ____________________________ ________________________________ ________________ Leader Name Leader Signature Date Page 25 Page 155 of 180 1 EMPLOYEE SELF-EV ALUATION - ANNUAL REVIEW FORM Employee Name Employee Title S ection A: Job Description Review Complete _______ The employee receives a copy of their job description prior to review prior to the Annual Review Meeting. The employee checks this box after reviewing the job description during the Annual Review Meeting. Comments: S ection B: Performance Evaluation and Ratings: The employee fills out the ratings for themselves for all standard competencies provided. Provided is a General Ratings Explanations. For more specific explanations of each competency, please see the full “Competency Ratings Explanations” document. General Rating Explanation 1 - Unsatisfactory 2 - Needs Improvement 3 - Meets Expectations 4 - Exceeds Expectations 5 - Exceptional The employee’s performance falls significantly below the expectations and requirements for this competency. Results and b