February 11, 2015

Mr. David Fuqua, City Manager

City of Bloomfield
915 N. First Street
Bloomfield, NM 87413
SUBJECT: FINAL REPORT RECAP PAY AND CLASSIFICATION SURVEY
Dear Mr. Fuqua:
Once again, we thank you for the opportunity to provide professional services to the City of
Bloomfield. We have completed the final report on the 2014 Pay and Classification Survey.
As we traveled throughout the state for the preliminary review of the survey results, we found
some errors on some of the tables in the preliminary report. The errors have been corrected, and
the revised tables are included in this report. We also took the time to create a listing of those
employee job classifications that currently earn more than the maximum salary based on the new
pay plan. Likewise, we created a listing of those employees who currently earn less that the
minimum salary for their pay range. In addition, we created a listing of those employee job
classifications that will result in a fiscal impact to the budget, if this plan is accepted by the City.
We are providing you with a final copy of the 2014 Pay and Classification Survey. In addition,
we are providing you with an electronic copy of the survey. The corrected tables are also
included in the electronic copy. Please dispose of all previous copies of the survey that we have
provided to you in the past.
As you can see from the results of the survey, the fiscal impact to the City if this plan is adopted
will be minimal. The fiscal impact summary shown of Table 4 provides you with a snapshot of
those results. Our recommendation is that priority should be given:
a. To adjust the salaries of those employees who are currently paid less than the minimum
salary for their job classification (see Exhibit 2).
b. To adjust the salaries of those employees to the correct step in their pay band (range)
based on the number of years in their current job classification (see Exhibit 3).
The vast majority of your employees are currently compensated at or above the prevailing
market rate for their job classification. This is based on the survey results of the eight
comparable sized cities. This should be regarded as good news, in that the City has kept up with
prevailing market rates for their employees. The results of this survey constitute a baseline

compensation for each job classification. Some cities will pay higher than the baseline for
certain job classifications due to the cost of living in their community, the cost of housing, or the
difficulty of recruiting for certain positions. For example, we found that in Ruidoso the cost of
housing has increased significantly, and as a result the majority of employees reside outside the
Village. In Lovington, we found that low housing availability makes it difficult to recruit for
certain positions.
During the course of our survey, we also found a few cities that have a policy regarding the
minimum starting salary. In some cases the minimum starting salary in those cities was higher
than the minimum salary shown in this report. We recommend that the policy remain in effect if
this plan is adopted. That policy would simply precede the starting salary in this report.
The biggest challenge that most of the cities face is the competition for certain job
classifications. Larger cities tend to recruit trained employees from smaller cities, and offer
higher compensation in return. This is especially true in recruiting and retention of police
officers. Los Lunas faces retention problems when their employees are recruited by the City of
Albuquerque, or Rio Rancho. In some areas, such as Lovington and Bloomfield, it is quite
difficult to compete with the oil and gas industry for certain job classifications.
Another challenge that our cities face is with employees who are at the top of the pay range.
During the course of the survey, we selected the wide pay range that was adopted by the State of
New Mexico Personnel Board because it provided for a 78% growth within each of the 19 pay
bands. By adopting this salary structure, we made significant progress in limiting the number of
employees who are at the top of the pay range. A very small percentage of your employees will
now be at the top of the pay range. The job classifications are identified in one of the
attachments.
The city should consider a policy to address those employees who are at the top of the pay range.
In most cases, these are very valuable employees who are close to retirement. To freeze their
pay because they are maxed out can result in morale problems and loss of productivity. In our
research, we found that some cities use one or more of the following options:
a. Set increases by position in range. Continue to allocate increases to employees at the top
of the pay range (band), but give a smaller percentage than to those in or below the range.
This approach has less risk of turnover.
b. Freeze base pay and offer performance based lump sum. Discontinue base pay increases
for those employees at the top of the pay range, but offer a lump sum performance based
check that does not result in an increase in base pay.
On January 22, 2015 Donna Clifton provided us with a detailed feedback report on corrections
and editing to the preliminary report. All of those recommendations have been incorporated into
this final report. Your feedback was very much greatly appreciated. The most important
concerns centered on the correct current salaries of some of your primary staff. This has been
corrected. The fiscal impact summary has also been revised. Take a look at Exhibits 1 to 3
(attached) to see the revised figures on the fiscal impact report. Exhibit 4 summarizes the
corrections made to the final report based on the feedback from Ms. Clifton.

This letter completes the deliverables for the Pay and Classification Survey. I wanted you to
know that I will be out of state for the next few months on another major project, and as a result,
only available by email. We sincerely hope that you will be pleased with the results of this
important project.
We really enjoyed conducting this survey for your city, along with the survey for the other seven
municipalities. Thank you for your cooperation, and we trust that you will be happy with the
results.
Respectfully submitted,

Gustavo Gus Cordova

Senior Vice President
MERCER GROUP INC.

Exhibit 1
Employee Classifications Currently Earning More Than Salary Maximum
CURRENT SALARY SALARY MAX. VARIANCE

CLASSIFICATION

Total
%
Employees Maxed

Los Lunas
$53,148
$35,971

$50,307
$33,488

$2,841
$2,483
$5,324

Las Vegas
$62,608
$58,260

$50,045
$55,307

$12,563
$2,953
$15,516

$0

$0

$0

191

1.05%

274

0.73%

101

0.99%

117

9.40%

213

4.23%

Solid Waste Supervisor

Youth Coordinator

Public Housing Director

Executive Assistant

Deming

Lovington
$62,171

$55,307

$6,864

Bloomfield
$48,436
$58,513
$72,927
$66,490
$33,797
$66,872
$35,049
$34,412
$92,000
$44,723
$72,219

$40,914
$50,045
$69,035
$61,568
$28,267
$61,568
$33,488
$33,488
$88,525
$40,914
$69,035

$7,522
$8,468
$3,892
$4,922
$5,530
$5,304
$1,561
$924
$3,475
$3,809
$3,184
$48,591

Street Supervisor

AP Procurement Specialist
Payroll Specialist
Network Manager (IT Dir.)
Planning & Zoning Coordinator
WW Laborer
Water Supply Supervisor
Meter Reader
Utility Billing Clerk
PW Director
Patrolman (Non-C)
Lieutenant

Ruidoso
$54,808
$84,261
$89,502
$66,394
$68,058
$53,019
$74,339
$76,066
$84,698

Portales

$50,307
$69,035
$88,525
$61,568
$61,568
$50,045
$69,035
$69,035
$77,917

$4,501
$15,226
$977
$4,826
$6,490
$2,974
$5,304
$7,031
$6,781
$54,110

Solid Waste Supervisor

Wastewater Supervisor
PW Director
Sergeant
Library Director
Assistant Recreation Supervisor
Recreation Supervisor
Municipal Clerk
HR Director

128

7.03%
Page 1 of 2

Exhibit 1
Employee Classifications Currently Earning More Than Salary Maximum
CURRENT SALARY SALARY MAX. VARIANCE
$51,424
$42,000
$52,104
$63,509
$64,880
$64,880
$64,880
$64,880
$69,393

$50,045
$40,914
$45,656
$61,568
$55,307
$55,307
$61,568
$61,568
$69,035

$1,379
$1,086
$6,448
$1,941
$9,573
$9,573
$3,312
$3,312
$358
$36,982

CLASSIFICATION

Total
%
Employees Maxed

EMS Director
Trans. Oper.
Fire Admin. Asst.
Library Admin.
Building Inspector
Code Enf. Supv. (Plan Admin)
Plan & Zoning Coord.
City Planner (Plan Admin)
City Clerk

Silver City

158
$46,258
$49,165
$28,523

$40,914
$45,656
$28,267

$5,344
$3,509
$256
$9,109

1.90%

Museum Specialist
Museum Director
Receptionist

Notes:
1. Excludes Municipal Judges
2. Excludes Airport Manager in Ruidoso. Maxed out by $6,053. Not included in Prevailing Rate,
Min. Salary, etc.

Page 2 of 2

Exhibit 2
Employee Classifications Below Minimum Step
CURRENT
SALARY

SALARY
MINIMUM

VARIANCE

CLASSIFICATION

Fire Admin. Asst.

Los Lunas
$25,334

$26,229

-$895
-$895

Las Vegas
$26,209
$49,296
$32,344
$29,099
$41,537
$75,046
$44,657

$31,782
$50,898
$35,381
$35,381
$44,782
$77,147
$39,686

-$5,573
-$1,602
-$3,037
-$6,282
-$3,245
-$2,101
$4,971
-$16,869

Deming
$19,739

$21,195

-$1,456

Street Maint. Worker

Lovington
$37,710

$39,686

-$1,976
-$1,976

Recreation Supervisor

Bloomfield
$0

Total
Employees
191

%
Adj.

Table 3
Line Item

0.5%
635

274

2.6%

Code Enf. Supv.

Comm. Develop. Dir.
City Planner
Planning & Zoning Coord.
HR Director
City Manager
Airport Manager

284
245
255
265
155
5
695

180

0.6%
735

101

1.0%
315

117
$0

$0

None

Ruidoso

213
$0

Portales
$23,527
Silver City
$34,801
$37,141
$33,895

$0

$26,229

$35,381
$39,686
$35,381

$0

-$2,702

-$580
-$2,545
-$1,486
-$4,611

None

128

0.8%

158

1.9%

Admin. Asst.

Plan & Zoning Coord

Municipal Clerk
Water Supply Supv.

265
165
795

Page 1 of 1

Exhibit 3
Employee Classifications Adjusted for Seniority Step
CURRENT
SALARY

MIN. SALARY
BASED ON SENIORITY

Los Lunas
$34,245
$24,806
$27,087
$25,334
$51,876
$26,391
$40,622
$31,674

$34,823
$26,474
$28,812
$27,498
$53,949
$27,498
$40,634
$32,744

Las Vegas
$26,312
$44,657
$38,812
$24,814
$16,328
$61,859
$19,552
$29,099
$32,344
$49,296
$41,537
$29,453
$75,046

VARIANCE

CLASSIFICATION

Total
Employees
191

-$578
-$1,668
-$1,725
-$2,164
-$2,073
-$1,107
-$12
-$1,070
-$10,397

-$1,171
-$5,674
-$2,930
-$192
-$818
-$5,128
-$169
-$6,282
-$3,037
-$1,602
-$5,411
-$2,919
-$2,101
-$37,434

970
900
740
640
510
440
320
280

4.74%

Park Maint. Worker

Airport Manager
Water Supply Supv.
Records Clerk
Museum Tech.
Fire Chief
Youth coordinator
Planning & Zoning Coord.
City Planner
Comm. Develop. Dir.
HR Director
Payroll Specialist
City Manager

Deming
$33,488
$19,739
$43,527
$31,928

$35,944
$21,702
$43,549
$32,215

-$2,456
-$1,963
-$22
-$287
-$4,728

Packer Operator
Street Maint. Worker
Patrolman (Cert)
Accounts Payable Clerk

Lovington
$41,309
$31,595
$40,997
$37,710

$48,479
$32,215
$48,479
$45,728

-$7,170
-$620
-$7,482
-$8,018
-$23,290

Senior Center Director

Youth Coordinator
Library Director
Recreation Supervisor

Bloomfield
$30,593

$32,222

-$1,629

Fire Admin. Assistant

Table 3
Line Item

4.19%

Packer Operator
Wastewater Op. 1
Street Maint. Worker
Fire Admin. Asst.
Lieutenant
Museum Curator
Recreation Supv.
Admin Assistant

274
$27,483
$50,331
$41,742
$25,006
$17,146
$66,987
$19,721
$35,381
$35,381
$50,898
$46,948
$32,372
$77,147

%
Adj.

750
700
795
550
460
565
340
270
260
250
160
100
10

180

2.22%
970
740
530
90

101

3.96%
990
410
410
320

117

2.56%
Page640
1 of 2

Exhibit 3
Employee Classifications Adjusted for Seniority Step
CURRENT
SALARY

MIN. SALARY
BASED ON SENIORITY

$26,817
$34,413

$28,828
$35,579

-$2,011
-$1,166
-$4,806

Library Assistant
Personnel Specialist

Ruidoso
$35,235

$36,508

-$1,273

Packer Operator

VARIANCE

CLASSIFICATION

Total
Employees

$30,945
$54,355
$36,227
$26,229

-$2,705
-$1,204
-$177
-$2,702
-$6,788

Silver City
$25,658
$42,666
$33,895
$30,110
$43,214
$23,479
$67,600
$36,150
$33,648
$34,801
$37,141
$51,065
$100,000

$25,858
$45,878
$37,092
$31,616
$44,661
$24,422
$71,906
$36,430
$34,116
$37,092
$46,821
$61,359
$102,426

-$200
-$3,212
-$3,197
-$1,506
-$1,447
-$943
-$4,306
-$280
-$468
-$2,291
-$9,680
-$10,294
-$2,426
-$40,250

200

0.47%
970

128

3.13%

Equipment Operator
WWTP Chief
Water Supervisor
Administrative Asst.

970
860
800
40

158
Water Operator II
Water Operator IV
Water Supervisor
Court Administrator
Captain
Records Clerk
Chief of Police
Recreation Coordinator
Code Enforcement Lead
Planner
Town Clerk
Personnel Officer
City Manager

Table 3
Line Item
370

213

Portales
$28,240
$53,151
$36,050
$23,527

%
Adj.

8.23%
830
810
800
660
590
550
470
330
290
270
170
160
10

Page 2 of 2

Exhibit 4: City of Bloomfield Addendum

The following addendum is included as part of the Recap in the Final Report for the City of Bloomfield.
There were several positions that did not have a comparable match as part of the eight city survey. As a
result, we identified comparable knowledge, skills, and abilities for those positions based on the job
descriptions and salary comparable data. In addition, the City identified some minor salary corrections,
and they are included in this addendum.

Corrections:
a. Personnel Analyst: The current salary has been corrected to $48,152 on Table 2 and Table 3.
b. PC Support Specialist: The starting salary has been corrected to $28,981 on Table 2 and Table 3.
c. Fitness Floor Monitor: This was incorrectly placed in the library. As a result, the position has
been removed from the library, and placed in the position of Recreation Specialist in Table 3.
d. Uncertified Police Officer: The starting salary has been corrected to $40,469 in Table 3.
e. Fire Chief: The current salary has been corrected to $91,080 on Table 3.
f. Fire Lieutenant: We are advised that this position does not exist in the department, and had
been removed from Table 3.

New Job Classifications:

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.

Seasonal Cashier: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 30.
Fitness Monitor-Floater: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 50.
Library Clerk: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 35.
MVD Title Clerk: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 50.
MVD Supervisor: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 60.
Police CSO: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 60.
Police Office Manager: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 65.
Fire Office Manager: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 65.
MOC Office Manager: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 65
Journey Mechanic: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 60.
Community Services Director: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 85.
Shop Foreman: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 65.
MOC Superintendent: Based on the job description, this should be in Pay Band 70.

City of Bloomfield, New Mexico

1000 Cordova Place, # 726

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505
www.mercergroupinc.com

Table of Contents
Page
2

A.

Executive Summary and Background Information

B.

Survey Methodology

C.

Survey Findings

D.

Acknowledgements

11

E.

Project Team Members

12

F.

Table 1 Selection of the Comparable Communities

15

G.

Table 2 Survey Data submitted by Participant Cities

16

H.

Table 3 Market Data Analysis

22

I.

Table 4 Fiscal Impact Summary

23

J.

Table 5 New Mexico Salary Schedule

24

K.

Table 6 New Mexico Salary Schedule with Steps

25

L.

Table 7 PERA Contributions by Participant City

26

M.

Table 8 Insurance Contributions by Participant City

27

N.

Table 9 Consumer Price Index, Last 10 Years

28

O.

Table 10 Average Annual Salaries, New Mexico Counties

29

P.

Table 11 Per Capita Income, New Mexico Counties

30
1

Executive Summary
The Mercer Group was retained by eight (8) comparable sized cities in New Mexico for the purpose of conducting a salary and classification survey for their employees. The
Cities agreed to participate in the survey during the same time period as a means to reduce costs, and to see how the salaries and fringe benefits of their employees compare with
the other participant cities.
Each of the participant cities desired an independent assessment by a professional consultant to ensure that the results of the survey were prepared in an objective process. The
Mercer Group prepared a proposal and methodology for review and consideration by each of the comparable cities. Each of the cities approved the methodology, timeline, and to
submit the employee payroll data needed to complete the survey.
After consultation with each of the cities, we found that the current pay and classification plans were seriously outdated, and in some cases, there were no actual plans in place.
The feedback from the Managers and HR Directors was very positive in retaining our services to obtain the data, and develop a new pay and compensation plan.
One of the most important steps in updating a pay and classification plan is to review the current job descriptions to ensure that they reflect the employees most current duties and
responsibilities. Further, it is equally important that the job descriptions be signed by the employee as an acknowledgement of their responsibilities, and also signed by the
employee supervisors. Each of the cities that we surveyed agreed to task their HR Directors with the responsibility of reviewing the job descriptions as part of the survey process.
The Mercer Group agreed to conduct a follow-up review of job descriptions on selected job classifications to determine how the duties and responsibilities compared with those of
the other participant cities. HR Directors were asked to compile a list of job descriptions for review by the Mercer Group. They were:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Department Heads
Division Managers
Administrative Positions
Certified Operators
Public Safety Officials

After reviewing the job descriptions, we found that some cities had up to date descriptions for their employees including the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. For the most part, we found that certain line departments were up to date, but others were not. The Mercer Group solicited a proposal
from a professional consulting group called HR Ganics to review and update job descriptions for the participant cities. A copy of the proposal was sent to each of the participant
cities to consider.
2

Each of the City Managers/Administrators agreed that a pay and position classification plan needed to be reviewed periodically to provide their employees with equitable and
competitive compensation. They also recognized that an updated plan was essential for the City to attract and to retain a professional workforce. The absence of an equitable
program could result in the loss of trained employees to other cities, and in the recruitment of quality employees. Most of the Managers were concerned that they were losing
trained employees. Unfortunately, the majority of employee losses are to much larger cities or private employers.
Some of the cities have a collective bargaining agreement, so it is important for the plan to be internally and externally equitable. As a result, the plan was developed to allow the
Governing Body in each city with several options based on their own budgetary constraints. For example, the Governing Body may have the option to consider:
1. Adjusting salaries to the minimum step in the new job classification.
2. Adjusting salaries to the prevailing market rate based on seniority in current job classification, or
3. Phasing in the pay plan over a period of time.
The lack of a current plan can result in varying pay rates for similar positions thus affecting the morale of each of the departments within the city. Comparable pay for comparable
positions is an important management tool that helps in motivating employees and in improving overall performance within the department.
A review of the current position classifications shows the need to reevaluate the classifications relative to the eight comparable cities and to each other within the respective
departments so that each position is placed in the correct pay range structure. Most important, that the positions value is compared to the relative value in the labor market.
In order for the City to compare its internal equity of each department with that of all other employees within the City, the State of New Mexico Personnel Board Pay Range
Structure that was approved in July 2014 was utilized in this study. This salary schedule was developed after extensive study and adopted for use by employees of the State. By
utilizing the same salary schedule for cities in New Mexico, we add a layer of uniformity in preparing the new pay plan. The use of this structure will be limited to the use of the
salary ranges for uniformity within City government. The actual pay range assignments will be based on the data obtained from the comparable cities and the calculation of an
external midpoint for each position.

PAY PLAN SURVEY METHODOLOGY

The Mercer Group utilized the following methodology and process to obtain the most current information available from the cities that were designated as comparable cities. The
following phases were utilized in the preparation of a new pay and classification report:

Phase I. Initial Scoping Phase

During the initial scoping phase, the Mercer Group met with the City Manager/Administrator and the HR Director to obtain the current job classifications, job descriptions, current
salary schedules, the dates of hire for each employee in the department, the organizational chart, and current titles of all employees assigned to the department.
3

As part of the proposal for this study, the Mercer Group selected the eight comparable sized cities based on demographics provided by the US Census Bureau, the Local
Government Division, and the New Mexico Municipal League. The Mercer Group utilized the pay and classification data and reports from those cities to come up with the market
data that was used in the preparation of this report. These comparable communities are the basis used by the Mercer Group to determine market conditions, job classifications, and
salary ranges. All of the information obtained during this initial phase was reviewed and analyzed by the contractor to establish a baseline for the remaining phases of this project.

Phase II. Fact Finding Phase

During the fact-finding phase, the Mercer Group contacted eight (8) comparable cities in New Mexico that met the demographic comparison due to similar size, population,
budget, and similar operations of their respective departments. For the purpose of this study, we will refer to these cities as comparable communities.
The Mercer Group contacted each of these communities to obtain the current pay scales utilized by those cities, the current job descriptions, and other factors that could be utilized
in determining market conditions. The following cities were contacted during this phase:
1. Village of Los Lunas
2. City of Las Vegas
3. City of Deming
4. City of Lovington
5. City of Bloomfield
6. Village of Ruidoso
7. Town of Silver City
8. City of Portales
Recognizing that not all of the cities contacted in the preparation of this report would be responsive in the submission of position classification and pay plan information, we set a
goal of obtaining data from at least 90% of the comparable communities. Previous experience in obtaining information from some communities has shown that some are reluctant
to submit such information. However, we were successful in obtaining the pay and classification data from all eight of these cities. The City of Artesia and the City of Espanola
also met the comparable demographics for this study; by they chose not to participate.

Phase III. Market Data Analysis

During this phase, the Mercer Group analyzed all of the data obtained from the comparable communities and created a series of tables to review the data. The tables are included
as part of this report. As mentioned earlier, the goal was to achieve internal equity by comparing the value of each job classification relative to all others within the respective
departments of the city. Our second goal was to place each position into the appropriate pay range structure based on the positions relative value in the labor market. The labor
market will be defined in this study as the results from each of the communities. The Mercer Group conducted an analysis of pay data that best reflected the classifications within
the city and within the comparable labor market. This pay data also serves as the basis to determine the citys competitiveness in recruiting and retaining employees.
4

Each city currently recruits externally and internally for most vacant positions. Some positions are advertised internally, and for the most part are filled through promotion by
selecting the most qualified candidates from within a department. The internal promotion process for all positions beyond the entry level position have a very positive impact on
morale within departments, and provides a mechanism for a career ladder for employees. On the other hand, external recruitment has also provided new knowledge, skills, and
abilities for upper level positions.

Phase IV. Pay Structure

The Cities currently hire new employees with limited or no experience in the starting step of their classification plan. More experienced applicants may be appointed at a higher
step at the discretion of the department and the City Manager/Administrator. The Mercer Group compared the current salaries of the comparable communities to establish the
prevailing market rates. The prevailing market rate is the average of the current salaries for each job classification. The prevailing market rate is then compared to the mid-point in
the State salary schedule. The mid-point salary that is closest to the prevailing rate is defined as the calculated midpoint on the pay band scale. One the midpoint is established,
the minimum salary and the maximum salary is defined for that classification.
A new employee is required to successfully complete a probationary period before becoming eligible for an increase in pay, or for retention in the classified service.
successfully complete probation, the employee must complete the required responsibilities of their position and demonstrate initiative to meet the job description parameters.

To

This practice is utilized by most cities in the state, and is documented in their personnel policies and procedures. This practice also ensures that employees who do not meet the job
description standards can be removed from the classified service during the probationary period. The end result is the retention of the best qualified employees within the city.
Some positions within the city require a professional certification as a condition of employment. Some flexibility is provided in certain cases to allow the employee to achieve that
certification within a period of time as a condition of retaining their position. For example, a police officer must obtain certification from the New Mexico Police Academy within
the first twelve months of employment.
Other positions require that an employee through a continuing education program, complete additional training and certification. This certification is required before advancing to
another pay grade within the department. The certification must be maintained to keep that pay grade. For example, a Wastewater Certification in levels I through IV require
continuing education and training to retain the certification, or to advance to a higher level.

Phase V. Pay Range Assignments

The Mercer Group reviewed each of the current job classifications including the starting, mid-point, and maximum salaries. That data was compared with the similar job
classifications in each of the eight cities as part of the survey. We then calculated the mid-point of the eight cities using the mean of the prevailing market rates of current salaries
that are being paid for each classification.
We also reviewed the Personnel Services Schedule that is submitted by each of the comparable cities as part of their annual operating budget. A review of those schedules
provided us with the data to verify the current salaries paid to individual employees. The use of current salaries provides us with the data to calculate the current market prevailing
rates for each classification.
As mentioned earlier, we used the 2014 Salary Range Structure that was approved by the State Personnel Board this past July. This structure simply defines the salary ranges, and
establishes the minimum, midpoint, and maximum salaries for each range. The use of the permanent pay structure allows us to use the same pay scale to compare the prevailing
rates. This data also allows us to establish a comparable range structure for each of the eight cities.
As a result of the study conducted by the Mercer Group, and the data provided by each of the cities, we defined the prevailing market rate, and then calculated the midpoint for
each position. Employee job classifications were then placed in the appropriate salary range based on the calculated midpoint and using the pay band structure adopted by the
State. The results of this analysis are reflected in the attached tables.

Phase VI. Implementation and Fiscal Impact

The Mercer Group prepared an analysis of the citys competitive position based on a comparison of the current pay range midpoint to the results of the survey midpoint. The
midpoint is the most objective, occupation specific and consistent component of salary structures among employers. In this case, we made changes to the salary pay ranges when
the prevailing rates were higher or lower in each classification.
We recommend that the City review its current policy in regard to the adoption of a pay and classification plan. The policy should reflect that the City adopts a pay scale that is
based on one of the options depicted in this report of prevailing rates paid for similar occupations within the labor market. This study provides the City with both pay scales, and
the fiscal impact of the adoption of either pay scale. We also recognize that this policy will need to be based on the ability of the City to pay based on the prevailing market rates
of the designated comparable communities.
The Mercer Group determined the fiscal impact of the new pay plan by comparing the cost of the recommended pay range assignments to the amount currently budgeted in the
2014-15 fiscal year budget. At a minimum, the City should have an established a goal of upgrading all current employees to the minimum step of their range in the classification
plan. The fiscal impact of that goal is described in this report.
6

The second goal is to identify the correct step in the pay range for each employee based on the number of years of service in their respective classification. In the event that an
employee has reached the maximum salary for their pay range, those employees will be identified as part of this report. This analysis will also show if an employee is in the
correct pay step based on current prevailing market rates. The fiscal impact of upgrading those employees to the correct pay step is also described in this report.
The results of both of these goals are being submitted to the City Manager and ultimately to the City Council for their consideration. The action taken by the City Council will be
based on the ability of the City to pay the prevailing market rates. It may be necessary to implement the new pay plan in phases over time with a goal of achieving pay equity
within a reasonable time period.

Survey Findings
Classified Salary Structure
The State of New Mexico Personnel Board uses the Hay Group Guide Chart-Profile Method of Job evaluation to determine job classification. Each pay band for classified
employees is currently at a seventy-eight percent (74%) wide meaning the maximum rate of pay is seventy-four percent greater than the minimum rate of pay. While this band
width is greater than typically found, it minimizes the impact of market increases upon hiring rates. Pay bands act as a control device identifying the lower and upper range of pay
rates the State is willing to pay for a particular job.
The classified salary structure consists of 19 pay bands. According to the State Personnel Board report, each pay band ranges from seventy-two (72%) compa-ratio to one hundred
twenty-eight percent (128%) compa-ratio with the midpoint value of each pay representing one hundredth percent compa-ratio. Compa-ratio is defined as a percentage of the pay
band midpoint. The range progression between midpoint values is approximately eleven and eight-tenths percent (11.8%). This means that a bay bands midpoint is
approximately eleven and eight-tenths percent higher than the lower pay band. This can be seen in Table 5.
This classified salary structure was approved by the State Personnel Board on November 22, 2013, and effective on July 1, 2014. For purpose of uniformity, the approved salary
structure was used in the preparation of this report.

Salary Structure Adjustment based on Seniority

After consultation with each of the eight comparable sized municipalities that participated in this survey, it was apparent that the salary structure needed to take into account some
credit for those employees who had served in their current job classification for a period of time. Recognizing that the midpoint in the salary structure reflects the prevailing
market rate for each job classification, any credit adjustments would be made only up to their respective midpoint salary. Based on our research, we decided to use the data from
7

the US Consumer Price Index for the past ten (10) years. This data was obtained from the University of New Mexico Bureau of Business and Economic Research. The data can
be seen in Table 9.
The credit adjustment was calculated by averaging the percent change for each of the past ten years, resulting in a mean of 2.39%. The mean was then applied as the difference in
each of the steps between the starting salary for a job classification and the midpoint salary. Senior employees were given credit equivalent to a step increase for each year that
they served in their current job classification not to exceed the midpoint salary. The amount for each of the step increases is shown on Table 6.

Fiscal Impact Summary

The fiscal impact summary shown on Table 3 reflects only the benchmark job classifications for which there was a comparable classification in the other participating
communities. This determination was made after review of the current job descriptions that were provided to the Mercer Group. It should be noted that the Mercer Group did not
review all of the job descriptions in all of the eight participating municipalities. Such a review was beyond the scope of this report. It should also be noted that those job
classifications that did not have a corresponding match in job classification in other cities were not included in the fiscal impact analysis. The reason is obvious in that a prevailing
market range cannot be established where there are few or none matching classifications. In order to determine which of these job classifications did not have a corresponding
match, we recommend that each city compare the classifications they submitted in Table 2, with those on Table 3.
Table 3 does show the estimated fiscal impact of adjusting the current job classification salaries to the correct step within the new pay bands (ranges). The fiscal impact to each of
the eight participating cities was determined by calculating the variance from the seniority step. The seniority step is defined as the step within the new pay range based on the
credit for years of service within an employees current job classification. The fiscal impact varies from city to city, however it appears that the impact will not be significant if the
plan is adopted by each participating city.
There were several job classifications in which multiple employees held the same classification. In order to determine the fiscal impact in those job classifications, we selected the
incumbent within the classification that had the greatest seniority. With few exceptions, the most senior employee within a job classification earned the highest rate of pay. As a
result, the fiscal impact data entered in a job classification for which there were multiple employees with the same classification reflects the most senior employee.
The assumption was made that if there was no fiscal impact to the city based on the highest paid employee within a job classification, there would be no fiscal impact to those
employees who earned a lower salary. We tested this hypothesis on several job classifications, and found this to be true.
We recommend that each participating city perform their own internal analysis using the current number of years in a job classification, and granting the credit adjustment
previously mentioned in this report. Only by performing such an internal fiscal analysis, can the city determine its total fiscal impact in the event they decide to adopt this new
pay plan.
8

Employees earning less than the minimum salary

Whenever a new pay plan is considered by any municipality, the first consideration is to identify the number of employees who currently earn less than the minimum salary of the
new pay plan. Based on our analysis, we found that only sixteen (16) employees were currently paid less than the minimum step within the range of their new pay plan. This data
is shown on Table 4.
The cost to adjust those employee salaries to the minimum step in their new job classification was minimal, and the amounts are shown separately for each of the eight
participating cities.

Employees earning more than the maximum salary

Due to the expanded salary structure shown on Table 5, the maximum salary an employee can receive was extended significantly. As a result, the number of employees who are
maxed out in their job classification was reduced significantly. Table 4 shows the number of employees who are maxed out. Because the number of maxed out employees were
significantly reduced with this pay plan, it should be viewed as a positive step for long term employees.
Based upon our analysis, the number of employees who are currently receiving a salary above the maximum step in their new job classification is shown on Table 4. We also
prepared Exhibits 1-3 to identify those job classifications that are less than minimum salary, more than maximum salary, and those that need to be adjusted based on seniority.
These exhibits are attached to the Final Report letter that accompanies this report.

Cities whose minimum starting salary is greater than the survey

During the course of our survey, we also found a few cities that have a policy regarding the minimum starting salary. In some cases the minimum starting salary in those cities was
higher than the minimum salary shown in this report. We recommend that those cities whose minimum starting salary is greater than the minimum salary shown in this report not
change the policy, but allow it remain in effect if this plan is adopted. That policy would simply supercede the starting salary in this report.

New Mexico Salary Trends

According to the data provided by the New Mexico State Personnel Board, the average classified employee salary was $41,912 as of July 2013 as compared to an average New
Mexico private industry salary of thirty-six thousand six hundred twenty-four dollars ($36,624). Nationally, as of the same time period, the average salary for private employers
was $42,577.

The US Department of Commerce released the Annual Average Wages for New Mexico Counties in 2012. This report also shows that the average classified employee salary in
New Mexico is approximately 12.6% higher than the civilian employee average salary in the state. Table 10 of this report shows that the average annual wages for the counties
that include the participating cities are as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

San Miguel County

Roosevelt County
Grant County
Lea County
Valencia County
Luna County
Lincoln County
San Juan County

City of Las Vegas

City of Portales
Town of Silver City
City of Lovington
Village of Los Lunas
City of Deming
Village of Ruidoso
City of Bloomfield

$30,121
$31,436
$35,645
$47,455
$30,977
$33,544
$29,249
$44,066

Based on this data, one can clearly see that the annual wages for New Mexico cities and counties are lower than the State and National average. The exceptions are Lea County
and San Juan County. Both counties are industry leaders in oil and gas production, and as a result have higher wages predominantly in the civilian work force.
Finally, Table 11 shows the per capita personal income in each of the counties in New Mexico. The per capita income data in this table also shows why the average annual wages
in each county are so low. In addition, Table 7 and Table 8 of this report show the PERA and insurance contributions for each of the participating cities
The Mercer Group agreed to provide the City with a copy of the final Pay and Classification Report upon completion of this project. Additional copies can be made by the City as
necessary to ensure that employees, management, and the governing body have a copy for their files. An electronic file copy will also be provided to the City so that they can
create multiple copies as they deem necessary. The timeline proposed by the contractor to complete this project was thirteen weeks from the date Notice to Proceed was issued by
the City Manager.

Acknowledgements:
The Mercer Group would like to acknowledge the support it received from the following individuals who helped us obtain the information necessary in the preparation of this
report:
Elmer J. Martinez, City Manager
City of Las Vegas

Leette Kugler, HR Manager

City of Las Vegas
10

Aaron Sera, City Administrator

City of Deming

Vicki Engle, HR Manager

City of Deming

James Williams, City Manager

City of Lovington

Carol Ann Hogue, City Clerk

City of Lovington

Debi Lee, Village Manager

Village of Ruidoso

Tania Proctor, HR Director

Village of Ruidoso

Gregory Martin, Village Administrator

Village of Los Lunas

Christine Nardi, HR Manager

Village of Los Lunas

Alex C. Brown, Town Manager

Town of Silver City

Celia Dominguez, Personnel Manager

Town of Silver City

David Fuqua, City Manager

City of Bloomfield

Donna Clifton, HR Director

City of Bloomfield

Doug Redmond, City Manager

City of Portales

Shelly Johnson, HR Director

City of Portales

Study Project Team Members

The Mercer Group, Inc. provides exceptionally high quality management consulting services to state and local governments, transit authorities, health care providers, utilities,
special districts, and private sector clients. Specialty practice areas include: salary and classification surveys, executive recruitment, organization and operations analysis, strategic
planning, organizational climate surveys, and general management consulting.
Our key consultants have provided professional services for hundreds of public sector organizations nationally and can offer numerous references as testimony of our work. This
important engagement will be conducted under the direction of Mr. James L. Mercer, President of the Mercer Group. Listed below are the qualifications of the project team:
11

1.

James L. Mercer, President - Atlanta and Santa Fe Offices

Mr. Mercer holds a Master of Business Administration degree from the University of Nevada, Reno, and a Bachelor of Science degree in Industrial Management from the same
institution. He has also received a Certificate in Municipal Administration from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and is a graduate of the Executive Development
Program at Cornell University. Mr. Mercer is a Certified Management Consultant (CMC) and has more than 30 years of experience in executive search and management
consulting. He has authored or co-authored six books and has written more than 250 articles on various management topics. His experience covers the following functional areas:
executive search, organization and operations analysis, management systems, productivity improvement, seminars/training, goal setting, strategic planning, privatization, government, and general consulting.

2.

Gustavo Gus Cordova, Senior Vice President Santa Fe

Mr. Cordova holds a Master of Science degree and a Bachelor of Science degree from New Mexico Highlands University.

He also holds a graduate diploma from the U.S. Army

Command and General Staff College in Fort Leavenworth Kansas. Mr. Cordova is a Credentialed Manager (ICMA-CM) with the International City/County Management Association, and
has over 25 years of experience in local government management in New Mexico. Mr. Cordova served as the Regional Vice President of ICMA, and as a member of the Committee on
Professional Conduct. He has served as City Manager in Taos and in Espanola; and as the Executive Director of the New Mexico Association of Counties. He holds the rank of Colonel
with the U.S. Army Reserve, and is a veteran of over 27 years of military service. Amongst his many distinguished recognitions, he is the recipient of the Profile in Courage Award and
the New Mexico Distinguished Public Service Award. His experience includes over seven years of executive recruitment for City and County Managers and other key local government
officials through the Mercer Group. He also specializes in strategic planning and priority setting for elected officials, planning and development of municipal budgets, preparation of pay
and classification plans, organizational assessment surveys, and general consulting for local governments.

3.

Vivian V. Santistevan, Taos HR Ganics, Taos

Ms. Santistevan holds a Master of Arts degree in Human Resource Management from New Mexico Highlands University. She is also a graduate of the Human Resource Management
School at Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana, and a graduate of the Senior Officer Staff College in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. She is the current owner and President of Taos HR Ganics which
provides professional services to small business, local governments, and non-profit agencies in employment law, human resource solutions, best practices, organizational development, and

12

business performance improvement.

She has previously served as the Director of Human Resources and Training Manager in the public, tribal, and private sectors. She has over 20 years

experience with documented success in the areas of human resources management, strategic planning, recruiting, executive coaching, training, and organizational development.

4.

Diane R. Cordova, Independent Consultant, Santa Fe

Ms. Cordova holds a Masters in Business Administration (MBA), and a BBA in Management from New Mexico Highlands University.

She is the previous co-owner of CRJ and

Company, a management and Human Relations professional business services company located in Santa Fe. She is also a former Director of Human Services and Executive Management member
for First Choice Healthcare in Albuquerque. Prior to that, she was the Executive Management member and Striving Towards Improvement Coordinator for Northeastern Regional Hospital in Los
Lunas.

Her expertise is in Human Relations policy development, career development, professional development training, quality improvement, self-directed work team training, and

development of personnel job descriptions and pay plans.

13

TABLE 1
SALARY AND CLASSIFICATION SURVEY - COMPARABLE CITIES

City

US Census
2012 Estimate
Population

Artesia

11,301

110,000

13,911

29,529

16,646,121

200

Belen

7,289

116,391

12,990

26,754

5,201,643

75

Bloomfield

8,112

140,200

14,424

32,905

8,462,417

5,006,560

117

Deming

14,793

93,300

10,943

20,081

10,799,049

6,305,610

180

Espanola

10,240

128,900

14,383

27,142

9,921,965

181

9,182

83,925

14,053

30,652

6,910,170

92

Las Vegas

13,529

105,900

12,619

24,214

11,350,322

9,312,024

274

Los Lunas

14,933

148,900

14,692

36,240

14,879,561

7,048,378

191

Lovington

11,275

81,100

12,752

26,458

9,933,078

5,857,248

101

Portales

12,280

95,100

12,935

24,658

8,624,400

4,681,686

128

Ruidoso

8,029

223,600

22,721

37,107

13,047,611

9,373,126

213

Socorro

9,052

107,979

13,250

22,530

6,057,072

Silver City

10,273

125,400

13,813

25,881

8,808,079

Sunland Park

14,106

78,502

10,757

25,990

4,916,993

Grants

Median
Value
Housing

Per
Capita
Income

Median
Household
Income

LGD/DFA 2014 Approved Budget

General Fund
Salaries
Budget
Budget

Number of
Employees

> 100
Emp

Comparable Criteria
< 275 > 8000
< 15000
Emp
Pop
Pop

> $8M
GF Bud

< $17M
GR Bud

140
5,865,699

158
88

TABLE 2 - PAY AND CLASSIFICATION SURVEY RESPONSE WORKSHEETS

CITY OF BLOOMFIELD
Dept.
Name

Employee
Last Name

# Years of
Service

# Years in
Position

Administration

David Fuqua

4.2

4.2

Administration
Administration
Administration

Bradley Ellsworth
Betsy Campbell
Evelyn Archuleta

4.1
11.2
34

4.1
8.2
17.2

Administration

Donna Clifton

2.6

2.6

Administration

Angela Romo

9.11

9.11

Administration
Administration

Jamie Thomas
Erikka Martinez

3.11
2.5

2.3
2.5

Administration/ IT
Administration/ IT

David Bell
Jerri Carle

1.5

1.5

Administration
Administration

Teresa Brevik
Sharpe-Baird

3.1
2.4

1.3
2.4

AQUATIC
AQUATIC
AQUATIC
AQUATIC
AQUATIC

Stephen Gromack
Erin Eagle
Haley Hensley
Martin Hickman
Shinea Woody

8.11
3.9
2.5
1.5
2.0

8.11
2.6
2.5
1.5
2.0

Benchmark Job
Current Comparable
Starting
Classification
Job Classification
Annual Salary
MANAGER'S OFFICE
City Manager
58,100.62
FINANCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES
Finance Director
Finance Director (+ 1.2 Asst FD)
55,076.74
Accounts Payable Clerk
A/P Procurement Specialist
35,876.26
Payroll Specialist
Payroll Specialist/Assistant Finance
28,981.06
HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICES
Human Resources Director
Personnel Analyst/Compliance Manager
39,949.73
Personnel Specialist
* See Personnel Analyst
Administrative Assistant
HR Administrative Assistant
30,593.47
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Municipal Clerk
City Clerk
55,212.58
Administrative Assistant
City Hall Admin Assistant
30,593.47
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
Network Systems Manager
IT Director
49,475.71
Computer Operations Specialist
PC Support Speicalist (Part-time)
26,032.03
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Director, Community Develop.
Special Projects Director
52,212.58
Planning & Zoning Coordinator
P&Z and GIS Director
49,475.71
RECREATION SERVICES
Recreation Director
Aquatic Director
39,949.73
Recreation Coordinator
Aquatic Center Coordinator
35,876.26
Lifeguard
17,863.87
Head Lifeguard
23,380.03
Aquatic Cashier/ Seasonal
16,951.58

1 of 5 Pages

Current
Annual Salary

Maximum
Annual Salary

120,000.00

80,451.07

77,268.67
48,436.13
58,513.73

76,271.52
49,666.66
40,119.46

49,115.04
48,152.00
34,412.35

55,310.11

55,394.98
36,512.74

72,282.91
42,325.92

72,927.56
28,981.06

68,506.46
36,045.98

62,375.04
66,490.94

72,282.91
68,506.46

56,943.74
35,876.26
19,561.15
23,380.03
16,951.58

55,310.11
49,666.66
24,759.07
32,354.40
23,464.90

42,325.92

TABLE 2 - PAY AND CLASSIFICATION SURVEY RESPONSE WORKSHEETS

CITY OF BLOOMFIELD
Dept.
Name

Employee
Last Name

# Years of
Service

Community Services Norman Tucker

20.3
Community Service Peggy Loyd
1.9
Community Service Consuelo Gonzales
3.5
Community Service Kathryn McAlexancer 3.3
Community Service Linda Greider
1.5
Community Service Michael Frost
11.2
Community Service Jenette Montoya
10
Community Service Peggy Gunnink
8.3
Community Service Paula Baca
20.5
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department
Police Department

Randy Foster
2 months
Taylor Carrillo
6 months
Cynthia Atencio
19
Carroll Scott
15.1
Randon Matthews
7.5
T.J. Brown
8.6
Robert C Barker
8
Joshua Calder
3.5
Darren Brown
1.10
Brian McCarty
5.8
Caleb Coates
1.5
Carlos Loomis
1.2
Kenneth Adair
6.3
Andrew Darby
9.3
Justen Darby
9.3
Jeremiah Whitaker
9.10
Robert Rothlisberger 4.5
Jonathan Thornton
9.5
Greg Clark
4
Jose Santistevan
4
Teena McKinney
3.3

# Years in
Position
10.3
1.9
3.5
3.3
1.5
11.2
10
8.3
20.5
0.2
0.6
9.0
6.0
0.1
2.3
2.5
0.1
0.1
4.8
1.5
1.2
1.9
3.10
3.10
5
4.5
9.3
2
3.3

Benchmark Job
Classification
CULTURAL SERVICES
Community Services Director
Library Manager
Library Assistant
Library Clerk

Current Comparable
Job Classification

Librarian

Part-time Floor Monitor for Gym

Part-time Floor Monitor
"
Part-time Floor Monitor
"
Part-time Floor Monitor
"
Part-time Floor Monitor
"
POLICE - PUBLIC SAFETY
Chief of Police
Administrative Assistant I
Administrative Assistant II
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Sergeant
Sergeant
Sergeant
Sergeant
Sergeant
Police Investigator
Police Investigator
Police Officer/Patrolman
Police Officer/Patrolman
Police Officer/Patrolman
Police Officer/Patrolman
Police Officer/ Patrolman
Police Officer/Recruit
Animal Shelter Manager
Animal Caregiver
Police Records Supervisor

Chief of Police/ MVD

Administrative Assistant
Office Manager
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Sergeant
Sergeant
Sergeant
Sergeant
Sergeant
PD Detective
PD Detective
School Resource Officer
School Resource Officer
Certified Police Officer
PD Detective

Community Services Officer/Codes

Community Services Officer/Codes
Evidence Technician/ Records
2 of 5 Pages

Starting
Annual Salary

Current
Annual Salary

Maximum
Annual Salary

52,12.58
49,475.71
26,032.03
22,170.72
23,380.03
23,380.03
23,380.03
23,380.03
23,380.03

62,375.04
54,079.58
26,817.02
22,170.72
23,380.03
27,114.05
26,329.06
24,801.50
28,747.68

72,282.91
68,506.46
36,045.98
30,678.34
32,354.40
32,354.40
32,354.40
32,354.40
32,354.40

59,829.12
30,593.47
34,009.25
55,331.33
55,331.33
54,270.53
54,270.53
54,270.53
54,270.53
54,270.53
44,723.33
46,929.79
46,929.79
46,929.79
44,723.33
44,723.33
44,723.33
44,723.33
34,009.25
34,009.25
30,593.47

91,188.76
30,593.47
41,859.17

82,848.48
42,325.92
47,099.52
81,257.28
81,257.28
75,109.38
75,109.38
75,109.38
75,109.38
75,109.38
61,887.07
64,942.18
64,942.18
64,942.18
61,887.07
61,887.07
61,887.07
61,887.07
47,099.52
47,099.52
42,325.92

72,219.26

66,087.84
57,580.22
59,298.72
55,882.94
59,298.72
55,882.94
51,809.47
61,229.38
56,031.46
54,376.61
47,460.19
46,081.15
46,081.15
46,081.15
36,088.42
40,607.42
32,418.05

TABLE 2 - PAY AND CLASSIFICATION SURVEY RESPONSE WORKSHEETS

CITY OF BLOOMFIELD
Dept.
Name
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
FIRE
COURT
COURT

Employee
Last Name

# Years of
Service

# Years in
Position

George Duncan
John Mohler
Edward Bo Rice
Travis Olbert
Joshua Mack
Kilian Carey
Andrew Placencio
Ryan Varnell
Clandy Bounds
Mario Salazar
Austin Johnson
Ian Rutter
Becky Bowden
Ayme Vigil

41.11
12.1
9.7
6.6
5 months
1.4
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
7.7
24.1

41.11
1.3
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
5 months
6.7
9.0

Gabriela Crane
Michelle Trujillo

4
12.4

2.2
4

Benchmark Job
Classification
FIRE - PUBLIC SAFETY
Fire Chief
Assistant Fire Chief
Fire Shift Commander
Fire Shift Commander
Fire Lieutenant
Fire Engineer/EMT
Fire Engineer/EMT
Firefighter
Firefighter
Firefighter
Fire Fighter
Fire Fighter
Administrative Assistant

Current Comparable
Job Classification

Current
Annual Salary

Maximum
Annual Salary

Office Manager

55,076.74
54,732.87
46,929.79
46,929.79
46,929.79
39,949.73
39,949.73
35,876.26
35,876.26
35,876.26
35,876.26
35,876.26
30,593.47
34,009.25

91,080.29
73,556.40
51,279.07
46,929.79
46,929.79
39,949.73
39,949.73
35,876.26
35,876.26
35,876.26
35,876.26
35,876.26
30,593.47
46,547.90

85,818.72
75,763.09
64,920.96
64,920.96
64,920.96
55,288.90
55,288.90
49,624.44
49,624.44
49,624.44
49,624.44
49,624.44
42,325.92
47,099.52

Court Deputy Clerk

Court Administrator

27,474.72
35,876.26

27,474.72
38,061.50

38,040.29
49,666.66

Shift Fire Captain

Shift Fire Captain
Shift Fire Captain
Fire Engineer
Fire Engineer

JUDICIAL - MUNICIPAL COURT

Municipal Court Clerk
Court Clerk Administrator

Starting
Annual Salary

3 of 5 Pages

TABLE 2 - PAY AND CLASSIFICATION SURVEY RESPONSE WORKSHEETS

CITY OF BLOOMFIELD
Dept.
Name
Administration
MOC
MOC/ PW
Parks & Recreation
Parks & Recreation
MOC
MOC
MOC
MOC
MOC
Parks
Parks
Parks
Parks
Parks
MOC
MOC
MOC
MOC
MOC
MOC
MOC
MOC

Employee
Last Name

# Years of
Service

# Years in
Position

Chris Darnell
Starts 10/23/2014
Adrian Garica
1.5
4.9
Kim Duncan
9.0
34.9
Melinda Gomez
3.3
4.11
Monica Seitzinger
3.3
7.7
George Gurule
4.3
7.8
Troy Hethcox
4.3
10.5
Sammy Duran
3.0
3.0
Daniel Mickas
1.4
6.9
Rod Hosteen
1.3
1.3
Shirley Archuleta
6.4
6.4
Freddie Garcia
7.7
7.7
Ferlin Willie
6.2
6.2
Brandon Callado
3.5
3.5
Christopher Yazzie
3.6
3.6
Harley James
2.2
2.2
Buddy Sanchez
21
34
Duane Cardenas
2 months
2 months
Watson Bradley
2.11
2.11
Justin Hawkins
3.0
3.0
Brian Mestas
1.3
1.3
Troy Rightmire
2 months 2 months
Tyler Wade
2.3
2.3

Benchmark Job
Classification
PUBLIC WORKS AND FACILITIES
Public Works Director
Public Works Manager
Parks Supervisor
Parks Supervisor

Street Division Manager

Equipment Service Worker
Maintenance Worker - Parks

Current Comparable
Job Classification
Public Work Director/ City Engineer
MOC Superintendent
MOC & P/W Office Manager
Parks Co- Superintendent/Admin Asst
Parks Co- Superintendent/Foreman
Crew Leader
Crew Leader
Crew Leader
Shop Foreman
Mechanic
Custodian
Parks Worker I / maint. & pool tech
Parks Worker I
Parks Worker I
Parks Worker I
Public Works Operator I
Public Works Operator I
Public Works Operator I
Public Works Operator I
Public Works Operator I
Public Works Operator I
Public Works Operator I
Public Works Operator I

4 of 5 Pages

Starting
Annual Salary
58,110.62
49,475.71
34,009.25
39,949.73
39,949.73
35,876.26
35,876.26
35,876.26
37,870.56
35,876.26
21,025.06
30,593.47
28,981.06
28,981.06
28,981.06
30,593.47
30,593.47
30,593.47
30,593.47
30,593.47
28,981.06
30,593.47
30,593.47

Current
Annual Salary
92,000.00
74,871.26
48,505.60
46,293.31
46,293.31
41,583.36
36,937.06
42,835.10
47,969.38
38,804.06
27,411.07
32,418.05
28,981.06
28,981.06
28,981.06
36,512.74
41,074.18
34,412.35
34,412.35
33,393.98
38,931.36
34,412.35
35,451.94

Maximum
Annual Salary
80,451.07
68,506.46
47,099.52
56,943.74
56,943.74
49,666.66
49,666.66
49,666.66
52,403.52
49,666.66
29,108.35
42,325.92
40,119.46
40,119.46
40,119.46
42,325.92
42,325.92
42,325.92
42,325.92
42,325.92
40,119.46
42,325.92
42,325.92

TABLE 2 - PAY AND CLASSIFICATION SURVEY RESPONSE WORKSHEETS

CITY OF BLOOMFIELD
Dept.
Name
Finance/ Utilities
Finance/ Utilities
Finance/ MVD
Finance/ MVD
Finance/ MVD
Finance/ MVD
Finance/ MVD
Finance/ MVD
Utilities
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Wastewater
Wastewater
Wastewater
Wastewater
Community Srv.
Community Srv.
Cultural Srv.

Employee
Last Name

Benchmark Job
Current Comparable
Classification
Job Classification
UTILITY BILLING - CUSTOMER SERVICE
Glenda Dugger
4.5
Customer Service Lead
Lead Customer Service Rep
4.5
Marjorie Smith
9.1
Customer Svc Representative I
Customer Svc Representative
11.2
Angie Vigil
25
MVD Supervisor
32.1
Angie Atencio
8.5
MVD Title Clerk
8.5
Riva Lehi
6 weeks
MVD Title Clerk
6 weeks
Lucille Begaye
14
MVD Title Clerk
14
Freda Bennett
1 month
MVD Title Clerk (Part-Time)
1 month
Yvonne John
1 month
MVD Title Clerk
1 month
Leroy Gonzales
2.7
Meter Reader I
Meter Reader Tech/ PW OP I
2.7
UTILITY OPERATIONS - WATER SUPPLY
Rubin Armenta
1.1
Water Distribution Superintendent Water Superintendent
33.5
Jose Serna
5.3
Water Supply Operator III
Senior Operator
5.3
Joe Hubbard
2.7
Water Supply Operator III
Senior Operator
2.7
Tony Gonzales
26
Water Supply Operator III
Senior Operator
30.2
Lucky Gonzales
1.1
Water Supply Operator III
Senior Operator
5.1
UTILITY OPERATIONS - WASTEWATER
Dave Sonnenberg
1.10
Wastewater Superintendent
Wastewater Superintendent
12.4
Alan Watts
Wastewater Operator II
WW Operator II
starting 10/27/14
David Kaulkarni starting 10/27/14
Wastewater Operator I
WW Operator I
Roxie Shreeves
1 month Laborer
Wastewater Trainee
1 month
SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER
Norman Tucker
9.3
Senior Center Director
Community Srv. Director
20.3
Senior Center Director
Jessica Polatty
11
11
Preston Haskie
5 months Senior Center Driver
Senior Center Driver/ Custodian
5 months
# Years of
Service

# Years in
Position

TOTALS

5 of 5 Pages

Starting
Annual Salary

Current
Annual Salary

Maximum
Annual Salary

32,269.54
30,593.47
37,870.56
23,380.03
23,380.03
23,380.03
23,380.03
23,380.03
34,009.25

39,673.92
34,412.35
49,412.06
31,420.90
23,380.03
29,617.54
30,487.39
26,329.06
35,048.83

44,659.68
42,325.92
52,403.52
32,354.40
32,354.40
32,354.40
32,354.40
32,354.40
47,099.52

46,929.79
35,876.26
35,876.26
35,876.26
35,876.26

66,872.83
44,150.50
38,061.50
45,444.67
44,150.50

64,920.96
49,666.66
49,666.66
49,666.66
49,666.66

46,929.79
34,008.47
30,593.47
27,474.72

65,932.96
39,440.54
34,412.35
33,797.09

64,920.96
47,099.52
42,325.93
38,040.29

52,212.58
49,475.71
21,025.06

62,375.04
55,713.22
21,025.06

72,282.91
68,506.46
29,108.35

$3,955,844

$4,829,622

$5,565,576

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

CITY MANAGER
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

ASSISTANT MANAGER

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Administrator

Manager

Administrator

Manager

Manager

Manager

Manager

Manager

86,074
103,247
2 years
2,612
80,879
22,368
0
Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT

72,004
75,046
3 months
(25,588)
77,147
(2,101)
2,101
Las Vegas

109,791
< 1 year
9,156
77,147
32,644
0
Deming

67,790
91,988
1.5 years
(8,647)
78,991
12,997
0
Lovington

ADMIN ASSISTANT

Bloomfield

Asst Manager

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

67,790
76,502
1.5 years
(4,827)
59,525
16,977
0
Lovington

Participant Job Title:

Bud & Mgmt Anal Office Manager Admin Secretary
Starting Salary
37,554
42,931
39,270
Current Salary
38,113
58,260
46,238
# Years in Position
1 year
8 years
1.5 years
Variance from Prevailing Rate
(4,223)
15,924
3,902
Min Salary Based on Seniority
32,542
38,392
32,542
Variance from Seniority Step
5,571
19,868
13,696
Fiscal Impact to City
0
0
0

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

58,101
120,000
4.2 years
19,365
84,791
35,209
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Admin Assist

27,518
29,993
2 years
1,753
27,498
2,495
0

Ruidoso

Portales

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Executive Assistant

Asst to Executive

32,773
34,091
1 year
(8,245)
32,542
1,549
0

30,219
34,976
4 years
(7,360)
34,931
45
0

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Admin Asst

22,314
23,527
9 months
(4,713)
26,229
(2,702)
2,702

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

77,147

134,202

96

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

81,329

79,649

58,136

101,150

90

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

42,336

43,549

31,782

55,307

65

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

28,240

35,949

26,229

45,656

55

0
Prevailing

Page 1 of 28

105,674

80,000
80,000
0
(1,329)
58,136
21,864
0
Silver City

Salary

57,000
100,000
12 years
(635)
102,426
(2,426)
2,426
Silver City

Calculated

100,635

Assist Manager

84,123
87,485
1 year
6,156
59,525
27,960
0

Admin Asst

31,021
31,200
3 months
2,960
26,229
4,971
0

79,997
1.5 years
(20,638)
78,991
1,006
0

Deputy Manager

Bloomfield

125,008
5 years
24,373
86,817
38,191
0

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

RECEPTIONIST

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Office Spec

Receptionist

Clerk 1, Range 5

Cen Receptionist

21,881
21,881
< 1 year
(2,022)
16,245
5,636
0

26,059
26,059

FINANCE DIRECTOR
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

ASST FINANCE DIRECTOR

21,957
25,829
1 year
1,926
16,633
9,196
0

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

2,156
16,245
9,814
0

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Finance Officer

Finance Director

Finance Director

Finance Director

Finance Director

Finance Director

Finance Director

55,484
70,376
16 years
(3,106)
69,709
667
0
Los Lunas

52,312
71,115
13 years
(2,367)
67,576
3,539
0
Las Vegas

68,000
<1 year
(5,482)
50,898
17,102
0
Deming

67,790
71,198
3 months
(2,284)
50,898
20,300
0
Lovington

55,077
77,269
4.1 years
3,787
55,941
21,328
0
Bloomfield

73,346
85,550
0
12,068
50,898
34,652
0
Ruidoso

Los Lunas

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Accountant

Accountant

32,718
34,258
1 year
(10,369)
32,542
1,716
0
Las Vegas

Lovington

42,058
48,235
1 year
3,608
32,542
15,693
0
Deming

Bloomfield

Lovington

Portales

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales
Accountant

Ruidoso
Page 2 of 28

16,245

Maximum
28,267

Range
30

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

69,709

50,898

88,525

85

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

49,093

48,479

35,381

61,568

70

36,807
43,482
2 years
(5,611)
37,092
6,390
0
Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

44,627

29,723
49,276
10 years
4,649
40,249
9,027
0
Portales

Minimum

Dep Fin Director

Staff Accountant

22,265

Prevailing
73,482

Silver City

Midpoint

19,395
28,523
7
4,620
19,166
9,357
0

38,812
70,868
10 years
(2,614)
64,458
6,410
0

52,675
54,704
2 years
5,611
37,092
17,612
0

44,943
46,738
< 1 year
2,111
31,782
14,956
0

23,903

Silver City

Asst Fin Director

Rate

Receptionist

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

ACCTS PAYABLE CLERK

Bloomfield

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

ACCOUNTANT

17,222
17,222
0
(5,043)
16,245
977
0

Lovington

43,549

31,782

55,307

65

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

PAYROLL SPECIALIST
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

PURCHASING AGENT

AP Specialist

22,589
32,074
8
(1,047)
28,418
3,656
0

19
(1,193)
32,215
(287)
287

AP Proc Spec

28,201
31,824
2
(1,297)
24,663
7,161
0

AP Clerk

35,876
48,436
8
15,315
28,418
20,018
0

29,147
29,147
Vacant
(3,974)
23,525
5,622
0

AP Specialist

24,107
29,097
0
(4,024)
23,525
5,572
0

Accounting Tech

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Payroll/HR Spec

Payroll Spec

Acct Tech

Payroll Spec

Payroll Spec

Payroll/HR Spec

Payroll Spec

Accounting Tech

34,062
45,568
2 years
5,912
30,157
15,411
0
Los Lunas

23,732
29,453
5
(10,203)
32,372
(2,919)
2,919
Las Vegas

34,216
34,216
0
(5,440)
28,766
5,450
0
Deming

28,201
38,875
4
(781)
31,616
7,259
0
Lovington

28,981
58,513
17
18,857
39,413
19,100
0
Bloomfield

Purchasing Agent

29,640
38,542
2
1,418
27,498
11,044
0

PURCHASING SPECIALIST

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Purch Spec

Purch Spec

37,554
37,554
2
5,650
24,663
12,891
0
Los Lunas
Dep Clerk

Deming

Las Vegas

Lovington

Portales

Purchasing Agent

Proc Officer

34,767
38,483
2
(1,173)
27,498
10,985
0

Bloomfield

Deming

Lovington

Ruidoso
29,147
31,782
2 years
(122)
24,663
7,119
0

Bloomfield

24,107
34,218
8
(5,438)
33,938
280
0

Ruidoso

Asst Pur Agent

21,507
29,182
2
(2,722)
24,663
4,519
0

Dep Clerk

32,773
34,944
1
(4,712)
29,454
5,490
0

Ruidoso
Dep Clerk

Page 3 of 28

Silver City

40,914

50

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

39,656

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

31,904

24,107
29,097
0
(2,807)
23,525
5,572
0
Portales

23,525

Prevailing

37,124

Fin Spec

Dep Clerk

32,215

23,817
41,459
13
1,803
39,105
2,354
0

33,300
34,346
Reclassified
(2,778)
26,229
8,117
0
Portales

33,121

28,484
29,339
0
(3,782)
23,525
5,814
0

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

DEPUTY CLERK

AP Clerk

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Participant Job Title:

Clerk II

23,442
31,928

32,215

23,525

40,914

50

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

37,598

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

CITY ATTORNEY
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

PARALEGAL

34,062
34,569
1
(3,029)
28,766
5,803
0

HR DIRECTOR

MUNICIPAL CLERK
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary

34,761
43,430

5,832
28,766
14,664
0

29,723
37,970
9
372
35,579
2,391
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Contract

City Attorney

Contract

Contract

Contract

Contract

Contract

Contract

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

30,388
34,424
6
(3,174)
33,146
1,278
0

65,332
100,734
5
0
86,817
13,917
0
Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

HR Manager

HR Specialist

Los Lunas

39,873
41,537
2
(18,094)
46,948
(5,411)
5,411
Las Vegas
City Clerk/HR

52,312

Salary

Salary

Pay

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

Lovington

55,390
64,688
6
5,058
51,600
13,088
0
Deming

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Pers Analyst

HR Director

Silver City

39,949
48,152
3
(11,479)
48,070
82
0

Portales

Silver City

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Mun Clerk

City Clerk

Village Clerk

City Clerk

Town Clerk

55,212

63,975
Page 4 of 28

38,812

134,202

96

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

59,631

61,359

44,782

77,917

80

31,970
51,065
16
(8,566)
61,359
(10,294)
10,294

Lovington
39,481

77,147

Personnel Off

73,346
84,698
5
25,068
50,395
34,303
0

105,674

39,250

30,388
39,250
2
0
30,157
9,093
0

HR Manager

52,842
67,643
3
8,013
48,070
19,573
0

Calculated

Rate
100,734

Paralegal

Prevailing

31,125

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

59,051

54,355

39,686

69,035

75

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

RECORDS COORDINATOR

61,984
5.5 years
2,933
44,661
17,323
0
Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

SAFETY COORDINATOR

Los Lunas

ADMIN ASSISTANT

Lovington

Bloomfield

76,066
12 years
17,015
52,690
23,376
0
Ruidoso

69,393
9
10,342
49,086
20,307
0
Portales

37,141
7 years
(21,910)
46,821
(9,680)
9,680
Silver City

Admin Assistant

26,208
35,401
2 years
(556)
27,498
7,903
0
Las Vegas

55,394
2.3 years
(3,657)
41,616
13,778
0

Deming

Lovington

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,957

30,593
36,512
2.5 years
556
27,498
9,014
0
Bloomfield

Prevailing

Ruidoso

Portales

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary

Deming

Benefits Coord

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

PERSONNEL SPECIALIST

Las Vegas

54,330
2
(4,721)
41,606
12,724
0

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Pers / Risk Coord

30,388
45,760
11
8,109
37,300
8,460
0
Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

HR Assistant

HR Generalist

30,593
34,413
9 years
(3,238)
35,579
(1,166)
1,166
Bloomfield

Portales

Ruidoso

Silver City

37,651

32,773
32,781
< 1 year
(4,870)
28,766
4,015
0

Admin Asst

Portales

Page 5 of 28

28,765

50,045

60

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

23,920

22,588
23,920

39,413

22,265

16,245

28,267

30

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

0
16,633
7,287
0

NETWORK MANAGER

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

IT Manager

Network Mgr

IT Manager

NETWORK ADMIN

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Comp Spec

Network Admin

47,929
55,280
1 year
(2,456)
40,634
14,646
0

43,473
48,193
1 year
4,333
32,542
15,651
0

COMPUTER SPECIALIST

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Comp Tech

COMM DEVELOP DIR

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position

40,872
57,741
16 years
5
54,355
3,386
0

Lovington

Ruidoso

IT Director

Lovington

49,475
72,927
1.5 years
15,191
40,634
32,293
0
Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Deming

Portales

Silver City

IT Director

IT Director

38,812
55,000
5.5 years
(2,736)
44,661
10,339
0
Portales

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Com Dev Dir

Com Dev Dir

Com Svc Dir

72,883
2

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Com Dev Dir

Com Dev Dir

52,213
62,375
1

63,975
72,987
2
Page 6 of 28

Salary

Salary

Pay

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

57,736

Silver City

Portales

Calculated

Rate

39,686

69,035

75

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

43,549

31,782

55,307

65

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

37,961

29,723
41,600
0
3,639
26,229
15,371
0
Portales

54,355

40,000
47,730
6 years
(10,006)
45,728
2,002
0

IT Tech

28,981
28,981
0
(8,980)
26,229
2,752
0

Prevailing

43,860

38,379
45,802
13 years
45,802
43,205
2,597
0

PC Support Spec

48,568
49,296
1 month

Systems Admin

32,718
37,585
1
(6,275)
32,542
5,043
0

35,766
43,301
11
5,340
34,011
9,290
0

61,171
71,936
4

Bloomfield

Part time

Deming

Las Vegas

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

Silver City
Com Dev Dir

50,000
72,042
5

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

66,920

69,709

50,898

88,525

85

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

5,016
55,941
15,995
0

(17,624)
50,898
(1,602)
1,602

5,963
53,360
19,523
0

CITY PLANNER

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

City Planner

City Planner

City Planner

City Planner

PLAN & ZONING COOR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Econ Devel Mgr

P&Z Coord

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

35,766
41,252
< 1 year
(8,875)
35,381
5,871
0

47,929
57,512
4
6,956
38,887
18,625
0

30,388
32,344
8 months
(17,783)
35,381
(3,037)
3,037

45,073
54,745
1
4,618
36,227
18,518
0
Deming

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Admin Sec

Admin Asst

Admin Sec

CODE ENF SUPERVISOR

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Code Enf Supv

Enf Svc Supv

43,473
51,163
9 years
6,989

26,208
26,208
vacant
(17,966)

39,481
54,000
1 month
3,873
35,381
18,619
0
Lovington

ADMIN ASSISTANT

27,518
36,857
13
1,836
31,980
4,877
0

Bloomfield

6,067
53,360
19,627
0
Portales

Silver City

Plan Admin

Plan Admin

Planner

Bloomfield

Lovington

Ruidoso

36,670
42,286
6
7,265
27,107
15,179
0
Deming

49,475
66,490
2
15,934
37,092
29,398
0
Bloomfield

Lovington

Bloomfield

5,122
57,278
14,764
0

Ruidoso

P&Z Coord

26,208
29,099
2 weeks
(21,457)
35,381
(6,282)
6,282

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

25,418
31,674
14
(3,347)
32,744
(1,070)
1,070

(4,545)
52,114
10,261
0

38,812
64,880
10
14,753
44,807
20,073
0

Silver City

Plan Admin

Planner

Ruidoso

Portales

Admin Asst

Admin Asst

29,147
29,147
0
(5,874)
23,525
5,622
0
Ruidoso

Code Enf Supv

33,840
44,970
1 year
796
Page 7 of 28

Salary

Salary

Pay

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

50,127

48,479

35,381

61,568

70

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

50,556

48,479

35,381

61,568

70

28,199
34,801
2
(15,755)
37,092
(2,291)
2,291
Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,021

24,107
35,141
7
120
27,754
7,387
0

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

Portales

Silver City

Plan /Admin

Leadsperson

38,812
64,880
2 months
20,706

Calculated

Rate

40,000
53,541
11
3,414
45,878
7,663
0

Portales
38,812
64,880
10
14,324
44,807
20,073
0

Prevailing

29,916
33,648
3 years
(10,526)

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

44,174

43,549

31,782

55,307

65

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

CODE ENF OFFICER

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

BUILDING INSPECTOR

39,310
11,853
0

RECREATION SUPV

ASST RECREATION SUPV

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority

0
0

32,542
12,428
0

31,782
33,098
0

34,116
(468)
468

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Code Enf Off

Code Enf Off

Code Enf Off

Code Enf Off

Code Enf Off

Code Enf Off

Code Enf Off

Code Enf Off

30,896
31,358
2 years
1,220
22,220
9,138
0
Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

31,782
vacant
0

23,732
25,979
1 year
(4,159)
21,702
4,277
0
Las Vegas

Deming

Building Insp

Building Insp

36,108
46,404
3 years
193
34,116
12,288
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Rec Supv

Rec Manager

30,896
40,622
< 2 years
(11,856)
40,634
(12)
12
Los Lunas

31,948
36,795
8 years
6,657
25,603
11,192
0

Las Vegas
30,388
41,163
2 years
(389)
30,157

Lovington

34,216
42,390
7 years
(3,821)
37,496
4,894
0
Deming

34,382
56,201
6
3,723
45,728
10,473
0

Asst Rec Mgr

24,947
27,726
1 year
(2,412)
21,702
6,024
0

Deming

Bloomfield

32,773
35,797
4 years
5,659
23,295
12,502
0

21,550
24,548
2 years
(5,590)
22,220
2,328
0
Portales

Silver City

Building Insp

Building Insp

Building Insp

38,812
64,880
10 years
18,669
40,249
24,631
0

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Rec Foreman

Aquatic Dir

Rec Dir

P&R Dir

31,021
37,710
6
(14,768)
45,728
(8,018)
8,018

39,949
56,943
8
4,465
47,940
9,003
0

63,975
74,339
0
21,861
39,686
34,653
0

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Rec Leader

Aquatic Coor

Asst Rec Dir

35,876
35,876
2 years
(5,676)
30,157

44,493
53,019
1 year
11,467
29,454
Page 8 of 28

Salary

Salary

Pay

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

30,138

29,039

21,195

36,878

45

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

46,211

43,549

31,782

55,307

65

31,500
40,935
8 years
(5,276)
38,392
2,543
0
Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

52,478

33,300
49,052
4
(3,426)
43,618
5,434
0
Portales

Calculated

Rate

27,654
28,760
2 years
(1,378)
22,220
6,540
0

Ruidoso
36,448
36,448
0
(9,763)
31,782
4,666
0

Prevailing

54,355

39,686

69,035

75

Silver City
Rec Coor

26,985
36,150
10 years
(5,402)
36,430

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

41,552

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

11,006
0

YOUTH COORDINATOR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Youth Coor

Youth Coor

LIFEGUARD

Los Lunas

29,424
35,971
12
10,047
25,572
10,399
0

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Deming

18,096
19,552
1
(6,372)
19,721
(169)
169
Las Vegas

Deming

Lifeguard

15,600
15,600
vacant
(2,014)
15,600
0
0

LIBRARY DIRECTOR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Lib Director

Lib Manager

50,326
60,626
10
7,366
44,807
15,819
0

ASST LIB DIRECTOR

Los Lunas
Participant Job Title:
Asst Lib Director
Starting Salary
28,023
Current Salary
32,308
# Years in Position
7
Variance from Prevailing Rate
(1,790)
Min Salary Based on Seniority
30,222
Variance from Seniority Step
2,086

Deming

37,024
38,646
1
(14,614)
36,227
2,419
0
Las Vegas

5,719
0

Lovington

Bloomfield

Youth Coor

Head Lifeguard

28,201
31,595
15
5,671
26,375
5,220
0

Bloomfield

Lifeguard

Lifeguard

Ruidoso

(280)
280

Portales

Silver City

Rec Aide

Rec Ctr Sec

20,671
21,222
4 mo
(4,702)
19,261
1,961
0
Portales

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Librarian

Lib Director

Lib Admin

Lib Director

Lovington

Bloomfield

Staff Lib

Library Asst

28,201
36,754
15
2,656
35,944
810

Salary

Pay

Minimum

Maximum

Range

63,975
68,058
3
14,798
37,979
30,079
0
Ruidoso

26,032
26,817
4
(7,281)
28,828
(2,011)

0
Page 9 of 28

38,812
63,509
11
10,249
45,878
17,631
0

19,261

33,488

40

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

20,714

15,600

26,312

25

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

53,260

54,355

39,686

69,035

75

42,954
46,906
7
(6,354)
41,742
5,164
0

Portales

Silver City

Library Asst

Adult Svcs Lib

29,723
33,134
4
(964)
28,828
4,306

26,375

Bloomfield

Deming

Salary

Midpoint

25,924

Silver City

Lovington

Asst Librarian

Calculated

Rate

17,614

17,863
19,561
3
1,947
16,745
2,816
0

49,475
54,079
2
14,798
37,092
16,987

Prevailing

19,000
23,826
6
(2,098)
22,193
1,633
0

Lib Director

33,840
40,997
15
(12,263)
48,479
(7,482)
7,482

31,948
34,070
5 years
(28)
29,517
4,553

Ruidoso

23,380
23,380
2
(2,544)
20,193
3,187
0

Lovington
17,580
17,680
seasonal
66
15,600
2,080
0

23,565
0

29,600
41,505
3
7,407
28,155
13,350

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

34,098

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Fiscal Impact to City

CHILDRENS LIBRARIAN

0
Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

0
Las Vegas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Library Tech

Library CL Sen

24,204
27,930
7
1,330
22,724
5,206
0

Bloomfield

Deming

16,806
28,995
30
2,395
26,375
2,620
0

24,947
25,501
1
(3,029)
21,702
3,799
0
Lovington

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Library Clerk

Library Clerk

Library Clerk

16,806
28,995
30
2,843
22,265
6,730
0

RECREATION LDR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Sports Spec

Rec Coor

29,424
33,248
3
2,038
25,252
7,996
0

26,208
28,787
1
(2,423)
24,087
4,700
0

21,881
29,619
12
3,467
19,166
10,453
0
Deming

Bloomfield

Library Clerk

24,208
25,132
3
(1,020)
17,438
7,694
0

2,011

Children's Lib

25,563
28,288
5
(242)
23,852
4,436
0

Los Lunas

LIBRARY CLERK

Lovington

Children Lib

LIBRARY TECH

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Deming

Bloomfield

Portales

Silver City

Youth Svcs

Youth Svcs

Youth Svcs

30,905
33,613
10
5,083
26,842
6,771
0
Ruidoso

24,107
24,758
1
(3,772)
21,702
3,056
0

Silver City

Library CL Sen

Tech Svcs

20,671
22,366
2
(4,234)
20,193
2,173
0

Ruidoso

Portales
Library Clerk

Ruidoso

Salary

Salary

Pay

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

Page 10 of 28

36,878

45

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

26,600

26,375

19,261

33,488

40

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

26,152

19,165
21,833
3
(4,319)
17,438
4,395
0

24,140

17,618

30,659

35

Silver City

21,195

Prevailing

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

31,210

29,039

26,067
27,110
2
510
20,193
6,917
0

Youth Coor

28,201
31,595
15
385
32,215
(620)
620

Calculated

Rate
28,530

Silver City

Portales

Prevailing

29,600
30,488
2
1,958
22,220
8,268
0

Portales

Library Asst

23,419
24,357
4
(1,795)
16,245
8,112
0
Bloomfield

Ruidoso

28,201
26,978
6
826
16,245
10,733
0
Lovington

32,215

23,525

40,916

50

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

RECREATION SPEC
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

RECREATION CLERK
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

MUSEUM CURATOR
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

MUSEUM SPECIALIST
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Recreation Spec

Rec Cont Clk

25,418
27,555
2
3,475
18,470
9,085
0

18,096
19,177
3
(4,903)
18,912
265
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Recreation Aide

Wellness Clk

21,957
21,957
1
2,035
15,973
5,984
0

Las Vegas

Museum Spec

Museum Cur

Deming

Los Lunas

Las Vegas
Museum Spec

25,563
26,291
1
(6,689)
24,087
2,204
0

Lovington

Bloomfield

Youth Aide

Floor Monitor

24,947
26,208
2
2,128
18,470
7,738
0
Lovington

Ruidoso

Silver City

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

24,080

23,380
23,380
2
(700)
17,031
6,349
0
Bloomfield

Portales

Calculated

Ruidoso

Portales

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Silver City

Portales

Deming

24,947
26,520
10 mo
(8,520)
26,229
291
0
Lovington

Museum Dir

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

35

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

20,714

15,600

26,312

25

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,040

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

32,980

32,215

23,525

40,914

50

30,171
46,258
9
13,278
32,441
13,817
0
Prevailing

Page 11 of 28

30,659

45,000
49,165
3
14,125
28,155
21,010
0

Museum Spec

17,618

Silver City

Museum Cur

24,140

19,923

34,382
38,084
1
3,044
26,856
11,228
0

Museum Spec

25,418
26,391
2
(6,589)
24,663
1,728
0

15,995
17,888
2
(2,035)
16,355
1,533
0

Los Lunas
25,418
26,391
2
(8,649)
27,498
(1,107)
1,107

Deming

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

MUSEUM TECH
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

CHIEF OF POLICE
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

DEPUTY CHIEF
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Museum Tech

Museum Clk

24,208
24,208
<1
3,940
15,600
8,608
0

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

20,268

15,600
16,328
4
(3,940)
17,146
(818)
818

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Chief of Police

Chief of Police

Chief of Police

Chief of Police

Chief of Police

Chief of Police

Chief of Police

Chief of Police

68,615
80,691
<1
3,641
58,136
22,555
0

50,756
73,570
4
(3,480)
63,896
9,674
0

72,883
2
(4,167)
60,948
11,935
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief

Patrol Cpt

59,272
70,368
10
7,711
56,713
13,655
0

45,973
59,946
3
(2,711)
48,070
11,876
0

67,790
73,549
1
(3,501)
59,525
14,024
0
Lovington

59,829
91,188
2 mo
14,138
58,136
33,052
0
Bloomfield

71,356
96,658
4
19,608
63,896
32,762
0
Ruidoso

38,812
60,258
10 mo
(16,792)
58,136
2,122
0
Portales

Silver City

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Admin Asst

Admin Asst

Admin Sec

Admin Asst

Admin Asst

Admin Asst

Admin Asst

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

31,948
32,323
1
(549)
24,087
8,236
0
Deming

24,947
29,640
2
(3,232)
24,663
4,977
0
Lovington

30,593
30,593
6 mo
(2,279)
23,525
7,068
0
Bloomfield

34,761
39,624
8
6,752
28,418
11,206
0
Ruidoso
Page 12 of 28

29,823
32,479
1
(393)
24,087
8,392
0
Portales

15,600

Maximum
26,312

Range
25

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

77,050

79,649

58,136

101,150

90

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

61,359

44,782

77,917

80

Admin Asst

27,518
30,139
10
(2,733)
29,792
347
0

Minimum

50,000
67,600
9
(9,450)
71,906
(4,306)
4,306

POLICE ADMIN ASSIST

30,896
38,551
5
5,679
26,474
12,077
0

20,714

Prevailing

62,657

57,324
57,657
1
(5,000)
45,852
11,805
0

Midpoint

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

SHIFT COMMANDER

Rate

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

32,872

32,215

23,525

40,914

50

25,069
29,626
4
(3,246)
25,856
3,770
0
Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

LIEUTENANT
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

SERGEANT
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

PATROLMAN (CERT)
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Shift Cmdr

Captain

45,973
56,700
3
(2,446)
44,782
11,918
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Patrol Lt

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

48,763
51,876
13
(5,417)
53,949
(2,073)
2,073

52,044
55,779
3
(1,514)
42,600
13,179
0

51,695
57,046
12
(247)
52,690
4,356
0

55,331
72,219
6
14,926
45,728
26,491
0

33,300
53,681
1
(3,612)
40,634
13,047
0

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Sergeant

Sergeant

Sergeant

Sergeant

Sergeant

Sergeant

Sergeant

Sergeant

44,903
48,441
3
(2,989)
37,979
10,462
0

45,056
48,987
4
(2,443)
38,887
10,100
0

36,662
50,617
6
(813)
40,768
9,849
0

54,271
55,883
5
4,453
39,816
16,067
0

51,979
66,394
12
14,964
46,974
19,420
0

47,985
47,985
9 mo
(3,445)
35,381
12,604
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Police Officer

Police Officer

Police Officer

Police Officer

Police Officer

Police Officer

Police Officer

33,840
44,762
5
722
35,766
8,996
0

44,723
46,081
5
2,041
35,766
10,315
0

33,415
36,603
5
(7,437)
35,766
837
0

36,669
43,527
15
(513)
43,549
(22)
22

42,453
52,458
14
8,418
44,237
8,221
0

44,220
46,925
10 mo
2,885
31,782
15,143
0

77,917

80

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

57,293

54,355

39,686

69,035

75

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

51,430

48,479

35,381

61,568

70

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

44,040

43,549

31,782

55,307

65

27,827
40,819
9
(3,221)
39,310
1,509
0

PATROLMAN (NON- C)

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Participant Job Title:

Uncertified

Uncertified

Uncertified

Uncertified

Uncertified

Uncertified

Uncertified

Uncertified

Page 13 of 28

44,782

42,518
50,047
7
(1,383)
41,742
8,305
0

Police Officer

34,655
41,144
10
(2,896)
40,249
895
0

61,359

52,112
53,159
1
(4,134)
40,634
12,525
0

Los Lunas
38,207
43,084
6
(8,346)
40,768
2,316
0

59,146

59,194
61,592
1
2,446
44,782
16,810
0

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

31,453

32,215

23,525

40,914

50

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

31,433
31,433
1
(20)
24,087
7,346
0

29,484
29,484
1
(1,969)
24,087
5,397
0

RECORDS CLERK

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Police Clerk

Records Clerk

EVIDENCE TECH

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Evidence Tech

Evidence Tech

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

25,418
35,884
15
6,954
29,039
6,845
0

29,424
37,706
3
5,115
25,252
12,454
0

33,065
33,065
1
1,612
24,087
8,978
0
Deming

19,968
24,814
7
(4,116)
25,006
(192)
192

28,201
28,201
1
(3,252)
24,087
4,114
0
Lovington

Deming

Lovington

40,469
40,469
1
9,016
24,087
16,382
0

0
0

26,066
26,066
1
(5,387)
24,087
1,979
0

0
0

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Evid/Records

Records Clerk

Records Supv

Records Clk

30,593
32,418
3.3
3,488
22,751
9,667
0
Bloomfield

26,059
31,554
15
2,624
29,039
2,515
0
Ruidoso

24,107
25,430
2
(3,500)
22,220
3,210
0
Portales

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Fire Chief

Fire Chief

Fire Chief

Fire Chief

Fire Chief

Fire Chief

Fire Chief

Fire Chief

73,840
5
(1,940)
65,423
8,417
0

67,790
69,347
2
(6,433)
60,948
8,399
0

55,077
91,080
41
15,301
79,649
11,431
0

73,346
96,658
3
20,879
62,405
34,253
0

38,812
66,740
4
(9,040)
63,896
2,844
0

Range

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief

Deputy Chief

39,481

54,732

50,115
Page 14 of 28

29,039

21,195

36,878

45

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

32,215

23,525

40,914

50

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

75,780

79,649

58,136

101,150

90

62,000
62,000
<1
(13,780)
58,136
3,864
0

Deputy Chief

51,201

Pay

Maximum

Los Lunas

DEPUTY CHIEF

Salary

Minimum

28,930

Silver City

FIRE CHIEF

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary

Salary

Midpoint

32,592

25,563
27,477
1
(5,115)
24,087
3,390
0

62,478
61,859
6
(13,921)
66,987
(5,128)
5,128

Calculated

Rate

19,000
23,479
6
(5,451)
24,422
(943)
943

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

59,272
84,712
28
8,933
79,649
5,063
0

Prevailing

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

62,152

61,359

44,782

77,917

80

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

CAPTAIN
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

66,164
7
4,012
52,833
13,331
0

60,000
<1
(2,152)
44,782
15,218
0

60,923
1
(1,229)
45,852
15,071
0

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Captain

Shift Comdr

Captain

Shift Comdr

Shift Comdr

Shift Comdr

44,230
55,671
10
3,067
50,259
5,412
0

31,501
45,915
2
(6,689)
41,606
4,309
0

38,496
52,707
9
103
49,086
3,621
0

39,841
51,730
10
(874)
50,259
1,471
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

FIRE ENGINEER/EMT

Los Lunas

LIEUTENANT

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

73,556
1
11,404
45,852
27,704
0

36,388
45,360
7
863
37,496
7,864
0

29,544
44,316
2
(181)
33,319
10,997
0

35,963
36,138
< 1
(8,359)
33,782
2,356
0

46,929
51,279
5 mo
(1,325)
39,686
11,593
0
Bloomfield

36,662
42,994
2 mo
(1,503)
31,782
11,212
0

50,808
62,368
9
9,764
49,086
13,282
0

50,115
<1
(12,037)
44,782
5,333
0

Portales

Silver City

Bn Chief

Captain

33,300
57,949
7
5,345
46,821
11,128
0
Portales

Silver City

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

Lieutenant

40,322
47,897
4
3,400
34,931
12,966
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Engineer/EMT

Engineer/EMT

Engineer/EMT

Engineer/EMT

Engineer/EMT

Engineer/EMT

Engineer/EMT

24,225
36,214
6.5
(2,378)
33,146
3,068
0

39,949
39,949
5 mo
1,358
28,766
11,183
0

FIREFIGHTER/EMT-i

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

FF/EMT-I

FF/EMT-I

FF/EMT-I

FF/EMT-I

FF/EMT-I

FF/EMT-I

FF/EMT-I

FF/EMT-I

31,333
33,196

28,200
40,654

35,876
35,876

29,749
34,781
Page 15 of 28

28,788
31,112

Salary

Pay

Minimum

Maximum

Range

52,604

54,355

39,686

69,035

75

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

44,497

43,549

31,782

55,307

65

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

38,592

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

36,662
37,943
2
(649)
30,157
7,786
0

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary

31,433
41,705

Salary

Midpoint

30,867
42,660
8
(1,837)
37,496
5,164
0

Engineer/EMT

36,388
40,260
1
1,669
29,454
10,806
0

Calculated

Rate

34,682
43,214
5
(9,390)
44,661
(1,447)
1,447

Ruidoso
43,699
52,116
8
7,619
38,392
13,724
0

Prevailing

29,120
33,226

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,793

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

12
5,912
34,823
6,882
0

6
(2,597)
30,222
2,974
0

6
4,861
30,222
10,432
0

5 mo
83
26,229
9,647
0

8
(1,012)
31,684
3,097
0

<1
(4,681)
26,229
4,883
0

3
(2,567)
28,155
5,071
0

FIREFIGHTER/EMT-B

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

FF/EMT-B

FF/EMT-B

FF/EMT-B

FF/EMT-B

FF/EMT-B

FF/EMT-B

FF/EMT-B

FF/EMT-B

FIRE ADMIN ASST

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Office Spec

Admin Asst

28,511
37,815
10
4,941
29,792
8,023
0

21,957
25,334
2
(10,790)
27,498
(2,164)
2,164

23,288
26,512
4
(6,362)
25,856
656
0

Deming

33,840
39,493
2
6,619
24,663
14,830
0
Lovington

27,518
36,940
7
816
32,222
4,718
0

29,749
35,856
9
2,982
29,097
6,759
0

26,994
26,994
11 mo
(5,880)
23,525
3,469
0

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Admin Asst

Admin Asst

Admin Sec

30,593
30,593
6.7
(5,531)
32,222
(1,629)
1,629

32,773
35,651
8
(473)
31,684
3,967
0

Silver City

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Mun Judge

Mun Judge

Mun Judge

Mun Judge

Mun Judge

Mun Judge

Mun Judge

COURT ADMIN
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position

43,992
7
4,090
33,938
10,054
0

14,400
21
(25,502)
39,413
(25,013)

25,000
5
(14,902)
32,372
(7,372)

20,000
0
(19,902)
28,766
(8,766)

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Court Admin

Court Admin

Court Admin

Court Admin

Court Admin

Court Admin

Court Admin

28,912
48,443
19

28,808
38,646
9

24,947
34,570
7

35,876
38,061
4

34,761
34,761
<1
Page 16 of 28

Pay

Maximum

Range

32,874

32,215

23,525

40,914

50

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

33,300
45,656
9

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

39,902

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

36,000
36,000
4
(3,902)
31,616
4,384
0

Court Admin

34,062
37,706
<1

Salary

Minimum

36,124

Mun Judge

44,000
44,000
2
4,098
30,157
13,843
0

Salary

Midpoint

29,723
52,104
30
15,980
35,944
16,160
0

MUNICIPAL JUDGE

54,953
80,828
21
40,926
39,413
41,415
0

Calculated

Rate

26,033
30,575
1
(2,299)
24,087
6,488
0

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

52,000
54,999
0
15,097
28,766
26,233
0

Prevailing

26,770
30,110
4

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

38,494

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

(788)
28,766
8,940
0

9,949
39,413
9,030
0

152
35,579
3,067
0

(3,924)
33,938
632
0

(433)
31,616
6,445
0

(3,733)
28,766
5,995
0

7,162
35,579
10,077
0

(8,384)
31,616
(1,506)
1,506

COURT CLERK

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Court Clerk

Court Clerk

Court Clerk

Court Clerk

Court Clerk

Court Clerk

Court Clerk

Court Clerk

PW DIRECTOR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

PW Director

PW Director

PW Director

25,418
29,315
1
3,318
19,721
9,594
0

61,171
71,046
<2
(1,859)
52,114
18,932
0

21,507
21,507
1
(4,490)
19,721
1,786
0

49,795
51,521
2 mo
(21,384)
50,898
623
0

21,881
25,438
2
(559)
20,193
5,245
0

27,474
27,474
2.2
1,477
20,193
7,281
0
Lovington

Portales

Silver City

PW Director

PW Director

PW Director

PW Director

PARK SUPERVISOR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Parks Supv

Park Supv

Park Foreman

Park Foreman

Parks Supv

AIRPORT MANAGER
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate

Los Lunas

36,108
42,577
5
2,605
32,372
10,205
0
Las Vegas
Airport Mgr

36,108
44,657
13
(7,016)

39,270
43,409
6
3,437
33,146
10,263
0
Deming

36,662
34,133
4
(5,839)
31,616
2,517
0
Lovington

73,346
89,502
1
16,597
52,114
37,388
0
Ruidoso

39,949
46,293
3
6,321
30,878
15,415
0
Bloomfield

38,812
61,117
3
(11,788)
54,635
6,482
0
Portales

Silver City
Parks Supv

Ruidoso

Portales

Airport Mgr

GS Director

63,975
75,088
3
23,416
Page 17 of 28

38,812
58,688
9
4,333

Salary

Salary

Pay

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

25,997

26,375

19,261

33,488

40

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

72,905

69,709

50,898

88,525

85

37,807
72,265
14
(640)
70,845
1,420
0

Parks Supt

33,300
36,000
9
(3,972)
35,579
421
0

Calculated

Rate

20,966
21,280
1
(4,717)
19,271
2,009
0

Ruidoso

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

30,896
38,881
9
(1,091)
35,579
3,302
0

20,671
26,952
5
955
21,675
5,277
0

Bloomfield
58,110
92,000
<1
19,095
50,898
41,102
0

72,883
1
(22)
52,114
20,769
0

27,494
30,014
<1
4,017
19,261
10,753
0

Prevailing

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

39,972

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

35,256
38,510
2
(1,462)
30,157
8,353
0
Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

51,673

54,355

39,686

69,035

75

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

50,331
(5,674)
5,674

STREET SUPERVISOR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Street Supv

Street Supv

PROJECT MANAGER

Los Lunas

37,554
40,716
2
(4,138)
33,319
7,397
0

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

EQUIP OPERATOR III

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

STREET MAINT WKR

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority

36,108
38,750
2
(6,104)
33,319
5,431
0

Deming

Lovington

Street Foreman Street Foreman

39,270
40,331
1
(4,523)
32,542
7,789
0

Las Vegas

Deming

Proj Mgr

Spec Projects

38,896
43,804
2
(4,930)
37,092
6,712
0

36,662
62,171
33
17,317
43,549
18,622
0
Lovington

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Equip Oper III

Equip Oper III

Equip Oper III

28,808
37,606
11
1,595
34,011
3,595
0

31,021
42,640
16
6,629
35,944
6,696
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Maint Worker

Maint Worker

Maint Worker

21,957
27,087
13
(965)
28,812

20,987
26,228
8.5
(1,824)
25,603

19,739
19,739
1
(8,313)
21,702

55,389
3,299

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Crew Leader

Street Supv

Street Supt

Street Supv

35,876
42,835
3
(2,019)
34,116
8,719
0

38,379
47,528
1
2,674
32,542
14,986
0
Ruidoso

33,300
48,631
4
3,777
34,931
13,700
0
Portales

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

44,854

Lovington

Bloomfield

Silver City

Ruidoso

Portales

Equip Oper III

Equip Oper III

30,905
33,592
10
(2,419)
33,217
375
0

Silver City

26,609
34,929
12
(1,082)
34,823
106
0

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Maint Worker

Maint Worker

Page 18 of 28

65

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

48,479

35,381

61,568

70

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

Maint Worker

26,609
30,461
5
2,409
23,852

55,307

Prevailing

36,011

Bloomfield

26,059
29,598
2
1,546
22,220

31,782

Maint Worker

28,981
32,418
6.2
4,366
24,422

43,549

33,571
37,872
6
(6,982)
36,621
1,251
0

48,734

39,270
53,664
6
4,930
40,768
12,896
0

Los Lunas

23,150
29,473
2 mo
(6,538)
26,229
3,244
0

48,070
27,018
0

Bloomfield

Bloomfield

Equip Oper III

28,023
37,824
2
1,813
27,498
10,326
0

20,440
30,835
9
2,783
26,215

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

28,052

29,039

21,195

36,878

45

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

PARK MAINT WKR

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

UTILITY BILLING SUPV

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

UTILITY BILLING CLERK

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

water
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step

(1,725)
1,725

625
0

(1,963)
1,963

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Maint Worker

Maint Worker

Maint Worker

Maint Worker

22,651
31,158
25
2,939
29,039
2,119
0

28,981
32,418
6.2
4,199
24,422
7,996
0

21,957
21,934
1
(6,285)
21,702
232
0

20,987
26,312
12
(1,907)
27,483
(1,171)
1,171

Lovington

7,996
0
Bloomfield

7,378
0
Ruidoso

6,609
0
Portales

4,620
0
Silver City
Maint Worker

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Utility Bill Sup

Utility Bill Sup

Utility Bill Sup

Utility Bill Sup

Utility Bill Sup

Utility Bill Sup

Utility Bill Sup

Utility Bill Sup

30,388
39,395
4
1,872
28,828
10,567
0

31,948
33,633
3
(3,890)
28,155
5,478
0

28,201
31,824
2
(5,699)
27,498
4,326
0

32,269
39,673
4.5
2,150
28,828
10,845
0

34,761
37,627
4
104
28,828
8,799
0

29,723
41,207
15
3,684
35,944
5,263
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Utility Bill / Cust

Utility Bill Clk

Water Clerk

Cust Rep

Utility Bill Clk

Utility Bill Clk

Utility Bill Clk

17,222
20,654
2
(6,920)
20,193
461
0

21,881
25,834
8
(1,740)
23,267
2,567
0

24,947
29,536
4 mo
1,962
19,261
10,275
0

30,593
34,412
9
6,838
23,823
10,589
0

26,059
27,102
3
(472)
20,675
6,427
0

20,671
24,871
7
(2,703)
22,724
2,147
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Meter Reader

Meter Reader

Meter Reader

Meter Reader

Meter Reader

Meter Reader

Meter Reader

20,467
26,915
8
(146)
23,267
3,648

25,979
33,134
6
6,074
22,192
10,942

24,947
26,000
4 mo
(1,061)
19,261
6,739

34,009
35,049
2.7
7,989
20,193
14,856

26,059
28,309
7
1,249
22,724
5,585
Page 19 of 28

21,097
21,657
1
(5,404)
19,721
1,936

Salary

Pay

Minimum

Maximum

Range

28,219

29,239

21,195

36,878

45

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

37,523

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

27,574

26,375

19,261

33,488

40

17,494
29,093
10
1,519
24,392
4,701
0

Meter Reader

21,957
22,293
2
(4,768)
20,193
2,100

Salary

Midpoint

20,865
39,747
18
2,224
35,944
3,803
0

Utility Bill Clk

28,023
29,088
3
1,514
20,675
8,413
0

Calculated

Rate

17,284
29,274
19
1,055
29,039
235
0

Los Lunas
30,896
37,080
3
(443)
28,155
8,925
0

Prevailing

19,000
23,127
3
(3,934)
20,675
2,452

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

27,061

26,375

19,261

33,488

40

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Fiscal Impact to City

UTILITIES DIRECTOR

0
Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

0
Las Vegas

0
Deming

0
Lovington

0
Bloomfield

Utilities Dir

0
Ruidoso

0
Portales

0
Silver City

Utility Mgr

54,954
70,408
5.5
4,295
50,395
20,013
0

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Water Supv

Water Supv

Water Supv

Water Supv

Water Supv

Water Supv

Water Supv

Water Supv

WATER OP IV
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

WATER OP III
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Asst Water Sup

Treat Plt Sup

35,766
37,127
2
(10,906)
37,092
35
0
Los Lunas

Deming

36,108
56,160
2
8,127
37,092
19,068
0
Las Vegas

39,270
52,104
1
3,705
36,227
15,877
0
Lovington

Deming

Bloomfield

Lovington

46,929
66,872
1
18,473
36,227
30,645
0

38,379
60,923
19
12,524
48,479
12,444
0

Portales

Silver City

Chief Oper

Oper IV

Ruidoso

Water Op III

Water Op III

34,761
37,960
2
(3,095)
30,157
7,803
0
Page 20 of 28

Salary

Pay

Minimum

Maximum

Range

33,300
52,151
30
4,118
48,479
3,672
0
Portales

44,782

77,917

80

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

48,399

48,479

35,381

61,568

70

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

48,033

48,479

35,381

61,568

70

23,314
42,666
11
(5,367)
45,878
(3,212)
3,212
Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

41,055

61,359

31,653
33,895
2
(14,504)
37,092
(3,197)
3,197

Ruidoso

Bloomfield
35,876
44,150
5.3
3,095
32,372
11,778
0

33,300
36,050
1
(12,349)
36,227
(177)
177

Water Op IV

44,943
52,062
7
4,029
41,742
10,320
0

Salary

Midpoint

Los Lunas

36,108
38,812
7
(9,587)
41,742
(2,930)
2,930

Calculated

Rate
66,113

57,280
61,818
1
(4,295)
45,852
15,966
0

WATER SUPPLY SUPV

43,473
50,140
2
1,741
37,092
13,048
0

Prevailing

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

WATER OP II

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Oper II

Oper II

Oper II

22,588
30,908
3
(2,541)
25,252
5,656
0

EQUIP OPERATOR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Maint Tech

Equip Oper

LABORER

Los Lunas

29,424
29,864
1
(404)
21,702
8,162
0

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

WASTEWATER SUPV
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Deming

Las Vegas

Deming

Laborer

Laborer

17,222
19,614
2
(2,245)
16,355
3,259
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas
WW Mgr

42,931
44,512
1 mo
(11,620)
39,686
4,826
0

31,021
40,019
16
6,570
32,215
7,804
0
Lovington

Ruidoso

Portales

Bloomfield

31,021
33,509
9
3,241
26,215
7,294
0
Lovington

Bloomfield

Deming

Ruidoso

Portales

Equip Oper

Equip Oper

30,905
36,005
6
5,737
24,222
11,783
0
Ruidoso
Laborer

19,739
20,280
2
(1,579)
16,355
3,925
0

Silver City
Oper II

Equip Oper

22,048
26,000
5
(4,268)
23,852
2,148
0

WWTP Supv

43,473
44,123
2
(12,009)
41,606
2,517
0

27,851
37,211
14
3,762
32,744
4,467
0

Bloomfield

24,701
24,710
1
2,852
15,973
8,737
0

Silver City

Laborer

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

23,525

40,914

50

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

29,039

21,195

36,825

45

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

20,714

15,600

26,312

25

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

WW Supt

WWTP Mgr

WWTP Chief

WW Supv

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

56,132

54,355

39,686

69,035

75

45,697
45,697
2
(10,435)
41,606
4,091
0
Prevailing

Page 21 of 28

32,215

Prevailing

21,859

21,097
22,830
4 mo
972
15,600
7,230
0

33,300
53,151
20
(2,981)
54,355
(1,204)
1,204

Pay

Bloomfield

63,975
84,261
5
28,129
44,661
39,600
0

Salary

30,268

Lovington

46,929
65,932
1
9,800
40,634
25,298
0

Salary

33,449

Silver City

WW Foreman

36,662
55,245
2
(887)
41,606
13,639
0

Calculated

20,767
25,658
4
(7,791)
25,858
(200)
200

22,786
25,962
2 mo
(4,306)
21,195
4,767
0
Portales

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

WASTEWATER OP IV

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

WWTP Asst

WW OP IV

35,766
41,250
3
(3,570)
34,116
7,134
0

WASTEWATER OP III

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

WWTP OP

WASTEWATER OP II

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Las Vegas

WASTEWATER OP I

Los Lunas
WWTP Tech

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Rate

WWTP OP IV

33,840
46,488
23
1,669
43,549
2,939
0
Lovington

Bloomfield

44,820

44,943
52,998
13
8,179
43,205
9,793
0
Ruidoso

Portales

Deming

Las Vegas

Lovington

Deming

Las Vegas

0
0
Deming

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

WW OP II

WWTP OP II

35,400
39,440
<1
3,131
26,229
13,211
0

Lovington

Bloomfield

WW OP I

WW OP I

31,021
31,054
1
(558)
24,087
6,967
0
Lovington

Silver City

Silver City

Ruidoso

Ruidoso
Page 22 of 28

Silver City

WW OP I

WW OP I

Portales

Minimum
31,782

Maximum
55,307

Range
65

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

36,309

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

25,324
32,859
7
(3,450)
30,945
1,914
0

Portales
26,609
37,872
8
6,260
27,754
10,118
0

43,549

WW OP II

29,147
36,629
24
320
35,944
685
0

30,593
34,412
<1
2,800
23,525
10,887
0
Bloomfield

Portales

Midpoint

38,275

30,862
41,932
9
3,658
34,749
7,183
0

21,957
24,806
5
(6,806)
26,474
(1,668)
1,668
Los Lunas

Bloomfield

WW OP III

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

LABORATORY TEC

Lovington
WW OP IV

34,382
38,542
2
(6,278)
33,319
5,223
0

29,424
34,617
2
(3,658)
30,157
4,460
0

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Deming

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

31,612

32,215

23,525

40,914

50

18,336
29,916
9
(1,696)
28,418
1,498
0
Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

WW LABORER

Lab Tech

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

SOLID WASTE SUPV

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

ASST SW SUPV
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

RECYCLING OPERATOR
Participant Job Title:

Water Qual Tec

32,440
39,287
10
3,466
33,217
6,070
0

Water Qual Tec

25,563
30,305
2
(5,516)
27,498
2,807
0

Las Vegas

Deming

Laborer

Laborer

17,222
18,262
1
(4,394)
16,633
1,629
0
Las Vegas

Deming

SW Supv

SW Supv

SW Foreman

Los Lunas

30,388
38,313
7
(7,407)
37,496
817
0
Las Vegas

Asst SW Supv

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Lovington

27,474
33,797
1 mo
11,141
16,245
17,552
0
Bloomfield

39,270
40,331
1
(5,389)
32,542
7,789
0
Deming

Laborer

19,739
20,280
2
(2,376)
17,031
3,249
0

Los Lunas
43,473
53,148
3
7,428
34,116
19,032
0

Lovington

Bloomfield

Silver City

Laborer

Laborer

21,097
21,656
1
(1,000)
16,333
5,323
0
Portales

SW Supv

SW Supt

Ruidoso

45,656

55

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

22,656

Silver City

22,265

16,246

28,267

30

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

45,720

43,549

31,782

50,307

65

Silver City

SW Lead

35,766
36,289
3
1,162
28,155
8,134
0

26,229

19,000
19,285
1
(3,371)
16,333
2,952
0

33,300
42,000
4 mo
(3,720)
31,782
10,218
0
Portales

35,944

Portales

Ruidoso
38,379
54,808
5
9,088
35,766
19,042
0

35,821

26,609
37,872
8
2,051
31,684
6,188
0

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,128

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

33,073
33,966
2
(1,162)
27,498
6,468
0

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Recycling OP

Recy Coor

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,507

Page 23 of 28

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

30,896
35,634
1
127
26,856
8,778
0

30,388
35,380
3
(127)
28,155
7,225
0

TRANSFER ST OPER

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Trans St Op

Trans St Op

PACKER OPERATOR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Packer/Dvr

Packer OP

Packer OP

30,896
32,069
3
172
25,252
6,817
0

28,023
34,245
12
(27)
34,823
(578)
578

Deming

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Deming

SW Laborer

Main Wkr

Laborer

SENIOR CTR DIRECTOR

Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary

Los Lunas

Las Vegas
Sen Ctr Dir

37,939

Lovington

Bloomfield

Bloomfield

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

31,897

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Packer OP

Equip OP

Sanitation Dvr

Ruidoso

22,786
28,240
7
(6,032)
30,945
(2,705)
2,705

32,215

23,525

40,914

50

Portales

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

34,272

35,944

26,229

45,656

55

20,273
36,134
19
1,862
35,944
190
0
Silver City

Main Wkr

19,739
25,625
11
1,727
21,065
4,560
0
Deming

Silver City

33,300
42,000
7
10,103
27,754
14,246
0

30,905
35,235
14
963
36,508
(1,273)
1,273
Lovington

Portales
Trans Oper

24,252
33,488
24
(784)
35,944
(2,456)
2,456

SW LABORER

20,987
20,841
2
(3,057)
17,031
3,810
0

Ruidoso

24,947
26,000
2 mo
(5,897)
23,525
2,475
0

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

21,957
22,293
1
(1,605)
16,633
5,660
0

Bloomfield

Trans Oper

30,388
27,518
3
(4,379)
25,252
2,266
0

21,507
38,292
9
4,020
32,441
5,851
0

Lovington

Prevailing

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

23,898

22,265

16,245

28,267

30

24,701
26,832
7
2,934
18,718
8,114
0
Lovington

Bloomfield

Sen Ctr Dir

Sen Ctr Dir

33,840

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

50,667

52,213
Page 24 of 28

48,479

35,381

61,568

70

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

ASSESSMENT COOR

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

SENIOR CTR DRIVER

PUBLIC HOUSING DIR

Deming

Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Los Lunas

Deming

Deming

Los Lunas

Portales

Silver City

Driver

Driver

Deming

24,947
27,685
5
3,370
19,826
7,859
0
Lovington

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

27,407

Ruidoso

Portales

Silver City

26,375

19,261

33,488

40

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

22,844

21,025
21,025
5 mo
(1,819)
16,245
4,780
0
Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Portales

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Housing Dir.

Silver City

Portales

Page 25 of 28

28,267

30

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

24,140

17,618

30,659

35

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

62,608

54,953
62,608

16,245

Prevailing
24,315

22,265

Cook

16,806
20,945
2
(3,370)
18,470
2,475
0
Las Vegas

Ruidoso

24,701
24,710
<1
(2,697)
19,261
5,449
0
Bloomfield

24,947
27,685
17
11,440
22,265
5,420
0

Assess Coor

Lovington

Lovington

Cook

Bloomfield

24,947
31,221
9
3,814
23,267
7,954
0

16,806
19,822
2
(3,022)
17,031
2,791
0
Las Vegas

62,375
11
11,708
45,878
16,497
0

NAPIS Clerk

Driver/Helper

41,309
19
(9,358)
48,479
(7,170)
7,170
Lovington

25,563
26,291
1
(1,116)
19,721
6,570
0

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary

Assess Coor

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

SENIOR CTR COOK

48,318
2
(2,349)
37,092
11,226
0

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

TRANSIT SUPVERVISOR

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

TRANSIT DRIVER

DISPATCH 911 MGR

911 SUPERVISOR
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position

Las Vegas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Los Lunas

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Los Lunas

Las Vegas
Comm Mgr

29,424
36,173
3
(3,807)
30,878
5,295
0
Los Lunas
Cert 911 Supv

29,424
36,173
3

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Silver City

Deming

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Comm Supv

Portales

38,840
44,803
23

26,420
26,420
1 mo
Page 26 of 28

Salary

Pay

Minimum

Maximum

Range

29,039

21,195

36,878

45

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

24,140

17,618

30,659

35

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

39,980

33,300
51,424
7.5
11,444
33,938
17,486
0

Dispatch Sup

Salary

Midpoint

24,989

19,165
24,269
8.5
(720)
21,282
2,987
0
Portales

Calculated

Rate

EMS Dir

29,494
32,344
2
(7,636)
30,157
2,187
0
Las Vegas

Prevailing
29,931

Transit Dvr

20,467
25,708
7
720
20,785
4,923
0

Chief Opns Mgr

Silver City

24,107
24,107
0
(5,824)
21,195
2,912
0
Portales

Transit Dvr

Transit Supv

26,852
35,755
7
5,824
25,006
10,749
0
Las Vegas

Portales

Transit Supv

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

6 mo
0
28,766
33,842
0

39,413

28,766

50,045

60

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

35,799

35,944

26,229

45,645

55

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

911 DISPATCHER
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

GAS SUPERINTENDENT

374
28,155
8,018
0
Los Lunas

Las Vegas

Cert Disp

Comm Spec

25,418
34,305
3
1,328
25,252
9,053
0
Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

GAS OPERATOR I

Los Lunas

Participant Job Title:

Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate
Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

GAS LABORER
Participant Job Title:
Starting Salary
Current Salary
# Years in Position
Variance from Prevailing Rate

Los Lunas

Deming

21,923
29,827
7.5
(3,150)
27,754
2,073
0

Lovington

Las Vegas

Deming

Gas Sys Mgr

Gas Foreman

42,931
54,246
4.5
375
43,618
10,628
0

Deming

Gas Oper I

Gas Oper I

23,150
23,150
0
(5,117)

24,252
33,384
25
5,117

23,150
0

33,384
0

Las Vegas

Deming

Laborer

Laborer

Bloomfield

Lovington

Bloomfield

(9,379)
26,229
191
0

Ruidoso

Portales

Telecom Off

Comm Oper

29,616
40,040
12
7,063
31,233
8,807
0
Ruidoso

Silver City

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

32,977

22,260
27,735
2
(5,242)
24,663
3,072
0
Portales

Prevailing

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Silver City

Portales

Lovington

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

Page 27 of 28

50

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

54,355

39,686

69,035

75

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

29,039

21,195

36,878

45

Silver City

Prevailing

Calculated

Salary

Salary

Pay

Rate

Midpoint

Minimum

Maximum

Range

24,117

19,739
26,873
13
2,756

40,914

Portales

23,525

Prevailing

28,267

32,215

53,872

39,270
53,497
14
(375)
51,338
2,159
0

Las Vegas

17,222
21,361
2
(2,756)

9,004
35,944
8,859
0

24,140

17,618

30,659

35

TABLE 3 - MARKET SURVEY DATA - SALARY COMPARISIONS

Min Salary Based on Seniority
Variance from Seniority Step
Fiscal Impact to City

TOTALS (Estimated)
Fiscal Impact to City

18,470
2,891
0

23,950
2,923
0

$10,397

$37,434

$4,728

$23,290

$4,806

$1,273

$6,788

$40,250

Page 28 of 28

TABLE 4
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY

Las Vegas

191
$7,048,378
$14,879,561

274
$9,312,024
$11,350,322

180
$6,305,610
$10,799,040

101
$5,857,248
$9,932,078

117
$5,006,560
$8,462,417

213
$9,373,126
$14,467,545

128
$4,681,686
$8,624,400

158
$5,865,699
$8,808,679

# employees below minimum step

Cost to adjust to minimum step
As % of Payroll

1
$895
0.0%

7
$16,869
0.2%

1
$1,456
0.0%

1
$1,976
0.0%

0
$0
0.0%

0
$0
0.0%

1
$2,702
0.1%

3
$4,611
0.1%

# employees above maximum step

Cost of those employees
As % of Payroll

2
$5,324
0.1%

2
$15,516
0.2%

0
$0
0.0%

1
$6,864
0.1%

11
$48,591
1.0%

9
$54,110
0.6%

9
$36,982
0.8%

3
$9,109
0.2%

# employees adjusted for seniority

Cost to adjust salaries for seniority
As % of Payroll

8
$10,397
0.1%

13
$37,434
0.4%

4
$4,728
0.1%

4
$23,290
0.4%

3
$4,806
0.1%

1
$1,273
0.0%

4
$6,788
0.1%

13
$40,250
0.7%

Number of Employees
FY 15 Total Payroll
FY 15 General Fund

Deming

SURVEY PARTICIPANTS
Lovington
Bloomfield
Ruidoso

Los Lunas

Footnotes:
1 In those job classifications that included several incumbents, the incumbent with the most seniority was selected to determine fiscal impact.
2 The assumption is that if the most senior incumbent does not create a fiscal impact, the remaining incumbents also do not create a fiscal impact.
3 Credit for service in current job classification was granted to all employees based on the new salary schedule.
4 The credit given was equal to 2.39% for each year of service up to the midpoint.

Portales

Silver City

TABLE 5 - STATE OF NEW MEXICO

FY15 CLASSIFIED SERVICE SALARY SCHEDULE (EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2014)
Hourly
Pay Band
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
96
97
98
99

Notes:

Minimum
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

7.50
7.81
8.47
9.26
10.19
11.31
12.61
13.83
15.28
17.01
19.08
21.53
24.47
27.95
32.12
37.09
43.01
50.06
94.17

Annual

Midpoint
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

9.96
10.70
11.61
12.68
13.96
15.49
17.28
18.95
20.94
23.31
26.13
29.50
33.51
38.29
44.00
50.80
58.91
68.57
129.00

Maximum
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

12.65
13.59
14.74
16.10
17.73
19.67
21.95
24.06
26.59
29.60
33.19
37.46
42.56
48.63
55.88
64.52
74.82
87.08
163.83

Minimum
$ 15,600.00 $
$ 16,245.00 $
$ 17,618.00 $
$ 19,261.00 $
$ 21,195.00 $
$ 23,525.00 $
$ 26,229.00 $
$ 28,766.00 $
$ 31,782.00 $
$ 35,381.00 $
$ 39,686.00 $
$ 44,782.00 $
$ 50,898.00 $
$ 58,136.00 $
$ 66,810.00 $
$ 77,147.00 $
$ 89,461.00 $
$ 104,125.00 $
$ 195,874.00 $

Midpoint
20,714.00
22,265.00
24,140.00
26,375.00
29,039.00
32,215.00
35,944.00
39,413.00
43,549.00
48,479.00
54,355.00
61,359.00
69,709.00
79,649.00
91,525.00
105,674.00
122,539.00
142,626.00
268,320.00

Maximum
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

26,312.00
28,267.00
30,659.00
33,488.00
36,878.00
40,914.00
45,656.00
50,045.00
55,307.00
61,568.00
69,035.00
77,917.00
88,525.00
101,150.00
116,230.00
134,202.00
155,626.00
181,126.00
340,766.00

Each pay band for classified employees is currently at a seventy-four percent wide - meaning the maximum rate of pay is seventy-four (Avg.)
percent greater than the minimum rate of pay.
This FY15 Classified Service Salary Schedule was adopted by the New Mexico State Personnel Board effective July 1, 2014.

TABLE 6 - STATE OF NEW MEXICO

FY15 CLASSIFIED SERVICE SALARY SCHEDULE WITH STEPS

Pay
Band
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
96
97
98
99

< 1 Year

1 Year

2 Years

3 Years

4 Years

5 Years

6 Years

7 Years

8 Years

9 Years

10 Years

11 Years

12 Years

13 Years

Minimum
Salary

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step

Step 6

Step 7

Step 8

Step 9

Step 10

Step 11

Step 12

Midpoint
Salary

15,973
16,633
18,039
19,721
21,702
24,087
26,856
29,454
32,542
36,227
40,634
45,852
52,114
59,525
68,407
78,991
91,599
106,614
200,555

16,355
17,031
18,470
20,193
22,220
24,663
27,498
30,157
33,319
37,092
41,606
46,948
53,360
60,948
70,042
80,879
93,788
109,162
205,349

17,555
18,281
19,826
21,675
23,852
26,474
29,517
32,372
35,766
39,816
44,661
50,395
57,278
65,423
75,185
86,817
100,675
117,177
220,427

17,975
18,718
20,300
22,193
24,422
27,107
30,222
33,146
36,621
40,768
45,728
51,600
58,647
66,987
76,982
88,892
103,081
119,978
225,695

20,712
21,568
23,391
25,572
28,140
31,233
34,823
38,192
42,196
46,974
52,690
59,456
67,576
77,185
88,702
102,426
118,775
138,244
260,056

20,714
22,265
24,140
26,375
29,039
32,215
35,944
39,413
43,549
48,479
54,355
61,359
69,709
79,649
91,525
105,674
122,539
142,626
268,320

15,600
16,245
17,618
19,261
21,195
23,525
26,229
28,766
31,782
35,381
39,686
44,782
50,898
58,136
66,810
77,147
89,461
104,125
195,874

Footnotes:
1
2
3
4

16,745
17,438
18,912
20,675
22,751
25,252
28,155
30,878
34,116
37,979
42,600
48,070
54,635
62,405
71,716
82,812
96,030
111,771
210,256

17,146
17,855
19,364
21,169
23,295
25,856
28,828
31,616
34,931
38,887
43,618
49,219
55,941
63,896
73,430
84,791
98,325
114,442
215,282

18,405
19,166
20,785
22,724
25,006
27,754
30,945
33,938
37,496
41,742
46,821
52,833
60,049
68,588
78,821
91,017
105,545
122,845
231,089

18,845
19,624
21,282
23,267
25,603
28,418
31,684
34,749
38,392
42,740
47,940
54,096
61,484
70,227
80,705
93,192
108,067
125,781
236,612

19,295
20,093
21,791
23,823
26,215
29,097
32,441
35,579
39,310
43,761
49,086
55,389
62,953
71,906
82,634
95,419
110,650
128,787
242,267

19,756
20,573
22,312
24,392
26,842
29,792
33,217
36,430
40,249
44,807
50,259
56,713
64,458
73,624
84,609
97,700
113,295
131,865
248,057

20,228
21,065
22,845
24,975
27,483
30,504
34,011
37,300
41,211
45,878
51,460
58,068
65,998
75,384
86,631
100,035
116,002
135,017
253,986

Minimum salary applies to employees with minimal experience and less than one year of service.
The Assumption is made that the City Manager has the authority to appoint an employee between minimum salary and midpoint based on prior job related experience.
The difference between each of the steps shown above is equal to 2.39%, which is equivalent to the cost of living mean for the past 10 year period.
Credit is being granted to employees who have served in their current job classification that is equal to one step for each year of service up to the midpoint salary.

TABLE 7
PERA CONTRIBUTION RATES - SURVEY PARTICIPANTS
Contribution Rates %

General Employees:
Municipal Employee Plan I

Employee Employer
7.00
7.40

Municipal Employee Plan II

9.15

9.55

Municipal Employee Plan III

13.15

9.55

Municipal Employee Plan IV

15.65

12.05

Municipal Police Plan

Municipal Police Plan I

7.00

15.40

Municipal Police Plan III

7.00

18.90

Municipal Police Plan IV

12.35

13.85

Municipal Police Plan V

16.30

18.90

Municipal Fire Plan I

Las Vegas

13.25/9.15 14.65/9.55

Deming

Lovington
8.50/7.04

Bloomfield

Ruidoso

9.15/9.15

6.25/13.95

Portales

Silver City

10.65/9.55

12.4/11.8

Contribution Rates %
7.00
10.04

Municipal Police Plan II

Municipal Fire Plan

Los Lunas

3.67/20.13

8.50/10.4

16.30/18.58 17.80/18.90 15.55/21.15

14.80/21.9

11.90/23.30

17.8/18.9

4.45/31.85

14.70/24.65

11.80/26.05

17.7/21.65 4.43/34.52

Contribution Rates %
8.00
11.40

Municipal Fire Plan II

8.00

17.90

Municipal Fire Plan III

8.00

21.65

Municipal Fire Plan IV

12.80

21.65

Municipal Fire Plan V

16.20

21.65

17.70/21.65
16.20/26.25 17.70/21.65 15.45/23.90

TABLE 8
INSURANCE CONTRIBUTION RATES - SURVEY PARTICIPANTS
Major Medical

LOS LUNAS
Employee

LAS VEGAS

Employer

DEMING

Employee Employer

LOVINGTON

Employee Employer

Employee

BLOOMFIELD

Employer

RUIDOSO

Employee Employer

Employee

PORTALES

Employer

Employee

SILVER CITY
Employer

Employee

Employer

Employee Employer

Municipal General Employees

100

25

75

22.5

77.5

15

85

20

80

20

80

25

75

20

80

Municipal Police Employees

100

30

70

31.5

68.5

15

85

20

80

20

80

25

75

100

Municipal Fire Employees

100

25

75

31.5

68.5

15

85

20

80

20

80

25

75

10

90

Dental
Employee

Employer

Employee Employer

Employee Employer

Employee

Employer

Employee Employer

Employee

Employer

Employee

Employer

Employee

Employer

Employee Employer

Municipal General Employees

50

50

50

50

22.5

77.5

$9.44

$9.44

20

80

20

80

25

75

20

80

Municipal Police Employees

50

50

50

50

31.5

68.5

$9.44

$9.44

20

80

20

80

25

75

100

Municipal Fire Employees

50

50

50

50

31.5

68.5

$9.44

$9.44

20

80

20

80

25

75

10

90

Vision
Employee

Employer

Employee Employer

Employee Employer

Employee

Employer

Employee Employer

Employee

Employer

Employee

Employer

Employee

Employer

Employee Employer

Municipal General Employees

100

50

50

22.5

77.5

20

80

20

80

25

75

20

80

Municipal Police Employees

100

50

50

31.5

68.5

20

80

20

80

25

75

100

Municipal Fire Employees

100

50

50

31.5

68.5

20

80

20

80

25

75

10

90

Other Information:
Total Number of Employees

191

274

180

101

117

213

128

124

TABLE 9
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX - LAST TEN YEARS
United States: Consumer Price Index

Consumer Price Index - All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), Not Seasonally Adjusted
All items, U.S. city average (base period: 1982-1984=100)

month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec

2004
185.2
186.2
187.4
188
189.1
189.7
189.4
189.5
189.9
190.9
191
190.3

2005
190.7
191.8
193.3
194.6
194.4
194.5
195.4
196.4
198.8
199.2
197.6
196.8

2006
198.3
198.7
199.8
201.5
202.5
202.9
203.5
203.9
202.9
201.8
201.5
201.8

2007
202.416
203.499
205.352
206.686
207.949
208.352
208.299
207.917
208.49
208.936
210.177
210.036

2008
211.08
211.693
213.528
214.823
216.632
218.815
219.964
219.086
218.783
216.573
212.425
210.228

2009
211.143
212.193
212.709
213.24
213.856
215.693
215.351
215.834
215.969
216.177
216.33
215.949

2010
216.687
216.741
217.631
218.009
218.178
217.965
218.011
218.312
218.439
218.711
218.803
219.179

2011
220.223
221.309
223.467
224.906
225.964
225.722
225.922
226.545
226.889
226.421
226.23
225.672

2012
226.665
227.663
229.392
230.085
229.815
229.478
229.104
230.379
231.407
231.317
230.221
229.601

2013
230.28
232.166
232.773
232.531
232.945
233.504
233.596
233.877
234.149
233.546
233.069
233.049

annual
average

188.9

195.3

201.6

207.342

215.303

214.537

218.056

224.939

229.594

232.957

2.70%

3.40%

3.20%

2.80%

3.80%

-0.40%

1.60%

3.20%

2.10%

1.50%

% change
same month
2014
2013
233.916
1.6
234.781
1.1
236.293
1.5
237.072
2.0
237.900
2.1
238.343
2.1
238.250
2.0
237.852
1.7

year-year
% change

Source: U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Table prepared by UNM Bureau of Business and Economic Research.

2.39%
(This is the mean of the 10 year period)

TABLE 10
ANNUAL AVERAGE WAGES/SALARIES PER JOB - NEW MEXICO COUNTIES
2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009r

2010r

2011p

$29,397

$30,393

$31,318

$32,562

$34,002

$35,503

$37,147

$38,686

$39,301

$40,069

$40,905

Chaves

24,157

25,367

25,297

26,328

27,378

28,856

29,976

31,363

31,668

32,457

33,060

Cibola

22,493

23,767

24,047

25,694

28,423

29,473

31,298

32,735

33,051

33,866

34,793

Colfax

23,099

24,402

24,601

25,580

26,750

27,974

29,493

29,804

30,528

31,010

31,184

Curry

25,975

27,594

28,074

28,999

30,646

31,971

32,929

34,176

35,863

37,409

38,921

De Baca

20,830

22,073

21,780

22,214

22,931

24,149

25,983

26,378

27,102

26,390

27,362

Dona Ana

24,238

25,538

26,633

27,752

29,063

30,285

31,792

33,164

34,593

35,094

35,281

Eddy

29,054

30,058

30,963

33,247

35,358

37,529

40,972

44,368

43,806

50,706

47,611

Grant

23,518

23,485

24,452

26,208

27,616

28,265

29,843

33,369

33,640

33,173

35,645

Guadalupe

20,976

20,502

21,873

23,425

22,894

25,939

25,571

26,830

26,880

28,547

28,231

Harding

21,106

22,419

22,059

23,165

24,522

26,831

29,145

30,198

31,640

29,365

29,376

Hidalgo

21,537

22,491

23,025

24,509

25,697

27,790

31,561

34,308

35,114

35,434

37,647

Lea

28,087

28,301

28,983

30,470

33,291

37,937

41,546

46,547

43,282

44,455

47,455

Lincoln

21,014

22,407

23,757

24,760

25,420

26,516

27,551

27,926

28,427

28,984

29,249

Luna

21,395

22,738

22,911

24,287

26,500

27,345

28,844

31,184

31,372

31,957

33,544

McKinley

26,616

27,007

27,158

27,972

28,858

29,880

30,992

30,789

31,729

32,276

33,278

Mora

22,042

22,127

23,273

24,114

25,183

26,660

28,211

29,125

29,518

29,874

30,171

Otero

26,052

27,681

27,841

28,605

29,784

31,676

32,753

33,614

35,355

37,331

38,469

Quay

23,422

24,313

25,465

25,874

26,452

27,390

28,837

29,970

30,606

30,649

31,783

Rio Arriba

22,913

23,544

24,081

24,466

26,024

27,456

28,923

29,418

30,462

30,801

31,457

Roosevelt

21,871

23,217

22,792

23,852

25,344

26,793

29,461

30,744

30,810

29,877

31,436

Sandoval

35,633

34,199

35,140

36,237

37,282

38,323

39,965

39,149

39,878

41,551

44,011

San Juan

29,407

29,639

30,715

32,524

34,137

36,584

39,143

41,838

41,081

42,084

44,066

San Miguel

21,845

22,691

23,068

24,373

25,621

27,050

28,478

29,216

30,159

30,402

30,121

Santa Fe

29,657

31,236

31,223

32,780

33,625

35,661

37,940

39,497

40,036

40,648

41,195

Sierra

20,911

22,474

22,624

23,475

24,524

25,339

26,207

27,372

28,151

28,310

28,798

Socorro

25,055

26,595

27,103

28,473

28,692

30,949

30,644

31,490

32,558

32,807

33,044

Torrance

22,586

23,377

25,029

25,746

26,533

28,095

29,408

29,849

30,485

30,336

30,710

Union

21,027

21,564

21,739

22,894

24,028

24,981

26,811

29,497

29,506

29,712

29,579

Valencia

23,623

23,929

24,521

25,639

26,535

27,492

28,850

29,871

30,003

30,475

30,977

Area
New Mexico

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Data released November 2012. Prepared by UNM Bureau of Business and Econonic Research

TABLE 11
PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME - NEW MEXICO COUNTIES
2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009r

2010r

2011p

$24,751

$24,977

$25,639

$27,092

$28,641

$30,209

$31,675

$33,490

$32,200

$32,940

$34,133

Catron

16,910

16,989

17,904

19,589

21,171

20,946

21,379

24,200

24,730

26,363

29,113

Chaves

22,169

21,959

22,169

23,628

24,623

26,270

28,597

30,672

27,105

29,010

30,319

Cibola

15,301

16,508

17,792

18,791

20,727

22,098

22,539

24,073

24,645

25,373

25,965

Colfax

22,851

22,730

24,079

24,929

26,171

26,872

28,563

31,346

31,099

31,730

34,359

Curry

22,995

23,156

24,267

26,358

27,625

28,636

31,560

34,711

34,103

36,710

39,844

De Baca

23,154

22,148

22,913

24,575

25,094

25,969

26,851

31,068

28,302

32,027

37,454

Dona Ana

20,086

20,746

21,235

22,587

24,017

25,075

26,772

28,325

28,436

29,431

29,963

Eddy

24,410

24,944

26,398

27,390

29,931

32,572

34,854

40,382

36,681

40,803

41,539

Grant

19,889

19,753

20,428

22,756

24,795

26,128

27,892

30,907

29,357

30,389

32,854

Guadalupe

15,131

15,044

15,637

17,311

18,428

18,647

19,182

21,515

22,556

24,436

26,426

Harding

36,237

29,004

31,765

33,566

33,882

30,842

28,501

34,335

32,196

38,986

48,067

Hidalgo

17,153

16,809

17,602

19,481

21,491

23,336

25,303

29,062

29,159

30,746

32,425

Lea

22,742

21,674

23,033

24,673

26,644

29,569

32,302

37,768

32,329

34,607

37,898

Lincoln

21,560

21,746

22,062

23,161

24,530

25,457

28,091

30,751

29,354

30,820

32,309

Luna

16,420

17,349

18,207

19,349

21,243

21,935

23,640

25,232

26,652

28,520

29,338

McKinley

15,194

16,035

17,141

18,032

19,324

19,991

21,649

22,649

23,585

23,964

24,079

Mora

16,571

17,251

18,181

19,610

20,186

20,352

21,575

24,017

25,440

26,295

27,908

Otero

19,079

20,031

20,395

21,419

22,413

23,424

24,709

26,066

27,042

29,054

30,154

Quay

20,563

19,733

20,879

22,691

24,751

25,518

27,319

29,004

29,450

31,163

33,385

Rio Arriba

19,365

20,513

21,859

23,169

24,260

24,830

25,895

27,529

27,868

28,504

28,888

Roosevelt

21,993

22,157

22,502

25,428

25,521

25,029

27,778

30,549

27,760

30,887

32,595

Sandoval

25,790

25,239

25,098

26,483

27,841

29,056

30,173

31,796

30,956

31,634

32,931

San Juan

21,061

20,600

21,202

22,584

24,388

26,645

28,290

31,519

29,004

29,218

31,373

San Miguel

19,301

20,061

20,994

22,463

23,550

25,074

26,807

28,847

29,532

30,523

31,366

Sierra

19,691

19,338

19,751

21,673

23,242

24,020

26,702

29,562

29,853

31,653

32,974

Socorro

17,992

19,027

19,306

21,471

23,356

24,115

25,741

27,718

27,447

29,155

30,462

Taos

21,274

22,012

23,510

25,223

27,292

28,810

29,961

30,453

29,220

29,921

31,119

Torrance

19,135

19,582

21,183

22,537

24,390

25,027

26,594

28,846

28,407

29,317

30,439

Union

28,510

27,027

25,681

26,666

29,732

27,174

24,268

28,028

26,884

23,644

25,986

Valencia

19,782

20,550

21,758

23,481

24,481

25,722

27,029

28,559

28,008

28,037

28,921

County
New Mexico1

Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Data released November 2012. Prepared by UNM Bureau of Business and Economic Research

Proposal for the

City of Bloomfield
Audit Services

By Axiom CPAs and Business Advisors, LLC

PRICE QUOTE
City of Bloomfield

It is with great pleasure that Axiom Certified Public Accountants and Business Advisors, LLC
(Axiom)submitsthispricequotetoprovideauditservicestoCityofBloomfield(City).We
arededicatedtoplanningourauditscarefully,whileworkingcooperativelywithyouandyour
staff.Wearededicatedtocompletingyourauditinanefficientandeffectivemannertoensure
itissubmittedbeforethedeadline.

About Axiom: Axiom, a limited liability corporation whose office is located in Albuquerque
andhastwentynineemployeesincludingthefourPartners.ThefourPartnersofAxiomhave
morethan80yearsofcombinedaccountingexperience.Axiomisafullservice,NewMexico
owned,CertifiedPublicAccountingfirmauthorizedtopracticewithinthestateofNewMexico.
Weprideourselvesonourreputationforintegrity,quality,andreliabilityandalwaysproviding
premierclientservice.

The expertise and backgrounds of the individual Partners and personnel of Axiom are what
makes up Axioms expertise in performing audits of governmental agencies including Cities.
Axiomhasextensiveexperienceinprovidingexceptionalclientserviceandprovideshighquality
auditservicesthroughitsindepthknowledgeofauditingstandardsandaccountingstandards
applicabletogovernmentalorganizations.

WHY AXIOM IS THE BEST FIT FOR THE CITY

It is imperative that the audit function be completed correctly, completely, and submitted to
theNewMexicoStateAuditortimelytoprovidethebestoperationalbenefittotheCityandto
meettheStateAuditorsdeadlines.Wecommitseveralresourcesthroughouttheyeartotrain
our staff to be uptodate on accounting and auditing standards applicable to governmental
organizationswhichenablesAxiomtocompleteourauditswithahighdegreeofquality.

Partner Presence at the City: Chris Garner, CPA, Partner for Axiom, will be the onsite
engagementmanagerforyouraudit.Mr.Garnerwillbeonsiteforatleast25%oftheaudit
process. This will help with the efficiency of audit and ensure that the City receives superior
clientservice.Additionally,thiswillhelpusfinishtheauditinatimelymannertoensurethat
wemeettheNewMexicoStateAuditordeadline.

AuditingExperiencewithGovernmentalEntities:Ourauditteamsexperience,expertise,and
training is from performing governmental audits As a result of our vast experience auditing
governmentalorganizations,weunderstandwhatittakestocompleteyouraudit.Overall,the
expertiseofthepersonnelthatmakeupAxiomsauditpracticegroupisallencompassing.The
Partner and Supervisor who would be responsible for your audit have completed over 250
audits of approximately 70 different governmental entities (including City Governments).
SomeoftheGovernmentstheyhaveworkedwithincludeCityofAztec,VillageofRuidoso,City

ofRoswell,VillageofLosLunas,VillageofAngelFire,CityofFarmington,CityofAlbuquerque,
City of Las Vegas, City of Portland Oregon, City of Riverside California, to mention a few.
Through this experience we have developed and continue to develop great audit practices
related to planning the audit to be effective and value driven, highly respectable
coordination/communication of the audit with client staff personnel through a teamwork
approach,andhighlyreputablepreparationandreportingoftheresultsoftheaudit.

While working for a large regional accounting firm (Moss Adams), Mr. Garner did four joint
audits with the New Mexico State Auditor (OSA) for the City of Albuquerque. Mr. Garner,
alongwiththeDeputyStateAuditor,ledthisteamandwasresponsiblefortheentirescopeof
the engagement. This experience working with the OSA has proved invaluable in regards to
understandingtherequirementsoftheOSA.

WeDeliver:Youwillnotbewaitingonus.Wemovedirectlyfromfieldworktocompletingthe
reportinatimelymanner.Itisourgoaltoperformtheauditunderalightsoutapproachthat
is within the required timeframe of the Cityand with theNew Mexico State Auditors Office.
Thisapproachinvolvesallworkperformedandreviewedinthefieldtoimproveeffectiveness,
timing,andcommunication.ThisispossibleasthePartnerinchargeofyourauditwillbeinthe
fieldonadailybasis.In2012,wewerehiredastheauditorsforFloydSchoolsandtheVillageof
LosLunas.Workingwithbothoftheseclients,wewereabletogettheirauditsubmittedtothe
StateAuditorbytheduedateforthefirsttimeinseveralyears.

Working with the City on Findings: We work with our clients on not just coming up with
recommendationsforimprovinginternalcontrolsandprocedures,weworkwithourclientson
implementing our suggestions. An example is with Valencia County. Upon completion of the
fiscalyear2012audit(ourfirstauditwiththeCounty),wemetwiththeCountymanagement
team numerous times to address findings and prior audit issues including how to resolve the
Countynotreceivinganunmodifiedopinion.Asaresultofthenumerousmeetings,theCounty
receiveditsfirstunmodifiedopinioninatleastthelast15years.Wecommittoworkingwith
ourclientsthroughouttheyeartohelpmakeadifference.Weworkwithourclientsnotonlyto
complete the audit but also to be a resource to address findings. See below for a copy of a
referenceletterfromValenciaCounty.

WHAT DISTINGUISHES US AS A UNIQUE AND WELL QUALIFIED FIRM

ClientServiceandTeamwork:Weprideourselvesinprovidingsuperiorclientservice.Wewill
be attentive to your every need and will do everything we can to keep you informed on the
issuesandareasthatareofparticularimportancetoyou.Completionofvalueadded,efficient
andeffectiveauditsrequiresahighdegreeofteamworkwithallindividualsoftheCityandwith
Axiom. We pride ourselves on this teamwork approach. We will communicate with you
regularlyaboutthetrendsaffectingyourindustryand,whenneeded,willprovideyouwithin
depthanalysisandcommentary.

EaseofWorkingwithUs:Areauditsfun?No.Yet,clientafterclientwillattesttoourabilityto
addressissuesinaconsultativeandhelpfulmanner.Ourapproachisproductive,efficient,and
not combative. If we identify issues, we will communicate them immediately and work with
youtogetthemresolved.

Contact Information: We pride ourselves on our work and dedication to providing superior
clientservice.Wewouldbehappytoclarifyanyitemsdiscussedwithinthisproposalandwould
behappytoprovideanyadditionalinformationasrequestedbyyou.Pleasefeelfreetocontact
uswithanyquestionsyoumayhave.Ourcontactinformationislistedbelow:

ContactName:
ChrisGarner

ContactTitle:
Partner

TelephoneNumber: 5057677640(o)5056814446(c)

Email:

chris.garner@axiomnm.com

Youwillbeanexceptionallyimportantclienttous.Wearecommittedandhavetheadequate
resourcesavailabletoprovideyouwiththehighestlevelofclientserviceandattention.

Sincerely,

ChrisGarner,CPA
Partner

TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE

ExperiencewithGovernmentalAudits:TheauditteamthatwouldbeassignedtotheCityhas
extensive experience auditing governments. Axiom has extensive experience in providing
exceptional Client service and provides high quality audit services through its indepth
knowledge of governmental accounting standards, those standards applicable to audits
performed in accordance with the Office of Management and Budget Circular A133 and the
NewMexicoOfficeoftheStateAuditor(OSA).

Our audit teams experience, expertise, and training is from performing audits in accordance
with Government Auditing Standards, the NewMexico Office of the State Auditor2015 audit
ruling2.2.2NMAC,OMBCircularA133forgovernmentsincludingcounties,GenerallyAccepted
Governmental Auditing Standards, U.S. General Accounting Office government auditing
standards, and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. As a result of our vast experience
auditinggovernmentalorganizations,weunderstandwhatittakestocompleteyouraudit.

TeamLeader:YourteamleaderwillbeChrisGarner,CPA,andPartner,whowillbetheprimary
contactthroughoutthetermofthecontract.Mr.Garnerwillbeonsiteforatleast25%ofthe
audit.ThiswillhelpwiththeefficiencyoftheauditandensurethattheCityreceivessuperior
clientservice.Additionally,thiswillhelpusfinishtheauditinatimelymannertoensurethat
wemeettheStateAuditordeadline.

Resumes of the onsite engagement manager, IT Audit Manager and onsite supervisor are
detailedbelow.AllotherstaffmembersassignedtotheauditengagementoftheCitywillbe
independent, compliant with the GAGAS continuing professional education requirement, and
qualifiedtoworkwiththeCityontheiraudit.Duringthecourseofouraudit,weexpectthe
followingpersonneltobeassignedtoyourengagement:

ChrisGarner:Audit
ManagingPartner(on
siteengagement
manager)

JimCox:Manager
(onsitesupervisorfor
fullscopeofaudit)

AxiomStaff

EverettTrujillo:
Partner(ITAudit
Manager)

AxiomStaff

Thefollowingaretheresumesofthekeypersonnelthatwouldbeassignedtoyouraudit:


CHRIS GARNER, CPA
PARTNER
ONSITE ENGAGEMENT MANAGER

Chris Garner, Partner and Certified Public Accountant, has spent the 21 of his 24 year career
serving governmental organizations, including counties. Chris has been supervising audits for
morethan20years.PriortobeingoneofthefoundingPartnersofAxiom,Chrisworkedfora
regionalaccountingfirm,MossAdamsLLP,foreightyears.Whileatthatfirm,hewasamember
of the firms Government and NotforProfit Industry Group Executive Committee. This
committeewasresponsibleforthedirectionofthegovernmentauditsperformedforthefirm
and was responsible to ensure that team members performing government audits remained
currentonauditingstandardsalongwithgovernmentalGAAP.

Chris experience, expertise, and training is from performing audits in accordance with
GovernmentAuditingStandards,theNewMexicoOfficeoftheStateAuditor2015auditruling
2.2.2 NMAC, OMB Circular A133 for general and special purpose governments including
counties, cities, colleges/universities, and special districts, Generally Accepted Governmental
Auditing Standards, U.S. General Accounting Office government auditing standards, Generally
AcceptedAccountingPrinciples,andgovernmentalaccountingstandards.

The focus of Chris career during the past 20 years has been auditing state and local
governmental entities. He has assisted various municipal clients. Some of the clients he has
servedincludethefollowing:

COUNTYGOVERNMENTS
MUNICIPALGOVERNMENTS
CityofAztec
SantaFeCounty
CityofRoswell
ValenciaCounty
VillageofLosLunas
BernalilloCounty
VillageofRuidoso
SanJuanCounty
VillageofAngelFire
GuadalupeCounty
CityofAlbuquerque
LosAlamosCounty
CityofLasVegas
DeschutesCounty,Oregon
CityofFarmington
BentonCounty,Oregon
CityofRiverside,California
YamhillCounty,Oregon
CityofPortland,Oregon
MercedCounty,California
CityofRaton
AlamosaCounty,Colorado
CityofLasCruces
MineralCounty,Colorado
CityofAlamosa,Colorado
RioGrandeCounty,Colorado
CityofMonteVista,Colorado
SaguacheCounty,Colorado

ChrishasextensiveexperiencewiththeprovisionsofGASBNo.34.Chrishastaughtnumerous
classes on GASB 34 while he was at Moss Adams. Chris has drafted numerous financial
statementsontheclientsreverencedbelowinaccordancewithGASB34.

During 2011 Chris assisted numerous clients with the implementation of GASB 54 and spent
timewithhisclientstrainingthemfortheimplementationofthisnewstandard.Forexample,
Chris prepared a presentation thathe along with the Director of Financeat Bernalillo County
usedtohelptraintheCountyCommissioners.

Relevance to the City: Through the above mentioned experience, Chris is well qualified to
performtheauditoftheCity.Additionally,hisexperiencewithauditingcountieswillmakethe
audit run effectively and efficiently with minimal difficulties encountered by the City staff in
relationtotrainingauditpersonnelontheoperationsoftheCity.

ChrisiscompliantwithallcontinuingeducationhoursrequiredbytheStateofNewMexicoand
the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants to perform an audit of governmental
organizations,includingmeetingtherequirementsofGovernmentAuditingStandards.

HeisapastmemberoftheNewMexicoStateSocietyPeerReviewCommittee.Heservedfive
years as the Treasurer for the New Mexico Museum of Natural History Foundation. Chris
currently serves on the Board and the Finance Committee for the Albuquerque Ronald
McDonaldHouse.

In summary, Chris Garner is exceptionally qualified for his role in the audit of the City
considering he has performed approximately 180 audits of governmental agencies which
includesCounties.Hehasdevelopedawealthofknowledgeinauditingduringhis20plusyear
careerinpublicaccountingandhasspecificallybecomeanexpertingovernmentalaccounting
practices.

EVERETT TRUJILLO
PARTNER

Everett Trujillo, Partner, has more than 16 years of experience in various areas of state and
local government. Prior to being one of the founding Partners of Axiom, Everett worked for
Moss Adams LLP for more than five years. During this time he worked with various
governmental agencies and nonprofit organizations. Prior to working with the regional
accounting firm, Everett worked for the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department in
variouspositions,includingtaxauditsupervisor,computertechnologyauditor,andoutofstate
auditor. While working with the state of New Mexico he performed numerous audits on
governmental agencies, educational institutions, and participated on various reviews and
testingofinternalcontrols.Everettwillbeinthefieldassistingwiththecompletionoftheaudit
overtheITstructuresandsystemsinplaceattheCity.EverettwillcompletetheITassessment

andwillobtainanunderstandingofthedesignandimplementationoftheCitysITenvironment
andgeneralcomputercontrols.HeholdsaBachelorsdegreeinAccountingfromtheUniversity
ofNewMexicoandanMBAinManagementInformationSystems.


JIM COX, CPA
MANAGER

Prior to joining Axiom, Jim worked for Moss Adams LLP. With his experience at Moss Adams
andAxiom,Jimhasgainedmorethansevenyearsofpublicaccountingandauditingexperience.
Hehasexpertiseintheindustriesofgovernmentalentities,includingcounties.Heiscompliant
with all continuing education hours required by the State of New Mexico and the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants to perform an audit of governmental agencies in
accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards, the requirements
delineated in the New Mexico Office of the State Auditor 2014 Audit Rule 2.2.2 NMAC, and
those standards applicable to Office of Management and Budget Circular A133 Audits of
States,LocalGovernmentsandNonProfitOrganizations.

InthelastfiveyearsJimhasexperienceworkingonthefollowinggovernmentalentities:

CityofAztec
FloydSchools
VillageofLosLunas
LosLunasSchools
CityofAlbuquerque
SanJuanWaterCommission
CityofRaton
PuebloofJemez
CityofPortland,Oregon
PuebloofIsleta
NMAdministrativeOfficeoftheCourts
CityofLasVegas
NMDepartmentofHealth
CityofFarmington
NMEducationalRetirementBoard
VillageofRuidoso
NMPublicEmployeesRetirement
VillageofLosLunas
Association
VillageofAngelFire
NMEnergy,MineralsandNatural
SanJuanCounty
ResourcesDepartment
SantaFeCounty
UniversityofNewMexicoHospitals
ValenciaCounty

LosAlamosCounty

Relevance to the City: As noted in the above, Jim has extensive experience working on
governmental audits. Such knowledge allows Jim to assist with the audit of the City with no
difficulty. Throughout his career, he has assisted Clients with continued implementation of
GASBStatementNo.34and34.In2011,hehasworkedwithSanJuanCountyduringthetime
of implementation of GASB Statement No. 54 in which he provided detailed guidance on the
applicationandevaluationofthefundstructuresoftheCity.

Insummary,JimCox,isqualifiedtoperformanauditoftheCity.Overhissevenyearcareerin
public accounting, he has performed more than 40 audits of governmental entities, including
counties.Hehasadevelopedahighdegreeofknowledgerelatedtogovernmentoperations
andcontrolstructureswhichallowsforanefficientandeffectiveaudit.


TIMELINE

Thetablebelowrepresentsourestimatedtimelinerelatedtoplanning,interimfieldwork,final
fieldwork,andreporting.Weunderstandtherearecircumstancesthatmayrequirealteration
oftheestimatedtimingduetoCityprojects,readiness,etc.Weplantoworkcloselywiththe
Citytoensurethatthetimingwillbeadequatetocompletetheauditbythedeadlineefficiently
andeffectivelywithoutcausingintenseinterruptiontotheoperationsoftheCity.Wewillwork
withtheCitytoensurethattheirauditforthefiscalyearendedJune30,2015andthereafter
willbesubmittedtotheOSAontime.

Weunderstandthatafirstyearaudittakesadditionalworkonbothourclientsandforus.We
proposethattheadditionalworktogainourfirsttimeunderstandingofyourinternalcontrol
systems, internal control processes and you IT environment should be completed well in
advanceoffieldwork.Thiswillallowustogetthroughthefieldworkportionoftheauditinthe
same amount of time as it did in your previous audits. As mentioned earlier, our Partner
responsibleforsigningoffontheengagementwillbeinthefieldforatleast50%ofthetime.
Thisallowsustoaddressanyquestionsorissuesimmediatelyandwearenotwaitingtokeep
theauditprogressing.Also,thisallowsfortheaudittobesubstantiallyreviewedattheendof
thefieldworkwhichreducesthetimebetweenwhenwepulloutofthefieldandwhenwego
over the draft financial statements with management. The timeline below takes all of this
informationintoconsideration.

Task
AxiomEstimatedTimePeriod
Planning
June/July
InterimFieldwork
June/July
FinalFieldwork
August/September
ReportingReviewofFinancialStatements
October
ReportingGoOverFinancialStatementswithManagement
October
ReportingSubmittoStateAuditor
October

REFERENCES

The following are references for work performed by Axiom:

San Juan County
Marcella Brashear, CPA
CFO
(505) 3344266
Village of Ruidoso
Ron Sena
Deputy Village
Manager
(575) 2584343

Village of Los Lunas
Monica Clarke
Finance Officer
(505) 8393840

City of Aztec
Kathy Lamb
Finance Director
(505) 3347653
Santa Fe County
Molly Saiz
Accounting Oversight &
Financial Reporting
Manager
(505) 9952781

Guadalupe County
Rose Fernandez
Finance Director
(575) 4723306

Type of Service Provided

Financial statement audit in accordance
with Governmental Auditing Standards
and Federal OMB Circular A133 audit.

Dates

Fiscal Years 2007
through 2014

Financial statement audit in accordance

with Governmental Auditing Standards
and Federal OMB Circular A133 audit.

Fiscal Years 2013

and 2014

Financial statement audit in accordance

with Governmental Auditing Standards
and Federal OMB Circular A133 audit.

Fiscal Years 2012

through 2014

Financial statement audit in accordance

with Governmental Auditing Standards
and Federal OMB Circular A133 audit.

Fiscal Year 2014

Financial statement audit in accordance
with Governmental Auditing Standards
and Federal OMB Circular A133 audit.

Financial statement audit in accordance
with Governmental Auditing Standards
and Federal OMB Circular A133 audit.

Fiscal Years 2013
and 2014

Fiscal Years 2013
and 2014

COST

Services
FinancialStatementAudit
FederalSingleAudit
DraftingFinancialStatements
(Review)
Other(TravelExpense)
Subtotal
GrossReceiptsTaxes
Total

Services
FinancialStatementAudit
FederalSingleAudit
DraftingFinancialStatements
(Review)
Other(TravelExpense)
Subtotal
GrossReceiptsTaxes
Total

Hours
FY
6/30/15
235
35
20

Cost
FY
6/30/15
$23,500
3,500
2,000

Hours
FY
6/30/16
235
35
20

Cost
FY
6/30/16
$23,500
3,500
2,000

290

2,500
31,500
2,205
$33,705

290

290

2,500
31,500
2,205
$33,705

Hours
FY
6/30/17
235
35
20

Cost
FY
6/30/17
$23,500
3,500
2,000

290

290
290

2,500
31,500
2,205
$33,705

City Hall Utilites

May - May

35500

35118.06

35000
34500
33530.91

34000
33500
33000
32500
13-14

14-15

MOC Utilites
May -May
17272.28
17500
17000
16500

15898.39

16000
15500
15000
13-14

14-15

Gasoline Expense
27043.33

30000
25000

25589.7

21566.71

20000

12783.97

15000
10000
5000
0
13-14

14-15

13-14

14-15
dept 42

dept 10

Sick hours used

3,727.25

3706

4,000.00

2,929.50

3,000.00
2,000.00
1,000.00
0.00
13-14

14-15

May - Nov

Dec - April

2580.75