HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/20/2012 Special Council Meeting SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
JUNE 20, 2012
The Special Meeting of the Council of the County of Kaua`i was called to
order by the Council Chair at the Council Chambers, Historic County Building,
4396 Rice Street, Suite 201, Lihu`e, Kaua`i, on Wednesday, June 20, 2012 at
8:35 a.m., and the following members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Tim Bynum (present at 8:39 a.m.)
Honorable Dickie Chang
Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i (present at 8:42 a.m.)
Honorable Nadine K. Nakamura
Honorable Mel Rapozo
Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura (present at 8:40 a.m.)
Honorable Jay Furfaro, Council Chair
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the agenda as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Chang, and unanimously carried.
COMMUNICATION:
C 2012-173 Communication (05/01/2012) from Robert Crowell, Chair, Salary
Commission, transmitting pursuant to Section 29.03, Kauai County Charter, the
Salary Commission's Resolution No. 2012-2, relating to salaries of the Police and
Fire Chiefs and their deputies, adopted by the Salary Commission on April 23,
2012: Mr. Rapozo moved to approve C 2012-173, seconded by Mr. Chang.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. May I have the Clerk
reconcile what actually needs to be done today on the communication sent to us by
the Commission before I call up the Commission Chair, and what affirmations
actually make what happen or what non-vote makes what happen.
RICKY WATANABE, County Clerk: On this item, the Salary Commission
sent this to the Council, and the Council has 90 days to act on it. Tomorrow is the
deadline. So therefore if the Council considers to reject in part or reject in whole,
the Council is required to reject by a supermajority vote of five (5). If the Council
agrees with the Salary Commission's recommendation, then the Council just needs
to receive this item for the record, and there will be only four (4) votes necessary to
do that.
Council Chair Furfaro: So we need four (4) votes to receive, which will put
the action by the Commission into play. We need five (5) votes if we want to reject
it. Thank you a very Y much.
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Chair, let me just amend my motion to receive.
I believe I made a motion to approve. Let me amend that to a motion to receive.
Mr. Rapozo moved to receive C 2012-173 for the record, seconded by
Mr. Chang.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 2 - JUNE 20, 2012
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Now I would like to start, if I could,
and I want to acknowledge Robert Crowell being here as the Chairman of the
Commission, may I ask you to come up?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much for being here this morning.
I am going to ask you to introduce yourself and then give us an overview of the
transaction of the resolution that came to the body.
ROBERT CROWELL, Chair, Salary Commission: I am Robert Crowell. I am
the Chair of the Salary Commission, and basically, what we passed on to you in the
resolution was for a pay increase for the Chief of Police, the Deputy Chief of Police,
the Fire Chief, and the Deputy Fire Chief.
Council Chair Furfaro: Members, you have been able to read and review
the resolution as submitted to us. Do you have questions for Mr. Crowell?
Councilwoman Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: Thank you for being here, good morning. I have a
question. This is relating to the Charter deadline of March 15, the date by which
the Salary Commission is supposed to submit a resolution to the Council, and in
that resolution that we received prior to March 15, this recommendation was not
part of that package.
Mr. Crowell: That is correct.
Ms. Nakamura: So given all of the discussion leading up to that
point, I was under the impression from the Salary Commission that from here on,
after all the lawsuits were filed and so forth, I believe we got a verbal sort of
agreement that moving forward you would not do this. You would not submit a
recommendation after that date, and here we are with that recommendation after
the March 15 date, after the budget had been approved. So I was just wondering
what was the...why was this not included in the original submittal to the Council?
Mr. Crowell: I cannot answer for the full Commission. I can
answer for myself. I think it was not as clear as it was in testimony after that date
from the Chief and from the Commission that...I believe public safety had a lot to
do with it and understanding the inversion that there was, I think better
understanding. And while we will try...I think we would like to try to get you
something prior to March 15. Being on the Commission a while now, I can kind of
recall that we used to send things after March 15 because I believe the Council
always had a...there was a second crack at the budget, which was usually...I
thought the date was May 1 to get something in final. So that was my thinking
behind all of that too. But like I said, there was a lot to do with the inversion and a
lot to do with public safety.
Ms. Nakamura: My second question is the correspondence from the
Mayor that was sent to the Salary Commission April 18. Basically it says, if I am
reading this correctly, that while he supports the desire of the Salary Commission
to increase the salaries of these four positions that he did not believe that this was
the appropriate economic climate to do this. Was this taken into consideration in
your recommendation?
1
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 3 - JUNE 20, 2012
Mr. Crowell: I cannot recall having real discussion on that. I
think we all understand the economic times, but let me digress a little and give you
my personal feeling about it. And that is while the other department heads, and
you have to understand I come from a State department, so I kind of know a little
bit about what was going on when it came to HGEA, UPW. I know of the freezes we
had back then. While we had freezes, while HGEA and UPW had freezes, the fire,
as well as the police, rank and file continued to get pay raises. While they were
getting their pay raises, we were freezing the chiefs like their counterparts who
supervised HGEA and UPW employees. So while the rank and file of the Police
Department and Fire Department were getting raises, we were freezing the chiefs,
the appointed positions.
Ms. Nakamura: That is a good point. That is a really good point.
Mr. Crowell: So that is what I took into consideration.
Ms. Nakamura: Do you recall what year those increases were
made?
Mr. Crowell: What I do recall is that they had two more years.
Ms. Nakamura: Of increases.
Mr. Crowell: Of increases. I do not recall the years exactly. I
cannot really go back. HGEA and UPW had furloughs. They called them furloughs,
but basically they were pay freezes or even decreases. But while that was
happening, the rank and file of the police and fire continued to move.
Ms. Nakamura: I guess my question is did this April 18 letter reach
the Salary Commission prior to your decision making.
Mr. Crowell: Yes, it did.
Ms. Nakamura: Thank you very much.
Council Chair Furfaro: Other Members, questions for Mr. Crowell? Vice
Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you, Chair, good morning. Thank you for
being here. I guess I was wondering why there was no report or rationale from the
Commission explaining their decision. I know you said you can speak for yourself,
but this was a group decision, and in the past, we have had Salary Commission
Reports or consultant reports that back up the proposed resolution. And you could
even conceive a majority/minority report, but something that would give us an idea
of the group think that went into the proposal because it was a proposal from the
group, not from individuals. So was there any reason why there was no report?
Mr. Crowell: I cannot recall one. I cannot give you a reason, no.
I think whatever was discussed is in our minutes of the meeting. I think there was
discussion that we wanted to keep it a short and sweet resolution, and just get our
point across. But why there was not a report, I do not recall.
Ms. Yukimura: I think you said and I think in the minutes other
people raised, other commissioners raised the factor of public safety. To me there
are issues of public safety with the Public Works Engineer and the Public Works
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 4 - JUNE 20, 2012
Department. I mean sewage, signage, even just the basic functions because public
safety is involved in almost every aspect. So how does that...to me public safety is
not an issue only for Police and Fire.
Mr. Crowell: Point well taken. For myself as Chair, I hope to
stimulate that discussion in future meetings. We have heard from Council Chair
about those kinds of things. We have heard about even licenses and education and
things of that nature that must be taken into consideration, and I think we will. I
hope we will, as Chair.
Ms. Yukimura: So why would you not do it all as one consideration
because it is a...I do not have a professional background in salary setting, such as a
Human Resources person might, but it seems to me it is a weighing and balancing
of diverse factors, and there is a concern about lateral equity as well as vertical
equity, I guess. So it seems to me it would be better done in its totality than to just
do isolated couple positions.
Mr. Crowell: As I explained I do not consider this being isolated
couple positions, and the reason right now is that, like I said previously, whoever in
their wisdom chose to allow the Police and Fire to continue to get pay raises, this in
fact happened. So I think we will in the future—there again, I hope as Chair I can
lead them in that direction—that we will take all of this into consideration. But in
this particular time, we did not. We felt that the need to consider the chiefs and
deputy chiefs of these two departments at this time that it was critical.
Ms. Yukimura: So I also noticed from the minutes that there was
no real posting of a proposed amended salary resolution. It was mainly...people
were agendaed to speak or you were considering various communications, but there
was no proposal from the Salary Commission to raise salaries. So I do not know
how much public notice there was to people who might have wanted...there were
certainly people there who wanted to give testimony, but I do not know if people
really were on notice that a salary resolution was going to come out of this meeting.
Mr. Crowell: Well, to tell you the truth, as the Chair, I was not
aware that that had to be agendaed, that something like that would have had to be
agendaed.
Ms. Yukimura: Well, I am not sure that it has to, but in terms of
taking testimony, it is good if people have notice that there is posted on the agenda,
and I know several of the commissioners mentioned how important testimony was.
But if people did not really realize that a salary resolution could have come out of
that meeting, then I do not know if everybody actually had the chance to testify. I
do not know if in the past you had actually scheduled public hearings on your
proposals or...
Mr. Crowell: I do not recall that to tell you the truth. I am not
sure.
Ms. Yukimura: But have you had proposed salary resolutions that
were posted as such, which told people a resolution might pass or might not.
Mr. Crowell: I am not sure. I thought that is what...when it
came to this body, they would have the time to do that too. I am not sure.
Ms. Yukimura: That is a point, okay. And lastly, there was a lot of
concern about the inversion.
. _..� �__. �,.-_ .....;„:._:v&f.,:N-,r .r„nf:+`S` ,'x-'.x_v .nc{=x.:..hk"'kW^s#+4._. :;1.. .-..,.e .__ ,. nf:`-ih.'•s,�n,3e-^ Y,w"w' _2`.-s-yry —_ — _- —_-
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 5 - JUNE 20, 2012
Mr. Crowell: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: But I was surprised to...I was given and all the
Councilmembers have a copy now of a comparison of gross earnings of various rank
and file police officers compared to the Chief of Police, and there are 21 officers who
have gross earnings in the year 2011 that exceed the Chiefs. So there was an
inversion clearly. I mean the highest paid ranked officer is getting $153,000 in
gross earnings. But with this Executive Order that I only learned about last week
by the Mayor that is dated May 12, the inversion will be even worse, will it not?
Mr. Crowell: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: So that in fact the proposed salary increases will
not be addressing the inversions. I mean was it your...what was the intention of
the Salary Commission?
Mr. Crowell: Well, there again, I am not speaking for the
Commission. For myself, the inversion was...the proposal was to get the Chief as
close to those that are getting paid more, as close as possible, as well as, I believe,
g ,
p p
there was some discussion about having some respect to the Mayor's position. I
kind of recall a discussion that we did not want to give the Chief at this time more
than what the Mayor is getting. So we took that into account. I believe there was
discussion about that, but I think definitely we are going to have to revisit, just as
we are going to have to revisit everyone else's salary, we will be revisiting the
Chief's also. We may not have gotten it this time. Obviously it did not happen this
time, but hopefully there will be a time.
Ms. Yukimura: Well, I recall one point long ago when I was
probably a young councilmember that there was a proviso that the Mayor's salary
or the executive's salary — I cannot remember which — had to be higher than the
highest paid civil servant, and we could not do it because it would have distorted
executive salaries compared to the rank and file so much, and the budget demands
would have been so great that it was an impossible task to prevent inversion. And
so I am not sure if it was a County proviso or a State proviso. I think it might have
been a County proviso. We eliminated the proviso, the requirement that there
would be no inversion because it was totally out of hand. If you put all the
executive salaries above the highest paid civil servant, the salaries would have been
far beyond what I think we thought was justified given the balance you have to
keep with the rank and file, and with the Mayor, and everything. So...
Council Chair Furfaro: Vice Chair, I want to make...you have asked two
more questions since you said that was your last question, and that was the second
time you said it was your last question. I do want to recognize other Members, so
please summarize.
Ms. Yukimura: Surely, okay, sorry, Chair. I guess my question is
is it possible to remove inversions and is that a proper goal?
Mr. Crowell: I am not sure if it is possible, but I think something
that at least what I feel is that we should at least try to remove the inversion when
it comes to the base pay. I do not think we are going to hit it when it comes to
overtime. I think that will always happen. But I think we can strive to work at
least towards getting rid of the inversions at the base pay, I would hope. And it has
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 6 - JUNE 20, 2012
a lot to do...along with the...and I am going to raise these terms like inversion and
stuff, but it has to do with retention also. Retention of your Chief, of a good Chief,
and a good Deputy. We have to recognize that, I think, as a jurisdiction.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for being
here today, Mr. Crowell. That Executive Order that Councilmember Yukimura
mentioned, you folks had no idea or no information on that in your deliberations. I
read all your minutes, there was no discussion of that. So you folks had no
information that that was happening.
Mr. Crowell: That is correct, we did not.
Mr. Rapozo: I know you and I spoke a few days ago, and that
Executive Order does not pertain to the rank and file. It only pertains to the EMs,
the Excluded Management, which I believe I think the Fire Department has three
and the Police Department may have five, I believe. So the $153,000.00 a year that
was referenced by Councilmember Yukimura is not going to be affected by the
Executive Order; however, the Assistant Chiefs and I guess they are called
Battalion Chiefs in the Fire Department were. But you had no information on that
as the deliberations for the Salary Resolution was being done.
Mr. Crowell: No.
Mr. Rapozo: That is all I have, Mr. Chair, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: Good morning and thanks for being here,
appreciate it, and thanks for the work for all the Commission. I am going to have
some comments later, but I will try to just ask questions because what seemed
pretty straightforward got really complicated last year for the Salary Commission,
and I appreciate all of your patience with that, but a lot of it had to do with sending
submittals after March 15. So my first question is, have you read the County
Attorney opinion that this Council released to the public regarding the "shall" and
"may" issue?
Mr. Crowell: Yes, we did.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, so you are aware that the Hawai`i State
Supreme Court has set up kind of a three-part test to determine how "shall" will be
interpreted in various government documents.
Mr. Crowell: Yes, I think I recall, but I cannot quote you
everything there.
Mr. Bynum: I know it puts people like me, I think, in a difficult
situation because hey, I am just a regular guy and shall means shall; it is as clear
as a bell to me.
Mr. Crowell: Right.
Mr. Bynum: But then you bring it into the legal world and I was
very surprised to find out that this was an issue, it had been a legal issue for many
years, and that our Hawai`i State Supreme Court had kind of outlined here is how
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 7 - JUNE 20, 2012
you deal with this in government documents. Here are the questions you ask to
determine whether the "shall" is set in stone or if it is directory or mandatory. So I
am glad the answer is that you were familiar with that and I hope the
commissioners all read it because personally I do not have an issue with this coming
after March 15. That is why I voted for the previous one that was controversial
because the County Attorney and the Hawai`i Supreme Court said, no, this is within
the bounds of normalcy for the way government operates, even though as a lay
person it is confusing.
My other question was recently I was not able to come to this particular
Commission, but did...and I have not read the minutes because they were not sent
over with the transmittal and I am not aware...so that is my fault; I could have
found them somewhere else. I am not sure when they were available. Maybe I did
see them. I think the Boards and Commissions sent over a...not an official copy
because it had not been approved by the Commission.
Mr. Crowell: It was 30 pages.
Mr. Bynum: Right, so I want to correct myself. I did receive
them. I have not read them. So did members of the public testify regarding this
issue?
Mr. Crowell: As far as after we recommended the pay increase?
Is that what you are asking?
Mr. Bynum: Well, there was a meeting where that was
discussed.
Mr. Crowell: Or during the meeting?
Mr. Bynum: Yes.
es.
Mr. Crowell: Yes. There were people that testified.
Mr. Bynum: And generally were they in favor?
Mr. Crowell: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: Or opposed or...
Mr. Crowell: They were all in favor.
Mr. Bynum: Did Councilmembers testify?
Mr. Crowell: Yes, as a matter of fact, Councilmember Rapozo
did.
Mr. Bynum: In favor?
Mr. Crowell: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, that is all the questions I have right now.
Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: We will give you more time for comments when we
call the meeting to order.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 8 - JUNE 20, 2012
Mr. Bynum: Trying to follow the rules.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much, but we will give you more
time then. First of all, is there anyone else that has questions here before I pose
mine? Go right ahead, Councilmember Kuali`i.
Mr. Kuali`i: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you Chair
Crowell for being here and for the work that you do for us. Just a simple question
on behalf of our citizens. And the work that you do and that the Salary Commission
does, I think you did say...you talked about inversion and retention, and to me that
is all very important. But I think in the next round, in the consideration of the
salaries as a whole across the County and especially these higher paid salaries, you
will also be considering what the actual jobs are, the scope of duties, the range of
supervision, the numbers under the line of supervision, not necessarily direct
supervision, but clearly the Police Chief and our Fire Chief are in charge of very
large and critical public safety operations. So to compare the salary of a Fire Chief
or Police Chief to a Director of Boards of Commissions, that is not really an equal
comparison. So I think I have to speak up on behalf of the citizens and say we have
to stop this raising and raising and raising all the top level salaries because it is
like a race to the top and how much more of the citizens' taxpayer dollars can we
just spend away. We need to be more fiscally conservative and think about our poor
struggling families who are paying the taxes to pay these salaries. And I just hope
that the Salary Commission will not always just be thinking about this one is
making more, so we have to make them make more, and everybody is making more,
and more, and more, and more. But look back again at restructuring those salaries
on what it really should be based on, not just comparing to other high salaries, but
comparing to the actual duties, the range of supervision. I mean when you have a
director supervising a total department or division of five people making similar
salary to the Police Chief, the average citizen thinks that is ridiculous and I agree
with them. So I really would like the Salary Commission to look at that as well.
And can you tell me that when you say you have this whole relook to do that you
will do that as well?
Mr. Crowell: Yes, I can assure you of that.
Mr. Kuali`i: Thank you, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. First of all, I want you to know that
the "shall" and "may," as Mr. Bynum pointed out, is something that when it is date
specific, we need to get resolved. In the business world I find myself struggling with
financial matters that occur after the budget process is done. Quite frankly, that is
why we do a budget. It is a forecast and it should express all revenues, all
expenses, and particularly in a County where 71% of our operating costs are in fact
salaries/wages/benefits. So it is extremely important in date specific, so that is
being worked on to get resolved.
And then we had the Executive Order by the Mayor that raised in Fire and
Police the eight EM positions. I just want to reconfirm. You folks were not aware of
that as part of the overview at the time?
Mr. Crowell: No, we were not.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 9 - JUNE 20, 2012
Council Chair Furfaro: Because it has about $71,000 worth of impact in
the year for the year for those eight classifications. Did you folks consider what is
referred to as the SOCD premiums that all police officers receive with the exception
of the Deputy and the Chief himself?
Mr. Crowell: I am not sure of that acronym, but we did in fact
hear about allowances that other chiefs do have, but we were not able to get all of
that information related to that, but we were aware that there are allowances.
Council Chair Furfaro: I will ask the Commission to share with all of your
members. It is right in the SHOPO piece referencing Bargaining Unit 12, where
the reality of all officers, whether they are patrol or senior managers, do receive a
$2,400.96 differential for being able to respond on call, except the Chief and the
Deputy. They do not receive that premium either. So the inversion actually, you
add the Executive Order on, you add on the understanding here with the line staff
all the way up to supervisors with the exception of the Deputy and the Chief, there
is another $2600 inversion that has to be added on to the base pay discrepancies
that exist, and clearly I want you to know I am going to support what you submitted
and I will support receiving it. But I think, as you'have heard around the table,
next go around there is a lot of work to consider all of these particular parts. Again,
I would get you the Bargaining Unit Agreements and this application on that other
differential. I think you have to see all the moving parts when it is presented to
you. So thank you very much for being here today.
Mr. Crowell: Very good point. I thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: Can I ask one more (inaudible) question?
Council Chair Furfaro: Sure, go ahead. You have the floor.
Mr. Rapozo: I apologize. It came up when you asked your
question, but did the Salary Commission ever receive the Salary Study from
Personnel?
Mr. Crowell: The Nash Study?
Mr. Rapozo: The Nash Study, the actual study.
Mr. Crowell: Not yet.
Mr. Rapozo: You still have not and neither have I. So staff,
Mr. Chair, if we can make a note...
Council Chair Furfaro: Do not worry, I have made a note already. I work
here and I have not received it after two requests as well.
Mr. Rapozo: I filed a Freedom of Information Act Request Form,
which was not...I still have not received it so.
Council Chair Furfaro: I will be glad to follow up for you.
Mr. Rapozo: I want to make sure that the Commission gets that
as well. If we can get that in...it is incredible how they want to not share that.
That is such a vital part of your deliberations, and I see Mr. Finlay here and I
apologize, I thought I would have gotten it by now. But even like the Chair said,
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 10 - JUNE 20, 2012
even he has not received it. So I just want to make a formal request today that not
only this Council but also each member of the Salary Commission get a copy of it. I
would like to see that done within the next week if possible.
Council Chair Furfaro: We will do it before we leave today. We will send a
correspondence over. Again I apologize for that, but we are anxious to see it as well.
Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: In considering the inversion problem, by base pay
was there an inversion?
Mr. Crowell: I believe...I want to say there was. I believe there
was. I am not exactly sure for sure right now.
Ms. Yukimura: I would like to have that, Chair, verified before we
go to a vote. And so you think it was a base pay inversion issue that...
Mr. Crowell: I think it was total.
Ms. Yukimura: It was I'm sorry.
Mr. Crowell: Total. It was base pay as well as the overtime. The
discussion had, I believe, was for both.
Ms. Yukimura: And do you know whether there were inversions in
other parts of the County?
Mr. Crowell: No, I am not aware of it right now. We did not get
any testimony relative to that. Offhand personally I am not aware of it.
Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Crowell, I will make available to you and the
Commission, I am going to pass out some research that I have done today to answer
Vice Chair Yukimura. There are pre-overtime, pre-SOCD, which is that on-call pay,
there are three positions that actually have an inversion in the Police Department
before any overtime is considered and before any of this premium on-call pay is
received, and I will be sending my research over to your folks as well because it is
something we need to address the next go around, and I think the more information
you have the better.
Mr. Crowell: I think as a Commission we have already asked for
that. As a matter of fact, as we speak I think there is a memo that is going to
Personnel Services.
Council Chair Furfaro: Just for all intents and purposes, I requested and
do have it, and I will be forwarding over with my staff to you and the Commission
just to make sure you have it.
Mr. Crowell: Appreciate that.
Council Chair Furfaro: But again, the piece you get is pre-overtime, and it
is pre- any other premiums.
Ms. Yukimura: And I just want to say as a comment, do not rely
only on the testimony. I am glad you have asked for the information because you
will not get all the information just from testimony.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 11 - JUNE 20, 2012
Mr. Crowell: Right.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, thank you very much.
Council Chair Furfaro: So Vice Chair, I will send that over as...
Ms. Yukimura: Is this it?
Council Chair Furfaro: That is the packet of the research that I have done.
Mr. Crowell: Chair, can I ask a question?
Council Chair Furfaro: Sure, you have the floor.
Mr. Crowell: In previous...because I have been a Salary
Commission member awhile, I recall some of our requests or our recommendations
coming to the Council after the March 15 date, and as Chair, I would like to know
what is the absolute drop dead date that you would like to see. We are going to
strive for March 15, be assured of that. But I recall some coming at a later date,
and so for my own clarification, what is the drop dead date that the Council would
like?
Council Chair Furfaro: I think there is an intensity for the Salary
Commission in the 4th quarter of the year, somewhere in
October/November/December to begin a dialogue about salary recommendations,
and by Charter right now we get a first draft by March 15, but we get a final act
by...I think it is May 1, I am not sure. So somewhere in that time, I think we could
continue to receive information. But what is challenging right now, there is a
Charter proposal that will be coming out from the Council that allows the first look
to be the correct look and that there are no variables after that. So I think this
question and answer is kind of a moving target right now. Because if we are only
going to have our best and first review by the change in the Charter, then obviously
the date becomes more critical, more time critical.
Mr. Crowell: That is good to know.
Council Chair Furfaro: That is my answer to you on that. Did you want to
answer the question, JoAnn?
Ms. Yukimura: I just wanted to add regarding the Charter
Amendment, which is that amendment about the Mayor's supplemental budget, it
does not preclude any input from anybody, whether it is from County entities or
agencies or the public until the public hearing, at least up until then, which is
usually sometime in May, I think we are okay. It is just that we are not wanting
the Mayor to submit a supplemental budget late. That is what the Charter
Amendment states because it gives us about five days or less to review a second
budget.
Council Chair Furfaro: And again, though, JoAnn, I think his question is
directed at when would I like to see it.
Mr. Crowell: That is correct.
Council Chair Furfaro: March 15 and we can take many comments and
variances after that. But in good budgeting, you have to have excellent planning,
and the date we need to have the plan completed should be March 15, regardless if
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 12 - JUNE 20, 2012
we are going to do a reforecast in the 60-day period or if we are going to continue
with dialogue. We should start with an understanding of March 15. Any more
questions for Mr. Crowell before I take public testimony? Mr. Crowell, thank you
again and thank you for the service you give the County of Kaua`i.
Mr. Crowell: Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Mickens.
GLENN MICKENS: Thank you, Jay, for the record Glenn Mickens. I
just have a few comments, maybe you can give me some answers. At first I thank
the Salary Commission for their efforts to correct the inversion discrepancy in the
Police and Fire Departments. For me there is something very wrong with the
system when an officer gets a status promotion and yet must take a huge cut in
salary, as Officer Contrades had to do and also when the Chief of the whole
operation gets less than people underneath him; something is wrong there. It was
said that 21 officers are getting higher salaries than the Chief and his Deputy. Is
this not due to collective bargaining rights for those not heading the departments?
And if it is true, could not all members be given collective bargaining rights? Again,
I am not that familiar with the system of collective bargaining, but I do understand
from the past that there were Police getting these higher salaries because they have
had the right to collective bargaining where people like the Chief and
Mr. Contrades do not have that right. I also agree with Councilman Kuali`i that
this whole salary system must be carefully looked at before the escalation goes off
the map. For me the Police are in a category by themselves since their jobs are
life-threatening and all these factors must be considered by the Salary Commission
when considering the setting of these salaries. They have a tough job, the Salary
Commission, and the dates you were talking about, that March 15, I definitely
believe that has to be adhered to. I do not think it can go on. Anyway, Jay, can you
tell me anything about this collective bargaining, this and that, why certain police
can get these higher salaries than say the Chief or anybody else?
Council Chair Furfaro: I will be glad to give you a copy of the bargaining
unit agreements for these business units, but it is not unreasonable for people who
are not in supervisory roles or the final decision makers to be compensated for
overtime. That is just a fair work standard and it is left in the third-party
bargaining unit. As far as the questions that you brought up about the Deputy
Chief and so forth, yes, we have a program that does not fairly work at recruiting
high achievers to continue to be elevated in position to become the deputy and
hopefully one day actually become a candidate for the Police Chief because of the
inversion. You actually get into higher elevations and you end up committing
yourself to a salary grade that does not allow you to earn the SOCD credit nor the
premium pay for overtime. So that is something that needs to continue to be
discussed because high achievers will have to make a decision between continuity or
their earning power, and right now there is an inequity there.
Mr. Mickens: Well is it possible for the Chief in the hierarchy to
be able to be under collective bargaining or is that a law or something that they
cannot?
Council Chair Furfaro: That is a discussion that goes much farther than
the time that we have for you today, and I think you should direct that to the Salary
Commission. Mr. Mickens, Mr. Bynum has a question for you.
Mr. Bynum: Did I hear you say at the end that March 15 has to
be the deadline that (inaudible).
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 13 - JUNE 20, 2012
Mr. Mickens: Yes, I thought that was the date that it had to be
in, that the Mayor does not have the right to come back with a supplemental budget
or anything, and that the Salary Commission...of course I heard the Salary Chair
say that he understood it was May 1. So I am a little confused here about that date
then.
Mr. Bynum: Glenn, have you read the opinion about "shall" and
"may" that this Council released?
Mr. Mickens: No, I have not.
Mr. Bynum: So your testimony is that March 15 deadline, it
says "shall," it should be rigid. So you would encourage us to reject this then, right?
Mr. Mickens: Yes, like you said before, I think "shall" means
shall, that drop dead time.
Mr. Bynum: So then this...what is before us came after
March 15. You are encouraging us to reject it then?
Mr. Mickens: Well, it is kind of a two-edged sword there because
I think there is something radically wrong with what is going on now, and if this
has to be corrected now as a onetime shot, then I say, well, go for it because I think
this does have to be done.
Mr. Bynum: So go for it if you support it, but be rigid if you do
not.
Mr. Mickens: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, thanks, I just want to be clear.
Ms. Yukimura: I have a question.
Council Chair Furfaro: I will recognize you when I know that Mr. Bynum
is finished. Are you finished, Mr. Bynum?
Mr. Bynum: I am done.
Council Chair Furfaro: Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: So "shall" does not mean "shall" then?
Mr. Mickens: Yes, yes. I think it is pretty definitive. Like Tim
said, maybe the courts can get a hold of this, and lawyers can get a hold of it and
construe it anyway they want to, but for the general public, Jay said that is what it
means to him and I think it means the same to you and Tim, the rest of the
Councilmembers, "shall" is definitive.
Ms. Yukimura: But then this should not be considered if "shall" is
definitive because it says "shall" be submitted before May 15.
Mr. Mickens: But again I think there is an exception in this case.
Ms. Yukimura: To "shall?"
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 14 - JUNE 20, 2012
Mr. Mickens: Yes, yes.
Ms. Yukimura: And when do you determine that?
Mr. Mickens: Well, I think that is up to you to go ahead and
determine exactly if this is a wrongdoing and something has to be done to correct
this huge inversion, which is wrong, then whether there was a mistake made in the
date setting of it, then I think you should go back and review it and say, in this
particular instance there is an exception and it should be taken into consideration.
Ms. Yukimura: And what if there is a big inversion in other
departments.
Mr. Mickens: Well, I thought you brought up an excellent point
about the other departments too. I think the whole thing is going to have to be
carefully scrutinized and looked at because you do it for the Police, you are going to
have Public Works coming back and saying, well, I am in a situation where it is
dangerous or something for me. I completely agree with that. So before any total
decision is made, I think then you are going to have to make sure that the total
picture is looked at before the decision is made, but then if there are exceptions, the
neutral Board or whatever, you people can make the decision as to whether you
think it is right or wrong. I mean that is what you are going to vote on.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, I am going to bring everybody back here.
The agenda item today is the approval of this salary recommendation. The agenda
item about discussions and interpretations and so forth, as you said, may drive us to
making a one-time correction, but those other items are not on today's agenda, but
it will be in the future.
Mr. Mickens: Thank you, Jay.
Council Chair Furfaro: We are looking for testimony. Any more testimony?
If not, I am going to call the meeting back to order.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as
follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: Members, we are open for discussion now. Vice
Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Chair, I am actually not ready to discuss yet. I
have a question about this flyer or this information that you just gave to us.
Council Chair Furfaro: I will try and answer what research I did.
Ms. Yukimura: And if you cannot answer, perhaps we can ask the
Chief, but...
Council Chair Furfaro: I have known a long time ago if I cannot answer a
question, I will direct you to the right person who can.
Ms. Yukimura: Oka thank you. There is a chart entitled "Annual
s. Y� Y
Salary and SOCD," which stands for Standards of Conduct Differential, and I would
love to have an explanation of what that is about.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 15 - JUNE 20, 2012
Council Chair Furfaro: That is a compensation piece that says to all
officers, you will get this premium based on the fact if you have to respond when
you are off-duty and so forth, you get compensation, but you still have the powers
assigned to your job. So you get a premium for being able to respond in situations
that you might be exposed to when you are off-duty. So it is a type of compensation.
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: She still has the floor.
Mr. Rapozo: I just want to...page 45, it is defined.
Council Chair Furfaro: It is in there under the SHOPO; it is defined.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: Clearly defined on page 45.
Council Chair Furfaro: That is the long version. I gave you the short
version.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. The chart that I am referring to and I
do not know if others have it, but it shows the Police Chief at $107,000 plus and
then two police inspectors at $119,000 and $120,000. Are these the actual salaries?
Council Chair Furfaro: No, the sheet I gave you are those pre-overtime.
That is their base pay. Now, earlier we got a schedule that indicated we have the
potential for officers to earn another $18,000 to $20,000 in overtime compensation.
The chart that I gave you was the base. This is before any premium pays occur that
contribute to a greater gap in the inversion.
Ms. Yukimura: I should say the position is officially described as
Police Inspector, but I believe it also...it is the same thing as Assistant Chief, right?
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: So it is about the Assistant Chief positions, and
these are about positions, not about persons. So the annual salary is the base
salary of...actual base salary or is it a cap?
Council Chair Furfaro: That is the actual base salary plus the SOC...
Ms. Yukimura: No, the SOC is another column.
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes, it is a plus. You have to add it to the base.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, but I am just asking...
Council Chair Furfaro: Let me finish.
Ms. Yukimura: All right.
Council Chair Furfaro: You add that to the base, which is with no overtime
and no other premiums, that is what that officer would earn. Then depending in
the payroll period any overtime that is earned is then put on top of that. Now we do
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 16 - JUNE 20, 2012
have another chart. Scott, do you have the one that showed the overtime for the
last 12 months? One of you have it? But I wanted to show you the base. There is
an inversion problem from the start.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, and who sets the salaries of the two
inspectors? Before that, does this include the Mayor's Executive Order.
Council Chair Furfaro: The Executive Order has not been referred to the
positions, but as I shared with you, the dollar number total is impacted at $57,000
additional for the whole department, all the EMs.
Ms. Yukimura: No, but does this individual figure include the...
Council Chair Furfaro: Let me say it again. I have only gotten from the
Administration the impact for the Mayor's Executive Order for all the EM positions
in total, inclusive, but they have not been allocated to the different individual
positions yet. I am still waiting for that from Finance.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, so that means that these figures do not
include the raises that were granted in the Executive Order.
Council Chair Furfaro: In the Executive Order, and if you read the
narrative, depending for the last three years those prices or those payroll earnings
could go up another 5% for the EM positions.
Ms. Yukimura: Actually it is 5% plus 5% because it is...
Council Chair Furfaro: It is compounded.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, it is compounded.
Council Chair Furfaro: If you read it, you want me to read it? I will tell
you at this time it goes first year 5%, the second year 5%, the third year 6%, and the
details in the Executive Order are available with our staff.
Ms. Yukimura: So then my question is who sets these? Is this not
set within a range? And if so, who sets these salaries?
Council Chair Furfaro: We do not have all of those particulars of the
Executive Order re et. I have requested it. The Salary Commission does not have all
Y q
the particular details yet. All I was able to get because I was not aware of it either.
t p Y g
I only was able to be aware of the bulk amounts, and I think for Fire they are like
$57,000, for Police it is $71,000.
Ms. Yukimura: Could we ask the Chief? I would like to ask a
couple of questions of the Chief.
Council Chair Furfaro: If he has more detail than I got on the Executive
Order. Chief, you have more detail than what I just summarized in what I was able
to get?
Ms. Yukimura:
I have a q uestion.
Council Chair Furfaro: Would you like to come up? She has other than
n posed. She has additional questions. You have the floor, Vice Chair.
that uestio p q ,
question
please introduce yourself.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 17 - JUNE 20, 2012
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
DARRYL D. PERRY, Chief of Police, Kaua`i Police Department: Darryl
Perry, Chief of Police, Kaua`i Police Department.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you, Chief. Can we give the Chief a copy of
what I am referring to so he knows? Thank you, Councilmember Chang. It is this
chart that shows a column entitled annual and then a column entitled SOCD, and
then a total. On the two first positions, which are the Assistant Chief positions, the
annual salary shown there are the actual salaries?
Chief Perry: Those are the base salaries.
Ms. Yukimura: Those are the base salaries.
Chief Perry: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: That do not include the impact of the Executive
Order.
Chief Perry: I believe they do.
Ms. Yukimura: They do include the...
Chief Perry: I do believe they include the impact of the
Executive Order.
Ms. Yukimura: So this is not...
Chief Perry: This is the pay that goes back to 2009, it was retro
back to 2009. So the pay increases today actually, I think it was 2011, their annual
salary would be $120,600 and for the other Assistant Chief it would be $119,000.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, but it does include the impact of the
Executive Order. So it is not what the Salary Commission dealt with because they
dealt with a glimpse of salaries on April 24 and the Mayor's Executive Order came
on May 12.
Chief Perry: Yes, the Executive Order came after the resolution
from the Salary Commission.
Ms. Yukimura: Right, which for me is a total curveball.
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, may I interrupt just for a second?
Ms. Yukimura: Yes.
Council Chair Furfaro: I have my notes. They are being copied now to
show those totals of the 120, the 119, and so forth. And I also have the last
12-month period that reflects all other overtime earned, and I will be passing that
out.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, that is fine. I am not wanting to look at
overtime. I am just trying to determine base salary. I just want to know what the
base salary was of these inspectors on April 24.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 18 - JUNE 20, 2012
Council Chair Furfaro: The sheet I am passing out to you shows it as of
March 12.
Ms. Yukimura: I know. I want to know it as of April 24.
Council Chair Furfaro: No, it is March 12 with the 5%.
Ms. Yukimura: I understand, but I want to understand what the
factual situation was that the Salary Commission looked at.
Council Chair Furfaro: They looked at the old one.
Ms. Yukimura: I understand. That is what I am asking. What was
it? I want to know if there was salary inversion at the time of the Salary
Commission decision. So is it possible to find out what that was?
Chief Perry: Well, the salaries were increased incrementally per
year. So the pay raises were increased each year and their base pay, I do not have
the exact amount, but if you were asking if there was an inversion, yes, there was
an inversion. The difference between my salary and the Assistant Chief back in
2007 was about $2,000. And now because of the increases incrementally, each year
it went higher and higher and higher until we reached this number today, which is
$120,000.
Ms. Yukimura: And how are the Assistant Chiefs salaries set? Is
that by a formula?
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, I would like to give some clarity here. I
really want to give some clarity here. What the Salary Commission had seen prior
to what they sent over to us was not the incremental raises.
Chief Perry: No.
Council Chair Furfaro: Right. What they have now based on the Executive
Order is the $120,000 that you referenced.
Chief Perry: Correct, correct.
Council Chair Furfaro: But it did not happen over an incremental period.
To make that happen, there is an additional charge of about $71,000.
Chief Perry: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: I know, but I am not talking about collective
amounts or total amounts. I am talking about two individual positions and I am
just wanting to know what the base salary was on April 24.
Council Chair Furfaro: And again I am just trying to clarify on April 24,
the Salary Commission saw the old salary.
Chief Perry: The old salaries.
Ms. Yukimura: So what did they see is all I am asking.
Council Chair Furfaro: They saw the old salaries.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 19 - JUNE 20, 2012
Ms. Yukimura: Can we get that please?
Council Chair Furfaro: You have it in my first piece.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, where is that?
Council Chair Furfaro: The schedule that I put out in this memorandum.
That is what the Salary Commission saw.
Ms. Yukimura: Can you refer to the page?
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes. It is the second page in the schedule right
here. In April, this is what the Salary Commission saw.
Ms. Yukimura: This one? It could not be because the Chief says it
includes the impact of the Executive Order, which came on May 12.
Council Chair Furfaro: The next sheet that I sent you out, and I have done
my own calculation, is what the impacts of the Executive Order were.
Ms. Yukimura: I do not have that.
Council Chair Furfaro: And the third sheet that I sent out to you was the
last 12 months, their base pay plus overtime. And I know you do not want to hear
that, but I just want to make sure you all recognize what the variables are on these
sheets.
Ms. Yukimura: I do not want this. It has overtime. It does not
have a break...I am looking for ba...oh, here it is.
Council Chair Furfaro: That is base pay plus overtime. The backside of
base pay plus overtime is what the Executive Order impact made. Yes, that one.
Ms. Yukimura: It still does not give me what the April 24
earnings...
Council Chair Furfaro: I answered it. On April 24, the Salary Commission
saw...
Ms. Yukimura: Just tell me the figure.
Mr. Rapozo: No, no, Mr. Chair, I mean...
Council Chair Furfaro: The Salary Commission, from my understanding,
saw this in April.
Ms. Yukimura: Not if this is the Executive Order that came up...
Council Chair Furfaro: The Executive Order did not come out until
May 23.
Ms. Yukimura: That is correct.
Mr. Rapozo: I can answer her question, Mr. Chair, if you will
allow me to answer.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 20 - JUNE 20, 2012
Council Chair Furfaro: I think if you can give clarity to what I am
attempting to do that would be great. I would appreciate your comments on the
pieces.
Mr. Rapozo: Our budget is what they were paid. Our budget,
one inspector was $105,696; that is the one that you see now as $120,612. The next
inspector or I am sorry, Assistant Chief was $104,148; that has been increased to
$119,472. And the other Assistant Chief, these are all EM-7s was $96,024 and that
one, I do not see the reflection in this chart, but it is about a $15,000 increase with
the Executive Order.
Council Chair Furfaro: And just for clarification from me, you were
referring to my chart that was in the first pass out.
Mr. Rapozo: Correct, that chart shows the...that is what they
are making today.
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: With the Executive Order. But I think JoAnn was
asking what did the Salary Commission see. What the Salary Commission saw was
a substantially smaller salary because the Executive Order, at that time, was
unknown to anyone. I am sorry? Yes, $105,696.
Chief Perry: It started at 105 and 104.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Mr. Rapozo: It went up to $120,612, so about $15,000. Again,
that is because of the retroactive compounding effect from 2009 until today.
Council Chair Furfaro: 9, 10, 11, and 12.
Mr. Rapozo: Correct, 2009 to 2010, 2010 to 2011. So now as you
can see the inversion has gotten worse than when the Salary Commission started
this process years ago.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: You can have that, Mr. Chair. That is just our
budget.
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes, this is our budget from the staffing and job
description lines. Thank you, Mr. Rapozo.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you very much for that clarification, Chief
and Councilmember. So effectively on April 24 there was not a base pay inversion.
These were still below the Chiefs base, though by a miniscule amount. But with
the Mayor's Executive Order, the inversion, just base pay-wise is tremendous.
Chief Perry: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you, now I understand, thank you very
much.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 21 - JUNE 20, 2012
Council Chair Furfaro: Any other questions for the Chief? Everybody has
four schedules to digest here? Chief, thank you very much. I will call the meeting
back to order.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as
follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: Discussion, Members? Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I want to start by thanking the Salary Commission
over the last four or five years. I have paid attention to what they are doing under a
change of leadership, and the world changed during the middle of that period, and I
think they have done an outstanding job. Their independence has been questioned,
whether they are just a rubber stamp. I do not believe that for a minute. I know
these people and they have worked diligently and appropriately. And then I want
to say we all want to have the best people doing the job for the people of Kaua`i that
Y p p g J p p
we can, and we want to live in the real world. And so at these executive salary
levels, there are important considerations and that we are competitive with the
entire country, and the Salary Commission recognized that. He had huge
inversions all over the place because it was a political decision that previous
Councils would never approve what the Salary Commission recommended. And so I
want to remind people that we changed the Charter, and now the question to the
Council is just "Do you reject it or do you accept it?" But they went out on a mission
to increase department head salaries because there were huge inversions. I
remember some people getting $65,000 when civil service people were at $100,000
already. So I really have supported the Salary Commission and I have commented
there many times, well not many times, but a few times about my perception. But
Y Y � Y
p p
it got really complicated the last year with this whole "shall" and "may" discussion.
I have read...and I keep encouraging people to read the opinion. This is our County
Attorney's opinion; they generated it, but they are quoting the Hawai`i State
Supreme Court, and this issue of "shall" and "may" is complicated. We heard that
there are 200 of them in our Charter, shalls, and each one is interpreted differently,
and there is a litmus test that has kind of settled law in the State about how to deal
with it, and no matter what the Kaua`i County says, it will be trumped by what the
Hawai`i State Supreme Court says. So I do not personally think there is a problem
with "shall" and "may." There is a learning curve to understand the history of this
law, and so I do not have a problem voting today on this. But it is a difficult vote in
the economic times we are in because, we talked about it today, unions have been in
different circumstances because the other thing we wanted to do as a County in the
past is to increase salaries for police officers and firemen to make them competitive
and fairly compensated for their work. And so when the economic downturn came,
we already had Step increases scheduled over a multiple-year period for police
officers and they continued, and they should because we lose police officers to other
jurisdictions who pay them more. And we have had a retention and recruitment
problem with police officers. Since I have been involved in the County, we have
never been fully staffed and it is like a constant update. However, the world did
turn and HGEA and UPW took cuts, had increases in their management. We
avoided a 5% cut this year for the County of Kaua`i so far, but the bottom line is the
take home pay of our County employees, other than Police and Fire, is lower than it
once was. And it is difficult to give their bosses raises when they are paying more
for medical and not getting Step increases and not getting...but having said all of
that, my testimony in the past has been there are specific positions in our County
where we are competitive, virtually nation-wide, and we have to remain
competitive. That certainly is true of the Fire and Police Chiefs. I believe it is also
true of the County Engineer, perhaps the County Attorneys, and then we have
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 22 - JUNE 20, 2012
positions that require advance degrees or licensure. I think there should be some
recognition in salary for that and that is the testimony I have made in the past.
In terms of this coming before us today, and one more point is about we had
efforts from community to go to a county manager form of government. Well, I do
not personally support that. It is not the political culture in Hawai`i. But there is
this profession called "City Manager" or "County Manager" out there that is highly
specialized, and I would like to see us be able to get that kind of person if it makes
sense in the future, and I have done some research on that, and to pay them
competitively for a city this size or a community this size, it would be somewhere in
the $160,000 to $170,000 range and that may be more than the elected Mayor, and I
would be okay with that. So inversions are not always wrong, but sometimes they
are. There is a version on this table, everyone that sits at this table could easily be
competitive for jobs making $100,000, but we make a choice to take the salary
because of public service and at some level public service leadership, even in
departments, need some sacrifice, and it is a personal choice people make.
Having said all of that, I want to put it in context because for me it is easy to
support this today. I do not have the issues with the "shall" and "may" because I
accept the guidance from the Hawai`i State Supreme Court. I think I would
encourage the Salary Commission, as I have in the past, in this next year to look at
those positions that require licensure or are competitive on a national basis. I know
for people looking in the public when you hear that somebody is making $120,000 or
$130,000 it is like wow, I wish I could make that. That is triple what working class
people make on Kaua`i. But we want excellence in the service that we deliver and
we have to be competitive. And if we are not, we are going to have situations like
we have had in the past where no viable County Engineer would step up for five or
six years, so we had to under fill, leave the position vacant, and we paid, as a
community, the consequences of that. So I am in support of receiving this, which
means it will go into effect. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Mr. Bynum. Any more comments here,
Members? If not, I would say something here. Vice Chair?
Ms. Yukimura: I think I would have preferred to have a
comprehensive look at executive pay because as Councilmember Bynum and others
have said, the concern is not only vertical fairness and equity, but it is also lateral
fairness and equity among the department heads. And there are issues of degrees
and qualifications and licenses that should also be weighed, and in fact there
probably are inversions which should have been checked on, and in fact there are no
salary inversions, but there may be overtime inversions. So one could argue that it
affects the morale across the other executives in our County. And perhaps this
Standards of Conduct Differential, I could see that needing to be incorporated into
the Police Chief and Deputy's pay, and then I would have liked to see and I still
would like to see some examination or audit of overtime in terms of what is
unavoidable overtime and what could be better managed, both in Fire and Police.
So there are a lot of issues for which I do not think there is sufficient information,
and I think I would have voted to reject this at this point and send it back to the
Commission to say, please take a comprehensive look, and if you feel that
retroactively there should have been some increase, well then do that, but only after
you have done a retroactive look.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 23 - JUNE 20, 2012
But I have to say this Executive Order from the Mayor just really throws
everything into a clinker for me because on one hand he is arguing to...he is arguing
my position, which is do not do anything until you do the comprehensive review, but
then by Executive Order, he is creating a huge inversion problem. And so for that
reason I am going to vote to receive and support this increase.
Now, I am not sure that Police and Fire are the same. I know they both
involve public safety, but there is the Standards of Conduct Differential that does
not apply. I do not necessarily think that the situations about competitiveness are
the same. We have a long waiting list for the Fire Department, and we are not able
to recruit for Police. I think these differentials need to be looked at. I do not even
think there is a problem of competitiveness for the Police managerial level. I think
the salaries are fine or it looks like they are fine in terms of...but there is a problem
with salaries at the bottom level for the police, given the fact that we are not able to
attract qualified people. So I feel like we have not been doing very careful salary
analysis and looking at the facts in each situation, and I am not an expert in this,
but I hope that the Salary Commission and the new Human Resources Department
will begin to do the kind of analysis that all of us decision makers need and deserve,
and the public deserves so that we can make fair and good decisions that fill the
positions that need to be filled, and have equity and fairness both laterally and
vertically, and that means we have to relook some of our...I think our collective
bargaining. We have to look at how we analyze benefits, the whole package of
benefits and salary, in order to get fairness. I agree with Councilmember Kuali`i
and Councilmember Bynum that when we do not do proper executive pay analysis,
it is very unfair to the rank and file, and they are struggling. And HGEA and UPW
have not only not had raises, but their pays have been cut in the past few years
through furloughs and otherwise, and there is some huge inequities brewing there.
So the Human Resource Department and the Mayor, who lead the collective
bargaining process, have to find ways to address these inequities. And I think if we
were able to do that, all the people involved in salary setting, the Salary
Commission, the Human Resource Department, the Mayor, and the Council, we
need to really strive to work together for fairness and proper compensation.
Anyway, but for now because of the Mayor's Executive Order, which hugely
increases the inversion, I am going to vote to support the Salary Commission's
proposal.
Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Kuali`i.
Mr. Kuali`i: Thank you, Mr. Chair. For starters I just want to
say I agree with Vice Chair's comments about the Mayor's Executive Order, and
then I do want to also say that I will be supporting this, and I am supporting it
because I think it is the right thing to do for fairness, and I am also supporting it
because according to our attorneys and according to the legal opinion that
Councilmember Bynum wants you all to read, and currently according to the
Hawai`i Supreme Court, legally I can, so I will. Last year the majority of this
Council, not myself included, did accept a late submission from the Salary
Commission well after March 15. It became a big issue and in the end we agreed
that it was necessary and right for it to be submitted prior to the March 15 deadline
because of the budget.
Now another issue with regards to that is it should be submitted before the
March 15 deadline, and it should be worked on probably the whole year prior or at
least six months prior by the Salary Commission over many meetings to come up
with a comprehensive proposal that is intended to be submitted once a year. So the
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 24 - JUNE 20, 2012
fact that this salary proposal comes from the Salary Commission, if you will,
provides political cover for the Council or the Mayor. A citizen's group is making
those decisions and bringing it to us, right? It should be done once a year.
Then what happened with the process was the Mayor did not want to take his
increase that was already in place. So he went back to the Salary Commission to
have additional work done and in a way that is what we are doing now, the Council,
exactly what the Mayor did last year. The Salary Commission submitted their
proposal on time this year. It was submitted before the March 15 deadline. And
here we are after the March 15 deadline adjusting, making a correction. We are
grilling the Chair of the Salary Commission this morning. The Salary Commission
acted in reaction to our meetings. We had one, maybe two meetings where there
was extensive discussion and testimony about how wrong it was, the salaries that
our Chief was getting, in comparison to other salaries and looking at all he is in
charge of. And so the Salary Commission did the right thing. So of course now we
have to do the right thing and support that regardless of all this talk about "shall"
and "must," whatever.
I agree with the citizens that "shall" should mean "shall." I have learned that
in order for that "shall" to be mandatory, according to the Charter, that we need a
consequence. So if this does not happen, what happens? So the work that we have
been doing and should come in the next meeting or so, some amendments that I am
working on will have consequences for date specific deadlines that is articulated in
the Charter and it says "shall." So if it says "shall be submitted on or before
March 15," the average citizen understands that to be "shall." The law says it is not
unless you have a consequence. So we are putting a Charter Amendment forward
for the voters to decide that yes, it should be shall and if not, there is a consequence.
And the consequence may be as simple as for some reason the Salary Commission
cannot make this deadline, then they come back to this Council because this
Council is the body that is responsible for the budget, and salaries is the biggest
item in this budget. So if you are going to be late, you come back to the body that
makes the decision, right. But it happens once a year. The Mayor should not use it
as a veiled cover to do changes with salary and neither should the Council, and I
think going forward, the voters will decide on this Charter Amendment. Thank you,
Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Before I ask for any more comments, I want to
remind this group that we are headed to the State Conference of Counties today,
and we will be breaking for lunch at 11:15 a.m. to participate in a presentation, and
we have a Certificate of Recognition. But I want to get through this particular
special item and then take a break, and then get to our recognition programs. I just
needed to remind you that we are on a time clock today. Mr. Rapozo, do you want
the floor next?
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me just start by saying
thanks to the Salary Commission. You heard a lot about what you should do, what
you should be doing, and all of that, but the reality is this comprehensive study sits,
a $90,000 study, on somebody's desk that is not being released, the Nash Study. So
it starts there. You folks need that study because there is some comprehensive
review that has already been done, and that is a public document, in my opinion, so
that starts your journey into the next deliberations.
The other thing is regarding this Executive Order that has been talked about
a lot. In the Mayor's defense, he had no choice. Where this County failed was we
did not honor the State law regarding EM compensation back in 2009 and in 2010,
which generated grievances and lawsuits that were successful, in Honolulu the Fire
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 25 - JUNE 20, 2012
Department. Because the State law says whenever a collective bargaining
employee in a bargaining unit gets a raise, their counterpart in the EM side gets the
raise. We did not do that in 2009, we did not do that in 2010 with Police and Fire
because those are the only two bargaining units that got raises. So to his defense,
yes, it needed to be done. The problem was it should have been done back in 2009
and 2010 so we do not get hit with this surprise in 2012. So I want the public to
understand this was not something initiated by the Mayor, okay, let us go give
these folks raises. I think we need to make that clear. But in 2009 is when we
should have given the raise, when the civil service, the collective bargaining
employees got their raises. So unfortunately it was something that had to be done
because of some legal action. That has not been said.
The other part is collective bargaining is what dictates the salaries. I know
Councilmember Yukimura asked earlier, who sets the Assistant Chief salaries.
That is all set by contract, not the Assistant Chief, but the...in essence the contract
because again, when the civil servant gets promoted, the SR equivalent gets a raise,
the EM should get a raise. That is not done by here, that is not done by the Salary
Commission, that is done by collective bargaining and State law, so that is out of
our control. We only have control through the Salary Commission to compensate
our department heads and that is what the Salary Commission has been trying to
do, what the Salary Commission has done. Again, I appreciate what the Salary
Commission has done based on the information that they were provided, and I think
they did a heck of a job. Is it perfect? Of course not. Is this Council perfect? Of
course not. But if we do not give them the resources and the tools...and to go spend
another $100,000 on another study, I think let us look at the Nash Study and let us
see what the analysis that was done back then. I would assume the majority of it
applies today.
The March 15 deadline, "shall" is "shall," no doubt about it. "Shall" is "shall."
Do I agree with the County Attorney's opinion? No, I do not. Mr. Bynum talks
about a Supreme Court ruling. Well, my attorney had a Supreme Court ruling too,
in the case of Fasi, that said otherwise. So it is a matter of interpretation.
But you know what? This inversion today, and I said this earlier, is worse
than when r
we started the journey with the Salary Commission back in 2006/2007 or
whenever it was. It is horrendous now. Now, the Assistant Chief will make, if this
does not pass, $13,000 more than the Chief, base, not including overtime, and that
overtime can be anywhere from $20,000 to $30,000 a year. The Chief, the Fire
Chief, I am looking at about $15,000 more than the Fire Chief, not including
overtime. Is that a problem? It sure is a problem. Now, do I think that the people
at the Landfill, Transportation should all get raises? Yes, I do. I know what it is
like to be a cop. I do not know what it is like to shovel trash all day, but in the short
time I spent down there dumping my trash, that is a horrendous environment to
work in. But that is not in our control, that is collective bargaining. This Council
has an opportunity with the Salary Commission's recommendation to at least try to
right that inversion or start that process. I know many will say, Mel, you sued the
County for the March 15 deadline. Yes, I did, and do I still believe that today? Yes,
I do. But I can operate under the Attorney's opinion that says we can do it, I am
going to do it because we need to right this wrong. And this is the first step and I
think this process has really enlightened the Salary Commission as far as what
they need to be doing, and it has never been for a lack of effort, believe me. I have
read every single meeting minutes that you folks have had and I congratulate you
on your work for free. But based on what you folks are provided, basically it is
testimony and memos from the Mayor's Office, you do the best you can. But we will
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 26 - JUNE 20, 2012
try our best to get you the study so you can...I know you folks are really interested
in that, and I think once you see that, it will just help you move forward to try and
equalize this whole salary schedules.
I have a lot more to say, but I am going to end here because I know we are on
a really, really tight time schedule. We commend all that you do and it is just a
matter of $107,000 for a Chief of Police. And one more thing, Mr. Chair, before I
end, the Standard of Conduct Differential is there because police officers are
required to adhere to the Standards of Conduct on and off duty, and that was
negotiated years ago in the union contract because cops are held to a higher
standard even if they are not working, so they negotiated the $2,000 increase
annually. It is a differential because they are expected to be held to a higher
standard even when they are not working. So that is what that is all about. And
again, that is something that I believe the Chief is held to that same standard. So
anyway, I will...obviously I made the motion, I will be supporting it, and again, I
just hope that moving forward we can equalize the playing field for all of our
department heads. And I am sure the Salary Commission will be working on that
as we move forward. So thank very much, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Chang, do you want to speak? Nadine, would
you like to speak? You have the floor.
Ms. Nakamura: Just I will be supporting this with reservations. I
believe that in our previous conversation with representatives of the Salary
Commission, we, I thought, had reached a verbal understanding about trying to
meet the March 15 deadline moving forward even though there may have been
different legal opinions. I think there was, I believe, at the time a verbal
understanding with the Chair at that time that we would attempt to recognize this
date and to work with it. So I would like to ask the Salary Commission to not wait
until the end of the year but begin now. Begin the deliberation now so that by the
end of the year, by the time the Administration is working on the budget, that
becomes input early in the budget deliberation process on the Administration side
that then feeds into our process by March 15. So that would be my only
recommendation. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, Mr. Bynum wanted to speak a second time.
No? Okay. Well anyway, first of all I want to say thank you very much to the
Salary Commission people for their fine work, and I want to make sure we all
understand. It is a fine process that you need to gather good information to make
the decisions you have, and be fair and balanced on our needs, our continuity, our
retention plan, and so forth. The work, in my opinion, has just started, I think you
have heard from this dialogue.
I am key about the fact that we are moving forward to an HR Department. I
think you need to work very closely with that new department, and you need to see
information. I know I gave you information and came to speak to you, and I gave
you five compensation packages from five different private groups across the island
and how they do retention plans and compensation and benefit pieces. And as you
can also see from today's meeting, I had to do a lot of research myself, pulling out
four different payroll schedules that have happened in the last 24 months, do
research on those exempt from overtime, do information about the SOCD process,
and it is all in the fact of making sure that we collectively, as a group, have good
information about making decisions in a timely manner. A budget process is about
having as much information you can to make good decisions in a timely fashion so
that we can also align the expenditures with the revenues. The budget is also a
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 27 - JUNE 20, 2012
learning curve for all commissions, and I will be speaking to both Police and Fire on
their future agendas to give them some commentary on this last budget process.
I want to say I am very appreciative of what I heard from the Commissioners
today, and I see them in the audience, in constantly making improvements to have
a more comprehensive look about compensation. It is really important to the
success of this County and retention is very key to constantly making improvements
about public safety in Fire and in Police. You are looking for continuity in
leadership and personal development.
So as I had mentioned earlier, I will be voting to receive this, which is a vote
that supports the recommendations by the Salary Commission. And on that note, I
again want to thank the Commissioners, Paula, your office and so forth. And I also
want to say that Mel's comment about the Mayor is a true statement. He was not in
a good place not to reflect submitting that Executive Order. I think where we have
to improve on is when we know we have strategic thinking going on like that on
compensation, the Administration needs to preview this information with the
Salary Commission much farther in advance. But on that note, I would like to call
a roll call vote. The motion was to receive, it was seconded by Mr. Chang.
The motion to receive C 2012-173 for the record was then put, and carried by
the following vote:
FOR RECEIPT: Bynum, Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo, TOTAL— 7,
Yukimura, Furfaro
AGAINST RECEIPT: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. Now on that note I would
like to take a 10-minute recess. Please be prompt and we would like to come back
with a certificate to be presented today.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 10:11 a.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 10:44 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: Al?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
ALFRED B. CASTILLO, JR., County Attorney: Council Chair,
Councilmembers, good morning, Al Castillo, County Attorney. The next matter for
your consideration is ES-552.
ES-552 Pursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. sections 92-4 and 92-5(a)(4), and
Kaua`i County Charter section 3.07(E), the Office of the County Attorney requests
an executive session with the Council, to provide Council with a briefing and
request authority for a possible settlement in a claim against the County of Kaua'i
by Roger Matias and Doreen Golden Matias, filed on May 27, 2011, and related
matters. This briefing and consultation involves consideration of the powers,
duties, privileges, immunities and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as
they relate to this agenda item.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as
follows:
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - 28 - JUNE 20, 2012
Mr. Rapozo moved to convene in Executive Session, seconded by Mr. Chang.
Council Chair Furfaro: Any questions for the County Attorney? Anybody
wishes to testify on this item? If not, could I have a roll call vote for executive
session?
The motion to convene in Executive Session was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION: Bynum, Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, TOTAL— 7,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro
AGAINST EXECUTIVE SESSION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. For those of you in the
audience, I expect that we will be out by about 11:05 a.m.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 10:45 a.m.
ADJOURNMENT.
The meeting was called back to order at 11:03 a.m., and there being no
further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
RICKY WATANABE
/wa County Clerk