Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015_0819_Minutes Open_APPROVEDCOUNTY OF KAUAI Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION Approved as circulated 9/14/15 Board /Committee: SALARY COMMISSION Meeting Date August 19, 2015 Location Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A /213 Start of Meeting: 9:01 a.m. End of Meeting: 10:17 a.m. Present Chair Charles King; Vice Chair Sheri Kunioka -Volz. Members: Robert Crowell; Michael Machado; Lenie Nishihira; Jo Shimamoto Also: Deputy County Attorney Matt Bracken; Boards & Commissions Office Staff. Support Clerk Barbara Davis, Administrator Jay Furfaro; Director of Human Resources Janine Rapozo Excused Member Cammie Matsumoto Absent SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Prior to the start of the meeting, Council Administrative Assistant Eddie Topenio gave the Oath of Office to reappointed Commission Member Charles King. Call To Order Chair Machado called the meeting to order at 9:01 a.m. with 5 members present; Ms. Kunioka- Volz entered the meeting at 9:02 a.m. Approval of Open Session Minutes of July 20, 2015 Minutes Page 8, second sentence from the end Ms. Nishihira thought the comment listed was attributed to Ms. Matsumoto rather than herself. Mr. King moved to approve the minutes as amended. Ms. Shimamoto seconded the motion. Motion carried 6:0 Business SC 2015 -01 Election of Chair for 2015 (Deferred from 7/20/15 meeting) Mr. Crowell nominated Charlie King for the position of Chair. Mr. King noted his problem is with his travel while at the same time recognizing the importance of the Chair being available for Council meetings. He noted that he can arrange the Commission meetings around his schedule, but he cannot necessarily arrange his schedule to meet the Council's schedule. Mr. Machado said with that in mind, the Vice Chair or other members could sit in on those meetings if Mr. King was not available. Mr. King agreed, but as Chair he would feel some responsibility. Ms. Nishihira seconded the motion. Motion Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION carried 6:0 Mr. King assumed the role of Chair for the duration of the meeting. SC 2015 -02 Information atg hering, review, discussion and possible decision - making with regard to establishing the maximum cap for salaries for the fiscal year 2016/2017 for Councilmembers and all officers and employees included in Section 3 -2.1 of the Kauai County Code (On- going) a. Comparison of Executive Pay Rates for Counties b. 2011 Gross Earnings for police rank and file C. 2013 -2015 State of Hawaii Short -Term Industry Forecast — Verbal summary by Administrator Furfaro d. January 7, 2015 County Council Open Session Minutes e. Review of Draft Resolution 2014 -1 rejected by the County Council on January 7, 2015 f. Resolution 2012 -1; Resolution 2012 -2; Resolution 2012 -3; Resolution 2013 -1; Resolution 2013 -2 as relates to the salaries of County officers and employ Chair King stated that the Salary Comparison distributed at the beginning of the meeting is based on initial information received 10/2012 for salaries. Chair King inserted information disseminated through minutes for the 7/1/2014 salaries. In looking at the 10/2012 and 7/1/2014 salaries there have been changes on the other islands. There is also a salary to employee ratio to give some basis of where things are, as well as the operating budget of different departments by county and a ratio. Chair King pointed out that this was not an HR study as it does not indicate how many deputies there are for the county attorney, corporation counsel or prosecuting attorney offices. Ms. Nishihira noted that some of the ratios looked misleading and skews it. You have less employees so the salaried employee ratio is going to be much higher, but they are still doing the same work with the same responsibilities. Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 Page 3 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Chair King agreed that it does skew it in that way, but what caught his attention more was the change on the other elements from 2012 to 2014. Mr. Furfaro stated there were four things he was to pursue following the last meeting. The first was to meet with Councilmember Kuali'i to get a better understanding of what narrative he was reading from when he did the Federal comparisons. That piece was dealing with salary bases as they relate to Federal unemployment and not something you can compare apples to apples. The comparison from Chair King incorporates the three items discussed when going before the Council in terms of justification of the proposal. One is having a better feeling of the ratings as it relates to the consumer price index, with the only consumer price index we have since 2009 to go forward on is the rating for the City and County of Honolulu. On the Index distributed to the Commission, it shows from 2009 going forward what those indexes actually were as it relates to the City of Honolulu. We also talked in terms of retention and there are two schools of thought. The Administration changes with the department heads being appointed by the incoming Administration, but that is not the case in all areas. The Police, Fire, Planning (Liquor, Civil Service and Water) Commissions make the (hiring) decisions for those departments, so continuity becomes very important; how much we are investing in the people coming through the ranks and have the familiarization with the operation of the department. That is very relevant when looking at what the deputy police chief and deputy fire chief have recently done in stepping back into a different position because of a compensation challenge. Continuity is as important along those same lines as retention. Mr. Furfaro said he started making comparisons on key department heads such as the chief engineer for the County of Kauai Public Works. On the Big Island there is no garbage collection so there is an extra duty in Kaua`i's Public Works Department. On Maui there is a comparison that deals with environmental issues through a separate department under public works. Mr. Furfaro noted that he was trying to get Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 _. SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION a better foundation of comparing job scope to job position as they compare salaries. Chair King said he had noted the timing of the Commission's submission and they thought they were being smart a couple of years ago when they submitted no recommendation and submitted it early. That does not fit the Administration's budget or the Council's budget and there is a 60 -day constraint. Mr. Furfaro pointed out that the key document that comes out in December will be the CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports), which is the reconciled piece for all 13 periods for the County's operating budget, and the audited number that would say if there is a carryover, and how much it is. Certainly you would want to have that snapshot from the auditor's report of what kind of cash position the County is in. The startup in late March is when they start to review the next operating budget. The members need to discuss the timing between January and late March when you want to make your recommendations and be able to justify that there are any carryover funds from the CAFR. (Staff note: Charter Section 29.03. Resolution. The commission's salary findings shall be adopted by resolution of the commission and forwarded to the mayor and the council on or before March 15 of any calendar year.) Chair King asked if carryover mattered as far as budgeting. Mr. Furfaro discussed the carryover from the last several years and the capping of the TAT by the Legislature, further explaining they can budget with the surplus noting there is a sitting resolution to try to build the reserve of which that document said only 50% of the reserve could be used for operating budgets with the other 50% left for emergency factors. Chair King asked if the Commission's deliberations should be based on the budget or on what is fair for the employees. Mr. Furfaro said the Commission's work has not changed — it is about being fair, equitable and under the 3 conditions of retention, continuity and the consumer price index. Ms. Nishihira asked for clarification on Councilmember Kuali'i's report as it relates to unemployment because in looking at the numbers they look plausible as far as wages. Mr. Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 Page 5 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Furfaro said looking at the report, it references the UCFE (Unemployment Compensation factor for the Federal government) and at the same time the Federal government has adjustments or variances that relate to what their COLA (Cost of Living Allowance) index is, which is hard to extract from the report. In the discussion with Councilmember Kuali'i, he was not making one point over another, other than to say it wasn't only related to unemployment or to consumer price indexes. Ms. Nishihira said Councilmember Kuali'i was referring to averages, so she thought it was averages on the schedule in the back, or he was comparing island to island which made it sound like Kauai made more than other neighbor islands in certain sectors or positions. Mr. Furfaro said they needed to compare the work scope and gave some equivalent comparisons. Councilmember Kuali'i was talking in terms of average, but the report does not extract anything for COLA or so forth, and certainly they do not reflect to the same job scopes. Ms. Nishihira said some places also track how long it takes to fill a position and asked if that would be pertinent to which Mr. Furfaro said that was very meaningful and pointed out areas where there have been improvements. Ms. Shimamoto stated that if the Commission is to continue to do what they are doing, and reading in the minutes that the Commission was looking at parity and equitable pay, if they continue that after having come up with recommendations and there is no balanced budget, the Council is never going to approve the Resolution if the thinking is the way they were thinking at the last Council meeting. The Council was asking to be provided with more information and justification, and take into consideration the performance evaluations. We have been told if we continue to do what we have been doing and make a recommendation, it is not our kuleana whether there is money in the budget, so that is how we proceeded. And yet when we go to Council they say there is no money, there is no balanced budget so the Resolution was rejected. Mr. Furfaro said you have to be careful with the fact when they say there is no money - that could be a very correct statement, but to say they can't balance the Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 i • SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION budget, the Charter prevents them from passing a budget that isn't balanced. Chair King thought the problem may have come more with the timing of the Commission's submission because it was submitted in November and on January 7 "no" was the only action they could take. If they did not take any action, the Resolution would go into effect, and it was too early in their budget process to really know what they had. Mr. Furfaro added that was because Council did not get the CAFR until the next month. Kauai County has a 13 month year, and the year ends in June, but they have a 13th month where they try to reconcile everything, and that is when the auditors come down and they work off that sheet. It takes them from there to about the middle of December before they actually submit their audited report. If the Resolution was sent over in November, the Council did not have that document to look at. Chair King said while the Commission thought they were being exceptionally prompt it did not work even though the Commission had been berated in the past for being late. Ms. Kunioka -Volz asked if they could have asked for it to be postponed and the Commission resubmit it to give them time. Mr. Furfaro pointed out that since it had already been submitted, to put it back on the agenda, the motion for a reconsideration would have to come from someone who voted affirmatively (to reject). Chair King said last year they thought the scale should go up and he is assuming the Commission still feels the scale should go up; now it is deciding how much the scale should go up and for whom. Mr. Machado asked if there wasn't also the controversy of the tax increase base at that point when the Resolution was submitted, so there was a lot of pressure from the public as far as any increases being presented because of the fact they were asking for higher taxes. Mr. Furfaro also pointed out there was also the reduction in the TAT back to the island. Mr. Crowell thought it was probably right that the timing was off and with the information provided by Mr. Furfaro he would like to propose the Commissioners take it home, mull it over, and bring it back to the next meeting. Looking at all of the comparisons, they have to take a hard look at our Mayor's Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION position as it relates to everything else and he believed that the City and County of Honolulu is the only one where the fire and police chiefs do have a salary that is higher than the Mayor. Chair King said they can come up with a recommendation as quickly as they want, but he would propose not submitting the Resolution until the proper moment. Chair King asked Ms. Rapozo if she had any comments on retention, and also thanked her for being on that personnel study. Ms. Rapozo said there are a few department heads that are appointed by Commissions and therefore do not necessarily come and go with the Mayor's term. Aside from fire, police, planning, it is water and her position that are all commission appointed, as well as liquor. Chair King recalled that water was a hard position to fill and took some time to fill. Ms. Rapozo said the first time it was vacant for a while and they used a head - hunting firm, so it did take longer. The next time they didn't (use an outside firm) and they received a number of applications, from outside as well as inside, for consideration. They did hire the person who was the deputy at the time; he is now trying to hire a deputy and is having difficulty. The difference with his deputy is the HRS requires a civil engineer license versus a public works deputy that does not require that. He cannot even do a reciprocity with an engineer license from the mainland; they need to have a Hawaii license. Those are some things to look at with the deputies and it is difficult because the deputy levels are lower, but at the same time the Charter does not require deputies, and it does not have any minimum qualifications for the deputies. Knowing the Commission only looks at the caps, and by making it a different cap it is incumbent on the director to ensure they would compensate accordingly. Retention is very difficult for the department heads. With the salaries from 2009, the mayor has had difficulty in finding replacements when they come up. Ms. Rapozo pointed out that compensation doesn't only include salaries, so maybe the Commission can consider other ways to compensate the department heads. She pointed out that police has the standard of conduct, the Councilmembers and Mayor have travel, so there are Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 i SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION other ways to try to compensate the department heads. It may not necessarily be all salary that attracts someone to a position. Asked if attorneys have other compensation, Ms. Rapozo believed their bar dues are paid. Asked if educational opportunities would get an attorney excited, Attorney Bracken said possibly as they have to do continuing education every year and they have to take certain classes of which there is no cost for many of the courses. Mr. Crowell asked who sets the minimum qualifications for the appointed positions. Ms. Rapozo said the Charter has minimum qualifications for department heads; deputies are not chartered so there are no qualifications basically except for the Water Department which is by Hawaii Revised Statutes. Deputies for attorneys have to be licensed (in the State). Chair King asked about the tiered rates to which it was agreed there are now three tiers with the fire and police being at a higher rate. Ms. Rapozo said it has come up before on looking at positions that require certain licenses and whether or not that should be compensated a little more because of the higher qualifications. Asked whether the neighbor island salaries were at the maximum of what their Salary Commission had set since there seems to be lot of variance, Ms. Rapozo said Maui is not necessarily at the max, but she did not know for sure. Mr. Furfaro said he would follow up on the question. Ms. Shimamoto thought a good suggestion might be a one -time package like continuing education if it is paid by the employee, and suggested asking the department heads what might be something they could use to attract applicants. Chair King said that gets to be a slippery slope because it can go a lot of different ways when one person is getting one thing and another is getting another type of thing. Mr. Furfaro reminded the Commission that is why it is important to compare the job scope and not the salary. Ms. Kunioka -Volz asked if the police and fire departments were looking at doing away with the deputy positions. Ms. Rapozo responded that the police department reallocated their deputy osition to another assistant chief so they now have a fourth one Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 .,_.. SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION who is quasi serving as a deputy. The reason for this is one of their assistant chiefs has been out long term so in essence they still only have three assistant chiefs. That was part of the problem as well as with the deputy's salary. With fire, because of budget constraints they dollar funded the deputy position so it is in the budget, but it is not funded. Part of the reason for the chief doing that was because he did not feel he would be able to attract anyone to that salary level because the battalion chiefs are currently making more than the deputy's maximum salary. Mr. Furfaro said he is doing a comparison on the staffing and not the money, which is Janine's area, but we have a grid for the police department about the number of badged officers compared with other areas in the country, and he will have that report for next month along with fire. Attorney Bracken said the previous month there was a discussion of possibly removing the police and fire chiefs from the Salary Commission's scope in an effort to raise their pay and under Hawaii Revised Statutes and the Constitution those positions the salary has to be set by the Council. You could make a recommendation to the Charter Commission to remove those from your authority, but it would be against State law and could create legal problems. Asked about the possibility of having a working group to put together some suggestions, Staff explained the Sunshine Law which governs a PIG (Permitted Interaction Group). Ms. Shimamoto asked about the pay for grade for officers, which was mentioned in a previous meeting, to which Mr. Furfaro said he had not thoroughly digested that but would have it for the next month although those gross earnings for 2011 are part of the meeting packet. Ms. Shimamoto indicated she would like to see the base pay also. Ms. Rapozo stated that sometimes the officers at the lowest level bring in the most overtime so if they are just looking at base then it would be the assistant chiefs at the highest level of base pay. The fire department has a rank- for -rank, so you have to find a classification to replace someone. Ms. Kumoka -Volz said if they get the base Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 Page 10 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION pay, it will give a better idea of what the comparison is and how much of it is overtime. Asked if they wanted the actual base pay or from the contract where they have the whole salary scale. Ms. Kunioka -Volz said the whole salary scale to include their uniform to which Ms. Rapozo said that would still be base, and they have standard of conduct, gun and uniform. Mr. Furfaro said Ms. Rapozo would get that for the Commission as he did not want to confuse it with what was in the report that was based on who was earning what kind of overtime. Ms. Rapozo wanted to clarify that the request includes the differential they would get but not overtime. Asked if they want it per officer or the salary scale from the Ist year up to 25 years because they have steps they move. It was agreed that it would be the salary scale and then the standard of conduct and the gun and uniform would be added to the base. The request was amended to include the fire department as well. On the CPI, Ms. Nishihira asked if the cumulative CPI had been calculated since 2009 to which Mr. Furfaro said he did it out of curiosity, but focused on the last 2 years which is 1.8 and 1.7. Ms. Nishihira said she asked because some of the positions in which raises were proposed had not received a raise since 2008. Ms. Kunioka -Volz said Councilmember Kuali'i had asked if, and was almost suggesting we do another study, but in previous meetings we had discussed that the figures would only get worse because they would be higher than the recommendations the Salary Commission was submitting. Would it help to do another outside study? Chair King said he works with consultants all the time and they are not cheap. We have talked about using other forms of compensation and there are not a lot of other forms of compensation that can be used. Chair King said they can see where it is deficient and thought a study would only confirm what the Commission thinks. Ms. Kunioka-Volz asked if it would make a better presentation to the Council to which Chair King agreed it would make a better presentation but was it necessary. It was asked if it could be found out if any of the other counties had a more recent study. Chair Kin Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 Page 11 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION said when he asked the consultants he deals with about their government work it is all in Washington, D.C. and they do not do much on the local level. Ms. Nishihira thought a lot of it was the CPI and for her that was minimum. Calculating from 2008/2009 it is almost 12% and the private sector looks at the Federal CPI in their salaries. The Hawaii Employers Council does not have anything on government, in addition to being very expensive to be a member. Ms. Nishihira did not know if they could quantify the cost of lack of continuity in retention in terms of lawsuits or other damages to the County as a cost. Attorney Bracken said that would be difficult to quantify and difficult to track down what percentage of the lawsuits are based on employment related loss of management. With most lawsuits, there are multiple factors involved and not just one poor decision and might not all be related to some lack of training. Chair King thought the Commission's justification should be more on the CPI parity. Attorney Bracken said he would look at their current caseload to see if they are employment related. Attorney Bracken said if they are looking at additional benefits, they could look at paying medical costs which would not be raising salaries, but would be covering out of pocket expenses. Ms. Rapozo said that is an option that some department heads have suggested as their share has been steadily going up. Benefits are part of compensation and something that can be looked at and made more palatable because you are not showing an increase in salary when it goes across the street. Chair King asked if that would even have to go to Council to which Ms. Rapozo said it is part of compensation, so it would be part of the Resolution like with the standard of conduct. Some of the Commissioners questioned how the public would perceive that to which Mr. Furfaro said even the bargaining units consider it. Next Monday, September 14,10:30 a.m. — Meeting Room 2 A/B Meeting(s) Monday, October 5, 10:30 a.m. — Meeting Room 2 A/B Adjournment Mr. Machado moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:17 a.m. Ms. Kumoka -Volz seconded the motion. Motion carried. Salary Commission Open Session August 19, 2015 Page 12 Submitted by: Barbara Davis, Support Clerk O Approved as circulated. O Approved with amendments. See minutes of Reviewed and Approved by: meeting. Charles King, Chair