Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015_1005_Minutes Open_APPROVEDCOUNTY OF KAUAI Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION Approved as amended 11/18/15 Board/Committee: SALARY COMMISSION Meeting Date I October 5, 2015 Location Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/213 Start of Meeting: 10:30 a.m. End of Meeting: 12:07 p.m. Present Chair Charles King; Vice Chair Sheri Kunioka -Volz. Members: Robert Crowell; Cammie Matsumoto; Leme Nishihira (10:34 a.m.); Jo Ann Shimamoto Staff: Deputy County Attorney Matt Bracken; Boards & Commissions Office Staff. Support Clerk Barbara Davis, Administrator Jay Furfaro. Also: John Low, Vice -Chair Civil Service Commission; Fire Chief Robert Westerman Excused Member Michael Machado Absent SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Call To Order Chair King called the meeting to order at 10:30 a.m. with 5 members present Approval of Minutes Open Session Minutes of September 14, 2015 Ms. Matsumoto moved to approve the minutes as circulated. Mr. Crowell seconded the motion. Motion carried 5:0 Business 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, revised 9/15/15 b. Memorandum dated 9/22/15 from the Civil Service Commission requesting consideration of changing the tier level for the Director of Human Resources C. Review of Draft Resolution 2014 -1 rejected by the County Council on January 7, 2015 d. Resolution 2012 -1; Resolution 2012 -2; Resolution 2012 -3; Resolution 2013 -1; Resolution 2013 -2 as relates to the salaries of County officers and employees Chair King noted that a letter was received from the Civil Service Commission and John Low was present to speak about the request. Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Low introduced himself and addressed the Civil Service Commission's request for a tier change for the Director of Human Resources to the level of other top directors in the County. Mr. Low also wanted them to know that the Civil Service Commission was unanimous in making the request because of its importance. A comparison of the functions previously handled by the then Department of Personnel Services to what is now the Department of Human Resources was distributed to the Salary Commission. It clearly shows that while the Department of Human Resources may not be among the largest in terms of the number of employees it certainly has one of the largest areas of responsibility that affects not only every County Department, but also every one of the County employees. For this reason, the Civil Service Commission feels this level change is warranted. Mr. Low thanked the Salary Commission for the opportunity to speak to them, and noted he would be happy to answer any questions. Chair King asked how the amalgamation had gone so far to which Mr. Low replied it has gone very well although not without problems. Some of that has to do with the HRIS (Human Resource Information System) that the County has not had the funds to change, so they are doing the best they can with what they have. They are working on a payroll change in terms of time reporting that will be automated, and make it a lot cleaner with less errors in the reporting of employee time. Without a doubt, bringing all the personnel files into one department has made it a lot cleaner system. The time and reporting to the County Council has been shortened, and the reports are more accurate. Overall we are going down the right road. Chair King agreed it was certainly more responsibility. Ms. Kunioka -Volz asked who was doing all those functions previously; Mr. Low responded that each department was handling their own, and that was part of the problem. It is now under one umbrella and centralized in HR, which makes Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 3 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION it more error free and consistent. Ms. Shimamoto asked about the number of employees in HR; Staff indicated it is currently somewhere around 18 employees. Ms. Kunioka -Volz asked if the positions that were in the departments were absorbed by HR; Mr. Low said some were brought into HR and others had their duties reassigned. Mr. Crowell said after reviewing some of the past things, if the Commission is in agreement with the tier change, should they put this in as a separate resolution instead of tying it to a salary increase. When the last salary increase went to Council this particular position was tied into that, and everything was rejected at that point. Some of the Commissioners noted that was a good point. Chair King noted last month they looked at a comparison of salaries (blue chart) and the updated comparison (green chart) was updated by Mr. Furfaro and included in the packet. Chair King said he is used to getting management's recommendations, and noted that Mr. Furfaro did speak with the Administration. Mr. Furfaro said that the green chart expands some of the positions that were not originally in Mr. King's blue spreadsheet, but the format is exactly the same. Mr. King had also reflected the work information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics from 2010 through 2014, which added up to an 11.2% increase in the Consumer Price Index, and it was recommended that some of the cumulative impacts were about 11.7 %. Thus the 11.7°/x, as requested by Mr. King, was inputted into the green spreadsheet, and some of the positions that were covered by the Salary Commission, but not previously shown on the blue spreadsheet, were added. The last column on the green sheet is a reflection of the 11.2 %, and if there was a variation from the 11.2% it shows up in the last column. Subsequently Chair King had said he wanted to get some feedback from the Administration. Ms. Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 4 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Shimamoto referred to the listing for the Mayor noting at 11.2% the increase was $12,823, but the base proposed increase shows $17,510 and questioned the difference. Mr. Furfaro said in the white section is the salary of the lowest paid Mayor within the 4 counties with the thinking that the Kauai County Mayor should be equal to the other scopes of those Mayors. That increase is 15.3 %, which would take it to $132,000 and equal to the Mayor of the Big Island. Also, the County Attorney's Office did not have an increase two years ago, but the Prosecutor's Office did, so to bring the Attorneys as a group up to the guideline of the 11.2% the Prosecutor's Office reflects only a 3.9% increase. That places all attorneys in the same tier. Chair King asked if corporate attorneys and litigators are normally at the same tier. Attorney Bracken said generally civil attorneys are paid more than criminal attorneys, so as it is now it is sort of an inversion. Attorney Bracken also said the question had come up about the definition of compensation; in the County Charter the word salary and compensation are used interchangeably to define each other. The legal definition of compensation is basically salary. According to Hawaii case law compensation is confusing in that it includes benefits, but under case law it doesn't include allowances. That does not directly impact us; that is defining compensation in different circumstances as it deals with retirement and ERS, but not necessarily defining compensation for this Commission. The reason it separated the two is it saw allowances as a reimbursement and benefits as additional salary. Hawaii case law separates the two, but IRS does not separate the two. It looks at wages and salaries and fringe benefits. What we see as allowances is considered fringe benefits according to the IRS. Under the County Charter salary and compensation are not directly defined. In the past it has included allowances and the Attorney felt the Commission could continue doing so under their authority. Attorney Bracken suggested it might be worthwhile to use the same definition of fringe benefits, which is in line with the IRS. Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 5 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Furfaro distributed information listing the Key Result Areas which focuses on Retention, Continuity, and the Consumer Price Index as it relates to Honolulu. Also included in the handout was the definition on salary and compensation as discussed by Attorney Bracken. The third sheet is the worksheet covering what benefits are included for which individuals, and the last sheet covers what Mr. King referred to as getting feedback from the Administration. Chair King noted that the third sheet included the current tiers of the directors. Mr. Furfaro said the fourth page ties into the two worksheets — the green which was received in the mail and the purple which reflects comments Mr. King sought out from the Administration along with a summary sheet showing four tiers. The highlighted positions moved or are different from previous worksheets, and the positions noted with a caret mark are items that have had some discussion about what tier they should be in. Chair King noted on the last sheet there was no recommendation to move HR up to Tier II. Mr. Furfaro said that is the task of the Salary Commission. Chair King said it appears the recommendation was a compression from five tiers to four tiers to which Mr. Furfaro said yes. Chair King said there has been lots of discussion around Police and Fire and he is curious why the deputies would be moved to Tier III. Mr. Furfaro said the Fire Chief and the Police Chief move into a category higher than even the Managing Director. Part of that is what the total impact would be in the way of salaries, summarized on the green sheet that was mailed out, which shows the total impact of around $304,000. With bumping the Police and Fire Chief up, the new totals on the purple sheet come out about $357,000 or a change of about $56,000 additional. The total benefit impact, PT & EB, is calculated at 44.9 %. There are some items in the Notes that strategically will become influential when it is the time to write the Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 6 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION narrative. For example, on Maui when you compare the engineer, the head of Public Works, the reality is their engineer does not take care of solid waste and/or waste water; they have a separate department that deals with that called Environmental Services. One of the differences with the Council positions is the island of Maui is done by districts, and those councilmembers have the higher salary, but they have to run at -large in which they have to campaign in the whole County. The Big Island is pure district and they only campaign in that district, so it would impact the salary earning. Asked if there is something our Mayor does that is unique for Kauai, Mr. Furfaro said some of the differences is our Mayor is the ex- officio on five major commissions and although he does not have a vote he does have influence on Planning, Fire, Police, Liquor and one other Commission. Chair King noted the salaries for the other islands were increased two years ago, so we are playing catch -up. Mr. Furfaro pointed out that it has been more than a five year period (since there was a salary increase) and there are department heads who have been with the County that long, so it comes under the category of being able to retain qualified people that are today earning 82% of what they earned five years ago. Asked about the license requirements for the engineer, Mr. Furfaro said the chief engineer is required to be licensed, but also thinks his deputy requires some type of licensing. The Water Department also requires licensure. Mr. Furfaro will report back on required licenses at the next meeting. Looking at the Council Chairperson's proposed salary, 11.2% would increase the salary by $7,056, but the new proposed salary at $71,033 is actually 12.8% with the feedback from the Administration. Mr. Furfaro said the Commission's recommendations are reflected in the colored section, and in the white is the feedback and what those percentages might be, which can be used for comparison. Further explanation was provided on campaigning Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION by district and at -large along with the scope of work, which frames some of the differences in the salaries. Asked if at the time the Resolution is before the County Council would it be helpful to have experts be able to explain this information to the County Councilmembers. Mr. Furfaro said whatever this Commission agrees on with a salary, and knowing what has happened in the past, they need to be prepared to lobby. They need to be prepared to show some key talking points that make up the differences and their rationale for the HR Department. All of that needs to be put into some type of narrative presentation that the Council will buy into. Ms. Matsumoto asked again if it would be helpful to have experts report this information at Council to which Mr. Furfaro thought it would be very important for the Commission to do. Chair King said he was trying to think of an expert that would have all of that information, and the most expert person he remembered giving testimony was Tom from HR who put together what the current information is based on. Noting that Tom has retired, Mr. Furfaro stated that Janine (Rapozo) is a good resource for this, and should be able to participate and go through executive job descriptions and provide feedback on what the variances are. Mr. Furfaro said he would consider her an expert. Ms. Matsumoto thought just having Tom present, if he is willing, would be helpful, and for Council to know what his role was in preparing the information. Mr. Furfaro pointed out some of the variances such as with the Fire Department. For an island of our size, which includes residents and visitors, for public safety and response and to reduce our insurance premiums we have to maintain 8 fire houses. This takes a lot of energy making sure the standards are met in every station, equipment, and capital improvements, etc. The Waianae coast has 140,000 people and are covered by 2 stations. Ms. Matsumoto said it is important to stress how much our people serve to keep Kauai unique and the extra work they do to maintain that. Ms. Matsumoto continued by saying comparing is a good thing, but Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 8 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION also remembering what they do to serve the island is another thing. Chair King said in most cases they are simply talking about getting people back up to status quo; it is whether they want to go beyond that. Chair King noted his appreciation for Mr. Furfaro putting in the budgetary impacts to the spreadsheet. Ms. Nishihira asked if they had to show the fixed allowance column to which Chair King did not think they needed to. The figures from the other counties do not reflect allowances, and Mr. Furfaro was in agreement that they should just deal with the salary. Ms. Nishihira stated they went to the Council meeting last year and things are very black/white, and when things are inconsistent it causes raising of the eyebrows. Ms. Nishihira thought it could get more complicated than the Commission wants it to because the Council just denied the whole thing last year. Mr. Furfaro said it was a split vote as well; nobody makes a bad decision because they have too much information. Give them the information that justifies retention, continuity, and that we are lagging behind what the cost of living is to retain these people. Ms. Kunioka -Volz said the Commission actually had the votes last year, but there was a change in a vote which gave the denial. Ms. Nishihira said if we are going to bring them up 11.2% or at the minimum of another island, someone may get caught up in that. Chair King did some quick math on the premium from Councilmember to Council Chair and it is 10.5% for Kauai with Maui at 7.5 %, and both Hawaii and the City and County of Honolulu are 11.5% and 11.7 %. Chair King suggested they look at the tier compression first and then the salaries. Looking at Tier V it is comprised of Boards and Commissions, Transportation, Deputy County Attorneys and the Deputy Prosecuting Attorneys. Tier IV had 3 positions and we are looking at expanding that tier by moving Boards and Commissions, Transportations, Deputy County Attorneys, Deputy Prosecuting Attorneys, Director of Economic Development and the Housing Director into that tier. It was agreed that the Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 9 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION comparison would be easier to look at if they were in the same format. Mr. Furfaro pointed out that the purple worksheet reflects the new tier alignment and is an increase of $56,000 with the changes in the tier levels. A question arose on the placement of deputies versus directors in the tier level to which Mr. Furfaro said the directors in Tier IV, up until 2006, were part of a joint department called the Office of Community Assistance (Transportation, Housing, Elderly Affairs, Parks and Rec), and there was a director of that office with the Housing Director a sub - department. In 2006 the Office of Community Assistance was taken apart and they became individual directors. Chair King pointed out two of those directors were moving from Tier V to Tier IV with the Director of Economic Development moving from Tier III to Tier IV. Mr. Furfaro said in the other counties the Director of Liquor does not come under the Salary Commission because the Liquor Department is referred to as a profit center and not a cost center. Chair King questioned moving the Director of Economic Development to a lower tier, and suggested keeping that position at the higher tier even if it is not paid the higher rate. Ms. Shimamoto asked if the two worksheets reflecting the various tiers could be put in the same format to which Mr. Furfaro clarified that the request was to show where the position is today and where the recommendation takes them. Chair King said they could then talk about it at the next meeting and whether to move the Director of Human Resources up to Tier II. Chair King then asked for thoughts on the salary recommendations, and said it was no question to him that they should be going to at least 11.2% if not 11.7 %, which was the accumulative number. Mr. Furfaro stated for the record he was only presenting reflections as a resource person to which Chair King added as requested. Chief Robert Westerman thanked the Commission for all the energy and good thought put into their work even though sometimes there are Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 10 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION roadblocks. The tier group is new to him but is a good way to go, even though it is hard to separate people saying one job is more important than another. Clearly the Tier I group has a higher level of responsibility than the Tier II and each tier from the other. The Chief said one of the things the 11.7% does is it actually gives him the opportunity to get over some mentoring challenges that he has. Both the Fire and Police deputies stepped down due to income disparities, which are significant to the tune of almost $45,000. They don't want to say it is all about the salary why people take the job because it is not all about the salary. The reality is the chiefs and the department heads work overtime every day and the salary does not compensate for that. It does create a significant challenge when the pay disparity is so much because they not only want to step down, but they don't want to step up. If the disparity is kept lower it gives more opportunity and creates the challenge for those who might think they are out of the running to be the chief or the deputy chief, and they can take on the challenge younger in their career, not at the end of their career. The Chief said when he took the job the challenge he had was to raise the Chief from the inside of the department, and he is struggling now with how to raise someone from within the department to replace him. The biggest challenge is in the pay disparity. Asked what additional training is needed to become a deputy from a battalion chief position, Chief Westerman said one example is the National Fire Academy's Executive Fire Officer Program. Chair King thanked Chief Westerman for coming noting he has always appreciated the words the Chief has for this body. The Commission was in agreement that there was minimal incentive to move someone up to Fire Chief from within the ranks. Chair King proposed writing something up based on today's information and get the tier paper put together for further review. The Chair thought they were close on the 11.2% and understands the logic in moving the Mayor's pay up, but he is not sure how that would fit politically. It was Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 11 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION noted that the purple worksheet was the more current of the two, but the Commission had not yet agreed on the proposed salaries as they were still in discussion mode. Chair King asked what the Commission thought about moving HR up to the higher tier, and questioned whether that was the Commission's decision since they only deal with pay, or does it need to go to the Council for approval. While it was part of the last package that got shot down does raising someone's tier have to go to the Council. Attorney Bracken asked if they were establishing tiers just for the salary range, but thought the Commission's movement within the tiers were within this body's control. Chair King stated they were changing the tiers to which Attorney Bracken thought it was still fine because they were changing the tiers for salary purposes, and they were more than entitled to do that. Chair King said then they were not talking about two Resolutions. Attorney Bracken said they could do two Resolutions, but they did not have to. Ms. Nishihira said the last Resolution was all combined and afterward thought at minimum they should have proposed another Resolution to bump up the Director of Human Resources because that was a definite change in the scope of responsibility. Ms. Kunioka -Volz thought it interesting that it was not a recommendation from the Administration. Ms. Nishihira suggested doing two separate Resolutions as Council could approve one but not the other; the one might be less controversial than a bump across the board. Mr. Crowell thought page 4 was incorrect as he thought the Director of Human Resources was in Tier IV right now if you go by salary; bumping it to Tier III would still be an increase. Mr. Crowell then corrected himself to say both sheets showed the position in Tier III. Chair King noted the salary levels do not reflect that but the worksheet is based on the new salary levels. Further comments were made as to why the HR position would not fall in the tier with other Directors in light of the added responsibilities and liability. Ms. Nishihira said they were also going to think about giving the Managing Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 12 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Director a fixed allowance, which would make everyone in Tier I consistent. Chair King said they had also talked about not messing with allowances, but have also been told the Commission is in charge of allowances. Ms. Nishihira suggested not reflecting it on the spreadsheet, but include the allowance verbiage in the Resolution. The Commission proposed the next meeting for Wednesday, November 18, at 9:00 a.m. Staff will check meeting room availability and confirm back to all members. Mr. Furfaro recapped for the next meeting they want to have an understanding of the department size for HR, going from 6 to 8 employees to its current size. They also want a more accurate number of employees that work in the County. Using the recommended 4 Tier sheet show the current salaries against the recommendation with the appropriate variance — Chair King said they want it to reflect the before and the after with leaving the HR Director in Tier III for now. Chair King stated the materials can be mailed out in the regular meeting packet. Chair King said he would draw up a reamble for the Commission's editing. SC 2015 -03 Memo dated 8/27/15 from the Charter Review Commission requesting_ input from the Salary Commission on Article XXIX of the Kauai County Charter (On- going) No recommendations for changes from the Salary Commission. Announcements Next Meeting: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 at 9:00 a.m.; Moikeha Meeting room 2 A/B Adjournment Mr. Crowell moved to adjourn the meeting at 12:07 p.m. Ms. Matsumoto seconded the motion. Motion carried 6:0 Submitted by: Reviewed and Approved by: Deleted: Resolution Salary Commission Open Session October 5, 2015 Page 13 Barbara Davis, Support Clerk () Approved as circulated. O Approved with amendments. See minutes of meeting. Charles King, Chair