Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016_0205_Minutes Open_APPROVEDCOUNTY OF KAUAI Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION Approved as circulated 4/11/16 Board /Committee: SALARY COMMISSION Meeting Date February 5, 2016 Location Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A /213 Start of Meeting: 9:00 a.m. I End of Meeting: 10:25 a.m. Present Chair Charlie King; Vice Chair Sheri Kunioka -Volz. Members: Robert Crowell; Michael Machado; Cammie Matsumoto Also: Deputy County Attorney Matt Bracken; Boards & Commissions Office Staff. Support Clerk Barbara Davis, Administrator Jay Furfaro Excused Members Lenie Nishihira; Jo Ann Shimamoto Absent SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Call To Order Chair King called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. with 5 members present Election Election of Chair and Vice Chair for 2016 (deferred 1/8/16) Chair King noted this item was deferred because he felt it was in the best interest of the Commission and the Council that the Chair who was responsible for bringing this forth stay and present it to the Council. Unfortunately for both of the dates available at Council, Chair King is unavailable and he will not be able to present (the Resolution) to the Council. Ms. Matsumoto asked if it was possible to get new dates. Mr. Furfaro explained that the request has to go to the Council at the appropriate dates and must be in front of them before March 15. There is only one other Wednesday, but it is a Committee meeting — not a Council meeting. Ms. Kunioka -Volz said in the past it was not necessarily the Chair who presented the information. Mr. Crowell moved to defer the election. Ms. Kumoka-Volz seconded the motion. Motion carried 5:0 Approval of Open Session Minutes of January 8, 2016 Mr. Machado moved to approve the minutes as Salary Commission Open Session February 5, 2016 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Minutes circulated. Ms. Matsumoto seconded the motion. Motion carried 5:0 Business SC 2015 -02 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 and the submittal /presentation to be ivg en to Council (On-going) a. Draft Resolution 2016 -1 b. Preamble to the Resolution C. Review of PowerPoint presentation Chair King pointed out the new Draft Resolution has only the maximum salaries. Attorney Bracken said in the past there has been language in regard to specific requirements, but he has removed that language because the Commission does not have the authority other than to set the salaries. It is HR's (Human Resources) authority to set the requirements for receiving the increases, which is why he removed that verbiage. Attorney Bracken also explained that initially the Commission wanted to include the language from the previous Resolutions in the new Resolution to encompass everything that had passed, which would include the Police Chief's firearm/uniform allowance and the amount the Council and Mayor receive for car /phone. He elected to leave it out because if for some reason the Council rejects this we could run into the problem this Resolution would supersede all the Resolutions that had passed and might effectively remove those former allowances. Attorney Bracken said if the Commission wants those allowances in the new Resolution he could put them back in. Chair King said this is what they are supposed to do and this is what should be in there. There was a brief discussion on the only two Council dates available for consideration of the Resolution and whether a revised Resolution could be submitted if the first one is rejected. Ms. Matsumoto said she would not feel Salary Commission Open Session February 5, 2016 Page 3 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION comfortable losing something to gain something. Mr. Machado pointed out the incorrect date of adoption listed in the Resolution to which Attorney Bracken said that could be changed. Mr. Machado moved to approve Resolution 2016 -1 with the corrected date of adoption. Ms. Matsumoto seconded the motion. Mr. Furfaro thanked Attorney Bracken for putting this Resolution together. Ms. Kunioka -Volz asked what the raise percentage was for the Council to which Chair King said it was 12.8% for the Chair and 10.8% for Councilmembers. Attorney Bracken said it might stand out more because it is listed in a different Article because their implementation date is different than everyone else. Ms. Kunioka -Volz said the last Resolution that was rejected did not show any increase for Council, only their existing pay and that increase was effected in December 2009. Mr. Machado said the raises in 2016 -1 would not be effective for this Council that votes on this Resolution. Attorney Bracken said correct; whoever is elected in December would receive these raises. Chair King said he could not speak to the reason they did not increase the Council the last time, but they would not have been affected until this new election anyway so if they voted on it, it would not have mattered. Ms. Kunioka -Volz thought Council's raise in 2009 was pretty hefty, so they have far exceeded the percentage based on the Commission's charts. Motion carried 5:0 Chair King pointed out that in the middle of the first page of the Preamble is a notation to decide what kind of exhibits should be presented with the Resolution. Chair King suggested one of the exhibits be the Comparison of County of Kauai with other Counties' departments. Also the 2016 Salary Recommendations which shows the current salary, the CPI (Consumer Price Index ) at 11.2 %, the proposed increase including fixed allowances, and a Salary Commission Open Session February 5, 2016 OEM SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION separation between deputies and heads of departments. As there have been discussions about the Human Resources Department the Chair proposed including those organizational charts as exhibits. Chair King pointed out some of the language in the Preamble is duplicated in the Power Point presentation. Ms. Matsumoto said on the 2nd page under the heading "Other" there are colons (after the position names) and nothing follows that. Chair King placed those colons there because he was looking for an explanation which he did not have. They could take the colons out and just leave the positions or put in reasons. Attorney Bracken said they might want an explanation; when he was drafting the Resolution he imagined Council would ask questions in regard to the tier system and why certain individuals are in certain tiers so it might be good to be prepared with responses. Mr. Furfaro said the last page in the Power Point is an explanation of the tiers. For example Tier I references the highest executives in the corporation of the County of Kauai and also deals with loss prevention, risk management responsibilities. Asked if that could not be one of the exhibits, Mr. Furfaro said it would be in the Power Point, but it could be made an addition to the exhibits. Ms. Matsumoto said she did not touch the worksheet on the Tiers when she was editing, but suggested they fill in the blank areas (in the Preamble) for increases because she does think Council will ask about blank areas. Attorney Bracken said the Prosecuting Attorneys already received the higher increase so for an explanation they could say it is to bring the County Attorneys into line with the Prosecuting Attorneys, or it could be based on credentials, too, which would be the same for the engineers as they require higher education levels. Chair King did not know why they recommended the increase percentage for the First Deputy County Attorney to which Attorney Bracken suggested it was based on the Tier structure. The County Attorney is in the second Tier and the other deputies are in the fourth Tier so the First Deputy would be in the third Tier. Mr. Furfaro explained that Tier I Salary Commission Open Session February 5, 2016 OEM SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION summarizes what is truly the executive positions. Discussion on whether to use the Power Point ensued and Mr. Furfaro said the intent of the Power Point was to restate the responsibilities of the Salary Commission to the Council and show the trends of the people that were deferred for so long and to justify the Consumer Price Index increases. The third part is the history and market trends along with retention. The First Deputy position has always performed well and they are high achievers that other law firms look at taking; it is part of the retention issue. Chair King added it is competitive pressures. For the deputy engineers for Public Works and Water that would be licensing requirements. Director of Parks and Recreations would be increased responsibilities to which Mr. Furfaro said that is one of the largest departments and the manpower that has to be supervised as well. Chair King suggested it was competitive pressures for the County Clerk and County Attorneys. The Deputy Director of Finance that has a lot to do with the duties that fall into that area which include the insurance monitoring, loss prevention, and risk management. The County used to have a separate risk manager and that position was eliminated with those duties going to the assistant Director of Finance to which Chair King said they would add increased duties /risk management to the justification. Chair King said this was not part of the motion but part of what the Commission is agreeing to, so he will make those changes to the Preamble and send them out to everyone. Mr. Furfaro explained the opening page of the Power Point is to make sure Council understands the Salary Commission's responsibilities as a Commission by the Charter. The second page deals with the equitable trends showing that so many of the bargaining units had increases during this same time while recognizing the fact that many of the positions were frozen. The next page deals with some of the historical factors. Jumping to the page Supporting the Nash and Company Report, the Nash Report gave a 21% Salary Commission Open Session February 5, 2016 '.:- . SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION increase spread over 3 years — 7 percent, 7 percent, 7 percent. The first year was identified as the 2008 amounts but as we rolled into 2009 and found ourselves with the recession, and the Mayor's wish to do furloughs, there was a period where the salaries outlined in green were frozen. Those increases did not go through with the exception of the Fire Chief, the Fire Department, the Police Chief, the Police rank and file because they are all related to loss prevention and public safety. With the court schedules we could not freeze the Prosecutor's Office. They were not furloughed so their wages were not affected. Mr. Crowell asked Mr. Furfaro to double check on the Police and Fire as he recalls their raises were not given in'09; they were something separate a little later. One of the reasons the Prosecuting Attorney as well as the County Clerk got those raises back then was because of their appointing authority which was not the Mayor. The Mayor made the call for the Administration but the Council makes the call for the County Attorney as well as themselves and the electorate is the appointing authority for the Prosecuting Attorney. Mr. Crowell asked Mr. Furfaro to please do the research because he vaguely recalls that because of their appointing authority that was the reason they continued to get those raises that were recommended by the Commission at that time. He further thought the Fire and Police got it later because there was a Resolution that went in only for Fire and Police. Mr. Furfaro said those departments were not furloughed. Mr. Furfaro said it was possible that those Resolutions that were passed in 3 year increments were not invalidated and so they followed the schedule. Unable to find any more than that he spent time with the County Clerk and she is rebuilding this information. The reality on how some of the other things occurred Ms. Fountain - Tanigawa has been very accommodating and will share some narrative with us. Chair King said he views the Power Point as something that Administration would be presenting alongside the Salary Commission with the Preamble Salary Commission Open Session February 5, 2016 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION coming from the Commission. Attorney Bracken said because the Resolution is coming from this Commission the Power Point might be appropriate coming from the Commission as well. Chair King said the Administration does the management for which the Commission is proposing raises and they should have something to say about it. Ms. Kunioka -Volz pointed out that the Administration is affected by this. Attorney Bracken said the Commission is the unbiased body making the recommendation. Mr. Crowell said he tended to agree with Chair King in that the Administration might want to come out and reiterate what the role of the Commission is and talk about the equitable trends, which would leave the Commission available to answer other questions. Mr. Furfaro said in the Nash Report the salaries boxed in green were postponed and the red boxes whatever was initiated with those increases started because those departments were never part of the furlough. Chair King stated that Administration had put together the Power Point and therefore had ownership of it and could present it. Mr. Furfaro pointed out they did not need to use the Power Point; the Commission can use it as a history piece. Ms. Matsumoto suggested from the Equitable Trends page where it says Honolulu CPI Increases (BLS.gov) that they write out the acronyms. Mr. Furfaro pointed out the exceptional job Chair King did in putting together the Preamble to which Chair King quickly said it was a group effort. Chair King said he was not on island on either February 24 or March 9 and asked who could and who would be willing to present this to Council. Mr. Furfaro pointed out there was an excellent person with government understanding on salaries and wages with Ms. Kumoka-Volz and Mr. Machado is now retired. Ms. Matsumoto noted that Mr. Crowell knows the history (of the Salary Commission). Mr. Furfaro said he would try to get a fixed time on the agenda for the presentation. Ms. Matsumoto said she does not have the expertise to go through all the figures but did help with the Salary Commission Open Session February 5, 2016 E ,, SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Preamble. If someone were to ask her she could speak to what she included in the Preamble, which is the big picture of taking care of the island and the future and she would have no problem doing that. Mr. Crowell said to address Ms. Kumoka- Volz's earlier concern about the Council's raise should they put something in for that. Chair King did not put anything in the Preamble for them because they pretty much follow the CPI increase being recommended for everybody else. Mr. Furfaro said they could put in that it is being addressed now because it won't be effective until this Council leaves. Attorney Bracken said the Charter provides that the Council cannot receive their raise prior to the start of the new elected officials or one year, whichever is the lesser. Chair King said he could appoint a presentation committee. Attorney Bracken said it might be best to have only 2 for the presentation and everyone else can be ready for answers. Mr. Furfaro said to get on the Council's agenda for February 24, everything has to be in to Council by February 12. Having reviewed HRS §92 -2.5, the scope of the group's work would be how to best present the resolution to the County Council with no authority to change anything. Ms. Matsumoto said the numbers and the tables are going to be critical and they need to be prepared to explain the Tiers, the columns and all of the numbers and she does not have that expertise. It was suggested that a member of the Salary Commission read the Preamble. If the Chair wants the Resolution read he will ask the Clerk to read it. Ms. Matsumoto asked if Administration does not do the Power Point will (the hard copy) be given to the Councilmembers. Mr. Furfaro thought if it was not presented by the Administration as requested, it would not be given to the Council. Chair King appointed Ms. Matsumoto, Ms. Kunioka- Volz, and Mr. Machado to determine the method of presentation. Announcement Next Meeting to be determined, if needed Adjournment Mr. Machado moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:25 a.m. Mr. Crowell seconded the motion. Salary Commission Open Session February 5, 2016 .,_.. SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Motion carried 5:0 Submitted by: Barbara Davis, Support Clerk () Approved as circulated. O Approved with amendments. See minutes of Reviewed and Approved by: meeting. Charles King, Chair