LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE

The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was held on December 8, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. with Chairman Slavin presiding. Members present were Mr. McGlumphy, Mr. Salters, and Mr. Shevock. Dr. Jones was absent. Other members of Council present were Mrs. Russell, Mr. McGiffin, Mrs. Williams, Mr. Ruane, Council President Hogan, and Mayor Carey.

AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS

Mr. Salters moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried.

Non-Bargaining Benefit Parity

During their meeting of October 27, 2008, members tabled action regarding staff’s recommendation to provide for Benefit Parity for Non-Bargaining Employees until a cost analysis and further information regarding the questions of members were provided.

Mr. Salters moved to remove the matter from the table, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried.

At the request of the committee, the financial implications of each benefit were calculated and the financial cost of the proposed benefit parity was provided to members (indicated in red font on the summary page). Mr. DePrima reviewed a summary of the recommendations, which included the approval to continue applying certain current practices that are not documented in the personnel policy, the enhancement of two (2) current benefits, and implementation of three (3) new benefits.

Staff recommended that all benefits become effective January 1, 2009 unless otherwise indicated and that the City of Dover Personnel Policy be updated to reflect the recommendations of City Council and submitted for final approval. Mr. DePrima stated that based on the committee’s recommendations and Council’s approval, the City of Dover Personnel Policy would be updated to reflect the recommendations by City Council and submitted to them for final approval.

Mr. McGlumphy questioned if the City were to start providing the same benefits for members of non-union affiliated organizations to level the playing field, would it be considered union busting? Responding, Mr. DePrima stated that he is not qualified to answer the question. However, he noted that based on documentation provided by the City Clerk, it has been the understanding that although non-union employees are not guaranteed any of the union negotiated items, Council, after all negotiations are completed, would consider those differences, which is what is being done at this time.

Mr. McGlumphy referred to information provided by the City Clerk regarding a memorandum dated October 29, 1998, which included copies of executive session minutes and correspondence of 1986 (as on file in the office of the City Clerk) and urged members to review the information prior to taking any further action. It was his opinion that the City has four (4) employee organizations (IBEW, IUE, FOP, and Management).

In September 2008, Mr. McGlumphy indicated that he had requested staff to provide a comparison of the City of Dover with other municipalities, to include benefits, etc. and that staff had estimated a report to be provided in January/February and questioned the status of this matter. Responding, Mrs. Hawkins, Human Resources Director, stated that her office is in the process of receiving responses to requested information of municipalities throughout the State.

Mr. Ruane referred to the Employee Handbook dated July 2004 and stated that Article I - Conflicting Policies Repealed (on page 2) indicates that “all policies, ordinances, and resolutions that conflict with the provisions of this policy are hereby repealed”. Accordingly, it was his feeling that the current practices that are not documented in the personnel policy, should have been repealed upon the adoption of the Employee Handbook. Responding, Mr. DePrima stated that this is the reason the matter is being presented at this time, confirming that certain practices were not repealed.

Based on the Employee Handbook, Mr. McGlumphy felt that the action that should be taken is to repeal those current practices that were not included but still provided to some employees rather than bringing forth enhancements for those employees that have not been participants of the practices.

Mr. Salters moved to submit this matter to City Council for consideration without a recommendation, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried.

Proposed Ordinance 2008-43 - Chapter 58 - Human Relations, Article II - Human Relations Commission, Section 58-33 - Organization; Quorum; Meetings; Rules of Procedure; Limitation of Functions; Agreements; Compensation; Legal Counsel; Reports

Members were provided a proposed ordinance (#2008-43) amending Subsection (a) of Chapter 58 - Human Relations, Article II - Human Relations Commission, Section 58-33 - Organization; quorum; meetings; rules of procedure; limitation of functions; agreements; compensation; legal counsel; reports. The proposed ordinance amendment would give the council president responsibility for selecting the Dover Human Relations Commission Chairperson rather than being elected by the membership.

After conducting a thorough review, Council President Hogan stated that it has been determined that a means to address some of the concerns regarding the Human Relations Commission would be to require the Chairman of the Human Relations Commission to become an appointment by the Council President.

In response to Mr. Salters, Mrs. Williams recollected, which was confirmed by Mr. McGlumphy, that during their tenure as Council President, they were responsible for the appointment of the Chair to the Human Relations Commission.

Mrs. McDowell, City Clerk, clarified that the Council President was responsible for the appointment of the member and that the membership elected their Chair. She also assured members that the City Solicitor has reviewed the proposed amendment.

Mr. Salters relayed his concern with giving the responsibility for selecting the Chair to the Council President and suggested that if there is a change, the responsibility should be that of the Mayor. He reiterated his opinion that the selection of the Chair should remain with the membership.

Council President Hogan reminded members that the Chair would not be appointed by the Council President without confirmation of City Council. Although there typically are no concerns with Commissions electing their Chair, he explained that for the past few years, this has not been the case. Considering the numerous discussions he has had with various groups, Council members, and members of the community, this is a situation where this Commission needs a new Chair. He indicated that there may be a need to review other City Commissions; however, this is being presented at this time since appointments are made in February.

Mr. Ruane noted that regardless of the opinions regarding the Chairs abilities or practices, the current Chair has been elected and re-elected, more than once, by its membership. He indicated that the proposed amendment may not solve the problem but rather worsen the situation, explaining that the membership may be disappointed in the approach being proposed. It was his opinion that there may be other means of resolving concerns.

Responding, Mrs. Russell explained that sometimes a Chair is elected because others do not want the responsibilities of the position and as a result, the Chair is elected because they are the only member willing to assume the position.

If it is the intent to replace the current Chair, Mr. Salters questioned the reasons why.

Mr. Slavin cautioned members regarding the discussion of any individual in public, feeling that it may lead into a personnel issue. He suggested that there may be a need to provide for further discussion during an executive session.

Disagreeing, Mr. McGlumphy stated his feeling that the issue would not qualify for an executive session.

Mr. McGlumphy moved to table the matter, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried.

Mr. Slavin requested that the City Clerk provide members with background information regarding the appointment of the Chair for the Human Relations Commission.

Discussion - Potential Summer Work Grants for Youth

At the request of Mrs. Russell, members were provided with a document entitled “Finding Resources to Support Mentoring Programs and Services for Youth”, issued by The Finance Project. Mrs. Russell expressed the need for youth to be provided the opportunity for summer jobs and felt that the City could assist in this endeavor.

If other resources are required in order for the City to provide this assistance, Mrs. Russell requested that staff research the possibility of obtaining grant funding.

Mr. Slavin suggested that the Budget Team consider this idea as an alternative by researching the possibility of obtaining grant funding and/or grant sources as well as determining the costs and whether or not the City could include a program in the FY2010 Budget.

Mr. Salters moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried.

Meeting Adjourned at 6:53 P.M.

                                                                                    Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                    Timothy A. Slavin

                                                                                    Chairman

TAS/AC/TM/jg

S:ClerksOfficeAgendas&MinutesCommittee-Minutes200812-08-2008 LF&A.wpd