MINUTES
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
AUGUST 19, 2004          2:00 P.M.
COURTHOUSE CONFERENCE ROOM

Present:  M. Lane, Chair; D. Winch; N. Schuler; D. Kiefer; K. Herrera

Staff:       S. Whicher, County Administrator; J. Wood, County Attorney; W. Skinner, Public Information;  S. Martel-Moore, Human Rights; A. Fitzpatrick, Personnel Commissioner; E. Marx, Planning Commissioner/Deputy County Administrator

Guests:    T. Joseph, Chair of the Legislature; M. Robertson, County Legislator; M. Tallarski, Union Electrician; B. Noteboom, Carpenter's Union

Called to Order

    The meeting was called to order at 2:03 p.m.

Changes to Agenda

    The following items were added to the agenda:

    - Appointment - Board of Human Rights Commission
    - Report - Contract Compliance

Approval of Minutes

    It was MOVED by Ms. Schuler, seconded by Ms. Kiefer, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to approve the minutes of the July 15, 2004, meeting as corrected.

Responsible Contractor Policy/Apprenticeship Program

    Apprenticeship Program
    Mr. Joseph explained the requirements of an apprenticeship program and said he would like the County to consider adopting such a program.  The State has enacted a Law that enables public entities, municipal corporations, etc. to adopt apprenticeship programs requiring construction contacts or sub-contracts offer a prevailing wage and fringe benefits to be paid on all public work projects.  Mr. Joseph said the issue is not wages, but would affect and encourage local hiring.   He hoped the Committee would consider a resolution similar to the sample copy that was distributed. 

    In response to Mr. Winch's question about what problem the County is trying to solve, Mr. Joseph said often contractors bring in labor from outside the County and that this policy would encourage local hiring and keep the money in the community.  This is also an issue of working conditions as many contractors bring in a workforce that is underpaid and not familiar with their rights with safety and health regulations.  He noted that he has never seen these incidences on any County projects but has witnessed such actions on other local projects.  In addition, this would help with the County's workforce development efforts.  Also, it is a cost saver in that we are bound by prevailing wages and apprentices get paid lower wages.

    Responsible Contractor Policy
    Copies of Cornell's policy for determining the responsibility of the lowest bidder was distributed to Committee members.  Mr. Joseph spoke about this subject and said the County has had experience in the past and at times believes the lowest bidder was approved but was not necessarily a responsible bidder.  The County is able to reject bids but feels a policy would provide the County more security when bids are rejected.

    Mr. Lane asked if the size of contracts could be considered.  Mr. Joseph said he presented this with the intent of only including County building projects and feels a threshold could be placed in the law.  Mr. Wood commented this subject has been discussed previously and said Mr. LeMaro, Facilities Manager, identified how many companies would be impacted in the apprenticeship program.  He feels that if the County rejected a bidder as not being a responsible, it would need to be well justified and that case law tends to favor contractors.

    Ms. Herrera spoke about the opportunities this would provide including educated workers, better quality of work on projects, and improved safety resulting in projects being done on time and under budget.  She encouraged the Committee to look into apprenticeship agreements.

    Ms. Kiefer spoke about her comments made in the past for documenting problems with contractors noting she doesn't want to give up on that subject, but she does support moving forward with passing a resolution adopting an apprenticeship program.  However, the size of both the project and the contractors force is relevant.

    Mr. Joseph clarified that the apprenticeship program is not intended to exclude any contractors but to affect their behavior and provide incentives. 

    Mr. Lane said the purpose for adopting the policies is for the betterment of the County and that these requirements could increase the costs for the County.  He said he would like to hear from the Chamber of Commerce, Tompkins County Area Development, and Workforce Development.

    At this time, the County Attorney was directed to draft a local law for the Committee to consider at the next meeting and provide members with a copy of State Law 816-b.  Mr. Joseph suggested the responsible contractor policy be sent to the County's Contracts Coordinator for review.

County Administration/Personnel

    Administrative Manual Policy 02-01 - Creating and Abolishing New Positions and Changing Existing Positions

    Mr. Whicher reiterated his comments that this policy as presented represents current practices with one exception being the County Administrator makes the final decision on appeals.  He said only a couple of appeals have come to him.  Ms. Kiefer said she had previously requested the changes to the policy be highlighted showing deletions and additions.   She also feels it is appropriate to have a standard appeals committee, that would deal with all employee appeals and would include employees and a Legislator(s). 

    Mr. Joseph explained this issue came up earlier in the year and he asked that the policy be revised and forwarded to the appropriate committee for review and discussion.  He feels the appeals procedure requires someone who understands and is familiar with the system.

    At this time, the report highlighting the 2004 reclassifications to date were reviewed and discussed. 

    Discussion continued on the question concerning the appeal process.  Mr. Winch expressed his opinion that Legislators should not be part of the process. Ms. Schuler recommended that the last sentence of the policy include a timeframe.  Ms. Skinner raised a concern that the staff in the County Administrator's office and Personnel Office may not be fairly represented in the process.  She feels a management-level staff person could learn the process well enough to be a third party in the process for evaluating appeals by staff in the County Administrator's office and Personnel office. 

    Further discussion followed and it was MOVED by Ms. Herrera, seconded by Ms. Schuler, to include language in the policy that appeals filed by staff within the offices of County Administration or Personnel be handled by a small group (three senior staff) appointed by the County Administrator.  A voice vote resulted as follows: Ayes - 3 (Herrera, Kiefer, and Schuler); Noes - 2 (Lane and Winch).  MOTION CARRIED.

    A revised version of the policy will be presented at the next meeting.

Annual Financial Disclosure Form

    Required Filers
    It was MOVED by Mr. Winch, seconded by Ms. Herrera, to accept the list of "key employees" required to file Annual Financial Disclosure Forms as presented to Committee.  Ms. Kiefer asked for the rationale for including and excluding employees on the proposed list.  Mr. Lane reminded the Committee that the discussion held at the last meeting was to reduce the list to include department heads and their deputy(s).  Ms. Kiefer said the purpose of the form is to identify employees who hold a position that has sufficient authority to make decisions or strongly influence decisions where a conflict of interest could arise.  Ms. Kiefer asked if the positions were tested against the purpose of the disclosure form.  Ms. Kiefer specifically raised the question about Assessors and Corrections Officers. Ms. Fitzpatrick said based on previous discussions on this issue and the understanding of the day-to-day operations in many departments, department heads accept recommendations from staff at all levels based on their expertise.  She feels that every department head and their deputy are responsible for the operation of that department.

    A voice vote resulted as follows to accept the list of required filers as submitted:  Ayes - 4; Noes - 0; Abstention - 1 (Kiefer).  MOTION CARRIED.

County Executive

    Visit to Broome County
    Mr. Lane said he continues to try to make contact with Broome County representatives and will keep the Committee informed on his progress.

    Tompkins County's Form of Government
    Mr. Whicher explained his responsibilities as County Administrator and stated the County Legislature adopts policy and he follows through by carrying out the procedures.  In his opinion the Chair is the filter for the Legislature and he meets weekly to discuss issues.  He tries to remain neutral and out of the politics.  He feels this system works well and there is a continual dialogue between the County Administrator and Chair of the Legislature.  It is also his opinion that a County Administrator's form of government is an inclusive decision-making process and issues are discussed and thoroughly examined.
    
    In response to Mr. Lane's question about weaknesses in the system, Mr. Whicher commented that sometimes when something needs to happen quickly it can be difficult and the committee structure can be a drawback. 

    Mr. Joseph spoke about the subject of County Executive and said he is currently the Chief Elected Official of the County and is the Chair of the Legislature.  He discussed how different County government would be with a County Executive position.  Typically County Executives are elected officials and politicians and generally do not get elected for administrative ability.  To have a well-run government, there needs to be someone who is a good administrator and knows how to manage bureaucracy and get things done. 

    He spoke about the County's current system and echoed Mr. Whicher's comments concerning the team leadership between the Chair and County Administrator.  They meet weekly and talk regularly about what is political and what is administrative, which in Mr. Joseph's opinion is an important distinction to be made. 

    At this time Mr. Joseph spoke about what he feels would be different with a County Executive position.  A County Executive would have the authority to speak for the County whether the Legislature agreed or not.  It would require a majority of the Legislature to challenge policy decisions of the County Executive.  The Executive can set goals and direction for the County and hire staff to carry out operations; however, the powers of an Executive would need to be defined in the County Charter.  Having a County Executive the County could move more quickly and effectively in a more coherent direction, whereas the current system is more stable and allows for debates by the Legislature on the directions the County should move in.  Mr. Joseph stated that he is against a County Executive form of government and does not feel it would be good for the County.

    At this time, Mr. Whicher distributed a report of comparative budgets for each county with a 250,000 population or less with a County Administrator or Manager and County Executive.  Mr. Lane feels having sales tax information would be helpful. 

    Ms. Herrera spoke about one argument that needs to be addressed is the notion that electing a County Executive is more democratic as one person would be representing the County. 

    Mr. Marx spoke about a County Executive form of government and said in many counties with County Executives the Legislature has their own staff doing their own analysis.  In his experience in Oswego County, he would often have to deal with both elected officials (County Executive and Chair) and there was not always the same perspective. 

    Ms. Kiefer asked if a contact could be made to NYSAC requesting information on counties that may have changed from an Administrator to County Executive or County Executive to Administrator.  Mr. Whicher agreed to make the contact.

Report from the Committee Chair

    Mr. Lane said he is the process of putting together information to begin the evaluation of the County Administrator as requested by the Chair of the Legislature.  He will be discussing procedures with the Legislative Chair and Legislator Koplinka-Loehr, Chair of the Budget and Capital Committee. 

Report from County Administrator

    Mr. Whicher did not have a report.

Report from the County Attorney

    Mr. Wood said he did not have a report.

Report from the Finance Director

    Mr. Squires was not present for the meeting.

Report from the Public Information Officer

    Ms. Skinner did not have a report.

Human Rights Commission

Contract Compliance Update
    Ms. Martel Moore reported that a training has been scheduled for September 14th for all departments concerning contract compliance.  At this time, she provided an overview of the agenda for that meeting. 

    Mr. Winch was excused at 4:29 p.m.

    Appointment
    It was MOVED by Ms. Herrera, seconded by Ms. Schuler, and unanimously adopted by voice vote, to appoint Kandea Mosley to the Board of Human Rights Commission for a term that expires December 31, 2007.

Naming Conference Rooms

    This item was deferred.

Adjournment

    The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.

  Tompkins County Home Page
 Tompkins County Legislature's Page
Comments or questions