MINUTES
PERSONNEL COMMITTEE
APRIL 12, 2006
3:00 P.M.
SCOTT HEYMAN CONFERENCE ROOM
Present: J. Dennis, Chair; D. Kiefer; F. Proto
Excused: L. McBean-Clairborne, P. Mackesey
Staff: C. Covert, Clerk of the Legislature; S. Whicher, County Administrator; K. Leinthall, Probation and Community Justice Director; A. Fitzpatrick, Personnel Commissioner; A. Valenti, County Clerk; B. Kominos, Personnel Committee; S. Martel Moore, Human Rights Director
The meeting was called to order at 3:05 p.m.
There were no changes to the agenda.
Mr. Dennis did not have a report.
Mr. Whicher distributed an outline of payroll fringe projections and the estimated increases through 2009. He anticipates the fringe rate increasing to 40 percent within two years and increasing to the mid 40s in a few years mainly as a result of escalating health insurance costs. This is an area that needs to be addressed and gain some control over. He believes there are other models that could work for Tompkins County and he would like to explore them. He recommends a committee be formed that would begin looking at health insurance models. The membership of the committee should encompass representation from all bargaining units including management and confidential employees.
Mr. Whicher commented that this topic is also being discussed with the Intermunicipal group including the formation of a consortium. The Governor’s budget includes $25 million available to municipalities who are looking at planning a consolidation of health insurance. Health Insurance Plans in all the municipalities are being reviewed and there seems to be a lot of similarities.
Mr. Proto recalled several years ago a similar committee being created by the Legislature and asked if a synopsis of those discussions could be made available.
Mr. Whicher envisions the newly appointed group would develop a Request for Proposals to possibly hire a consultant for that process. It would require all the stakeholders including the retiree group to be involved with the process.
Mr. Dennis feels the union contracts have identified this and have tentatively agreed that they want to be a part of this and are willing to look at the health plan. He also believes the unions recognize that this is not a genuine negotiation or a re-opener. Ms. Fitzpatrick also commented there were statements made in the agreements to begin having meetings on the health insurance issues. She will be meeting with the regional CSEA representative next week and will discuss the issue of health insurance and ask what the experience is in other areas as it relates to health insurance.
Following
further discussion, the Committee agreed that Mr. Whicher and Ms. Fitzpatrick
put together a proposal with clear ground rules and a list of all stakeholders
for creating a committee to review health insurance plans.
25-Year Retirement Plan –
Probation Officers
Ms. Leinthall requested the option of a 25-year Retirement Plan for Probation Officers be explored. Mr. Whicher said he wanted the Committee’s approval prior to researching this and said it would require asking the State for the actual cost. He believes there is only one other county (Columbia County) in the State that provides this option.
Ms. Leinthall explained that this is a State retirement option for Probation Officers and is designed so that they can retire after 25 years regardless of age. The option requires that a Probation Officer would have to opt in the first year from the time the plan is passed or within a year from the date of hire. She feels that in reality not everyone would opt-in as many would be of age to retire after 25 years anyway. Studies have shown that people who work intensively in this environment can have health issues and this would provide an opportunity for an employee to move on to other areas.
Following discussion, the Committee agreed it would like to see more information. Mr. Whicher feels a full description of the plan should be provided before contacting the State for additional information. Ms. Fitzpatrick agreed to provide a copy of the legislation with a summary sheet for the Committee.
Mr. Dennis ask the Committee how it wished to proceed in establishing salaries for the Sheriff and County Clerk. Ms. Kiefer said it is important to know the history of why the salaries were set at the particular amounts. Mr. Dennis said he does not have the history, but the resolutions setting salaries for both the County Clerk and Sheriff were made available at the previous meeting.
Mr. Dennis commented that Tompkins County is the only county (out of 30) in the State with a Sheriff that makes less than an Undersheriff. He believes the person in charge of a department should make more than the person who is directly under them. These two individuals (Sheriff and County Clerk) have the same type of duties and responsibilities as a department head.
Ms. Fitzpatrick distributed and reviewed the point-factor rating sheet she prepared in 2002 at the request of the Budget and Capital Committee for the two positions and an informational sheet containing various salary comparisons with other municipalities, senior departmental staff, and contiguous counties. The point-factor rating sheet was prepared using the appropriate Department article of the County Charter and her understanding of the duties for both positions.
Ms. Kiefer said elected officials are difficult to deal with as there is no job description or evaluation. Mr. Dennis said their duties are based on what the Legislature requests as well as appropriate laws. Ms. Kiefer spoke briefly about discussions held in the past in Charter Review Committee meetings to make the two positions appointed and asked that this Committee consider adding this to its discussions for establishing salaries. Mr. Dennis said that would require considerable discussion and that the Legislature should adopt a salary schedule before June 1 (petition day). He feels if there is interest in discussing those positions becoming appointed, it should be discussed separately.
Mr. Proto said regardless of the percentage, the Committee needs to be sensitive to other County employees when establishing salary schedules.
Following further discussion, Mr. Dennis proposed the 2007 salary schedule for the Sheriff be set at $81,954 and the County Clerk at $67,667 and suggested the range of 2.9 percent and 2.85 percent for the years 2008-2010. He said the increase in the Sheriff’s salary will be ahead of the Undersheriff’s salary who will be receiving a raise in 2007.
Ms. Kiefer said she cannot recommend such a big jump in the salary amounts. Mr. Proto expressed concern with having a ten percent increase in the County Clerk’s salary and an approximate 9 percent increase in the Sheriff’s salary. Ms. Kiefer said she had hoped there would have been a presentation on the point-factor rating system before this issue came up. Mr. Proto said he had also hoped the policy for reclassifying positions could have been discussed.
Ms. Kiefer suggested that if Mr. Dennis has a target salary he wants to get to that he could use the same idea as was done in setting salaries for Legislators and develop a salary amount and spread the increase out over the next four-year period.
Ms. Kiefer said at this point she could propose considering the Management/Confidential/White Collar amount of approximately 3 percent for 2007.
Mr.
Dennis said at the next meeting he hopes a recommendation will be made and
forwarded to the Legislature for consideration. Ms. Fitzpatrick agreed to
provide a presentation at the next meeting on the point-factor rating
system.
The following items were deferred to the next meeting:
· Health Insurance Census on Retirees
· Employment statistics –first quarter – 2006
· Organizational Structure
· Training Update
Copies of the Diversity Policy with the changes highlighted as recommended by the Workforce Diversity and Inclusion Committee were distributed.
Ms. Kiefer reiterated her comments from the last meeting that if this policy is to be incorporated into the Administrative Manual, it is not in the correct format as the procedures are not included. Polices should have an Objective, Reference, Policy statement, and Procedure. Ms. Martel Moore explained they are working on a “shell” plan, and that the procedures will be developed and incorporated in the overall Diversity Plan. The draft plan is in the process of being created and will be completed in June and following Legislative approval will be incorporated in the Administrative Manual.
Mr. Proto suggested, if appropriate, that “community members” be added to paragraph 2 under Expectations. Ms. Martel Moore agreed that it was appropriate. A brief discussion followed concerning paragraph 12 and the Committee felt adding clarifying language would be helpful such as: “…the Human Rights Commission and the Commissioner of Personnel will together or separately as appropriate monitor...” or reversing the order to Commissioner of Personnel and the Human Rights Commission.
Mr. Proto referenced a resolution adopted by the Legislature requesting a data-driven workforce diversity work plan be developed for the County to use for new hires, promotions, etc. Ms. Martel Moore said that an interim plan was developed and submitted to the Workforce Diversity and Inclusion Committee and will be incorporated into the final overall Diversity Plan.
Following further discussion regarding the policy and direction, it was MOVED by Ms. Kiefer, seconded by Mr. Proto, and unanimously adopted by voice vote by members present, to approve the good work that has been done and to recommend the Workforce Diversity and Inclusion Committee send out a memorandum to all employees with the subject manner being an explanation and intended use of the Legislative policy.
The meeting adjourned at 5:34 p.m.
Tompkins County
Home Page
Tompkins County Legislature's
Page
Comments
or questions