Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommittee of the Whole October 26 20041 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Committee Of The Whole October 26, 2004 Council Chair Dan McShane called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Barbara Brenner None Laurie Caskey- Schreiber Sam Crawford Seth Fleetwood Sharon Roy L. Ward Nelson 1. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE COUNCIL'S TRAVEL POLICY (AB2004- 018) McShane stated the Council received a copy of the employee travel policy for all County employees. The councilmembers each have a travel reimbursement amount of $1,500 annually. The Chair of the Council approves the reimbursements. He's generally gone along with whatever has been submitted because it is consistent with the policy. They may want to solidify the policy, talk about some of the expenses councilmembers carry, and talk about the constraints the councilmembers may or may not want on the policy. They may also talk about whether $1,500 is enough. The trip to Washington D.C. each year is pretty expensive, and it's challenging to do anything more than that. As the chair, he's never been comfortable with sharing money between councilmembers. Caskey- Schreiber stated the budget individually is inadequate. She would support increasing the individual travel expense to $2,500 per person. One trip to Washington D.C. can consume the entire budget for the year. Throughout the year, there can be reimbursement for mileage, opportunities to lobby on Whatcom County's behalf in Olympia, and participation in the Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC). It's important to continue to go to D.C. to bring a local perspective directly to the national legislators. The purchase of development rights (PDR) grant of over $1 million is an example of how their efforts in D.C. pay off. Nelson asked the last time the councilmembers had this set amount in the travel budget. Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated the amount went to $1,500 in 1999. Before that, the amount was $1,000 per councilmember annually. Committee of the Whole, 10/26/2004, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Nelson stated they haven't had a substantial increase. Years ago, one councilmember did a meeting with National Association of County Officials (NACO), it got written up by The Herald, and there was enough of a public outcry that the Council lowered the amount. If they are going to have an effective government that is responsive to the citizens and also collaborates with other jurisdictions, then they have to have an appropriate amount. They're not highly -paid politicians from King, Pierce, or Snohomish counties. Yet, the Whatcom County Council is competing with these same people for the same grants and funding. He agreed with increasing the travel fund. Brenner stated she doesn't usually support raising the amount. She doesn't usually declare a lot of expenses. However, gas prices have gone way up, and some councilmembers live far out in the county. She doesn't want something like transportation expenses to prohibit some people from considering running for office. There are a lot of expenses involved with being a councilmember. She'd like to allow councilmembers to be reimbursed travel costs from their houses to and from a meeting. If a councilmember has been invited to a function as a County councilmember, there should be some flexibility. McShane stated they need to talk about what they will and will not reimburse. Crawford stated the Internal Revenue Service does not allow mileage reimbursement or business deductions for travel to or from one's workplace. That policy is followed rigidly in the private sector. He has empathy for a councilmember from Birch Bay who has to travel more miles. It might be fair to have a general across - the -board travel reimbursement for all councilmembers. There are a lot of people in the private sector who will be paid a flat fee per month. The employer doesn't want mileage records or care what the employee does. That is a legal policy. He's concerned about employee and department head response to special treatment for the councilmembers. He's more interested in having the Executive's Office make the case to the employees that the councilmembers are part -time, unique, elected officials to who this would only apply. If the travel amount were $2,500 per year for councilmembers, that totals $17,500 per year altogether. That is an increase of $7,000 from the current amount. However, a $100 per councilmember, per month auto reimbursement expense, the increase would total $8,400 per year. The total auto and travel expense would go up to around $26,000 per year, from the current $10,500. Caskey- Schreiber asked if she should decline her travel reimbursement to the Northwest Air Pollution Authority (NWAPA). Crawford stated she can still claim that mileage. The policy would be for usual, customary auto expense within the county. The flat rate proposal would not be taxable income. If audited by the IRS, the amount would have to be deemed reasonable, which $100 per month is. Committee of the Whole, 10/26/2004, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the idea has some merit. They would normally have to either take the amount as taxable, or prove the mileage for the money to be tax deductible. Mileage is used at a rate of $.37.5 per mile, which is the rate allowed by the IRS code. Crawford stated it allows no burden of recordkeeping for a customary and reasonable amount. He agreed they should check it out. Desler stated the only other issue is that the amount might be significantly different depending on where someone lives. There could be a system set up for transportation within the county, and then long distance trips would be separate. Brenner stated some of the councilmembers go to a lot of places on Council business. Crawford stated it's better to try and not get an accounting of the amount traveled, and just have a flat reimbursement. Nelson stated he understands the intent, but he would rather be up front to the public. The Council is not a regular business, and is subject to public scrutiny. They have to consider the perception to the public, which may be that the councilmembers are circumventing the process to give themselves a raise. As a councilmember, he was going to Mt. Vernon twice per month. Now he travels from Fort Lewis. There is a financial burden to the councilmembers, but the councilmembers took the position knowing the amount the position pays. He understands that some people have limited incomes. However, they have to keep rules equal and simple. He didn't run for office to make money, but to do good for the county. That's what they need to focus on. The councilmembers are allowed to be reimbursed for actual expenses. If they open this up, others in the County government who live far out in the county will want to be treated the same way. Caskey- Schreiber stated she's paid these costs for two years. This is the third year. Gas prices have climbed $1 per gallon of gas. She's feeling the dent to her income. In the last three months, she drove 300 miles. She doesn't mind spending the time to go to events on County business. However, she resents the impact to her income and the wear and tear to her car. The councilmembers are the lowest paid in the state. She's not being subversive. She talks about it openly. She doesn't care if they go to the monthly flat fee. If the Council allows a fair amount for travel expense reimbursement, she's comfortable with submitted her mileage. They should address situations like Councilmember Roy who drive into town from far out in the County to go to a Council- related event. Desler stated that if they use the existing County policy, they can continue to claim mileage based on travel from home to the meeting. The issue comes when they talk about traveling from home to the County courthouse, which is deemed their official work station. They want to stay away from getting involved in that. If Committee of the Whole, 10/26/2004, Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. the Council chooses to go to a monthly rate, there is justification. The way to get around Councilmember Nelson's concern of perception is to approve a resolution explaining the reason for the fee. They can have a public discussion about it. McShane stated almost no one has submitted reimbursement for mileage. Brenner stated she understood that they could not submit mileage from their house to a meeting. McShane read the policy, and stated a board meeting in Bellingham would not be reimbursed. The question is whether they should change that for councilmembers, as opposed to staff as a whole. Roy stated the councilmembers are elected to represent their constituents, who gather in lots of different groups and places. The councilmembers' job description are different from a regular County employee. She may feel differently about reimbursement for things like a banquet. However, there is a built in rationale for the job being different from a regular County employee. Their job is to get out there and talk to people and go to meetings. The way she interprets the policy, one can only claim the mileage from the courthouse to the meeting. For her, that is a terrible imposition. Three of her four advisory committee meetings are in Bellingham. She drives a 40 -mile round trip between Birch Bay and Bellingham, and she can't claim mileage to go to the meeting. She makes that trip at least once per week. According to this policy, she can't be reimbursed for the expense. Desler stated that an employer would expect an employee who lives in Birch Bay to travel that distance back and forth to work at the employee's cost. The County Council is unique. The policy can be adjusted for the County Council to allow transportation to points other than the courthouse. The councilmembers basically work out of their home as part -time councilmembers. They don't have the same status of employees who work in town. Crawford stated he doesn't want to have the burden of filing detailed expense reports for each expense. That may not be right. However, it would take a change of mindset for him. Fleetwood stated he supports a reasonable, appropriate increase in funds. He's never thought about seeking reimbursement. He asked at what point they constantly respond to appropriate concerns, or refrain from doing appropriate things in the public's interest because of public perception. Nelson stated that's a good question. That's why it's important to find the mechanism that the public will accept. To alleviate a perception problem, do it above board. Turn in travel vouchers. If they want to have reimbursements increased because of the increased cost of living, then increase salaries or talk about what a legitimate policy is for reimbursement. Talk about the effect of Committee of the Whole, 10/26/2004, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. coming from home to a meeting. The courthouse is not his business place. He works from home. That is the legitimate argue they should make. He's uncomfortable with just adding another $100. Caskey- Schreiber stated she agreed with Councilmember Nelson. She'd rather submit mileage reports and be reimbursed. They should be able to submit mileage for reimbursement when they go to meetings in the county from home. As long as she works in Bellingham, she won't submit mileage expenses to meetings in Bellingham because she's making the trip anyway. For someone who doesn't come to Bellingham, that shouldn't be a penalty one has to bear. Roy stated the secretaries forward all their calls and emails to the councilmembers' homes. The councilmembers work from home. That's another reason the councilmembers are different from regular County employees. Caskey- Schreiber stated regular County employees get paid to go to meetings outside of their work place. Councilmembers are not on company time. The councilmembers are paid for the hours they spend at meetings in the courthouse, which are extensive. Anything beyond that is voluntary. McShane stated he's hearing an interest in establishing the official councilmember worksite as their homes instead of the courthouse. That would be the way to draft a change for mileage reimbursement policy. Desler stated the definition of Official Station, item a., would apply because the assigned location would be their homes. He's not sure if it's appropriate to pay mileage to and from the courthouse for Council meetings. On the official dates the Council meets, the official station becomes the courthouse. On other days, the official station is the residence. McShane stated they should talk about the mileage that would be allowed when driving to banquets and lunch /dinner meetings. Nelson stated the chair should not be held accountable for what each and every councilmember is doing on the public's behalf. He agrees that something that is a gross error should be brought to the Council's attention for discussion. If they start trying to define what is and isn't a legitimate meeting, they will have more problems. Leave it up to the individual councilmembers who know their constituents. For instance, if a councilmember is a Rotary Club member, that expense should not be reimbursed because the councilmember chose to be a Rotary Club member. However, if a councilmember is not a Rotary Club member and is chosen to speak at the Rotary Club on an issue, that expense is legitimate. Make the policy as wide open as possible so the Council Chair is not in the position of having to make a decision. Committee of the Whole, 10/26/2004, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. McShane stated the question is when councilmembers are being official representatives of the County at banquets and lunch /dinner meetings, and when are they're attending for political reasons. Brenner stated an expense should be reimbursable when an invitation comes to the Council Office and when the councilmember is not a member of the organization or is a member because they've been assigned to it by the County Council. If the invitation comes to the Council Office, they're being invited in their official capacity as councilmembers. Invitations that come to her home are personal, unless they are addressed to her as a County Councilmember. Caskey- Schreiber suggested they consider an invitation reimbursable if the invitation was extended to all councilmembers, but not reimbursable if extended just to the republicans, democrats, environmentalists, or other special interest group. Roy stated the councilmembers have good judgment, and anything that is questionable will be discussed. McShane asked if there are any parameters they want to set for banquets and meetings. He suggested not allowing reimbursement for attendance to any political activist organization, which can be difficult to define. The political parties would definitely be considered a political activist organization. The Building Industry Association (BIA) event would depend on the situation. They can leave those judgments to the councilmembers. If the event is a fundraising event, where the money goes to an organization, the expense should not be reimbursed. Nelson stated they are all smart enough to pay their own way to something like that. However, councilmembers have the right to go their and talk to their constituents, if they think it's necessary. group. McShane stated it may be a legal issue. Nelson stated the parameter should be what is and isn't legal. Brenner asked what is considered a political action group. McShane stated the Washington Conservation Voters is a political action Brenner stated the BIA is also a political action group. Roy stated the Chamber of Commerce is also a political action group. McShane stated the BIA has political action banquets. Committee of the Whole, 10/26/2004, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Nelson stated they should find out the legal ramifications. If the activity isn't illegal, they shouldn't make a judgment. It should be up to the councilmember. McShane stated that the problem is with the chair who signs the reimbursement. Desler stated that if they what to set some standards, write it up as a policy and let the Council adopt it. I can say that they will generally include or not include certain things. Let it be on the record for the County. At the same time, establish the fact that their official station will be at home on certain days and at the courthouse on other days. Nelson stated the policy should be as broad as possible and up to the individual councilmember. The policy should say that the only things that are reimbursable are banquets and special meeting functions that are legal. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A. The rest of the meeting was not audiotaped.) OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:00 p.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription The Council approved these minutes on November 23 , 2004. ATTEST: Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dan McShane, Council Chair Committee of the Whole, 10/26/2004, Page 7