HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommittee of the Whole December 8 19982
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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Committee Of The Whole
December 8, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Council Chair Robert Imhof in the
Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Also Present: Absent:
Kathy Sutter None
Marlene Dawson
L. Ward Nelson
Connie Hoag
Barbara Brenner
Tom Brown
ADDENDUM:
RESOLUTION AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBER
HANDBOOK OF OFFICE AND OPERATING POLICIES (AB98 -428)
Imhof read the proposed amendment into the record.
Hoag stated that she agreed with the first two items regarding allowing the Clerk to
review and assign correspondence to staff. She did not agree with the last three items. Each
Council Member was elected to represent the people that elected him or her. To require each
Council Member to get written approval of a majority of the Council members to send out
correspondence longer than one page makes those correspondences Council action.
Imhof clarified that they would not be approving or disapproving what is being sent out,
only approving nor disapproving the content.
Hoag stated that the language doesn't specify what the Council members would be
approving. Also, it isn't appropriate. If a Council member wants to say something about an
issue, they can.
Committee of the Whole, 12/8/98, Page 1
I Nelson stated that the purpose of the resolution is that, with staff time being limited, there
2 may be a problem with the amount of materials that have to be typed up and the functioning of
3 the office.
4
5 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated that the staff needed written direction
6 from the Council regarding how correspondence should be handled in a fair and equitable
7 manner.
8
9 Brenner stated that she is always aware of the staff schedules, and if staff is too busy to
10 do a letter, then they will tell her. Each Council member was elected to represent a portion of the
11 community. It may not be the majority of the Council, but it may be a majority in the
12 community. This effectively stifles part of a Council member's duties. The Council would be
13 setting a dangerous precedent by approving the proposal. It is not in the public's interest.
14
15 Brown stated that he usually prepares his correspondence on his own. He didn't know if
16 this affects the way that he does business. The reason he does that is because, by the time he
17 writes the letter out by hand and then gets someone to type it, he doesn't save any time. He
18 questioned how the proposed amendment changes the way he does his correspondence.
19
20 Sutter stated that she was concerned about staff time. The staff is backlogged. She is
21 concerned about correspondence that goes out of the Council office with her name on it that she
22 finds personally offensive. She does not want the public or the person receiving the letter to
23 believe that she condones everything that goes out of the office. She did not want to censure or
24 restrict anyone from stating his or her opinion. More often, she is offended at the way something
25 is stated.
26
27 Hoag suggested that each Council member have their own letterhead, rather than one
28 letterhead with all of the County Council members' names.
29
30 Brown -Davis stated that her concern was that would take up more staff time. Plain
31 Whatcom County letterhead has been ordered.
32
33 Imhof stated that there are items going out of the Council office that are filled with
34 accusations, administration bashing, allegations of cover -ups, and they continue to happen. The
35 Council requested four months ago that the particular Council Member come up with the
36 substance of the allegations. The Council needs to be careful of what kind of correspondence
37 goes out of the office, because it reflects on everyone, even if only one Council member name is
38 on the letter. They have lost the ability of civil discourse in certain instances. It makes no
39 legislative sense to use the inflammatory words that are put in there. They are a way that
40 activists go after their goals. The Council needs to have a way to make sure that what goes out
41 of the office will not get the Council as a whole in trouble.
42
43 Hoag stated that if they have to go through the process of seeking approval of three other
44 Council members to send a letter, then it increases Council members' workload. They are
45 already overloaded. The solution that Imhof proposes is worse than the problem. She proposed
46 that if something goes out which a Council member feels is offensive, then they can get together
47 and take action to reprimand or whatever.
48
49 Sutter stated that is action after - the -fact.
Committee of the Whole, 12/8/98, Page 2
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
48
Hoag stated that if there is outgoing correspondence that a Council member believes
reflects poorly on the Council member, then it should be taken up as a Council.
Imhof responded that it has been addressed a number of times, but the same things keep
coming up.
Dawson stated that the issue is lack of professionalism in the correspondence.
Hoag stated that was a judgement call.
Dawson stated that they should be able to give the Clerk the authority to evaluate whether
or not something lacks professionalism. The Council enters into areas of liability if they make
inflammatory statements. They can't dismiss this lightly.
Brown -Davis stated that the staff currently does make those judgements. That is the
reason this issue has come up.
Sutter suggested that the Clerk be able to request other Council members' input if she
believes something lacks professionalism or could expose the County to liability.
Dawson questioned why that was not working.
Brown -Davis responded that if she and legal counsel agree that staff could handle a
certain correspondence, and another Council member decides that they don't agree with it, then
he or she confronts the Clerk.
Brenner stated that Imhof was accusing her of accusation and insinuation. Every Council
member has different gifts. For any majority to decide which gifts are more important than other
gifts is outrageous. Many times she doesn't agree with correspondence that other Council
members send, but it is not her business. This policy is intended to muzzle minority opinion.
Sutter stated that she would like to see a way for the majority to vote on an item that may
be offensive and could be done in a more productive way that won't open up the Council to
liability. She doesn't mind if someone has a different opinion than her own, but doesn't want her
name attached to it. She could not support an offensive manner in which an opinion may be
stated.
Brenner stated that her intent is not to hold other people hostage to her opinions.
Sutter questioned who makes the decision as to whether correspondence goes on Council
letterhead or a Council member's letterhead.
Hoag stated that if it was from the chair, with a majority agreement, then it would go on
Council letterhead.
Brown stated that they are proposing censorship and freedom of speech is out the
window. He responds to issues differently than other people. Even on business matters, he
Committee of the Whole, 12/8/98, 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
48
49
doesn't concur and agree with things that go out, proper or not. His name should not be listed on
the letterhead of a letter he doesn't agree with. The discussion is a battle of personalities.
Sutter questioned legal counsel if there would be a mechanism where the Council and the
County could not be held liable if a Council member sends out libelous correspondence on their
individual letterhead.
Karen Frakes, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated that they are liable, whether it
would go on County Council letterhead or individual Council member letterhead. Regarding
implications of freedom of speech, the meeting was supposed to be about whether or not staff
would prepare the letter, not whether or not someone could express their opinion. The proposal
doesn't say that an opinion cannot be expressed through correspondence, just that staff won't
prepare it.
Sutter stated that there is more than one issue. She doesn't want the County to be held
liable for the actions of one Council member.
Brenner stated that the purpose of the change is to prevent the minority from using staff
resources.
Imhof stated that they are trying to get to a mechanism to prevent the liability factor.
There is only one way to do it. If a letter contains libelous material, the only way to keep the
County from being liable is to send it out on personal letterhead, without a County seal.
Brenner stated that currently it is a duty of the staff to consult with legal counsel to
determine if something is libelous.
Imhof stated that it is the Council members' duty to consult with legal counsel.
Nelson stated that he approved the idea of generic stationary, even though it doesn't
reduce the liability concern. He was concerned that special issues to which a Council member is
involved, such as health care, would be appropriate to do as a Council member.
Frakes stated the issue is the gray area between acting as a legislator, on behalf of the
County, and furthering a personal cause.
Nelson questioned whether there was a definition.
Frakes stated that they could get some guidance from the County's Home Rule Charter
and review the responsibilities of a legislator. The Charter only gives power to the Council as a
body, not to individual Council members.
Nelson stated that the people grant their power, and that power is freedom to express
themselves in a fashion to represent the public. He stated that Brenner many times feels like she
is being attacked, but she does her share of attacking. They all at times take actions that do not
reflect a professional image. They want to be sure they reflect a professional image. His
concern is that they make sure they protect individual expression. On the other hand, they need
to be sure to protect the County. He would not want someone sending something out that he
later finds out legally obligates the County. The attorney needs to be protected from a Council
Committee of the Whole, 12/8/98, Page 4
I member attacking that attorney for their recommendation. The Council member has right to get
2 a higher opinion. If the attorney makes a recommendation, it should stand.
3
4 Imhof stated that they need professional correspondence going out of the office. It takes
5 the author to task. If the author knows he or she needs to get approval of a majority, then they
6 will phrase the letter in a way that is not libelous or accusatory.
7
8 Nelson stated that legal counsel can check for libelous or accusatory content.
9
10 Hoag stated that there are seven different members of the Council. Each member is a full
11 Council member with the right to represent their constituents, and take action on behalf of their
12 constituency. Liability needs to be covered. If the Clerk makes a judgement that the content of
13 certain correspondence could be libelous, then she should run it past legal counsel. If legal
14 counsel believes that the content is libelous, then it should be brought before the full Council.
15 Having to run documents of more than one page past the Council does not accomplish that
16 purpose. All it does is serve a political function and creates added workload for the Council
17 members. It stifles the entire process.
18
19 Hoag moved that the last three items be deleted.
20
21 Frakes stated that they don't have the right to send out anything as an individual Council
22 member. It has to be related to County business or Council functions.
23
24 Hoag stated that they could send out correspondence that represents their constituents.
25 Frakes stated that they could be representing their constituents, and not be doing County
26 business. Just because they are elected as a County legislature doesn't mean that any issue is
27 County business.
28
29 Nelson stated that, as an example, general health care is not County business.
30
31 Frakes stated that it is not just a legal issue. It is also a policy issue. As the chair of the
32 Council, Imhof is the supervisor of the Clerk of the Council, who in turn supervises the staff.
33 There is a lot of gray area from a legal standpoint. She doesn't review a document for
34 professionalism. That isn't her job. There are concerns beyond legal concerns.
35
36 Hoag stated that is not the issue. Concerns other than legal are the individual person's
37 responsibility. If the Council does not feel that what was sent out was appropriate, then they can
38 send out something that disagrees with it, reprimand the Council member, or take other action.
39
40 Dawson suggested that the concerns could be addressed by focusing the issue on
41 questions of liability and professionalism be addressed by the Clerk, legal counsel, and majority
42 of the County Council, in that order.
43
44 Sutter stated that the Council members have a responsibility to each other. There is
45 responsibility that goes along with the right of freedom of speech. She would not support
46 correspondence going out under her name or on County letterhead that is offensive or potentially
47 libelous. That sort of communication does not further resolution of a problem.
48
49 Sutter moved to table until the evening Council meeting.
Committee of the Whole, 12/8/98, Page 5
2 Imhof stated that this item was for discussion only. It would be dealt with during the
3 evening Council meeting.
4
5 (Clerk's Note: Sutter's motion to table was not voted on)
6
7 Motion to delete the last three items carried 4 -3 with Brown, Brenner, and Sutter
8 opposed.
9
10 Nelson moved to go into executive session for minutes to discuss items #1 and #2.
11
12 Motion carried unanimously.
13
14
15 1. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION
16 ON FILE CUP98 -0025, FILED BY KRIS AND SANDRA OLGEIRSSON, CIO PHIL
17 SERKA, ATTORNEY AT LAW (AB98 -387)
18
19 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING MASTER COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT
20 NEGOTIATIONS (AB98 -360)
21
22
23
24 OTHER BUSINESS
25
26 1. RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTING POLICIES AND A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR
27 UNREPRESENTED WHATCOM COUNTY EMPLOYEES FOR 1999 (AB98 -418)
28
29 Council recessed the executive session.
30
31 Dave Wareing, Deputy Administrator, stated that they have developed an agreement
32 similar to a labor agreement document. It outlines rights and benefits. They are trying to give
33 the unrepresented employees the same feeling of having a document that they can use as
34 protection similar to a represented employee. A 2% increase is all that can be afforded this year.
35
36 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
37
38 Wareing continued to state that if they apply the 2 %, then it sets the tone to be prudent.
39 They will have to explain to the unrepresented employees why it is not 2 ' /z %. It is a fair
40 increase for the unrepresented employees. There is some idea that employees over a certain
41 income should not receive the 2 %. The people who have been managers work as hard as their
42 employees. The County gets a bonus with them because they don't get overtime or additional
43 compensation. They are responsible for the duties that take more than eight hours a day. It is
44 only fair to give those people a 2% raise as well.
45
46 Brenner stated that they have to decide whether it is good policy to keep giving people
47 raises until the County runs out of money. A better policy would be to stay at a certain level.
48 There are many qualified people looking for work. They have an over - educated population in
Committee of the Whole, 12/8/98, Page 6
I Whatcom County. They will find more and more people who will stay here that have a public
2 servant ethic and appreciate the job security and benefits.
3
4 Hoag questioned what the purpose was of additional leave that could be granted by the
5 Executive's office. She wondered if it built in an atmosphere of favoritism.
6
7 Karen Sterling - Goens, Human Resources Manager, stated that is included to make sure
8 there is uniformity and consistency.
9
10 Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated that the unrepresented employees don't abuse
11 their benefits. The unions know that the represented employees have an extremely high
12 absenteeism rate. There is not a problem with the unrepresented employees.
13
14 Hoag stated that there may be less absenteeism if 6 of the sick days were paid, but the
15 other 6 allowed days were not paid.
16
17 Hoag questioned the general salary range of unrepresented employees. Kremen
18 responded that the average salary level is in the mid - $40,000.
19
20 Wendy Wefer - Clinton, Human Resources Compensation Analyst, stated that the
21 unrepresented employees are all the department heads, division manager, higher level
22 professionals such as the employees of the Human Resource, Council, and Executive offices.
23 They are also the deputies in the Public Defenders office, the civil prosecutors, and all the
24 elected officials.
25
26 Hoag suggested for next year's budget to give a specified amount depending on salary
27 level. When a flat percentage raise is given, the gap grows between the higher level and the
28 lower level.
29
30 Kremen stated that the higher salaried and more skilled positions are the ones that the
31 County is not competitive with. The County, however, is above average in the lower salary
32 levels.
33
34 Hoag questioned whether the positions that were not being filled were all represented
35 positions. Sterling - Goens replied that there were unrepresented positions that were also not
36 being filled.
37
38 Wefer - Clinton stated that there were some adjustments for the lower level engineers, not
39 the engineering managers. Engineers are represented employees.
40
41 Wareing stated that each range is a 3.8% difference from the next range. Each step is
42 also a set percentage. They changed the step instead of the range level. When there is a vacancy
43 for a lower level position, the County receives 40 — 70 applications. The higher level vacant
44 positions have trouble receiving any applicants.
45
46 Kremen stated that there has been a decline over the years in number of applicants.
Committee of the Whole, 12/8/98, Page 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:00 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on September 21, 1999.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Robert Imhof, Council Chair
Committee of the Whole, 12/8/98, Page 8