The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0200.003 1996-1998 Stephen K. Yamaahiro ~ Richard Wutdenun Mayor Cerpomelon Cervel ~~O~~M~~ (~uun#g of ~ttfuttii OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL l0l Aupuni Street, Suite 325 • Hilo, Hnwi'i 96720.262 • (808) %1-8151 • fa: 1808) %I.8622 RECE'JVED 'r May 6, 1997 n"~.-..._.___ g~,_______^ , Count The Honorable Aaron S. Y Chung r Chairperson, Hawaii County Council Finance Committee 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 RE: Bill No. 83. Dear Chairperson Chung and Members of the Finance Committee: The Office of the Corporation Counsel supports the passage of this amendment to the Hawaii County Code. 1. Purpose: Given the County's stagnant economy and reduced revenue stream, this proposed amendment grants the Corporation Counsel and Prosecuting Attorney the flexibility to award merit raises and determine the amount and size of those raises. Currently, salaries and raises are locked into a system of grades and steps, which generally follows the Civil Service System. Sea Exhibit "1," attached hereto. Salaries and especially raises must be planned according to the respective department's budget. Because of the financial condition of the County, if the department's budget is cut, the department can not find the money to fund a salary increase or raise according to the Pay Grade and steps. If the department can save money, but not enough to meet the funds required for a Pay Grade and step movement upwards, then the money has to go to some other account or expenditure. 2. How this Proposed Amendment Would Work: If adopted by the Council and signed by the Mayor, this amendment would allow the appointing authorities more flexibility in setting salaries and wages. First, the department no longer has to save enough money to fund a particular Pay Grade and step movement for the individual deputy. If the department is able to save some money on a regular basis, but not enough to fund a Pay Grade movement, under this amendment it can st~ award a ~.OOr 0 3 ~,u_; i. pr@580t8CL ~ L The Honorable Aaron S. Y Chung May 6, 1997 Page 2 token salary increase to an attorney or attorneys. Given the attorney's work performance, the appointing authority can vary the salary increase. Second, the proposed amendment will allow the appointing authorities to exceed the salary caps or ceilings that have artificially prevented many attorneys from receiving a raise for over seven (7) years. The Office of the Corporation Counsel, Main Office has only eight (8) attorneys to service all County departments, boards, commissions, agencies, the County Council and the Administration. Of those eight (8), only three (3) attorneys have not reached their salary cap or ceiling. The other five (5) attorneys have had their salaries capped since 1990, i.e., for seven years. This amendment would do away with that salary cap or ceiling and allow the appointing authority to reward these individuals based on their job performance. The Office of the Corporation Counsel has four (4) other attorneys assigned to the Family Support Division in Hilo and Kona. The Family Support Division is fully funded by the State. Any salary increase must come from and be approved by the State. There are only two (2) attorneys who have not reached their salary caps or ceilings in that division. 3. There is a Substantial Need for Salarv Increases: The current financial status of the County must be taken into account when requesting salary increases and raises. There are three (3) reasons for supporting this proposal. A. Hawaii County has the Lowest Paid County Attorneys in the State: Based on an informal poll of the different counties, including Kauai, the salary caps or ceilings for the attorneys in the Office of the Corporation Counsel, County of Hawaii, are the lowest. In other words, if you have reached your salary cap or ceiling, then you are getting paid the least of all other county attorneys in the state. It should be noted that the Corporation Counsel for Hawaii County is paid less than a supervising attorney in the City and County of Honolulu, Corporation Counsel's oftlce. The salary cap or ceiling for the attorneys in the Office of the Corporation Counsel, County of Hawaii has not changed since 1990. B The Workload has Increased by about 100%: Since fiscal year 1989 - 1990, the number of requests for opinions and other assignments from the various County departments, agencies, boards, commissions, County Council and Executive branch has increased by The Honorable Aazon S. Y Chung May 6, 1997 Page 3 nearly 100%. This tlgure does not include the number of lawsuits and claims which have been filed against the County. C. Other County Employees have Received Salary Increases of Approximately 30%~ Since fiscal Year 1989 - 1990, to the present, the following bargaining units for County employees have received the following average salary increases: • Unit I Blue Collar Still negotiating FY 95-96 & 96-97. • Unit 2 Blue Collar Supervisors 29.78% • Unit 3 White Collar -Clerical 35.25% • Unit 4 White Collar. Supervisors 35.25% • Unit 11 Firefighters 32.20% • Unit 12 Police 37.00% • Unit 13 Professional & Scientific 32.10% • Excluded Management 33.10% Civil servants and excluded management positions have had salary increases averaging 30% in the past seven years, while the attorneys have received nothing. This is especially disheartening when the Excluded Management positions earn more than Department Directors and their raises are automatically tied to the civil servants' raises. 4 Misconceptions About the Proposed Amendment: There are two Fundamental misconceptions about this proposed amendment. It has been expressed that this amendment gives the appointing authority too much discretion in determining salary increases. This is an exaggeration since under the present Pay Grade and step system, the appointing authority already has the authority to award a salary increase or raise. This amendment only changes the amount that can be awarded. This proposed amendment will allow the appointing authority to determine who and by what amount an attorney's salary can be raised given the savings in the department's budget. The other misconception is that this amendment will be applied automatically, across the board to all attorneys. This amendment sets a salary cap or ceiling of no more than ninety percent (90%) and a minimum of fifry percent (50%) of the appointing authority's salary. Even if this amendment passes, no salaries can or will change until the appointing authority decides to make The Honorable Aaron S. Y Chung May 6, 1997 Page 4 a change. This is not an automatic salary increase. Finally, it should be noted that the proposed amendment ties the percentage (i.e., 90% - 50%) to whichever salary is higher at the time, the Corporation Counsel or the Prosecuting Attorney. This was necessary because of the inequity in the current salary levels and that at any given time, one or the other may be higher. This part of the proposed amendment allows the maximum percentage to go up without having to request a change to an ordinance and minimize any possible inequities in salary between the two offices. It has been noted that there may be a circumstance where under the proposed system an attorney's salary could be higher the salary for the First Deputy Prosecuting Attorney or Assistant Corporation Counsel. This is already a common occurrence under the state and county's "Merit System" set up in our state and county laws. It is common place to have the "Excluded Management" personnel paid more than the department director. 4. Conclusion: The Office of the Corporation Counsel respectfully requests the Finance Committee's favorable consideration in this matter and pass this proposed amendment out of committee to the full Council Thank you for this opportunity to be heard on this important matter. Respectfully, - ed H. S. Ho g Assistant Corporation Coun Enclosure Pay Grade Annual Salary Monthly Salary Hourl Rate LG-1A $39,828 $3,319 $19.15 LG-16 $43,152 $3,596 $20.75 LG-1 C $48,132 $4,011 $23.14 LG-1D $49,788 $4,149 $23.94 LG-1E $51,444 $4,287 $24.73 LG-1 F $53,112 $4,426 $25.53 LG-1 G / LG-2A $54,768 $4,564 $26.33 LG-1 H / LG-26 $56,424 $4,702 $27.13 LG-11 / LG-2C $58,092 $4,841 $27.93 LG-1J / LG-2D $59,748 $4,979 $28.73 LG-2E $61,404 $5,117 $29.52