HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0486.004 2000-2002 POLICE U~PARTMEN'T
8tl1 SOUTH BERETANIA STREET ~ ~ i. -
HONOILULU, HAr:Ail 96813 -AREA COE3E Ir 2Q-3111
http://x: at L:.honoiulupd.org Vr? ~L~j ~ C j'~j 1 ~I t-
v,(tsM~.co.hanoluiu.hi.us I f t `
1 r R E M V H A 9 R i S pVNTY
0 4.j~. -
~ G,~+^"x->•. ~",y t - LEE D. D O N O H U E
.^.".AYOh ~f~#~pxx)+'~4`~y,..6 `-+E i..J l..d1 d IJ CHIE6
L;„~'~.~¢~ MICHAEL CARVALH(}
s:.
i-S%;~ p~~~* ROBERT AU
~ DEPUTV CHIEFS
'}i<°\
t9~f OF
HP~
'}l~R RFFERENCFGK-AS
January 30, 2002
The Honorable James Arakaki, Chair
and Members
Hawaii County Council
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Dear Chair Arakaki and Members:
Subject: Resolution 168-02 Approving the Cost Adjustments Agreed Upon by the
Employers for Excluded Managerial Employees Covered by Chapter 77,
Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS)
I am Lee D. Donohue, Chief of Police, Honolulu Police Department, City and County of
Honolulu. Resolution 168-02 seeks the approval of cost items for salary and benefit
adjustments that are to be applied to excluded managerial employees for the period
July 1, 1999, through June 30, 2003. I strongly urge passage of this resolution.
Under §89C-5(a), the "state legislature or the legislative bodies of the counties acting in concert,
as the case may be, may approve or reject the cost items submitted to them, as a whole. If the
state legislature or the legislative body of any county rejects any of the cost items submitted to
them, all cost items shall be returned for revision." However, should the Hawaii County Council
decide to reject the excluded managerial cost adjustments and they are returned for revision, it
should be understood that the law also requires that adjustments for officers and employees in
the excluded managerial compensation plan (EMCP) be not less than those provided under
collective bargaining to officers and employees in the professional and scientific
employee bargaining unit (bargaining unit 13). It is my understanding that not only do the
proposed cost adjustments meet this requirement but further, due to acknowledged fiscal
constraints, they also do not provide more than that provided to employees in 1311 13.
Therefore, if the county rejects the excluded managerial cost adjustments and they are returned
for revision, the same cost package would be resubmitted to the legislative bodies based on the
requirements under §89C-2(2), HRS.
In view of the foregoing, I strongly urge passage of Resolution 168-02.
Sincerely,
C~ L~D. DONOHUE
Chief of Police Nca, •
1'iie No.
Ref, fio:~
~~°rri~~,~~ clir(1 Pr~,t~~ctirt,r; with A?(~hu ~ ~~2
~f• Date