Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0276.003 2012-2014 kOUN cLL. TESTIMONY AGAINST RES-112-13 (Walua Road Trail) COUNTY COMM. 27' TESTIMONY AGAINST RES-113-13 (UPW Contract) COUNTY OF HAWAII TESTIMONY AGAINST RES-117-13(HGEA Contract) Time /O;RECEIVED y .440 I will be testifying against three resolutions. Date r1 RES 113-13 I am against RES 113-13 because to the best of my knowledge it does not contain a clause prohibiting the UPW from inviting county workers to "informational meetings"on county time during which campaigning takes place. As you know, Section 2-83 (b)(3) of the Hawaii County Code of Ethics specifically states that"Using County time, equipment or other facilities for private business or Campaign purposes"is an example of an employee attempting"to use his position to secure or grant unwarranted privileges...or"treatment". An article by Nancy Cook-Lauer in the August 1, 2012 issue of West Hawaii Today titled "Union Touts Candidates at Public Expense" detailed how county and state workers in UPW bargaining units 1 and 10 attended union "informational meetings"at which union endorsed candidates spoke—i.e., campaigned. This matter came to light because UPW members upset with the practice notified the paper. After the article came out, a petition was filed with our Hawaii County Board of Ethics pointing out that this action was a violation of our Ethics Code. The Board agreed to consider the petition,but in its decision of Nov. 19, 2012 dismissed the petition based on a state ruling that said it was "legal"and that"county employees didn't know they were going to a campaign event". The Board never openly discussed the fact that our County Code prohibited it. Only the Ethics Commission Chair, Bernard Dill, dissented, saying, "This board has no jurisdiction over union activities. However, County employees who are subject to the County Code of Ethics and are union workers must abide by the county code of ethics." Another commissioner commented that the county should negotiate with UPW and HGEA to bring them more in line with those of the police (SHOPCO) and fire fighter union (HFFA) which prohibit campaigning. With that latter comment in mind, I spent the month of March trying to get an appointment with Mayor Kenoi to discuss this issue because according to HRS Chapter 89-6, he is the "public employer"of the Hawaii County workers in bargaining units. This code also states that"each employer may negotiate, independently of one another,supplemental agreements that apply to their employees." On April 24 I e-mailed him a letter, followed by subsequent snail mail and a personally delivered copy at the Kona budget meeting,asking him,as the employer of Hawaii County, to negotiate a supplemental agreement with the Unions which would prohibit the release of county employees on county time. I never received a response from the Mayor. I also discussed this issue with Wally Lau, Managing Director, who promised to get me an answer. I contacted him two weeks later for a response and was told he had forwarded a copy of my letter to the Mayor to Ron Takahashi, our HR director,who is the official negotiator, for his opinion. � ,, ,,,. ,,�,,. -7(D. Ref. To: Ref. Date • r I would have been more reassured if it had been the Mayor,as the "Employer of Hawaii County",wlio'had acknowledged receipt of the letter,and directed his HR director to work on a supplementatagreement prohibiting campaigning on county time at these union meetings. I am disappointed that this was not negotiated with the main contract. Those representing and negotiating for the county had to have been well aware of the recommendation by the Board of Ethics to include a no campaigning clause in the next contract. I would have thought they would have been ashamed by the headline "Union Contract Trumps County Code"and tried to do something about it. For that reason, I ask that you defer your support on these contracts until the Mayor has time to issue a response regarding the request to negotiate a supplemental contract with these unions which forbids campaigning on county time at union informational meetings. RES 113-14 I am against this resolution for the same reason stated in my testimony on RES 113-13 -- because to the best of my knowledge the contract does not contain a clause prohibiting the HGEA from inviting county workers to"informational meetings"on county time during which campaigning takes place. RES 112-13 (Walua Trail): OPPOSED I would ask that council members postpone voting on this resolution until the public has a chance to give their opinion. There has been no mention of this proposed renaming of the trail in the media and I was unaware of it until I read the council agenda —which most people who use the Walua Trail probably don't do. I personally am opposed to the renaming of the Walua Trail,as we call it,and intend no disrespect to the memory of the deserving woman who helped establish it. I believe it would be more appropriate to honor her memory with a bronze plaque embedded at the beginning of the walk on Sunset and Walua Rd. and a mention of her efforts to establish the path. People would actually read this and remember her name and contribution. On the other hand,if the name is changed to an even longer one than we currently have,the trail will still be referred to by most people as the Walua Trail. Just on general principles, I prefer to keep long established names,especially names that include the location,as they are. Let's build new trails,buildings,and roads to honor worthy individuals.