Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN FC 2017/11/14 2017-2018COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 23rd Session West Hawaii Civic Center 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A Kailua-Kona, Hawaii November 14, 2017 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Finance was called to order at ORDER: 12:10 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Kailua-Kona, by Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair Ms. Karen Eoff, Vice Chair Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member Mr. Dru Mamo Kanuha, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Ms. Eileen O'Hara, Member (via videoconference from Hilo) Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Member Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member Ms. Jennifer Ruggles, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.) CHR. DAVID: I'm closing public testimony at this time. Move to Communications. COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, please, Communication 57. Comm. 573: NOMINATION OF DR. NAN SUMNER-MACK TO THE BOARD OF ETHICS From Mayor Harry Kim, dated October 24, 2017, submitting for the Council's review and confirmation the above nomination. Requires Council Confirmation by: December 9, 2017 (Section 13-4(1), Hawaii County Charter) FC -23 November 14, 2017 Vote on Comm. 573: Mr. Richards moved to recommend confirmation of the (Approved) appointment of Dr. Nan Sumner -Mac to the Board of Ethics. Seconded by Ms. Poindexter and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung — 1. Excused: None. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. Chair David informed Dr. Sumner -Mack that she does not need to appear before full Council for final confirmation. Recess: At 12:23 p.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 12:27 p.m. CHR. DAVID: Alright, thank you. Thank you, Council Members. We are out of recess and moving on with the agenda. The next communication I'm going to it's been requested to take it at the end of the agenda. Mr. Chung had to leave for a few minutes. So we will move on to the Order of Resolutions. Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, the of Business: following items were taken out of order: CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, please, Resolution 387-17. Res. 387-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR ONE SINGLE DRUM VIBRATORY ROLLER Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement at an estimated monthly cost of $2,900. The equipment would be used by the Department of Public Works, Highways Division. The County will own the equipment at the end of the lease. Reference: Comm. 574 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Page 2 FC -23 Vote on Res. 387-17 (Approved) November 14, 2017 Mr. Richards moved to recommend adoption of Res. 387-17. Seconded by Ms. Poindexter and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, and Chair David — 6. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Chung, O'Hara, and Ruggles — 3. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Resolution 388-17. Res. 388-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR ONE FORKLIFT Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement at an estimated monthly cost of $1,650. The equipment would be used by the Department of Public Works, Highways Division, to be stationed at the South Hilo roads baseyard. The County will own the equipment at the end of the lease. Vote on Res. 388-17 (Approved) Reference: Comm. 575 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Ms. Poindexter moved to recommend adoption of Res. 388-17. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, and Chair David — 6. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Chung, O'Hara, and Ruggles — 3. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Resolution 389-17. Res. 389-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR ONE LOADER Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement at an estimated monthly cost of $5,400. The equipment would be used by the Department of Public Works, Highways Division, to be stationed at the Kona roads baseyard. The County will own the equipment at the end of the lease. Reference: Comm. 576 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Page 3 FC -23 Vote on Res. 389-17 (Approved) November 14, 2017 Mr. Richards moved to recommend adoption of Res. 389-17. Seconded by Ms. Poindexter and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, and Chair David — 6. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Chung, O'Hara, and Ruggles — 3. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, please Resolution 390-17. Res. 390-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR ONE CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION AND ONE CHEMICAL GROUTING TRUCK Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement for a closed circuit television and chemical grouting truck to be used by the Department of Environmental Management, Wastewater Division, at an estimated monthly cost of $8,500. The County will own the equipment at the end of the lease. Reference: Comm. 577 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Motion to Approve: Mr. Richards moved to recommend adoption of Res. 390-17. Seconded by Ms. Eoff CHR. DAVID: Any discussion? Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Director Kucharski, please? (Note: At this time, Environmental Management Director Bill Kucharski came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KUCHARSKI: Yes, sir? MR. RICHARDS: Director, what is the grouting truck? MR. KUCHARSKI: Bill Kucharski, Director of DEM (Department of Environmental Management). The grouting truck and the CCTV (Closed Circuit Television) is a device that can go into a sewer, can see if there's a break or a leak. The CCTV is the camera that will identify. It also has the equipment to be able to go in and apply grout, internal to the pipe, to seal up any minor separations within there. It can't Page 4 FC -23 Vote on Res. 390-17 (Approved) November 14, 2017 do a major repair; but if there's a small crack or—generally it's in between the seams, when the pipe comes together, that can make that repair. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, it gives me a lot better understanding. Is this replacing some equipment that we have now, or is this increasing level of repair? MR. KUCHARSKI: The existing vehicle is 17 years old. It sometimes works, usually does not. Like most of the equipment, it has passed it's useful life, and this will be a replacement for the existing vehicle. MR. RICHARDS: Are we behind on some of those repairs because of that? MR. KUCHARSKI: Say? MR. RICHARDS: Are we behind on some of ourI'm assuming these are concrete ductile tape. Are we behind this schedule because of our equipment not working all of the time? MR. KUCHARSKI: Yes is the short answer, but it is not a complete answer. But yes, we are behind. Generally, we use this to try and head off problems. But we've not had an excess of personnel to do that. We've been dealing with existing problems more than to trying to turn off and stop future problems. This will help with the personnel. It's also—the technology in there is 17 years advanced, and there's a lot of things that we can do much more easily now than we could've done when the original vehicle had been purchased and used. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thank you. I yield CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. No one else? Okay. Well, all those in favor of the motion please say "aye." The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 390-17 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David – 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung – 1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Resolution 390-17 moves forward to the Council with a positive recommendation. Mr. Clerk, please, Resolution 391-17. Page 5 FC -23 November 14, 2017 Res. 391-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR TWO 200 KILOWATT EMERGENCY GENERATORS Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement at an estimated monthly cost of $6,500. The equipment would be used by the Department of Environmental Management, Wastewater Division, to power sewer pump stations during power outages. The County will own the equipment at the end of the lease. Reference: Comm. 578 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Eoff moved to recommend adoption of Res. 391-17. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. DAVID: Any discussion, Council Members? MS. LEE LOY: Chair? CHR. DAVID: Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Mr. Kucharski, I noticed that it just covers all other facilities. On our next agenda item, we identify some of them, for the 600 kilowatt generator. How many facilities are these two 200 covering? MR. KUCHARSKI: Bill Kucharski, Director of DEM. I can't answer exactly how many, but this is primarily for pump stations, and we have 16, 17 pump stations around; and if the power goes down, nothing happens. We do have others, but they're old and not as reliable as we'd like. Again, this is more preventative or times when we can get into a big problem in power outage. I can get that information for you, though. MS. LEE LOY: And maybe not so muchI think my concern is, if this is emergency backup, is there really emergency backup or at some point are we going to be kind of holding these new ones and to pull out old ones? And then actually kind ofI think my concern is these are not going to serve as emergency, they're going to serve as a way to upgrade the aging infrastructure. We're still going to need to purchase to have a real backup energy or emergency generators. MR. KUCHARSKI: It's my understanding that these will be portable and will be used to bring—if the backup generator fails, then we will bring the backup -backup generator, if that answers the question. MS. LEE LOY: Okay, thank you. I yield. Page 6 FC -23 November 14, 2017 CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? MR. KANUHA: Chair? CHR. DAVID: Mr. Kanuha. MR. KANUHA: Thank you. Is there a warranty on these? MR. KUCHARSKI: I assume there is. I am not aware of that level of detail. MR. KANUHA: Okay. I love the backup -backup, you know, but at $180,000 a pop you'd hope that there is some warranty. Maybe I can get the details later. MR. KUCHARSKI: I can't believe there is no warranty, but I never asked that specific question. MR. KANUHA: Okay, thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kanuha. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion please say "aye." Vote on Res. 391-17: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 391-17 was (Approved) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Resolution 391-17 moves forward to Council with a positive recommendation. Mr. Clerk, Resolution 392, please? Res. 392-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR ONE 600 KILOWATT EMERGENCY GENERATOR Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement at an estimated monthly cost of $6,500. The equipment would be used by the Department of Environmental Management, Wastewater Division, to power wastewater plants and larger sewer pump stations during power outages. The County will own the equipment at the end of the lease. Reference: Comm. 579 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Page 7 FC -23 November 14, 2017 Vote on Res. 392-17: Mr. Richards moved to recommend adoption of Res. 392-17. (Approved) Seconded by Ms. Poindexter and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David – 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Resolution 392 moves forward to Council with a positive recommendation. I'm going to go back to almost the top of the agenda and take Communication 583 at this time. Mr. Clerk. Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. Comm. 583: REQUESTS DISCUSSION WITH THE FIRE CHIEF, THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES, AND THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE REGARDING CHANGING THE BATTALION CHIEF'S PAY GRADE FROM EM -3 TO EM -5 From Council Member Aaron S. Y. Chung, dated October 25, 2017. Motion to Close File: Mr. Chung moved to close file on Comm. 583. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you, Madam Chair. I asked for a half -an -hour on this matter, but it really shouldn't take more than 12 minutes, I think. This is the situation. I don't know if any of you recall, but during the course of the departmental reviews, I did ask Chief Rosario what he felt about this particular issue, which I'll describe in a little while. He said that he was actually in favor of it. And I'm going to use the word "reallocating" but I don't really know what the term of our is moving the Assistant Chief salary—the Battalion Chief salary pay from what it is right now to a little higher grade. Now, just as a matter of background, I think all of you know we have the ranking in the Fire Department. You have the Fire Chief, you have the Deputy Chief, you have two Assistant Chiefs; and ten Battalion Chiefs. Ten or, maybe depending how you look at it, it might be even 11; I'm not too sure. But those Battalion Chiefs are paid at an EM -3 level; the Assistant Chiefs, EM -5. Page 8 FC -23 November 14, 2017 Back in 2005 or maybe about 10, 12 years ago, they had six Assistant Chiefs. I know this is kind of hard to follow. But they had six Assistant Chiefs; and they had some kind of reorganization in the department which made them all reallocated into the Battalion Chief positions. So you had now remaining two Assistant Chiefs; then you had actually downgraded from Assistant Chiefs to Battalion Chiefs, then they got that EM -3 salary, but they got the same job description basically. These Battalion Chiefs are overseeing companies of over 55 employees at a crack. I think each district, depending on which district you have, you might even have nine or eleven companies that these guys are overseeing, whereas Captains only oversee anywhere from four to five people per company. What has happened in the department—and I'm hearing this from Fire Department personnel, it's not something that I came up with, right? They're telling me that there's a problem in the department, which is compromising promotion and safety. These are people, not just those who are affected by this; but it's Fire Captains who don't see any motivation for trying to move towards a Battalion Chief promotion; people under the Captain's rank; and also retired people. And actually, Battalion Chiefs themselves are saying something's wrong with this this system. So what I wanted to do is, if I could call up Bill Brilhante, who is our HR (Human Resources) Director. He's actually a former Fire Fighter himself, so he knows this thing really well. If he could just come and explain very objectively what the situation is in that department as it relates to the Battalion Chief's salary and Captain's salary. Bill, are you there? Is Bill there? (Note: At this time, Acting Human Resources Director William Brilhante came forward to address the members of the Committee.) CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Brilhante. Go ahead. MR. BRILHANTE: Good afternoon. William Brilhante, Acting Director, Department of Human Resources. You know, in response to Council Member Chung's question requesting a brief history, to explain the differences between a Captain and Battalion Chief, it primarily comes down to one distinction, and that is, as it relates to Collective Bargaining, a Captain's position, a FEO (Fire Equipment Operator), a Rescue man, or a Fire Fighter, they're incorporated in the Collective Bargaining system, HFFA (Hawai`i Fire Fighters Association), and so they come under whatever the Collective Bargaining agreement relates to. Whereas, a Battalion Chief and an Assistant Chief, they're classified as what is known as EMs' or Excluded Management. And Excluded Management primarily deals with, you know, those are your mid-level managers or your division's supervisors. So that's what we have for the Battalion Chiefs and the Assistant Chiefs. Whereas, the Page 9 FC -23 November 14, 2017 third highest prong or the third highest level of administration within a department is your Deputy department head or department head, and those are appointed administrative positions. So, that's the discrepancy. As far as the salaries for a Captain, currently a Captain in the Fire Department is classified as a SR -25, and that's the scale we use moving forward. We have to have some typeI'm just going to interrupt, this is just so—it's unnerving to be talking to empty chairs here in Hilo, to video feed, is to my side; so if I seem uncomfortable, I truly am. But moving forward, there has to be some basis, when we're setting salaries for our Executive Management personnel. What we do, is we incorporate the structure that is established through the Bargaining Unit or the SR (Salary Rating) scale. So a Captain is classified as a SR -25; and what happens is as you go down a step, there's a four percent difference between a SR -24 and a SR -25; and as you go up a step, there's a four percent difference, a higher increase in pay between a SR -25 and a SR -26. What the County has historically done, as well as the other jurisdictions, is they use that SR scale moving forward. So in this particular situation, a Battalion Chief is classified as an EM -3, which is similar or comparable to a SR -26. So from a Captain (SR -25) to a Battalion Chief (SR -26), there's a four percent difference. And moving up the ladder, you look at an Assistant Chief, which is an EM -5, which would be equivalent to a SR -28. So it's a two-step increase from the Battalion Chiefs, who are at 26. I'm sure I explained that and now you guys understand it clear as mud moving forward. But I'd be happy to answer any questions, to hopefully clarify the situation. MR. CHUNG: Well, Bill, then my question is this, is it possible for a Fire Captain to make more than a Battalion Chief? MR. BRILHANTE: You know, that's somewhat a loaded question. The reason why I kind of addressed it that way is because when we compare a Captain and compare a Battalion Chief, we're looking at, you know, there's Captains who have different steps. So a Fire Captain who's been in a position for maybe three or four years may be at a lower longevity step than a Fire Captain who has been the position for 18, 19 years. So if we're looking at just the base pay of the Captain's position in comparison to the base pay of a Battalion Chiefs position, the Captain's position starts off at a lower salary rate and the Battalion Chiefs position would be a four percent higher starting rate. Getting back to your question, there's some variances as to what Captains make, based on their seniority and longevity. So the answer to that question is, can be yes in some instances; and if you look at just the base starting pay, the answer to that question would be no. Page 10 FC -23 November 14, 2017 MR. CHUNG: Well, would you say this then, does the current system provide an incentive or a disincentive for a Fire Captains or others to aspire to the position of a Battalion Chief? MR. BRILHANTE: Council Member Chung, the only thing I can really make a comparison of and kind of base my opinion on, in response to your question is we look at the recruitment and we look at how competitive and how, I guess, the term I'm looking for is, how interested the potential candidates were in the recruitment? So when we looked at that, is we establish the—we recently had a recruitment maybe about two months ago, and for the Battalion Chief we had two vacant Battalion Chief positions that we were recruiting for, and we only were able to qualify two candidates. There were only interest from two candidates, you know, Captains for that position. So when I reflect upon that taking place, then I think my response to your question would be, probably there is some disinterest by the Captains to seek the promotion of a Battalion Chief at this time. MR. CHUNG: I'm trying to be really careful in asking you these questions because I certainly understand your situation. You have to be totally objective when you assess this arrangement. Because I understand back in 2014, when the administration was againstI don't know what term of art is—but reallocating or reclassifying that position, there was some kind of study done. I think all of these HR positions are supposed to be assessed on basis of fairness, I would think. I just don't look at it as being very fair. When you have just a small increase in the salary which, from all accounts, when I talk to Fire personnel, these Fire Captains are saying they've got to get their heads examined if they're going to apply for the Battalion Chief. You don't have to comment on that, but I know you're kind of synthesizing all of this and probably agreeing with what I'm saying. But just given the amount of responsibilities that a Battalion Chief has, vis-a-vis a Fire Captain, I just wanted to know this, and this is my last question, are you guys looking at having these salaries increased for the Battalion Chiefs, which would also necessitate a corresponding increase to the Assistant Chiefs' salaries, I would assume. But are you guys looking at this? MR. BRILHANTE: Recently there was a meeting that I attended. It was between the—at that meeting was the Fire Chief, myself, and the Mayor. There was some discussion specifically related to this issue. There was a decision made that we would go forward and conduct additional investigation to kind of ascertain exactly what was going on. I believe information was elicited from our Finance Director as well, Ms. Sako. At this time, it's my understanding that the administration, the Fire Department and along with the Finance Department, is supportive of the premise that we're going to further investigate the situation. Page 11 FC -23 November 14, 2017 The basis that I think everybody agreed to, you know, the rationale and the justification for moving forward was the point you brought on, specifically is that we want to ensure that there's fairness and equality with the level of work and the expectations and the responsibilities for each of the positions within the County of Hawaii. But that being the case, there has to be some quantifiable evidence to support why we're going increase an employee's pay, and that's the process moving forward. My understanding is that the Fire Chief is in the process of preparing a repricing request that would be submitted to HR. Upon receipt by HR of that reprice and request, we will then conduct another—we'll requisition another study by our Classification and Pay Division, and to make a determination as to what the most appropriate price level salary should be for those positions. They're going to investigate all the responsibilities, all the areas that these Battalion Chiefs are responsible for. But what we also do is we also will take a look at other jurisdictions' comparative pay, for like County of Maui, City and County of Honolulu and the like, and we'll make a determination. You referenced the 2014 study. I had a chance—although I wasn't in HR at the time, I didn't play any role in that, I did have an opportunity to review a confidential report, you know, which we always hold confidential in our department. There were some concerns. There were areas that I thought maybe wasn't sufficiently addressed that maybe could be better addressed moving forward. But at the end of the day, we want to make sure that there is sufficient evidence to support a determination that is specific to determining an employee's pay and what type of compensation level they should be at. And again, the premises to ensure equality and fairness for everybody, you know, not just one specific employee sector but everybody within the County to ensure that fairness is across the board. MR. CHUNG: And I appreciate that. So you guys are actually looking into this issue. There is some movement in that regard. I know you can't guarantee anything but at least you guys are looking into it, right? MR. BRILHANTE: That's correct. I believe there's concerted effort from the administration moving forward, to take a second look and to kind of give additional eyes, put additional eyes on this issue, and just fully consider all the issues that are raised by the Fire Department administration, by the current Battalion Chiefs, by future Captains, who may aspire to those positions, moving forward. MR. CHUNG: Right. Okay. Page 12 FC -23 November 14, 2017 MR. BRILHANTE: And of course there's always the rationale behind, you know, the back of everybody's mind, that we have to ensure financial stability moving forward. So that's always a consideration, as well. MR. CHUNG: Right. There is a larger picture here, especially when we're dealing with public safety departments. I don't know exactly how much the Chief of Police is making or the Fire Chief, but I would suspect that there are persons within the department who are making more than those respective Chiefs. It could be because of overtime. I've always felt that all of our Department Heads should be entitled to overtime with some checks and balances. But having said, I really appreciate your time and everyone's indulgence here. did say it was going to be short, but I forgot that Bill was on the other side over there. He has a tendency of talking a little longer. But anyway, thank you, Bill. I really appreciate the information. MR. BRILHANTE: You're welcome. Thank you very much. CHR. DAVID: Mahalo, Mr. Chung. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Mr. Brilhante, we are looking at empty chairs also here, so we are a little nervous ourselves. I do have a question. Maybe if you could slowly explain the process for the understanding of the positions? What we're looking at is the EM -3 position and its relationship to an SR position, compounded by a Bargaining Unit situation with the Fire Fighter's contract. Then EM -5 position, which is a relevant EO position, which is Excluded Management, and I believe covered by a different Bargaining Unit. Could you slowly walk us through that, please? MR. BRILHANTE: Okay. Thank you, Councilwoman Lee Loy. Again, William Brilhante. This was a concept that took me awhile to grasp as well as when I moved into the HR arena. But when we look at management positions, our EMs are not covered by—well, to a certain extent, they're not directly covered by a Bargaining Unit. Whereas, with the Fire Department, HFFA, they cover all the lower level rank and file, on Fire Fighters. From a Fire Fighter to a Fire Rescue Specialist, to a Fire Equipment Operator, and then to the level of a Captain, those positions come under—and, you know, you have your Fire Inspectors as well, those positions come under the classification or the auspice of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. They're Union members, specifically. Page 13 FC -23 November 14, 2017 Now when we move up the ladder to the Battalion Chiefs and the Assistant Chiefs, those positions are, you know, as I alluded to earlier, they're classified as Excluded Management, so they're management positions. And I think there's justification and rationale to keep the two separate; because what you want to do is—you don't want to have a situation where when you're represented by a Bargaining Unit, there's some disadvantage to having your managers represented by the same personnel or same entity that's representing the subordinates. So, I think, just to keep that process clean, they created this Excluded Management classification of employees. That being the case, the State as well as all the other jurisdictions have cumulatively compiled salaries. As you know for a Fire Department, an SR -25 in Hilo makes the same as a SR -25 in City and County of Honolulu, and conversely as a SR -25 Captain in County of Maui, as well. So there's a salary structure that is applicable to each of the positions statewide. So as they were addressing the EM salary structure, the Excluded Management structure, they wanted to kind of create a similar type situation. So what they did was, they needed a basis in order to establish the EM salary at. So collectively, all the jurisdictions, created a salary structure for the EMs that would be based on the Collective Bargaining salary structure, the SR structure, and they would assign them to the comparative level for the EMs. So say like a EM -3 is compared or is a comparative level currently as a SR -26; a EM -5 is in comparison to a SR -28. So, that was the basis and the rationale behind the salary structure for the EMs. I hope that answered the question. MS. LEE LOY: It helps me. Everybody's got to pick a lane in all of this. It seems like some of it is we're using an apple cart to address oranges, so I can understand some of the confusion in the salaries. Like Mr. Chung alluded to, that if you put in a lot of time and experience at a specific SR level after your step and grade, you might be at step J, K, L and then have to move into a SR -26 level but start at Step -A. That's actually less than where you left because you were at a different grade. I wanted to circle back on a question Mr. Chung asked, about advertising for the two BC (Battalion Chief) positions. Could you share that story again? You mentioned they opened it up for recruitment but it wasn't filled. MR. BRILHANTE: Well, actually the position—the two BC positions were recruited and there were only two applicants who submitted their application for consideration for the position. My understanding, and Chief Rosario who's present today could probably provide a better accurate answer, but my understanding was that only one of the applicants met the—accepted the position. So currently there's a vacant Battalion Chief position right now. Page 14 FC -23 November 14, 2017 That's kind of the concern that we had, you know, when we had that meeting with the administration, is that—as we move forward, the County as a whole always wants to ensure that, you know, the best and brightest. I know that term is overused. It's such an important concept; moving forward, is that we want the best and brightest individuals to be promoted. Because as we get older and as our families mature, we want to ensure that the stability of the County is there, and that's based on having the best and brightest individual running the various departments. I'm just going to go back to an opinion that I hold right now is, I think, what's somewhat problematic, and maybe a specific area that we have definitely have to take closer look at, is the fact that a Fire Captain is classified as a SR -25 and a Battalion Chief is classified as a SR -26. Now, that's only a four percent difference. When you look at the structure of the Fire Department, you look at the classification of a Fire Fighter. The base one Fire Fighter coming on the line one year after passing recruitment; I believe he's a SR -17. Then that Fire Fighter could possibly get promoted to a Fire Rescue Specialist, who is a SR -19; and that Fire Fighter or Fire Rescue Specialist could get promoted to a Fire Equipment Operator who is a SR -21. And then that Fire Equipment Operator could get a promotion to that of a Captain, which is a SR -25. So as you can see, there's significant steps in between, you know, all along the processes: a Fire Fighter progresses to a Fire Rescue Specialist, a Fire Equipment Operator, and a Captain. Unfortunately, from Captain to Battalion Chief, we don't have that same separation. I think what we have is what I've identified as a compression at that level: when we go from a SR -25, a Captain, at SR -25; to a Battalion Chief, who is an EM -3 who is classified as a SR -26. So I think that's kind of the pinch point in the process, you know, the advancement process. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Brilhante. I agree. I've said this before, County jobs are coveted jobs, but I also want to become an employer of choice, where people choose to come and offer that skillset of being the best and brightest. I'm going to yield at this time. I actually have some other questions, but I'm cautious because it might roll over into some personnel issues. And I don't want to go into an Executive Session. So I'm going to yield at this time. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Mahalo, Ms. Lee Loy. Any other Council Members? Mr. Chung. Page 15 FC -23 November 14, 2017 MR. CHUNG: And, Bill, thank you very much for that last statement that you made because it really hit home. You know, some of my colleagues might be wondering, "Why the heck did Aaron pick this subject to ask for a presentation on?" But really, it's emblematic of a more fundamental problem, I think, in my opinion, and I touched upon it earlier. With the Public Safety departments, Police and Fire in particular, most of the time—you know, I can only think of a few examples, maybe when Vic Vierra came from Honolulu to be the Police Chief—normally people go up the rank, and we'd like to see that, quite frankly. It's good to have outside eyes from time -to -time, but we want our people aspiring to that highest job. Unless we can get them a salary that's commensurate with the responsibilities, it's going to be hard for us to have people applying for those jobs and getting the competition at that level. I just wanted to say that this little presentation today or this job that we're looking at, the Battalion Chiefs, is actually part of a bigger issue. But thank you very much for your time, Bill. I appreciate it. MR. BRILHANTE: You're welcome very much. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Any other Council Members? Ms. O'Hara in Hilo, do you have any questions? MS. O'HARA: No, I don't. Thank you, though. CHR. DAVID: Okay, great. Thank you very much. Mr. Brilhante, thank you very much for being here this morning. On that note, all those in favor of filing Communication 583 please say "aye." Vote on Comm. 583: The motion to close file on Comm. 583 was carried by the Filed following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David – 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, I think we can go to our last item on the agenda, which is Resolution 393-17. Page 16 FC -23 November 14, 2017 ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. (Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.) Res. 393-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR ONE SEWER CLEANING TRUCK Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement at an estimated monthly cost of $7,300. The equipment would be used by the Department of Environmental Management, Wastewater Division, to clean sewer main lines and service laterals as well as remove material from lift station wet wells, treatment plant tanks, and channels. The County will own the equipment at the end of the lease. Reference: Comm. 580 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Vote on Res. 393-17: Ms. Poindexter moved to recommend adoption of Res. 393-17. (Approved) Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Resolution 393 is forward to the Council with a positive recommendation. BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Bills ORDINANCES: for Ordinances. (There were none.) CHR. DAVID: Please, may I have a motion to adjourn? Page 17 FC-23 November 14,2017 ADJOURN- There beingno further business, at 1:07p.m., Ms. Poindexter moved to adjourn J MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David—9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much, Council Members. We are adjourned. Approved: lap, �i A. a ifato fezon Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair (Date) Finance Committee MD/na Page 18