Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-10-12 Salary Commission MinutesREGULAR SESSION Salary Commission Hilo Council Chambers Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street, First Floor, Room 1401 Hilo, Hawaii October 12, 2023 (Thursday) Call to Order (Item 1) The regular meeting of the Salary Commission, County of Hawaii, was called to order at 10:00 a.m. by Chair Steven Pavao, at the Hilo Council Chambers, Hawaii County Building, 25 Aupuni Street, First Floor, Room 1401, Hilo, Hawaii, on Thursday October 12, 2023. Roll Call — Present Mr. Steven Pavao, Chair Mr. Dawood Y. Farahi, Vice -Chair Mr. Jules Dudoit, Member Ms. Donala Kawa`auhau, Member Ms. Teresa T. Nakama, Member (via ZOOM) Ms. Luahiwa Namahoe, Member Mr. Sam Nelson, Member Mr. Dennis Riordan Member Ms. Jamie Martines, Acting Ex -Officio Member Absent and Excused Ms. Judy Greenbaum Mr. Danny B. Patel, Ex -Officio Member Also Present Ms. Dakota "Cody" Frenz, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Office of the Corporation Counsel Ms. Michele Lamkin, HR Program Specialist, Human Resources Department Ms. Glynis Yamada, Secretary -Reporter, Human Resources Department Commission members will participate in-person, via ZOOM, or by teleconference. Members of the public may attend this meeting either in-person at the meeting location or via ZOOM. Salary Commission Call to Order (Item 1) October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Good morning, we'll call the meeting of our Salary Commission to order. Statements from the Public (Item 2) CHR. PAVAO: "Statements from the Public" no one? None. Approval of Minutes (Item 3) September 7, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Then moving on to the approval of the minutes from our last meetingoh, I'm sorry, let's do introductions, starting at the far end here. MR. DUDOIT: Commissioner Dudoit. CHR. PAVAO: If you can state your district, too. MS. FRENZ: No need. CHR. PAVAO: No need the district—okay. MR. DUDOIT: Seven. MR. RIORDAN: Commissioner Riordan. MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau. MR. FARAHL Dawood Farahi. MS. NAMAHOE: Commissioner Namahoe. MR. NELSON: Commissioner Nelson. MS. MARTINES: Jamielyn Martines, I'm on TA to the Deputy Director of Human Resources. MS. FRENZ: Thank you. And, Chair—Deputy Corporation Counsel Cody Frenz, Counsel for the Salary Commission. Also present is our Secretary, Glynis Yamada. Thank you, Chair. CHR. PAVAO: Thank you. And, of course, I introduce myself as Chair Steven Pavao. Page 2 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 Statements from the Public (Item 2) CHR. PAVAO: And we'll move on to the "Statements from the Public" on agenda items. None? MS. FRENZ: No statements, Chair. CHR. PAVAO: Okay, thank you. Approval of Minutes (Item 3) September 7, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Let's move on to the approval of the minutes. MS. FRENZ: Sorry, my apologies, Chair. On ZOOM, Commissioner Nakama. CHR. PAVAO: Oh, yes, I'm sorry. MS. FRENZ: Can you hear us, Ma'am? Commissioner Nakama? We're going to pause one moment—we cannot hear you Commissioner Nakama. I just want to make sure our technology is working correctly. RECESS: The meeting recessed at 10:02 a.m. RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 10:04 a.m. Approval of Minutes (Item 3) September 7, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So we'll move on to the approval of the minutes from the September our last meeting on September 7h, 2023. Any corrections to the minutes? If not, we'll entertain a motion to accept the minutes as circulated. MR. RIORDAN: I move to approve the minutes—Commissioner Riordan. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. And a second? MR. NELSON: This is Nelson, I will second that. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. Any further discussion? If not, we'll take a vote. All those in favor of accepting the minutes, as circulated, signify by saying "aye." Any opposed? Page 3 Salary Commission The voice vote was as follows: October 12, 2023 AYES: Commissioners Dudoit, Farahi, Kawa`auhau, Nakama, Namahoe, Nelson, Riordan, and Chair Pavao – 8. OPPOSED: None. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Commissioner Greenbaum - 1. CHR. PAVAO: Hearing none, the motion is accepted and the minutes are approved. Communication(s) (Item 4) CHR. PAVAO: "Communications" we don't have any communications. New Business (Item 5) Communication No. 23-14: Proposed Findings Of Fact By The 2023 County Of Hawaii Salary Commission, Dated October 12, 2023: Pursuant To Section 13-28 Of The Hawaii County Charter (2022), As Amended, The County Of Hawaii Salary Commission Makes Its Findings In Support Of Its Decision To Adjust The Salaries And Salary Schedule Of Elected And Appointed Officials Of The County Of Hawaii, To Be Effective January 1, 2024. (A Table Of The Proposed Salary Increases Are Set Forth And Attached As Exhibit "A") CHR. PAVAO: "New Business" for discussion—Communication 23-14 is the Proposed Findings of Fact of the 2023 County of Hawaii Salary Commission, dated October 12, 2023 which we all have copies of. Discussion? This also includes the Exhibit A, the table of proposed salary increases, set forth and attached. Any discussion? It should be the email that was attached and circulated to all of us—from Commissioner Farahi to Glynis (SEE ATT. A, COMM. NO. 23-14.01). Any discussion? If not, then we just—do we need to vote and accept the communication or just move on then? Okay. Seeing no discussion, I move on to Communication 23-13.01 MR. NELSON: I think we need to get—this is NelsonI think we're going to need to, kind of, walk through this—the Finding of Facts—which I think was attached to Commissioner Farahi's message. I think we got to go through that. Yeah, it was a markup. I think that's what we need to go through. I mean, he provided a markup. It was some further markups. I've got a couple of suggested changes. I don't know if anybody else has some changes but I think that's what we need to do. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. This is the one that we're looking at now is this Findings of Facts, by the Salary Commission, Dated October 12th, 2023. So, we can go through that and see if the corrections that have been made is acceptable or if we need to make further corrections. Page 4 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. NELSON: So, just to the group, I do think—I got a couple of small changes to this. But I do have one big one. I guess that I would like to bring to the table—and I think that relates to the 5% increase after the initial increase. Okay. I would, kind of, like, to revisit that and see if we—if the group would like to look again and bringing that down to 3% or similar to what the union the bargaining unit employees are going to get. `Cause I think what Cody sent out to us was, kind of, just a warning—kind of the next meetings are going to be the public will come in, they're going to look at this. It's going to get noticed. People are going to come in and say, "Oh, okay, why are you doing—what is your rationale for making these increases?" Okay? So, I think for the 22% increase, we've got a cost of living adjustment—there's a rationale for that. We've, kind of, talked through that. The 5% is, sort of, a arbitrary number, I think. That's my opinion on it. And I do think giving something more than what all the other staff is to the management employees—it's going to send a message. I mean, it's going to be, "Why are we giving the management employees more than the regular employees?" Right? I mean, I think it's going to—I don't think it's going to send a right message. So, I would recommend that we look at scaling back the next years' increase to 3%. MS. NAMAHOE: Commissioner NamahoeI'd like to respond. Two things. I would like us to—my suggestion is uniform language for the January increase—we do not use the words "increase" we use "inflationary adjustment" as that is the essence of what it is. When it comes to the July pay increase, we call that a "pay increase" but that—so that in our mind the inflationary adjustment speaks to the January 2023 numbers that we worked out as a 22.44%. For July, we look at that that—and we call that the "pay increase." I also believe that, to your point about the ability to scale that back—my suggestion on your suggestionI'd like to amend your suggestion that we keep that in the back of our mind after the November 16th public hearings because we will be meeting again to temper our adjustments and increases accordingly. So, in standard negotiation practices, you come with A, they come with C, we find B. MR. NELSON: Okay. But I don't think we're negotiating with the public is the thing. It's not—it's more of input, getting their suggestion. I mean, I think they're looking at us—we say in a message that we've done the analysis, this is our best assessment, or what do you think it ought to be. Okay. So, I don't think we should be making a little cushion to say, "Oh, okay, we're going to give up a little bit after that." I don't see our role as negotiators. I see our role as setting the rates, being Page 5 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 reasonable to both the employees and the taxpayers, as opposed to negotiating. This is not a win-win—we're not I don't think—I don't see this as negotiating partners. MS. NAMAHOE: To respond to that, I used the word "negotiation" as placeholder language for the process that faces us. The public will weigh in and we will meet thereafter. And it would be—it might be unreasonable to assume that our numbers stay firm outside of public engagement. The until I have a better synonym for negotiation that is, in effect, what we're doing. And that's the sobriety of the language that I've chosen to use. So, thank you. But, again, we areso, again, to be clear and just to reiterateI'm suggesting that we speak, going forward, regarding the January pay movements that we are looking to implement, that we call those "inflationary adjustments." For the figures that we come up with for July 2024, we call that their "pay increase" for clarity and also to set expectations for everyone who engages with us—not only ourselves, here, on this Commission, but as the public comes in. And, again, we have November 16th to participate in democracy and watch people come in and weigh in on the behavior—on the choices that we are tasked with making and going forward. I think I've made myself clear. Thank you. CHR. PAVAO: Thank you. Any more discussion? MS. FRENZ: This is Deputy Corporation Counsel, Cody Frenz. Let me jump in and just remind everyone on expectations for legal requirements for this Commission to adopt any sort of increase or decrease as required by law, under the County Charter. So, 30 days prior to the approval of any sort of salary adjustment, we shall—and I this is part of my communication with you all yesterday publish at least once in at least two daily newspapers of general circulation in the County, a detailed account of its proposal or proposals including specific increases or decreases in both actual dollar amount and percentages. The excel spreadsheet that has been provided to all of you includes to use the correct terminology as discussed this morning both the inflationary adjustments to—from 2018 to 2023 to current—which should be, theoretically, the January 2024 change in base compensation and the July pay increases—both need to be properly articulated when we do those newspaper publications. So, to the point of discussion, reconsideration, negotiation that entire conversation with Commissioners Nelson and Namahoe this Commission, as I indicated at our prior hearing, really needs to be prepared to know what it personally wants to do. If you were—and it's fine if you do—let me just make clear. It's fine if you hear public testimony and you, as a body, decide we don't want to do the 5%. Let's say you were to continue on that path today and we publish with those rates -22.44% and the 5% in July. Page 6 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 If you chose to decrease that number, we would need to publish the new numbers, yet again. So, when we think about time and taxpayer dollars—unnecessary publications are also something that we should keep in mind because it is an expensive requirement to run that information in the newspaper in two different publications. So I just want to be cognizant of taxpayers' dollars in the same sense, right—and once you decide what you want to do be secure, be solid, be grounded in what you're doing and why. And either you hold firm or you don't. If you do not, that's fine. We would need to re -publish and provide notice, yet again—exactly what you are now reconsidering doing. So, I just wanted to put that out there that it would require—change would require re -publication. CHR. PAVAO: Thank you. I'd like to add my own personal comments. I think, personally, I would continue to support the 5% for a variety of reasons. I know that the HGEA Bargaining Unit 13 just recently received a 4% raise on July 1st of this fiscal year. And they will get a 3.59% raise on July 1st 2024. And HGEA Bargaining Unit 13, which probably is the bargaining unit that closely relates to most of the administrative staff, appointed staff, and elected staff as far as salary schedules—also, get step movements to most people. I mean, all the members in Bargaining Unit 13 get a step movement based on the years of seniority. Initially two years and then after that every three years, which is an equivalent of another 4% raise when you get a step movement. So, I think that 5% is actually reasonable given the reality of the raises that HGEA has negotiated and if we take in mind the step movements as well. Because the idea is, to me, is parity. We want to make sure that as much as possible that directors and deputy directors are being paid at the right level and that subordinates are not being paid more than their supervisors. Any further discussion? MS. FRENZ: So, I'm thinking, Chair, we could—we don't have a motion on the table right now, right to adjust the 5% as suggested by Commissioner Nelson. So, what we do still have in the agenda item that we are, in fact, on—is the "New Business" with Vice -Chair Farahi's very helpful commentary on the proposed findings of fact that I drafted. So, if we want to continue down the path of reviewing those proposed findings, any and all suggestions by this body would be appreciated, so we can try to fine-tune that—and should there be a motion from Commissioner Nelson or anyone else to make specific adjustments in that regard, we can consider that at the time. But, right now, I believe we're still on the "New Business" agenda itemso I want to make sure we track where we are now. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, yeah, probably the best thing to do is to review it from line -by-line and we can always come back to that, if there's—someone wants to make a motion to change any part of the proposed salary schedule. So, we're looking at I guess, we can start with Item number 1. Does anybody have any issues there? I personally see that the language that was changed is appropriate and much better than the original language. Anybody have any issues with the first item? Page 7 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. NAMAHOE: Just a request. This is Namahoeif we could—Chair, if you would be so kind to read out the line items so that we're all—for the auditory learners? CHR. PAVAO: You want me to read the entire paragraph? MS. NAMAHOE: Yes, please. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. MS. NAMAHOE: Thank you. CHR. PAVAO: So, "The County of Hawaii Salary Commission has the authority to review and set compensation for all county executive positions, elected positions, and appointed positions of directors and deputy directors—collectively hereinafter "Covered Positions"—so that the total compensation and benefits have an equitable, reasonable relationship to compensation in the public and private sectors." Anybody have an issue with any of that language? No? Okay. If not, we'll move on to Number 2. "The County of Hawaii Salary Commission has not reviewed and adjusted the compensation for any of the Covered Positions since March 1st, 2018. The base compensation for these positions have remained unchanged and frozen at the same 2018 base salary. Individuals occupying these positions have not received either a cost of living adjustment or any increase in their pay for five consecutive years. Meanwhile employees covered by the collective bargaining process have received contractually agreed upon adjustments and raises in their compensation during the period from 2108 to 2023. This situation has created unfairness and inequity in the compensation for the Covered Positions. A sample table from the Department of Human Resources is attached to illustrate this fact." Any questions? MR. NELSON: So, I mean, I think this language looks good. I don't know, though, what the table isI would suggest to deleting the last sentence just deleting the table. `Cause I don't know if we have a table. I mean, I think Commissioner Farahi was recommending we have one but I don't know that we have one. So, I would recommend just leaving it, the statement "as is"—it's created inequity and unfairness, and just—'cause if we don't have the table, we shouldn't mention that. CHR. PAVAO: Delete that last sentence. MR. RIORDAN: I agree with that we should delete that last line that we don't need that table. It's just going to confuse the public. CHR. PAVAO: Do we have consensus? Everyone agrees? Page 8 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. NAMAHOE: All in favor, aye? CHR. PAVAO: Well, if we don't have an official motion but it seems like we have consensus that we'll delete that last sentence. Okay. Number 3—in accord—well, no changes in Number 3. So, we can go on to Number 4. "To facilitate and assist in the review of the compensation for Covered PositionsI don't know if you want me to read the entire thing or just the changes. So, we're changing "salaries" to "compensation for Covered Positions." And then, further on—"The County of Hawaii Salary Commission has afforded the Mayor of the County of Hawaii and..." all—again, deleting "Covered Officials" to "Covered Positions"—substituting—"...to submit input or recommendations for the Salary Commission to consider." And then, further on, there's a typo. change from an "an" to an "and." Okay. And next page—again, changing "Covered Officials" to "Covered Positions"—and then, also changing, again further on the County of Hawaii salaries of the "Covered Positions," again instead of "Covered Officials." Any problems with that paragraph? Hearing none, we'll accept that. Number 5, there's no corrections Number 6, "The County of Hawaii Salary Commission has not awarded any adjustment for the Covered Positions"—maybe it should say, "any salary adjustment"it just says "any adjustment"—kind of ambiguous there. Or you think that "annual salaries" in that statement— Number tatementNumber 6 it says, "The Salary Commission has not awarded any adjustment for the Covered Positions." Should it say something like, any "salary" adjustment for the Covered Positions? MS. NAMAHOE: Agreed. MS. FRENZ: So, just to clarify this is Cody. I know earlier there was—Commissioner Namahoe was recommending "inflationary" adjustment. So, I think it's critical that when we use our terminology we're consistent throughout. So, does this body want "inflationary adjustment""salary adjustment" because I want to make sure our excel spreadsheet as well as our proposed findings are consistent throughout. CHR. PAVAO: Personally, "inflationary adjustment" is fine with me at this time. Yeah. This time—so it's consistent. It makes sense. Thank you. Everybody okay with that? MS. NAMAHOE: I'm fine. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, where am I now? "...for the Covered Positions since January of 2018 and March" of—wait—January 1st, '18, and March 1st, 2018. Is that correct? Page 9 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. FRENZ: So, just to clarify this is Cody, again. In drafting this, it was pointed out to me by Acting Director Patel, that some positions received their increases in January and some received them in March. Which is why rather than spelling out who got a raise in January versus March, I just generalized it by indicating that it was inconsistent and we have two different dates when raises took effect. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. Thank you for the clarification. So, and then, again, making the change to the "Covered" Position not "Official." And then, "The County of Hawaii Salary Commission has not met to evaluate the salaries of the Covered Positions since 2019." Okay. Everybody okay with that language in that paragraph 6? And then, we'll move on to Number 7. So, Number 7, in the last sentence—again, we're just changing "Covered Officials" to Covered Positions" to be consistent. Anybody have a problem with that? No? We'll move on to Number 8. Same thing here. We're changing, again, `Covered Officials" to "Covered Positions"again, being consistent. And then, in Number 9, same thing—"Covered Officials" changed to "Covered Positions." And then, the last couple sentences in Number 9. Again, changing "Covered Officials" to "Covered Positions"—compensation consider "...salaries since 2018, an unfair reduction of income for the individuals occupying these positions. This adjustment is granted to bring the base compensation from the 2018 level to a 2023 level. It is not—does not entail any retroactive pay individual serving in a Covered Position." Everybody okay with that language? Okay, we'll go on to Number 10. Again, let's see, I guess I might as read all of these so it makes sense. So, "To keep pace with the CPI inflation rates, pay increases granted to Bargaining Unit 13 and to avoid further inversion scenarios where civil servants are paid more than their managers, the County of Hawaii Salary Commission concludes that an inflation adjustment of 22.44% in base salary for the Covered Positions, effective January 1st, 2024 or on the first day of the month following the County of Hawaii Salary Commission's final approval. Therefore, the County of Hawaii Salary Commission only approves a 5% adjusted increase after the base compensation is set to a 2023 level. This is the only increase granted to account for the cost of living adjustments for fiscal year 24-25, effective July 1st, 2024. It shall be implemented and is consistent with the principles of adequate compensation for the work performed and the preservation of reasonable relationship to the compensation in the public and private sectors, as the County of Hawaii Salary Commission is directed to do by Section 13-28 of the"Chapter table"... of the Charter. A table of the recommended salary increases are set forth in the section are attached hereto as Exhibit A." Any questions? Everybody okay with that language? Page 10 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. NELSON: (Inaudible) the 5% (inaudible)—like a broken record here, but if you look at the previous in Chapter 7, it talks about the other bargaining unitsBU11 got 17%17 and -a - quarter; BU12 got 21.25; BU13 got 16%. So, with the 22.45 we're already giving the managers more than bargaining unit people. Okay. CHR. PAVAO: Well, the thing about the bargaining units is you have to realize it's compounded, right. So, if they got 4% in 2018 that raises their base salary. The following year they got 4% to that new base salary. So to say 16%, it's just adding all the adjustments is not an accurate depiction, actually—it's much higher when you do all the compounding. MR. FARAHL Your 4%, you change the base. And then, on that base you get another 4%. So, in cumulative terms yeah. MR. NELSON: Well, I understand. But if BU13 was the closest analog, I think that's 16%. We're offering for the management employees 22%, plus an additional 5%. We're giving them moreI mean, yeah, the management employees have lost the compounding over the five years, it's true. But I don't know that—I'm just trying to be—they do have to negotiate with the bargaining unit employees. And so, if we give—if you give the management employees 5% well, then, that's the set point, whereas now they're supposed to get 3%. And I hear what you're saying about the step points and all that. I don't know how that works. I'm not sure how to factor that all in. Clearly, the management employee there's no steps. CHR. PAVAO: But if you go from 2018 to 2023, every single member of Bargaining Unit 13 got at least one step movement, which is another 4%. Many of them got two step movements in that timeframe, which is another 8%. I only know that because I was a union steward for a long time and I was a member of Bargaining Unit 13 for many years. MS. NAMAHOE: So—Commissioner Namahoe. I just want to, kind of, distill this since we're talking the difference between linear math and compounded math, which when you have a base that changes. I am now looking to challenge the idea of the difference between 3% versus 5% for July 2024. I'm going to stop right here just to make this a placeholder for the future conversation because by the inflationary adjustment correction, for effective JulyJanuary, excuse me, 2024—okay. I'll wait till the appropriate time. I'm just leaving this here for the future discussion we're going to have. Thank you. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau. Is it possible to add somewhere in the language about the 5%. `Cause I think it's important that we know that the managers don't have the opportunity for promotion and also for overtime. So, that's the reason that we're putting it at that amount because if that's not in your forefront of your mind you might think like, "Oh, Page 11 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 that's not fair" but they don't have the opportunity any other way to have any other increase `cause they don't. That might be something that we'd want to consider adding in somewhere. MR. FARAHL That's a good point. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, thank you. MR. RIORDAN: Also, if we're going line -by-line, now's the time to decide whether it's going to be 3 or 5%. It isn't something in the future `cause MR. NELSON: Yeah—and now's the time, right—and you're right. And I think it's 3%, but I think if everybody else thinks it's 5 -well, so be it. CHR. PAVAO: So, if we're going to change, we'd have to have a motion and vote on it I would think at this point. Anybody want to make a motion? MR. NELSON: So, I'll make a motion to change that to 3%. CHR. PAVAO: Is there a second? MR. RIORDAN: This is Commissioner Riordan, I'll second that. CHR. PAVAO: Any further discussion? If not, we'll take a vote of changing the MS. FRENZ: No discussion? CHR. PAVAO: No discussion? MR. RIORDAN: I agree that—Commissioner Riordan here that we are setting something for the unions to come to the bargaining table with and say, "This is what you gave management and this is what we want, and we didn't get it last time. And so, we want it this time." Because the step increases, I agree with you, that that isn't UPW doesn't have step increases and a lot of people in HGEA switched jobs—and so, they lose those step increases because they move to a different bargaining unit. So, I think we are setting a bad example making it a 5% because we could split it at 4% which is, kind of, what the other unions and stuff are getting but I think 5% is a step too high. MS. NAMAHOE: Commissioner Namahoe. I think that this disincentivizes—even though it's a 2% differential to clarify, again, with Commissioner Kawa`auhau just said they get no overtime, they get no step, there're so many ways that whatever we're establishing is going to remain for quite a period of time going forward, where nobody comes to the table on their behalf. Page 12 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 And, again, to the discussion that Chair had just mentioned earlier, the differenceagain, between linear math versus compounding math—the payment—the paycheck that they've had from as late as March 2018 until now, has been what they've been living on. They've had no corrections and cushions and no annual bonuses. They don't see what we've seen in the private sector, I would like to hold at 5. So, I appreciate there's a motion on the floor. I, personally, look forward to the vote. CHR. PAVAO: Thank you. Any further discussion? MR. FARAHL The actual inflation rate for 2023 is about 4.8%. It was about 8% in the first quarter, six -and -a -half and so on. So the accumulative one that they're talking about, which is a very good number for the U.S. is about 4.8%. The otherI mean, if Cody had not spoken about the cost, I would have gone with 5 and then adjusted it to 3 after the noise. So, it would have been the issue of the public came in and get these nickel heads to get it down to 4 or even to 3. And if you don't give that opportunity for the noise makers to win, then the issue becomes 22 plus 5 -this doesn't give them that 5% raise. (Inaudible) 28% raise. And since I'm at that, with the permission of the Chair, it is more important than anything else that we understand and say the same thing. Positions are compensated. People that are in that position are given salaries and benefits. So, we are adjusting the position. These people are not getting any arrears for five years, right? And there's a loss of income of roughly 22 to 23% for these people. I'm saying it's their fault because they need to set up a system that works. This one doesn't work. When you look to the police commissioner the gentleman that spoke on behalf of the police you will be behind the eighth ball the minute you're done with this. It's just—whether some get a step, some get longevity, some get increments, or not—that cumulative effect of difference between the two groups would never change. Unless you create a system, which I did, and the union screamed and if you go on the internet probably Cody did they called me a whole bunch of names. But after the second year, the system stabilized itself. The unions do not—they think that the management is all fake. So, she's getting too much money and they're not doing anything. But in reality that's not true. There are some members of the collective bargaining agents that are making more money than the managers. When I was temporarily a county manager in Union Township, `cause the person that was in there passed away. I was there for six months I think the corrections officers? of 8 of them were making more money than the county manager, which was making 200 and somewhat thousand dollars. Page 13 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 The reason that was the case is that the New Jersey system, the pension is based on the 55 in number of years, divided in the last three years of highest salaries. So, if you're making $100,000 and you're saying you're retiring from the correction department because you're the seniority guy you get pretty much every piece of overtime that the (inaudible) created. So, during those three years your salary goes through the roof and then the State of New Jersey is stuck with it, which, of course, was bankrupt with the pension system. All of this is based on the simplistic motto of they got 5%, they got 30%, we got (inaudible). And unless you change the system that the argument is very straightforward, this is not going to change. And I don't think we have the time and the energy to change this system. CHR. PAVAO: Unfortunately, we don't have the power to change the system. The Charter Commission would have to change the Charter— MR. FARAHL I think that they tried it the same thing was true in Union. They had a charter, we went to the public during the election and the (inaudible) holders—and the public said change it. If there was a determination, they can change. I want to say two other things, Mr. Chairman, and that relates to you there's only one person that should speak for the Commission and that's you. Nobody else nothing. Because the media will pick up that portion of dissidence within seconds. And when you're speaking, you need to speak very clearly that we are not giving a raise from 2018 to 2023. We're adjusting the compensation for the position. There's they're not getting any arrears, they're not getting any loss of income that the other units got. It's an adjustment to make that 2018 dollars equivalent to 2023 dollars period. In reality, this is true. The value of the dollars that they get today, even with the 22.44%, will be almost identical to what they got in 2018. That's one point. The other point is the 5% is actually the only increase because now you have created the base you're giving the increase. You could justify that money in different ways—and with Cody's permission, I would add some language at the appropriate place to make a better justification of the 5%. Or you could politically become aware and go with the 5 and listen to the noise and then vote an adjustment to 3so, this way, they scare the hell out of you you went to 3. So, the headline becomes that the public outcry made the Salary Commission reduce the manager salaries from—of increase of 5 to 3%. Now, the bureaucracy and the Sunshine Law thing that's not my department—it's Cody's department of help you do it. That is politically better `cause you need to think in terms of what is it that they will grab. What is the media and some butterflies probablyI had them. There was one guy that went through every public meeting of a county and municipality and (inaudible) and everything in between. They come and they do that. The second one is the media. The media by definition doesn't say anything positive, `cause there's no advantage to that. But if they find something negative, they'll grab that. And if we're Page 14 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 cautious—and especially you, Mr. Chairman you could make that a little better and a little softer. MS. NAMAHOE: Mr. Farahi, not to interrupt you MR. FARAHL Sure. MS. NAMAHOE: It's Commissioner Namahoe. You said something that I think is very important and I think in the last meeting there was some discussion on it. But you started this conversation or you started to speak your thoughts with this point, which is currently inflation is set at about 4.8%. MR. FARAHL Correct. MS. NAMAHOE: When—at the beginning of 2023 it started at 8%. Those are numbers that I had to take out with businesses. And although the federal government is starting to clamp on that, we're seeing reduction in inflation. The idea of whether it's 3%, whether it's 5% that if, at least, is set to the fair inflation value as close as possible to July 2024. And I understand that that means some guess-timation going forward—those are going to be the common denominators of all conversation for the bargaining units as well. So, the reality should be that the number that we're holding—and, again, we're going to have discussion on November 16, we're going to come back and meet, we will be facing the likelihood of spending the taxpayers monies to refile, if we do move it from—if this motion goes forward with 3—if the motion doesn't carry it remains 5—or if we're adjusting it going forward. My—I'd like to end to say that the official request be as close as possible to what inflation is expected to be in 2024. At least to give the leadership the fair shot that when they are making the decision to stay on the job or take the job to work for the County that they're doing it knowing that their paycheck is reasonable by what we're offering. Thank you. MR. FARAHL Iif, with your permission, I want to continue that thing, so we're not—I've been through this 17 years in many, many different bargaining units. They grab the number, they grab the highest number. They ignore all of the other perks associated with that like the step, longevity. So, you give them 5% (inaudible). Number 2, as I stated before, you need to politically give them a win. The win would have been unnecessary if this Commission had met every year and made the adjustment to the salaries of those people. It is their fault, our fault, anybody's fault. It's just stupid, for lack of a better word—stupid to say, to do nothing for five years. And all of a sudden you're looking at this number. And I will say to myself, "If you did that to me, I will be pissed that you made the adjustment but you're not giving me anything from 2018 to 2023." But the thing is, they did it wrong. They did it wrong. And I think in the text there is a recommendation strongly from our side that before the budget starts, the Commission should meet and set the salary and (inaudible). Page 15 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 This is the 5 year that this causing the problem. It's not the 3 to 5%. And I hope that, Mr. Chairman, no matter what they ask, the answer is, "There is no increase. It's an adjustment to the position equivalent to the inflation rate during that 5 -year period." The only increases, whether it's 3 or 5. Politically, if you can make an adjustment and—it really doesn't matter. The win doesn't matter. You make it 5 and they give their speeches. You make it 4.8, it has the same effect as you're making it 3. It has the same effect as you make it a 4 because they said, "Yeah, we told them." So, my hope is that—and if you want me, I could write an outline for you—when the time comes in. So, no matter what question they ask, your answer is the one that you want to give. You never want to answer their questions. You want to give the answer you want to give. I think we have done a reasonable job and a pretty good job, but Commissioner Nelson's point is well -taken. CHR. PAVAO: So, at this point, we have a motion on the floor, so and it's more discretion MR. RIORDAN: This is Commissioner Riordan. Social security increase for next year is 3.2%—and so, that's what all the retirees on the island that's what their pay increase for next year's going to be. And so, I think that's another point of the 3% increase. CHR. PAVAO: I think the basis for the 5% was, again, to try to not end up with the situation with Commissioner Farahi was just talking about and that is trying to maintain that parity, `cause if we don't have that parity, we're back to the same situation where subordinates are making more than their supervisors. So, I think that was the main reason we did want to maintain that kind of a parity with salaries. So, we have a motion, we can go ahead and take a vote. CHR. PAVAO: Commissioner Nakama, do you have a comment or any input? MS. NAKAMA: No. CHR. PAVAO: Okay, thank you. Otherwise, we'll go ahead and vote. All those in favor of the motion, which is to change the July 1st yeah, we can poll, we'll go down the line of the Commission. So, again, the motion as I understand it is to change the July 1st salary adjustment from 5% to 3%. So, we'll start at the end, if you'll signify by saying how you're going to vote. MR. DUDOIT: Nay. Say again? MS. FRENZ: Please state your name first, please. MR. DUDOIT: Oh. Commissioner Dudoit and that's a nay for me. Page 16 Salary Commission MR. RIORDAN: Commissioner Riordan—aye. MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau nay. CHR. PAVAO: Chair Pavaonay. MR. FARAHL Vice-Chair—nay. MS. NAMAHOE: Commissioner Namahoenay. MR. NELSON: Nelson—yes. CHR. PAVAO: Commissioner Nakama? MS. NAKAMA: No. MS. FRENZ: Motion fails. October 12, 2023 MR. NELSON: It's just a problem is if we readjust it after public comment. They're not going to get their raise for (inaudible). MR. FARAHL For lack of a better word these knuckleheads didn't get a raise for five years. CHR. PAVAO: Personally, I think we make a decision the Commission should be firm on its decision. We shouldn't be already thinking about negotiating in public hearings. We should be firm in our decision and have justification in our mind while we're doing it. And I think, personally, myself, I think we are justified in making that decision. MS. NAKAMA: Commissioner Nakamawe have a vote on the floor, we can't take discussion. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, we voted that the motion failed. MS. NAKAMA: Okay. I didn't hear that. CHR. PAVAO: Thank you. So, where was INumber 11. So, anybody have any other questions about the changes in paragraph 11? MS. FRENZ: Just briefly, this is Cody Frenz, Deputy Corporation Counsel. For everyone's consideration to remain consistent with Commissioner Namahoe's suggestion that we use the same terminology of "inflationary adjustment"—if you all could look at number 11, in two Page 17 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 different spots I've added the word "inflationary" in front of the word "adjustment" just to be consistent throughout. MR. FARAHL Inflationary adjustment. MS. FRENZ: Yes, sir. MR. FARAHL And if there need be, I could send in a paragraph of explanation for Number 10 to be inserted in justification MS. FRENZ: We should do that now. CHR. PAVAO: We should do that now, otherwise, we might have to come back to another meeting. You were going to add something now we should add it now in the interest of time. MS. FRENZ: Yes. MR. FARAHL Okay. Then somebody has to write it right now. MS. FRENZ: I am. I'm ready, Vice -Chair. CHR. PAVAO: You can just say it verbally and she'll write it. MR. FARAHL So, when we get older your brain doesn't work as fast as it should. Let's see where we are MS. FRENZ: And also for the record, everyone, we had "inflation" adjustment in paragraph 10I added "ary" to make it "inflationary" adjustment—again, to remain consistent throughout. MR. FARAHL The 5% adjusted increase—is that what it says? The 5% cost of living increase or I would say "cost of living increase" (inaudible) adjusted increase. MS. FRENZ: Is this the middle of the paragraph it begins, "Therefore, the County of Hawaii Salary Commission only approves a 5% adjusted pay increase after the base compensation is set to a 2023 level." MR. FARAHL Correct. MS. FRENZ: And what would you like that to say, Vice -Chair Farahi? MR. FARAHL The cost of living increase—instead of an adjusted increase, the "cost of living increase." CHR. PAVAO: You're saying the 5% is the cost of living increase? Page 18 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. FRENZ: So, it would read, "Thereafter, the County of Hawaii Salary Commission only approves a 5% cost of living increase after the base compensation is set to a 2023 level." MR. FARAHL This is the only increase granted to account for cost of living adjustments for fiscal year 24-25, effective July 1, 2024. MS. FRENZ: Correct. MR. FARAHL The estimated inflation rate for calendar year 2023 is 4.8%. And this adjustment is also consistent with the payments to other county employees who receive step or increments and/or overtime—something like that. My brain is not doing so well. MS. FRENZ: I will read it back. MR. FARAHL Huh? MS. FRENZ: I can read it back, Vice -Chair. MR. FARAHL Okay. MS. FRENZ: All right. So, the recommended language as currently—I'll read the entire MR. FARAHL Just like that—we didn't take out the 4—the 5% out of that—the bur the Bureau of Labor Statistics—you should say that `cause (inaudible)estimates the inflation rate for this calendar year to be 4.8%. CHR. PAVAO: It justifies our decision that's fine. MS. FRENZ: Let me re -read it. "Therefore, the County of Hawaii Salary Commission only approves a 5% cost of living increase after the base compensation is set to a 2023 level. This is the only increase granted to account for cost of living adjustments for fiscal year 2024 to 2025, effective July 1st, 2024. The estimated inflationary rate for calendar year 2023 is 4.8%. This adjustment is also consistent with the payments"—should be "payments made"—"to other county employees who receive step or incremental increases and overtime benefits." CHR. PAVAO: I think that needs to be changed a little bit—so, "across-the-board pay increases, step movements, and overtime." MS. FRENZ: One more time, Chair? CHR. PAVAO: Across-the-board pay increases, step movements, and overtime. MS. FRENZ: So, again, that would read, "The estimated inflationary rate for calendar year 2023 is 4.8%. This adjustment is also consistent with the payments"—should be "payments made" Page 19 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 "this adjustment is also consistent with the wages paid to other county employees who receive across-the-board pay increases, step movement, and overtime." CHR. PAVAO: Maybe instead of "other employees"—"collectively bargaining employees," "collective bargaining members"I don't know what would be the right terminology there "county employees who are covered by collective bargaining"—it just says, "other county employees" but kind of ambiguous I think. MS. FRENZ: Right. Earlier we have said that "employees who's positions are included in or index to"—so we have referred to them in a couple of different ways—"County of Hawaii employees in collective bargaining units" CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, that would be better. That would be consistent. MS. FRENZ: So, again, it would now read, "This adjustment is also consistent with the wages paid to other County of Hawaii employees in collective bargaining units who receive across-the- board pay increases, step movements, and overtime." CHR. PAVAO: That's good. MS. NAMAHOE: Sounds comprehensive. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, we're done with Number 11. MS. FRENZ: Yes, sir. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. We'll go on to Number 12. So, On October 12, 2023, the County of Hawaii I'm sorry. MS. FRENZ: That was 10. CHR. PAVAO: That was 10? Okay. So, Number 11"The County of Hawaii Salary Commission acknowledges that the proposed adjustment and 5% increase may not level the historic disparity but it is, nonetheless, a step to get in the right direction. The County of Hawaii Salary Commission strongly recommends that the Commission meet annually, before the budget cycle begins, and make the appropriate adjustments going forward. It should be reiterated that the Covered Positions compensation have not received an adjustment or a adjustment"—should be "an adjustment"—"have not received an adjustment" MR. FARAHL "any" adjustments— CHR. PAVAO: Oh, "any Page 20 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL The "a" has to go—it should say "any" adjustment. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, okay. Take out the "a" and put "any" "...any adjustments since either January 1st, 2018 or March 1st, 2018 (certain select Covered Positions received salary increases on January 1st, 2018, while others received their salary increases on March 1st, 2018)." MR. FARAHL (Inaudible) after "2018" put a period in. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, that makes sense. MR. FARAHL The other one is a dangling CHR. PAVAO: "Covered Positions" are still hanging out there. Okay. MS. FRENZ: I think, also, additionally, for this Commission's consideration would be to incorporate the consistent language of "inflationary adjustment" and the "5% cost of living increase." CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. MS. FRENZ: To stay consistent. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. MS. FRENZ: So, let me accept those changes and re -read you all the paragraph—if that's okay? CHR. PAVAO: That's fine. MS. FRENZ: It would read Number—provision Number 11 would read as follows, "The County of Hawaii Salary Commission acknowledges that the proposed inflationary adjustment and the 5% cost of living increase may not level the historic disparity but it is, nonetheless, a step in the right direction. The County of Hawaii Salary Commission strongly recommends that this Commission meet annually, before the budget cycle begins, and make the appropriate inflationary adjustments going forward. It should be reiterated that the Covered Positions compensation have not" been—"have not received" MR. FARAHL And we don't want to say "inflationary" there. MS. NAMAHOE: Yeah. MS. FRENZ: "Adjustment." MR. FARAHL Just "adjustment" there. Page 21 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. FRENZ: Okay. So, it would read, "The County of Hawaii Salary Commission strongly recommends that this Commission meet annually, before the budget cycle begins, and make the appropriate adjustments going forward. It should be reiterated that the Covered Positions compensation have not received any inflationary adjustment since either January 1st, 2018 or March 1st, 2018 (certain select Covered Positions received salary increases on January 1st, 2018, while others received their salary increases on March 1st, 2018)..." MS. NAMAHOE: Comment there. MS. FRENZ: Yes? MS. NAMAHOE: Remove also the second "inflationary adjustment" in that last sentence because in these cases, adjustments isspeaks for itself. MS. FRENZ: So, remove "inflationary" MS. NAMAHOE: For that second one because inflationary adjustment is about the pay attached to January going forward in a corrective fashion. This is just stating the facts. They've never gotten any adjustment. MS. FRENZ: Would anyone like me to re -read that sentence with the word "inflationary" removed? MS. NAMAHOE: Yes, please. MS. FRENZ: Yes? Okay. "It should be reiterated that the Covered Positions compensation have not received any adjustment since either January 1st, 2018 or March 1st, 2018." MR. FARAHI: Period. MS. FRENZ: So, you do you want to remove the parenthesis that breaks down the difference between— MR. FARAHI: If that makes the lawyers happy—leave it there. MS. FRENZ: Okay. MR. FARAHL All right, if you guys didn't have parenthesis in these numbers and things like that—you can't sleep at night. MS. FRENZ: I can cut it. It'sultimately, it's this Commission's kuleana to decide exactly how they want and what they want. CHR. PAVAO: (Inaudible.) Page 22 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. FRENZ: Okay. The Chair says leave it. MR. FARAHL Just leave it there. MS. FRENZ: Moving on to Number 12. CHR. PAVAO: Okay, so Number 12—"On October 12, 2023, the County of Hawaii Salary Commission having acknowledged its charge pursuant to the Charter is to review and compensate all county elected officials and appointed directors and deputy directors so that their total salaries and benefits have a relationshipa reasonable relationship to compensation in the public and private sectors. The County of Hawaii Salary Commission approved these Proposed Findings of Fact recommending the base pay adjustment of 2018 to 2023 level and grants a 5%"—are we saying, "inflationary adjustment" there instead of "increase?" MS. FRENZ: I believe it would be—"inflationary" would be—instead of the "base pay adjustment" it would be the "inflationary adjustment." CHR. PAVAO: The inflationary adjustment. MS. FRENZ: And the 5% would be "pay increase" based on our previous conversation, but I need to know what this body would like. CHR. PAVAO: I mean, are we calling it 5% pay increase or calling that inflationary as well. FEMALE SPEAKER: No. Five percent pay increase and then January -22.44 inflationary adjustment CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, we'll do as consistent as it is in other sections. Yeah. Okay. And that's the only changes. MS. FRENZ: I'll re -read that paragraph. CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. FRENZ: "On October 12, 2023" that's today, everyone—"the County of Hawaii Salary Commission having acknowledged its charge pursuant to the Charter is to review and compensate all county elected officials and appointed directors and deputy directors so that their total salaries and benefits have a reasonable relationship to compensation in the public and private sectors, the County of Hawaii Salary Commission approved these Proposed Findings of Fact recommending the inflationary adjustment from the 2018 to 2023 level and granting 5% pay increase for fiscal year" the "I" needs to go away—"2024 through 2025 for Covered Positions and will hereafter ensure publication at least once in two daily newspapers of general circulation"—and the rest is unchanged. Page 23 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Up here, I think, there's sort of a run-on sentence there. When you go to this the compensation in public and private sectors—shouldn't this be a period and then the next should be a different sentence? MS. FRENZ: That is fine as well, Chair. If everyone's okay with that? MR. FARAHL Yeah. You're asking for the period and then starting (inaudible). CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. Because, otherwise, it sound like a run-on sentence—it goes on and on. MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau. I just had a quick question. Is the 5% a pay increase or a 5% cost of living increase? Yeah—so do we want to put that in a level and grant a 5% cost of living increase instead of MS. NAMAHOE: This is Namahoe. In my mind—and you're all free to disagree—in my mind, January represents an inflationary adjustment and July represents a pay increase. But if you're calling it a cost of living increase versusI mean, it's either a cost of living increase or a pay increase. What's the standard language used in the County? If they use pay increase, then it would be a pay increase because July 2024 represents the normal increase that occurs. So, what is the proper noun for that? Pay increase? Cost of living increase? MS. MARTINES: Hi, Jamielynn Martines. Standard language is pay increase for included and excluded members in the County. MS. NAMAHOE: Okay. So, then, again, does the one (inaudible) for January is inflationary adjustment. July is the pay increase. MS. FRENZ: So, it begs the question when we said cost of living increase above, what are we going to do? MS. NAMAHOE: Pay increase. Go back to because what we're doing for July is getting back to business as usual. CHR. PAVAO: So, all references to the 5% should be pay increase then? MS. NAMAHOE: Yes. MS. FRENZ: Is everyone agreeable with that? CHR. PAVAO: I think that's fine. I think we can also still—when if anybody asks what's the justification, we can bring up the 4.8% inflationary as part of the reason for that pay increase. It doesn't negate the fact that the thinking of the 5% also involves the cost of living. MR. FARAHL And the social security, 3.2. Page 24 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. NAMAHOE: So, the pay increase then trends with inflation, so to speak. CHR. PAVAO: And part of the justification for that would be inflationary for sure. MS. NAMAHOE: Yeah, right. And just a little bit more than what our senior citizens are getting. MR. FARAHL Mr. Chairman, I think that sentence there, is the one you need to memorize. And say it like 52 times (inaudible). It is an adjustment to bring in the 2018 to 2023 level and you're granting a pay increase of 5% in July 1, of 2024. Anything else they say, you just say there is no increase from that date `cause we're not paying them for what they have lost. CHR. PAVAO: There are no retroactive pay. Okay. So, we're okay. Where are we? MS. FRENZ: Just to clarify, everyone. The only cost of living term I have not adjusted is in provision paragraph Number 2, which is part of your overall, general explanation on the factors that you considered. I didn't think that that was necessarily adjust the pay. If you disagree, please let me know. CHR. PAVAO: In what section? MS. FRENZ: Number 2. Sentence begins with—"Individuals occupying these positions have not received either a cost of living adjustment or any increase in their pay for five consecutive years"I thought it was okay to leave that there. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, that's fine. MS. FRENZ: Great. Thank you. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, where are we. MS. NAMAHOE: For the record, Number 2 and Number 12 read pretty similarly. CHR. PAVAO: So, we're moving on to Number 13? MS. FRENZ: Is everyone okay with Number 12? Any other adjustments to paragraph 12? CHR. PAVAO: Everybody okay with 12? Okay, I'll move on to 13. So, "The County of Hawaii Salary Commission is comprised of volunteer commissioners who are mindful of current economic conditions and anticipated concerns of the public. The County of Hawaii Salary Commission balanced such against their—balanced such against their obligation to set salaries consistent with the principles of adequate compensation for work performed while preserving a reasonable relationship between the salaries it sets for Covered Positions so that their total salaries and benefits have a reasonable Page 25 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 relationship to the compensation in the public and private sectors, mindful that the salaries of other County of Hawaii employees have regular salary increases. In total, the recommended salary increases for the Covered Positions for the fiscal year 2024 are approximately $484,107 or six -tenths of a percent of the County operating budget while the recommended salary increases for the fiscal year 2025 are an additional $264,216 or roughly .03% of the current operating budget. These potential salary increases" you want to call them "salary increases" I guess— for—"were accounted for when the fiscal year 2024 budget was prepared. In addition, approximately the $23 million lapsed (budgeted but did not spend) on the salaries and wages in the fiscal year 2023 or 10% of the total salaries and wages is larger than the last fiscal year." Everybody okay with that? MR. FARAHL It doesn't do you any good to tell the public or the unions that you have $29 million in surplus. The first one is okay. There's one reference to "increases"—it has to become "increase"—recommended salary "increase" for fiscal year 2025. CHR. PAVAO: "These potential salary increases were accounted for"—is that what you're talking about? I think it's the third to the last sentence. MR. FARAHL "recommended salary increase" not "increases." MS. FRENZ: For the Covered Positions? MR. FARAHL Yeah. MS. FRENZ: Okay. In total MR. FARAHL Yeah. MR. NELSON: So, the lapsed—that sentence on the lapsed funding that was probably put in by the finance people? I mean, is there—you're recommending to take that out but, I mean, why did they put that in there? MR. FARAHI: Like we have the money to give the raise. MR. NELSON: I know, but I mean— MS. FRENZ: I cannot speak for Director Sako, however, my assumption is it was to exemplify and show that we have the funds available to pay these raises and, apparently, even more so, and we have actually not utilized those funds. But I also understand the perspective of Vice -Chair Farahi about calling that unused fund out. So, whatever this Commission want to do. But I think that was the purpose, Commissioner Nelson. Page 26 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL That's usually called a "fund balance." You never want to say that (inaudible) in the sentence prior to that, you say you have money for the 480,000 bucks just leave it there. MR. NELSON: I mean, if the finance—if Sako isn't strong about it, you can take out. MS. FRENZ: That's correct. MR. FARAHL This is like Bob Menendez, the New Jersey Senator (inaudible)—1 kept the cash in the house. CHR. PAVAO: (Inaudible) have that response but I don't think it needs to be written in. We can take it out. Everybody okay with taking it out? Okay, we'll delete that. And then, Number 14"The County of Hawaii Salary Commission is aware that salaries offered for equivalent work in the private sector are generally higher than that offered by the County of Hawaii. The County of Hawaii Salary Commission also notes that other employees may continue to make higher wages based on their ability to receive overtime. The County of Hawaii Salary Commission's intent is to bring the Covered Positions up to a fair and equitable salary consistent with these Proposed Findings of Fact to facilitate recruitment and retention of qualified Covered Positions." MR. NELSON: So, I just want to make one change to that—that, basically, where it says on "The COH Salary Commission is aware that salaries offered for equivalent work in the private sector are generally higher" I'd like to change that to "may be higher" because some of the positions that were adjusted here, like the police or fire, they have no private sector equivalent. And, really, we don't have a salary survey kind of comparing these things, okay. So, I don't know that we can make a statement that the private sector is generally higher, `cause there isn't an equivalent. So, I would just like to change that to "maybe higher." CHR. PAVAO: I'm okay with that "may be higher" is fine with me. Do you have any opinion? MS. NAMAHOE: I think that's reasonable to say that because it's true. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, there are several positions police and fire, for instance, don't have anything comparable in the private sector. MS. FRENZ: So, I think we would change it then to remove "are" and say "private sector may be" CHR. PAVAO: "maybe higher." MS. FRENZ: "higher" Page 27 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. MS. FRENZ: Just, sort of, tracts and makes sense. CHR. PAVAO: Or take out the "are" and "generally" out. MR. NELSON: Yeah, "are" and "generally" need to be deleted and then it should say "may be higher." CHR. PAVAO: Okay. MALE SPEAKER: Do we need that sentence in there at all? MR. NELSON: (Inaudible). CHR. PAVAO: I think it's important because that's one of the the Charter spells out, one of the things we have to consider is the comparison between these positions and in private sector salaries. Okay—everybody okay with everything else in that paragraph -14? Otherwise, we're okay with that? MS. FRENZ: If we could consider a motion. If someone would like to make a motion to have me make all of the adjustments we just walked through, as discussed in today's hearing that would give me the authority to then make those adjustments, I will email them to Glynis. She will print copies and we can handout on a break to all of you to review the last final draft. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, yeah, the Chair will entertain a motion to accept all the changes that were discussed and made to the Proposed Findings of Fact on today's date. MR. NELSON: Commissioner Nelson, I'll make a motion. CHR. PAVAO: And a second? MS. NAMAHOE: Namahoe, seconds. MR. FARAHL Just one sentence over there, to make Cody happy—and that the Commission directs the deputy county counsel to make the stylistic adjustments to the through this resolution prior to publication—something like that. So, if you find, like (inaudible) MS. FRENZ: An extra space or a missing comma— MR. FARAHL Correct. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, that's fine. So, are you amending the motion? Page 28 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL —and authorizes the Deputy County Counsel to make the stylistic adjustment needed before publication. CHR. PAVAO: Are you okay with the amendment? MR. NELSON: I'm okay with the amendment, although I'm not sure what it was. Could you just repeat the amendment? CHR. PAVAO: Just giving her the authority to make any kind of typographical changes. MR. NELSON: Okay. I'm okay with the amendment. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. Any further discussion? MS. FRENZ: Is there a second on MS. NAMAHOE: No, II second in agreement on that. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. Any further discussion? If not, we'll go ahead and vote. All those in favor of the motion, signify by saying "aye." Any opposed? Commissioner Nakama? MS. NAKAMA: Aye. CHR. PAVAO: Thank you. The voice vote was as follows: AYES: Commissioners Dudoit, Farahi, Kawa`auhau, Nakama, Namahoe, Nelson, Riordan, and Chair Pavao – 8. OPPOSED: None. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Commissioner Greenbaum - 1. MS. FRENZ: All right. Motion carries. CHR. PAVAO: Okay, motion carried. Where are we on the agenda. MS. FRENZ: Also, part of Vice -Chair Farahi's communication and for this Commission's consideration, is the Exhibit A that will actually run in the newspaper. Vice -Chair, I'll give this back to you, sir. If you'd like to read the changes you're proposing as to the exhibit? CHR. PAVAO: Are you making some proposed changes on here? MR. FARAHL Yeah. Page 29 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: You want to read the changes that you're making that you're suggesting? MR. FARAHL So, to be consistent in that MS. FRENZ: Can you get a little closer, Vice -Chair, just to make sure we can hear you. MR. FARAHL So, to be consistent in the attachment you have, the first column says "Salary 3/l/2018"it should say "Base Compensation 2018" MS. FRENZ: Just for everyone's information, this is Exhibit A, the excel spreadsheet that has a graph of all of the proposed salaries, should this action be taken. MR. FARAHL It's just the titles of the column to make it consistent with what we say. The first column that says "Salary 3/l/2018" should be changed to `Base Compensation 2018." The third column that says "22.44% ATB Increase"—you just don't say that. Say, "2023 Base Adjustment to 2018 dollars"—or "2018 level." And then, the last column should say "Adjusted Compensation CHR. PAVAO: Instead of "Annual Salary." MR. FARAHL For 2023. MS. FRENZ: So, just to clarify. Actually, I think maybe this would be a great opportunity we're an hour and 20 minutes in for a brief break. Glynis Yamada is going to be printing larger charts for you all, so we can have effective conversation and follow with Vice -Chair Farahi's thoughts. And you will also get a copy of the proposed findings at the same time as well. So, if we could take a five/10-minute recess—would that be okay, everyone? CHR. PAVAO: That's fine. I'm okay with that. MS. FRENZ: Great. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. We'll take a 10 -minute break. It's 11:20 so we're back at 11:30. Thank you. In recess. RECESS: The meeting recessed at 11:20 a.m. RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 11:46 a.m. CHR. PAVAO: Okay, we'll call the meeting back to order after our recess. We're now looking at the excel spreadsheet with the proposed changes to salaries. Page 30 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL Mr. Chairman, I propose that the first column of that spreadsheet be changed to say instead of "Salary 3/1/2018"should say "Base Compensation 2018." CHR. PAVAO: Okay. Anybody have an issue with that? MR. FARAHL And the third column to be changed to "Base Inflationary Adjustment 2023." MS. NAMAHOE: This is Commissioner Namahoe. So, just to clarify in that 4h column, it'll say "22.44% Inflationary Adjustment Base Compensation?" Is that what you're saying, sir? MR. FARAHL No. The third columnI have a plan for the third column. MS. NAMAHOE: As long as it says "Inflationary Adjustment" MR. FARAHL It's too totally unnecessary. It's just unnecessary. Now, that column doesn't do anything. `Cause it's repeated on the column next to it. See it? "16,588.78," 16,589"—okay, hit the 70, hit—you see what I mean? CHR. PAVAO: Duplicate, yeah? MR. FARAHL The third column MS. FRENZ: Can I clarify, Vice -Chair Farahi? MR. FARAHL Sure. MS. FRENZ: Are you saying that we should delete columns, for exampleI'm looking at the excel spreadsheet in excel—so that would be Column C, the column that says, "Monthly Salary" and Column E, the "New Monthly Salary, Effective January 1, 2024." Are you recommending deleting both of those, so we don't show what the monthly salaries will be, but we show the 2018—the new 2023, and then the MR. FARAHI: No. I'm just recommending that column that says "22.44 ATB Increase" that column doesn't add anything. CHR. PAVAO: Three and 4 are redundant—they're exactly the same thing. MR. FARAHL Huh? CHR. PAVAO: Three and 4 are exactly the same thing. MR. FARAHL Right. CHR. PAVAO: Just 4 rounds it up. Page 31 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau. I see its value only that it, kind of, shows the math in case anybody wants to see the step. And kind of, eliminate the question that will be asked, like, "Where this salary come from" well, it's the 22.44% increase—and what we did was we rounded it up—and you don't have to say that `cause it's already presented there. People, like me, who will be looking at it would want to see the math. I don't know, maybe that helps if there's other people looking at it—might want to see the math. So, it's spelled out for them and they don't have to necessarily take the step or if something doesn't allow their brain to take the step, they have it here. But it's not like I'm completely for it, but I see its point. MS. FRENZ: So, just one more reminder. Again, this is Deputy Corporation Counsel Cody Frenz per Charter, our Rule is to publish—and I'll just recite it here"...a detailed account of its proposal or proposals including specific increases or decreases involve actual dollar amount and percentages." So, it is critical that we leave the 22.44% figure there the percentage. And then, also show what that dollar amount will be. Whether we need to show it as 78 cents versus the round upI will defer to you guys. But we do need the percentage amount to show and we do need a dollar amount to show. MS. NAMAHOE: Commissioner Namahoe. When we say 22.44%, again, the title of that ATB says what? MS. FRENZ: I believe, Vice -Chair Farahi is asking that we change that header to be—it should be taking the liberty of ensuring we include the percentage— `22.44% Base Inflationary Adjustment 2023." MS. NAMAHOE: Thank you. CHR. PAVAO: That's good. MS. NAMAHOE: Okay, thank you. 1 -that's my personal request is that we use the term "inflationary adjustment" there in that column so people see it in black and white. MS. FRENZ: Do we need the word "base?" MR. FARAHL It's okay. MS. FRENZ: You want it there? Page 32 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL Yeah. It doesn't make any difference. It's just I'm confused between Column 3 and 4 so but if you need to have that, then you need to have it. It should say, "Base Inflationary Adjustment 2023" and then in parenthesis "(22.44%)". MS. FRENZ: So, do we want to keep the word "base" there, Vice -Chair? MR. FARAHL Huh? MS. FRENZ: `Base MR. FARAHL "Base" yeah. MS. FRENZ: So, it would say "22.44% Base Inflationary Adjustment 2023." MR. FARAHL Correct. MS. FRENZ: Okay. MS. NAMAHOE: So, the question then, begs—do we need Column number 4 "New Monthly Salary Effective"—or could we just eliminate that and have "Annual Salary" since the eyes already going to be drawn to the 22.44% inflationary increase—inflationary adjustment—excuse me. MS. FRENZ: I think what Commissioner Kawa`auhau is saying is that they won't match, right, if Column 4 is going to round up that so many cents—if we don't have that there, the numbers the figures will not match at the end, when you take an annual salary and break it down, if we're not rounding up, then it's not going to match. CHR. PAVAO: The thing about this—Column 3 is actually a monthly salary—it's not the actual annual increase, right? MS. FRENZ: That's correct, Chair. CHR. PAVAO: So, that actually, kind of, misleading. We should have a column that just shows the actual annual increase. There isn't a column here that shows the annual increase. You have to do the math from the first column to the last column to get that number. MS. FRENZ: Correct. MR. FARAHL That one is they're not getting $14,000. CHR. PAVAO: No, this is the new monthly salary the 22.44, right now, is the current monthly salary. What I'm saying, it should have a column that just shows the annual increase, right. Page 33 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MALE SPEAKER: Do we even need the monthly salary? CHR. PAVAO: I don't think so. MR. NELSON: Please take it out. Forget it. (Inaudible) it becomes an annualI think that's where you're going, right? CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. MR. NELSON: Just have the annual salaries. (Inaudible) and the 22% of base increase, it raises it up to whatever that is. Okay. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. Right now, you have to do the math between Number 1 and Number 5 to get to that so MR. FARAHL Well, my recommendation was to blow it out of there. Just blow it out. It doesn't add anything. MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau CHR. PAVAO: Yes? MS. KAWA`AUHAU: If you have a lot of people looking at this, which you will, `cause when you're teaching a large body of people, there's different ways to see it. And those that—you can't make assumptions about what people know and what they don't know. So, we know because we were talking about it, but they weren't here. So, the more information you put out there, the more brains you can reach because people see things differently. So, having extra information is not necessarily bad, if it doesn't do anything to harm it. I mean, there's people that are going to see it differently—and instead of having to come back with the questions and the emails that you get from people, `cause you didn't put the assignment right—you just say it clearly in the beginning with all of the information there for the people who need it. And then, the ones that don't, can just disregard it. But you can't assume that everybody knows what we know `cause they weren't in our conversations. So, it's just to be safe and just offer a little bit information so that they can have a fuller story. MS. NAMAHOE: Commissioner Namahoe. So, then systematize it more further—salary— annual salaries 3/1/2018; monthly salary 3/1/2018so that they know that these two figures are correlated—one on the monthly, one on the annual. The increase in the middle, annual salary effect—annual monthly salary effective 1/1/24, annual salary effective. MR. PAVAO: The 22.44 increase is not the increase, that's a monthly salary. It should be the actual—what the public would want to know is what the annual increase was. And I'm looking Page 34 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 at this as part of about 37,000 for the mayor. So, I think this is what the public would want to see is what's the actual annual increase was. This is monthly salary increase. MS. NAKAMA: Commissioner Nakama CHR. PAVAO: Yes? MS. NAKAMA: I agree with you, Chairman—shouldn't the total 22.44% be the amount of increase? CHR. PAVAO: The annual increase yes. MS. NAKAMA: (Inaudible) the amount of the increase, not the total monthly salary CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. MS. NAKAMA: of the increase included in the monthly salary, which is spelled out—the monthly increase. In other words, it should spell out the first one $2,040.28 to come up with a monthly salary of 16,589 rounded. When you look across—when you look through the spreadsheet (inaudible) we want to know what the amount of the 22.44% is. CHR. PAVAO: So, you want to see the monthly increase or the annual increase? MS. NAKAMA: The monthly increase. `Cause it's the same (inaudible) it's the annual salary that it says monthly salary, what is the increase. So it (inaudible) 16,000 the 22.44% of (inaudible) 15,000, it's not 16. It's $3,040.28. You know what I mean? CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. MS. NAKAMA: (Inaudible) it's just (inaudible) math that (inaudible) the people would want to see what the amount of the increase is (inaudible) the amount of the increase included in the monthly salary. MR. NELSON: Yeah, I suggest that we just do, like, base compensation—like for the first—for the mayor 162,582. All right. The increase, the 22.44% increase 3,641, which is 22.4%. New annual salary, which is the 199,068. So, basically, three columns. Here's the current base compensation as of 2018. Here's the 22.44% increase, which is on an annual basis, right, which is 3648. Here's the new amount, which is the 199, right? So, you got three columns and then that way everybody can see—here's what it was, here's what they're getting, here's the new stuff—right? I mean, the monthly, it confuses it, right? CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. Page 35 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. FRENZ: So, what I could—what I have done, just to help facilitate the conversation is thankfully, I know excel a littleso I added a column. So, I think what I understand is we want Column 1 - CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. FRENZ: So, everyone understands where salaries are currently at from 2018. We would then remove Column 2, 3, and 4 on our current paperwork. And our annual salary would then, I think, would need to say "22.44% Adjusted Compensation 2023" or whatever the correct terminology is. And then, the new Column number 3, I have done some difference between—and it says "Annual Increase Proposed" or whatever the terminology would be. For example, the mayor would be—we're showing that it's increasing his annual salary by $36,486 just simple math. They raised from the 2018 what's the difference—and that's what that column is. Does that make sense? CHR. PAVAO: That makes sense to me. I think the annual difference is an important thing that the taxpayers will be looking at. MS. NAMAHOE: So, again, we're removing "monthly" and people can divide by 12 if they choose. We're just doing annual? Current— CHR. urrent CHR. PAVAO: You could do both, if you wanted to. But I think the annual is important. MR. FARAHL Monthly doesn't say anything, anyway. I think the first column should be "Base Compensation 2018"—"Adjusted Inflationary Compensation 2023"—should be the one that says "Annual 1/1/24." And then, percent changeI mean, then the amount of change if you want it to say how much. CHR. PAVAO: By the month or by the year? MR. FARAHL By the year. CHR. PAVAO: The year, I think, is the easiest to see. MR. FARAHL `Cause you already have that number right in front of you. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, I agree with that. I think three columns is sufficient, actually. MS. FRENZ: And can I get some assistance in firming up exactly what those column titles will be? CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. Page 36 Salary Commission MR. FARAHL The first column would say "Base Compensation 2018" MS. FRENZ: Dash—"Current." CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. FRENZ: "2018 – " or `Base" MS. NAMAHOE: "Base Compensation 2018 - Current." CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, that's a good idea. MS. FRENZ: Dash or slash? Which one? CHR. PAVAO: Dash. MS. NAMAHOE: I defer to Counsel. MS. FRENZ: I just want to be as clear as we can. October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL That's where she charges for the minutes. We don't give her an option to do the dash and the hyphen. MS. NAMAHOE: HR, what do we use? MS. MARTINES: I think this is JamieI think "dash" is fine. CHR. PAVAO: I think dash is fine—better than speculate, right? MS. FRENZ: Yes. I don't want to speculate that's not my kuleana. MS. NAMAHOE: Okay, thank you. And then—so that's Column A. And then Column B, "22.44% Inflationary Adjustment Per Annum" MR. FARAHL No. That one would say, "Base Inflationary Adjustment 2023 MS. NAMAHOE: "January 2023." MS. FRENZ: I need the percentage, so MS. NAMAHOE: "22.44 %." CHR. PAVAO: And then, the last one would be just the "Annual Increase?" MS. NAMAHOE: "Annual Salary." Page 37 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL It doesn't (inaudible) annual salary—"Annual Compensation 1/1/24." MS. NAMAHOE: Right. I mean—'cause the middle, Column B, is only going to show the 36,000 on top of it. So, then "Annual Salary January 2024"—"Annual Salary 2024." MR. FARAHL "Annual Compensation"—twenty— MS. ompensation"twenty MS. NAMAHOE: Annual compensation CHR. PAVAO: 1/1/2024. MS. NAMAHOE: 1/1/2024. MR. FARAHL Well, I think Cody is confused. MS. FRENZ: Yep. CHR. PAVAO: She still has way too many columns. MS. NAMAHOE: Which one? MS. FRENZ: I also want to make sure that it makes sense as we read it. So, currently, Column 2—and I'm going to change the titles and then all of the formulas are adjusting if I delete them now. So, I'll send it back to Jamie to finalize later on. But—and that's because the monthly salaries are tied to the formula that I'm using for the price the dollar difference. So, I have Column 1, "Base Compensation 2018 -Current." What will be new Column 2, which is currently Column 3—`Base Inflationary Adjustment for 2023 of 22.44%"is that okay? MS. NAMAHOE: Thank you. CHR. PAVAO: But it's not going to be his monthly salary, right? MR. FARAHL If you say it like that, then say "2018 to 2023." MS. FRENZ: So, "Base Inflationary Adjustment for 2018 to 2023 of 22.44%?" MR. FARAHL Correct. That would make it easier to see the 5. CHR. PAVAO: The annual increase is (inaudible). MS. FRENZ: Yes. So, column—current Column number 1 will be retitled to say, "Base Compensation 2018 -Current." Our existing Column number 3, will become Column number 2 and it will be titled "Base Inflationary Adjustment for 2018-2013 of 22.44%." Page 38 Salary Commission MR. FARAHL Try 18 to 2023. MS. FRENZ: Correct. MR. FARAHL Correct. CHR. PAVAO: What numbers would be there? MS. FRENZ: "of 22.44%." And here it will be the new annual adjusted— CHR. PAVAO: Annual increase? MS. FRENZ: So, it'll be, for example, the mayor's199,068. October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL (Inaudible) could put the date in there so that's "Compensation as of 1/1/2024." MS. FRENZ: Okay, I can. MR. FARAHL Or just MS. FRENZ: So, actually, why don't I just move that title straight over to Column number existing Column number 5, to keep it simple. Because we're going to delete 1 through -2 through 3 CHR. PAVAO: And just eliminate Number 3 altogether. MS. FRENZ: 2, 3, and 4. MS. NAMAHOE: All the monthly data. MS. FRENZ: Right. So, column—our existing Column 5 will now be—and, again, Vice -Chair and everyone else—"Base Inflationary Adjustment for 2018 through 2023 of 22.44% FEMALE SPEAKER: was the additional language you wanted? MS. FRENZ: "as of January 1st, 2024"—is that right? CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. FRENZ: Okay. MR. FARAHL I want to see that (inaudible). MS. FRENZ: So, I'll read it again Page 39 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: You have another column for the annual salary? MS. FRENZ: There will be a title for the difference column, so that we spell that out for everyone. So, Column number 2, again, which is currently Column number— MS. NAMAHOE: "Proposed Annual Salary." MS. FRENZ: Yes. Four—five is going to be "Base Inflationary Adjustment for 2018 through 2023 of 22.44% as of January 1st, 2024." Is everyone okay with that title? CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. MS. FRENZ: What is currently Column 6, which will become Column 3, which is our "Annual Increase Proposed" what do you want that to be? Not "Annual Increase" but— MS. ut MS. NAKAMA: "Annual Compensation 2024." MS. NAMAHOE: Right. "Proposed Annual Compensation 2024." MS. FRENZ: This is actually the column CHR. PAVAO: No, this is the difference. MS. FRENZ: that shows the difference between the current and new. MS. NAMAHOE: Oh, the difference. Oh. MS. FRENZ: `Cause you guys said you wanted to show everyone the difference. CHR. PAVAO: Like this from 162 to 199 would be 30 -somewhat thousand, right? MS. NAMAHOE: Yeah. MS. FRENZ: $36,486. CHR. PAVAO: What do you want to call it? MR. NELSON: It's an inflationary adjustment. MS. NAMAHOE: Yeah, "Inflationary Adjustment." MS. FRENZ: "Difference Between 2018 an Inflationary Adjustment" or the more detail we give, the simpler it'll be. Page 40 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL Well, you could say that "Inflationary Adjustment" and then underneath say "2018 to 2023." MS. NAMAHOE: to current. Yeah. MR. NELSON: 22.44%. MS. NAMAHOE: Yeah. MR. FARAHL We have already said that. MR. NELSON: Okay. MR. FARAHL So, that would be the amount, right? CHR. PAVAO: The annual amount. Yeah. The difference. MS. FRENZ: How about "Inflationary Adjustment Difference" CHR. PAVAO: You don't want to use word "increase." MS. FRENZ: "From 2018"I don't know. This is your guys work. I'm just typing. So, if you guys can tell me what you would like. CHR. PAVAO: But you cannot say (inaudible) 2018 because that would insinuate that would be retroactive, yeah. MS. FRENZ: Right. MS. NAKAMA: Commissioner Nakama. It should be a simple—in its simplest form. "Compensation Adjustment 2024" right? The annual amount of (inaudible). MS. FRENZ: How about "Annual Inflationary Adjustment Amount." CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, I think that's good. MS. FRENZ: Or "Differential." MS. NAMAHOE: Either one. CHR. PAVAO: "Adjustment" is a good idea. MR. FARAHL It's not an annual adjustment. MS. NAMAHOE: Well, the "annual-lized"oh, no. Page 41 Salary Commission MR. FARAHL It's not. MS. FRENZ: How about "Inflationary Adjustment Difference?" MS. NAMAHOE: "Differential." MS. FRENZ: "Differential." CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, that's good. MR. FARAHL And then, you have to say "2018 to 2023." MS. NAMAHOE: (Inaudible) "Inflationary Adjustment"period. October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: But I think if you put in "2018 to 2023" it's going to insinuate that you're going to that it's going to be retroactive back to 2018. MS. FRENZ: Yeah, "Inflationary Adjustment" may be simple enough. MS. NAMAHOE: Yeah, "Inflationary Adjustment." MS. FRENZ: Someone will (inaudible) a question. CHR. PAVAO: I think that minimize the confusion, I think, yeah. MALE SPEAKER: That's fine. MS. NAKAMA: You think that inflationary adjustment will be confusing if it was back in 2018 to 2024—this is Commissioner Nakamaquestion. MS. NAMAHOE: It's hard `cause it's clear to me but that's because we've been talking about it all day. MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau. I don't know if this is too much, but what if you put in parenthesis how you got the number so previous salI mean, proposed salary minus previous salary—this is the difference. So, then, they can look and say, "Oh, okay, that's where they got that number." Underneath, whatever title we give it, in parenthesis put just "the proposed salary minus previous salary"—"sum of proposed salary minus previous salary "—something like that. CHR. PAVAO: That's the annual difference yeah, I don't know if you want to say that that would annually Page 42 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Just a way for them to check on us and see that we just didn't pull this out. MS. NAKAMA: Commissioner Nakama. That's why we're just saying inflationary adjustment—it will not say "annual." MR. NELSON: I think inflationary adjustment's the right way to go. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, it's fine. MR. NELSON: Leave it at that way, `cause it's before, this is what you add after. CHR. PAVAO: And it's consistent with what we said in the findings (inaudible). MS. MARTINES: This is Jamie. You guys are using "inflationary adjustment" in your fact findings. So, to be consistent with what you're saying in the fact findings "inflationary adjustment" would be consistent. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, that would be consistent. MR. FARAHL I think that's the simple thing to do. MR. RIORDAN: And shouldn't that be Column 2? You put the old salary, we put the increase, and we put the new salary—and then use whatever words you'd want to use, but— CHR. ut CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, then it's real clear. MR. RIORDAN: The amount that we're going to add on, there it is right there. MS. FRENZ: So, wouldn't that be an annual inflationary adjustment? Or, no, it's that word "annual" misleading. MR. RIORDAN: Yeah. MR. NELSON: I think "annual" confuse it. I would just leave it as an inflationary adjustment because it's (inaudible), it's taken over all the last years. MR. RIORDAN: It could be "Inflationary Adjustment 22.44%." MS. FRENZ: If you really want to have it spelled out, I could put in an asterisk not to confuse things but I'd put an asterisk by "Inflationary Adjustment" at the end. And down below at the bottom of our chart, I could have the asterisk there and then there we could say, "Difference between base inflationary adjustment for 2018 through 2023 as of—of 22.44% as of January 1st 2024, minus base compensation 2018 through current." Page 43 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 I meanI don't know if anyone's going to but the longer our headers are, the bigger the publication will be. So, I'm just thinking of not quite pulling out a footnote but providing that for someone who is reading the detail or not. MR. RIORDAN: Isn't the inflationary adjustment of 22.44%? Couldn't that be the heading and then at the mayor's it's going to be 36,000 and the next guy is going to be whatever-15- 3,000—just hateverl53,000just right down the line. I mean, that's a 22.44 %—it's the inflationary adjustment. MR. NELSON: It should be obvious. Before this is what you're adding on it—after. I think keep it as simple—it's better, `cause it's really, the math is right there. MR. RIORDAN: Yeah. MR. NELSON: Before—we're adding 22%—after. MR. RIORDAN: I got confused by MR. NELSON: I think make it as simple as possible. MS. FRENZ: I just wanted to address the other concern about having it—an explanation—so it's fine with me, again, our current titles. Column 1 will be "Base Compensation 2018 -Current" which will show the existing salary of our Covered Positions. Column 2 will be titled, `Base Inflationary Adjustment for 2018-2023 of 22.44% as of January 1st, 2024" that will show what the Covered Positions will be and then column MR. FARAHL What that last column shows you here? MS. FRENZ: Column the last column will just be titled "Inflationary Adjustment" and it'll show the difference between Columns 1 and 2. MR. NELSON: I think the inflationary adjustment should be in the middle. MS. NAMAHOE: Me, too. MR. NELSON: Okay. Because (inaudible) show the base, here's what the adjustment is, here's the new salary. CHR. PAVAO: This plus this equals that. Yeah. MS. FRENZ: Okay. MR. NELSON: Okay. Does that make sense? Page 44 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. FRENZ: It does. And I canI will obtain the amazing Jamie's assistance in that regard. So, Column 1 would be Current, Column 2 will be the differential, and Column 3 will be the final. CHR. PAVAO: Their new salary. MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau. Yeah, that addresses there's no need for a footnote or anything. MS. FRENZ: Excellent. CHR. PAVAO: That's logical. MR. FARAHL That will do it. And there is another thing there that says "annual increase" underneath that top table. MS. FRENZ: So, if we could all turn, I believe, Vice -Chair, you're referring to our second table the lower table? We'll work on that one now? Yes, sir, go ahead. MR. FARAHL That one, where it says "annual increase CHR. PAVAO: That's the total amount of increase for the County for all the salaries. MR. FARAHL Yeah, but that one doesn't make sense. MS. NAMAHOE: "Annual County Budget Increase"(inaudible). CHR. PAVAO: You want to say something there about the inflationary or MR. FARAHL What is that thing trying to say? CHR. PAVAO: It's tentative—all the salaries increase has to the total amount of the increase from the salaries. MS. FRENZ: So, this table MR. FARAHL I'm looking CHR. PAVAO: Are you looking at this? MR. FARAHL Yeah. MS. FRENZ: This table, the second table on the handout that we all had is going to show when our 5% proposed July 1st, 2024, increase comes into effect—that's the second table. Page 45 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL Then it should say, like in here, "Annual Increase of 5%," right? It just now says, "Annual Increase of 5%." And then, adjust those columns to say the same names as the one on top, right? CHR. PAVAO: Can be the same, yeah—keep it consistent. MR. RIORDAN: The question is, is the totals at the bottom of the first chart—and why do we need to have those? MS. FRENZ: I think it's more example—we don't need to have them, they can be deleted, if you want. MR. FARAHL Well, they wouldn't have had it, if excel wasn't there. MR. NELSON: (Inaudible) I think that the finance person probably just needs to know what they're going to be adding to the budget. CHR. PAVAO: I think it's important to say current salaries, the new salaries, and that's the increase. FEMALE SPEAKER: For public consumption. MS. NAMAHOE: Yeah, we're Salary Commission—we not the budget director. MR. RIORDAN: Yeah, we don't need that and neither does the public. CHR. PAVAO: So, the July 1st one is the same thing. Just got to go to shrink it to the same three columns. MS. FRENZ: Okay. So, I have—what I have done for Jamie is I have stricken just so that we're all on the same page or the same working document—the totals at the bottom of Table number 1. I've stricken them so Jamie knows that we're going to take that language out. I have highlighted columns 2, 3, and 4 so that she knows those are going to be deleted. And she already knows that the inflationary adjustment will be called Number 2. Moving down then to Column to Table number 2, if we could just fine-tune that language now that I've stricken the totals above. MR. FARAHL Well, the title of that would say "Annual Increase 5%," right? That second table is the 5% increase, right. So, you should say that it's a 5% increase. MR. NELSON: (Inaudible.) Page 46 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Well, this is the 5% increase to the salary. It's not that's not the actual increase. It's just a monthly salaries again—it's confusing. MS. FRENZ: So, that's, again, showing the 5% difference between what will be their monthly salary and what would become come July 1st CHR. PAVAO: What it should show is the actual 5% for the year—for the entire year—not by month like this MS. NAMAHOE: So, this is Namahoeso, new Column number 3, which is "Annualized Salary" becomes Column 1, in the second table. And then the 5% increase MS. FRENZ: But what's that going to be called? (Inaudible.) CHR. PAVAO: Same thing like the earlier one, right. MS. NAMAHOE: Annualized Salary, Base Salary, Jan—July—January 2024 MR. FARAHL "Base Compensation." MS. NAMAHOE: "Base Compensation." MS. FRENZ: By actually copying it from above, which is "Base Inflationary Adjustment"—do we need the 2018 through 2023 CHR. PAVAO: I think in our findings we call the 5% a "pay increase." We didn't call it "inflationary." MS. NAMAHOE: Right. CHR. PAVAO: We got to be consistent (inaudible.) MS. NAMAHOE: Since we only are now going to have two columnsI'm sorry, I didn't mean to—since we only have two columns that'll be now Column 3, from Table 1—and that title, again, is called? MS. FRENZ: "Base Inflationary Adjustment for 2018 Through 2023 a 22.44% as of January 1st 2024" that's copied from above. MS. NAMAHOE: Okay. So, then, now, in Table 2 MS. FRENZ: Column 1 will be that. MS. NAMAHOE: Column 1 will be "Annual Increase as of January 1, 2024." Page 47 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MR. FARAHL No, that's not an annual increase in Table 2. MS. NAMAHOE: Right. Right, so take out all that descriptive language, just go effective, the wages as of January 1, 2024—since all those numbers are going to match. And then, Column 2 now be 5% wage increase base wage increase—salary—what was the words we used? Base— MS. FRENZ: We used "Base Inflationary Adjustment" but then (inaudible). MS. NAMAHOE: Pay increase—okay, then there you go pay increase. So, columnso, again, so for Table 2 it's now been established, right, which is why we're only doing it as of the annual salary per January 1, 2024. And then, Column 2 be with that base wage increase. MR. FARAHI: The 5%. MS. FRENZ: So, I actually had created another column to do the 5 -to show the difference between January and July. And then, we would have—so our last—so that would become Column 2, right, to show the difference between the hard thing, though, is that's a CHR. PAVAO: You should only have three columns, right? MR. NELSON: So, it should be the same as the previous one. CHR. PAVAO: Same format as the previous. MR. NELSON: So, one is the adjusted base compensation, right, (inaudible) 2014 (sic.). The 2014 (sic.) adjusts the base compensation. Five percent increase CHR. PAVAO: The annual increase. MR. NELSON: (Inaudible) 5% on that. And then, it's the adjusted total (inaudible). CHR. PAVAO: Should just have three columns like the first one. MS. NAMAHOE: I agree. MS. FRENZ: So, I have—Column 1 would be "Annual Salary as of January 1st, 2024." The carryover, what will be up above. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah. MS. FRENZ: Second column will be "5% Annual Increase Amount" CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. FRENZ: "effective July"—it should be "July 1st" right. Page 48 Salary Commission CHR. PAVAO: July 1st, 2024. October 12, 2023 MS. MARTINES: Sorry, this is Jamie. It's a 5% annual increase? It's going to be every year. `Cause when you say "annual" I imply—if you're going to say "annual" in the title, to me, that implies that you're going to be giving a 5% annual reoccurringso, I would take away "annual." Thank you. CHR. PAVAO: Five percent increase—take the word "annual" out. MS. NAMAHOE: We're never using "annual" again. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, it's "5% Increase." And, otherwise, it might insinuate you're going to give it every year. MS. FRENZ: "5% Increase Effective July 1st, 2024." MS. NAMAHOE: Okay, thank you. MR. FARAHL There's too much description there. The first one, as Commissioner Nelson says, it's very plain English—"Compensation"—"Base Compensation as of 1/1/24," right? MS. NAMAHOE: Right. MS. NAKAMA: Commissioner Nakama—are we stating the 5% the amount of the 5% or (inaudible). CHR. PAVAO: You get the initial salary 1/1/24 and the second column would be the 5% the annual 5% percent that total increase (inaudible). MS. NAKAMA: I prefer "of the" CHR. PAVAO: "of the" 199, like, for the mayor—with 5% of the 199. And then the third column would be the new annual salary, `cause the old salary plus the 5% (inaudible). MR. FARAHL (Inaudible) the base salary as of 7/l/24. CHR. PAVAO: The third column the base salary as of 7/l/2024. MR. FARAHL The base salary as of 1/l/24 MS. FRENZ: So, we said "Base Compensation" in first column, so MS. NAMAHOE: "Base Compensation." Page 49 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: So, yeah, it'd be consistent as well. MR. FARAHL And then increase MS. FRENZ: Okay. So, I have, again—Column 1 will be "Base Compensation as of January 1st, 2024" which is a carryover of what the July 1st new salary will be. Column 2 will become "5% Increase Effective July I", 2024" that'll be the difference between January 1 and July 1overall salaries. And Column number 3 will be "Base Compensation as of July 1, 2024." MR. FARAHL Correct. MS. NAMAHOE: Right. MS. FRENZ: Okay. MR. FARAHL That's it. You got it. MS. FRENZ: Great. So, could I get a motion CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. FRENZ: to approve the modifications to Exhibit A that we just discussed here? MS. MARTINES: Can I clarify, though. Are you guys also taking the totals away from the second page—so all totals are being removed from both tables, right? CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. MARTINES: Okay. Thanks. CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. FRENZ: I will strike through those as well. So, I just need (inaudible). CHR. PAVAO: We'll entertain a motion MS. NAKAMA: Excuse me—Commissioner Nakama. At the bottom where the totals are, is (inaudible) increase being removed? MS. FRENZ: Yes. MS. NAKAMA: Thank you. Page 50 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, do we have motion to accept the salary proposed salary schedule as modified. MS. NAMAHOE: So moved. CHR. PAVAO: A second? MR. RIORDAN: I'll second. MR. NELSON: I'll also second. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. It's been moved and second. All those in favor MS. FRENZ: Discussion CHR. PAVAO: Oh, discussion—any discussion? MS. NAKAMA: Call for the question CHR. PAVAO: Okay. MS. NAKAMA: Commissioner Nakama. CHR. PAVAO: All those in favor of accepting the salary—adjusted salary schedule, signify by saying "aye." Any opposed? The voice vote was as follows: AYES: Commissioners Dudoit, Farahi, Kawa`auhau, Nakama, Namahoe, Nelson, Riordan, and Chair Pavao – 8. OPPOSED: None. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Commissioner Greenbaum - 1. CHR. PAVAO: Hearing none, the motion carried. Okay, where are we now on our agenda— MR. NELSON: On the statement of facts, I did have one change that I suggest be made on paragraph 10. MR. FARAHL Item number 10? MR. NELSON: Item number 10—paragraph 10, section 10 where it says, "To keep pace with CPI" that sentence blah, blah, blah, blah—it goes to final approval. The next word says, Page 51 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 "Therefore, the COH Salary Commission only approves a 5% pay increase." I think that should be "additionally." Instead of "Therefore" it should be "Additionally, the COH Salary Commission only approves a 5%" increase after the base compensation." That's what I suggest that change. CHR. PAVAO: Take the word "Therefore" out? MR. NELSON: Yeah. "Therefore" it gets deleted and it becomes "Additionally"—is what we're doing here. CHR. PAVAO: Okay, that's fine. Anybody have any problem with that? MS. FRENZ: Commissioner Namahoe's paragraph 12. Any recommendations? MR. FARAHL Do you accept the change? MS. NAMAHOE: No. I think the change is brilliant. MS. FRENZ: As to paragraph 12—sorry. Capitalizing the first letters of MS. NAMAHOE: Oh. In Section 12, my question is and my suggestion is, is that the Office of—man, where did it go CHR. PAVAO: Is directors and deputy directors you wanted to capitalize? MS. NAMAHOE: So, two-thirds down, "...said Proposed Finding of Fact to the office of the county clerk and the office of the mayor for public inspection..." that both of those offices they're proper nouns, so be capitalized. MS. FRENZ: Any other proposed changes? CHR. PAVAO: You don't think it's necessary to capitalize "directors" and "deputy directors?" MS. NAMAHOE: Well, I'd also like to capitalize "civil servants" but I mean, proper nouns, if it's the title of an office, it should be CHR. PAVAO: I think "directors" and "deputy directors" should be capitalized. MR. FARAHL The county counsel is hereby directed to make appropriate capitalization as deemed necessary. MS. FRENZ: And as to "civil service" then? CHR. PAVAO: I guess so. Page 52 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. FRENZ: We have "civil servants" used throughout, in at least I have that in four places. Is there a request to capitalize "civil" and "servant" with capital "C," capital "ST' MS. NAMAHOE: Please, to be consistent for all proper nouns. CHR. PAVAO: It should be consistent there. MS. FRENZ: Are there any other corrections in that regard? CHR. PAVAO: Not that I can see. MR. FARAHL You took Commissioner Nelson's "therefore" and changed it "additionally." MS. FRENZ: Yes, sir. MR. FARAHL "In addition" I think, is a better word. MS. FRENZ: But what are we—what are you going with, everyone? I haveI currently have "Additionally." MR. FARAHL No"In addition MR. NELSON: (Inaudible.) CHR. PAVAO: "In addition" is good. Let's go with "In addition." MS. NAMAHOE: Not to quibble but—"of the County operating budget"—in Number 13is "operating budget" also a proper noun? MR. FARAHL "operating budget" is not a proper. MS. NAMAHOE: "0.06% of the County operating budget" CHR. PAVAO: I don't think so. MS. NAMAHOE: That's not a proper noun? Okay. I'm clarifying. MR. FARAHL "operating budget" is not a proper noun. MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau. Technically, it's interchangeable. If you're using it as a title it would be capital, but if you're using it as a standard practice vocabulary, it's not just in case you're wondering. MS. NAMAHOE: Right. Page 53 Salary Commission CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, everybody else is okay with the MS. FRENZ: No other proposed modifications? CHR. PAVAO: with the findings? MS. FRENZ: So, I'll just need a quick motion to make those changes. CHR. PAVAO: Motion to accept the findings as revised. MS. NAMAHOE: So moved. CHR. PAVAO: Second? MR. FARAHL Second. October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Moved and second. Any further discussion? We'll go ahead and vote. All those in favor of accepting the findings proposed findings, as revised, signify by saying "aye?" Any opposed? The voice vote was as follows: AYES: Commissioners Dudoit, Farahi, Kawa`auhau, Nakama, Namahoe, Nelson, Riordan, and Chair Pavao – 8. OPPOSED: None. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Commissioner Greenbaum - 1. CHR. PAVAO: Hearing none, the motion carries. Okay, where are we now—where are we on our agenda? Is there anything we haven't done— MS. FRENZ: We're back to Number 6 on our agenda, Chair. We've only—we just finished Number 5, "New Business." We're on Number 6 now. Page 54 Salary Commission Unfinished Business (Item 6) October 12, 2023 A. Communication No. 23-13, Received On August 4, 2023, From Salary Commissioner Judy A. Greenbaum, Transmitting A Hawaii County Executive Salary Worksheet Incorporating An Across -The -Board (ATB), Proposed 18 Percent Salary Increase For All Executives. (Reference Materials Include Inflation Calculator, Hawaii County Population, And Maui County Population.) At Its Meeting Held On August 4, 2023, The Commission Unanimously Approved Commissioner Greenbaum's Offer To Prepare A Worksheet Incorporating An 18 Percent ATB Salary Increase, As A Starting Point, For Discussion At Its Meeting Scheduled For September 7, 2023. (For Informational Purposes, Chair Steven Pavao And Commissioner Donala Kawa`auhau Were Absent); And Communication No. 23-13.01, Dated August 7, 2023, From Salary Commissioner Dawood Y. Farahi, Providing His Comments Re The Proposed Hawaii County Executive Salary Worksheet; And Communication No. 23-13.02, Dated August 29, 2023, From Salary Commissioner Sam Nelson, Providing His Comments Re The Proposed Hawaii County Executive Salary Worksheet; And Communication No. 23-13.03, Dated August 29, 2023, From Salary Commission Chair Steven Pavao, Providing His Comments Re The Proposed Hawaii County Executive Salary Worksheet; And Communication No. 23-13.04, Received On September 6, 2023, From Salary Commissioner Judy A. Greenbaum, Providing Her Comments Re The Proposed Hawaii County Executive Salary Worksheet CHR. PAVAO: Okay. "Unfinished Business" for discussion and appropriate action. Most of this has already been discussed. Anybody has any issues with the unfinished business on the agenda? It's Communication number 23-13, dated in August. MS. NAMAHOE: Question. This is Commissioner Namahoe. For Section 6.A. of the following Communications—numbers 23-13, 23-13.01, 23-13.02, 23-13.03, 23-13.04do we need to move these into the record? MS. FRENZ: They are already in the record. MS. NAMAHOE: Okay. So, there's no action needed on those? MS. FRENZ: Just acknowledge them. Close file. MS. NAMAHOE: Okay. All right. MS. FRENZ: Unless you want to discuss them or continue them on the agenda? Page 55 Salary Commission MS. NAMAHOE: No. Just for propriety. CHR. PAVAO: So, do we need a motion to close file on all of these? MS. FRENZ: Yes. MS. NAKAMA: So moved. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. A second? MR. FARAHL Second. October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: So, there's a motion to close file on all the unfinished business in Section 6.A. All those in—any discussion? All those in favor signify by saying "aye." Any opposed? The voice vote was as follows: AYES: Commissioners Dudoit, Farahi, Kawa`auhau, Nakama, Namahoe, Nelson, Riordan, and Chair Pavao – 8. OPPOSED: None. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Commissioner Greenbaum - 1. CHR. PAVAO: Hearing none, motion carries. B. Communication No. 23-11, Dated July 25, 2023, From Salary Commission Chair Steven Pavao, To Appointing Authorities, Requesting Information To Determine Whether Future Salary Adjustments Should Be Incorporated Into The County Of Hawai`i's Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Budget. Adjustments May Represent Increases, Decreases, Or Status Quo (No Adjustments). (This Memo Was Distributed Via Email On July 25, 2023.) The Following Responses Were Received From The Appointing Authorities And/Or Department/Agency Heads (Communication Nos. 23-11.09 And 23-11.10 Were Circulated On September 7, 2023): Communication No. 23-11.099 Dated August 18, 2023, From Rick Robinson, Chair, Police Commission; And Communication No. 23-11.109 Dated September 6, 2023, From Danny B. Patel, Acting Director, Human Resources Department. (Note: The Following Responses Were Received From Appointing Authorities And/Or Department/Agency Heads, Which Were Circulated On August 4, 2023, And Agendized/Filed At Its Meeting Held On September 7, 2023: Communication Nos. 23-11.01 Through 23-11.08) CHR. PAVAO: We move on to Section B6.B. Again, more outstanding communication. Anyone see any reason to revisit any of those? Otherwise, is there a motion to close file? MS. NAKAMA: A motionNakamaso moved to close file on Communication number 23-11 through 23 Page 56 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Dot 10 MS. NAKAMA: Dot 9 and dot 10. Yes. Thank you. CHR. PAVAO: Is there a second? MR. NELSON: I'll second. CHR. PAVAO: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of closing—close file on Communication numbers 23-11, 23-11.9, and 23-11.10, signify by saying "aye." Any opposed? The voice vote was as follows: AYES: Commissioners Dudoit, Farahi, Kawa`auhau, Nakama, Namahoe, Nelson, Riordan, and Chair Pavao – 8. OPPOSED: None. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Commissioner Greenbaum - 1. CHR. PAVAO: Motion carries. C. Review Of Existing Compensation Plan To Include Discussion And Consideration Of Ideas For Adjustments To Future Salaries Of Executives And Officials. (Note: This Matter Were Listed On The Agenda On The Following Dates: July 11, August 4, And September 7, 2023) CHR. PAVAO: Moving on to Section C. Do we have a motion to close file on that as well? MS. NAKAMA: Close file on Section C. MS. NAMAHOE: Namahoe—second. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. Any discussion? MS. NAKAMA: Call for the question. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. All those in favor of close file on unfinished business, Section C 6.C.signify by saying "aye." Any opposed? The voice vote was as follows: AYES: Commissioners Dudoit, Farahi, Kawa`auhau, Nakama, Namahoe, Nelson, Riordan, and Chair Pavao – 8. OPPOSED: None. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Commissioner Greenbaum - 1. Page 57 Salary Commission CHR. PAVAO: Motion carries. Okay. Announcements (Item 7) CHR. PAVAO: Any "Announcements?" Hearing none. Schedule Next Meeting Date (Item 8) CHR. PAVAO: Schedule of our next meeting date? Do we have a date? October 12, 2023 MS. FRENZ: Yes. So, in line with the email that I this is Deputy Corporation Counsel Cody Frenzin line with the email that I sent everyone yesterday, touching on the importance of preparation and attendance at our upcoming hearings. Again, by—let me go back to the Charter since that's what controls us. Subsection (e) of 13-28—at least 30 days prior to the approval of any salary adjustment, the Salary Commission shall—we've already talked about publication in the newspapers. So, with Chair Pavao—actually, since you have all approved the modified document and you have a copy of itGlynis already has—I've emailed to Glynis and Jamie the documents that this body has approved. Glynis will produce a publication notice as well as the excel spreadsheet that you all approved today, subject to Jamie's modifications—which I'm sure will be done as quickly as possible, since we need to send that to the newspapers tomorrow by noon for publication. So, that is Step number 1. Hold at least one public hearing in either East Hawaii or West Hawaii provided that any public hearing shall be conducted using videoconference technology to allow for public participation from both East and West Hawaii. That needs to occur 30 days prior to any action that you all take. So, what we are looking to actually do to afford as much public testimony and comment as possible is, just about 30 days after we this meeting today and the running of it in the newspaper—we would like to come in and meet here tentatively, which is why I wanted everyone to be ready to look at dates—November 13excuse me -16th is when we would look at doing our first round of public testimony on our proposed findings. But the important one per Charter, after we have received testimony, is 30 days. So, after we receive public testimony, 30 days later is the first time that you could actually take any action on proposed increases. So, that's kind of the critical thing to keep in mind. So, in November, if we meet here on November 16th, 30 days later would be a Saturday, December 16th. So, we're looking at the week of December 18th. We are currently slated and have a hold on this room for December 22nd. It is very close to the holidays, which is why I wanted to touch base with everyone and make sure that we can all commit to being present, even Page 58 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 if it's by ZOOM, but having full representation at that hearing, I think, is critical if you intend to vote and take action that day. I would prefer to not have any district representation absent. So, we also looked at—in the abundance of caution given the holiday schedule the week of the December 18d' at other locations that are available. They are not as ideal as this location. When you think visually of the location, right, we have our public testifiers present in front of us. The other room is the ACCR room, which is right down the street, this way—some people refer to it as the old Firestone building -if you're old -school HiloAupuni Center—where they do election voting, they do booster shots. It's right down the walkway from registration. Does everyone know what room I'm referring to? CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. FRENZ: Okay. That room is, kind of, just a big open room, right. Here, we have a little bit of separation, a little bit of distance between our public testifiers and our Commissioners. So, this is the ideal room. The speaker system is already in place. Our ZOOM is already in place. None of those features are readily accessible at ACCR without additional steps being taken by Glynis to get that arranged. It is possible. It is just not as ideal. So, the important question is, can everyone commit to a December 22nd hearing date and presume it will likely be quite long. Kind of like our November 16' date. We should presume it will be quite long, which begs the additional question that we should discuss before we leave here today, how much time is this Commission going to afford every public testifier? Because that is not in our Rules. November is going to be first opportunity for public comment. MALE SPEAKER: Oh, there's two testimonies? MS. FRENZ: Yes. And I think it's cleaner to afford everyone a second opportunity, if they want to come in again in December, so no one can claim that they were not afforded a fair opportunity to protest or agree or recommend otherwise. CHR. PAVAO: If we're going to do MS. NAKAMA: Commissioner Nakama, could I speak? CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. NAKAMA: Normally, in a public hearing 3 -minutes is given. And then, if you want, you can give a lee time of another 30 seconds or another minute. But it's up to us to decide that. Maybe we could give notice to the public that they come prepared with the testimony after the printing of the notice, to make sure that the public comes prepared with their testimony. Page 59 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 That we give them the option to either turn in their testimony or be enforcing to make sure that their testimony is no longer than 3-minutes—and be precise in their testimony. Just a suggestion. Thank you, Chair. CHR. PAVAO: Thank you. Are we going to have two opportunities for public testimony—do we consider doing one in West Hawaii? MS. FRENZ: Those were discussions that we have all had. It really comes down to ensuring attendance by each and every one of our Commissioners whether it's going to be in Hilo or in Kona because I will travel either way but I need to make sure that everyone here, if we set a Kona date, is going to be committed to showing up as well. No sense we have one person in Kona and everyone on ZOOM because of the travel. So, that really is up to you this body. MS. NAKAMA: Commissioner Nakama. I make the commitment to travel to Hilo, if it is in Hilo. MS. FRENZ: Thank you, Commissioner Nakama. MR. RIORDAN: I'm okay—Commissioner Riordan, I'm okay with December 22nd in Hilo. MS. FRENZ: Thank you, sir. MR. NELSON: This is NelsonI am, too, I got both dates—are good for me. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah, I can do November 16th and December 22nd MS. NAMAHOE: Namahoe is in agreement—I'll be there both days—wherever. MS. FRENZ: Vice -Chair Farahi? MR. FARAHL I can't make that—have to be in the mainland. MS. FRENZ: Can you join by ZOOM—remotely? MR. FARAHL I'll try—if it's on time. MS. FRENZ: We have to run on time pursuant to Sunshine, so MS. KAWA`AUHAU: Commissioner Kawa`auhau. I can. It's just for clarity—it's 10? MS. FRENZ: You could also consider starting earlier, if you're anticipating a lot of public testimony, so that we afford ourselves more time. If 50 people show up, at 3 -minutes a person if that's what this Commission decides to do the math would tell us how much time we would actually need. Page 60 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 MS. NAKAMA: Commissioner Nakama. I think CHR. PAVAO: Oh, is she frozen? MS. FRENZ: We can just take a recess in place because I think we had a power surge. CHR. PAVAO: That's what it sounds like, yeah they're frozen. MS. FRENZ: And we're required by law to ensure connectivity under Sunshine. RECESS: The meeting recessed at 12:38 p.m. RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 12:51 p.m. MS. FRENZ: So, just for the record, Chair, we are reconvened at 12:51 p.m. Our audiovisual connectivity has resumed and we are now back on ZOOM. For the record, Commissioner Nakama asked to be excused for the duration of the meeting. She had another engagement. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So, I guess we're going back to scheduling the next meeting or meetings. We had some discussion of proposed dates—November 16th and December 22nd MS. FRENZ: That's correct. CHR. PAVAO: So, I think everybody's in agreement with those days—were okay. MS. FRENZ: And that would be at the Hilo Council Chambers— CHR. PAVAO: Yes. MS. FRENZ: Anybody opposed to those dates? November 16th and December 22nd. Thank you for spending your last workday before Christmas with us. Santa will be here you will be Santa. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. MS. FRENZ: November 16th. Yes, sir. In light of the anticipated testimony, do you want to start earlier than 10 a.m. on either or both of those dates? MR. NELSON: I'm good with going earlier. CHR. PAVAO: Yeah -9 a.m. MR. NELSON: Eight o'clock or 9 o'clock? MS. FRENZ: Nine a.m.? Page 61 Salary Commission October 12, 2023 CHR. PAVAO: Eight is too early, I think, if you were to drive from West Hawaii but 9 would be okay I think. MS. FRENZ: So, November 16th, 9 a.m., Hilo Council Chambers—as well as December 22nd 2023, 9 a.m., Hilo Council Chambers. And, finally, I think—last but not least is this Commission deciding how much public testimony time will be allowed per public testifier subject to either of these members or the Chair affording that individual testifier additional time. CHR. PAVAO: I think the suggestion of 3 -minutes is sufficient, in my mind. MS. NAMAHOE: Do we need to take a motion on that? I'd like to make a motion, then, that the testimony be limited to 3 -minutes per citizen. MS. FRENZ: Subject to MS. NAMAHOE: Subject to MS. FRENZ: Or just 3 -minutes regardless of the testimony, no ability to afford additional time depending on the nature of the testimony should this body want to hear more just 3 -minutes per person. MR. NELSON: Why don't we allow it 3 -minutes unless the Chair decides MS. NAMAHOE: Okay. So, 3 -minutes as well as affording the Chair the opportunity to extend, if so needed. MS. FRENZ: We will publish that information in our publication that will indicate both the November 16th, 9 a.m.—date. And the December 22nd 9 a.m. date at 3 -minutes. MS. NAMAHOE: And just to make sure that at two -thirty that the bell goes so that they know they've got 30 seconds to end it—to wrap it up. MS. FRENZ: We will figure out that. CHR. PAVAO: Yes. Some kind of notice—maybe a 30 -second sign or something. MR. RIORDAN: I second. CHR. PAVAO: Okay. So moved and second. Any further discussion? Okay, all those in favor of limiting the public testimony to 3 -minutes subject to the Chair affording them an extension, if necessary or so warranted, all signify by saying "aye." All those opposed? Page 62 Salary Commission October 12,2023 The voice vote was as follows: AYES: Commissioners Dudoit, Farahi, Kawa'auhau, Nakama,Namahoe, Nelson, Riordan, and Chair Pavao— 8. OPPOSED: None. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Commissioner Greenbaum - 1. CHR. PAVAO: Hearing none, motion carried. Adjournment (Item 9) CHR. PAVAO: Do we need a motion to adjourn? MR. FARAHI: Yes, so moved. CHR. PAVAO: A second? MS. NAMAHOE: Second. CHR. PAVAO: Okay,moved and seconded that we adjourn. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of adjourning, signify by saying"aye." All opposed? The voice vote was as follows: AYES: Commissioners Dudoit, Farahi, Kawa'auhau, Nakama, Namahoe, Nelson, Riordan, and Chair Pavao— 8. OPPOSED: None. ABSENT& EXCUSED: Commissioner Greenbaum - 1. CHR. PAVAO: Hearing none. The motion carried and we are so adjourned. Thank you very much. It's 12:54 p.m. Thank you very much. Respectfully submitted, A1 Glynis amada, cretary-Reporter APPROVED: t Steven '. ao, Chair Salary • mission Page 63 Yamada, Glynis 4'MAN RESOURCES From: df bb *immor OCT 0 9 2023` Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 2:57 PM RECEIVED To: Yamada, Glynis Subject: Re: Salary Commission Agenda and Related Documents for its Meeting Scheduled for Thursday, October 12, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. at the Council Chambers - COMM. NO. 23-14 IS ATTACHED Glynis, Please check with DCC Frenz if she authorizes that this communication on my part could be shared with the chair and the commissioners. All references made to salary increases between 2018 and 2023 must be changed to state the adjustments to the base salary of the positions of covered officials.This will make it clear to the public that this is not a raise but an adjustment to the compensation associated with the base salary of the positions-- not a salary increase for an individual who occupies that position. It is very important that it is clearly understood that we are making an adjustment to the compensation of a position, not a salary increase for an individual. After the adjustment is made to the base salary to bring it to the level of the purchasing power of the amount that was authorized in 2018,the base salary for the covered positions have been adjusted by 22.44%.This is the number used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from 2018-2023. Once this adjustment is made to the base salary of a position then the word salary increase could be used for the FY 2023-24 which is the recommendation of the commission for the amount of 5%. I'm also asking that the Human Resources department creates a table for comparison to what has happened to the average salaries of the positions that are covered by the collective bargaining process. I would like the public to see a four column table to be prepared that shows,for example the salary of a patrolman in 2018 and the salary of the same patrolman and 2023.The same for someone at the rank of Sergeant and also the highest collectively bargained position in the Police Department.The third column of this table should show the amount of difference between the first and second column.The fourth column would be the percentage change that has occurred between 2018 and 2023. The same comparative information should also be provided for the employees represented by AFL-CIO who are comparable to the covered officials we're talking about now. I do not know what the exact unit identification of those positions are.The same table should also include the salaries of a firefighter, a supervisor and the highest paid Fire Department employee covered by collective bargaining. I believe such a four column table is very important for the public to see. I believe this may help to understand that the adjustment is for the base salary of a position and it's very comparable to that that has been granted to employees covered by collective bargaining. I should point out, as I have before,that if we look at it in terms of equity,the change to the base for the positions is not actually a salary increase but a compensation adjustment five years overdue. For example, if the director of my favorite department !!, the building department, was paid $100,000 in 2018 dollars that individual in terms of purchasing power today is being paid about$77,000 and change. I wonder who would take a position if the response to the question of how much is the pay?And he/she was told "well, in 2018 it paid $100,000 but as of now it pays a little over$77,000". SALARY COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII Comm. No. 23-14.01 Date P/October 12, 2023 ATT. A This is very important for the public to understand that we are not talking about a significant raise but an adjustment to the base compensation of the positions in question.The increase of 5%for the current fiscal year is the only raise. I appreciate your cooperation in this matter and sharing this information with the commission and making it also part of the public record so those interested are aware of what the facts are. Thank you. Dawood Farahi, District 5 On Sat, Oct 7, 2023, 11:31 AM Yamada, Glynis<Glynis.Yamada@hawaiicounty.gov>wrote: Hi, Danny and Cody, Please find attached Communication No. 23-14 re the "Proposed Findings of Fact by the 2023 County of Hawaii Salary Commission Dated October 12, 2023." This message has been bcc'd to all Salary Commissioners. Commissioners, for your information, Cody will be sending you a confidential attorney-client privileged email with information and instructions early next week in preparation for our meeting on October 12 (Thursday). Thanks! Glynis From:Yamada, Glynis Sent: Friday, October 6, 2023 4:31 PM To: Patel, Danny .Frenz, Dakota (Cody) Cc: Carvalho, Emarie Subject:Salary Commission Agenda and Related Documents for its Meeting Scheduled for Thursday,October 12, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. at the Council Chambers Hi, Danny and Cody, 2 Please find attached the Salary Commission agenda and related documents for its meeting scheduled for Thursday, October 12, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. at the Council Chambers. Commissioners Donala, Dennis,Teresa, and Judy—your board packets were mailed to you today. If you are participating in-person, please bring these documents with you to the Council Chambers (and they will be placed in your meeting binders). For informational purposes, Commissioner Greenbaum will be participating via ZOOM. For the remaining Commissioners, your board packets will be available at the meeting location or, if you prefer, you may pick them up at the Department of Human Resources prior to the meeting. For your information, Communication No. 23-14 re the Proposed Findings of Fact(page 2, Item number 5 of the agenda)will be forthcoming. Note: This message has been bcc'd to all Salary Commissioners. Thanks! Glynis 3 RCJO HUMAN RESOURCES 2023 OCT 11 PH2:02 PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT BY THE 2023 COUNTY OF HAWAII SALARY COMMISSION DATED OCTOBER 12,2023 Pursuant to Section 13-28 of the County Charter for the County of Hawaii Charter(2022),as amended(hereinafter"Charter"),the County of Hawai`i Salary Commission(hereinafter"COH Salary Commission")hereby makes the following findings in support of its decision to adjust the salaries and salary schedules of elected and appointed officials of the County of Hawaii to be effective January 1,2024: 1. The COH Salary Commission has the authority to review and set compensation for ate all county executive official:positions,elected officials positions and appointed positions of directors and deputy directors(collectively hereinafter"Covered OftieialsCovered Positions")so that their total salaries compensation and benefits have an equitable and reasonable relationship to compensation in the public and private sectors. 2. The COH Salary Commission has not reviewed and adjusted the compensation for any CoveFed-OffieialsCovered Positions since March 1,2018. 1 he base compensation for these positions has remained unchanged and frozen at the same 2018 base salary. Individuals occupying these positions have not received either a cost of living adjustment or any increase in their pay for five consecutive years. Meanwhile employees covered by the collective bargaining process have received contractually agreed upon adjustments and raises in their compensation during the period from 2018-2023. This situation has created unfairness and inequity in the compensation for the Covered Positions. A sample table from the Department of Human Resources is attached to illustrate this Ffact4 - Commented[Atp Commissioners-you may want to consider seeing what this table comparison looks like before 3. In accordance with the Charter and Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 92,the COH Salary we reference it in the Findings. Maybe consider cutting this sentence and figure out a way to show the public the Commission's meetings held on June 8,2023,July 1 I,2023,August 4,2023,and comparison separately? September 7,2023,and October 12,2023;were duly noticed and afforded opportunities for public comment and testimony was received. 4. To facilitate and assist in its review of salafiiescompensation for the Covered Positions, and as required by the Charter,the COH Salary Commission consulted with those boards and commissions which have appointing authority for department heads,specifically,it solicited input from the Police Commission,Fire Commission,and Merit Appeals Board. The COH Salary Commission also afforded the Mayor of the County of Hawaii and all covered -Positions to submit input and/or recommendations for the COH Salary Commission to consider. The COH Salary Commission also considered all testimony both written and oral received to date,the cost-of-living index from 2018 through 2023,the purchasing price of a dollar in 2023,historical salary data,salaries of excluded managers within the County of Hawaii,the schedule of raises for both included and excluded subordinates over the past five years,challenges with recruitment for positions within the County of Hawaii,the duties and responsibilities of the C erect Oftici ii C'oy erect Positionspos-itione with the County of Hawai`i,salaries of the Covered Offrei;rtsCovered Positions'counterparts in other county jurisdictions within the State, inversion challenges,and other public and private industry data. 5. Historically,the salaries established by the COH Salary Commission have been indexed to the increases given to County of Hawaii employees in collective Bargaining Units 11 (HFFA), 12(SHOPO),and 13(HGEA-Professional and Scientific Employees) ("collectively,BUs")and the various civil service managerial employees who are excluded from collective bargaining("Excluded Managers"),but whose salaries are tied to the BUs. 6. The COH Salary Commission has not awarded salary-increasesanv adjustment for the Covered Positions to .. . . . . . .Positions since January 1,2018 and March 1, 2018(depending on the Covered OfleialPosition). The COH Salary Commission has not met to evaluate the salaries ofCovcred O eialsCovered-Positions since 2019. 7. The COH Salary Commission acknowledges that employees whose positions are included in or indexed to BU 11 are set to receive a cumulative total of 17.25%in across- the-board("ATB")salary increases for the period July 1,2018 through June 30,2025. Employees whose positions are included in or indexed to BU 12 are set to receive a cumulative total of 21.25%in ATB salary increases for the period July 1,2018 through June 30,2025. Employees whose positions are included in or indexed to BU 13 are set to receive a cumulative total of 16.02%in ATB salary increases for the period July 1,2018 through June 30,2025. (veered OffcialsCocered Positions have not and currently are not scheduled to receive any increase in salaries since 2018. 8. The COH Salary Commission notes that quite often Department Heads and Deputy Department Heads are suffering from salary"inversion"where subordinate civil servant employees are paid higher salaries than the Department Heads and Deputy Department Heads who supervise them and oversee their work. This inversion provides a disincentive for experienced civil servants to step into Department Head and Deputy Department Head positions when they are vacated and makes it difficult for the Mayor and appointing boards and commissions to appoint or promote experienced managerial employees from within the County of Hawaii or to recruit qualified candidates for employment. The COH Salary Commission considered inversion information,which compared base salaries that did not also include other forms of monetary compensation, such as overtime pay and step increases. None of the Covered OfticialsCovered Positions are eligible for overtime pay or step increases. 9. The COH Salary Commission considered all the above information and determined it was necessary to be competitive with the current compensation of Covered Ofticiah Co\erect Positions to ensure the County's ability to both retain and recruit qualified employees. In so doing,the COH Salary Commission also considered that there has been a 22.44% Consumer Price Index(CPI)inflation rate change that has not been accounted for by failing to increase overed-Positions compensation salaries since 2018:, an unfair reduction of income for the individuals occupying these positions. This adjustment is granted to bring the base compensation from the 2018 level to a 2023 level. It does not entail any retroactive pay to individuals serving in these Covered Positions. 10.To keep pace with CPI inflation rates,pay increases granted to BU 13 employees,and to avoid further inversion scenarios where civil servants are paid more than their managers, the COH Salary Commission concludes that an inflation adjustment of 22.44%in base salary increase-for overed-Positions effective January 1,2024 or on the first day of the month following the COH Salary Commission's final approval,of increases,Therefore,the COH Salary Commission only approves with a 5%adjusted increase after the base compensation is set to a 2023 level. This is the only increase granted to account • ... . •••- .••°. . , . . ..• for cost of living adjustments for fiscal year("FY")2024-2025,effective on July 1,2024. It shall be implemented and is consistent with the principles of adequate compensation for work performed and preservation of a reasonable relationship to compensation in the public and private sectors,as the COH Salary Commission is directed to do by Section 13-28 of the Charter. A table of the recommended salary increases as set forth in this section are attached hereto as Exhibit"A". 11.The COH Salary Commission acknowledges that the proposed . . . . ...•. be-substantialadjustment and the 5%increase may not level the historic disparity but it is, nonetheless,a step in the right direction. The COH Salary Commission strongly recommends that this Commission meet annually,before the budget cycle begins,and make the appropriate adjustments going forward. Howeye_ thetheirlt should be reiterated that the overed-Positions compensation have not received a salary-inerease-orany adjustment since either January 1,2018 or March I,2018(certain select overed Positions-Positions received salary increases on January 1,2018,while others received their salary increases on March 1,2018)and"„Q t is-COH OfficialbCovered Positions-aeeerdingly. 12.On October 12,2023,the COH Salary Commission having acknowledged its charge pursuant to the Charter is to review and compensate all county elected officials and appointed directors and deputy directors so that their total salaries and benefits have a reasonable relationship to compensation in the public and private sectors,the COH Salary Commission approved these Proposed Findings of Fact recommending the base pay adjustment from the 2018 to 2023 level and grants a 5%increase for FYI 2024-2025 for Covered Positions . . . .: e and will hereafter ensure publication at least once in two daily newspapers of general circulation, submit said Proposed Findings of Fact to the office of the county clerk and the office of the mayor for public inspection and will hold a public hearing on these Proposed Findings of Fact on a date to be announced in the aforementioned newspaper publication. Any adjustment that increases or decreases any salary by more than ten percent shall require an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the entire membership of the COH Salary Commission. Following public hearing,the COH Salary Commission may vote to approve the recommended salary increases attached hereto as Exhibit"A"at its next duly scheduled and noticed meeting. 13.The COH Salary Commission is comprised of volunteer commissioners who are mindful of current economic conditions and anticipated concerns of the public. The COH Salary Commission balanced such against their obligation to set salaries consistent with the principles of adequate compensation for work performed while preserving a reasonable relationship between the salaries it sets for Covered Officiak CoveredPositions-Positions so that their total salaries and benefits have a reasonable relationship to compensation in the public and private sectors,mindful that the salaries of other County of Hawai'i employees have regular salary increases. In total,the recommended salary increases for the Covered Positions for fiscal year 2024 are approximately$484,107 or 0.06%of the County operating budget,while the recommended salary increases for fiscal year 2025 are an additional$264,216 or roughly 0.03%of the current operating budget. These potential for-salary increases were accounted for when the fiscal year 2024 budget was prepared. In addition,approximately$23 million lapsed(budgeted but did not spend)from salaries and wages in fiscal year 2023,or 10%of the total salaries and wages budgeted last fiscal year. 14.The COH Salary Commission is aware that salaries offered for equivalent work in the private sector are generally higher than that offered by the County of Hawai`i. The COH Salary Commission also notes that other employees may continue to make higher wages based on their ability to receive overtime pay. The COH Salary Commission's intent is to bring overed Positions up to a fair and equitable salary consistent with these Proposed Findings of Fact to facilitate recruitment and retention of qualified overed Positions. The above Findings of Fact will be available for public inspection at the Office of the County Clerk and the Office of the Mayor as required by Section 13-28(e)of the Hawai'i County Charter.