Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-03-27 Minutes Salary CommissionCOUNTY OF HAWAI‘I SALARY COMMISSION March 27, 2013 M I N U T E S Chairperson Lundkvist called the meeting to order at 9:38 a.m. in the Conference Room of the Prosecuting Attorney, 655 Kilauea Avenue, Hilo, Hawai‘i. Present: Ms. Karolyn P. Lundkvist, Chairperson Ms. Pudding Lassiter, Vice Chairperson Ms. Marcella L. Stroh, Secretary Mr. Brian De Lima, Member Mr. Michael Sumja, Member Excused: Mr. George Handgis, Member Ms. Gloria Wong, Member Others present: Ms. Molly Lugo, Deputy Corporation Counsel Ms. Sharon Toriano, Deputy Director of Human Resources Ms. Joney Nitahara, Human Resources Manager Ms. Jennifer Sakamoto, Human Resources Program Specialist Ms. Velma Y. Menezes, Secretary-Reporter MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13, 2013 MOTION: Mr. De Lima moved that the minutes of February 13, 2013 be approved as circulated. The motion was seconded by Ms. Stroh and unanimously carried. NEW BUSINESS A) Duties of Secretary and Election of Secretary for Calendar Year 2013 Chairperson Lundkvist noted that the election for Secretary was inadvertently omitted from the agenda last month and asked for clarification on what the duties of the Secretary are. Hawai‘i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Ms. Menezes stated that traditionally, the Secretary has been assigned to keep the meeting moving along and keep the Commission on track in their discussions as it relates to the agenda items. Ms. Menezes does the minutes for the Commission, and the Secretary is someone elected from the Commission. When the Mayor’s Office assigned the Salary Commission to the department many years ago, they continued to follow what was traditionally done. Chairperson Lundkvist stated that it’s not clear to her whether they need a Secretary. Mr. De Lima stated that they already have a Secretary, so they should just say it’s the Secretary’s job to keep notes of the meetings and compare it with the minutes prepared by staff. He believes that would be a good task. The Secretary can proofread the draft before it’s finalized to see if it’s in accordance with her notes. In response to Mr. Sumja’s question on whether the meetings are recorded, Ms. Menezes stated that they are. She also noted that the Commission doesn’t have any rules pertaining to the election or duties of officers. Ms. Stebbins stated the Secretary position has just evolved per previous practice, but it’s not actually in the Commission’s rules that they’re required to have a Secretary. Mr. Sumja commented that business corporations have a secretary. That doesn’t mean the secretary takes notes. The secretary of a corporation has a different function, and maybe that’s what this function is supposed to be. Ms. Stebbins responded that the Commission’s rules do not specifically note what the duties of the Secretary are. She thinks Mr. De Lima’s suggestion that the Secretary coordinate with Ms. Menezes to review the minutes would be a useful one, as the minutes are not prepared verbatim, but are summarized with the content of what was said. MOTION: Mr. Sumja moved that the Commission carry on with the position of the Secretary and that the Commission’s Secretary collaborate with the staff secretary on the minutes. The motion was seconded by Mr. De Lima and unanimously carried. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) Review of existing pay plan to include restructuring current salaries of executives and elected officials and adjusting accordingly. 2 Ms. Stebbins reminded the Commission that at the previous meeting an investigative subcommittee was formed and tasked with looking into recommendations for salary changes. At this meeting, the subcommittee will report its findings and recommendations; and there can’t be any deliberation or discussion on those recommendations at today’s meeting. Deliberations and discussions will occur at the next meeting. This is per the requirements of the sunshine law. They will hear from the subcommittee today and then at the next meeting there will be deliberation and decision making. Mr. Sumja reported that they made some real headway, but when he sees Nancy Crawford’s letter today, that throws them off and bears some discussion. The subcommittee came up with specifics along the lines of what members had discussed previously. Members had given the subcommittee excellent input, and the subcommittee came up with what they felt was fair all the way around. The subcommittee also got excellent support from the department’s staff, Ms. Nitahara and Ms. Sakamoto, who worked very hard putting the data together. (See attached “Recommended Salaries for County of Hawai‘i Executives and Elected Officials Effective 07-01-2013.”) Ms. Stebbins stated that the subcommittee can elaborate on what their findings and recommendations are and present that to the full Commission. The sunshine law says that when a committee is formed and tasked with a certain assignment, they do the assignments, then come back to a meeting to report their findings and recommendations. Deliberating and decision making can only occur at a subsequent meeting. Mr. Sumja stated that they understood from the onset that there were certain things that people were concerned about, specifically a member of the Commission and the Prosecutor who was here at the last meeting, and they took that into consideration. Then Ms. Lassiter said they ought to be fair to everybody. Thus, they went through the entire list and deliberated to the point where they were fair to every position on that list, staying within the context of 3%. They also dealt with the issue of subordinates being paid more than the department head. Chairperson Lundkvist thanked the subcommittee for their work and time on this important task. Mr. De Lima suggested that when they schedule their next meeting, they invite the public to attend and testify on the issue. The item that’s on every agenda, “Statements from the Public on Agenda Items,” should serve that purpose, but perhaps they should hold their next meeting at the County Council room with video conferencing in Waimea and Kona to afford an islandwide opportunity for the public to comment on what may be a concern to them. MOTION: Mr. De Lima moved to coordinate the next meeting date and time to facilitate public participation at the normal 3 video conferencing locations. Ms. Stroh seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. De Lima stated that the statements from the public and the Commission’s regular meeting can be at the same meeting, but they need to have video conferencing. The public’s opportunity to give input will occur at the beginning of the meeting under the agenda item “Statements from the Public.” The subcommittee’s recommendation is already a public item and should be posted with the agenda for the public’s review. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. Ms. Stebbins noted that there has been a communication submitted by Finance Director Nancy Crawford. If the Commission wants to, they can discuss it in a broader sense of restructuring pay plans. However, again, they cannot deliberate or decide on this specific recommendation. Mr. De Lima suggested that they transmit the proposed pay plan to Ms. Crawford, advise her to review the recommendations and provide further comment at the next meeting, because the unknown may have caused her to draft that letter. Now that there is a precise number being proposed here, she may have a different view. What she may have thought was going to cost millions when it’s $226,000, may have a major impact, or it may not. The Commission can ask her to provide further input on that matter. He thinks the Chair should send a letter, give her the proposal, and invite her to comment further on the specific impact it would have. Motion: Ms. Lassiter moved that the Chairperson write to Ms. Crawford with the salary recommendations and invite her to the Commission’s next meeting to give a presentation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sumja and unanimously carried. Ms. Lassiter questioned whether they should have asked Ms. Crawford to come sooner to explain the budgetary responsibilities of the County. Perhaps for the future, the Commission should invite Ms. Crawford for any matter that involves salary increases. Mr. De Lima stated that Ms. Crawford voiced her position perhaps based on not knowing what their recommendations would be. The Salary Commission has a specific charge to provide equitable salaries that are appropriate for the executives. They are independent, their decision is final, but they need to take everything into account, so he doesn’t disagree with anything Ms. Lassiter said. However, they have invited all departments, including her department early on since they started meeting over a year ago, to provide input so this is not something that has just come up. They 4 5 have gotten submissions and testimony, but he thinks the work of the permitted interaction group, by presenting this plan, took into account the totality of the circumstances. They also provided rationale and information on the highest paid subordinates, so he thought the report was well done. The Commission is going to deliberate and discuss it at their next meeting, and if Ms. Crawford has more input, even the specifics, she can provide it then. Then they’ll make the best decision they can. Mr. Sumja added that financial people, and Nancy Crawford specifically, will always not want to raise one dime. So they have to think about that when deliberating. If they don’t do it this year, what year are they going to do it? Then it’ll be worse next year than it is this year. Mr. Sumja also noted at this time that he and Ms. Lassiter wished to compliment the Chairperson on creating a group of people who will meet on a regular basis as opposed to once a year, but also, as Ms. Lassiter had mentioned, there are certain members who never show at meetings. Ms. Lassiter explained that if a member’s interest is not there, then perhaps it’s time to suggest they resign and have their position filled with someone willing to attend so that they would always would have a quorum. Mr. De Lima stated that he doesn’t think it’s appropriate to discuss this now, as it’s not agendized. Commissioners can speak to the Chair or to other members at the appropriate time, but they shouldn’t be discussing it until it’s agendized. The Chairperson can speak to all the members about their time commitments. NEXT MEETING DATE The next meeting is pending the availability of the County Councilroom. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Mr. De Lima moved that the meeting be adjourned. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sumja and unanimously carried. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Karolyn P. Lundkvist, Chair vym