SUMMARY MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 2005 AT 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council members present were Sally Greene, Ed Harrison, Cam Hill, Mark Kleinschmidt, Bill Strom, Dorothy Verkerk, Jim Ward and Edith Wiggins.
Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Finance Director Kay Johnson, Library Director Kathy Thompson, Housing Director Tina Vaughn, Information Technology Director Bob Avery, Engineering Director George Small, Public Works Director Bill Letteri, Police Chief Gregg Jarvies, Inspections Director Lance Norris, Human Resources Director Pam Eastwood, Transportation Director Mary Lou Kuschatka, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Senior Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper, Assistant Human Resources Director Anissa Graham-Davis, and Town Clerk Sabrina Oliver.
Mayor Foy stated that the public hearing was on the recommended budget for 2005-2006. He said that before the hearing began, he had two proclamations to present. Mayor Foy said the first was recognition of the Bike to Work Week. He noted that this was Bike to Work Week, and Friday was Bike to Work Day and encouraged everyone to ride their bike to work on Friday.
Mayor Foy said the second proclamation was National Public Works Week, and read the proclamation in honor of Public Works employees. Public Works Director Bill Letteri accepted the proclamation on behalf of the Town’s Public Works employees.
Item 1 – Public Hearing on the Manager’s Recommended 2005-2006
Annual Budget, Capital Improvements Program, 2005-2006 Downtown Service
District Tax, and 2005-2006 Transportation Grant Funds
Mayor Foy said that two employee groups had contacted his office requesting additional presentation time. Those groups, he said, were the Employee Forum and Transit employees.
Comments from the Manager
Mr. Horton briefly reviewed the recommended budget:
· Current total tax rate was 57.5 cents
· Total recommended tax rate was 53.27 cents
· Reduction equaled 4.23 cents on the tax rate
Mr. Horton said this year a revaluation was conducted for real estate, and he was required to calculate an equalization rate. That was a rate that would produce the same amount of money accounting for normal growth as it produced next year, he said. Mr. Horton said the equalization rate was 49.3 cents and the base budget rate recommended was 48.68. The proposed budget rate including priority additions would be 53.27 cents, he added. He said that would be a 3.97 cent tax rate increase.
Mr. Horton said the Council had so far made adjustments that would reduce that tax rate increase to 2.9 cents. He said most of the tax rate increase was accounted for by new debt service in the next year at $2,035,000, equivalent to 3.8 cents on the tax rate.
Mr. Horton said the property tax base for 2005-2006 would rise to $5.3 billion from $4.5 billion. He noted that one cent on the tax rate would produce about $530,000.
For the General Fund, Mr. Horton said a budget of $46,968,200, including priority additions was recommended. Considering the situation the Council had been facing this year, and taking into account the recommendations of the Citizens Budget Subcommittee and the recommendations of the Council’s budget consultant, he said a series of changes in fees, which all together would produce an additional $503,900 in increases, was recommended:
· Inspection, Planning and Parks and Recreation fees,
· Business licenses,
· Commercial garbage fees,
· Non-profit and governmental garbage fees,
· Compactor and yard waste rentals,
· Engineering fees,
· Parking fees and fines, and
· Modifying the Library out-of-County fees.
Mr. Horton noted that all of these together equaled approximately 1 cent on the tax rate.
Mr. Horton said a number of priority options for the Council’s consideration were put forward:
· Reserve for pay adjustments ($746,000),
· Information Systems GIS programmer/analyst ($62,000),
· Increase April Chill Specialist to full-time ($8,720),
· Increase Special Olympics Specialist to full-time ($15,900),
· Incentives to retain Police officers ($70,000),
· Budget Analyst ($50,900),
· Human Service contracts, hotel/motel tax allocations and other grants ($422,700),
· On-line inspections permits ($7,500),
· Fire Department replacement equipment ($48,610),
· Homelessness initiative ($18,450),
· Fire Department truck, financed ($1,900), and
· Capital Improvements Program ($1,390,000), although the Council had requested that the equivalent of 1 cent on the tax rate be cut from that amount, or just over $500,000.
Mr. Horton said the Transportation Fund budget, including priority options, totaled $12,307,320, offset by $12,441,560 in revenues, resulting in a slight decrease in the Transportation tax rate. He said priority options included a reserve for pay adjustments at $192,400, the addition of a paratransit services supervisor at $53,000, the additional of a mechanic specialist at $59,000, and the addition of a service attendant at $38,000.
In the Stormwater Management Fund, priority options included the addition of an accounting technician at $49,000, charges for a surveyor at $14,000, charges for a vacuum flusher truck and operator at $41,000, and a utility truck, financed at $4,000.
Mr. Horton said in summary, that the General Fund budget was recommended at $46,968.200, the Transportation budget at $12,307,300, the Stormwater Utility budget at $1,638,900, all other funds at $13,849,700, for a total of $74,764,100. He noted that there were some deductions already made by the Council which would need to be reflected in these figures.
Mayor Foy thanked the Manager for his presentation, and noted that the purpose of the meeting was to hear from citizens regarding the recommended budget. He said the Council had been working on this budget since last June, recognizing how difficult it would be to put together a budget that was sustainable in terms of the tax rate and the provision of services to citizens.
Mayor Foy noted that about 15 people had signed up to speak regarding the position in Parks and Recreation for a Special Olympics Coordinator. He stated that the position was recommended to be funded in the Manager’s budget, and no member of the Council questioned that. Mayor Foy said the Council was prepared to go forward with it, but wanted to make sure the public was aware that the position, funded at $56,000, was fully funded by Chapel Hill taxpayers.
Mayor Foy stated that the Town had requested that Carrboro and Orange County contribute to the cost of Special Olympics, because services were provided to all County citizens. He said that those who wanted to speak to the Council regarding Special Olympics would be better served by speaking instead to the Orange County Commissioners and the Carrboro Board of Aldermen to ask them to pay their fair share.
Mayor Foy stated that in his opinion, their “fair share” would be half of the cost, although the Council had not asked them for that. The two entities had been asked to provide $16,000, he said. Mayor Foy said the Council was prepared to fully fund Special Olympics, but everyone who benefited should help pay the cost.
Comments from Advisory Boards
Bob Schreiner, representing the Library Board of Trustees, stated that the proposed budget was about as good as they could expect given the difficult fiscal environment. He thanked the Council and the Manager for working hard to minimize the impact on the services of the Library.
Mr. Schreiner said that they had heard much about raising fees and becoming more efficient, noting that the Board was concerned because they believed the Library was incredibly efficient already and that raising the out-of-County card fee to $100 was ill-advised. He noted that the Manager’s recommended budget concurred with that view, and said the proposed $10 increase from $60 to $70 was in accord with the Board’s recommendation. Mr. Schreiner said that the Board was in agreement with the modest increase in library card fees for those patrons who were not Chapel Hill or Orange County taxpayers.
Mr. Schreiner stated that the needs of the Library, as identified in the Library Master Plan, would not go away. He said the need for more books and more space for a growing population remained at the top of the list.
Mr. Schreiner asked, since this year’s budget process was concluding and the Town Operations Center project was off to a good start, could the Library Building Committee be convened.
Mr. Schreiner thanked the Council for its support.
Comments from Employee Forum
Mayor Foy noted that the Employee Forum had requested that Maggie Burnett be allowed 10 minutes to speak, and hearing no objection from the Council she would be allowed that time.
Maggie Burnett made the following statement on behalf of the Employee Forum:
“Thank you again for the opportunity to address you tonight on behalf of the Town of Chapel Hill Employee Forum that represents all Town employees and, foremost as a concerned employee nearing retirement status with the state of that future in your hands. Please allow me to first thank our Manager, Mr. Horton for his continued effort in keeping the Town’s compensation package competitive with the surrounding labor market. To the members of Council, I wish to focus on key issues that affect us.
1) The Manager’s recommendation of a 3.78% step increase -- Based on the present average annual income within the Public Works Department for the non-staff personnel currently employed, this recommendation will result in a gross increase of $24.18/week and a net increase $13.94/week. If the reduction to a 2 or 2.5% step increase as proposed by one of the members of Council were to be adopted, the average gross pay would only increase to $15.99/week and a net of $9.22/week. Please keep in mind that with a 2% step increase, the realization of the net increase would be even less. I wish to point out how such a “too generous” increase as characterized by a member of Council opposed to the recommended 3.78% step increase would relate to just one aspect of an average employee’s life style. Given a daily commute of 25 miles one way, extended out one year, an average increase of $.4.3/mile based on an increase of $.69/gallon of regular, self-serve unleaded gasoline compared to last year’s cost of $1.43/gallon for the same, (according to AAA Carolinas), we have within the Public Works Department, especially those working in our Solid Waste Services Division, who will have to pay an additional $559 next year to get to work and reliably collect the citizens’ garbage. In other words, in order for the Collector to pick up a citizen’s garbage, that employee will get to spend $80 out of pocket after depositing the net raise suggested by the member of Council. Even if the Manager’s recommendation were adopted, then that employee would get an additional weekly increase of $2.40 after paying the higher cost for commuting.
Of particular interest is information contained in the 2005 Town of Chapel Hill Data Book that is in preparation by the Planning Department that only 28.5% of the Town’s workforce resides within Chapel Hill zip codes which does not necessarily mean that they reside within town limits receiving town services as these areas extend outside town limits and include areas in southern Orange County, southwestern Durham County and northern Chatham County. The information further reveals that since 1995 there has been a declination of the work force living within town limits as follows: 1995 – 41%; 2002 – 32%; and 2005 – 28.5%.
2) Given the present spacing of 3.78% between salary steps within a pay grade, it takes on the average a total of five years if the Council approves a merit increase of a minimum of one step each year after an employee completes probation to reach the average pay for his/her job within our labor market. In layman’s terms, the Town’s message to a new employee is that if he/she remains in the employ of the Town and performs successfully in a particular job, then the Town may take action to pay that employee the average salary for that job in five years or more. As proposed by some members of Council, if the gap between steps were reduced to 2 or 2.5%, then that period of time would increase to almost seven to nine years to reach this plateau. Also, the net impact in disposable income each year for the typical employee at 2% intervals would hardly be noticeable and could also impact retirement benefits.
3) We face the reality of a 4.9% health insurance premium increase that an average employee who covers his/her dependents will pay half of this increase out of pocket with it being realized by the employee most likely occurring a minimum of one month prior to the effective date of any adopted increase. Again, keep in mind that the net increase as mentioned above does not include the increased health insurance premium that employees will be paying. Employees understand the need to accept a lesser benefit in our health coverage in order to save the Town the expense of a higher premium, thus, endorsing the recommended changes in our health care policy.
4) Of major concern to me is the fact that each year employee pay and benefits is a major highlight of the Council’s budget deliberations. We as employees are faced with many major uncertainties where a pay raise and continued benefits are concerned, yet we continue to strive to perform our duties at the highest levels possible. We no longer feel that our governing board is committed to our welfare. And, with all due respect to Council’s statements during the Board’s May 9th session, I cannot help but feel that you believe that Town employees aren’t doing high quality work and not deserving of the pay increase and benefits package as recommended by the Manager and his professional staff when discussion of it is tossed around so liberally without apparent thought to our rising economy on every hand from increased cost of housing, health care, gas prices, food and utility costs, to mention a few. Even our President is endorsing major social program cuts that directly affect the elderly and typical middle income class families that qualify for such programs.
Indications that the Council would support the notion of a recommended lower rate increase plus a special adjustment for certain groups of employees brings about inequities among the Town’s workforce when the special adjustment comes from the same fund allotment for pay raises for all Town employees adopted by the Council, thereby placing a cap on our earning potential and adversely impacting retirement benefits for senior employees. While we support the Council taking action to bring this selected group of employees’ salaries in line with the average of the job market, we cannot support the concept of you taking away portions of a pay increase from the other classes of employees in order to meet these standards to retain a selected class of employees. This method alludes to the old cliché of “robbing Peter to pay Paul”. For the past four years, the Council has rejected the Manager’s recommended pay increases for employees followed by a general statement of “this is not a good year”. We note the following:
a. FY 2001-02 – Manager’s original recommendation of 5.57% merit increase was amended at the direction of the Council and the Manager recommended the following: Resolution A - a 1.5% range adjustment and step advancement for employees below job rate and a 4.5% average merit increase for employees at/above job rate implemented 11/2/01; Resolution B – a .72% range adjustment and step advancement for employees below job rate, and 4.5 % average merit increase for employees at/above job rate implemented 10/5/01 (Council adopted Resolution B implemented 11/2/01);
b. FY 2002-03 – Manager’s recommendation using two scenarios- 1) a 3.78 % step increase for employees below job rate, an average of 4.5% merit increase for employees at/above job rate and a 2.5% increase to ranges and range increases for employees below job rate; recommended effective date of 10/1/02; scenario 2) a 3.78% step increase and 4.3% job rate increase with recommended effective date of 1/1/03 (Council amended and adopted 3.78% increase and implemented 12/1/02);
c. FY 2003-04 – Manager’s recommendation of a 2% Town-wide range change, a 3.78% step increase for employees below job-rate, a 4.5 % performance pay for employees at/above the job rate for their range, and special pay adjustments for the nine employee groups whose pay would remain below the 75th percentile of the market and after general increases were applied (Council amended and adopted a dollar figure of $670k for employee raises, including one-time adjustments for police and fire employees determined to be below the competitive market level implemented 10/1/03; employees including members of the Council received a 3% increase);
d. FY 2004-05 Manager’s recommendation of a 4% pay increase effective 10/1/04 (Council amended and adopted a 3.78% step increase implemented 10/2/04).
Well, again, with all due respect, what defines a good year? Yes, we are aware of the cost of constructing a new Town facility and the financial aspects of such an undertaking. But, should the nucleus of the Town’s government, its employees, be the chopping block in order to reach this goal when the governing board has known for years that constructing this facility was inevitable and would be costly? Rather, each year we find ourselves having to appeal to members of the Council to support and adopt the Manager’s recommendation of a pay increase that will help us meet the rising cost of living. And, members of Council, with respect to your statement at the May 9th Council session that “considering the Town has relatively low turnover among employees, one could argue that perhaps the Town was even being “too generous” in some cases”, is quite the contrary. We do not believe assuring your workforce of stable employment with a competitive labor market pay and benefits package is “too generous”. If the Town is to continue to attract and retain the high caliber of skilled employees as in its present workforce it is imperative to remain competitive with the surrounding market. We work for the Town of Chapel Hill because of choice. The choice of a reputable employer who has down through the years maintained high standards of commitment to its employees as employees are committed to the Town. The fact that low turnover among employees represents this type of commitment of a quality employer as that of the Town of Chapel Hill.
We note cost saving measures were recommended to the Council by the MAXIMUS group and the Citizens Budget Subcommittee, with some of these savings suggestions directly impacting a class of employees with the recommendation of all employees being compensated on a bi-weekly basis. We ask the Council to give special consideration to the potential of undue financial hardship to this class of employees and not go forth with this recommendation as it not only affects the timeliness of compensation for hours worked in the lower pay grades of the Town’s pay plan, but also on-call duty compensation.
In conclusion, we, the employee forum, as elected by our peers, upon the direction of the Council, endorse the Manager’s recommended pay and compensation package for your adoption with the consideration of key issues as presented.”
Comments from Others
Adam Smith, an employee in the Public Works Department, stated he did not know how to express his shame, disappoint, and frustration in what was happening, nor could he find the right tone to represent how employees, as well as citizens and business owners, feel about the budget discussions regarding pay increases for Public Works employees who provide their services.
Mr. Smith described why he worked for the Town by displaying a photograph of his son. He said he had lived in Chapel Hill for 37 years, and worked for the Town for ten years. He said what he personally brought to the Town was a degree in Recreation Management, a degree in Architectural Drafting, two pesticide licenses, a commercial driver’s license, and certifications as an arborist, a playground inspector and landscape technician. Mr. Smith noted he worked for the Town because he wanted to serve his community and to provide a safe, attractive and enjoyable atmosphere.
Mr. Smith said he was a certified arborist but was not paid for the tree work he performed for the Town, because he was a horticulturist. He said he had been using his own equipment for the last seven years to help keep the Town safe. Mr. Smith asked why he was inspecting playgrounds when he was a horticulturist, and the answer was because it needed to be done.
Mr. Smith said that many of his fellow employees were already knowledgeable, skilled tradesmen, who wanted to be paid a decent wage, be responsible citizens, and care for their families. He said for every dollar the Town paid its employees, it was receiving $1.25 in service. Now, Mr. Smith said, it appears the Town wanted to pay 75 cents for that service.
Mr. Smith said he was looking for other employment because his job with the Town had become untenable. He said if you compare the Town’s benefit package with other local governments, they are comparable but sometimes the Town lagged behind. Mr. Smith said maybe the Town should look to reducing the number of downtown parties so that funds could be saved for employee pay and benefits.
Mr. Smith said that reducing coverage means that employees pay more, paying more of a family’s premiums means they lose money, and increasing the deductible means the employees pay more. He stated that when employees agree to work for the Town part of their salary included certain benefits. Mr. Smith noted that to reduce benefits may not be a breach of contract, but it was a break in trust and responsibility. He said reducing benefits was a “confiscation” of salary.
David Ripperton, speaking for Special Olympics athletes and their families, thanked the Council for considering making the Special Olympics Coordinator position full-time. He agreed that Orange County and Carrboro should pay their fair share of that expense.
Mr. Ripperton said he had spoken to Orange County Commissioner Moses Carey regarding funding for the Special Olympics Coordinator, and he indicated the County would not provide that funding but would be willing to provide part-time employees to help with the program. He asked if the position being made full time was contingent upon receiving funding from Orange County and Carrboro.
Mayor Foy said the Council had not made it contingent on their funding, but reiterated that he believed it was unfair. He said the Council had not received notice from Orange County or Carrboro as yet, adding the Council had not asked for help but had asked for funding. Mayor Foy said Chapel Hill was providing a service to the County and doing it unselfishly, and believed Orange County and Carrboro should help pay for that, not just the citizens of Chapel Hill.
Mayor Foy suggested that those who supported Special Olympics should not take “no” for an answer. He said they needed to lobby the County Commissioners and the Board of Aldermen to fund their fair share of Special Olympics.
Walker Blakey, a Law School professor, said he was delighted that the Council had decided to fully fund the Special Olympics Coordinator position. He noted it was probably the best decision the Council had made this year. Mayor Foy asked Professor Blakey to advocate for funding from the County Commissioners. Professor Blakey noted he would do so.
Robyn Dorton, president of Up With Orange, and Brenda Spivey, vice president, thanked the Council for its support of the Special Olympics Coordinator position. She said the Special Olympics program made persons with special needs feel happy and important. Ms. Dorton thanked Colleen Lanigan, the Special Olympics Coordinator, for all of her time and efforts to make the program such a positive and quality experience.
Comments from Transportation Employees, Representing UE Local 150
Stanley Norwood, a 17-year employee of the Transportation Department, thanked the Council for the opportunity to speak, as well as for its support of collective bargaining for local government employees.
Mr. Norwood said that the Employee Forum and department meetings had not been effective in solving problems within the department. That was why, he said, that UE Local 150 was formed in the Town. Mr. Norwood noted a number one issue of concern to Transportation employees:
Pay progression, pay scale, and cost of living adjustments:
· New hires making as much or close to those with years of seniority.
· No workers in department have reached top pay grade, even those with 20 years of service or more.
· No annual “cost of living” adjustments.
Mr. Norwood said that rather than comparing Chapel Hill employees to others in the market area, Chapel Hill should be the model for the entire State. He asked the Council as they deliberate on the budget to remember the “foot soldiers” who provide services to citizens. Mr. Norwood said instead of handing employees “crumbs,” they would like “a slice of the pie.”
Mr. Norwood said that instead of Transit management working to solve existing problems, a safety coordinator was hired at a salary of over $50,000 as well as a Transit Operations Manager at about the same salary. He said that many employees felt that these positions should have been filled from within the current Transit workforce, rather than bringing someone in. Mr. Norwood said that wasteful spending would waste any budget, regardless of the amount.
Horace Seawell said he had worked in Transit for about seven years. He said he believed that cooperation between UE Local 150 and the Town would improve the relationship between labor and management that would help to maintain the quality of life that we all want for the Town.
Mr. Seawell spoke about the issue of the 40 hour work week and how it negatively impacted employees in Transit:
40-Hour work week/run schedule:
· Analysis shows that transit workers are losing a minimum of $14,000 in pay annually due to lack of a guaranteed 40-hour work week.
· 29 workers or about 25% of the drivers are impacted.
· Overtime pay is directly impacted.
· Run schedule unfair.
Mr. Seawell said meetings with the Employee Forum and Town management had not been effective in implementing the types of changes they feel are needed. He said as well, expenses are rising but their salaries were not rising at the same rate to meet that challenge. Mr. Seawell said they need the Council’s help to address these issues.
Mr. Seawell said they were professionals who were required to obtain and retain CDLs, and were required to undergo rigorous training including memorizing nearly every street in Town. He said their salaries should reflect that high degree of skill level.
Mr. Norwood said he wanted to make a few points regarding the attendance policy:
· Number of active drivers too low due to unfilled positions.
· Stand-by drivers list/extra board to small or not used enough.
· No run switches.
· Workers can’t actually take sick days as guaranteed in the Town’s Personnel Policy without generating “occurrences” and “miss outs” and/or “doctor’s notes”.
· No specified personal days to take care of business without using a sick day or vacation day.
· Policy is now being discussed with Transit management.
Mr. Norwood thanked the Council, and said he looked forward to future discussions with them.
Nancy Hayes, an 18-year employee of the Transit Department, spoke on the subject of split runs, which is when an employee has to be at work at a particular time, works for a few hours, then is taken off the clock for as much as five to five and a half hours, then gets put back on the clock for a few more hours. Many times, she said, their day did not total eight hours.
· Workers have three- to five-hour split time, forcing them to work 14-hour days in Transit.
· With the split time as it currently exists, many workers have the 14-hour day without even making a full eight hours of pay for that day. Causes missed time with families.
· Problem impacts attendance, stress, income, job satisfaction
Regarding bus maintenance, safety and cleanliness, Ms. Hayes noted the following:
· Lack of working radios and other equipment.
· Number of buses on deadline or without inspection stickers.
· Buses not ready to go (gassed up) for morning shifts.
· No regular cleaning service for buses.
· No “on duty” supervisor for late shift runs.
Ms. Hayes said the next issue was uniforms:
· Once per year ordering of uniforms (was twice each year).
· Unreasonable wait time for new uniforms.
Ms. Hayes said the workers take pride in how they look, and many members of the public see them daily. She asked that uniforms be provided at least twice each year to keep that standard.
Mr. Norwood said they wanted to focus on all non-supervisory, non-salaried hourly wage workers in the Town of Chapel Hill. He listed four possible first step solutions:
1. Establish a series of periodic meetings between Town workers elected by their peers who are members of UE Local 150, their chosen representatives and Town management in and outside of departments to identify, discuss, and resolve problems and issues that impact Town employees.
2. The series of periodic meetings will start immediately in May 2005 with a goal to resolving key issues as mentioned above by July 1, 2005, or no later than September 1, 2005. These series of periodic meetings will thereafter be opened each January to be completed no later than July 1 of each year. Next meeting schedule will begin in January of 2006.
3. Each series of meetings will end with a written summary of understanding that both Town workers and the Town will honor until the next series of period meetings begin and end the following year.
4. We are asking the Council to enact this process, calling for it to commence annually as stated above. Monthly or periodic reports to the Council would be required from all those involved in the process.
MAYOR FOY SUGGESTED THAT THE SPECIFIC REQUEST JUST MADE BY MR. NORWOOD BE REFERRED TO THE MANAGER AND STAFF AND THAT THEY COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITH A PROPOSAL FOR A PROCESS THAT THE COUNCIL COULD ENDORSE. HE SAID THE PROCESS SHOULD GIVE THE COUNCIL AND DEPARTMENTS THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS SOME OF THESE ISSUES.
Council Member Kleinschmidt said there may be budgetary issues involved with this. He said it appeared to him that employees were spending 12 to 14 hours here, but were being forced to clock in and clock out. Council Member Kleinschmidt asked why a driver who began 12 hours before the last run ended and clocked more than seven hours, could not be guaranteed pay for eight hours. Council Member Kleinschmidt said he had been concerned about this last year, and it was “beyond the pale” to expect someone to be at work for 12 hours but to pay them for only seven and a half hours.
Mayor pro tem Wiggins asked for information about how overtime was earned, since that would have budget implications as well.
THE MOTION AS AMENDED WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Comments from Citizens
Karen Dehart, representing the North Carolina High School Athletic Association, asked the Council to continue its funding to the Association. She provided a brief description of the programs and services of the Association, as well as described the benefits it provided to the Town and its citizens through sponsorship of events. Ms. Dehart noted that currently the events the Association brought to Chapel Hill included two football events, four basketball events, indoor track championships, swimming and diving events and men’s tennis.
Mayor Foy noted that the Manager’s recommended budget included an allocation to the NCHSAA. Mr. Horton confirmed that was correct.
George Small said for the first time in his 20-year history with the Town, he had been approached by the otherwise silent minority, which included both professional staff and certified technical staff to speak to the Council. He said it was suggested to him that there was a great deal of anxiety over the difficult budget the Council was facing.
Mr. Small said that budgeting was a matter of allocating financial resources, and one of the key elements that a portion of resources were directed to was the protection of assets. He said the single asset that the Town had the largest investment in and that needed the most protection was the workforce. Mr. Small said from top to bottom, it was a matrix that could not survive without a labor force on the street, as well as a highly skilled professional force.
Mr. Small said as he talked with employees this year, it came to him that there were four key things that they deal with when hiring, recruiting, and trying to retain professional and technical people in the workforce. He noted the four key elements as salary, benefits, stimulating and interesting work, and a quality work environment. Mr. Small said salary and benefits combined were used to make a hire, then he worked hard to make the work interesting and keep employees trained and stimulated. He said if he could not provide a fair salary and benefits package then he would suffer when trying to recruit employees.
Mr. Small said it was important that the Town offer a fair raise to all employees, and he believed a step raise, 3.78%, was the right choice to make. He said the Manager had done an excellent job of making the argument for the step raise. Mr. Small said the people of Chapel Hill expect a high level of quality service, and the Town has an excellent workforce that provided that service.
Mr. Small said he was a Chapel Hill taxpayer, and he was willing to pay another penny on the tax rate to make sure that the Town continued to hire and retain excellent employees who provide the service that this demanding community requires. He said he believed many other citizens felt the same.
On behalf of the professional and technical staff, Mr. Small encouraged the Council to accept the Manager’s recommendation. He thanked the Manager for watching out for the wellbeing of employees. Mr. Small ended his comments with the quote, “There are no menial jobs. Anything that needs to be done is important.” Mr. Small said the Council had heard from many important people tonight.
Dale Pratt-Wilson, representing the Committee for Alcohol and Drug Free Teenagers of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, provided the Council with a brief history of the Committee’s work since its inception in May 2004. She noted that the Committee believed that the community must have a centralized resource to address the multitude of issues related to the use and abuse of drugs and alcohol by children. Ms. Pratt-Wilson said the Committee believed this need could most efficiently be fulfilled through establishing a web presence that would allow parents, teenagers, and others to post concerns, communicate local data, and disseminate information.
Ms. Pratt-Wilson requested that the Council authorize the expenditure of Town funds to support this effort. She said an appropriation of $5,000 from the Town would allow for set-up, design and maintenance of a web site for educational, referral, and informational purposes.
David Sasser, a Chapel Hill firefighter, expressed his support for increased staffing for the Fire Department. He asked members of the Fire Department to stand, and indicated that these men and women would be the responders if you had a fire at your house. Mr. Sasser said the National Fire Protection Association standards call for 15 to 17 firefighters to respond to a house fire. In Chapel Hill, he said, only 13 would be sent because one unit had to be available in the Town to cover other emergencies. Mr. Sasser noted that meant that three people were covering 21 square miles of area when others firefighters were already responding to an emergency.
Mr. Sasser described the different roles played by individual members of the department and their importance in responding to emergencies. He explained the difficulties employees experience during fire emergencies and the dedication required to perform the job. Mr. Sasser said increased staffing was an urgent need, stating it was vital in order for them to perform their jobs safely.
Mayor Foy noted the $1 billion investment the State was putting in Chapel Hill with the construction on campus, noting that firefighters protect that investment. He said that an increase in the contribution the State makes for fire protection was in the State’s budget, and if the Town received that additional funding the Manager would recommend hiring four additional firefighters.
Amy Harvey, an employee of the Town Clerk’s Office, made the following statement:
Good Evening Mayor and Council, Managers, Employees and Citizens
My name is Amy Harvey and I work in the Town Clerk’s office. I am here tonight to offer my support to you and the Manager during this very tight budget year.
Because of where I work I have the benefit of seeing a lot of what happens in the Town. I unlike many other employees have spoken to most of you on a regular basis. I also have the opportunity to work with the Town Managers on a daily basis. This along with my close to five years of employment, have had the opportunity to hear many conversations, both positive and negative, about various budgets including this year’s budget.
There are many things that you are aware of and have to consider during the budget year. You have just started to consider the material in about 65 budget working papers, the Manager’s recommended budget, and two reports from a consultant and citizens’ subcommittee. Sometimes I do wonder how you can digest all of this information, make policy decisions, and maintain your lives as teachers, attorneys, mothers and fathers.
I am here to tell you that the employees do show an interest in this process and the work that you do all year. While many employees are not able to attend Council meetings due to family commitments, some do find other ways to keep up with the Town’s business by reading the minutes online, checking out videotapes and watching the meetings on the cable channel.
You can also take a look out in the audience tonight and see a large number of departments are represented. Some of the same folks that have been keeping tabs behind the scenes have made it a priority to stay in Chapel Hill late or return after work to show you that we are indeed interested in your actions.
In 1999, the Council saw fit to end the debate of how to compensate employees each year by adopting the current pay plan. This pay plan takes into consideration, inflation, compensation, cost of living, and incentives for the employees to do exceptional work.
Unfortunately, over the past few years the Council has had to put aside implementing this plan in its entirety each year, to plan for the large ticket items, like the Town Operation Center and other Capital Improvements. This has forced a debate on how to overcome the increases in the costs of living and trying to find a balance in compensation. I am here to ask this Council to accept the Manager’s recommendation which would accomplish one of the two goals set out by this plan. That is, the step/merit increase.
While this is a tight budget year the Manager’s request for employee compensation is reasonable and will keep employees salaries in line with the labor market in our area.
I am asking that you fund the Manager’s recommendation of a step/merit increase for all eligible employees.
Thank you for allowing me to show you my perspective. Now, I should get back upstairs and help finish the packet for your next business meeting and look forward to reading the follow-up material in the morning.
Mayor Foy said the next step in the budget process was a work session for the Council to attempt to finalize its efforts. He said no date was set for that work session, but it would soon be advertised so that the public was aware of it. Mayor Foy noted the budget was scheduled to be adopted by the Council on June 27.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND THE ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
The meeting was adjourned at 8:47 p.m.