Council, Bishop at odds over increases

Employees for the municipality of Greenfield could see a 1-percent increase in pay if council passes proposed ordinances accepting salaries and wages and accepting a new collective bargaining agreement with the Fraternal Order of Police. However, some council members voiced opinions against the measures, stating that the increases might not be fiscally responsible, and are out of the scope of the authority of the city manager. 

   The legislation was brought before council during their regular session Oct. 19 by city manager Betty Bishop. During her report to council, she said that she had received a request to enter into collective bargaining with the police union. She asked that Police Chief Tim Hester, finance director Karen Daniels and council member Bob Bergstrom be on the negotiating team.

   "Bob was not able to be at the negotiating meeting, but I discussed the parameters with him before our meeting and after. The legislation you have before you tonight reflects a 1-percent increase for 2011, 1 percent for

2012, and 1 percent for 2013 with a clause for either party to re-open

negotiations for 2013 if they so choose,² Bishop said. "Also, there is a pay

ordinance for all non-bargaining employees readjusting longevity pay to

reflect the ordinance before the cuts were made with a 1-percent pay increase for 2011, 1 percent for 2012, and 1 percent for 2013.

   "When I discussed the concerns that I had with (the related ordinance)

with the finance committee they asked me to look at making some changes. One of their requests was to look at initiating step increases instead of longevity. In two instances, (Hester and Daniels) were making less or the same amount of people working under them, so we have addressed that. I recommend the FOP contract be approved.

   "In making this recommendation, I am keeping in mind the FOP freezing wages for a year and non-bargaining employees wages being frozen for two years and longevity cut in half. Since it looks like our finances are stabilizing and in good faith readjusting our pay in a small amount to

reflect this stabilization.

"What happens if we get hit again with another downturn? Then we will have to cut again and ask for concessions," Bishop said. "I hope that does not happen; but if it does, we will handle that situation at that time. We have good people working here and I applaud them for being committed to this city. I realize our entire community has been hit hard with this recession and I hope and pray this is just the beginning of good things to come."

   Council member Harvey Everhart said that he had serious concerns with the city entering collective bargaining, as "it does not apply for

populations less than 5,000."

   Bishop said she was aware of that, but that she felt it was necessary in order to maintain the good working relationship with the city employees. 

   When questioned on the new salaries of Hester and Daniels, Bishop said that she arrived at their new salary figures by taking the difference in pay between a patrolman and a sergeant in the police department. She took that figure, added it to the pay of a sergeant, and that would be Hester's new salary. She then made Daniels' salary the same as Hester's. The increase in salary is 4-percent, according to Everhart.

   Everhart said that according to Greenfield law, the city manager was permitted to increase salaries by 1-percent without bringing the matter to council. 

   "How can you explain making this increase without bringing it before

council?" Everhart asked. 

   Bishop said that was what she was doing with the legislation. Council member William Redenbaugh began shaking his head "no" while Bishop was speaking.

   Everhart said that Bishop was not requesting the matter before council, rather telling council what she was doing. Bishop reiterated that she was bringing it before council.

   Everhart said that the proposed increases were approximately $20,000 more for salaries than Greenfield paid last year, which would be more than $60,000 over the three-year period of the contracts.

   Bishop said that it was approximately a $12,000 increase.

   Council members said that was not the way the ordinances were written, or at least that it was unclear what some of the numbers were.

   Redenbaugh said that he found some of the numbers questionable and that he only had a short time to review the figures in the time between receiving the information and when the council meeting started. 

   Council president Betty Jackman said that the ordinance committee met the day before the council meeting and that the clerk worked diligently to have the legislation prepared as soon as she could. 

   Council considered separate ordinances regarding the FOP collective bargaining, setting wages for non-collective bargaining employees and amending the codified ordinance section regarding longevity.

   "That was why we did not ask it be passed as an emergency," Bishop said.

"So you can look it through, it can have three readings and you can be

comfortable with it."

   "We will look at the numbers," Redenbaugh said. 

   Everhart said that with the proposed legislation the city would be paying $1,449,586 in compensation to the 25 full-time employees and two part-time employees. In the police department, it would be $633,803 for 11 people. 

   "With the half-percent income tax the city receives, the money taken in will not satisfy (the salaries) let alone run the police department," Everhart said. "If council wants to do it, OK. But it's $633,803 for 11

people."

   Everhart went on to say that because Greenfield consented to go into collective bargaining ­ something they did not have to do ­ they had to then increase the pay and longevity for the other employees to match that of the police department. 

   Bishop said that she researched the pay of area cities and villages, and in most instances, the pay of the employees of Greenfield was almost always last. In many cases, she said, there were large disparities in pay between their counterparts in other cities and even in the villages they are making more than the employees in Greenfield. Our employees are nowhere near the top.  We brought this to you in full faith, and I stand by that."