ORDER-2018-179 : An Appropriation from Free Cash (01-324001) in the amount of $284,210.00 to Police, Salary and Wages (012111-511000) to fund the settlement of a 3 Year Contract with the Police Superior Union.

Transcript (~14 min @ 10:02)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 10:01 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: Motion to suspend the rules. We have a motion to suspend the rules by President Search. Second. seconded by alderman Mortimer all in favor of the motion thank you madam

▶ 10:13 Michael P. Zwirko: chair I seek to take the items out of order this evening I'd like to take the second item on the agenda out of order which is order two zero one eight dash one seven nine I'm requesting so I see that we have the police chief here this evening I was hoping that he might be able to speak to that order and also I'll note excuse me that in the department list for the agenda that

▶ 10:38 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: going over on the budget uh the police chief is also first we have a motion to take order 2018-179 the third item on our agenda out of order and address it first from president President work though second seconded by alderman mortimer all in favor any opposed to taking it out of order so we will first address order 2018-179 and appropriation from free cash zero one dash three two four zero zero one in the amount of two hundred and eighty four thousand two hundred and ten dollars to police salary and wages zero two zero one two one one one dash five one one zero zero zero to fund the settlement of a three-year contract with the police superior union and we do have chief lyle with us this evening as well as patrick delarusso thank you

▶ 11:34 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: both for being here to speak on this order would you like to begin with a statement

▶ 11:51 Speaker 4: I commend the City and also the Superior Officers Union for coming together and settling this contract. It was long overdue. The contract does expire on June 30th, 2018. So it was a long negotiation. And like I said, I commend both sides. We came to terms and we have an agreement.

▶ 12:04 Speaker 5: yeah if I may to the chair there should be a memorandum in the packet from today from Robert VanCampen the city solicitor and in the memorandum that he sent the board if I may just paraphrase it here he indicated that the superiors union that the parties have agreed to a 2.5 percent cost of living adjustment as well as some additional financial enhancements the city's objective during this round of bargaining was to invest responsibly in the department's command staff and to implement an important bulletproof vest where policy the cost

▶ 12:52 Speaker 5: of the agreement I have outlined and a memorandum to the mayor that was dated May 7th and in it it indicates that an appropriation from free cash in the amount of two hundred eighty four thousand two hundred and ten dollars to police salary and wages to fund the settlement of a three-year contract with the police superior union that's fiscal 16 17 and the rest of 18 and in so doing that would

▶ 13:32 Speaker 5: bring the free cash balance down from 1 million 342 282 to 1 million 58 072 and again it's uh for a three-year settlement and i ask uh their support thank you yeah so um

▶ 13:55 John N. Tramontozzi: so we uh i i heard what you said and i understand it but just for the public's um information so this is retroactive back to fiscal year 2016. so it's a three-year and it's this uh was a bargain for it was a union contract right is that what it is okay so they're going to be without a contract coming into fiscal year 2000 july 1. yes uh is there any um

▶ 14:28 Speaker 4: anything in the works to uh i know that the uh the city solicitor has reached out to the union attorney to set up meetings to expedite negotiations okay that's that's good news

▶ 14:35 John N. Tramontozzi: the sooner the better i think yes uh let's try to get on top of this and not have to try to make these things retroactive but uh one of the other things i was looking at and i understand uh the negotiations and the cost of living adjustment but um they also agreed upon was these mid-career step increases maybe mr de la rusa you can comment on that what is the city's positions on these steps and and what i mean by that is not only i'm looking for because we are going to be having budget hearings i'd like the public to understand what the city uh how the city handles these these steps and whether they're part of union negotiations or these step increases the salaries are are applicable to non-union

▶ 15:23 Speaker 5: employees as well yes um on the latter half step increases are applicable to non-union employees I'm sorry, they are or they are not? Yes, they are. Okay. To non-union.

▶ 15:35 Speaker 5: You'll find that in the budget says that we've already had some to see in the past. Relative to the CBA, the collective bargaining agreement here, in this case, it was bargain that based on the total years of service within that department, that they would be entitled to 10 years at 2 percent 15 years 2 percent and at 20 years 2 percent so it historically in terms

▶ 16:01 John N. Tramontozzi: of what the city has done do we still uh provide step increases to uh salaried employees for the

▶ 16:12 Speaker 5: city are we doing away with that program not through the chair yes the uh human resource

▶ 16:17 John N. Tramontozzi: department still takes that approach correct so what um and these step increases are applicable

▶ 16:24 Speaker 5: every year um through the chair historically what has happened in the uh in the past several years and then some is that if an employee was entitled to a step increase again non-union not union we're talking about we typically would grant the step increase but not the cost of living okay not both you get one or the other so for those that find themselves at the end of that step and if they haven't been any adjustment to upgrade them to another level then they would receive just the cola period so when did that policy change to the city that

▶ 17:00 Speaker 5: they'd get one or the other but not both my guess has probably been at least uh three to three to five years i mean i can go back because it when it happened um shortly thereafter if not directly thereafter now you tested my memory we had done the wage freeze across the city for union non-union and it became evident that we had to peer back where we could on those types of increases not that they're not warranted but there is a cost to such a program to do both and it was decided that policy would be that if it was uh a step and you get the step but you're not going to get the

▶ 17:39 John N. Tramontozzi: cola with it one or the other all right that's a decision that the the administration will make when it comes to non-union employees salary employees that is correct but it's is it still considered part of the negotiations in in union contracts the union the union positions are not

▶ 17:52 Speaker 5: parallel to with cities two different complete different working groups working units and

▶ 18:06 John N. Tramontozzi: uh different policies all right so um yeah i mean i know we're as the mayor suggested we're in some fiscal uh concerns here in terms of uh you know we got to scrutinize these budgets as we go forward and um and i think it's important to um to look at these uh uh step uh increased salaries um and you know i can understand cost of living step but in fairness do you get both and and i'm not sure that that's something let me strike that i'm sure that's something we should be looking at

▶ 18:41 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: anyway okay thank you i appreciate it thank you alderman medeiros thank you thank you uh this

▶ 18:44 Monica C. Medeiros: expenditure tonight that we're looking at the 284 210 does that includes all uh back wages and any

▶ 19:02 Monica C. Medeiros: overtime increases due to the everything and then um i see the bulletproof vest policy

▶ 19:13 Speaker 4: i didn't bring the bulletproof vest policy i have pulled a copy of the policy to the union

▶ 19:21 Monica C. Medeiros: for review and then we would discuss it okay so it shall work to craft this policy but it it's

▶ 19:26 Speaker 4: Currently, we have one with patrol now, and I would like to mirror the patrol policy with the supervisors, so we don't have two separate policies for ballistic guns.

▶ 19:36 Speaker 6: Do we have the equipment that we need to purchase additional?

▶ 19:40 Speaker 4: It's a grant that we purchased. So 50 percent comes from the federal government, the Department of Justice, and 50 percent comes from the state EOPS, Executive Office of Public Safety. So the net cost of the city is zero.

▶ 19:57 Monica C. Medeiros: think that's been one of the things that's been on on and off the chopping block at the federal

▶ 20:02 Speaker 4: level uh if i for as far as i know every year we have we have satisfied the grant requirements and we receive best funding for best every year for as long as i've been here obviously important

▶ 20:16 Monica C. Medeiros: for safety very very important um hopefully you know wondering if we'll see another expenditure related to it so it should be as far as we as far as i know the grants are already out we've

▶ 20:21 Speaker 4: already applied for next year our next fiscal year so we're good to go okay and we don't buy 20 vests a year so they come in dribs and drabs so that some offices three to five a year they expire when we replace them it's an ongoing thing they have a five-year shelf life and i guess the

▶ 20:46 Monica C. Medeiros: question that probably all wondering is is the budget that we're going to look at later today does that include this salary increase the salary numbers in the police budget

▶ 20:59 Speaker 4: to incorporate the settlement yes thank you thank you thank you remember in the

▶ 21:07 Robert A. Boisselle: memorandum of understanding there's an item at the bottom of the letter the bulletproof vest policy I thought this was mandatory but it says show work to to merely craft and implement a mandatory. Has there been a problem in the past with the officers wearing their vests?

▶ 21:28 Speaker 4: No. There is two different types of — the policy impacts both administrative, like myself, as well as the officer on patrol. Currently now, the supervisors, a good portion, fall under the administrative, and the sergeants fall under the patrol. They all wear their

▶ 21:52 Robert A. Boisselle: best they all wear their vests okay now the vest says we talked about in the past and past budgets were upgraded on an yearly basis or every five years is

▶ 22:04 Speaker 4: there a warranty on these better five-year shelf life and you replace them at five years is that a lot was to be issued a vest today five years from now you get a notice from from myself that your vest is due to expire six months please cannot get fitted for a new vest okay do we have a line item for

▶ 22:24 Speaker 4: that or is that paid for by a grant it's basically paid 50% by the federal government 50% by the state and the net cost of the city is zero so zero is out

▶ 22:30 Robert A. Boisselle: the lined in yes it does okay thank you very much thank you thank you just for

▶ 22:37 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: my own edification we have this really helpful questionnaire there are 48 staff persons in your department and how many are covered in this contract for the police superior union 13 thank you that's all thank you thank you I just

▶ 22:54 Scott M. Forbes: have a quick question regarding the free cash you said that after this allocation if it gets approved which I'm assuming it will we're down to 1 million fifty eight thousand and seventy two dollars yeah that is through this fiscal year which should be I assume will be going down as the budget process continues if other allocations of free cash are going to other various areas absolutely right

▶ 23:18 Speaker 5: all the men you will see the remainder of this free cash the majority approximately hundred eight hundred and twenty five thousand just going to relieve the snow and ice deficit so you will see that before June 30 correct so this will be depleted as time goes yeah yeah it will absolutely be depleted before the end of the fiscal year okay thank you thank you

▶ 23:48 Speaker 7: additional questions or comments second I'm sorry I didn't I'm sorry it's okay

▶ 23:52 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: motion to recommend for passage we have a motion to recommend passage by President work oh it's been seconded by alderman boys L any further discussion all in favor aye any opposed this motion will be recommended for passage at the next full board meeting thank you thank you very much it's probably more efficient if you stayed there since I believe you're up next we will move back to the top of our agenda this evening to order 2018-183 the City of Melrose operating budget for fiscal year 2019 in the amount of $79,399,945.73 we have seven departments on our agenda to go