The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet 04/17/2010• AGENDA A. CALL TO ORDER — Special Meeting at 9:00 a.m. B. ROLL CALL C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CITY OF PORT ANGELES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 17, 2010 at 9 :00 a.m. City Council Chambers 1321 E. Fifth Street / Port Angeles, Washington D. WORK SESSION 1. Budget 2. Economic Development Summit E. ADJOURNMENT II. ROLL CALL: 70RTANGE'L,ES CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL/REGULAR MEETING W A S H 1 N G T o N, I. CALL TO ORDER - SPECIAL MEETING: Members Present: Mayor Di Guilio Deputy Mayor Perry Councilmember Collins Councilmember Downie Councilmember Kidd Councilmember Mania Councilmember Nelson Staff Present: Manager Myers Attorney Bloor Clerk Hurd G. Cutler T. Gallagher D. McKeen N. West Y. Ziomkowski III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Led by: kar o- G:IGROUP\CLERK\FORMS1Council Roll Call.wpd v V April 17. 2010 Other Staff Present: uiohj-c — p� �•s • J ORTA NGELEIS W A S H I N G T O N , U.S.A. CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMO DATE: APRIL 14, 2010 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: KENT MYERS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING -WORK SESSION A special City Council meeting has been scheduled for this Saturday, April 17, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers. The primary purpose of this meeting is to have some preliminary discussion on the 2011 Budget. 1 have also added a discussion on the Economic Summit so that I can get some additional input from Council prior to the next Summit meeting on May 11. Normally we do not have a budget discussion this early in the year but 1 think that having this initial meeting in April is important due to the fact that we will be facing some major challenges this year in preparing and adopting the 2011 Budget. Also, we have four new Councilmembers involved in the process this year so we need to make sure that there is a clear level of understanding and consensus at each step in the budget process. Last year the budget process was smooth and efficient and 1 hope that we can proceed through the many budgetary steps this year without major conflicts or problems. At Saturday's meeting 1 have invited our Finance Director and Human Resources Manager to join us, but the other Department Heads are not required to attend. This is due to the fact that 1 do not expect to get into the specific details of the budget this early in the year and Yvonne Ziomkowski, Bob Coons, and I can address general questions that might arise during the meeting. I thought that we would start the meeting with Yvonne discussing the budget calendar so that each of you understand the step -by -step process that is involved in developing the annual budget. Once again, this is the City Council's Budget and if there is anything that you would like to change please let us know on Saturday and we can adjust the budget calendar. Following discussion on the budget calendar. I thought that 1 would offer my comments on the key factors that will help ensure that the budget process proceeds in an orderly and efficient manner. i would like to have a lot of discussion during this part of the meeting to make sure that the Council is committed to addressing these factors. 1 of 2 I would also like to discuss the public input into the budget process that is planned for later this year and get your thoughts and ideas. This year citizen input will be even more important because it is likely we will be reducing costs that impact City services. Citizen involvement in this decision making process will help to minimize the public fallout from budget reductions. As we go through the various steps in balancing the budget, personnel costs will likely be a major point of discussion. Bob will have background information available at the meeting on staffing levels and salary increases that should help the Council in making decisions on these types of personnel issues. Once again, no decisions should be made at the work session on personnel issues but some preliminary guidance would be helpful to City staff as we move forward with the 201 l budget. The final part of the budget discussion planned for Saturday's work session is to get initial Council input on the budget. What are some of your initial ideas and concerns? What do you like or dislike about previous budget processes? What are some of your preliminary goals for next year? What costs or services should we consider for reduction if we determine that revenue shortfalls make it necessary to make major cuts? Following the budget discussion, I would like to take a few minutes to discuss the Economic Summit. We have completed two steps in the Summit process and on May l i t h e proposed economic development action plan will be drafted. I would like to make sure that the Council's top programs and priorities are proposed for inclusion in this plan. So is there anything specific that you would like to propose that we include in the action plan that needs to be accomplished to ensure a bright economic future for our community? Thanks for your participation in this informal work session. See you on Saturday morning. 2 of 2 Questions for City Council regarding discussion of labor relations and contract negotiations. Question 1: Should the City attempt to settle with the unions for multi -year contracts or a series of one -year contracts, due to the unstable economy? Discussion: Historically the city has 3 year labor contracts as the practice. A few times we have had a one -year roll -over contract because of labor dispute and just could not reach agreement and another time when the mill closed. We also had a few two year contracts because of the economy. I suggest a series of one year contracts would be better now, and evaluate our fiscal condition each year. The unions will not like this but it is our decision and will be an issue subject to bargaining. Question 2: Should the City continue to use 90% of the Seattle - Bremerton- Tacoma Consumer Price Index for determining COLA's or switch to a flat percentage rate? Discussion: The city has used a CPI formula for over 20 years. It is the primary method used to calculate COLA's in the public sector and private industry. Management and labor like using the CPI formula as it is about the only known factor to determine increases in the cost of living. It gives both sides a common ground without conflict in setting wages adjustments. 90% is the most common used CPI and a many cities in the Seattle area use 100 %, mostly larger cities. We use the Seattle- Bremerton - Tacoma CPI -W index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, known as the CPI- W index. There is another CPI called CP1 for All Urban Consumers and one for U.S. City Average. The difference between the CPI =U and the CPI -W is generally only a tenth of a percent or so and one maybe higher than the other from time to time. Most employers use the CPI -W index. The U.S. City Average is often lower than the Seattle CPI, which is why few cities use it in the labor contracts. Unions would not agree for the very reason it does not measure the Washington market. There are down. -sides to using the CPI formula as it applies only to Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA) and rural areas like Port Angeles do not have a way to measure market increases for goods and services for a small community. There are differences in costs for PA compared to the Seattle 1 -5 corridor cities, therefore the reason to apply 90% of the CPI and not 100 %. Flat Rate COLA: Because we are in a very unstable economic situation and may be so for the next 1 -3 years, a series of 1 -year labor contracts may be the best way to control budget increases. Unions tend to accept this method only with conditions that if the CPI reaches a certain level, then the parities re -open the contract. This negates the reason for holding to a flat rate. Question 3: Should the City consider furlough days off in an effort to balance the budget? Discussion: In 2009 and into 2010, many cities and state governments used furlough days off to reduce costs. Furlough days off clearly saves money in a short term budget crisis. This method has a number of pro's and con's. Furlough days are a short term fix to budget shortfalls for 1 -2 years, it is not a long term or lasting impact to the budget. The primary method for lasting budget reductions are service cuts and layoffs. Furlough days used by other cities I am familiar with range from 512 days a year depending on the agency. They are generally Fridays or tied to holidays. Productivity and services are seriously reduced, however they clearly save money. Furlough days do not impact employees equally because many public services must be maintained 24/7 such as police, fire, medic, and water and waste water treatment plants. The work load increases because services are not normally reduced or eliminated; you have fewer staff - hours with the same work load; delays can be expected. Unions also expect something in return for agreeing to furlough days off, such as a larger COLA in the near future; added vacation to make up for the furlough days, and other concessions to make up for the financial loss. Agencies that make these concessions are defeating the purpose and merely backload the costs on future years. The Police and Fire unions do not generally accept furlough days off and also have binding arbitration, which adds to the difficulty for negotiations. Western Consumer Price Index Card www bis..gav Search: All BLS.gov BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS //orne Subject Areas Databases & Table., Publications - firirtrk - .r1c.)1 SPENL.:■* Western Information Office IIR0W51 WESTERN HOME REOIONAL. OVERVIEW - 5TA1F AND AF".EA DATA NEWS RELEASES AND TABLES ..-..... FATS BY GPOCRAPHY DATABASES FAi?S ONTACT NS SEARCH WESTERN WESTERN TOPICS - . - - INFLATVN. ANT' CONSUMUL .SENDING EMPLOYMENT AND NNEFIPICIYMENT PAN AND BEN8FliS woRKPLACL INJORres PEGIONAL REPORTS AND AP TICLES NY-- - i EMPLOYMENT : 'AT ; O.J Is'Irr Western Consumer Price Index Card ' N1Dlitlr il Birrg+ntlily 1n,lexp,=; " 1-P Ify• r ver:Aor) DL Pacific ritig5__Card - the PDF is preferred for printing (note that the tables below are updated several hours before the PDF version). Monthly and Bin Indexes Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in Pacific Cities and U.S. City Average (1982-84=100 wife% otherwise noted) Monthly Data I U.S. City Average (1967=100) - Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA (1967=100) West (Dec.1977.100) West - A (Dec. 1977=100) !West - DEC (Dec. 1996=100) a/ Footnotes j (1) 1,500 population and over C. Less than 1,500,000 Econorom Release!. Schedule of Upcoming Releases for the Consumer Price Inge/ ......__ __ , MI items Indexes Percent change 1 1 12 months i 1 month I i ended I ended Mar i Feb I Mar Feb Mar I Mar 2009 I Zino ] 2010 2010 I 2010 I 2010 -- 1 212.709 216.741; 217.6311 2.1 23 _ OA 637.182: 649.259] 651.925 I __.. ..._ --- - 1 221.3761 224.620 225.4831 -- : 1711 1.9: 6.4 654.042: 663.6271 665.177 • --/ 1 217.3531 220.179 1.4 1.6 0.31 351.345 355.9081 356.9261 : 221.124 223.989] 221.6361 1.4r 1.61 0.3 360.5741 365.246 366.30. I i - F - 131.775 133.513 133.863! 1.41 1.6: 03 r -J Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) in Pacific Cities and U.S. City Average (1982-84=100 unless otherwise noted) r _ All Items Indexes Percent change for. .. _ Mar 1 Feb I Mar ' Feb Mar Mar Monthly Data 2009) 2010 2010 2010 i 2010 I 2010 U.S. city Average 207.218' 212.544 213.5251 1 2.8: 3.0 0.5 (1967=100) . r . • 636.025 ra Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA . 213.013 217.00 218.157) 1.8. 2.4: : 0.5 (1967.100) 1 529.518 641.557[ 544.721 1 West l 210.6511 214.7161 215.457 2.0. :17' 8.3 (Dec. 1977.100) . 338.942: 345A55 346.659 J [West - A 101 -0.41 212.9651 218.850 217.700, 1.41 2.2 West - B/C (Dec. 1996=100 (2/ (Dec. 1977=100) -- 1 344.748i 351.037 352.4141 -- 1 130.674 133.325: 133,675: . 2.0 23 . . 0.3 ......_..... __ _ footnotes (1) 1,500,000 population and over (2) Less than 1,500,000 Schedule of Upcomino Releases for the Consumer Price Index Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPL-U) in Pacific Cities and U.S. City Average (1982-84=100 unless otherwise noted) Feb Page 1 of 3 Newsroom I Tutorials / Release Calendar 42 A -Tinder I Abolit BLS I ll I: WeLte,rA9 Fr r441 12 months 1 month 1 ended ended All Items Indexes Percent change 12 months 2 months ; Jan Feb ended ended 2an Feb ; Feb http://www.b1s.gov/xg shells/ro9xgOla.htm 4/14/2010 Western Consumer Price Index Card Page 2 of 3 fiad, li.3. TOD Bimonthly Data 2009 1 2010 . 2010 1 2010 2010 : 2010 San Francisco-Oakland-S 1.81 an Jose 222.166' , 226.1451 € 0.8 683.001 695.2.33 (1967=100) i Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton 1 i 1 I 226.085 0.6. 0.2 (1967=100) : 224.73_ 1 seloss . i 689.195 j --s l Schedule of Upcominu Releases for the Consumer Price Index Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) in Pacific Cities and U.S. City Average (1982-84=100 unless otherwise noted) All Items Indexes Percent change I I . 1 11 12 months i 2 months , ended l ended i L s I i i Feb Jan I Feb Jan 1 Feb r Feb Bimonthly Data 2010 : 2010 2010 : 2010 ' ' 2009 2010 ; San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose I 216.797 20 2.4 1 0, 9i - (1967=100) I 660.165 i € t s - 1 Seattle-Taeoma-Bremerton 218.752 221.215! 1.1 0.1 { (1967=100) 648.819 . _ I 656.122E i Schedule of gpromino Rplpaqrs for NIP Consumer PrIen Index 1111 Semiannual Indexes Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in Pacific Cities and U.S. City Average 1 r (1982-84=100 unless otherwise noted) - -7 1.11 1 Index J Percent change from -,- Semiannual Data $ 2nd half 2009 2nd huff 2008 .- lst hair 2009 ■ 1 Anchorage - ----- ------ 1 --- ------ - - (Oct. 1967=100) 1 193.956 1.1: i , 516.351 1.8, -1 Honolulu 232.0261 0.71 1.7 . (1967=100) if'hoenix (Dec. 2001=100) 1 I 638.761- 117.802 Portland . . 217.1911 0.51 1.4 (1967=100) ! .... ..... ........... ........, . ___ ... 635.846i 0 San Diego 293.655 ------ .-- 0.6 1.1 '[. (1967=100) ' 823.8721 i Schedule of Upcming RE Consurnar Price_ Inc:ft I_ Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) in Pacific Cities and U.S. City Average 1 (1982-84=100 unless otherwise noted) Index 1 Percent change from 1 ■ Semiannual Data € 2nd half 2009 I 2nd half 2008 I let half 2009 1 11 . ! € Anchorage € 191.881t 0.7, 2.0 : I (Oct. 1967=100) 499.398' Honolulu 231.084 9.5 r (1967.„, 645.586! 2.0 Phoenix (Dec. 2001=100) 117.577' - _ ... ......_ Portland 1 211.950! -1At 0.9 0.71 1.9 1 (1967=100) 610.846! San Diego r- - - t - 228.6I37:1 - : IA; (1967=100) 1 737.476; Schedule of ,Ltacatalpg Pele_asesior th P Consumer Price Index ! Tools Calculators Help Info C At Glanct: 111flatiC•1 461■01MC. gur:stieri 1111 Datahses & Tables 0 Injury 4iid iliriies http://www.131s.govixg_shells/ro9xgOlaltrn • 7 lode. O FAQs O Cl ELF • • nracr Jr EY bihi 11,7w • C.Ismt.....•rs I. BLS O rind Jr! ClOt. dl hdri our Lists & r zecurity o Lifikifig ii. Cilt.tyrigtit Frctdurn of /Worm:Won Ad I Co,A4Imer Survey I Do vrsu hay,: S t...hnial VOH sik gLiko,loistt'.7 bis.qipv 4/14/2010 r 11! LI cola.5yrs.hist 4/14/10 YEAR 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS (COLA'S) 2005 - 2010 Teamsters r7 Sworn 2.0 % +1% 5.58%+1% 3.0% +1% 4.50% 3.70% 4.00% Teamsters Non -Sworn 2.00% 5.58% 2.25% 4.50% 2.7% wx 2.00% Mgt. -Non IBEW IAFF AFSCME Union 3.50% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 3.50% 5.58% 5.58% 5.58% 3.50% 2.25% 3.00% 2.25% 3.50% 4.50% 3.00% 4,50% 3.50% 3.70% 3.00% 3.00% 4.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% " = non -sworn unit received 2.7% plus 5% market adjustment for Records personnel in PD. Sworn: 2008 -10 received the COLA in January plus 1% mid -year in July. IBEW: generally negotiate a flat rate versus a CPI formula. Since about 1990, City uses 90% of the Seattle- Bremerton Consumer Price Index, All Urban Wage Earners, W- index. July CPI, applied the following January to allow budgeting. COST OF CITY EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS -2010 Empl Annual Cost Enrolled AWC Medical (active) $2,262,792 182 Fire LEOFF I (retired) $166,500 14 AWC Dental $160,180 182 AWC Vision $20,872 182 LTD _ all city $56,000 238 Life Insurance - all city $22,500 238 Teamsters Medical $649,377 58 Teamsters Dental $71,500 58 Teamsters Vision $8,000 58 Police LEOFF I (retired) $150,000 15 Total $3,567,721 Source: March 2010 billing Hbenf.2010.a[lcitycost.4.10