Is there a possibility to create qualifications established for other positions? 87 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc.
I'm not sure where that line is. I understand where you're going with your question. I mean, there are qualifications for the chief assessor. I understand there are amendments.
So there could be qualifications established for other positions within the legislation?
Thank you. So those qualifications could include experience?
Yes, Madam President. I think I understand what Councilman Goode is asking. I understand Councilwoman Blackwell's concern, Councilman Clarke's concern. I think I 88 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. understand Councilman Green's explanation that the legislation says that the employees shall become employees of the new entity and they could be fired the next day or whatever could be done to them that could possibly happen. I just think the worst or the best, depending on how you feel. But with the Memorandum of Understanding in place today, isn't our real concern, will the Administration between now and October, the date --
-- 2010 honor the intent of the legislation that the employees go off the payroll somehow involuntarily between now and October 2010 since that legislative intent is for these employees to move on to the new group? And I don't know if that's something we can legislate since the Memorandum of Understanding is already in place, but we can certainly establish a record as to the Administration's intent 89 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. between now and October of 2010. I hope I made -- I'm trying to bridge this, because I think that's the biggest gap now that we have, that we can have some control or at least some involvement in it. Mr. Dubow?
Maybe Mr. Dubow can further clarify this. I guess the issue is what happens to the Memorandum of Understanding after we pass the bill, it's signed into law by the Mayor, it's approved by the voters, it has an effective date? What happens to the Memorandum of Understanding? The Memorandum of Understanding dies.
Dies with the agency. 90 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc.
Yeah. The Memorandum of Understanding is a six-month agreement that started October 4th. So it goes through April 4th, with the ability to extend it, I think it's, maybe one month at a time for up to six more months. That would take it to next October when the agency dies. So the longest the MOU could last is essentially until the day the BRT goes away.
So the point I'm making is, the Memorandum of Understanding is temporary. The legislation is meant to be permanent.
That's correct. The MOU between now and whenever it ceases to be in place.
I'm still maybe confused now. I appreciate that clarification. Does the Memorandum of Understanding include a provision that mirrors our legislation that the employees will stay in place until the 91 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. effect of the legislation comes into play, which is they will transfer over to the new agency? Because if we're providing at least hours of job 6 protection with this legislation, it is 7 all for naught if those people don't have 8 24 hours of job protection between now 9 and then, and we will have appeared to 10 have missed that opportunity to get the 11 Administration to agree that those people 12 at least can compete for those jobs 13 because they'll still be in their job 14 come October 2010. 15
As I said to 16 Councilman Clarke, there obviously would 17 be a process -- if it is determined that 18 they should move to civil service, the 19 process for how that will work, I can't 20 answer with certainty what that process 21 will look like, but we'll be able to do 22 that by the time you have to vote for 23 final passage on this. 24
Right, but there's a different question, though. 92 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. And I understand that. That's going to be determined over a period of months. But do we have your and the Mayor's assurance that the people in those jobs right now, the particular people in those jobs, will not be furloughed, laid off, fired, whatever verb you want to use? They'll still be able to enjoy the protections of this legislation for at least that 24-hour period in October of 2010 and compete for the job under whatever civil service requirement there is, whether it's qualifying, whether it's competitive or whatever. I can't be more direct.
There's 11 months. You guys plan on laying off these people or will you give us assurances, on the other hand, that they will stay, I mean, subject to somebody not showing up for work or doing things like that, but doing the same thing 93 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. they've been doing, working for fairly low wages, working hard and that they'll at least get a chance to see this through, switch to the new entity and then deal with the civil service, whatever it is?
No, I can't give that assurance. The first answer I gave was that one of the things that we're doing when we get in there is looking at the organization, seeing whether the staffing levels are appropriate, and if they're not, there may be changes. We're not going with any pre-conceived notion that they're not the right staffing levels, but if they're not, we want the flexibility to be able to change those levels. And I don't want to tell you anything different today and then have us take an action three months from now and you say, Well, that's not what you told us.
Okay. You're not willing to give us the 94 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. assurance that between now and October 2010 for those people that we're giving them come October 2010? They could be gone before those assurances become effective?
That's correct. We want the ability to look at the organization, see how it works and see whether there are changes in staffing that should be made. I think there are two different sets of questions. I think there's are we guaranteeing that there will be no 15 changes in staffing, and that I think the answer is no. The other question is, if they're determined to be City employees, what's the process for how they'd be transitioned from being School District employees to being City employees.
So what kind of testing will we do. That's the thing that I can get back to you on within a week. 95 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. There are two separate questions, and we can answer the first one within a week. I can't answer the second one with a yes and be honest with you.
Thank you, Madam President. I believe that when we had this discussion on the floor some time ago, we talked about exempting employees, we talked about other issues that have been mentioned today, issues like experience. We talked about exempting current employees. There are ways we can deal with this if we want to do it. I'm not saying it's easy, but we're not always 96 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. elected -- we're not elected because it's always easy. I'm not saying it's an easy issue to deal with, but I'm saying we certainly have a responsibility to do so. And I don't see how we move forward when the Administration is saying they can't make any commitment on anything, on what they'll do. I believe that that is not what we can do, that we have to deal with this issue, as we have tried to in the past, and that the Administration has to at least show that they're willing to meet halfway in this discussion.
Can I make one other clarifying point? We wouldn't make that commitment on any department about a staffing level.
We wouldn't make that commitment on any department about a staffing level.
Well, 97 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. then we think you're wrong. We don't think the Administration should say blankly that they have a right to treat the citizens who elect them as well any way. People have a right to know how to look at this holiday season, whether they're going to be working next year. People have a right to know. We have a responsibility to at least show that we're being as fair as we can and not to say that we refuse to deal with the issue because it's easy not to. That's unfair. None of us would want to be in that position.
No. I agree, we need to treat them fairly and we need to let them know what the process is going to be like and how we're going to look at their jobs. Remember, the MOU was just passed a couple hours ago, so all we've known, it's coming. In terms of being able to communicate with them and set up a process, we haven't had a lot of time. 98 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. That's a different question from what will the staffing level be in an organization we haven't actually had time to analyze yet.
Madam President, I am requesting a friendly ask, that we hold up until we have these issues resolved.
This bill 15 transfers the employees. That's what we can do in this bill. This bill reforms the BRT. It is a City Council bill. Whether or not we pass this bill today, the Administration is going to do the same thing that they're going to do, whatever that is. It's that simple. This bill changes to two different agencies in October 2010, and by then, they will have done whatever they will have done. We can't control 99 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. it. We're not in charge of it. We need to pass this bill today and pass it by the 17th and do what we can through the powers of our office and look at other legislation that is far more important to the Administration in order to try to control the outcome for these employees and others, as City Council often does. They need our votes in the future, and I suggest that that's the leverage we apply in this situation, because there is simply no leverage we have. The Administration can do what it wants between now and 2010. Those employees will be there or not be there whether or not this legislation passes.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee.
I might as well weigh in on this. Everybody else is. Mr. Dubow, I think through this 100 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. process, there's been a pretty -- there's an attempt to be a pretty cooperative effort. It's pretty clear where just about every Councilmember is on here. To Councilman O'Neill's question, why can't you understand where we're coming from and give a more affirmative answer to his question as far as some kind of understanding that we're going to try to protect these people, who we all think -- who you admitted are not a problem, are not the problem.
Who, as Councilwoman Blackwell and others have said, are not getting paid a heck of a whole lot, who obviously are great concern to us. And Councilman Green is very right, maybe we can't legislate it, but since we've had cooperation, why can't we cooperate on this as much as possible anyway and go on record and say, Okay, we understand where you're coming from on this, let's see what the voters 101 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. say in May and then go from there. I mean, it's not that long a time, and a lot of these people have spent a heck of a lot of time in service, again, for not getting paid a lot of money. I guess my question is, why not? Why can't we do that?
I think what we're -- what I said we'll do is -- I think one of the key concerns is about what process we'll use, and that we will have an answer for you on that within a week, and hopefully that will address your concerns.
We hope so. I'd like to hear still a little more definitive, but okay. All right. Thank you.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo. I'm sorry. Councilwoman Tasco is next, then it's Councilman Rizzo. 102 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc.
I just want to say, I think that we all have expressed our concern about the employees with the BRT. I do agree with Councilman Green, this is our bill, Council's bill, it's not the Administration's bill. By the time this bill is passed and voted on by the voters next spring, the issue will be resolved. To hold this bill up would not be -- would not resolve the issue. So I support his call to move this bill 13 forward.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Dubow, I just can't figure why you, the Mayor and all the people involved in this decision can't get together and -- this is about also relationships. You can tell us exactly where you're going to be, whether it's not what we're hearing here today or something else, that you will look out 103 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. for these folks over there. So why can't you get in a room and come back to us -- this is about relationships. You tell me something and you change your mind. Guess what? Our relationships are over. But I just can't figure why you, the Mayor and other people, the decision-makers of this government, can't come up with a strategy. And if you have to deviate from it, work with us, but I think you hear loud and clear what we want here, and I think that you need to develop your strategy quickly and tell us what you plan to do and not do. Lay them off -- I mean, what a shot that would be to lay people off a day after because of a loophole? I mean, that's disgraceful. Tell us what you plan to do or not do.
Right. And I said that that's our plan, is to be back to you within a week with that plan.
Well, again, I just want to restate the importance of that happening. Hopefully that -- 104 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc.
Maybe it should have happened before we came here today. Thanks.
Yes, Madam President. I agree with the Majority Leader, that this is a Council bill. I know Councilman Green and a lot of other people have put a lot of time into it. I do think that this bill is our leverage. I know there's individual things that happen you can kind of bring back, but it doesn't seem to work out that way. But I think we have a week, and whatever commitment we're going to get, we'll either get it in a week or we won't, and if that means holding the bill over the holidays, we can make that decision on our own, not in this forum but collectively. So let's get it out today. 105 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. I know it's our bill, but we can hold it if we're not satisfied with the response. I don't think we're asking for anything but fairness. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President. I'll be real brief. There's absolutely no reason why we should not vote the bill out of committee today, but regardless of when we vote the bill out of committee, as long as it's enough time to go on the May 18th ballot, then essentially the voters will have their say. But regardless of what we do in terms of amending the Charter, the Charter can't be amended before May 18th, and the Memorandum of Understanding is effective today, and so what we do today is really unrelated to the Memorandum of Understanding and should not actually impact our decision one way or the other. 106 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc.
Are there any other questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, this will conclude our public hearing. We will now go into our public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilman Green regarding Bill No. 090706.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move the amendments that have been previously circulated to all members of Council be approved. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that the amendments be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The 107 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. record will reflect that Councilwoman Blackwell voted no, all other members voted in the affirmative, and the motion passes. Again, the Chair recognizes Councilman Green.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that we approve Bill 10 No. 090706 with a favorable recommendation and a suspension of the rules to allow second reading and final passage on our December 17th Council meeting, should we choose not to hold this. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 19 090706 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation, as amended, and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.) 108 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc.
Again, the record will reflect that Councilwoman Blackwell voted no, all other members voted in the affirmative, and the motion is adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco regarding Bill No. 12 090773.
Madam President, I move that Bill 090773 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so that this bill can be read at Council's next session. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 23 090773 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as 109 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Again, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco regarding Bill No. 13 090774.
Madam President, I offer an amendment for Bill 16 090774.
It has been moved and seconded that the amendment previously introduced be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.) 110 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc.
The ayes have it, and, again, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
Madam President, I move that Bill 090774, as amended, be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so this bill can be heard at Council's next session. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 18 090774 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation, as amended; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
Those 111 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. opposed? (No response.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Again, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco regarding Bill No. 8 090777.
Madam President, I move that the amendment for Bill 090777 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that the amendment as proposed earlier be adopted. All in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Again, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco. 112 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc.
Madam President, I move that Bill 090777, as amended, be adopted as amended and that the rules of Council be suspended so that this bill can be heard at Council's next session. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 11 090777 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation, as amended; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco -- I'm sorry. We neglected to vote. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. 113 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco regarding Bill No. 4 090782.
Madam President, I move that Bill 090782 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so that this bill can be heard at Council's next session. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 15 090782 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The 114 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. ayes have it and the motion carries. We will now consider Bill No. 4 090842. Councilwoman Tasco.
Madam President, I move that Bill 090842 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so that this bill can be heard at Council's next session. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 15 090842 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation; further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The 115 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc. ayes have it and the motion carries. Councilwoman Tasco, I don't see any reason why we couldn't read all of the resolutions at one time and vote on them at one time. So if you will, just read the numbers.
Madam President, I move that the following resolutions be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation: Resolution Nos. 090616, 090617, 090618, 090619, 090620, 090621, 090622, 090623, 090624. I move that all of these resolutions be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Resolution Nos. 090616, 090617, 090618, 090619, 090620, 090621, 090622, 090623 and 090624 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation. All in favor will say. (Aye.) 116 12/9/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090706, etc.
The ayes have it, the motion carries, and this concludes our public meeting. Thank you very much. (Committee of the Whole concluded at 12:15 p.m.) - - - 117 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on December 9, 2009, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)