HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 02-01-1993 SpecialPr. 11
AGENDA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1993
5:30 P.M. - 6:30 P.M.
5:30 P.M. DINNER AND INTRODUCTIONS
I. Community use of school district facilities for recreational programs - Eric
Blank
II. DARE Program - Craig Gerdes
III. School Liaison Officer Program - Craig Gerdes
IV. Mielke Field Update - Linda Powell
V. Areas for Cooperation
VI. Other Business
6:30 P.M. ADJOURN
DATE: January 28, 1993
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Frank Boyles, Acting City Manager
SUBJECT: MONDAY FEBRUARY 1 CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
Three meetings are scheduled for the City Council on Monday afternoon and evening,
February 1. They are:
I. 4:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
The purpose of this session is to afford Councilmembers with the
opportunity to discuss personnel matters and particularly, the
impact of the Governor's State of the State message on Plymouth
labor negotiations and 1993 budget.
H. 5:30 p.m. JOINT PLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL & INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT 284 MEETING
Attached is an agenda for this meeting which I have reviewed
with Robbinsdale School Superintendent Linda Powell. The
person's listed will make brief presentations on their respective
agenda item and an opportunity will be provided for questions
and answers.
HI. 7:00 p.m. TOWN MEETING - WARD 4
Attached is the agenda, invitation letter and Ward 4 map for the
Town Meeting. Staff members are prepared to make their
respective presentations. We will endeavor to complete our
presentations within 40 minutes in order to provide enough time
for resident questions.
attachment
January 11, 1993
Dear Plymouth Resident:
SUBJECT: TOWN MEETING, Ward 4
Plymouth is a developing community and there are many actions underway or in the
planning stage which could impact you. In order to maintain open communication
channels with residents of the community, the City Council has scheduled a Town
Meeting for residents of your ward at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, Febniary 1, 1993.
In order to keep the meetings on an informal basis while dealing with specific topics of
interest to you, the Town Meeting will be for the ward shown on the map below.
On the reverse side of this letter you will find the agenda topics for this meeting.
Following reports on these topics, questions will be entertained regarding these or other
matters. If you have questions about other issues you do not choose to raise publicly,
the Resident Feedback Form you receive at the meeting may be used. Your particular
concern will then be reviewed and a response provided.
I encourage you to join Councilmembers Edson, Helliwell, Tierney, Vasiliou, and me
at 7:00 p.m., on Monday, February 1, 1993, at the Plymouth City Center. We are
anxious to meet you and look forward to this opportunity to informally discuss matters
of mutual interest. If you have any questions about the Town Meeting, please call your
City Clerk Laurie Rauenhorst at 550-5014. If you cannot attend the meeting, but
would like further information on a particular topic, please contact the appropriate staff
member listed on the attached agenda.
Sincerely,
Kim M. Bergman
Mayor
1993 PLYMOUTH
TOWN MEETING AGENDA
WARD 4
1. DEVELOPMENT CLIMATE/CITY SERVICES (10 min.)
A. Development Trends and Approved Projects - Chuck Dillerud (550-5059)
B. 1993 City Service Revisions - Frank Boyles (550-5013)
2. PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS (10 min.)
A. Streets, Sanitary Sewer and Water - Fred Moore (550-5080)
B. Public Buildings - Dale Hahn (550-5101)
C. Parks/Trails -Eric Blank (550-5131)
3. PUBLIC SAFETY (10 min.)
A. Police/Fire Report - Craig Gerdes (550-5161)
B. Neighborhood Watch Program - Craig Gerdes (550-5161)
C. Animal Control - Craig Gerdes (550-5161)
4. OTHER ITEMS (10 min.)
A. Communication Efforts - Frank Boyles (550-5013)
B. City Charter - Frank Boyles (550-5013)
C. Water Sprinkling Restrictions - Fred Moore (550-5080)
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dwight Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Wages, Negotiations, and the Salary Freeze
DATE: January 27, 1993
Introduction. A special meeting of the City Council has been
called for 4:30 p.m. on February 1st to discuss the impact of
Governor Carlson's wage freeze proposal on city labor
negotiations and to discuss related budgeting strategy.
Background. Governor Carlson has recommended a wage freeze
for all public employees for 1994. While he has not proposed
a means for absolute enforcement, he has suggested that a
special election be held on September 14, 1993 for any city
that wishes to fund wage increases with an increased property
tax levy. In addition, a new kind of "truth in taxation"
statement would be required in which the salaries of all city
employees would be published in advance of the election.
While DFL leaders in the Legislature have not embraced the
proposal, and some have been critical, it is significant that
many DFL representatives have not ruled out some form of wage
freeze.
There are many questions about how the proposed wage
restraints would work. They apparently would not affect
utility employees, recreation employees, and others not
directly paid by property taxes. It is not clear that the
restraints could or would affect employees with pre-existing
agreements in force. It is not clear exactly what the
penalty would be for non-compliance (loss of HACA?).
The City must consider alternative strategies to prepare for
the possibility of strong restraints on wage increases in
1994.
Alternatives and Discussion. Some of the possibilities
that could be considered include:
1. Negotiate for one year (1993) only. This would have
the advantage of allowing for all possibilities in 1994, a
very flexible approach.
2. Negotiate for two or three year contracts. This has
the advantage of providing stability for both the City and
its employees and reduces the considerable staff time spent
in negotiations each year. However, if the Legislature
applies the proposed wage restraints to existing bargaining
contracts (which may be legally questionable), the City could
be forced into either an unreasonably tight budget or a
special election. Or, if all pre-existing contracts are
honored, non-union employees might be required to accept a
freeze, while union employees are not.
3. Negotiate multi-year contracts, but with 1994 agreements
consisting only of changes in fringe benefits, not wages.
This might side-step the letter (and intent) of the
Governor's proposals, but could be justified if one believes
that the wage freeze is an unacceptable short-term solution
which will cost public agencies more in the long run.
4. Plan to have a zero property tax increase so that no
proposed state regulations would affect Plymouth. While this
is more difficult in rapidly growing cities, it might be
possible, especially if the Council is willing to consider
such fees as the surface water utility fee to replace some
property tax expenditures or is willing to consider major
changes in how we do business.
5. Plan to have a special election on September 14, if
required. Such an election could invoke an unpleasant round
of public employee bashing which might be counterproductive.
6. Do nothing. Bargaining units are likely to want to
settle very soon to get contracts in place for this year and
next. Refusal to bargain in good faith is illegal.
Therefore, this is not likely a viable option.
7. Actively lobby for changes in the law in conjunction with
another alternative. Possible lobbying positions to take
might include allowing a growth factor in the "no property
tax increase for salaries" provision to be fairer to rapidly
growing cities. Or, it could be argued that cities not
receiving LGA should be exempt. Another possibility might be
to lobby to exclude cities with either (1) wages below
average or (2) fewer employees per capita than average.
Lobbying would probably be best channeled through the
Municipal Legislative Commission. In any case, the proposal,
even if meritorious, is an attack on local control.
8. Refer the matter to the Financial Advisory Committee for
recommendation. News reports indicate that top corporate
executives advised Governor Carlson that any wage freeze
would cost the public in the long run. Also, the national
wage and price controls adopted in the 1970's under President
Nixon eventually resulted in higher inflation for both. It
would be interesting to see what our committee thinks.
Recommendation. The choice of alternatives depends upon a
philosophical judgement on the idea of a wage freeze. A
freeze seems defensible if public employees are consistently
paid above -market rates (a possible result of comparable
worth regulations?). However, if this is not the case, it
is no more reasonable to reduce real wages than maintenance,
operating, or capital expenses. Furthermore, some
jurisdictions might choose to pay above market wages to
attract the best candidates when recruiting. This might
result in fewer employees being needed.
w
For these reasons, as well as the discussion of alternatives,
the best courses of action would appear to be to pursue
options 1, 4, 7, and 8 simultaneously.