Negotiating who gets paid how
much for what at the Marin Civic Center will remain behind closed doors as
county supervisors rebuffed civil grand jury proposals to let the light shine
in.
The county board Tuesday
dismissed a call by the grand jury for a more open government.
“What are you, what are the
unions afraid of?” asked former San Rafael councilman Jack Nixon, foreman of
last year’s grand jury. “Why can’t you at least let the public know what is
being proposed during negotiations?”
But supervisors approved
without change an administration analysis rejecting or deferring key grand jury
proposals to pull the covers off employee pay talks.
County Administrator Matthew
Hymel’s review of a transparent labor negotiation process called Civic Openness
In Negotiations, or COIN, similar in some respects to statements issued by
other public agencies in Marin, disagreed with aspects of it while saying more
study was required. The county sees value in some provisions but “other
provisions may work against our ultimate goal to negotiate the best deal for
taxpayers,” he said.
The grand jury liked the
program so much it recommended it twice, issuing reports urging the county and
local cities to adopt it, then following up with a directive that key special
districts do the same.
The one proposal Hymel
identified as helpful — and recommended for adoption “after good faith
bargaining” with labor unions — is publication on the consent calendar of tentative
labor pacts a week before they are up for review. The plan lags more
progressive programs, such as in Fairfax, where officials agreed to publish pay
pact proposals a month before they come up for review.
Freshman Supervisor Damon
Connolly dominated board commentary on the plan, saying releasing negotiating
proposals during labor talks could backfire amid grandstanding disruption.
“I fundamentally disagree ...
with negotiating in public,” he declared.
Connolly, calling COIN a
“legally suspect gesture,” noted that public posturing during the BART strike
triggered confusion, hardened positions and delayed resolution of issues.
Other board members lined up
behind Connolly, with Kate Sears saying bargaining requires candid
conversations. “Our Board of Supervisors is committed to transparency,” Sears
said, but “bargaining in public is very different, whether it be for a nuclear
Iran deal or a sports star contract.”
Supervisor Judy Arnold lauded
Hymel’s analysis, including publication of tentative agreements a week early on
the consent calendar. “Yet again our board has responded,” Arnold said,
saluting county efforts on pension reform.
Supervisor Katie Rice had
unusual praise for relentless board critics, saying, “I appreciate the pressure
Citizens for Sustainable Pension Plans has brought on us ... to improve.”
A half-dozen members of the
pension group criticized the county retort to the grand jury, replaying a
debate on the open negotiation program last spring. This time around,
representatives of county fire unions, who earlier had provided fierce
criticism of allowing the public to know more about labor talks, did not
appear.
Jody Morales of Lucas Valley,
founder of the pension group, said the county was embarking on business as
usual and “thumbing its nose” at the grand jury as well as taxpayers. “It is
time to open closed doors,” she said.
Criss Romero, a senior
representative of the Marin Association of Public Employees, said critics
suffered from “flawed logic” and lauded the “service mentality” of the county’s
workforce.
The grand jury advocated an
open government process in which taxpayers get independent interim reports on
how pay and benefit pacts are progressing and letting the public chime in long
before decisions are final.
The jury noted that the negotiation
process itself would not be public, but more information about it disclosed. As
it stands in Marin County today, public officials exclude local residents “from
input until it is too late for a reasoned public dialogue,” jurors noted.
“Although Marin County
residents pay taxes to support decisions by the Marin County Board of
Supervisors and the city and town councils, there are numerous times when no
transparency into the background of those decisions is made to the public,” the
jury said.
The issue,
the jury said, is “What should be disclosed to the residents of Marin, and
when?”
August 25, 2015
Marin
Independent Journal
By
Nels Johnson
No comments:
Post a Comment