Marin’s civil grand jury
renewed its call for public agencies to provide timely, independent analyses of
the costs of pay and benefit proposals pitched during labor negotiations, this
time targeting special service agencies including the Marin Municipal Water and
Golden Gate Bridge districts.
“The need for labor negotiation
transparency, Part II” underscores a report issued earlier this month in which
the jury concluded the public has a right to know about how elected officials
cut pay and benefit deals with public employees. The earlier report was
addressed to the Board of Supervisors and local city councils.
“The grand jury decided to
reinforce its position by sending the report to additional respondents,” said
Jack Nixon, a former San Rafael city councilman who serves as jury foreman.
This week’s follow-up report
repeats jury findings and recommendations and seeks responses from the water
and bridge districts, as well as the Novato and Southern Marin fire districts
and the North Marin Water District.
The jury urged officials to
give taxpayers independent interim reports how pay and benefit pacts are
progressing, letting the public chime in before decisions are final — and
making officials more accountable for the result of benefits that consume the
lion’s share of agency budgets.
Adoption urged
The jury urged adoption before
next June 1 of a formal negotiation process used in Southern California called
Civic Openness In Negotiations, or COIN. The program requires public agencies
to hire professional negotiators and an outside auditor, issue an independent
fiscal analysis of all pay and benefit proposals, and post details of tentative
labor pacts at least two board meetings before they are adopted. After each
proposal is accepted or rejected during closed-door negotiations, it is
publicly disclosed, along with costs.
In addition, tentative
agreements would be made public a week before their consideration, and a final
agreement would be placed on the agenda for discussion for two consecutive
meetings of the agency board, giving time for taxpayers to weigh in.
The jury noted that the
negotiation process itself would not be public, but more information about it
would be 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.
“The COIN process can be implemented without
affecting the manner in which tentative agreements are negotiated but which
nevertheless will ensure public awareness of the terms and cost of those
agreements in advance of their being adopted,” the jury declared. “The COIN
process mandates transparency in government decision-making.”
Marin’s Citizens for
Sustainable Pension Plans urged county supervisors to adopt the COIN plan in
April but the move drew heated protests from union representatives who believe
disclosure wouldn’t provide an advantage. Supervisors expressed lukewarm
interest, calling aspects of the plan challenging but worth exploring, but have
not scheduled the matter for action.
‘Litmus test’
The county board, local city
councils and five special district boards are compelled to make formal
statements about the proposal because they are required by law to respond to
jury reports that address them. These typically involve brief,
carefully-crafted statements in which officials agree, “partially” agree or
disagree, or disagree with jury recommendations.
Some observers think candidates
will face a COIN transparent government “litmus test” during 2016 election
campaigns, and pension critics say they intend to keep the pressure on.
“We owe a great deal of
gratitude to this grand jury for their dedication to pursuing transparency in
our governments’ negotiations,” said Jody Morales, head of the sustainable
pension group.
But Bob Briare, president of
Marin Professional Firefighters Local 1775, said pension critics are exploiting
grand jury reports “to get their own message out,” and “the sad part is they
just don’t trust our government.”
Briare said the COIN program
would impede collective bargaining by curbing the frank exchange of ideas
between negotiating parties.
“Negotiations are difficult
enough,” Briare said. “There are a lot of proposals going back and forth” in
negotiations, the former Southern Marin firefighter noted, adding the grand
jury “doesn’t say how you are going to pay for” the program it so strongly
recommends.
Those unhappy with pay deals
approved by officials, he noted, can vote for others at election time.
June
20, 2015
Marin
Independent Journal
By Nels
Johnson
No comments:
Post a Comment