Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-02/28/2006-AdjournedFebruary 28, 2006 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council -Manager Form of Government Adjourned Meeting - 6:00 p.m. An adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on Tuesday, February 28, 2006, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll Call was answered by the following Councilmembers: Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Ohlson, Roy, and Weitkunat. Councilmembers Absent: Manvel Staff Members Present: Atteberry, Krajicek, Roy. Resolution 2006-027 Urging the Registered Electors of the City Not to Support The Calling of a Special City Election to Amend the City Charter So as to Require Binding Interest Arbitration as Part of the Collective Bargaining Process with Police Employees Adopted Following is staffs memorandum on this item: "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fraternal Order of Police is seeking a special City election for the purpose of considering an amendment to the City Charter that would require binding interest arbitration as part of the collective bargainingprocess with Police Services employees. This Resolution declares that it is not in the City's best interests to incur the expense of a special City election for this purpose, and that binding interest arbitration would be expensive, unnecessary and inadvisable. BACKGROUND A citizen -initiated ordinance was approved by registered electors in August 2004 which provided for a system of collective bargaining for Police Services employees. The City and the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) Lodge #3 entered into goodfaith collective bargaining, which resulted in a collective bargaining agreement for 2006 and 2007. Notwithstanding this Agreement, the FOP has filed with the City Clerk's Office a statement of intent to circulate a petition for a proposed amendment to the City Charter that would seek to establish binding interest arbitration into the collective bargaining process. The FOP has sought a special City election in September of this year. Binding interest arbitration is unnecessary, inadvisable, and expensive. Such a requirement would 352 February 28, 2006 deprive Council of its ability to effectively balance the competing financial needs of Police Services with all other financial needs of the City, would deprive the City Manager of his duty to establish the terms and conditions of employment of Police Services employees, and would turn these important financial and administrative decisions over to an arbitrator who is not accountable to the citizens of the City and who is neither elected nor appointed to protect the long-term interests of the organization as a whole. One provision of the proposed Charter amendment would prevent the Cityfrom ever reducing any benefit or other term or condition ofemployment that was in place at the time the proposed Charter amendment was adopted, without the prior agreement by the FOP. This would render the City's efforts to manage costs and align the City's pay and benefits with the marketplace moot. In addition, holding a special election would be very costly. It is estimated by the City Clerk that a special City election would cost the City approximately $100,000. For the above stated reasons, it is believed that the proposed Charter amendment, binding interest arbitration, and a special City election are not in the best interests of the City. Registered voters are urged not to sign a petition seeking any such special election. " City Manager Atteberry made the staff presentation, summarizing staff s position as to why Council should urge citizens not sign the petition calling for a special election to amend the City Charter. Councilmember Kastein asked how many items were under negotiation between the City and the FOP in the current round of negotiations. Rick DeLaCastro, Human Resources Director, stated the negotiations began with eighty items and agreed on approximately sixty-four items. If the Charter amendment is adopted, nothing could change that would be less than what is currently agreed upon. Councilmember Ohlson stated collective bargaining is now in place with the Police and will continue in the future. The objection is with the binding arbitration proposal. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded byCouncilmember Brown, to adopt Resolution 2006-027, Councilmenber Weithkunat stated binding arbitration is an unnecessary direction for the City to go. It is extremely costly for the City to hold a special election and amending the City Charter should be done very carefully. Councilmember Kastein stated this resolution is not about lack of support for the Police force but about being fair to other City employees. The City should be able to negotiate all City employee benefits equally. Councilmember Roy stated binding arbitration would divide City employees regarding benefits. He encouraged citizens to look at the petition and decide if they truly support such an amendment. 353 February 28, 2006 Mayor Hutchinson added the Council supports the Police force as City employees. The latest negotiations with the bargaining unit resulted in reasonable pay and compensation and other conditions. This resolution is being adopted in the best interests of the City. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Hutchinson, Kastein, Ohlson, Roy and Weitkunat. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Weitkunat made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to go into Executive Session under Section 2-31(a)(2) of the City Code for the purpose of meeting with the City Attorney to discuss potential litigation and the manner in which certain policies or practices of the city may be affected by existing law. Yeas: Councilmembers Brown, Kastein, Weitkunat, Ohlson, Hutchinson, Roy. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Mayor ATTEST: 0 City Clerk 354