Finance and Personnel Committee Minutes Tuesday February 14, :30 a.m.

Transcription

1 Rock Island County 1504 Third Avenue Rock Island, IL (309) Finance and Personnel Committee Minutes Tuesday February 14, :30 a.m. The Finance and Personnel Committee of the Rock Island County Board met at the above date and time in the Conference Room of the Administration Office on the second floor of the County Building, 1504 Third Ave, Rock Island, IL. Chair Richard Brunk called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. Minutes as follows: 1) Call to order and roll call Committee members present: Richard Brunk, Scott Noyd (via phone), Dewayne Cremeens, Don Johnston, Ginny Shelton, Rod Simmer, Kai Swanson, Brian Vyncke Committee members absent: None Others present: Kenneth Maranda, Dave Ross, Hayleigh Covella, Jerry Clyde, Ed Langdon, Bill Long, Darren Hart, April Palmer, DeAnne Bloomberg, Sue Alberts, Larry Wilson, Sylvia Gomez, Bob Westpfahl 2) Public Comments There were no public comments. 3) Approval of minutes from the January 10, 2017 meeting Motion to approve: Ginny Shelton 2 nd : Rod Simmer 4) Reports to the committee Mr. Brunk called for reports to the committee. Ms. Alberts noted that she s here on behalf of Ms. Ewert and the monthly reports are in the packet. Mr. Ross and Mr. Brunk noted that those were posted online. Ms. Palmer noted that since there was time this month, the reports did come upstairs early. She will present tomorrow night for another month going forward at Committee of the Whole.

2 Mr. Clyde provided his monthly summary report. He explained that this is the report he provided monthly to the former HR Committee. He wanted to go over and explain it and from here on out, unless there are questions, he won t go into detail. There are three basic sections on the report. In the top left hand corner are boxes for new hires and terminations. These are reflective of the payroll periods ending within a calendar month. There might be some from the last week of January or some that were hired in February that won t show up until March. Under new hires, he thinks it s important to keep in mind that with the FY16-17 budget there were a number of vacant positions that were eliminated from the budget. What they re seeing as far as new hires is reflective of only those positions that were allowed in the FY16-17 budget that have become vacant and are being filled. If there was a need for a new position, that would still need to come to this committee. Those boxes reflect new hires and terminations that occurred in January. Mr. Johnston asked, for the Sheriff s Department in Corrections, if the two that left were terminated, or retirees, or what. He said as short as they are Mr. Clyde said he doesn t know that information and asked Captain Hart. Captain Hart explained that one was a personnel matter and the second was a vacant spot. He was becoming a teacher. Mr. Johnston asked if they were replaced. Captain Hart said they were posted and they re in the process of doing some interviews. Mr. Clyde explained that they don t normally put down the reason why they were terminated because it is a personnel matter. Mr. Johnston asked if it could be a retirement in some cases and if that would be listed here. Captain Hart said it could be but these two were not. Mr. Clyde explained that the next section is the comparison of payrolls for the last three calendar years. The payroll system on New World only gives reports on a quarterly basis for the calendar year. For calendar year 2016 as an overall change in expenditures for payroll, it s at -0.78%. That s really good: the fact that they ve lowered payroll and in FY16 the county had both cost of living increases for union and nonunion employees, and union employees had step increases. For the most part, step increases range from 3.5-4% on an annual basis. Looking at payroll for the last year on a dollar for dollar basis, it increased by 6%. Taking that into account, the county did really well on payroll for the 2016 calendar year. Mr. Clyde explained that the bottom part of the report shows work comp activity. The front shows the past three fiscal years. The back has three more fiscal years in brief summary. He tries to show this on a monthly basis. Looking at FY15-16 for the county, excluding Forest Preserve, the average was about $17,214/month not including any settlements for work comp injuries. That is strictly claims incurred and paid. This year for the first two months is averaging $32,000/month. One of the things they tried to do in the safety committee and that he and Mr. Ross are working on closely is taking a look at trends. Taking a look at the middle part of 2016, the county had some fairly significant Page 2 of 9

3 claims that continued on through September. Then they went back down to what he would consider a normal range of $12,000-15,000/month. This year, they ve incurred some higher expenses that have come through. One thing they are taking a look at is the reasons behind those and whether or not they re for strains and those types of lifting injuries. They re also looking at where they are coming from. He gets monthly reports that will help identify those departments. That s something Mr. Ross will be working with the safety committee on how to do reporting so that if they have things coming up in the future for work comp settlements, they have proper documentation. Mr. Simmer asked if the third party administrator is doing their job. Mr. Clyde said they are essential and very beneficial in getting the documentation the county needs. They are providing timely reports so the county knows where to concentrate its efforts to keep injuries to a bare minimum. He s very supportive of ECS and thinks it was the wisest move they ve made as far as work comp. Mr. Brunk made a final call for reports. There were no more. 5) Consider transfers of appropriations Motion to approve: Kai Swanson 2 nd : Brian Vyncke 6) Consider appropriation resolutions for funds Mr. Brunk explained that there aren t any real new money resolutions. They re all related to the Motor Fuel Tax Fund from the Highway Department, payroll, making adjustments for easier accounting processes, tax distribution, and grant funds, essentially. Motion to approve: Ginny Shelton 2 nd : Scott Noyd 7) Consider FY17 claims in the amount of $1,363, Motion to approve: Rod Simmer 2 nd : Kai Swanson Page 3 of 9

4 8) Consider FY16 TDs in the amount of $1,289, Motion to approve: Rod Simmer 2 nd : Kai Swanson 9) Consider FY17 TDs in the amount of $1,767, Motion to approve: Brian Vyncke 2 nd : Kai Swanson 10) Review and award bids received on Monday, February 6, 2017 for seal coat Mr. Ross explained that this is an annual bid for the townships. The county is responsible for doing the bid letting for them, but it s contractors they ll be working with for their seal coat work for the year. The bids are broken down by road district. Not every road district wanted to have a bid. The sheet shows different amounts for the dollar value based on the amount of work the road district put forth that they wanted to do. They had three bidders: Porter Brothers, Brandt, and Tri-City. In no case was Brandt the low bidder. In three cases, Porter Brothers was the low bidder. There was a technicality in the bidding process where one of the paperwork items that all the contractors had in front of them said that within 24 hours of the bid letting, they have to provide a form to the county. It s essentially an availability form that shows they will be available to complete the work in a timely manner. It s a standard form IDOT uses and that the county uses. They submitted it within 48 hours, not 24 hours. The county talked about that with IDOT and asked them if they had guidance. IDOT said it s entirely a local matter. The county can choose to waive that on a technicality and award the low bid or can strike them as a bidder. They talked about this at Public Works. Mr. Ross s recommendation to them was that because they ve waived on a technicality another bid at another time and because Mr. Ross certainly doesn t want to go in front of the townships and explain why they didn t award the low bid since they re the ones who have to pay for it. He recommended awarding the low bid for each thing. Public Works agreed and voted unanimously to award the low bid. Porter Bothers, when they did submit that form, showed they were wide open in their schedule. Mr. Johnston asked what the significance is between 24 hours and 48 hours. Mr. Ross said he has no clue. At some point somebody said they needed it within a day. There s no big deal with it. Mr. Massa has never had this happen before. Moving forward, he is going to change the way he does things and require that people give him this form Page 4 of 9

5 before they even take out the specs. Before they even take the specs out, the county wants to know they have the availability to do it. Mr. Johnston asked why the biggest township, South Moline, which certainly isn t the biggest road district, isn t in there. Mr. Ross said he doesn t know. Mr. Simmer asked about the blank ones. Mr. Ross said they had no seal coat work to do. Mr. Ross noted that Public Works voted to recommend that Finance and Personnel accept the low bid on each one. Mr. Simmer asked where Porter Brothers are out of. Mr. Maranda said Rock Falls. Mr. Maranda explained that every month Mr. Massa gives the townships an update on how much Motor Fuel Tax they have. Like this bid here in Blackhawk for instance, they ve got nothing on there this year so that money is just set back until their road commissioner decides they need to do a road and save more money. He doesn t know how much MFT they re getting, but Mr. Massa gives them a monthly report for all the townships of how much MFT they ve got for the month and how they build it up to do their projects. That s whether it s a tube that a contractor has to replace or some seal coat. Then, of course, the county takes in some too. Mr. Johnston said he assumes they re prevailing wage contracts. Mr. Maranda said absolutely. Motion to approve low bids: Kai Swanson 2 nd : Rod Simmer 11) Consider Resolution Re: Elimination of Chair Stipend for Chair Position of Committee of the Whole Mr. Ross suggested taking Items 11 and 12 at the same time. Mr. Brunk asked if any committee members had any issue with combining Items 11 and 12. No one did. Mr. Swanson, at the behest of the author, moved to postpone consideration of the resolutions indefinitely. Motion to postpone Items 11 and 12 indefinitely: Kai Swanson 2 nd : Brian Vyncke Opposed: Rod Simmer Page 5 of 9

6 Mr. Johnston noted that both these statements are things that normally would be in the pay resolution that would be implemented in May, which is 180 days before the people running in the next election come in. If they start breaking this up piecemeal, and he s glad they re postponing it, they ve got problems all the way around. There are bigger problems coming in that resolution that really have to be thought out for some Elected Officials. He s glad they re postponing it. It s not a good time to break this stuff up and do it individually. Mr. Brunk added that they did just address all of this not even a year ago. Mr. Simmer noted that he thinks some of what Mr. Johnston is saying is true, but the gist of this is there s no reason for the Committee of the Whole that Mr. Maranda can t be overseeing that and decrease it by that much, reducing more funds. He noted that it seems like it was already orchestrated and organized before they got here. It s already a done deal. It needs to be looked at a little differently than what Mr. Johnston is saying. It s another way to cut some funding that really isn t necessary. Mr. Maranda is there. There s no reason he couldn t run that particular committee. Mr. Johnston noted that by that logic, there s no reason he couldn t run every committee. Mr. Simmer said that s absolutely right. Mr. Johnston said that s not very practical. Mr. Simmer said he s at every one. It s a good idea. Mr. Johnston noted that to change that at this point, the procedure and policy would have to be changed because the Chairman has that ability to appoint committee chairs. The Committee of the Whole is nothing more than a committee. Mr. Westpfahl noted that they already set precedent in taking away salary and benefits when they took away County Board health insurance and retirement. There s no reason it can t be done. They already started. Mr. Simmer agreed. Mr. Westpfahl noted that they said there was no reason why they couldn t do it so they did it. $3,500 here and there, $1,000 here, pretty soon they re talking a little bit of money. 12) Consider Resolution Re: Reduction of Committee Chair Annual Stipend Item 12 was considered with Item ) Consider Employee Policy Vacation and Other Leaves Mr. Brunk noted that this has to do with jury duty for county employees. He s actually requesting or making a recommendation to remove the limitation on the amount of time. Currently, county employees are required to use leave after two weeks. He feels that the county is asking citizens to do their civic duty and serve. He doesn t think there are likely too many situations where county employees are serving an extensive amount of time on jury duty, but he feels it is kind of silly for the county to be limiting their own employees when it comes to this. Page 6 of 9

7 Mr. Ross added that one thing to consider is that the employee who gets picked for jury duty, they get their summons and show up and answer questions; they can t control length of the trial. What he did when the County Board originally adopted this was continue past practice. It makes sense to remove that language and allow the county to pay for jury duty. People are only picked so often anyway. He supports this. The employee isn t trying to manipulate anything; they re just doing their duty to serve on a jury. If that particular trial happens to go on for more than two weeks Mr. Simmer asked what the private sector does. Ms. Shelton said they have to allow time off. Mr. Simmer asked if they give time or take time. He doesn t think the county should do anything different from the private sector. They shouldn t be getting special treatment. Ms. Shelton said she doesn t know. Ms. Palmer said she doesn t know either, but she has an example that she knows of for companies that have had employees go on jury duty and the jury duty pay they receive from the county is deducted from their pay and they get the rest of their normal pay. It s as if they were working. They get the same amount of pay in total through a combination of what comes from the county to serve on the jury and the rest of the pay they normally would get. In essence, if they made $5/hour from the county for serving on the jury and their normal wage was $15, they d get $10 from company to get a cumulative $15/hour. Mr. Clyde said he has been in both the public and private sector. In the private sector, it varies from company to company. Every company has its own philosophy. He has seen where it s unlimited and seen where it s limited to two weeks or less. Mr. Simmer asked what they do pay wise. Mr. Clyde said it s similar to what Ms. Palmer described. If they got anything for serving, it had to be turned over to the company. Mr. Brunk noted that this would mirror what was done by the Forest Preserve Commission for the Forest Preserve last month. Mr. Simmer said he doesn t think they should be going above and beyond the private sector. Ms. Shelton said the county should be setting an example for the private sector. Mr. Simmer said he doesn t want to hear constituents saying, Why do you get all this and we don t? If they get the same thing, he s good with that. They don t need to be getting above and beyond what the private sector does. Motion to approve: Brian Vyncke 2 nd : Kai Swanson Page 7 of 9

8 14) Closed session as per 5 ILCS 120/2(c) (11) Litigation: when an action against, affecting, or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent The committee did not enter into closed session. 15) Consider Carey settlement Mr. Brunk noted that this is the settlement they all had in their notes. It s a work comp case. He asked if anyone felt a need for closed session. No one did. Mr. Johnston asked to make sure they put what this is in the minutes. Motion to approve Cheryl Carey Work Comp Settlement pending Litigation Committee approval: Brian Vyncke 2 nd : Ginny Shelton, Scott Noyd 16) Consider Board member per diem/mileage report Motion to approve: Brian Vyncke 2 nd : Rod Simmer 17) Committee member opportunity for brief comments (no decisions will be made) Mr. Ross noted that the county is continuing its efforts to renegotiate contracts with some vendors. They recently did one for all the copy machines and saved a lot of money. He s working with Kone right now. Where it stands right now is a 27% savings without any change in service. He s still working on that. It will come back to committee for approval once it s finalized next month. Mr. Ross explained that there are two TIF districts the county should be seeing refunds from this year. One is the Jumer s TIF. That s $507,000 to all the taxing bodies. There s a particular formula and give or take 10% of that is what the county will get. That 10% is divided up amongst all the levying funds. The General Fund will get 21.9% of that 10%. Mr. Ross believes Milan will also be refunding one of theirs for about $1 million total. That s not official. Page 8 of 9

9 Mr. Swanson had a brief announcement from the Health Insurance Planning Committee. The new co-chair is Brian Schumacher. He is doing an outstanding job. Also, the key indicator they look at is the reserve and that s staying in the green zone, which is where they want it. Mr. Johnston noted that dentists are starting to get way behind from the state and they are sending out statements to patients saying they won t accept insurance. Mr. Swanson explained that the county is self-insured and has done a good job being very frugal and setting up a reserve. They haven t faced that yet, but if they ever do he will certainly report that to the County Board. Mr. Clyde noted that Delta Dental is not part of the Health Insurance Committee. Mr. Swanson agreed that it is separate. Mr. Clyde said that ll have to come through this committee. Mr. Swanson noted that the state s woes are going to start cascading. That s a concern they all have. 18) Adjourn Finance committee adjourned at 8:59 a.m. by Chair Richard Brunk. Future scheduled meetings on March 14, April 11, May 9, and June 13 Page 9 of 9