Council Study Session

MINUTES OF THE GILBERT TOWN COUNCIL, IN SPECIAL MEETING FOR A STUDY SESSION, OF TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2024, AT 5:15 PM, MUNICIPAL BUILDING I, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 50 E. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, GILBERT, ARIZONA COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Brigette Peterson, Vice Mayor Scott Anderson, Councilmembers Chuck Bongiovanni, Bobbi Buchli, Yung Koprowski, Kathy Tilque, and Jim Torgeson COUNCIL ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Town Manager Patrick Banger, Town Attorney Chris Payne, Town Clerk Chaveli Herrera, Assistant Town Attorney Amanda Jenkins, Fire Chief Rob Duggan, Police Chief Michael Soelberg, Chief People Officer Nathan Williams, Firefighter Shea Kearney, and Police Sergeant Daniel Brause CALL TO ORDER OF SPECIAL MEETING Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 5:17 p.m. ROLL CALL Town Clerk Herrera confirmed a quorum was present. AGENDA ITEM 1. Presentation and discussion on the meet and confer process with Gilbert Police and Fire Labor Associations. Assistant Town Attorney Jenkins provided a definition of Meet and Confer as a formalized process codified by Town Code for the discussion and negation of employment issues. She said typically the goal was to finalize a contract known as a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The MOU would document and detail all employment related concerns that had been discussed and mutually agreed upon through the Meet and Confer process. She emphasized that while the mutually agreed MOU was created through the Meet and Confer process, it was not final or binding until Council has approved it. She gave a general overview of the Meet and Confer process, first with the Role of Council being to approve an ordinance with the Meet and Confer procedure, and then to consider at the end the final proposed MOU created through the Meet and Confer negotiations. The role of management would develop the procedures of the Meet and Confer process in accordance with the ordinance, and then management and staff would participate in scheduled negotiations about the proposed MOU, usually weekly or biweekly. She stated that the Town Manager usually did not take part in those negotiations. The role of the labor associations historically had been to produce the initial MOU to begin negotiations, and they participated in those scheduled negotiations with management and staff. Typical guardrails of the negotiations regard duration, which had been usually 2 or 3 years, and that once Council had approved the proposed MOU, the negotiations were closed. She gave a history of when the Gilbert Police and Fire department’s labor organizations began, and that the Meet and Confer process with them started in November of 2007. That original 2007 ordinance had a sunset provision for 2013. Fire Chief Duggan started by describing the transition in 2013, which incorporated MOU benefits into personnel rules for all employees. He described what an interest-based policy meant to the Fire Department, where each side would describe why any particular issue was important and would strive to find win-win solutions. It also initiated regularly occurring meetings between labor and management. Additionally, there were quarterly meetings with the chiefs, labor leaders, and the Town Manager’s Office. Police Chief Soelberg stated the current meeting schedule for the Police Department was once a month, with more meetings happening as needed. They said they also had the same quarterly meetings as the Fire Department. He described the discussion atmosphere as open. Fire Chief Duggan described their view of the differences between the existent meeting structure, and defined MOU process. He said that currently the Town Manager and the Chiefs had their usual weekly meeting, but with an MOU they would be excluded from the negotiations. He emphasized that new issues currently could be addressed as they emerged, but under an MOU the issue would have to wait until the next contract period. He then gave two examples of situations where the current meeting structure allowed new issues to be resolved, and indicated that the rigidity of an MOU would have prevented those solutions from being implemented as quickly. Councilmember Tilque asked if the Town Manager was excluded from attending the negotiations under an MOU, who would be representing the Town. Fire Chief Duggan replied that it would be typically an assistant Town Manager, a People Team member, and a Budget person. Councilmember Koprowski asked if they knew of the struggles other municipalities had with MOU style negotiations. Police Chief Soelberg stated that usually the biggest issues were financial, with the contracted language of an MOU being inflexible in times of economic limitation. Councilmember Bongiovanni asked if it were possible to have language in the contract that if both parties mutually agreed the Town could intervene and make changes. Chief Duggan said that there had been language used that it could reopen if there were mutual benefit. International Association of Fire Fighters Gilbert Chapter President and Firefighter Shea Kearney stated that there could be language in an MOU in order to reopen negotiations. He also said that the MOU process was important, and could be helpful during economic downturns, with an example of salary freezes in Mesa and Phoenix with an MOU being able to save jobs. He said that Meet and Confer was an evolution of organized employee and employer communications. Kearney said the general principals were developed in Arizona, and were able to have effective and non-contentious working relationships realized in communities throughout Arizona. He gave a brief history of how the Meet and Confer process began in the 1970s, and mentioned in contrast that collective bargaining negotiations were contentious and were less effective. He mentioned that there was no compulsory membership to labor unions, and that without Meet and Confer, labor organizations would be compelled to go straight to the Council. Kearney claimed that the interest-based negotiation at the heart of the Meet and Confer process strove for mutual understanding, focused on goals common to both parties, and resulted in a win- win for all. He stated an additional advantage of Meet and Confer was it improved leadership development through a collaborative process. He clarified that Meet and Confer did not force anyone to join a union and met all Right to Work laws. He then brought up quotes from multiple local elected officials in favor of the Meet and Confer process. He stated that the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) provided interest-based communications and labor management training for no charge. Councilmember Koprowski asked how to envision the relationship and coordination with the Town Council with the MOU process in terms of dispute resolution. Kearney replied that he believed that the role of the Town Council was to solidify things at the end, and that he thought the MOU process created the opportunity to resolve issues before presenting to Council. Councilmember Koprowski asked what the risk would be in the Town Council did not approve the MOU, and also a concern she had was that she did not know the job of being sworn personnel. Kearney replied that one of the benefits of the labor group was to create relationships and explain to those they were in negotiations with the needs of the job, and thus come together. Vice Mayor Anderson asked if there were specific issues that led to the sunsetting back in 2013. Chief Duggan replied that there was a shift in the makeup of the Council, and their direction was to not have an MOU. Gilbert Police Leadership Association President Dakota Richter introduced Police Sergeant Dan Brause to give his experience with the MOU process. Brause recalled that he remembered meeting weekly back in 2008, and that part of the MOU was a reopener clause solely dedicated to compensation. He stated things were always cordial, all information was open, an that everything came to be mutually agreed upon. He stated that without the MOU process, there was no formal process to have things in writing. He explained that without the Meet and Confer, slowly things that had been part of the last MOU, had slowly been taken out as they did not apply to all Town employees, and were police specific needs. Police Chief Soelberg spoke about the accomplishments both Police and Fire had made in the last decade without the Meet and Confer process. He highlighted sworn top-out pay, increased Field Training Officer (FTO) pay from 5% to 10%, FTO incentive leave, and for the Fire department they increased vacation leave. Fire Chief Duggan agreed with what Soelberg stated, and wanted to also emphasize the expanded cancer screening for the Fire Department. He also spoke to his pride in having made the switch to the 48/96 schedule in his time as Chief. Chief People Officer Williams shared his perspective of the accomplishments from a compensation and benefits perspective. He stated the paid parental leave program, babies at work program, expanded catastrophic injury leave, and expanded enhanced military leave as major townwide accomplishments. He summarized in his own words the Town’s current compensation philosophy of being market-rate. Williams listed the estimated additional costs that would be associated with trying to be either the 3rd highest paying municipality among benchmark cities, or with being in the 60th percentile of market. He then listed the estimated costs from an actuarial study of post-retirement health insurance. He stated that Fire and Police labor represents roughly one-third of Gilbert’s workforce, and that when possible the Town tried to make options and improvements to compensation and benefits available consistently across departments. With that said, he acknowledged times when public safety needed different solutions. Williams gave as additional consideration an estimated staff cost to the Meet and Confer annual meetings being $30,000 and stated that estimate did not include research/work time outside of meetings. Town Attorney Chris Payne stated as a reminder that the Council was always bound to state law, and also the constitutions of Arizona and the United States. He brought up a recent Arizona Supreme Court case, Gilmore v. Gallego, that indicated it was an illegal violation of the Arizona Constitution’s Gift Clause for the Town to compensate employees for various union-related activities. Councilmember Torgeson asked in reference to the prior $30,000 figure, what the current cost was for how the negotiations were handled at this time. Williams did not have any estimate or numbers ready, but suspected due to greater number of meetings and greater number of staff involved that the MOU number to be much higher than current costs. Councilmember Koprowski asked about how the current pay-for-performance might be affected by an MOU. Williams replied that he couldn’t give an estimate as they wouldn’t know what the ultimate ask would be through Meet and Confer; he then discussed different approaches to benchmarking and a merit matrix. The Council indicated more discussion was needed on the topic. ADJOURN Mayor Peterson adjourned the meeting at 6:29 p.m. ATTEST: ___________________________ ___________________________________ Brigette Peterson, Mayor Chaveli Herrera, Town Clerk CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Study Session of the Town Council of the Town of Gilbert held on the 10th day of September, 2024. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this __________ day of ______________, 2024. ___________________________________ Chaveli Herrera, Town Clerk Pfost