Personnel Committee

March 13, 2008 – 9:00 am

DRAFT MINUTES

 

Present:                      Larry Cornell, Chairman; Tony Piombo, Vice Chairman; Steve Dafoe, Sandy Price and John Troy

Others present:          Scott Schrader, County Administrator; Mark Suben, County Attorney; Tom Williams, Legislator, District 10; Gene Waldbauer, District 13; Mike McKee, Legislator, District 17; Katrina Spicer, Secretary to County Administration; Annette Barber, Personnel Officer; Bob Howe, Board of Elections; Bill Wood, Board of Elections; Dennis Whitt, County Auditor; Jeremy Boylan, County Historian; Susan Morgan, Clerk of the Legislature; Evan Geibel, Cortland Standard; and Eric Mulvihill, WXHC

Absent:                       Dan Tagliente, Kathie Wilcox

Mr. Cornell called the meeting to order at 9:03 a.m.

Mr. Troy moved adoption of the minutes of the February 14, 2008 meeting; seconded by Mr. Piombo.  All members voting in favor; none opposed; minutes approved as printed.

RESOLUTIONS:

HISTORIAN

1.                  Amend Agreement, Amend Budget, Cortland County Chamber of Commerce – Mr. Troy moved adoption; seconded by Ms. Price.  Mr. Schrader requested that a correction be made to the resolution.  He explained that $7,000 has already been budgeted for the Chamber of Commerce and this $5,000 is in addition for the purpose of being combined with the funds for the annual fireworks show in celebration of Cortland County’s Bicentennial Celebrations.  He further explained that these funds are funneled through the Chamber of Commerce.  Mr. Schrader stated that a correction needs to be made in the first resolved of the resolution and should read $12,000 and not $5,000.  All members present voting in favor; none opposed; resolution approved as corrected.

DISCUSSION:

1.         Vacancy Report - A Vacancy Report was provided to each Committee members.  Ms. Barber explained that there would be new caseworkers starting and added that a new nurse would also be starting.  Mr. Troy inquired about the position of Accountant in the Treasurer’s Office.  Ms. Barber and Mr. Schrader stated that they are in the process of reviewing the classification for that position.  Ms. Price inquired about the status of the Safety Officer.  Mr. Schrader explained that he would be setting interviews in the near future for that position.

2.         Alternative Drug Program – Mr. Schrader explained that he briefly discussed this at the last Personnel Committee meeting.  He added that the County and CSEA have negotiated an agreement in regards to prescription drug acquisition through the CSEA Trust.  He explained that an employee might obtain their prescriptions through this program and pay no co-pay.  He further discussed a list of eligible medications and those being non-generic maintenance drugs.  He added that there is potentially a large savings to the County.  Mr. Schrader explained that all Cortland County employees, union and management, and their dependants are eligible except for the Road Patrol.  He added that the Road Patrol’s contract is still under negotiations.  He further explained that interested partied will be required to submit an enrollment application and obtain a new prescription from their doctor.  He added that the Trust would call individuals two weeks in advance of their prescription expiring.  Mr. Schrader expressed there being a potential savings of $300,000 a year to the County.  He added that a savings such as this could assist in controlling the increases in insurance premiums.  Ms. Barber explained that her office has scheduled times for employees and retirees to come in and listen to a presentation regarding the program.  She added that about fifty people showed, mostly retirees.  Mr. Schrader explained that he would report back to the committee as this program moves forward. 

3.                  Code of Ethics – Mr. Troy explained that Mr. McKee, Mr. Schrader, Mr. Whitt and himself have met and have discussed volume of information regarding the Code of Ethics.  He explained that a draft copy of the document has been provided to all present and added that he did not intend on this being an actionable item at this time.  He added that it has been provided here for input from the committee.  He suggested that Mr. Ross and Ms. Price take this back to their respective parties to discuss and requested that any suggested changes be brought back to this committee in April for appropriate action to be taken.  Mr. Troy pointed out that page 5, number 4 is the most controversial.  He discussed changes that were made to this by Mr. McKee and himself.  He explained that this originally read “office” and was changed to “Chairman.”  Mr. Cornell requested that the Clerk of the Legislature notify all Legislators of this document and a request for their input.  Mr. Cornell, Mr. Troy and Mr. McKee expressed that they are working to have a document that will be passable on the floor by the full Legislature.  Mr. McKee expressed that this is a start and the need to start somewhere.  He further expressed that the Legislature is out of compliance with State Law in regards to disclosure.  Mr. Schrader also stated that the lack of disclosure leave the county out of compliance with State Law.  He further explained that the form included in this packet is the form prescribed by New York State.  He explained that the state prescribed form is the best way to start.  Mr. Schrader discussed the changes that were made to this prior to bringing it the committee.  He discussed page 5, (C) 1 and explained that the intention of this is for clarity and exact limitations.  Mr. Schrader stated that the current Code of Ethics is twenty years old.  He added that this document mirrors many other counties and allows for enforcement.  He discussed that this provides for a penalty for the violation of the Code of Ethics.  Mr. Schrader further discussed page 4, number 7 and explained that in the current Code of Ethics this was not included.  He expressed that it is imperative that this be included.  He discussed the need to avoid even the appearance of impropriety and unethical conduct.  Mr. Whitt explained that he provided Mr. Troy, Mr. McKee and Mr. Schrader with a packet of information that he had collected dating back to 1987.  He discussed a New York State Code of Ethics that was not passed in 1987.  He further discussed State Law prescribing the minimum to be included in a Code of Ethics.  He added that a local entity has the right to pass an enforceable Code of Ethics.  He further discussed the state minimum request regarding disclosure.  Mr. Whitt also discuss a recent change in November 2007 regarding who can hold a political office.  He expressed that the Attorney General of New York issued an opinion regarding this.  Mr. Whitt discussed it not being illegal to hold the office of party Chairman while holding a position in the Election Office.  He also explained that it is not unethical to do the same until the time at which it becomes prohibited to do so.  Mr. Whitt discussed enforcement and the possibility of creating aboard to enforce the Code of Ethics.  He further discussed the disclosure form and added that over the last four years there has only been one elected official who has filed a disclosure form.  He further discussed it becoming an issue when a disclosure is not filed and how filing can be enforced.  He stated that the Code of Ethics in New York State is disgracefully inadequate.  He offered to provide any Legislator that desires a copy of the volumes of documents and research that he provided Mr. Troy and Mr. McKee with.  Mr. Schrader discussed Appendix A, Disclosure Form, and who should be responsible for filing.  He suggested this list of who should be responsible for filing is reviewed annually.  Mr. Cornell inquired as to who would appoint an Ethics Advisory Board.  Mr. Schrader expressed that it should be done by the Legislature.  Mr. Cornell inquired about a violation.  Mr. Whitt expressed that there is no violation if the Code of Ethics has not been established.  He added that the Code of Ethics is not enforceable until it is passed.  Mr. Schrader expressed that he feels disclosure should be provided.  He further discussed a law adopted in 1991 in which allows for the county to have a Code of Ethics.  He discussed a county having a choice in 1991, if their population was fewer than 50,000, to opt in or out.  He discussed there being no record of Cortland County opting in or out.  He expressed that in regards to the disclosure form, he believes that Cortland County should use the state prescribed form.  Mr. Schrader stated that he is current in filing his disclosure.  He stated that he files it annually.  Mr. Whitt discussed Public Authority Law and stated that even without the Code of Ethics certain individuals may be required to file a disclosure due to the boards that they serve on.  Mr. Troy expressed that April3, 2008, following the Chairman’s Meeting. There will be a meeting regarding the Code of Ethics.  Mr. Suben discussed Mr. Whitt having done the research and whether or not Cortland County has opted in or opted out in regards to the 1991 State Law.  He explained that research needs to be done pertaining to this and also discussed researching the history of the population of Cortland County.  Mr. Whitt explained that if the county is not in compliance then we could theoretically loose funding from New York State.  He discussed there being no history of this in New York State.  Mr. Suben expressed that he would like to have a meeting with Mr. Whitt.  Mr. Troy expressed that there will be a meeting regarding the Code of Ethics on April 3, 2008 following the Chairmen’s Meeting.  He added that any comments should be directed to Mr. Cornell, Mr. McKee or himself.

4.                  Rules of Order – Mr. Cornell explained that the Rules of Order were reviewed by Legislators and proposed changes have been requested.  He also explained that any changes made to the Rules of Order would require a two-thirds vote by the full Legislature.  Committee members discussed the following proposed changes to the Rules of Order.  

Page 1 – Article I, Section 3 – form

A question was proposed regarding the form.  Ms. Morgan expressed that the form is not being used.  Mr. Cornell discussed and suggested eliminating the phrase “on the form provided” and added that he has not seen the form mentioned in this.  Mr. Schrader explained that a friendly amendment could be made orally without objection on the floor.  He added that if there was an objection the Legislature could simply recess the meeting and put the amendment in writing before reconvening the meeting.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order by eliminating the phrase “on the form provided.”

3.         Amendment – is a proposal to change the wording of a motion or a resolution.  All amendments must be submitted in writing on the form provided and distributed to all members.

Page 3 – Article I, Section 28 (Robt Rules – same day)

A question was proposed regarding Motion to Reconsider not being the same as in Roberts Rules of Order, in Roberts Rules of Order it must be done the same day.  Committee members discussed these Rules of Order being the Rules of order of the Cortland County Legislature and Roberts Rules of Order being a guide to establish these Rules of Order.  A suggestion was made to add the verbiage, “as long as something has not already been done which cannot be undone” to the definition of Motion to Reconsider.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order by adding the phrase “as long as something has not already been done which cannot be undone.”

28.       Motion to Reconsider - is a motion to bring again before the Legislature a motion which has been adopted, rejected, or postponed indefinitely, as long as something has not already been done which cannot be undone.

Page 4 – Article I, Sections 40 – 41 (two-thirds vs. majority)

A question was proposed regarding changing the required votes needed to purchase property.  The Rules of Order currently require a two-thirds vote to purchase property.  Committee members discussed the reason for requiring a two-thirds vote may have been because two-thirds vote is required for the sale of property.  Nothing was found that required a two-thirds vote to purchase property.  Mr. Dafoe suggested leaving this alone and not making any changes.  The consensus of the committee members was not to make any changes to the Rules of Order regarding this. 

Page 6 – Article II, Section 1, Subsection A-1 (review of Local Law #2 of 1972)

A question was proposed regarding the date of the Biennial Organizational Meeting.  Ms. Morgan discussed the need of the meeting to be held on the second Wednesday unless that Wednesday falls on the first of January according to the local law.  She added that the date couldn’t be changed.  Mr. Schrader explained that the date could be changed and added that the Legislature sets its own schedule as long as it is in compliance with state law.  He added that there is no problem with this.   The consensus of the committee members was not to make any changes to the Rules of Order regarding this.

Page 7 – Article II, Section 2, Subsection B-2 (resolution issue)

A question was proposed regarding the need for a resolution to nominate the Clerk of the Legislature.  Ms. Morgan expressed that this states a resolution for the appointment of the Clerk of Legislature is not required.  Mr. Schrader expressed that a resolution to appoint the Clerk of the Legislature is required.  He added that the resolution is sent to the full Legislature with the name of the individual to be appointed left blank.  He further expressed that nominations are made orally from the floor of the Legislature.  Mr. Schrader expressed that a resolution is the appropriate manner to handle this and added that leaving the name blank in the resolution is also appropriate because it allows for nominations to be made orally.  Ms. Morgan expressed that she does not disagree but added the wording does not say that.  Mr. Troy suggested not making any changes.  The consensus of the committee members was not to make any changes to the Rules of Order regarding this.

Page 8 – Article II, Section 2, Subsection F (change order)

A question was proposed regarding the order in which these items are listed.  Ms. Morgan requested that the order be changed to comply with the previous Section.  Mr. Schrader discussed there being no prescribed order by law.  Ms. Morgan explained that she would like this to be consistent.  The consensus of the committee was to switch the order of the appointments listed in Article II, Section 2, Subsection E and F to be consistent with the listing in Article II, Section 1, Subsection C.

E.                  Appointment of a Public Defender

1.         At each biennial organizational meeting, the Legislature shall appoint a Public Defender, in accordance with Local Law No. 2 for year 1966. (See County Law, Section 716)

2.         The term of the office of Public Defender shall be for the term for which the membership of the Legislature appointing him/her was elected or for a term as may be determined by local law not to exceed four years.

3.            Appointment of the Public Defender shall be done by resolution.

F.                  Appointment of a Veterans’ Services Officer

1.                  At each biennial organizational meeting, the Legislature shall appoint a County Veterans' Services officer, in accordance with County Law Section 800.

2.                  The term of office of the Veterans’ Services shall be for the term for which the membership of the Legislature appointing him/her was elected or for a term as may be determined by local law not to exceed four years.

3.                  Appointment of the Veterans' Services Officer shall be done by resolution.

            Page 9 – Article III, Section 1, Subsection A-6 Public Comment Statement

A question was proposed regarding the Public Comment Statement.  Ms. Morgan expressed that Public Comment has been allowed for only three minutes.  She added that this states five minutes and this has caused confusion.  Committee members discussed the Chairman choosing the length of public comment.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order to reflect the length of Public Comment being three (3) minutes.

            Public Comment: Provision is made at this point in the agenda for citizens of the community to make comments regarding any agenda item to be discussed at this meeting. After Public Comment, citizens will not be recognized at any time except at the request of the Chairman after approval for such recognition by a unanimous vote of the Legislature in attendance. No person, not a member of the legislature, shall speak for more than five (5) three (3) minutes without specific approval of a majority of the Legislators. The minutes shall show that a privilege of the floor was granted and shall include a brief statement of the subject matter presented

Page 15 – Article IV, Section 1, Subsection A-4, edit wording - consistent to page 18, No. 22

A question was proposed in regards to the regarding the wording of Article IV, Section 1, Subsection A-4.  Committee members discussed the wording.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order by inserting the phrase “by the Clerk of the Legislature” after the word prepared in Article IV, Section 1, Subsection A-4.

4.         prepare, or cause to be prepared by the Clerk of the Legislature, in conjunction with the County Administrator, an agenda for each committee meeting;

            Page 17 – Article V, Section 10, Question, Why this is necessary?

A question was proposed regarding the necessity of No. 10 – “file with the Cortland County Clerk all documents as directed by a majority vote of the Cortland County Legislature.”  Ms. Morgan expressed that she does not understand this and why file all documents.  Mr. Schrader expressed that “as directed” is equivalent to action by the Legislature.  The consensus of the committee members was not to make any changes to the Rules of Order regarding this.

Page 18 – Article V, Section 22 change Article V to Article IV

A question was proposed in regards to changing Article V to Article IV.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order changing Article V to Article IV in Article V, Section 22.

22.       on the request of a Committee Chair or County Administrator, prepare an agenda for a committee meeting and distribute it in accordance with Article V IV

            Page 19 –Article V, Section 25, change roll to role

A question was proposed in regards to changing roll to role.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order changing the word “roll” to “role” in Article V, Section 25.

 

25.       upon receipt of a tentative budget from the County Administrator in his roll role as Budget Officer, distribute a copy to each member;

            Page25 – Article X, Section 10

A question was proposed in regards to a motion to reconsider being on the same day.  Ms. Morgan discussed Roberts Rules of Order and a motion to reconsider needing to be made on the same day as vote being reconsidered.  Mr. Schrader expressed that it needs to be dome at the same meeting.  He added that once a meeting is adjourned, a vote from that meeting couldn’t be reconsidered.  The consensus of the committee members was not to make any changes to the Rules of Order regarding this.

            Page 26 – Article XI, Section 3, requires County Attorney review

A question was proposed in regards to have the County Attorney review this.  Ms. Morgan stated that she thinks the County Attorney should review this.  Mr. Schrader expressed that if a member refuses to vote, then his or her vote is recorded in the affirmative.  He added that a member cannot refuse to vote.  Ms. Morgan requested to know where this came from and asked to be educated regarding this.  Mr. Schrader expressed that in Roberts Rules of Order if a member is not present, the their vote can not be used to pass a motion; therefore a “No” vote is recorded.  He went on to discuss a member being present and refusing to vote being recorded as a “yes” vote.  He further discussed this being designed as a penalty from refusing to vote.  The consensus of the committee members was not to make any changes to the Rules of Order regarding this.

            Page 27 – Article XII, Section 8, not following, change or delete

A question was proposed in regards to this not being followed.  Ms. Morgan stated that his is not being followed.  Mr. Schrader explained that if an agenda item does not pass its Standing Committee, then it is not sent to Budget & Finance Committee.  The consensus of the committee members was not to make any changes to the Rules of Order regarding this.  The committee members further discussed changing the words Statutory Committee to Standing Committee in two places in this section.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order by changing the words Statutory Committee to Standing Committee in two places on page 27 of Article XII, Section 8. 

8.         For any item to be moved from the Statutory Standing Committee to the Budget and Finance Committee requires a majority vote of the members present (a quorum being present) of the Statutory Standing Committee.

            Page 28 – Article XII, Section 12, Subsection A, not following, change?

A question was proposed regarding changing the wording.  Ms. Morgan expressed that the phrase all budgetary items suggests all budgetary items and added that this is not being followed.  Mr. Schrader expressed that anything that impacts a change in the budget or any amendments to the budget is presented to the Budget & Finance Committee.  The consensus of the committee members was not to make any changes to the Rules of Order regarding this.

            Page 28 – Article XII, Section 12, Subsection B, Add Conflict Attorney to list

A question was proposed in regards to adding the Conflict Attorney.  Ms. Morgan recommended adding the Conflict Attorney.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order by adding the phrase “Conflict Attorney” to the second paragraph of Article XIII, Section 12, Subsection B on page 28. 

The District Attorney, Coroners, Public Defender, Conflict Attorney, Sheriff’s Department including the Jail, Enhanced 911 (E911) Center, and Special Traffic Options Program for Driving While Intoxicated (STOP-DWI), Probation Department, Office of Emergency Management, and Alternatives to Incarceration.

            Page 29 – Article XII, Section 12, Subsection D, add Dwyer Park

A question was proposed in regards to adding Dwyer Park.  Committee members discussed Dwyer Park falling under the Highway Department.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order by adding Dwyer Park to Article XII, Section 12, Subsection D, on page 29.

            D.        Highway – Not less than five (5) nor more than seven (7) members who shall oversee:

County Highway Department, including Highway Department garages, grounds, buildings and the maintenance thereof, used to carry out this function, and the County Airport, the County’s contract with the State for snow removal, and bidding procedures and equipment purchases as they relate to the Highway Department, county solid waste and recycling functions and Dwyer Park.

Page 29 – Article XII, Section 12, Subsection E, change name back to Buildings & Grounds

A question was proposed to change the name of the General Services Committee back to the Buildings & Grounds Committee.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order by changing the name of the General Services Committee to Buildings & Grounds Committee in Article XII, Section 12, Subsection E, on page 29.

E.         General Services Buildings & Grounds – Not less than five (5) nor more than seven (7) members who shall oversee:

Additionally, a question was proposed in regards to the wording of the last sentence.  Committee members discussed changing the last sentence.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order by changing the wording in the last sentence to include the phrase “The committee shall have general supervision over” in Article XII, Section 12, Subsection E, on page 29.

The buildings and grounds, including the construction, maintenance, and repair of all county-owned or rented buildings and grounds, including the Court House, Horizon House, Highway Administration Building and Recycling Center, but excluding County Highway garages and grounds, County Park buildings and grounds, the County Jail, the County Landfill, and such other exempt buildings as the Legislature may designate by resolution. The committee shall have general supervision over Buildings and Grounds Department, Information Technology, the County Safety Office, Weights and Measures and all safety issues that affect the County.  The committee shall have general supervision of the allocation of space within said buildings, security, and scheduling and fees established for public use, within the exceptions heretofore mentioned.

Page 33 – Article XV,1, question to adding to Rules of Order that they be adopted every two years

A question was proposed regarding adoption of the Rules of Order every two years.  Committee members discussed adopting the Rules of Order at the Biennial Organization meeting.  Ms. Morgan explained that Clerks of Legislature from counties across New York State were recently surveyed regarding this and of the 22 counties surveyed, 16 counties allow for their Rules of Order to carry over.  She added that those who do not allow for the Rules of Order to be carried over, adopt their Rules of Order at their organizational meetings.  Mr. Schrader expressed his concerns regarding the binding over future Legislators if the Rules of Order are not adopted by the incoming Legislature.  He suggested that this be added on page 7, Article II, Section 1, Subsection C, as No. 9 and changing No. 9 to No. 10.  The consensus of the committee members was to change the Rules of Order by adding “Adopt Rules of Order” as No. 9 and change No. 9 to No. 10 on page 7 of Article II, Section 1, Subsection C. 

9.      adopt Rules of Order; and

10.  any other business necessary and appropriate to come before the meeting.

The consensuses of the Personnel Committee was to have all changes made to the Rules of Order and distribute them to all Legislators for their review.  Additionally, they agreed to have a resolution to adopt the proposed changes to the Rules of Order at the next Personnel Committee meeting. 

5.         Workers Compensation – Mr. Schrader explained that an issue has arisen regarding Workers Compensation that has caused him to review the Local Law and the assessment of municipalities.  He explained that the cost charged to a municipality is based 60% on claims and 40% on assed values.  He added that recently the Town of Harford’s Workers Compensation costs increased from $12,000 to $66,000.  He explained that this increase is not being charged this year due to an error in past years calculations.  He added that at the request of the Legislature he is reviewing the formula used to calculate a municipality’s cost.  He explained that the Local Law meets the letter of the law and added that it’s intent is not to exhaust a municipalities ability to tax.  He further discussed protecting municipalities from having to impose a 20% tax increase just to cover the cost of workers compensation.  Mr. Schrader discussed reviewing the local law and added that he prepared a draft spreadsheet.  He discussed examples on the spreadsheet and expressed the need to protect municipalities from exhausting their ability to tax.  He explained that he has had a meeting with Legislators and the Town Supervisor from Harford, Ray Marsh.  He stated that it is not appropriate to share the Town of Harford’s costs across the entire county.  He further discussed the county assuming the costs because they are the largest tax base and further discussed protecting the municipalities from a catastrophic loss.  Mr. Schrader stated that a loss like the one the Town of Harford had could happen anywhere.  He discussed the reserve workers compensation fund and added that the only down side is the impact on the county.  He also discussed the detrimental impact that multiple deaths could have.  Mr. Schrader stated that would formally draft a Local Law pertaining to Workers Compensation Assessments and present it to the April Personnel Committee.  Ms. Price expressed that she appreciates all Mr. Schrader’s work in regards to this.  Mr. Cornell stated that this could happen to any municipality and be detrimental to the municipality’s budget.  Mr. Schrader agreed that this would have detrimental impact on a municipality’s budget.  He further discussed looking into this and it being good public policy.  Mr. Schrader discussed the being more able to handle a catastrophic loss.  Mr. Schrader further discussed the Safety Officer being able to enforce safety issues.  He discussed the County Safety Officer being recognized in these municipalities and being there to protect the municipality as well as the County.  Mr. Troy inquired as to how long a catastrophic loss would impact a municipality’s budget.  Mr. Schrader explained that the impact would be forever and is a substantial amount.  The consensus of the Personnel Committee was to have Mr. Schrader move forward with this to bring back a draft copy of a Workers Compensation Assessment Local Law to the April Personnel Committee meeting.

6.         Board of Elections – Mr. Wood explained that Village Elections would be held next Tuesday and the paper ballots need to be kept.  He added that storage space is needed.  Mr. Schrader briefly discussed storage space for the paper ballots.

Mr. Cornell adjourned the meeting at 10:36 a.m.