10/04/2011 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#,,,. Council Minutes of 10-04-2011 ~; employee organization and the legislative body. The agreement is binding upon the legislative body, the employer and the employee organization and the employees covered by the agreement. The Mayor may have stated that he would be doing negotiations and would have Mr. Johnson's back-up for the bigger issues. There are going to be bigger issues. As a legislator and representative of the taxpayers of North Olmsted, I strongly suggest we put our personal feelings aside and vote yes on 2011-96. My vote is yes. Roll Call continued: Schumann, yes; Williamson, no; Brossard, yes; Orlowski, no; Kearney, no; Mahoney, no with comment. First, I would indicate that I really see this as two issues. What the legislation is asking us to do is to dispense with the RFP process and authorizing the Mayor to enter into a contract with Mr. Johnson. I note from just the very face of the legislation that Mr. Johnson has worked for us since 2002. The city chose to go out to an RFP (request for proposal) process, soliciting proposals from various entities. Nonetheless, the city required an RFP process in 2006. From 2002 to 2006, Mr. Johnson represented our city in our labor negotiations. Now, it is five years later and we are being asked to dispense with the RFP process and again hire Mr. Johnson. I see no reason to depart from the prior practice of this Council and not require an RFP process. I would advocate that we consider going out for an RFP process rather than just simply hire someone. I would indicate that I did vote to hire Mr. Johnson and bring him on board on previous occasions, and that was primarily because the Law Director at the time, Mr. Dubelko, indicated that he thought it was too specialized and decided he did not want to handle it. I have heard nothing with regards to this particular year that would cause me to consider that our Law Director couldn't handle this type of negotiation. Our current Law Director has vast experience with municipal law and municipal government. We have afull-time Asst Law Director as well. I fail to see at this point in time why he couldn't also undertake these responsibilities as well. While I recognize Mr. Johnson's successes in the past, at this point in time I don't understand why it would be necessary to again go to Mr. Johnson. I have every confidence that Mr. Gareau and Mr. O'Malley can handle this. I respectfully disagree with the representations that this is above and beyond them. I don't know that the negotiations this year or next year will be any more difficult or challenging than they have in the past. Given the concessions that our unions have already given up, I just don't know what more Mr. Johnson can get out of them as opposed to what Mr. Gareau or Mr. O'Malley could get. The city of Fairview Park has an Asst Law Director who conducts their Boards & Commissions much like Mr. O'Malley's responsibilities here. His name is William McGinty. He handled all of the negotiations for Fairview Park. Nothing went beyond arbitration. All unions signed the contracts, and he did it within 6 to 9 months. This is a fine example of a city taking negotiations in-house and got all of their contracts done by their Asst Law Director. We have afull-time Asst Law Director and apart- time Law Director so that buttresses my view on this particular issue. In regards to catering special interests and putting the residents second, my view of the RFP process is that by its very nature it enhances and ensures the residents are getting the best available product for their money. I am at a loss of the suggestion that I am not following the residents' best interests or that I'm not protecting their interests. I see my no vote here that I am fulfilling the responsibility of the residents by ensuring that we go forward with an RFP process and not simply hire Mr. Johnson. So, my vote is no for those reasons. Councilman Barker pointed out that Mr. O'Malley is a part-time employee, not full-time. 8