Personnel & Finance Committee - Regular Meeting

All the Monday, 12/08/2025 personnel finance committee to org. Chuck, can I have the role, please?

Okay. Chair Veldrin. Here. Supervisor Erickson. Here. Supervisor Yang. Supervisor Smith. Smith here. Supervisor Brower. Brower here. Supervisor Kemp. Smith here. Supervisor Glaser. And YGP members, Hong.

Glaser here.

Oh, k. YGP member is Hong? Hong was not able to attend tonight. Okay. And Shukla?

He didn't contact me. So Okay. Okay? Thank you. Okay. First is up is consideration of minutes for we have two from October 28 and November 24. And a motion on that? Move both. Moved by Ericsson. Any discussion, questions? I'll put my chat up. I don't see me yet. I'll just. Swipe it up. If not, all those in favor, say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Those opposed, say no. Motion carries. K. Referrals. We have 16 items. Just care of 11 and chill, eleven and twelve with Chuck's. Those are. They passed. I wanted to separate sorry. Cross separation. 16. 16. We have speaker. 16. I figured that. Any other ones? You got a separation? I wanna separate eight and fifteen.

Okay. Wait. 8.

I have question on it because it just came here, so I want to What's going on?

K. Does that come through?

Okay. So then on the balance, it's one through seven, nine through 14. Can I get a

So we're separating eight, fifteen, and 16? Correct.

Okay.

I'll move the rest.

Okay. Move by Ericsson. Any other discussion, questions? If not, all those in favor, aye. Aye. Aye. Carried. Okay. Eight. Todd, did you does that go through you, the terrestrial contract?

It's not a public works thing. Oh. Information management. It's land information office.

Just because I started only came here?

Could be because it's under information management.

Oh, okay. Anything

You got a question, Anthony. I can probably answer your question.

Well, I was just surprised that the the contract went way up from this year to last year. It went from that AB. Is that just the addendums? If you look on the on the

Yeah. But that does that and there's a change in the scope. So is there? Okay. Yeah. Alright. Because I because that seemed like a big jump from

a $100,000 up. Mhmm. Okay. That's fine. That's the only question I had. Motion on number eight. Approval. Moved by Ericsson. Any other questions, discussion? If not, all those in favor, aye. Aye. Opposed, say no. Motion carries. Okay. 15 was oh, just well, it's just you, Thorn here. I just was I wanted to go over this anyway just for our it's the list of all the obligation. They

This is 15?

Yeah. This is all of our borrowing for the next year. Okay. So this is just the first step, obviously.

Are you asking a question?

Now I am.

Alright. Okay. Yes. Right. This is not to say that these are all of the projects that were included in the 2026 budget. So the first step is to get authorization to borrow for those projects at some point. That authorization requires a three quarter vote of the board. So we take all the projects together. Then depending on the progress of these capital projects and the timing, we'll borrow for them as needed as they progress. Some vehicles and things like that, we borrow for right away.

Other ones are in process already. Some of them may or may not actually, you know, move forward very quickly. So the the borrowing that we do in September will be include some of these projects, but then also some that were authorized in a similar manner in last

year Right.

And are now making progress.

So it's just putting them all in front of us. But you will then then

So that we can get the three quarter vote. Right. And that way we don't have you know? And it also authorizes departments. Part of one of the section is authorizes departments to move forward with their with their capital spending.

Okay. Any questions? I did have question on one of them, just the the term. I can find it again. Something was there something longer than 20? Is that what I saw somewhere?

No. 20 is the maximum term that we can borrow for.

I can't find that. I'm not gonna worry about it.

There's nothing longer than 20? No. Okay. No. There isn't.

Was it a 15? Is there There

is a 15.

I think that was the one. Yeah. There you go. Oh, yeah. What is what is that administration expansion? It's $22,000,001.74. That

oh, that's at the airport.

Oh,

okay. That's, yeah, that's for the admin staff portion of what's now in the terminal. So now they have you know, the the staff has grown. They've got people kind of all over the place. So they're working on redesigning the

Oh, okay.

And I know they had that issue. Of the terminal. And they still have

that issue with TSA, right, at the top of the there

Yeah. Center project? It right. Right. That is that as well.

Okay. Okay. Does anybody else have any questions on them, comments? If not Move approval. Moved by Ericsson. Are you wavering, chair Miles, or you're just No.

I'm playing with my dog.

Sorry. I wasn't sure if you are. That's fine. Alright. If there's no other questions, all those in favor say aye. With a motion by Ericsson, aye. Opposed, say no. Motion carries. Okay. Item 16, speaker. I'll get back to it in a second and bring it up.

Ready for me?

Yeah. I'm just trying to get back to it. 2025, Redis February, approving changes to the 2026 employee benefit handbook. And Derek Wells.

Thanks, I've got 9% on my battery, so we'll see what I can do here. I mean, you speak

fast. Or

Yeah. No. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight in support of resolution two sixty two, proves changes to the Dane County employee benefit handbook. So this is the culmination of our meet and confer process in 2025. Began six months ago and consisted of main discussions, over 75 separate proposals to modify the handbook.

And on behalf of the six ASKME affiliated employee group representatives, I wanna thank assistant directors Nick Bubb and Shelby Slavin for their collaboration in this process. So I do also wanna thank the this committee for your continued interest in our in our handbook process and providing formal guidance regarding the committee's priorities, you know, along with the annual budget process. We view this as one of the the committee's most important tasks. And, obviously, we've got an election and a new term coming up spring this spring, but and we know you all limited time. But to the extent possible, we'd certainly welcome further participation from committee members early and often, both next year, future years.

So that's an open invitation, at least on our behalf. So regarding the priorities this committee identified earlier this year from our perspective, all of them were key components of strengthening workers' rights in a number of critical areas. Discussions on most of these topics with administration are ongoing. But I just wanted to point out three areas for your attention. So the first is the environmental working conditions for protections regarding air quality, extreme temperatures.

In the handbook, we've changed the countywide safety committee. It has a new charge that's chaired by Alex Dudik, who's the president of Asheville Local eight ninety five. And essentially, we're going to be or that committee, I should say, is gonna be preparing recommendations to both DOA and this committee next year regarding their own recommendations from that committee. So be on the lookout for some time for that sometime next year. I think Alex couldn't be here tonight, but Amaran, I think, registered if you have questions on anything from the safety committee.

Amaran is the local sixty five representative from the from the safety committee. So second is telecommuting. Unfortunately, despite telecommuting becoming the new normal for many county employees, which in our view has helped recruit and retain workers and reduce congestion and negative environmental impacts associated with daily commutes, there's still no permanent handbook language regarding telecommuting in this handbook. You know, for those employees who can't telecommute, this continues to be a top issue for members. So we'll be continuing to advocate strongly next year so that we finally incorporate telecommuting into the 2027 handbook.

And all these things, I I think DOA is is well aware of our position, so I don't think any of this is a surprise. But just the last thing we want to talk about was from the P and F priority list. There was no progress on the ability for employee representatives to participate in the reclassification, reallocation, hearing, and appeals. So just just for a bit of context, if an employee believes that they're being underpaid compared to their peers in county government who perform similar work, they have the right under county ordinance to request a reclassification or reallocation. Employee relations then performs that audit.

If the request is denied, then the employee can appeal the decision. It goes to basically what's a quasi judicial panel. They recon make a recommendation to the county executive regarding the appeal. So and to give you a sense of how the how those have played out this year in the two hearings where employee group representatives participated. There was a half dozen representatives from employee relations for their unpaid status to defend the county's position and only one outside employee representative in attendance to support the affected employees.

Yet only the EG representative lost pay by attending those meetings. You know, those attendant board independent independent board board members who serve on the commission, they told us they value our feedback. We tried to resolve this issue with the grievance through DOA. Director Brockmeyer denied the grievance, but also indicated that he commended the employee representatives for contributing to the reclassification process in a healthy manner. So there's an agreement to pause that grievance process, and we were optimistic we could find a resolution as we were updating this handbook.

But, you know, with that lack of progress, we're kind of back to square one now, and we're faced with potentially spending thousands of dollars of both employee group resources and county resources to have an independent hearing officer resolve this matter. And, you know, it's not something we're gonna be able to change tonight, but we did want to thank the committee again for recommending this as one of your priorities this year. And still crossing our fingers, we'll find a way to forward to resolve this issue. So to conclude, you know, these draft changes still move us largely in the right direction. Based on the surveys from our respective membership, I think actually, it was 100%, if I remember correctly, from all of our six locals.

No one was opposed to any of these changes. So, you know, on behalf of the 1,500 AFSCU members who wake up every day willing and eager to serve this county, we encourage the committee to support this resolution, and thanks for the opportunity to speak. Certainly happy to answer any questions that you have.

Questions for Vigar? Let's see anything in the chat. Okay. Thank you there. Ben, your battery ran out. Yeah.

It's alright.

Okay. So let's get a motion on the floor.

Motion to recommend approval.

By Brower. Discussion. Is there anything you wanna address in that?

I believe Greg sent a memo to kinda all kinda go over to supervisors explaining what's in the the resolution that approves a consensus of the draft handbooks and the updates to that handbook. And that memo, I think, sort of explains a lot of things from our perspective. But if you have any questions on what's in the context of that memo, we're here to answer those questions.

Do think that you have something? Go ahead.

Yeah. I do. Thank you for that that opening. So the question, I'm I'm I'm gonna direct it to Nick and Shelby here, but I don't know if Greg's gonna weigh in online. But so the the piece about the reclass, reallocation paragraph in that memo that talks about the uniformity clause.

And I I really appreciate the memo. I think it does a good job of explaining the process, and I I in particular, appreciate the engagement with the the items that PNF forwarded to DOA. But so on the reclass reallocation piece, it talks about the uniformity clause. And based on some experience I have in the world, I see things of how different public entities engage this, especially when it comes to, like, having a representative present in disciplinary meeting where you get to bring in, you know, another coworker into that meeting if you're not represented by one of the by the by the work by the union that covers your classification. So is it something like that potentially workable in this instance to address that uniformity clause?

Like, I hear I hear the the position in here about, you know, being represented, you know, if it's just only for union members, but could is there the possibility? Would that be a violation if if a worker brought at this appeals reclassification appeals process, brought one of their coworkers with them? Would that kind of address that uniformity issue, do you think?

That wasn't a part of the proposal that was presented. Mhmm. The proposal that was presented was strictly to allow kind of employee group representation at that time, and so it didn't discuss what unrepresented members and how they would sort of get paid for that time. So that's maybe something we could discuss in the future. I'm not certain how that sort of would play out. We would need time to take a look at that proposal and figure out sort of how that would work. It would be kind of odd for the county to be paying for, you know, someone to have their own sort of private attorney. So, obviously, there would be a lot to kinda discuss. Mhmm. Anything else?

If I can and I know this is a off the cuff question, so we should, know, talk about this through email or something. But I'm just curious if you have any sense of aside from, like, a in the disciplinary context, if there are the other instances where the county system of employment has implemented the ability for a worker to bring just a a coworker outside of a employee group representative context into a meeting or some other kind of process.

Well, representation at discipline is distinctly different from, like, these reclassification processes, and so they're analyzed with a a different lens.

Okay.

Alright. Those are my Anything else?

Else? Anything? I just had a question just to follow-up on a point that Derek made about telecommuting. Obviously, lots of people are telecommuting. So it's just that we don't have a formal is it chain is it different from department to department?

Right now, there is a temporary exception that allows for which is language that's in addition to the handbook that's outside of the actual formal adoption to the handbook, which is how we've been providing telecommuting for the last couple years. I I forget exactly when the first year that we issued that exception was. We're in discussions of reissuing another temporary exception that's similar to the one that we have for this year for the following year.

So is this sort of a department by department right now? Or Well, there is something now.

Language of the exception provides the rules as to how each department is gonna construct their telecommuting arrangement.

Mhmm.

And then that's up to each department to kinda figure it out. There are some departments where it's just not possible.

Right. Right. Oh, absolutely. That. So Right. I mean, there's, you know, places in this building. You can easily do it.

The highway department Right. Where we're driving trucks.

That's just like The rest of society. Right? There's just certain businesses and that just don't have it and can't. So that's fine. Anyway okay. If there's nothing else, don't see anything. Maybe online. Don't see anything in the chat. If not, we have a motion and to approve. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye. All say no. Motion carries. Excellent. D, we have nine items. These request for separation, I'll just abstain from five two eighty one. But other than that, I thought they did it together. Guess they separated. Anyway, if there's can I get a motion then on Move approval? On move by Ericsson? Any questions, comments? If not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Both say no.

Motion carries. Okay. Future meeting dates. We are done for the year. I wanna thank everybody. It's been a a rough time over the budget, but it was a good some great discussions and and some hard work done. Chair Miles, thank you for all your work there as well as as supervisor Glaser. We certainly appreciate that help. It's been you know, hopefully, we'll tackle whatever's next in the New Year. The schedule's up there, so it's pretty much straight usual. So you can look at that. 05:30, Mondays. That doesn't change. K. So if there's no questions on that adjourned.

Move public comments. There isn't any ticket. Such other business. I guess I gotta put it there, but I appreciate it anyway. Appreciate everybody's time and energy they put in. So with that, we will see you in the New Year. All those in favor, say aye. Have a German. Aye.

Thanks, Eric.

We are adjourned. Thanks, everybody.