Item 2A - Approval of Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In response to a question from Mr. Pap6, Mr. Taylor said ARFF services in Billings, Montana were provided by city employees represented by the Teamsters Union. He explained that it was an example of cross-utilization. Mr. Pap6 opined that safety services would become a regional question, should a regional airport district be formed. In response to a question from Mr. Pap6, Fire Chief Tom Tallon said to retain the status of an indexed airport, the City had to maintain ARFF services. Should ARFF services be somewhere other than the airport, planes would be instructed to land elsewhere. He stated that firefighters were cross-trained and rotated through ARFF-required fire safety services. Mr. Pap6 asked if there would be a change in how fire emergencies were handled should ARFF services be privatized. Chief Tallon noted that the City of Medford contracted with a private fire service. Ms. Nathanson pointed out that Mr. Poling was a retired public safety provider and that she was a long-time union member. She related that she was troubled by the cost comparison of ARFF services to other cities. She asked what the downside of proposing some policies to govern the cost of the service. Mr. Taylor said the City did benchmark and look at best practices. He stated that cross-utilization was the predominant way ARFF services were adequately provided and landed weight costs kept down. Ms. Nathanson asked why the services had not been made more cost-effective to date. Mr. Taylor responded that the scheduled work session on the item had created a chilling effect on bargaining. Sharon Rudnick of the City Attorney's Office stated that nothing in State collective bargaining laws prevented the City Council from directing an outcome of a collective bargaining issue. However, she felt concerned about the impact on progress that the policy question created. She said that the collective bargaining process worked because of the necessity for compromise. She suggested that the situation wherein the costs at the airport had been a part of the bargaining for quite a while and one party chose to invoke the political process had fostered an environment in which the party could posture rather than negotiate. Ms. Rudnick said the outcome of this was no longer dependent on the good faith participation in the process or the bad things that could happen if an agreement was not reached. She believed the timing of this discussion would create an impact on the ability of the City to manage its collective bargaining processes. Ms. Nathanson agreed that, in general, critical public safety jobs should be performed by public employees. She opposed having this discussion while the collective bargaining process was underway. She interpreted the City Charter to direct such discussion to be held in executive session only. Ms. Taylor supported the amendment. She supported directing the City Manager not to privatize services. She disagreed that this was a charter matter, stating that whether or not a City service should be privatized was a policy matter and was subject to the authority of the City Council. Ms. Solomon asked if the attorney had seen the amended motion. She opined that the amendment did not seem to be an improvement as it still neutralized the City Manager. She was compelled by the figures provided by Mr. Corey, stating that the City was clearly %ut of synch" with other cities. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 23, 2004 Page 3 Work Session