HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 29,1971
CITY COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS ARE TAPE RECORDED AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
I,,~, "
ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
PERSONNEL
(sa~ff
"
l"'IT>OITID"
ASS]If:O~
19:7841
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 29, 1971
The City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, met in adjourned
regular session on Tuesday, June 29, 1971 at 7 p.m. in the Council
Chamber of the Arcadia City Hall.
City Attorney, Robert D. Ogle
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Butterworth, Considine, Hage, Helms
None
In response to the request of Mayor Helms the Personnel Director
advised that a tentative agreement had been reached this date with one
of the associations, i. e., City Employees Association. He read the
agreement which would provide for a 4 1/2 percent increase plus $5 per
month per employee. Further the City would provide a medical insurance
program at a cost of between $14.50 and $15.50 per month with details
to be worked out to the mutual satisfaction of the city and the asso-
ciation. Further, the current $4.50 dependent payment for medical
insurance would be dropped.
It was determined that Council take action on this tentative agreement
at this time whereupon it was MOVED by Councilman Butterworth, seconded
by Councilman Considine and carried on roll call vote as follows that
the agreement as read by the Personnel Director be APPROVED subject to
its acceptance by the association membership prior to June 30 at 5 p.m.,
that if it is accepted by the membership that sufficient funds be appro-
priated to fund the agreement; that in the absence of such acceptance
by the association that sufficient funds be appropriated to grant an
across the board cost of living increase. It was noted by Councilman
Arth that the across the board figure was to be based on the May-to-May
price index of the Los Angeles to Long Beach area. '
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Butterworth, Considine, Hage, Helms
None
None
The City Manager then advised that agreements with the other three
associations had not been reached, whereupon Mayor Helms stated that
Council would hear from a spokesman for each group.
S. Cynthia Street, Pomona, spoke on behalf of the
Association and in answer to an inquiry by Mayor Helms
employed as a firefighter with Los Angeles County.
the following statement.
Don Donnelly, 2268
City Firefighters
stated that he is
He then presented
"Let me begin by indicating to you that our goal was to reach agreement
with your representative. We made every effort time and time again,
gentlemen. We spent extensive time with both your staff and ourselves
in seeking an agreement. Our wage proposal we felt was modest and
reasonable. We have met so many times with your representative that
6-29-71
- 1 -
19:7842
we almost question whether the taxpayer ever knew how much it took in
city finances in his salary and others to meet and confer and come to
no agreement. We found a deaf ear, gentlemen. We have gone as far as
to make extensive counter proposals from our original proposal. We
were not cemented in the proposal that we originally offered because
we knew that you have to be flexible. We have not found your repre-
sentative to be equally as flexible. We have altered our position
downward time and time again. We are now in a complete state of frus-
tration in the process of meeting and conferring with your represen-
tative. We asked and you have allowed us to speak before your body
to communicate to you our sincerity and our great concern for the issues
that we have presented to your representative. I should state at the
very beginning that your representative may indicate to you that he has
been offering us a very handsome package. I think the most germane I
word that may relate to that is that the package that has been offered
to us, relative to the position of the firefighters of this city, is
extremely inadequate. If you start so low on the spectrum, where your
firefighters are, and offer what he has considered to be an adequate
proposal, that because you are so far down the totem pole it is most
difficult to find anything other than getting to the average of what
we have sought to be equitable. We have sought someone who is concerned
about the issues of your Fire Department. We have not found that so in
your representative. I would like to insert at this point that cer-
tainly there is no personal animosities here. He has a role to play I
suppose and we are seeking the best interests of the firefighters in
your Fire Department. This is nothing personal.
"You have sought, and justly so, a performance of your Fire Department
above and beyond the average. You have demanded these skills to be
above the average. I think rightfully so. The firefighting profession
is an emergency service vital to all of your constituents, The
firefighters have not been satisfied with average standards of perfor-
manCe. They have always sought and I believe have obtained a perfor-
manCe that is far beyond just the average. I think you should be justly
proud of the firefighters of this community. The administration of your
city as well has sought excellence in the Fire Department, both from
your city administration in this building and fire department head-
quarters. They 'respond daily, they perform their duties, and they seek
your concern once a year. They eat smoke. They go upon their very
hazardous profession, and I might depart from my prepared statement,
that firefighting today as determined by the Department of Labor
Statistics is the most hazardous profession in the United States today -
bar none. Your firefighters are not exempt from that hazard. They eat
smoke, fight fires daily, they perform life saving performances to
young people, to your families and their constituents daily in thw
community.
"We feel it was necessary t~ come before your Council to bring the
conCerns of this Fire Department and its members to your attention. We
feel that firefighting and the emergency service they perform is one of
the most important services this city provides to its people. They
protect your family when you are away from home, your children and so I
forth. As I have said before, our concerns were not to he in the upper
quartile of any wage survey. Our concerns were to be just paid average.
As articles in the paper have indicated it is unfortunate that the
placing of the Arcadia Firefighters in salary is at the bottom of its
comparable cities. We want to bring these very important considerations
before your body and we seek only one thing. We seek to be remunerated
in an average salary and fringe benefit package. The figures that we
have submitted to your representative he himself has acknowledged that
they are correct and that with a few decimal points - and it is that
far off - that he agrees completely with our statement. Our concerns
are that we try to meet agreement.
"We would like to respectfully suggest to your body that you select a
6-29-71
- 2 -
Jr'
I
UNION
REPRESENTATIVE
I
19:7843
new representative to represent you and go back to the table to seek
agreement. We do not seek impasse. We do not seek any other thing
,other than agreement. Our caus~ we feel is just. We have tried with
all the compassion, all the reasonableness and all the facts and
figures, and we have provided we feel reams of it to your representa-
tive. We feel it has not,had a just hearing or due 'process and now
we seek your approval to recognizing that your firefighters as they
perform beyond the average quartile only seek the average in salary.
We thank you for your consideration in this matter but we want to be
very very candid of the importance and the gravity that the firefighters
of this department feel toward this ussue. We have met time and time
again with your representative seeking agreement. We have made con-
cession after concession and yet we still find a deaf ear. We now
come before your honorable body seeking your concern as elected people
representing ,the citizens of this community. We feel that you will hear
us and you will find a way 'in which to seek a representative of your
body who will reach an agreement with our organization. That is all
we seek. Thank you and ,I welcome any questions at this time."
Forrest :Payne, American 'Federation of State, County~ Municipal Employees,
spoke as follows' on behalf of the setvice division' employees who 'are
members of , that organization.,
,"We have a proposal that we would like, and we are bringing it here
tonight, for this Council to entertain because I think, while we had
submitted our proposals for negotiations, or meet and confer consid-
erations, mailed from our office on March 19th after some consideration
through the months of January and February. These were drafted by the
membership of our union here - they were certainly received no later
than probably a week after March 19. We have been in serious negotia-
tions the last couple of weeks. I think that there are areas that have
been unexplored. I think there may be possibly a chance to reach an
agreement. We are asking this Council to extend the negotiating
sessions - the length of time to your own discretion - we would suggest
a week or ten days and that you pass a motion and if there is an
agreement at that time after further 'negotiations, that it be retro-
active to July 1, 1971. I think this will take pressure from the
bargaining table and perhaps forego further confrontations which none
of us certainly desire.
"Let me cite some of the reasons. I am sure that you have been in
consultation with your negotiators at the table. It would be ridiculous
to think that you weren't that responsible people. ,So I am addressing
the City Council not your representative. You indicated that through
your negotiator that you preferred apparently some kind of a 2 year
agreement. I think we and the other three organizations were close to
that but as a matter of trying to reach agreement we went back to our
people and we came back with a proposal for a'2 year agreement. This
was turned down. We are not saying, you know, because you didn't
accept it, --- it is a one way street. We proposed that a ten percent
increase be granted across the board along with the proposals that had
been submitted to us on improvements in health insurance and this would
be the end of negotiations to July 1, 1973, and that next year we would
want to meet and confer 'with you only on those fringe benefit items
which we would agree to outline, to what extent, what barometers would
be used to reach an agreement on those fringe benefits ---- believe me
this was not a proposal that we were very happy about in the membership,
but an interest in trying to reach an agreement. You did not see fit -
which is your prerogative - to agree to that proposal. But however the
negotiadons in the.. Last "few" days , ,.and ,there is.reason that our member-,
ship and some of the other organizations are very skeptical, that when
you come within 24 hours from 3.8 to 4.5 we begin to feel like the
customer who watches his local retail store who puts out an item and
very repetitiously - not good merchandising sense - within a time
lowers the price on it so the whole community says, we will wait until
6-29-71
- 3 -
'19:7844
Joe Jones store goes down and then we will go buy this because he
always comes down. With this kind of bargaining we felt that you were
trying to purchase us on an option block and not bargaining on the
tssueso
I
"I am not here tonight to get involved in your budget. We have done
that with your negotiator. There are certainly some mighty mysterious
things in it that we don't understand and I am sure the taxpayer would
like to have them discussed -- but that is not for this meeting. But
you keep saying a cost of living - I think you must realize that when
you give a cost of living increase to employees you are giving them
,~oney on July 1st that they have already had to spend because of the
increased cost of living this entire fiscal year. It was money they
have had to invest, got no interest from and now you come along later
and say now we are going to make it right to you and make it up to you
what you lost last year and while you are making it up to them for the
next fiscal year that cost of living is eating that out and it is a
compounded infringement on their purchasing power. We were submitted
a proposal, would we agree to it every six months, if the cost of living
Went up we would get a raise, if the cost of living went down we would
get a cut. We absolutely turned that down for the basis of one thing.
We could bring in surveys and we have and the City could bring in
surveys and I am sure we would pick all the good ones and you would
pick those ... The question before the City Council of Arcadia is
purely this - do the finances of this City have the ability to pay the
price that is deserved by its wage earning employees for the services
the taxpayers insist on having. I think the taxpayers have a right to
insist on good service and ~ am sure the employees of this city try to
give it and do give it, but at the same time the taxpayers and the
City Council must see that these people are paid equitably for these
services.
I
"I just want to say one thing in ending and would be glad to answer
any questions ... You talk about figures based on cost of living from
the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U. S. Department of Labor. We
have never-even though newspaper and people misinterpreted, we say
cost of living, we would be happy with the cost of living is what we
are asking - we have never wed ourselves to those figures because that
same Bureau of Labor Statistics, a division of the Department of Labor,
also issues another set of statistics which management and industry
and governments of the public sector chose to ignore. The same Bureau
of Labor Statistics that said the cost of living only went up 3.8 or
4.5 nationally also said in the Spring of 1970, the report for the
Spring of 1971 is not out yet, that the bare ~inimum standard of living
for an American family of four means that each wage earner must bring
in $7,507 or $625.58 a month. This is a bare minimum. This is no
frills - no nothing. That same Bureau of Labor Statistics that tells
us what the cost of living is by gerrymandering figures in many cases,
also says that for an average decent standard of living, not a
luxurious standard of living. For a standard of living where the
person walks in the community with his head up, should be paid an
annual rate of $10,770 at the rate of $897.50 a month.
I
"Gentlemen, I think that we ought to take a look -- that in the laboring
and maintenance series 12 classifications out of 17 start in tbis
city below what these same Bureau of Labor figures say is the very
~inimum existence of standard of living. I think we should understand
that 20 classifications in this city which embodies the majority of
employees by the way, and again I do not want this to be interpreted
that I want to pick on any administrator or any department head
salary. We don't go that road. Once a man gets paid his means that
he deserves for a decent standard of living then he should be paid
equally in advancement what he contributes in the way of professional-
ism. But 20 classifications do start below in your city. This very
~inimum existence salary of $7,507 or $625.78 a month. After a year
and a half there are still 16 different classifications below this
~inimum standard of $7,507 or $625.78 a month. After 3~ years there
6-29-71
- 4 -
I
POLICE RELIEF
ASSOCIATION
I
.
19:7845
are still 12 classifications in your city. After 3~ years they have
not reached a minimum subsistence wage. These are the figures we
must look at and we must not go to the public and scare and say,
look they are going to eat us up if we are going to raise wages
because the taxpayer is going to be up on our necks. It is about
time that city officials and other public officials when it comes to
discussing the wages necessary for their employees talk to the public-
not deride your own employees by saying these guys want to rob you
almost but say we are providing; we have a fine bunch of firemen,
policemen, secretaries and blue collar workers that are giving you
services now we want to give them a decent standard of living. Be on
their side. I know this is a little unorthodox politics in the next
election but try it out for size. It might work.
"I want to say in closing that we ask you here tonight please do not
act arbitrarily and shove down the throats of our membership this
last proposal. We are asking you to postpone this; that you make it
retroactive to July 1st; give us another opportunity around the
conference table for another week or ten days or whatever you feel
like. We will be back in there and we will try to get together. In
making that decision I say to you this is the only thing we know.
The only way to go now. We think it is a position that this community
can live with and you can live with and we can live with and try to
reach an agreement without further creating any more problems without
confrontations, without sour feelings between employee and employer.
I respectfully ask that you take action on our recommendation."
James Corrigan, President of the Arcadia Police Relief Association,
made the following representation.
"My purpose this evening is to respectfully request that you postpone
adoption of the budget until such time as your agent representative,
Mr. Francis, and our Wage and Benefit Committee, are able to equitably
and fairly negotiate a just settlement of wages of benefits for sworn
personnel, police clerks of the police department of this City. In
the months that we have spent at this activity we have pursued worthy
goals in attempting to reach agreement, of trying to provide an
equitable settlement of our differences, and provide a standard of
living that is in keeping with the work we do and which would not be
a burden upon the taxpayers of this city. At this point we feel we
are very close to reaching that agreement. We do feel, however, that
additional time is required. We feel also that it would be necessary
for your body to carefully analyze what our minimum request would be
and we feel if you were to do that that it would appear equitable and
fair to you and a request that could be met by this Council. Again
in that light I won't belabor the point. We are simply asking that
you withhold judgment at this time; that you postpone formal adoption
of the budget until such time as we can equitably settle the differ-
ences that we have reached at this point so that a formal impasse will
not have been reached. II
In response to a request by Mayor Helms the Personnel Director stated
in part that the speakers had indicated accurately the fact that they
have been meeting for quite sometime and that they have been unsuccess-
ful in reaching agreement with all four organizations; that some are,
very close; that up to the morning of this date they were still unable
to go the last distance. That he had presented to the organizations
a week or ten days ago a letter indicating that he was to meet with
Council on June 28 to present any agreements or an indication as to
where the negotiations stood - this was the date Council had
given him as a final date to reach agreements.
In answer to a further inquiry by Mayor Helms as to whether or not the
Personnel Director had made it clear to the various organizations that
Council had no intention tonight of negotiating as a negotiating body-
that the only purpose of the meeting basically was to adopt whatever
contract it had and the salary schedules proposed by the City Manager.
6- 29-71
- 5 -
19:7846
The Personnel Director responded that he had indicated to the organi-
zations that in the past the City Council had adopted a budget which
included salaries at its last meeting in June; that if history were
a guide to the future he would expect the same course would be
followed - that he could not speak for the Council. He referred to
the summaries of the proposals made by the city and by the associations
during the course of the negotiations all of which he had submitted
to Council.
Mayor Helms then made the following statement:
MAYOR
HELMS
"I would like to point out to the audience that there have been
negotiating sessions between the Personnel Director and the represen-
tatives of the various associations over a period starting sometime
in April and ending generally today. With the City Employees Associ-
ation there were ten meetings, with the Union there were seven, with
the firemen there were eight, with the policemen there were nine, and
the City Council itself met on eight occasions to study this matter
totaling over 17 hours of very intensive thought and consideration
given to all of these proposals and to the basic problem of compensa-
tion to our city employees. I would like to point out to Mr. Payne
that we really do put ourselves in the position of the employees in
trying to think through the problems that are presented to us by the
salary schedules that we have. It is an exceedingly difficult
problem and something that we each take very seriously, and I know
that the number of hours that we spent in executive sessions studying
these problems do not reflect the total number of hours that we have
spent in very serious contemplations of what is involved in paying an
honest and reasonable wage to each of our employee classifications.
I
"I think that one of the things that we are all going to have to
recognize is that times do change and what has happened in the past
is no criteria for the present or the future and that the years when
cities were handing out 10, 15, 20 percent increases in compensation
without any increase in production or without any relationship to
merit are something of the past. I would call your attention to a
meeting that was held yesterday 'when mayors of almost all of the
cities in Los Angeles County met to discuss the problem of compen-
sation and the center of the entire meeting was to tnat'effect: The Lawn-
dale Mayor announced 'an in,crease of 2\1% . '. another city that the
increase was zero. This is not unique to Los Angeles County. At
the recent U. S. Conference of Mayors I had occasion to discuss this
with many city officials from many parts of the country and the
situation is the same. The mayor of one city of 95,000, a suburb of
Boston, indicated to me that their salary increases this year were
going to be zero percent across the board. It is not something that
is peculiar to Arcadia. It is endemic of the whole country and the
economy that we are living in today and it is a problem that we who
represent your interest and the interest of all of the citizens of
Arcadia have to somehow compromise. And it is not easy. It is a
very difficult task and we have approached it with the greatest
humility and we had hoped so much that we could have reached an agree-
ment with each of the associations. We hoped last night at 10:30 when
we finally finished our meeting after over three hours of very diffi-
cult discussion on this matter, that we would have agreements of at
least two and possibly three of the employee groups today. We had
hoped that we could arrive at a solution which would be acceptable
to each group and to the taxpaying public. You all heard today on
the radio the announcement that the County of Los Angeles is raising
its tax rate 559 and the school district is going up and there just
doesn't seem to be any way that a conscientious city official can
administer the burdens that are presented to us and grant the kind
of request that your associations have asked us for. II
I
6-29-71
- 6 -
19 :7847
The individual Councilman then presented their views as follows:
COUNCILMAN
CONSIDINE
"One or two points should be brought out. I know that I have been
perhaps the one man who more than anybody else has thought the raises
that were given should be related to merit and not to existence of
salaries in other cities, et cetera. Since I have sat on the Council
the plea that I first heard from the employees was that we would like
to be equal the salaries to industry. As you passed the salaries of
industry I next heard the plea we want to stay in the upper quartile
of 16 other cities. This has put us on a spiral staircase which
compounds each year. Salaries go up simply to stay in an upper
quartile without relation to merit, without relation to function,
without relation to job. Suddenly our salary structures related to
industry are completely out of phase, out of scale, and they are out
of proportion to the incomes of the people who are going to have to
pay the salaries and I think we have to start thinking in terms not
of what someone is making in 16 other cities. I think we as Councilmen
have to think in terms of what our employees are making with respect
to the people who are going to have to pay the salaries - namely the
taxpayer. I think this is one of the conclusions that is becoming
more and more prevalent. We all know the position of the aerospace
industries and a good many of the electronic industries where people
who have been very competent, very capable in their jobs, are unem-
ployed and have been unemployed for as much as 15 and 16 months ...
residents of our city. We are asking them to pay increases when they
don't even have jobs. I feel that the time is come to try to develop
a wage scale which relates to merit and to the value of the position
within the community of serving and isn1t based upon what other cities
under different circumstances might be paying. I think the only
equitable thing for the employee and for the citizen is to work on
this type of a relationship and these are one of the things that we
are trying to instill and trying to start with this particular wage
offering.
I
"l would like to point out one or two discrepancies that were made at
the microphone. We were told by Mr. Payne that in the last 24 hour
emergency clutch sort of thing we offered a 4.5 percent. I would
like to point out that our record shows on 6-21-71 we offered a 4.5
increase for cost of living adjustments over a two year period. That
is hardly the last 24 hours. I would also like to point out that the
Federal Government's concept of a minimum livable wage is one the
Federal Government themselves are trying to figure how they are going
to fund because they don't have any money either.
I
"We were told that all things coming back to us from the Feder.al
Government were ridiculous because the Federal Government simply
didn't have the funds. Rep. Rousselot told us at one time before the
income tax was paid that in spite of the promises $16 billion that
was going to be distributed to the cities, the Federal Government
only had $3.5 billion in the bank with weekly expenses exceeding $5.5
billion. So some of these figures that we are getting on minimum
wages, minimum standards, equitable living, et cetera, from people
who are being very reckless with their values and don't know how to
finance those salaries either, and certainly we donlt, because the
people in Arcadia who are considered to be a very affluent society
can't fund them. We find that the people in Arcadia as an average
family income - not individual but family income - are only making
$15,000. ,Many of our employees are making that much and more. I
would suggest that perhaps some of these'figures even though they
would be delightful for us all to share just aren't achievable at
the present time.1I
COUNCILMAN
ARTH
"I agree tha t we met many times and we made a number of concessions
the things in the Retirement Plan, for example. I think the majority
was opposed to that to begin with but we finally felt that we would
give this certain segment as a concession. I think we should also
6- 29-71
- 7 -
COUNCILMAN
CONSIDINE
MAYOR
HELMS
COUNCILMAN
BUTTERWORTH
19:7848
realize along the line of what Mr. Considine stated that many of the
average family incomes are much lower than this figure given. Last
,year the County tax rate alone increased $1.18 a hundred. This year,
with the raises we are contemplating and the added retirement, it
will be the equivalent to approximately 10~ on the tax rate. We
hope to meet this some other way - not keep putting the burden on
the property taxpayer. But one way or another the citizens of this
community will feel this. I think we do have to look at the people
of this community - and there are a tremendous amount of people. We
talk about holding our heads up - we have received numerous letters
from people wondering whether they can continue to live in Arcadia
because taxes are getting so high -- or in Los Angeles County as far
as that goes. It is a question of where can you move. We do have a
serious problem from this standpoint and I think that the cost of
living is something that we should if at all possible grant to em-
ployees so without any promotions or anything they do hold their own,
but we also recognize that on a merit system that those people who
are achieving the most and putting forth the most also are promoted.
I think this is one of the means of moving ahead. But we can't
continue to escala'te if the 'cost of living is going up 3.7 percent,
and I am not sure of the figure, but around 5 percent last year but
we ,can't continually give increased over and above this. You get
your salaries completely out of line with private industry. I think
from my standpoint, as a Councilman representing both the employees
and the citizens, that in going over this considerably as I feel we
are with the new retirement plan - one of them State ordained, but
regardless - the City or the taxpayer will pay for the approximately
,20 percent increase and the retirement benefit for the general em-
ployees and the other things we are offering I think are more than
cost of living and we will be giving not a big boost - there is no
question about this. I don't think we can talk about this in these
kind of times. I think it is as 'far as we can go and I would like
to state that in so far as Mr. Francis is concerned that he doesn't
have anything left in his back pocket and hasn't at this point that
he could have given; that he has offered the best package that he
thought the employees wanted - everything that the Council felt that
he could place on the taxpayer as a burden this year."
I
"I would like to add one point to that, if I may. I think in all
fairness to Mr. Francis I would like to inform the employee groups
that he came into our session discussing salaries for the various
groups within our community and he fought just as hard with us even
to the point of once in a while getting us a little bit hot under the
collar as he represented us when he talks with the employees. I
don't think the employees could have had a better representative at
our Council sessions,lI
"I don't think you realize really how fortunate you are to have a
man of his character and caliber sitting in the position that he has
been sitting in in the last few weeks. It is a position that none of
us would envy at all. We know how intensive his activities have been, I
how hard he has worked to try to bring all of us to a meeting of the
minds and the many different proposals he has suggested to us trying
to arrive at a formula that would meet the demands of the present
situation. It is exceedingly unfair for anyone to make any comment
derogatory to Mr. Francis."
"I have been on this Council since 1960 and I have some doubt as to
whether anything I could say or anything anybody else could say that
could make any possible difference to some of the people here in the
audience. I agree - directing my attention to the firemen, and I
don't have a prepared talk - that your job is risky. I agree that
you have a right to have your City Council concerned. You say that
you give better than average performance than other fire departments.
6- 29-71
- 8 -
19:7849
I
We are lay people and not in a position to where we can judge that.
Let me say that you certainly give, from my standpoint at least and
from the standpoint of the Council, excellent fire protection to the
commuriity. We are not blind to that and we are concerned. Let me
tell you whether you agree with it or not - certainly at least a
point of view that we have - I don't have to tell you of course that
we represent the taxpayers. This is not money we are paying out of
our own pockets.
,"I would like to say something Mr. Considine said in another way.
About the'time I came on Council there'was developed in city employee
bargaining, something we have never had before, and this was the
system of taking a certain number of bench-mark cities and comparing
this city with these other so-called 15 or 16 bench-mark cities
so called comparable cities. At that time the cities fell into what
has subsequently proved to be a trap of stating that they would
either meet the average or they would put their employees in the upper
quartile,. Arcadia being a so called affluent city, I know that in
the early 60's, it was in the upper <juartile.. ,It should have been
obvious to the ,cities at that time but it was not obvious apparent ly
to them that everybody couldn't be in the upper quar,t l'le.. Indeed
everybody couldn't meet the average and so ,I think that many, of you
here know just as well as we do what took place. One group of cities
would jump'over the other group in order to keep at the median point
or in the upper quartUe" and the next year the employees of those
cities that had fallen behind would demand that' :th'eir cIties would
leap frog over those that had jumped the prior 'year. This has gone
on year after year and as I say I am positive that you people who
have been here a number of years know that this has been the situation
and it obviously couldn't go on forever. The jumps that were made
had no relationship whatever to merit. They had no relationship to
want or need or to the tenure of the employee or to merit or relation-
ship necessariiy to ,the salaries that were paid in the community.
They were jumps for the sake of jumps in order to put employees at
the medium point or in the upper quartile knowing full well that in
about two years we were going to fall behind and have to jump again.
Let me just illustrate that. When I was Mayor in 1962 the salary
range for a fireman was $463 to $564. This was eight years ago. In
1970 this has gone from $755 to $919. Making the comparison another
way the low range $463 to $755, the upper range from $564 to $919.
Let me tell you, something about the cost of living during the same
number of years. In 1962 under the Consumer Price Index of the Los
Angeles-Long Beach Metropolitan area, the index stood at 90.6. In
1970 the index stood at 114.3. And without reducing this to a
mathematical formula the wages - and I am speaking now just of the
firemen - have 'gone up 75 to 80 percent in that eight year period
while your cost of living has gone up 25 to 30 percent in that range.
I
"Now, I was interested 1n what Mr. Payne said about the minimum
standard that is necessary - $7500 for subsistence today. Apparently
Mr. Considine may agree with the figure. I have never heard $7500.
It seems to me to be a little bit high when you are talking just
about subsistence, but I am going to assume that he has made adequate
research and that is the correct figure. That, being so, with $7500
as the subsistence level and $10,770 necessary for a person to hold
up his head and live in dignity, the average salary paid a fireman
in Arcadia without considering wage benefits is $12,815 and with
taking into consideration the fringe benefits the average paid
firemen in Arcadia is $15,201, and this can be contrasted with the
figures which we have received from Mr. Simon Eisner who is the
architect of our proposed General Plan, the approximate family earn-
ings in Arcadia is just about $15,000 in a so-called affluent
society. ,I don't say this by way of criticism and I would like to
say again, we would like to come to an agreement. You certainly
must know that. But we are in a situation that just cannot go on
forever. Even an affluent community reaches a point where it can't
6- 29-71
- 9 -
COUNCILMAN
RAGE
RESOLUTION
NO. 4206
(salaries)
/
AMENDMENT
ADOPTION
RESOLUTION I
NO. 4207
(Budget)
AMENDMENT
19:7850
keep on leapfroging year after year. Whether you agree with it or
not, ladies and gentlemen, I think this is at least a point of view
of the Council."
"I know the Counci 1 as a body does feel that we have the fines t group
of employees of any city,that I know of around the area. Unfortu-
nately we wear two hats - serving our employees as well as serving
the taxpayers of Arcadia. We have tried to arrive at what we feel
is a just settlement with all of the four negotiating bodies. I
have to compliment Mr. Francis again on behalf of the city employees.
I know many of the things that have come up in the broadening of
our offer have been his direct ideas that we have, adopted, because if
you will look at the record the offer did start out smaller than what
we eventually ended up with. I would like to say that Mr. Francis I
was instrumental in the broadening of these offers. I am sorry that
we haven1t been able to reach an agreement with more than one group.
I feel that the offers we have made have been pondered. We, hope they
have been received, hope that they have been understood, and I feel
we have done the best we can to arrive at an equitable settlement in
the times as they are today."
The City Attorney presented, explained the content, and read the
title of Resolution No. 4206, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA ESTABLISHING AN OFFICIAL SALARY STEP
SCHEDULE FOR THE VARIOUS POSITIONS IN THE CITY EMPLOY, ASSIGNING
SCHEDULE NUMBERS TO SUCH POSITIONS, AND ALTERING AND ADJUSTING THE
MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM COMPENSATION FOR VARIOUS POSITIONS IN THE CITY
'EMPLOY, AND AMENDING ALL PRIOR RESOLUTIONS TO CONFORM HEREWITH."
It was MOVED by Councilman Butterworth, seconded by Councilman
Considine that the full reading of Resolution No. 4206 be waived
and that same be ADOPTED.
Prior to the adoption thereof it was further MOVED by Councilman
Butterworth, seconded by Councilman Considine and carried on roll
call vote as follows that Resolution No. 4206 be AMENDED by adding
thereto the prior motion, made earlier in this meeting, granting
members of the Arcadia City Employees Association certain raises as
heretofore announced providing said agreement is ratified by 5 p.m.,
June 30, 1971.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Butterworth, Considine, Hage, Helms
None
None
RESOLUTION NO. 4206, as AMENDED, was then ADOPTED on roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Butterworth, Considine, Hage, Helms
None
None
The City Attorney then presented, explained the content,' and read I
the title of Resolution No. 4207, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR 1971-1972."
It was MOVED by Councilman Considine, seconded by Councilman Hage
that the full reading of Resolution No. 4207 be WAIVED and that same
be ADOPTED.
On recommendation of the City Manager the 1971-72 budget was AMENDED
on MOTION by Councilman Arth, seconded by Councilman Butterworth and
carried on roll call vote as follows to provide for an increase in
cost of utilities in the amount of $10,000 and salary adjustments in
6-29-71
- 10 -
ADOPTION
I
CIVIL DEFENSE
Revised Plan
APPROVED
f( 'to ~ 'I
'L",(:1.
LEGISLATION
I ~.
J} .j' "'r' ,i
ff: ,"- ft/{.,L " '
I
GENERAL
PLAN
d _/1'1 C)
.
19:7851
the amount of $30,000, total contingency of $40,000.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Butterworth, Considine, Hage, Helms
None
None
RESOLUTION NO. 4207, as..AMEN~ED, was then 'ADOPTED OR roll call vote:
AYES:
NdES:
ABSENT:
Councilmen Arth, Butterworth, Considine, Hage, Helms
None
None
Mayor Helms then made the following remarks:" We have at this
time adopted a salary schedule and a budget for the coming year. We
all wish, as I know you wish, that there had been something different-
something which would have been equally agreeable to all of us. Ihatnot
b e'i ng the case this is the unanimous act of the Council. It is
adopted. Our negotiations as far as being able to produce an agree-
ment came to the eleventh hour.. You tried, we tried, and we were
unsuccessful. I don't think there is any fault to be found on either
side. It is a very painful fact of life that exists today."
RECESS AND RECONVENE
The City Manager advised that in order to continue participation in
the federal contribution program (federal funds for the proposed
emergency operation center) the city is required to review and update
the plan every two years. He noted that changes have been made
where necessary-and recommended approval of the revised plan.
It was MOVED by Councilman Considine, seconded by Councilman Arth
and carried unanimously that the revised Emergency Operations Plan
be APPROVED and that the Mayor and City Clerk be and they are hereby
AUTHORIZED to execute the document.
Discussion held on Assembly Bill Nos. 2402 and 2159. The ,former
authorizes the County Sheriff to set up certain law enforcement dis-
tricts to include unincorporated areas and cities which would wish
to join. Initially the bill was supported by independent and con-
tract cities, however, through more study the question has been
submitted as to the advisability of creating more special districts
which could or would include cities. On the other hand, Assembly
Bill 2159 is confined to unincorporated areas and permits levying
of special taxes only within those areas to pay for urban type law
enforcement service. The City Manager noted that this was the
feeling at a recent meeting of the Mayors in San Gabriel Valley,.
It was MOVED by Councilman Arth, seconded by Councilman Butterworth
and carried unanimously that the City representative to the League
of California Cities (Councilman Hage, alternate) be instructed to
go on record at the next League meeting as opposed to AB 2402 and
indicate approval of AB 2159 to protect ,rights of cities.
Simon Eisner, Consultant, made the following summarizations on the
General Plan which has been scheduled for a public hearing on July 20
and which has heretofore been considered in detail by the Planning
Commission.
Points covered in summary included basic planning as to location,
existing improvements, population, economic and regional relations.
Land use element for residential, commercial and industrial; housing
element - objectives, characteristics, quality, projections and
6-29-71
- 11 -
19:7852
problems including recommendations therefor; public facilities -
parks and open space, standards, cultural and public buildings -
library, police and fire stations.
In explaining a map Mr. Eisner noted in part tha t the area west of
Baldwin Avenue north of Huntington Drive had received special
attention in an effort to preclude any increase in density which
would imperil the balance between the population, the school and the
other facilities which are there for the pleasu.e of the residents
in that area - all in view of the fact that the northeast corner of
Huntington Drive and Baldwin Avenue has been zoned for a regional
shopping center.
He continued that one of the other controversial elements which was I
considered on Oommission level was the R-l land lying between Foothill
Freeway and the south side of Foothill Boulevard where the densities
generally reflect a 10,000 sq. ft. lot area per dwelling which it was
felt represents the pattern that has already been established for
that section of the city; that with proper design it could become a
good development for lower density but higher than that north of
Foothill Boulevard. In answer to an inquiry he stated in part that
he could not speak as to the availability of adequate financing for
residential development adjacent to a freeway, but 'reiterated that
the homes could be attractively designed with the living areas located
away from the freeway and that the homes should be surrounded by
masonry walls.
In discussing' Wilderness Park he recommended ,that the park not be
,given"to"intensive recreation'which 'would ,in any way imperil the living
conditions of the surrounding area.
Reference was made to the fire station on Baldwin Avenue north of
Huntington Drive. It was recommended for removal to another site in
the hopes that the subject intersection could be redesigned to create
a service road to provide protection to the residents to the west.
That if the station were moved to the southerly part of the city it
could serve the potential industrial development in Chicago Park, the
commercial developments on Live Oak Avenue and the entire southerly
section.
It was suggested that Council try to visit the Baldwin Hills Village
development which could be eventually considered for race track
property should the track cease to exist - although that could be ten
or fifteen years hence - if at all.
Noted also was a proposed park connection between the Arboretum, Civic
Center, County Park, Golf Course and High School in order to protect
that which has been such an important structural element in the city.
Some discussion held on surrounding area and the feasibility of
annexing some territory - all of this is dealt with in-depth in the
report. He noted specific sections of the city where medium density
multiple family development would probably eventually evolve, i.e.,
south of Huntington Drive east of Santa Anita Avenue. He felt high
rise would probably not become a reality in that section although it
is currently so zoned.
I
In closing his remarks Mr. Eisner stated in part that there is a great
deal of work to be done on the report and diagrams before the hearing
date, and in response to a request he will endeavor to seek out excess
freeway or other land suitable for a mini park and/or tennis courts.
6-29-71
- 12 -
LABOR
NEGOTIATIONS
ADJOURNMENT
I
I
19:7853
Councilman Butterworth commented that at the next regular meeting he
would make a motion to this effect - that it be the sense of the
Council that labor negotiations be brought to an end on June 15 rather
than June 30, and that staff submit to Council by May 15 all salary
recommendations for departmental administrators and any other special
case not directly related to labor negotiations. This would provide
Council an opportunity to give the recommendations thoughtful consid-
eration.
At 9:30 p.m., Mayor Helms adjourned the meeting sine die.
ATTEST:
~~,)/4n~
Christine Van Maanen
./
6-29-71
- 13 -