Loading...
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 -