1995-02-01 ARRA Special Minutes
MINUTES
OF THE
SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE
ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Wednesday, February 1, 1995
6:00 p.m.
I. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Ralph Appezzato, City of Alameda; Councilman "Lil"
Arnerich, City of Alameda; Mayor Ellen Corbett, City of San
Leandro, Councilmember Albert DeWitt, City of Alameda;
Wilma Chan, Alameda County Board of Supervisors, District 3;
Councilmember Karin Lucas, City of Alameda; Vice-Mayor
Charles Mannix, City of Alameda; Vice-Chair Sandré Swanson,
District Director, 9th Congressional District; Alternate Roberta
Brooks, Senior Staff Member, 9th Congressional District;
Ex-officio Member Lee Perez, Chair, Base Reuse Advisory
Group; Absent: Ex-officio Member, Gail Greely, Alameda
Unified School District; Councilmember Dezie Woods-Jones,
City of Oakland. (Vice-Chair Swanson arrived at 6:05 p.m.)
II. AGENDA ITEMS:
A. Report (and action, if necessary) Regarding the Status of Benefits to the Staff of
the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority.
Interim Executive Director reported that the benefits for the Base
Conversion/ARRA Staff are authorized at a rate of 30% by OEA. This
authorization for 30% benefits was offered to the employees in a cafeteria style
benefits plan. Because of the closing of the OEA grant through the EBCRC for
fiscal year 1993-94, it is necessary to resolve the issue of benefits immediately.
Per the benefits package outlined by the Personnel Department and the
calculations of benefits received, it was noted that the ARRA staff members
were not able to collect their full 30% in benefits.
Mr. Louk added that a similar resolution was reached by the employees
of the EBCRC and their fiscal agent, Alameda County, resulting in a cash
pay-out to employees of benefits not available for collection due to local
practices. Mr. Louk stated that the monies to cover the 30% benefits were
available through the OEA/ARRA approved budget, resulting in no expense to
the City of Alameda.
The Personnel Director from the City of Alameda, Elizebeth Kingsley,
stated that she would like to add a different perspective on the issue. She stated
that the staff of the ARRA began to be hired in the Fall of 1993. At the time
the staff was hired, two things happened: (1) early on staff didn't want to have
benefits in the normal sense of the word because of their individual
circumstances (i.e.,a retiree from the military having health benefits from other
sources, etc.) instead, they wanted salary to be maximized. When the City
classified the positions, did the recruitments, and set the salaries, that was taken
into consideration when compared to like positions in the City. (2) As the
small group of individuals (5 ARRA staff positions) are funded from two
different sources with different sets of rules, (i.e., federal government, the
County of Alameda and the City of Alameda) trying to balance all the rules
created a two headed animal. She stated that she felt now that the staff has
reconsidered their positions, and that they would like to be more on a "basic"
approach with benefits similar and/or equal to the City. She stated that she
would be willing to do this. She added that she had not been informed of this
request until late the previous day, and recommended to the Authority that she
be requested to report back to the Authority with options or other alternatives of
providing benefits to the staff.
Chair Appezzato stated that he liked this idea, and requested Mrs.
Kingsley come back to the Authority after meeting with staff and developing
various options.
Vice-Chair Swanson stated that one of the reasons that he raised this
issue some time ago was that these programs' budgets, (i.e. the work the staff of
the EBCRC and ARRA is doing), call for 30% in a benefits package, and that
he is very concerned that people who are working in projects which have a
projected end-date receive the maximum amount of benefits. Since these funds
would go back to the federal government if unused, there is no rational reason,
if it was not inconsistent with local practice, for an employee to receive the full
value of their benefit package. It was the thing to do given the work load, and
everyone has to admit, that this small group of people are doing a tremendous
amount of work. With the EBCRC, as they ended the grant year, there were
unused benefits and as it was permissible, they cashed out, which is Option #2
on the staff Report to the Authority; "All or a portion of the unused benefit
monies could be made available to the employee through deferred comp and/or
cash payment". The EBCRC chose a cash payment with its unused benefit
funds. He stated that he felt that there wasn't any advantage to not try and
provide the full package. Because of the closing date of the grant, Vice-Chair
Swanson recommended that for this first grant cycle, that the remaining benefit
values be cashed out, and then have the Personnel Department and the staff look
at the next funding cycle to see if there are any adjustments that need to be made
for the next fiscal year. He concluded by stating that it is appropriate for the
Authority to determine what the permanent relationship might be with the staff
of the ARRA, whether it is this solution (cash-out) or another combination of
benefits for future budgets. He stated that he felt the cash out option is the
best: giving the staff at least the opportunity to invest that money in a
retirement fund; would speak to the principle of 30% staff receiving the full
benefits; and would not be any additional cost to the program. In summary, he
recommended that for the first grant period, the Authority vote for Option #2
(cash out), and then staff and the Personnel Department can meet to develop the
most agreeable approach for the next grant fiscal year. Mr. Louk reported that
the first grant period ended October 31, 1994, and that it was in the process of
being closed so that this item needed to be acted on immediately. He stated that
2
there would be no expense to the City of Alameda, and added that all benefits
are provided by the grant from the Office of Economic Adjustment.
Councilman Arnerich asked Mrs. Kingsley to verify the fact that when
the staff was hired, that several or all of them, opted to not take benefits,
because of their particular situation. Mrs. Kingsley agreed that was true. He
asked whether, as a result of that, instead of taking the benefits to pay for
medical that they were getting somewhere else, more money was added into
their salary. Mrs. Kingsley stated that salaries were higher than they might
have had, had they been hired in the same position in the City. Councilman
Arnerich then stated that he supported the recommendation that the issue be
brought back to the ARRA for further discussions.
Vice-Chair Swanson stated that there are two amounts of money for staff
members: one does not affect the other and the benefit package is the benefit
package.
Interim Executive Director Dave Louk stated that the positions for the
two employees on the bottom of the Benefit Balance Sheet do not get any paid
vacation or holidays as their salaries when hired were more than the money the
EBCRC had allocated for these positions so benefit money was used to pay the
difference in their salaries. The part of the ARRA funds which would cover
these expenses is listed on the sheet. For the staff members on the top of the
sheet, for example, himself, when hired the office had not yet been approved for
funding by the Office of Economic Adjustment, and when hired staff was being
told by the Personnel Department, "You are a temporary employee, you don't
come under City benefit packages". He in turn negotiated a salary with Don
Parker, which was obviously approved by the City Manager and Personnel
Director. He understood that, at that time, there were no benefits.
Subsequently, when OEA granted funds to the ARRA, OEA designated the
amounts that certain positions would be funded at, and on top of that, there was
a 30% benefit package afforded to these positions. These funds all come from
the OEA grant. In summary, he stated that OEA has authorized the 30%
benefit package (based on the ceiling amount allowable for each position), the
staff does not currently get this total value amount, and if it is not used for
benefits, it will revert back to the Office of Economic Adjustment. He added
that these positions are not permanent full time civil service positions and there
is no tenure for the ARRA staff positions.
Personnel Director Elizebeth Kingsley stated that she felt there was an
honest misunderstanding, and that possibly the manner in which to deal with the
problem was to proceed with the suggestion made for the grant year being
closed (1993-94), and then come up with a very clear-cut understanding for the
current fiscal year. She recommended to the Authority that the grant period
currently concluded be cleared up and paid out for the one year (Option #2),
then bring back to the Authority the proposal for the current budget.
Vice-Chair Swanson moved that the Authority accept Option #2, "All or
a portion of the unused benefit monies could be made available to the employee
3
through a cash payment", for the first concluding fiscal year and for the next
fiscal year, staff and the Personnel Department negotiate how the total 30%
benefit package will be distributed for the current fiscal year. He added that
part of the problem is growing pains as new staff transition in, and felt that this
solution was the best, so that the monies will not be sent back to the federal
government. The motion was seconded by Councilmember DeWitt and
carried by a unanimous voice vote.
Vice-Mayor Mannix stated that he hoped, that in the future, these types
of discussions occur initially with the hiring authority rather than be brought to
a public meeting.
B. Report from the Chair Requesting Authorization from the ARRA to Communicate
with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Economic Security Requesting
Consideration of the Development of a Federal Loan Program to be Utilized for
the Implementation of the NAS Alameda Final Community Reuse Plan.
After a report by Chair Appezzato regarding the Mayor's Conference in
Washington, D.C. and the idea presented to the President regarding federal
loan programs for base closures, he requested that the title of the action be
amended to read "communicate with the President of the United States" rather
than "communicate with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Economic
Security". A motion was made by Mayor Corbett to accept the
recommendation to communicate with the President in the form of a letter to be
written by staff, Mayor Appezzato and Mayor Corbett. The motion was
seconded by Councilmember DeWitt and carried by a unanimous voice vote.
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
(Any person may address the Governing Body in regard to any matter over which the
Governing Body has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the
agenda.)
There were no speakers for this item.
IV. COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNING BODY:
There were no communications from the Governing Body.
V. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Brydon
Secretary
4