Monday, 20 June 2011
Ridgefield Press Headline: Should Finance board sit in on [town] union talks?
I say “sure”, why not? A member of the Board of Finance is already able to do that for BoE teacher negotiations.
To date, the rationale for this minor organizational change on the town side has been buried in mis-information and a sea of red herrings.
The Board of Finance has NOT suggested that it wants to negotiate labor contracts alongside the BoS. They just want a place at the planning table.
In fact, the BoF has NO place negotiating along side the BoS, any more than it does with the BoE.
While I subscribe to more inter-board dialogue, public tri-board meetings, that’s where it ends. Each board has a function. Checks and balances should be preserved.
Consider the following: The BoF is the only board tasked with tracking the town’s overall finances so let’s look at their utility in that context.
1. The Board of Finance can break out the total town-wide costs of the entire labor pie, including salaries, insurance, medical, pensions.
2. The BoF should be allowed to present such data that would support a notion that if there is to be less pressure on tax payers going forward, only an x% labor increase should be contemplated for that pie -- short term plus long term, i.e. salaries plus pensions & benefits.
3. The BoF should be encouraged to offer (if they have anything to offer) their perspective on possibly more nuanced approaches to achieve those goals.
And that’s where the Board of Finance involvement should end in my opinion.
From then, the BoS & BoE should act independently. Periodically, in executive session, the boards can (and probably should) discuss their progress with the BoF.
There are differences in how labor negotiations are currently conducted in Ridgefield.
The BoE has PROPERLY included several members of their board on the negotiating team along with a labor relations attorney, the superintendent of schools as well as a representative of the BoF (currently David Ulmer).
On the flip side, the current first selectman likes to negotiate the town contracts ALL BY HIMSELF. (The Human Resources Director is present but that person reports directly to the first selectman.)
In my opinion, this process smacks of politics and conflict of interest as the negotiation is between politician and constituents.
The first selectman currently makes progress reports or presents completed contracts to members of his board (the BoS) for their ratification. Yet none of those members attend any of the negotiation sessions nor have they been encouraged to join the process.
Yet, quoting selectman Manners, this process has “worked very well.” I wonder on what she bases this comment. As compared to what — wishful thinking, political allegiance, convenience? There are certainly no facts or statistics that I know of to support this statement but it must have felt comforting to state that for the record.
The first selectman, like any good politician who wants to assure an outcome, presents a report from his vantage point and since NO ONE ELSE from his board attends any negotiation sessions, who’s to disagree — or even has grounds — for serious discussion about his approach to the negotiation or with the first selectman’ assessment of its outcome. Moreover, there is no real ability to discuss the long term implications of these contracts on future tax rates & by then, it’s too late anyway.
In the Ridgefield Press of June 2, 2011, Mr. Marconi is reported to have stated “[...] that with 12 years of contract negotiations experience, he understands the budget implications of contract decision without advice from the Board of Finance.”
If accurately stated in the press, I take the following from that statement: Mr. Marconi has nothing to learn. He has done it right for 12 years and sees no room for possible improvement.
An open discussion with the only board that is ultimately responsible for the town’s financial health only intrudes on his ‘territory.’ It seems he may be resistant to change for some reason other than than for the public good.
This is a very foolish position to take in my opinion. A good idea — no matter where it comes from — should be welcomed and embraced, not mired in territoriality and rejected as out of hand.
If we are to compare our town’s first selectman to a CEO (vs a political leader), then asking all management parties to the table in order to get the town’s financial ducks in a row before starting a negotiating season should be a no-brainer.
Considering that labor costs represent at least 71% of Ridgefield’s entire $124 million dollar budget, I firmly believe exploring this kind of reorganization to include the Board of Finance in labor negotiations is a vital step in making Ridgefield’s financial future more conducive to growth.
Ridgefield Press Headline: Should Finance board sit in on [town] union talks?
I say “sure”, why not? A member of the Board of Finance is already able to do that for BoE teacher negotiations.
To date, the rationale for this minor organizational change on the town side has been buried in mis-information and a sea of red herrings.
The Board of Finance has NOT suggested that it wants to negotiate labor contracts alongside the BoS. They just want a place at the planning table.
In fact, the BoF has NO place negotiating along side the BoS, any more than it does with the BoE.
While I subscribe to more inter-board dialogue, public tri-board meetings, that’s where it ends. Each board has a function. Checks and balances should be preserved.
Consider the following: The BoF is the only board tasked with tracking the town’s overall finances so let’s look at their utility in that context.
1. The Board of Finance can break out the total town-wide costs of the entire labor pie, including salaries, insurance, medical, pensions.
2. The BoF should be allowed to present such data that would support a notion that if there is to be less pressure on tax payers going forward, only an x% labor increase should be contemplated for that pie -- short term plus long term, i.e. salaries plus pensions & benefits.
3. The BoF should be encouraged to offer (if they have anything to offer) their perspective on possibly more nuanced approaches to achieve those goals.
And that’s where the Board of Finance involvement should end in my opinion.
From then, the BoS & BoE should act independently. Periodically, in executive session, the boards can (and probably should) discuss their progress with the BoF.
There are differences in how labor negotiations are currently conducted in Ridgefield.
The BoE has PROPERLY included several members of their board on the negotiating team along with a labor relations attorney, the superintendent of schools as well as a representative of the BoF (currently David Ulmer).
On the flip side, the current first selectman likes to negotiate the town contracts ALL BY HIMSELF. (The Human Resources Director is present but that person reports directly to the first selectman.)
In my opinion, this process smacks of politics and conflict of interest as the negotiation is between politician and constituents.
The first selectman currently makes progress reports or presents completed contracts to members of his board (the BoS) for their ratification. Yet none of those members attend any of the negotiation sessions nor have they been encouraged to join the process.
Yet, quoting selectman Manners, this process has “worked very well.” I wonder on what she bases this comment. As compared to what — wishful thinking, political allegiance, convenience? There are certainly no facts or statistics that I know of to support this statement but it must have felt comforting to state that for the record.
The first selectman, like any good politician who wants to assure an outcome, presents a report from his vantage point and since NO ONE ELSE from his board attends any negotiation sessions, who’s to disagree — or even has grounds — for serious discussion about his approach to the negotiation or with the first selectman’ assessment of its outcome. Moreover, there is no real ability to discuss the long term implications of these contracts on future tax rates & by then, it’s too late anyway.
In the Ridgefield Press of June 2, 2011, Mr. Marconi is reported to have stated “[...] that with 12 years of contract negotiations experience, he understands the budget implications of contract decision without advice from the Board of Finance.”
If accurately stated in the press, I take the following from that statement: Mr. Marconi has nothing to learn. He has done it right for 12 years and sees no room for possible improvement.
An open discussion with the only board that is ultimately responsible for the town’s financial health only intrudes on his ‘territory.’ It seems he may be resistant to change for some reason other than than for the public good.
This is a very foolish position to take in my opinion. A good idea — no matter where it comes from — should be welcomed and embraced, not mired in territoriality and rejected as out of hand.
If we are to compare our town’s first selectman to a CEO (vs a political leader), then asking all management parties to the table in order to get the town’s financial ducks in a row before starting a negotiating season should be a no-brainer.
Considering that labor costs represent at least 71% of Ridgefield’s entire $124 million dollar budget, I firmly believe exploring this kind of reorganization to include the Board of Finance in labor negotiations is a vital step in making Ridgefield’s financial future more conducive to growth.
