I'm going to call this meeting of the Personnel Administration Committee to order. We have with us,
Kate Wiltz, Liz Spital, and myself, Peter Iverson, here in the county courtroom. And thank you all for
joining us. There's a packed crowd here today, and thank you for joining us on Teams as well. I hope,
PAC members, you have the agenda in front of you. Does anybody have any changes?
Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion. All right, a motion to accept the agenda. Is there a second?
Second. Oh, golly, that small committee. Sorry. I'm sorry. All right. The motion and a second are on
the table. Is there any conversation? Hearing none. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. All
those opposed to the same sign, the ayes have it unanimously.
All right, also PAC members in the packet, which those of you joining us online or here in the room
here can find the minutes in the packet today. I trust you all have had a chance to make sure your names
are spelled correctly. Any conversation about the summary minutes? All right.
Yeah. We've been gone for a while. All right. Is there a motion? Is there a second? Hearing a motion
and a second. Is there any further conversation? All those in favor of adopting the summary minutes
of the presenter, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Michelle, the ayes have unanimously.
Thank you. You're welcome. All right. Here's what we're all here for.
We have been tasked by the broader County Council to have a conversation regarding the hiring freeze
that the Monroe County Council adopted. We thank those departments who we had to push to a later meeting,
but we felt like this conversation was really important to have with you so that we structure this hiring
freeze in a way that does more good than harm.
And so you'll see in your agenda today that we're going to go through three pieces, creation of a request
form that is to be completed by the departments, the administration of the hiring freeze. How are we
going to, once those requests come in, is council going to review those or are we going to use the KSA
model where council staff will review them? Then we'll go and talk about the hiring freeze request
For a 2nd review. So, if a department comes to council with a hiring freeze request, and it is denied.
What happens do they have to departments need to wait for 6 months 1 year 10 years. We're going to talk
all about it. Okay. I think I'm going to run this meeting a little different than we generally run pack
meetings. We have so many people here and so much institutional knowledge that I think we'll have folks
lead us off with.
the topic, and then we'll make sure Pac has questions, and then I'll open it up for people in the room
and also online. Does that sound like a good plan? Legal? Does that sound good? Excellent. All right.
Michelle or E, what do we need to know about creating a request form for the hiring freeze? I can go first.
In my observations over the first couple of weeks that the hiring freeze was in place, I am copied on
those email requests and some of the information that comes from departments, some departments provide
more information than others. And I thought that for you of the council to have the most information
when making these decisions, it would be of best practice to have departments
answer the same set of questions so that you're getting the most information. So that's where I'm coming
from to make sure that the priorities of the council for this hiring freeze are being met by the request
that the department is making, if that makes sense. Yes, and in the packet there is a copy of a draft
request form that he has come up with and I've got it displaying on the screen, but it's just, you know,
the questions that we have received for all council members and that kind of thing. So we've just kind
of consolidated that into a request form. And so then that way it's uniform to everyone that makes a
request. So we already kind of have a format, but we need to have input from the PAC members as to
Did you like? Do you see anything else that you would like to see on it or not? You know, as for the
Council on behalf of the Council. Alright, Kim Schell teed it up. PAC members, what questions or comments
do you have to start off the conversation about the document that's being shared on the screen? So I
saw a draft earlier and so I had submitted some comments I think to be early on. It's been a while.
We talked about it, and I think you incorporated those in, but I think now. So I don't have anything
more to add with my point. I have one thing to add there was some information that was submitted already
by a department and they included supporting documentation from other departments about how that position
in that office.
Interacts with other departments and I thought that was a good addition to the request if it's that
specifically if it's a position where it's the sole position in that department or in the county that.
That's additional support. Michelle, I think that's section six about OK, I didn't know I was just typing
it on here as a reminder to myself.
They're just the best. I mean, it could just be section two, a question. And then if you wanted to provide
supporting, but. You know, I guess I want to make this. Less, you know, as least cumbersome as possible.
I get is where I mean, it's it's a lot.
And I want to focus on the things, the questions that the answers to which will really kind of cut through.
And I'm not saying anything I think that anyone else hasn't been thinking. I just want to make sure that it's
For each question that we ask, we know what we're going to do with the answer. And I really kind of
want to hear also from everybody who's here and has an opinion what you would suggest we consider. Have
they seen this? It was in the packet.
In light of that, Michelle, would you mind walking us through the document? Or do we need to print off
these pages for folks? Let's do that, then we can all have a look at it. If we could print on both sides,
that would be fantastic.
Just worried about that tree. Oh, this isn't about cost savings. That's fine. Should. So we only have
like an hour, right? In the meeting. So can I go ahead? That's a very good idea. I understand your.
to your reason behind the hiring freeze and all the budget constraints and being in the whole white
million dollars and all that. I totally get that. But seeing this form, it's just, as you put it, it
seems so cumbersome for us department heads to have to go through all these hoops. For one, these positions
were created for a reason years ago.
they're budgeted for and you approve those budgets that that that position is need and is a need. And
you depend on the department heads to put those in their budgets and only budget for what you need and
they're approved. But now it's like we're having to start all over and go through this whole process
for something that already exists. And if it already exists, how does, how does that even really save
you in the long run? Yeah. It's taking,
It's taking me almost a month to get to the next agenda. And in that time, you know, I have a truck
driver leaving to go to another higher paying job. I have a guy now retiring. I have somebody else do
an interview. I have an engineer that's going to retire and it's going to take me all this paperwork
to go in and get permission for something that I've already budgeted for that has no effect on cabin
general. It doesn't save the overall County anything.
You're not going to see those cost savings out of my budgets, but I'm going to have to go through all
these hoops and months of paperwork to build a position or the ones that don't have CDLs. We've built
a program in our department to train them in-house and be able to move them up. I can't even do that
now, but it's for positions that's already there. I feel like I'm starting over now and I'm going back
through WIS.
is what I feel like, that this is a WISP process. So maybe that could be a clarifying question. Are
we only interested in working on positioning that have impact on the job, right? I know you're trying
to be fair for everyone and I'm not asking for any special permission here either. I get that we all
need to be treated the same. I just feel like this is a step backwards for all of us when we're already busy
And it's going to take us months to go through just trying to fill one position. And then you've already
maybe lost another position. You're going to have to start the process over for another one. It's just,
it's never, as I've seen it in the last month, it's just continuing now and building and building. And
it's the first month. All right. Let's go to Linda Brady, who has raised their hand on teams.
Thank you for letting me speak. I agree with what Lisa said as well for the positions that don't affect
County General that you may want to rethink about how much effort you're going to go to to be looking
at something like I'm thinking about and Beth could speak to this as well. If we have grant positions,
we're signing a we the county are signing a contract agreeing to take this grant money and operate these
programs and
at some level, I mean, we're going to have to fulfill our contracts that we're signing with the state.
So and I'm not sure how to do it, but maybe having something that could expedite getting those positions
filled. The other thing I was thinking about, too, is if you're going to ask these questions, what are
some other things that the department might already be doing to save money in
county general or whatever, because there are some departments and ours included that we've already
made a ton of cuts. We already have 11 vacant positions right now in order to try to save money. So
I'm wondering if you would want to know that. What are some other things that you're already doing to
save money or something like that?
That was my comment. Anybody else have a comment? I'm a little confused. If the council gave us, we'll
say for example, hourly money, they didn't want us to have that, why didn't you take it? Because now
we have to do all of this to even see if we're going to be a recreation department or what we're closing
at the parks.
I'm confused. It's already there. The money's there. If you already wanted to take it, why didn't you
take it? And then that would answer that. I think it's an imperfect system. OK, that question. OK.
You know, it's a series of decisions and compromises, and that's where we get down the road. And. It's
it's not ideal. And in ours, I don't read all this yet, but it would be.
just so the council realize what we're closing at the parks. So you can realize this is what we're not.
What programs you're not doing and what restrooms are closing or the splice pattern, the things that
we have to close in order to operate with the people who are left. And that's fine. I don't know if
that's on here. I'll put it as an attachment. And I know we're not the jail. We understand, you gotta
watch the inmates, but you also,
We need to know what we're not doing and we're, you know, we're behind planning. It's already November.
We're supposed to be planning already for next year in hiring. So, Billy, that's Billy. Just as a reminder,
if you're on Teams, simply raise your hand and we'll see you. Go ahead. I second Lisa was saying,
For example, we have the record who you are. So everybody knows Laura. We're chief deputy clerk, clerk's
office. Um, we have been asking and we didn't even get denial. That's the form of communication. We
got silence. No, I sent you an email saying that you were, you know, you were great. Yes. You were,
you were great. I'm just saying from our representatives. Okay. Because we, we, we didn't even have
the opportunity to explain like, uh,
Two counters, we have those positions for a reason. We had one leave, we need to just hire it back.
By the time we hire, it's going to be another month at least, because you have to go through the interviewing
process, you have to do the posting process, you have to do onboarding, training, all these other things.
We're getting into the holidays. We have people leave. We want people to go visit their families. We
want people to not be burned out. So when we have people that are trying to cover their position as
well as someone else's position, it leads to a lot of frustration, a lot of resentment. We even had
people say, hey, we're kind of looking for something else. So then that leads to we're just trying to
replace someone in a position that left. That's it.
We're also looking for the criteria. What is it that you guys are looking for? What is standardized?
Because we hear through the grapevine, oh, this one department had a new position created. We had a
new position that was hired all within one week. We're like, what? I'm sorry. Hang on. And then we had
other people that just spoke in public comment. And then it was like, oh, yeah, you guys are approved.
But they weren't on the agenda. So we're trying to do the right thing.
And I miss Terry request again, because I'm like, okay, the space hasn't been filled. So, of course,
our representatives know we're, of course, we're going to ask that we did. We did try to get a hold
of them. We did have some conversation with David Henry and it was like, so we did request. Nobody said
yes, because it was silence.
You were great. Thank you. Appreciate it. The thing is, I want to make sure everybody gets the information.
You were absolutely correct. You were good with us. I appreciate it. Thank you. But that's not the council.
These are the people that we didn't even have a chance to pitch. What's the criteria? How do we get
before? Other than silence. Other than Kim.
Thank you. Any other comments, questions? All right. You know, I would just echo everything that's been
said here today. You know, my office has a statutory duty to prosecute all crimes and infractions that
have been in Monroe County.
When I am fully staffed, we are understaffed. There is a report from the Indian Press Communities Council
and WIS that justifies us having two more deputy prosecutors, more support staff. My deputies, when
I have everybody on board, has 300 cases a piece on average. That means the legal secretaries have about
600 cases a piece on average, plus there's four victim assistants that handle all of the crimes in Monroe County.
I'm now down a juvenile deputy prosecutor. It's the only person in my office who does juvenile delinquency
cases. Nobody else really knows how to do it. And nobody has the capacity. I have two attorneys who
worked more than a hundred hours of pay period, about two or three pay periods in a row recently. And
that was just working on their own caseload. That wasn't trying to cover that one and a half vacant
caseloads that I have right now. So it already takes me time.
to post and recruit, it usually means that I have a vacancy for at least 30, 60 days anyway, if I can
just go through the process. But if I can't go through the process and I'm put further behind, oh, and
because I can't do a knowledge, skills, and abilities pay bump, that means most of my people I'm going
to hire are going to be brand new. They're going to require training. That's going to put me even further
behind the ball.
So this whole process is really just causing a lot of problems for my office. And I can hear that it's
causing problems for everybody else as well. So I would be interested to know from some of the feedback
that we're receiving that the based on your employee services department would have anything to add
or to aid us in making any at all combinations to some of these concerns.
I think that where I'm coming from is purely to find consistency in the requests because sometimes it's
much like the job description process where some people are a little bit more advanced at writing a
job description than other departments. So there lacks some consistency there. So I just want to have
questions that council wants to know
When they're evaluating these requests to even the planes feel for own departments, but I also understand
that there are different. These are not my decisions to make their council decisions. What are the priorities
for you in the hiring freeze? And what's that look like? You know, you've made some decisions about
public safety. You know, what are the other priorities? How do you want to. Designate what that.
Here looks like, I don't, I don't know, but just to help you answer the questions to get the data that
you're looking for to value them. I think there are some things I've made some notes can ask to you
some other questions we can add to this morning. Good question and maybe you've discussed it another
meeting, but why was a hiring delay not. The decision rather than a hiring freeze where every new position,
every vacant.
vacancy has to be delayed by 30, 60 days. So at least then we can start the process. We can give a potential
hiree a start date that's two months out or whatever. There's always going to be consistent line reversions
because it'll be vacant for a certain period of time. And it'll allow us to do what we need to do. It'll
save everybody time. Just see how that works.
It's not ideal for us, but it, you know, even our staff that's covering caseloads once, if they know
that it's a defined period of time, it makes it much easier to swallow. There's not a hiring delay in
part because none was suggested. I don't think we discussed that. It's an interesting idea. Although,
when you say reversions, not necessarily because people can transfer that money across lines within,
you know, within the tens, but presumably we're staff. I mean, we're never, I mean, we can't, we'd have
to come to you to move them to the thirties or something. We can move it to part time. And I just want
to say that since we do have, since departments cannot, um,
are not allowed right at this moment to do KSAs, we always know that they're going to be hiring in at
the minimum, you know, balance. So if somebody does leave at an eight, three, you know, whatever,
you know, it's always going to go back to the minimum. So unless a minimum person has left and you're
filling it with a minimum, there will always be a savings cost when, when you're replacing that vacancy
budget wise. That's what I'm, you know, I see.
And I think those are things to add into them to put in the form if what you're, you know. What are
those cost savings based on the positions? All of that? I mean, I think that a lot of times in the request
that you're receiving generally, they are explaining the need for the.
Help in the office and how that impacts the other people and the functions, but I think that adding
more financial questions so you can evaluate those of you are if somebody is leaving at 25 years. And
you're high, you know, we all know they would come in at the minimum what that equals this. Maybe that
helps you make a better decision about whether that person could be hired. Linda, what do you think?
I just wanted to bring up that Greg Garitas at a meeting actually did bring up his recommendation was
not a hiring freeze. It was, I think he called it a hiring chill, which is similar to what Beth was
just talking about, which we used to have done that in the past where we did what we call slow hire.
We, we maybe gave it a month or whatever, some period of time, but that was actually brought up by Greg
Garitas. I just wanted to bring that up.
Yeah, I didn't. I didn't understand him that way, but neither that makes sense. Um, I thought he was
talking about a shorter term of nothing happening rather than this kind of slow roll. Right. Um,
but that's, that could be me. Um, no, it's interesting. It is. I'm looking at the clock or halfway through
our allotted time. Are there any,
Other suggestions or comments or changes you want to make on the document before you or portrayed up
on the screen. We've heard it's too long. It's too cumbersome. We've heard you need to add even more.
What any other changes before we move on to streamlining the process, which is the next item on the
agenda? And this is for everybody, not just members of Pat. All right.
Let's talk about process. We've heard a little bit about some frustration about the way it is really
counseling meets twice a month. And it takes forever to get something on our agenda takes forever for
us to hear something. We understand that. So we don't want the well, actually, let me stop talking.
Kim and E. What do you want to say about this?
I agree that it does delay the process with regards to if it's a no, you know, it's a no. And so as
the example, you know, the clerk, she hadn't heard from, you know, anyone. So there, I think there needs
to be a process with regards to, if it is a no, they, I think somebody needs, as their liaison needs
to speak to that department. And then that way they know that they're not moving forward and why.
But. I don't know, I kind of like this delay thing. Maybe we need to rethink the hiring freeze itself
and have a hiring delay and then. And then reevaluate and have them come at, you know. Or I don't know,
you know, I'm just I mean, the whole idea is to, you know, basically save money so it.
30 days will save you money, but it gives them the opportunity to go ahead and get the job posted. Maybe
go ahead and get, you know, interviews started and conducted. And then that way when that 30 day limit
or whatever you set is up, they can fill it. So maybe if we come up, maybe that kind of a process rather
than a just out and out freeze.
Just as a reminder, this is not the full council. The full council will make these decisions. Right.
And so that could be something that is brought to the full council to think about. I want to bring us
back to the form that was on the screen. And once that form is completed by a department head, what
happens next? We think you have a couple of options for how you can do that. It's either an evaluation by TAC,
an evaluation by Kim and I, similar to the KSA process, or a combination of both of those things. It
will be the three packed people plus Kim and I to evaluate work. And to say that- Or the entire council.
Right. If you do a pack, and it is all the members pack, it has to be done in a public meeting. So that
delays the process. Yes. Which means we have to schedule a meeting.
which takes time, which takes time. It's got to go to council. And then it would go to council. And
with the KSA model, Kim and I do that usually within 24, 48 hours after we receive a request. And then
that process was, if council didn't agree with our decision, then it was brought to council for a discussion. So,
Any comments or questions about the process, how long it takes, who's involved? I've been here a long
time, and I'll tell you between November and January 15th, not a lot of committees meet. Not a lot of
meetings occur. It's the slowest time that county government moves. It's already pretty slow. And you
might also think different in hourly.
than a, you know, solid position. Because what are you going to say? Well, don't work that day, but
now we'll pay you for this day. I mean, hourly will be different. If you just want to take some of our
money, just tell me. You know, we're different. It's different. Yeah. And so I think our election members.
Yeah. So there's some consideration to take place. Just a lot of silence. OK.
I mean, I guess I'd like to know if Kim and E are going to be comfortable doing these. I mean, I feel
like KSA was probably a little bit easier. This is a pretty potentially devastating decision to have
to make for a department and this was the council's idea. So my feeling is you're going to deliver bad
news, you ought to have the guts to do it yourself. And I've never gone through the KSA process, so
I don't know.
But how how is it how are departments to know you're going to be consistent with those decisions with
all the departments across the board? How are you going to know in your position why I should rehire
a mechanic or a highway engineer?
Based on what? The form. I mean, ultimately that's what comes back to us. And that's why EFI needs to
be in the animation and then us. Someone invited County Legal. I did. For a reason. Because I'm both
clear. Can we make a recommendation to council? So it would still be a council decision. And I think
they have expressed their call for making a recommendation. Did we lose video? Andrew, can you see us? Linda?
You guys lost the video. It looked like you turned your camera off. We haven't touched it. No, we keep
shutting off. He's blinking. There we are. But since you're talking about and you say that the council
is going to make the decision, this is just a recommendation. Aren't we just throwing a step in there?
It makes the process faster when Kim and because it's not done in a
But it still won't have to go to a meeting. It doesn't have to go to necessary. It only goes to a meeting
if council disagrees with our. I thought I said they make the final decision like a KSA. In KSA, we
send them a recommendation if they don't respond, if they move forward with the recommendation, if they
do respond and it goes to a meeting.
Yeah. Cause you haven't been to that process. So somebody asked, it's just in that non-communication
part. I reached out to my liaisons like three times in that 48 hours because I, I know they're busy.
How am I, how do I know that's not even just going to be overlooked? And I will say one of my liaisons
called me after the 48 hour Mark was like, did I miss something? I mean,
It's a lot of back and forth. It's going to be a lot of emails and, you know, Kim, any of you looked
at my request and. Yep. Yeah. And I don't know offices. I mean, that's that's the other thing. A lot
of people, people, a lot of people are making decisions, but you don't know how we function our office
function. So is there a better way? Well, that's yeah.
Because I agree with you. We don't know. And when you said how are Ian and Kim going to know if I need
a mechanic, how am I going to know if you need a mechanic? It's all based on the information we have.
And I think that's where he stepped in rightly and said, hey, you all need to get the right information
and the same information from everybody so that we can make a decision. And we're also budgeted.
We're already budgeted. It's not like we're trying to create a new position. It's not like we're trying
to bump up. We're just, and it takes like a two, three month process anyway to get it in there. With
the already budgeted argument, I will say at least from my perspective, the hiring freeze is moving
forward because the budgets, the budget cuts that we already did as painful as that was this year, more
has to happen for the coming year.
and we were just trying to get to a point where we have an alternative that isn't cutting positions.
Honestly, that's the way, I mean, I don't know if I'm speaking for, I can't speak for all counsel, but
that's the feeling I get from others. And that is definitely my understanding is the way our funding
is changing, unless the state changes something early this coming year,
and we suddenly have more money than we're expecting, we will be doing even more drastic things than
a hiring freeze. So we were hoping that through attrition, you know, people leaving positions and not
billing them, that might be, that might let some of the pressure off of the need that we see to eliminate
positions because we've done all the cutting we can in
other areas that we know about. Again, we only know what we know. How is it not eliminating a physician
when you're denied to fill it? It's the same thing. It's just a different. I mean, it's eliminating
position. It is. It is. So that's already happening. And you know, the morale in our office and,
and we've, like we said, we've got two different rooms, two different front counters, but we're only
allowed to have one front counter person.
they cannot be in two rooms at one time. And yet we were denied. And it's just frustrating because we're
watching our people be frustrated with the extra workload. They've got to answer to judges upstairs.
And you do what those judges say. Trust me, you do. But we feel like physicians are being eliminated
already by what's happening. Can I answer it? Can I just respond real quick?
May at Peter. You do not have to ask my permission. We are co equal here that you're having the meeting.
I just want to make sure it doesn't get off the rails. Keep going. I just wanted to. I almost forgot
my point here, so it's OK, it's OK. One of the one of the things that I've brought up as because I realized
that yeah, this is actually less strategic than if we
looked at departments and got rid of positions, and that seems weird and not the best way to go. My
thought process was that we would have a stage of this where, okay, someone's left, and if you feel
that position is so valuable that you have to fill it, you need to find that amount of personnel to
cut elsewhere in your department so that the people who do know their departments are making a decision
to cut a position, maybe not the one that just, you know, was vacant. But that's horrible too. I mean,
all of it's horrible. We can't shift. That's the problem too is we're kind of locked in. This person
is in this position. This person is in this position. Well, I mean, what I was suggesting was that we allow
that sort of shifting. We allow you to say, okay, I'm not, I'm, I really need front counter person.
So I guess I'm going to have to find that amount of salary to eliminate in a different position. And
that's a hard thing to put on you, but it's because we're already there. Yeah. You're prioritizing services
based on who's leaving. I mean, that's not very,
Well, we're saying that the department, I'm saying, this is not a way. I was saying that rather than
just saying because this person retired, you're out that position, you're out that money in your personnel
budget. You can hire that position, but you would have to then let go. I want to go back to something
that Beth had said.
A few years back, we've been with the county for a long time and when they were working on the personnel
policy, you made a comment that has stuck with me in the past. It was what can we do to help our departments?
And now it's like, what can we do to take away from our departments? And that's you made that call me.
What I said better than I didn't because it really.
It really hits home. Before it was, what can we do for you? And now it's, what can we take from you?
And that's where the financial aspect of it is. But in the meantime, we're hurting. I mean, we was already
at bare bones. And I know you guys have heard this over and over. We lost seven positions when Linda
Robbins was clerk. And now we've already lost two more just with this hiring freeze. It's killing us.
And it's just, it's more of a burden on everybody else there. You can see it in the morale. People are,
you know, I don't have time for this. I, and it's getting bad.
And we are the hub of this justice center. We deal with the sheriff's department. We deal with the courts.
We deal with prosecutors. We deal with DCF. Every job's crucial in our office. And I'm sure it's probably
like that in every office. And then that. I'm just not throwing this out here. It's like, this is a
great idea. It was me saying, I get that the way we're doing it doesn't seem right. So as a possible, like,
way of, of shaping a hiring freeze. If we're sticking with hiring freeze and it's just, you can't, you
can't hire. I was hoping to find some sort of valve to allow at least some control back to the departments.
You know, you don't have any control if someone just retired or left, but if you can move things around,
that might help. I don't think this is brilliant plan. Don't get me wrong. I'm just saying the conversation. Yeah.
It's just something that, that, you know, we talked about. And I think that, I think the, the future
issues that you're saying we could be faced with hard decisions where we have to eliminate positions
through a reduction in force. And this is the, yeah. So I think that that's a, that's,
We don't know what that looks like, but this is a precursor to that by asking you to. Consider what
it would look like by making some accommodations in your offices based on the the attrition or whatever
is happening and working with with council, but I would also.
put back on council that it's helping the departments understand what the priorities are and liaisons
working with the departments to figure out what that looks like. I don't think anyone is expecting you
to do more with less. We're expecting you to essentially get by right now. And I think that it's okay.
Those are the conversations that you should have with your liaisons and whoever to explain what you
are unable to do and what that future looks like doing a little bit less.
and how we figure that out. Linda, what do you think? So at the beginning of this budget session, Jennifer
talked to department heads and said they really hope to be able to get through this this budget process
by cutting 20s and 30s and 40s. And, you know, if everybody would make sacrifices, which a lot of departments
did well, that still didn't cut it. And so I'm wondering about this same process here that how many
Have you all gotten any kind of sense how many positions you need to cut across the county like even
if we all none of us refilled any positions like.
what an average year would that even get you to where you're hoping? I mean, I don't I've not seen anything
that says if we reduce by 10 positions or 50 or whatever across the county that we're going to get where
we need to be. So I mean, it just it's concerning to me that we're just kind of doing this without having
any kind of goals or any kind of maybe you've got that information. I haven't seen it. So Linda, I'll
speak for myself.
I was really happy that we got through this budget year without having to do that. And I'm quite frankly
scared to ask that question. I don't know, Kim, I don't know that we've pulled those numbers. So Linda,
thank you for touching the third rail. But it's a good question. It's a very good question.
there a number on how many new positions have been created, created than last three or four years? Yeah.
And I count many as you would think I did put that together and it was less than 10. I feel like, um,
Tim. Yeah, we've, we've done a lot of like, here's a lot of like, here's the job description and we're,
is he doing it, you know, kind of thing. So some of them were just changing a,
current position, but, or how many departments overall, like jumped applications, like every employee
in that department. I mean, I feel like a lot of departments that have not grown are now going to pay
the price for those kinds of changes that have happened over the years. And I'm not even one of them
because I'm not within county general at all, but it's now everybody's having to pay that price for
all these changes and the increases and other departments and now we need to cut. And if I remember
one comment during budget hearings, it was thanking a lot of the departments that had really cut back
and made changes and respected the advice of their liaison to make those cuts. But there was departments
that absolutely didn't make a cut at all. I mean, is that addressed? I mean, we all know if we're all
having to make cuts then
we should all make the cuts. But I remember that being stated at one of the meetings that not everybody,
not everybody, you know, went with that guidance from the county. By the end of the budget sessions,
those departments that had not voluntarily cut, we cut. So at least for this year,
we tried to apply some equity there. I want to bring it back and repeat what I'm hearing. I'm hearing
that the process of having Kim Shell and E Sensenstein review the completed worksheet that was on the
screen. And as long as no council member says no, that that is a process that is efficient, fair,
transparent and can communicate better than us. I thought it worked well for KSA. That's great. But
I do think that you need to tell us to our sweet little faces. Can you speak up a little, please? Yeah.
Sorry. I said, sorry, the KSA process was well done. It was easy to do and follow when Ian
Kim made the evaluation and council requesting to review if they didn't agree with it. But then I said,
a council member needs to tell us to our sweet little faces directly when they decide not to give us
what we need. And exactly why I think that was my biggest frustration. It's like, why are you refusing?
We don't understand. Why is it? Because then it leads to another more involved discussion of this is
apparently you didn't hear or we may not have made
Proper. So I think understanding, I should say, I hear you. And that leads to the third point on our
agenda today is what happens? What should happen? That's a better question. What should happen when
these two or council says no to a request? I and Kim, do you have thoughts before we launch into it?
Is there a waiting period before they can come back? We don't have that for KSA. I mean, once it's a
no, it's a no because, you know, by that time you've got somebody on the, uh, the, uh, you know, tire,
they're on that scale, this kind of thing. So, um, as far as a hiring freeze, I think that's going to
have to be a council decision if there is an appeal process or a,
I was going to ask about a waiting period. Yeah, a waiting period or something. Is there anything stopping
a department from giving a department update to the public that they've been denied to fill a position
and that things might be taking a little longer? Based on the current administration, I would say that
as long as you were there, you could use your, was it 10 minutes, however you see fit? Because I do
think there's a piece of this that becomes less than
transparent. Yes. And I think the public is going to notice a reduction in service eventually. Yes.
And I think they need to know why. And I think unfortunately, I mean, it's your responsibility to prioritize
what's funded. This is sort of what we talked about just a second ago, but I can put together data about, I,
know how much turnover we have in a year and that roughly how much those employees cost during that
time period. So I can put that together for whatever time period you want and I can also put that information
together as a regular report for council because we're talking about what that looks like moving forward
and what cost savings. So if you have positions that you've said no to, we can quantify
what that has looked like over time. And if that helps you come up with your decision on whether you
would then allow, I'm just throwing that out there that I can provide data. Is that going to be helpful
as in it's, oh, no, no, no, no. Is it only helpful if that position never comes back? I mean, is it
just one year and then you're going to hire January 1st, 2027? I mean, they have to be gone forever.
Like in 2027, the financial, we all understand that. People are going to get fired, positions eliminated.
Forget reduction in their firings, they're eliminated. Longevity's gone. Maybe really need to start
considering moving more departments back to $35. You put all those buckets together, does it get to
your magical number that we, I understand you don't know that magical number yet. But you need to consider
going back to $35.
And there are inequities there. I mean, you know, department to department. And I mean, some, yeah,
they're working a million hours. Maybe they need to work 40. A lot of people may, we can, we'll just
tell 35. That's what we're doing. And that's how much stuff we get done in 35 hours. But anyway, there's
a lot of buckets. 27 is going to be, it sounds like a ship ship. That sums it up.
The question is, how is this going to affect the seasonal workers? For instance, I have 250 plus absentee
workers that I hire every year for both elections, primary and general. So how does that affect them?
But then also it's, we don't know what hours we're going to be working. Yes, early voting is open from
eight to four, I mean, eight to six. But what happens when we have a line out the door and every person
in that line at six o'clock gets to vote?
then we're still there. Your regular employees are still there. We can't leave until everything's done,
locked up and ready to go for the end of the night. And we have to pay them. Yeah. And then we don't
have to turn you around. Yeah. We have no overtime for next year. So it's like, okay, what's that going
to look like? But then you're also looking at election day. We're there every bit of 20 hours.
It's not more. I get there at 4 a.m. No, 4 30 a.m.
because our poll workers get to the polls at 5 a.m. I was not out of there until 3 a.m. last year. Okay.
So I'm hearing that we need to think about the seasonal workers in a different way. I think that's very
valid. Is there any thought as to when a department has received a no? Do you want to come back in six
months with the same request?
12 months with the same request. PAC members, what do you think? Let me look at my council. Yes,
you can. This is a serious conversation. Let's say you have
A lovely, lovely, lovely, lovely position that you absolutely need. Council says, no, we don't have
the money for it. What's the waiting period? What's the waiting period? Yes, it's forever. That's the
question you asked. So because it's not getting any better. What about like the positions because like
elections, I have to have a DNR in every position. So if I have one of my employees leave,
I have to fill that position and that's the reason I love the request for me to document the need so
that. Rather than just an email that says, I would like to hire it's it's getting all of that information
explaining. Yeah.
Isn't everyone going to say that that position is brutal? Yeah, but it's statutory. But am I going to
back off on saying I need a highway engineer or a mechanic and say that it's not needed because I budgeted
for it and it's there for a need and it's just going to be. Let's use that as an example. So you have
the highway engineer who is the only position that does that job and then say you're also going to have
uh, position that opens up and you have four of those positions. So we're going to look at, we're just
going to, do you understand what, like the information that you're going to provide for the, the one
person that's the only one that does that job may be a little bit different than you being
able to accommodate for a little while when you have multiples. I'm just using that as an example. I
don't know what it's going to look like, but just, I'm just trying to play devil's act. I mean,
and I get it, but it's easy to sit here and,
Sit at a table and say, Hey, Lisa, you've gotten 30 truck drivers. You'll be fine without four. When
you go out there and 700 miles to plow and you have vehicles breaking down, but you're short a mechanic.
It all goes hand in hand, but it's here and say, I don't need that position.
If we get to 2027 and we need to reduce those, that's where I think it's the accommodating or fine.
I'm not in that same budget. That's a whole different story, too. Yeah. So for getting on the table
for that with the amount of positions, I have backups that I have to hire for during early voting and
election day because of the fact of if somebody calls in last minute, I have to fill that position
immediately. If I run out of those backups, do I come back again and wait
until the next meeting in order to hire that person. Because I don't know if it's on the day. It is
a different fund. And you clearly need to fill these positions, and you need to fill these positions.
I think this is a completely different conversation. I think we need to come up with a different solution
for our seasonal workers, particularly our stationary ones. I'm looking at the clock. Do we have to
end at four? We do not have to end at four, but I need to leave.
Cause I've got a kid getting off a bus. So I need to go pick up a kid off the bus. Can I turn it over
to you? Okay. Okay. Whichever one. You're the season one. You're the season one. Thank you all. As long
as you want to keep it going. Thank you all for being here. I thought this was really helping. I thought
this was a very good conversation. Do we need to continue or you're all going to disappear now?
I'm willing to talk if it's useful. Yeah, that's what I'm learning. I'm going to hang out and as long
as we have something productive to talk about. So maybe my primary question would be what do you all
and your departments think we should be doing instead? That would be my fundamental question. At this
point agenda item number 4 exactly that would be my fundamental question. I know we don't have all the
magic answers. I never pretend to do that.
But I want to know what people want. What's your solution to the problem? I was just going to say,
I mean, I've been asked for years if I can lose positions by attrition. And I said, no, I can't afford
to lose. But that's exactly what you do. Yeah. And I can. I mean,
If what you're saying is you want to do a systematic review of every department to decide if all of
their positions are relevant or still necessary. I mean, good luck, but I think you're going to be hard
pressed to find positions we don't need. But you know, my office, I have intentionally avoided trying
to expand staff and requests for all kinds of equipment and other things. I mean, I have really,
been a cheapskate for years, and now I feel like maybe I should've been redeared. All our support staff's
35 hours, whereas Fort's- They're already at 35. Yeah. Our employees are at 40 because they were already
working 50 hours a week. I mean, but our support staff is still at 35. Other comparable departments
are at 40. We've not asked to move
to 40 as a sort of good faith, like we're just trying to do the right thing, but I feel like we've been
punished now, you know, because if we were at 40, then if we lose a support staff, everybody's got five
more hours a week to cover that. It seems to me like we're not all coming from the same position to
begin with, right? So we're all on different levels from what I'm hearing to begin with. And so the
question is, how do you equalize everything when you're not coming from the same place to begin with, right?
How is that going to play out? Well, we all have different functions. I mean, we all have different
statutory functions. The clerk has things they have to do. We have things we have to do. Everybody's
got a different set of law that they're operating under. So it's just going to be, I mean,
it is a challenging, I get where you're coming from, but it's just, I can't, we can't.
We cannot keep going with the amount of extra hours my attorneys are putting in to get caseloads covered.
Like, I will lose people, we will burn out, and we will have an unstaffed prosecutor's office, which
is back in New York. So, I mean, we need funding from the state. There's no doubt about that.
I mean, that would be an easy solution if they can count on that. I don't know. There's talk that something
may happen. I don't know. I'm not counting on it. I didn't count on the first thing to happen. So I
would not count on that. So we're in this whole mixed conundrum. It's a big mix up here where we find
ourselves. Well, I know our General Assembly people are getting their butts kicked by all of their counties,
all their county governments.
And hopefully that will make a difference, but that's right. There's no guarantee, right? If we knew
that that was going to happen for sure, I think there'd be a totally different conversation today. Totally
different conversation. At least I would feel totally different about it. But, you know, there are no
guarantees. And until something is done, you operate in the absence of that guarantee because you don't have it.
And I think, unfortunately, you guys are in a position where you're going to have to be the ones to
make a strategic decision for the county about what gets funded. I mean, it's easier for you guys to
let us fight amongst ourselves, but I don't think that's healthiest for the county. I think you all
need to come together and decide what
You're willing to cut. So maybe a good prioritization of services. Yeah. I mean, that's what it's going
to come down to is a lot of services. And I think that's a fair point to do. That's ultimately where
I'm coming from is for like, you know, your department's best and it's helping council understand what
should they be prioritizing and how do we figure that is? I don't know. I mean, maybe liaisons make
an effort to, you know, meet up with their
departments and learn more thoroughly who does exactly what and what's required and what's. And talk
about the unevenness already. I would like to see the big picture. I'm a big picture gal, right? So
how many do we have that a 35 hour department? How many do we have that or whatever? What are the, what
are the disparities already? I want to know what we're starting with with the base right now. Right.
And then how do we go about making some priorities based on trying to figure out this base
and how inequitable it might be already.
and then make those decisions based on that. You know what I mean? It's really quite the challenge,
I think. And I'm not trying to shirk it. I'm just saying that we got to start from somewhere to figure
this out. And I think as departments, we get a little frustrated. I mean, you guys are our liaisons.
And I know you've both been to our office and whatnot. But I hear other departments say that they just
have never talked. Like, how is the liaison supposed to represent at the council if they don't really
know what's going on? I agree.
I'm with you. Yeah, we're lucky. The prosecutor's office is lucky, but thank you. Yeah, it's just. Well,
I would be willing to advocate for the council county council coming up with some sort of prioritization
of services. I'm sure I'll whatever we're going to call them, right? We have to do something.
I mean, I, you know, I can offer for my department that you can pay some of our stuff out of PS lit
if you have PS lit available. Okay. But because we are, those are the kinds of conversations we need
to hear, right? Yeah. Yeah, definitely. So can the money come from somewhere else? That's a prime example
of the, of the special we should be having with departments or other things like that, where the money
could come from. Maybe it's not PS lit, maybe it's something else, right?
Where could the money possibly come from if it's not what we're dealing with already? So. I think where
this. This might be a whole council conversation. Why it is very in line with when. When a couple of
years ago, we established the long term finance committee, it was not.
Meant to have a consultant come in and tell us what to do with our yearly stuff, which is what it turned
into. I mean, we've been very, I think I was very in favor of having the consultant come in to talk
to us about certain things. But when I suggested this long term finance, meaning my thought was we would
be doing priorities based long term strategic planning around
Different fiscal needs for the county. And I think that we might need to get back to that. So you're
saying this topic should go there. I mean, I think it needs to be, they need to be talking to each other.
You know, if it's not in the long term finance committee, the long term finance committee needs to consider.
The budgeting priorities, that was the idea behind it. Would the long term finance committee be the
appropriate place to figure out. Based on your policies, a hiring freeze or reduction in force, how
much money you. Need to through those processes to say, I think that ultimately.
I don't think that they're equipped to do that right now. I don't think any of us are really equipped
to do that right now because there's no certainty. It's just kind of all been blown up. What we thought
was right was not. And we haven't spent any time talking about priorities. So not going to move. No,
I think we've just been limping by trying to get at least through this year.
for 2026, maybe hold some community conversations about it. Yeah, I, you know, I think that's the public
that's going to suffer. I think we should talk. Well, yeah, I think that's always a good idea. Yeah.
Listen to the people who we represent. Um, but in terms of this particular thing, the hiring freeze,
I think we should have a conversation. Is it on our agenda for,
Monday, I guess we had a meeting to talk about this about this meeting. I think when we debriefed about
this meeting, we needed to be open to this concept of the delay. Or is there a specific goal that we're
trying to achieve? Because I had asked that once before, and we just didn't know. I mean, the answer
was no, just as much as we can, which, you know,
I believe for that too. So, I mean, I'm not trying to be, I'm not being, you guys shouldn't have given
us raises, shouldn't did longevity. I know that snowball though. Yeah. And again, there's seven people
in council. I don't speak for all of them and we'll always agree on everything, but we are where we
are. I think we should discuss the bigger picture during the debrief and, um,
You know how we can maybe be more strategic because I do have one more thing because all the effort
that we all are going to be doing. We're spending hours and. Right? When we should have been spending
hours doing other things covering the vacancy. Yeah, covering the vacant decisions. I'm just saying
I know nothing's good, but I mean all the hours. I mean, I'm like, oh my God, I don't have to carve
out a few days just to get my pen ready.
Is there a mechanism that you all have in place to track the savings from, you know, the vacant, you
have an opposition that we've had? And that's, I think, what I'm offering. I can incorporate that into
some type of report for capsules. And you can say no transfers. Yeah, we can see that. That'll take
care of that battle. Yeah. What did she say? No transfers at all in the funds. Like if you save something.
not transferring it down the line. We've done that with those. That'll save us some decisions on extradition,
I guess. We don't have the money for it. We'll just banish everybody to other states, but not have them
be responsible for the rate they get in 2023. I mean, these are the real things. That's right.
That's right. It's the real reality. And that, yeah, because you made some budget
sacrifices knowing that you could make transfers. I get what you're saying. We do, like the most years,
we do end up having to move a little bit from the tens to cover depositions and extradition. So the
short answer is we will pick this back up for people council on Monday and emphasize
the points that you all have made here, which are recorded and our colleagues will watch, I'm sure.
It's always fun. Yeah, I don't envy you guys at all. We don't have time to have chosen this path.
What you said about the goal, I think it's really important because that's what makes it hard for these
folks to be cooperative in the method that you're trying to act out. And the unequalness for me, to
begin with, is a big thing for me. And you all know the unintended consequences as we're begging people
not to retire, begging people not to quit. For performers, this isn't my job. You're like, oh gosh,
We're going to have to keep that. And that's better than nothing. So all that's happening. No one's
leaving payroll right now. Let's be honest, no one's going to be let off payroll. That's on today. Yeah.
Yeah. Well, there's no incentive to do that. Right. Well, there's an incentive. Yeah.
there's a cost to all of that too. Everything. That's true. That's true. I think we need to, yeah, we
need to think about the strategy on this and a few other things and match our tactic to the strategy.
And I'm sorry I don't have an answer. I know. I'm sure you all were hoping might come out of this meeting.
At risk of ruining everything, do we?
Do we think this is the form? I had to take my gun out. Do we anticipate this is the process for now,
is this form? And we have no other vote on it. So do you have to vote at the regular council? Well,
this committee would make a recommendation if we voted, and then vote. But you guys didn't even vote
to make a recommendation. No. OK, so I don't feel we're at here.
And I guess part of why I'm interested in whether we're accounting, like, I mean, we're already. Shouldering
some of the debt for the county right now, because we have these vacant positions. Yeah, I would like
that to be credited to us in some way in twenty twenty seven, you know, noted. Yeah, I get it. Yeah,
I don't know at this point, to be honest.
If I want to recommend this, I want to blow things up a little bit, to be quite honest, that I'm running
out of this is I think we need to reopen and look at what are we doing and why. I hear you on Monday
and it does not mean that in the meantime, Jim miles like what's running the meantime. Now's the time.
OK. Is there a lot on the agenda?
Uh, no, no, it's not. I mean, it's this, this was one of them. Are we discussing individual positions
Monday? No, those were moved to the 18th. Lord, I'm sorry.
because we needed to know what we were going to do about those positions. So in your defense, you did
ask me if that would be a problem. Yeah. Yeah. And she consulted with me. I also said it was to wait
and see. And then, uh, the, uh, the two positions that the highway has, she's not even going to be here
on the 10th. So that's why it's, you know,
It worked out where everything's going to be on. Do I have to be here on time? You're not, I'm not.
Good question. Good question. Okay. Well, I think that we need to commit to some of this vision making
on Monday. Yeah, definitely. Yeah, I'm ready. On Monday, I will be ready.
more time to think, more time to talk about it in public. Yeah. And come up with something that we can
look at. I'm ready to advocate for that. Right. I mean, if you don't like this form, I mean,
I don't like, it's not that I don't like the form. Right. I mean, yeah, it's, it's time consuming and
like things. Exactly. So I mean, you can just get to the chase and say, right, is it statutory?
Not statutory. Okay.
And you all on the chopping block. It's sort of like, it's a long chart. Yeah. That's actually what
I wrote right here. Decision three with a fund. We want a dissertation. Then, you know, exactly. You
have an R and a D. Yeah. Yeah. Proceed to number two. Yeah. Let's not stop here. Exactly. Yeah.
Decision tree. And I kind of feel like that might be where we,
go if you stick to it. Then you know whether you're still going or not, right? Well, I'm a low hanging
fruit here, so it is what it is. I understand. I understand it is what it is.