[0:00] We will begin the working

[0:07] session of the Council of the Association of

[0:08] Police

[0:09] Charities

[0:10] on

[0:11] Thursday, September 3,

[0:13] 2026. Please

[0:14] stand for the oath.

[0:19] I pledge

[0:20] allegiance to the flag of the

[0:21] United States of

[0:22] America and to

[0:23] the republic it

[0:24] represents. One nation

[0:26] under God, indivisible

[0:27] , with liberty and

[0:28] justice for

[0:29] all.

[0:33] Secretary, please

[0:35] take a

[0:35] roll call.

[0:36] Mayor John Cooper is

[0:37] here.

[0:38] Vice Mayor Chris Meyer is

[0:39] here.

[0:40] Councilman Robert

[0:41] Hubbard is

[0:41] here. Council member Lisa

[0:43] Burke is

[0:43] here.

[0:44] Council member Christine

[0:45] Sullivan is

[0:46] here.

[0:46] City Attorney

[0:47] Nancy Meyer is here.

[0:48] Acting

[0:49] City Manager

[0:50] Salikeri is

[0:50] here.

[0:51] Thank you. The first point

[0:52] is comments from

[0:53] the public. And

[0:54] we still don't have any

[0:55] public representatives at the

[0:55] meeting. So I'm

[0:56] closing the time for

[0:57] public comment.

[0:58] Let's move on to the

[0:58] city

[0:59] manager's comments. I'll give the

[0:59] floor to Mr. Carey for

[1:00] his comments.

[1:01] They are gone now.

[1:02] OK. Moving

[1:02] on to the

[1:03] city prosecutor's comments.

[1:04] Miss, do you have any

[1:04] comments?

[1:05] No.

[1:05] OK. Thank you.

[1:06] Next up is

[1:07] Council agenda item

[1:08] number one: an agreement between the

[1:10] Police

[1:10] Benevolent Association

[1:11] (PBA) and

[1:12] the City of Port Richey for

[1:13] 2026-2029. I will hand it over to

[1:14] Mr. O'Carey for

[1:15] presentation.

[1:17] Port Richey Police Association,

[1:18] oh my god.

[1:19] Thank you, gentlemen,

[1:21] the Association (PBA)

[1:22] has opened seven articles

[1:23] for discussion as

[1:25] part of negotiations

[1:26] for a new

[1:27] contract for 2026-2029

[1:29] . The negotiations

[1:31] were conducted with the participation of myself

[1:33] , the city prosecutor,

[1:34] and the

[1:35] police chief. As

[1:37] a result of these

[1:38] discussions, the

[1:40] city's negotiating team and

[1:40] PBA representatives

[1:41] reached a preliminary

[1:42] agreement on a contract

[1:43] that would remain

[1:45] in effect without review

[1:46] until 2029 unless the

[1:48] November

[1:49] property tax measure is approved

[1:50] . So, we have a

[1:52] preliminary agreement for

[1:54] three years with a

[1:54] provision for

[1:55] increased payments.

[1:59] If this

[2:00] issue passes in November, we

[2:01] will be able to open

[2:02] negotiations and

[2:03] discuss the next

[2:05] two years of the agreement.

[2:08] If the City Council

[2:09] agrees to the

[2:10] proposed

[2:11] terms, the agreement will be

[2:13] submitted to

[2:14] Port Richey police officers,

[2:15] represented by

[2:16] the union, for

[2:17] ratification. After

[2:18] ratification

[2:18] by the union, the contract

[2:20] will be presented to

[2:21] the city council for

[2:22] final

[2:22] approval. So, I

[2:25] can go through

[2:26] specific articles

[2:28] if you want me to

[2:29] point out the changes. Um,

[2:32] yes,

[2:32] please do that

[2:33] . Give me a

[2:35] minute.

[2:40] So, let's start with

[2:41] article one, the

[2:42] preamble, we're

[2:43] actually just

[2:44] changing a few words here. There's nothing there

[2:47] that would actually

[2:48] affect the

[2:49] contract one way or the

[2:50] other. It's just that the PBA

[2:52] noticed that it

[2:54] said "Hillsboro County

[2:55] Police

[2:56] Benevolent Association

[2:58] " and they

[2:59] wanted to remove it.

[3:01] So, this is article one.

[3:05] Was this in our contract all this time

[3:06] ?

[3:08] Yes. And they just,

[3:09] they noticed it.

[3:10] So, uh, same thing with

[3:14] article six,

[3:16] basically wording changes.

[3:17] Um, they removed

[3:18] Hillsborough County,

[3:19] maybe that's what they were

[3:20] known by

[3:21] . I actually, I do

[3:23] n't, I don't remember if

[3:24] we asked about it or

[3:25] not. Were they, were

[3:26] they known as the

[3:27] Hillsborough County Association? That

[3:28] has changed, or that's what they

[3:29] used to

[3:29] be called. Good.

[3:30] So, it wasn't

[3:32] always like this.

[3:32] Official documents

[3:33] change. It was

[3:35] n't that long ago. So

[3:36] maybe this is the first

[3:37] time they've had the

[3:38] opportunity to

[3:38] do this. Article 10 is

[3:50] essentially their, uh,

[3:52] complaints procedures, and there were

[3:53] a few, uh,

[3:54] crossed out words that

[3:56] they pointed

[3:57] out, uh, that we

[3:58] completely agreed with. Um

[4:03] , the main addition

[4:04] starts, uh, on

[4:06] line 96, where, uh, during

[4:14] discussions with the

[4:15] city attorney, uh

[4:16] , and our

[4:18] arbitration procedure is much more

[4:19] efficient than what

[4:21] was before. Um, as

[4:25] you can see, what was

[4:26] crossed out, there was

[4:27] just, you know, there

[4:29] wasn't a lot of

[4:29] wording regarding, uh, the

[4:31] arbitration process.

[4:32] So we agreed to

[4:33] just spell out everything in

[4:34] detail: the number of

[4:36] arbitrators who should

[4:37] be present, uh, where

[4:38] it would take place, uh

[4:40] , what the

[4:40] city would be responsible for, what

[4:43] the union would be responsible for, and

[4:44] basically all of it is

[4:45] clearly spelled out.

[4:46] Now, and this also

[4:47] continues in

[4:49] line 109. What was the

[4:53] justification for changing the

[4:54] deadline from 5 to 10 and from 10

[4:56] to 15 days?

[4:58] This is for appeal,

[5:01] right?

[5:01] Yes. Um,

[5:02] just give me more

[5:03] time to write

[5:04] the appeal.

[5:05] Yeah, we just, we

[5:06] just gave them more

[5:07] time, you know,

[5:08] weekdays, weekends, stuff like that

[5:09] . So we just

[5:10] extended the deadline, and

[5:11] we both agreed

[5:12] that it was better to provide

[5:13] more time, uh, for

[5:14] both parties. And that was the

[5:24] main section,

[5:25] really everything else—

[5:26] it's just, uh, simple

[5:27] word substitutions or something

[5:29] like that that just

[5:30] caught my eye. It was

[5:32] Article 10. Uh, Article 14

[5:47] , which deals with

[5:48] the workweek and

[5:50] overtime, uh,

[5:51] just, essentially, uh,

[5:52] there were just some changes to

[5:54] the numbers, uh, actually,

[5:55] to write the number in

[5:57] words. Um,

[5:58] write this down. Uh,

[5:59] word changes, uh,

[6:00] you know, minimum 48

[6:01] hours, like in line 21,

[6:03] just to put

[6:04] it in words. Uh, 28. So there

[6:07] really wasn't

[6:08] any difference there. um,

[6:11] scrolling down the

[6:12] text, and the same thing as

[6:15] we get to

[6:17] the end of this article,

[6:18] just writing the number in

[6:19] words. So, there

[6:20] really

[6:21] weren't any significant

[6:22] changes to this article.

[6:26] It looks like they shortened, uh,

[6:28] chapter six.

[6:30] Instead of eight hours of

[6:32] compensatory time,

[6:33] they get

[6:35] four, and instead of 28

[6:36] days for each, it's

[6:37] now 14, right?

[6:40] What is my number?

[6:41] Uh, that's 142. Yeah, we

[6:50] went from 8 to 4, and

[6:52] then from 28 to 14.

[7:13] Vacation and

[7:14] sick leave. Article 16.

[7:18] Uh, the same, uh, as in

[7:20] lines 13, 32, 34, just the

[7:24] wording was actually written out. Uh,

[7:29] one specific

[7:31] addition, uh, in

[7:32] lines 35 through 36—it's

[7:33] just during the

[7:35] second pay

[7:36] period in October. Uh,

[7:40] previously, it did

[7:42] n't seem to specify a

[7:43] specific time of

[7:44] year, but we wanted to

[7:45] make sure it was

[7:46] done at the beginning of the

[7:47] fiscal year. So

[7:49] , since October

[7:50] is our fiscal year

[7:51] , we extended this to the

[7:52] second pay

[7:53] period. Uh, so

[7:54] they don't

[7:55] expect it in the

[7:56] very first

[7:56] payment period of the

[7:57] fiscal year. That

[7:58] gives us that month

[7:59] to actually

[8:00] pay off any,

[8:01] you know, time or anything

[8:02] like that that we have to

[8:03] do. So it was

[8:05] just an addition.

[8:10] Uh, line 78—it's

[8:11] just added

[8:12] wording about,

[8:13] you know, a death in the

[8:14] family. Uh, lines 64-65

[8:17] — they just wrote

[8:19] the numbers in words. Uh, and

[8:26] lines 79 through 81 are

[8:27] simply a strikethrough with

[8:28] the addition of

[8:29] wording about

[8:30] organizing and

[8:31] attending a

[8:32] funeral for

[8:33] family events. Uh-huh.

[8:39] We were discussing,

[8:40] you know, just

[8:41] situations where someone

[8:42] dies and you can't

[8:43] , you know, we can't

[8:45] attend the event immediately.

[8:48] Usually, a funeral

[8:49] is not organized

[8:50] in a few days. Sometimes

[8:51] it will be out of

[8:52] state or city. So

[8:54] we actually agreed on

[8:55] their, uh, allowed

[8:57] time, but they don't

[8:57] have to take

[8:59] it immediately, on the day,

[9:00] you know, or the

[9:01] day after

[9:02] someone dies. We

[9:03] can, if, you know,

[9:04] agreements

[9:05] are reached, for example,

[9:06] next week

[9:07] or something, that's when it

[9:09] will start. And

[9:14] lines 93 through 99 were

[9:17] added. Uh-huh. Just

[9:22] clarifying, uh,

[9:23] maybe paid

[9:24] compensatory time

[9:25] instead of

[9:26] overtime.

[9:28] It used to be very

[9:29] blurry. So the union and I

[9:32] agreed to write down

[9:33] specific

[9:34] wording for

[9:35] this process, and

[9:36] now that it's there, you

[9:37] know, it's here.

[9:42] Does this, uh, repeat

[9:43] what, uh, non-

[9:44] union

[9:45] employees have

[9:46] regarding, uh,

[9:48] bereavement leave? Is

[9:53] it significantly

[9:54] different?

[9:56] Um, let me

[9:57] take a look at these

[9:58] wordings.

[10:00] Most of these

[10:01] formulations, um,

[10:02] you know, refer to

[10:03] family members. It's all pretty much the same thing

[10:04] ,

[10:06] yes, one day for

[10:07] everyone. I'm just

[10:10] wondering if the staff

[10:12] had it too or if it

[10:13] was just for the PBA.

[10:17] Um, I believe the

[10:19] staff has

[10:19] at least three non-

[10:20] contractual days. So

[10:27] but, of course, if they

[10:28] need to use the

[10:29] time, they have time off,

[10:30] they have

[10:31] compensatory time,

[10:32] you know, personal time

[10:33] , if they need it.

[10:34] So, the union

[10:35] only asked to, you know,

[10:36] keep the same

[10:37] editorial as before.

[10:54] Article 19, which is

[10:55] included, um, in this

[10:56] document because I

[10:57] didn't highlight it separately, is

[10:59] essentially just a

[11:00] mimic of what we

[11:01] had to go back to

[11:02] , um, the city manager had

[11:04] previously added Emancipation Day

[11:06] , which

[11:07] wasn't in the manual. Um,

[11:11] so we agreed on

[11:13] this when Liberation Day happened

[11:14] this

[11:15] year, but since we

[11:16] were negotiating

[11:17] this in the middle of the year,

[11:18] the union wanted to

[11:19] bring the article back to

[11:21] essentially bring the

[11:22] holidays into

[11:23] line with the

[11:24] manual. So, um, I'm

[11:27] trying to work

[11:28] with the city attorney and,

[11:29] um, personnel to

[11:30] put together a new

[11:32] personnel handbook

[11:33] that would move us

[11:34] to the federal

[11:35] calendar. It's just

[11:37] because, you know, I

[11:38] agreed to some extent with my

[11:40] predecessors that, um,

[11:41] they all noticed that,

[11:42] you know, Newport County

[11:44] -Mitchie, a lot of

[11:45] our other institutions—they all

[11:46] follow the

[11:47] federal

[11:48] calendar. We have

[11:49] some holidays that aren't,

[11:50] um, you know, like the day

[11:52] after Thanksgiving,

[11:53] technically not a holiday.

[11:54] It's just, you know, you

[11:55] just do it on a 40-

[11:56] hour weekend,

[11:57] and it's right after

[11:58] that. So

[11:59] it's usually there. Um, here

[12:01] Good Friday is a

[12:02] holiday that has always

[12:03] been in the personnel

[12:04] handbook, but it is not a

[12:05] federal holiday.

[12:07] So, moving

[12:07] forward, I'm trying to,

[12:08] you know, work out a

[12:09] federal calendar

[12:10] , but I'll have to

[12:11] present that to

[12:12] the union when it's

[12:13] ready. But

[12:14] now we're just

[12:15] back to what we

[12:16] have in the current

[12:17] personnel handbook.

[12:33] Article 20 essentially

[12:34] covers

[12:35] wages for both, um,

[12:37] officers and

[12:38] dispatchers. So, for the

[12:42] first year, um, for the

[12:44] first year of

[12:45] the raise, we

[12:46] agreed on a

[12:47] 3.7% increase for

[12:49] officers and a 3% increase for, um

[12:50] , dispatchers. Um, this is

[12:54] all within your

[12:56] budget that you

[12:57] just approved. Um,

[13:00] this was discussed

[13:01] during the negotiations

[13:02] between me and the

[13:03] union. Um, we, I

[13:04] mean, the city

[13:05] attorney and the

[13:06] police chief, you know, we both

[13:08] discussed it back and forth

[13:09] . Um, and we got

[13:11] to this, um, we

[13:12] got to these

[13:12] negotiations. Ahem. I

[13:16] think this is another step

[13:18] in what we're doing with the

[13:19] police

[13:20] department. So,

[13:21] this is where we

[13:23] are now.

[13:25] is that... is that 3%-- is

[13:29] that a straight

[13:30] 3% hourly increase, because I

[13:32] just did a quick

[13:33] calculation, taking

[13:34] 23.22, which was the first

[13:36] increment of the hourly

[13:37] rate on October 1,

[13:39] 2025. With a

[13:42] 3% increase, it should be

[13:45] 23.9166 or 23.92, but here it is 24.07.

[13:54] Maybe this refers to the

[13:55] annual amount?

[13:56] You start from the number

[13:58] 23.22.

[13:59] Yes. Let me take a

[14:00] quick look at the

[14:01] annual amount.

[14:10] Yes, it's not 3%, it's more

[14:12] . It

[14:12] should be 3.7%.

[14:14] Oh, 3.7%.

[14:16] Yes, 3.7% for officers

[14:18] for the first year.

[14:19] Good. So, for the

[14:20] first stage, for the

[14:22] first year, for

[14:23] 2026, it will be 3.7%, and for the

[14:25] next two years of

[14:26] this contract—3%.

[14:29] So, these 3.7% bring the

[14:31] first degree to a

[14:32] salary level of

[14:34] $50,000. Um,

[14:37] the union originally

[14:38] wanted a lot

[14:39] more, but this is what

[14:41] we came to as a

[14:42] result of

[14:43] negotiations, and for the

[14:44] next two years, the 27th

[14:46] and the 28th, it's just 3%.

[14:49] Now, if the

[14:50] November

[14:51] vote is

[14:52] successful, then 2027 and 2028

[14:54] will be

[14:55] put on hold until we can come to an

[14:56] agreement on

[14:58] those two years.

[15:18] Of course, Article 27

[15:19] only concerns

[15:21] the duration and

[15:22] termination of this

[15:24] particular

[15:25] contract, changing

[15:27] it from 2026 to 2029. Um

[15:30] , but lines 17-22

[15:32] basically describe...

[15:42] We both

[15:43] agreed on

[15:44] the wording that

[15:45] in the event that we

[15:46] need to...

[15:50] revise the agreement

[15:51] or in the event that

[15:53] any disputes arise

[15:54] or anything like that,

[15:55] we both agreed on that

[15:57] wording in

[15:58] lines 19-22.

[16:11] Where exactly is it written down that what

[16:12] will happen in

[16:13] November?

[16:16] Go back,

[16:17] I'm sorry,

[16:18] go back to

[16:19] article 20.

[16:21] And then on the last

[16:23] page, lines 122-129.

[16:31] Good. So, as I

[16:52] said, Nancy Meyer,

[16:53] Rob Ashenfelder, myself, and the

[16:54] police chief—

[16:55] we all agree that these are

[16:57] acceptable terms for

[16:59] moving forward. As I

[17:01] said, this is within

[17:02] our budget

[17:03] parameters. Um,

[17:05] you know,

[17:06] it was mostly changes. Um, the

[17:09] raise negotiations were all within the

[17:11] planned range. So,

[17:13] if you don't have

[17:14] any specific

[17:16] questions, I've included the entire

[17:17] agreement as an attachment

[17:18] in case you wanted to

[17:19] discuss anything else,

[17:20] but none of those

[17:21] articles will change.

[17:24] The ones I read to

[17:25] you tonight are the

[17:27] only ones that will

[17:28] change. Have a question?

[17:42] Tom? That was good.

[17:49] Just wanted to be

[17:50] aware.

[17:56] Good. So, do

[17:57] we need

[17:58] a vote of

[17:59] approval?

[17:59] This is a working meeting. This

[18:01] issue will return to the

[18:03] agenda for formal approval in

[18:04] the near future. Yes

[18:05] , they will have a

[18:06] vote on

[18:07] ratification by

[18:08] officials.

[18:09] If it passes, we

[18:11] will prepare a final

[18:12] agreement and present

[18:13] it to the council at the

[18:15] September meeting. I hope

[18:16] we can

[18:17] wrap this up by the end of

[18:18] this month, and it

[18:19] will be a closed

[18:20] session.

[18:21] No.

[18:21] So there is no

[18:23] closed session,

[18:25] since the agreements

[18:26] have been signed, even if they are

[18:27] preliminary.

[18:28] Good. So,

[18:29] this never happens to us

[18:30] . No. Of course. I

[18:31] spoke to both

[18:32] attorneys about this

[18:33] , and we could, you

[18:35] know, we probably should have

[18:36] held a

[18:37] closed session.

[18:41] But the fact that we

[18:42] have a preliminary

[18:43] agreement means that

[18:44] if you disagree with something

[18:45] now, I

[18:46] can still go back to

[18:48] negotiations, but we have

[18:49] almost everything

[18:50] agreed. But they have

[18:54] n't held a

[18:55] vote on

[18:56] ratification or anything yet

[18:57] . So if we

[18:58] needed to

[19:00] discuss something, I could

[19:01] notify

[19:01] the union and do

[19:03] it. But it was the

[19:05] lawyer's suggestion

[19:06] to hold it as a

[19:07] working meeting or

[19:08] closed session.

[19:10] I think last time

[19:11] we held a closed

[19:12] meeting because the issue

[19:14] was controversial and not

[19:15] agreed upon.

[19:15] Right.

[19:16] I think there

[19:18] was more

[19:19] debate last time. Yes. We could

[19:21] do the same this

[19:22] time. But again

[19:24] , since many of

[19:26] the changes concerned

[19:27] wording, not

[19:28] substance. I thought this was the

[19:32] best way to

[19:33] move forward.

[19:36] Good. I mean,

[19:37] just my thoughts for the

[19:38] future. Um, I think

[19:40] that before—I mean,

[19:41] of course,

[19:42] if an agreement is reached,

[19:44] that's great, but I

[19:45] think that before we

[19:46] , the city side,

[19:47] agree, it should

[19:48] go back to the council

[19:50] in closed session

[19:51] so we can

[19:52] discuss it and

[19:53] make sure, because right

[19:54] now we... if we

[19:55] want to open up

[19:56] or discuss something, it's in

[19:58] public, and we can't have

[19:59] those

[20:00] discussions. So I

[20:01] think in

[20:02] the future, if we

[20:03] do

[20:03] contracts, we should

[20:04] have closed

[20:05] meetings where before the

[20:06] city... I mean,

[20:07] you could

[20:07] work together

[20:08] to prepare something,

[20:09] but I think it

[20:09] should go back to the

[20:10] council so we can have

[20:11] our say

[20:12] before it's

[20:13] finally agreed to, those are

[20:13] my thoughts.

[20:14] And we could

[20:15] do it. It's just, um,

[20:16] as I've said in my

[20:18] discussions with Nancy

[20:19] and Rob...in their

[20:22] opinion, since I'm essentially the

[20:25] negotiating representative,

[20:26] and I signed the

[20:27] preliminary agreements that

[20:29] I submitted there. Um, like I

[20:30] said, they're still

[20:31] preliminary. So

[20:33] if there's anything we

[20:34] should bring back for

[20:35] discussion, we

[20:36] can.

[20:36] Um, but in their opinion,

[20:38] it was just...

[20:39] not to hold a closed

[20:40] session, but to just

[20:41] hold it as a

[20:42] working session. So that's why

[20:43] we're here tonight

[20:44] .

[20:45] And it works both

[20:46] ways. As a council, we

[20:47] say we want

[20:48] more than 3%, right? Or

[20:49] we may want to...

[20:50] So I think it's

[20:51] good practice

[20:51] because we have the

[20:52] appropriate

[20:53] authority

[20:53] to hold these sessions,

[20:54] and we should

[20:55] take advantage of this

[20:56] discussion because

[20:56] it's part of the

[20:57] discussion, I think.

[20:58] Yes. Longevity bonus

[21:00] , how long has it

[21:01] existed in this

[21:01] form? And was

[21:02] this discussed?

[21:03] This was not discussed.

[21:04] This was already in

[21:05] the contracts before. Um

[21:06] , and they didn't ask for

[21:07] any changes.

[21:08] They didn't...they didn't

[21:09] want any changes.

[21:10] Yes.

[21:11] And actually, we just

[21:12] performed it for

[21:13] Sergeant S.

[21:14] Sergeant Cox. He has been with

[21:16] us for 15 years.

[21:18] So, are there any more questions?

[21:23] Good. If not, then I'll move on

[21:24] . Are there any

[21:25] comments from the

[21:26] public? I don't

[21:27] see it, then I'll move on to

[21:28] the comments from the mayor and

[21:29] city council. Uh,

[21:30] let's start with Councilman

[21:31] Burke. That is, with Councilwoman

[21:32] Burke.

[21:34] Let's go back to the

[21:35] council member. I got it all

[21:36] mixed up again. I will do

[21:38] everything right. I'll

[21:39] talk to the

[21:40] council member.

[21:41] Now, I wish

[21:42] we could pay them

[21:44] more.

[21:44] Yes, I hope

[21:45] we can someday.

[21:46] Me too. I wish

[21:47] we could pay them

[21:48] more, but, uh,

[21:49] nothing more.

[21:50] Good. Vice Mayor,

[21:51] I just want to say

[21:52] that they are doing a great

[21:53] job in their

[21:54] city. The police are

[21:55] constantly everywhere, and you

[21:56] see them. They are

[21:57] present. Cars on

[21:58] the streets, just

[21:59] great work.

[22:00] Okay, Card.

[22:04] No, it's just that the seniority bonus

[22:06] seems too small, but

[22:08] they didn't ask for it

[22:09] and no, they're

[22:11] doing a great

[22:12] job. They

[22:13] deserve the

[22:14] best too. They

[22:15] do a great

[22:16] job. What is, is what is.

[22:19] Gladly. Yes, and that's an apt

[22:23] observation, since

[22:24] we've worked it out. It would be

[22:25] good

[22:26] to meet as a council in

[22:27] closed session

[22:28] to be able to

[22:29] discuss things. So

[22:30] I definitely think that

[22:31] depending on what

[22:32] happens in

[22:32] November, let's

[22:33] make sure that we

[22:35] all have a say on

[22:35] this so that we

[22:37] can

[22:37] I think, uh, then in

[22:38] November we'll

[22:39] keep an eye on it, and if

[22:40] we have to

[22:41] reopen the contract

[22:42] , we can as well

[22:43] , and the thing is,

[22:44] the review doesn't

[22:45] necessarily

[22:46] just have to be about

[22:47] salaries. We can

[22:48] review

[22:49] almost anything.

[22:50] So I'll do this, and this will

[22:51] become our

[22:52] practice, I'll just

[22:53] call a closed

[22:54] session right away.

[22:56] That way, since

[22:57] the contract is in front of us,

[22:58] we can discuss

[22:59] anything we

[23:00] want to move forward on.

[23:02] So, and then

[23:02] move on from this

[23:03] point. So before

[23:04] I sit down with them

[23:05] at the negotiating table,

[23:06] we will first

[23:07] hold a closed

[23:08] meeting.

[23:08] And you guys did a

[23:09] great job. So don't

[23:11] get this

[23:11] wrong. As I

[23:13] said, you know, I think

[23:15] that myself, the chief, and our

[23:16] city lawyers—they all

[23:17] did a great

[23:19] job. The union

[23:22] was very open

[23:23] to our proposals,

[23:24] and we were very open to theirs. So I

[23:27] think we were able to

[23:29] negotiate a good

[23:30] contract and move

[23:31] on. So,

[23:35] I guess the

[23:37] fire department salary structure and so on

[23:39] also need to be

[23:40] reviewed. It would be possible to

[23:41] do both

[23:43] things at the same time

[23:43] next year.

[23:46] Well, actually, I'm

[23:47] in the process of working with

[23:48] our new HR

[23:49] person right now, we're going to

[23:50] look at

[23:51] doing a new

[23:53] salary survey,

[23:54] because the last

[23:55] survey we

[23:56] did was four or

[23:57] five years ago, so it's

[23:58] time to do a new one. And,

[24:00] of course, I will

[24:01] coordinate with

[24:02] all

[24:02] employees to move forward

[24:04] with this

[24:05] issue. So, um, that's what

[24:06] I told her

[24:08] as soon as she came in,

[24:09] actually, what I

[24:10] recommended doing

[24:12] . Um, but of course, Gee,

[24:14] given our

[24:15] scale, given

[24:17] our situation, um,

[24:18] of course,

[24:19] we're going to have to

[24:20] make some serious

[24:22] decisions in November if this

[24:23] goes through. But, um,

[24:24] regardless,

[24:25] if we can

[24:27] do it, we'll

[24:27] do it. Good.

[24:30] OK. Nothing more

[24:32] . So I make a

[24:32] suggestion.

[24:34] Motion to

[24:35] close the meeting. I

[24:36] support.

[24:37] The offer is accepted.

[24:38] Second proposal. Those who are

[24:40] "in favor", please say "

[24:41] yes". Yes. Yes. Yes. You.

City council PBA Work Session 09.03.2026

Transcript