JPs Shut Out Parental Leave, Raise Requests in August
JPs easily approved routine appropriations, a code of County Ordinances, a salary surveys process, and a “marriage resolution,” but shut out parental leave and County raise requests at the August 17 Quorum Court meeting.
Several attended online, which has become a regular practice during the COVID online meeting guidelines — including JPs Tyler Pearson (D, Dist. 7), Jake Moss (R, Dist. 13), and Justin Knight (R, Dist. 1). JP Randy Higgins (R, Dist. 2) was absent.
Continuing poor audio/visual connection issues made even the roll call, as well as other parts of the meeting, awkward and difficult to hear.
After JPs approved a couple of typos in the July Journal (minutes), Committee chairs gave brief summaries of the August committee meetings.
County Officer Reports
County Judge Jim Baker asked Jennie Felling, Chief Deputy in the County Treasurer’s office, to read the July Treasurer’s report; Treasurer Scott Sanson was absent.
The “big five” County fund totals as of July 31 are:
County General: $3,190,332
County Road: $4,594,264
County Road Sales Tax: $3,392,587
Animal Control: $1,735,578
Criminal Justice Sales Tax: $1,587,092
Sheriff Report
Sheriff Tim Ryals first mistakenly read “last year’s” report for July, then corrected the information when JP Rose Roland (R, Dist. 5) pointed out that “the numbers are not matching up.”
The monthly report shows average headcounts and total calls to dispatch and the Sheriff’s Office, as well as the numbers of violent crimes, thefts, and domestics and other details through July, 2021.
COVID Update; Staffing Issues
Responding to a question from JP Tyler Lachowsky (R, Dist. 6), Ryals said the jail has six COVID cases, but “we’re doing really good within the facilities and, responding to Baker’s question, Ryals said the new medical provider, Turn Key, “has been fantastic for us in every aspect … we do offer the opportunity for the inmates to get their vaccines.”
Roland asked Ryals about stress within the department from short staffing levels and Chief Deputy Chad Wooley explained the workload is causing officers to lose vacation and paid holidays off. He said, “… We’re feeling the strain. Our guys are wearing out pretty fast.”
Baker pointed out the number of ADC inmates has gone down “consistently” since January, but it was unclear from Ryals’ response if that reduction is due solely to COVID issues.
Public Comments
Before the Court moved on to consider regular agenda items, Baker asked for public comments.
Lachowsky read a statement at request from Jack Sotallaro, a Faulkner County resident “who is not able to speak tonight,” about “an incorrect action by the Chair of the Personnel Committee” at the “meeting last week.” Sotallaro described the
questionable reopening of a meeting that was adjourned after a request to table was not granted. A request of the same kind was approved by the Chair … when he disagreed with the subject matter, and denied when it concerned at item he has aggressively politicked for….
It was dangerous because it establishes a precedent. What would happen if a meeting were adjourned and the majority of the committee members decided to reopen it and change an ordinance or take an action outside the legal, scheduled meeting? …
The ordinance forwarded to the full Court at this illegal meeting should not be acted on … as it should not even be here [before the Court].
County Attorney Phil Murphy said the August 10 Personnel Committee action to approve Ordinance 21-11 was legal, that a quorum had voted to pass the Ordinance, and added
… even if it had not passed [in committee], any individual — or you setting the agenda — could put that Ordinance before this Court.
JPs Weigh In
When Baker asked for further comments, JP Kris Kendrick (R, Dist. 9) said
While it may not have been illegal, I believe it was completely inappropriate. The meeting was adjourned and then several members started discussing their vote and what happened, and coordinating….
Based upon that precedent, committee members can sit around and let committee members leave, and then come back later in the meeting and vote….
It should never happen…. I think the right thing to do would be for the Committee Chairman to pull that back to committee.
JP Matt Brown (R, Dist. 8) said he supported Kendrick’s comments, and Roland said she “was quite shocked with what took place.”
She added, “… I heard exactly what they said through the mics — and it [the Ordinance] was brought back…. I think this is unethical. It’s not the way that I’m going to work and operate as a JP.”
Pickett “Did Not Hear”
Pearson, Chair of the Personnel Committee, explained
There was no malintent. Justice Pickett informed me that he did not hear when the Ordinance was introduced…. Everyone was still in the room. I did not discuss a vote with anybody….
Baker then remarked, “All comments were well noted. We’re moving on.”
Ordinance 21-21, Codification
JPs heard the second reading of this organizational ordinance that places all Faulkner County ordinances into a “unified,” indexed format.
Lachowsky, a co-sponsor along with Pearson, moved to consider the Ordinance, with Kendrick providing the second.
After reading by title only, Murphy said he has about 20 copies of the final document in his office and Baker reminded JPs the third reading “will be September 14th.”
Ordinance 21-11, New Parental Leave Benefit
Baker introduced the first reading of Ordinance 21-11 by asking, “What is your pleasure?”
Several moments passed in silence before Pearson moved to discuss the Ordinance. After several more moments had passed, Baker said, “The motion’s been made. It has not received a second.” JP John Pickett (D, Dist. 7) then said, “Second” to begin the discussion.
After Murphy read the entire Ordinance, Roland spoke first, saying
Being that I don’t fully agree with … the extent of the maternity leave and the fact that I don’t approve of the method this came to full Court, I’ll be a ‘no’ vote.
While some JPs expressed support for various pieces of a parental leave benefit, Allison and Lachowsky asked about the number of leave hours employees currently accrue, with Allison asking “County employees in all departments to reach out to me and us, the JPs, with your opinion….”
Co-sponsor Knight said “the goal was to create a benefit that most employers offer,” and said “multiple employees” had told him their participation in the CLB would “dwindle if it [CLB] were allowed to be used for fraternity and maternity leave….”
(An earlier version of the new proposed leave benefit used the CLB to provide paid leave hours.)
After each remark, Pearson explained that the new leave benefit would “be a good thing for Faulkner County employees. It would make us a more competitive employer….”
As he did repeatedly during Committee deliberations, he compared to the State of Arkansas, saying the State “supplies their employees with four weeks of paid maternity leave” and referring to his wife’s use of State maternity leave for the birth of their latest child.
Strain: Send Back to Committee
JP Sam Strain (R, Dist. 4) said he would “probably support” the Ordinance but “since it has come before the Court with such controversy behind it, I would like to make a motion that we send it back to committee.” Brown provided the second.
Brown suggested several changes “to make me a lot more comfortable in supporting the … parental leave,” including language to ensure the parental leave benefit is not used in a piecemeal fashion and ensuring birth and adoptive parents are treated equally as well as a sunset provision to “see how it works … so that we have time to see how this operates.”
Justices voted 9-4 by roll call to send the Ordinance back to the Personnel Committee, with JPs Pearson, Pickett, Jerry Boyer (R, Dist. 12) and Andy Shock (R, Dist. 10) voting “no.”
(See a complete report about Ordinance 21-11 HERE.)
Ordinance 21-16, Raise Requests
Pickett moved to consider the Ordinance that contains raise requests that were first submitted in May, and Allison provided the second. Murphy read the Ordinance by title only.
Strain reported the raises overall would cost $75,277 annually, with the cost of benefits included.
Typos Corrected
Lachowsky noted two typos in the Ordinance and moved to correct them:
— in Section 26, change July 3, 2021 to “August 28, 2021” (Kendrick gave the second)
— for the Quorum Court approval date, change June 15, 2021 to “August 17, 2021” (Kendrick gave the second)
JPs voted voice voted unanimously to approve those changes.
JPs’ Concerns
When Lachowsky reminded the Court of a previous “handshake agreement that maybe was made” about chief deputy clerks and “keeping them at the same rate,” Circuit Clerk Crystal Taylor — who is seeking a raise for her Chief Deputy — said she disagreed and that “we need to consider more factors than just a title,” such as years of experience in setting salaries.
As she has in the past, Roland reminded JPs of her disagreement with “grouping several departments together” adding “for that reason alone” she would not approve the Ordinance but also saying, “I do recognize that there is a need for some employees to get raises.”
Strain also disagreed with putting all the raise requests into one ordinance, then Kendrick added, “I definitely think it’s bad practice to have all of the departments under one ordinance.”
Referring to the medical services for the jail, Roland talked about “how much money, extra money that this County is putting out right now.”
“I will not vote for a tax to cover the position that some of these expenses are putting us in,” she said.
Pickett: Delay Raises till End of Year
Pickett suggested
… if you’re worried about the money — and rightfully, you should be — then let’s just change the effective date to the end of the year … and just let all this be included into the next budget cycle. Then it’s considered with the other raises that might flow through the budget for 2022.
Strain objected, saying “that’s kind of kicking the can down the road…” Then Allison, agreeing with earlier remarks, said “I share the concerns of other justices about mixing all the departments together in this Ordinance.”
Department Heads’ “Frustration”
He continued,
I am willing to overlook that tonight because of the frustration I’ve seen on the faces of the department heads who brought this over the last several months; this came out in May…. they thought they were doing the right thing and doing what was asked by the Court …
The right thing to do is to give them these raises at this time.
Ordinance 21-16, which combined several department raise requests, failed 7 to 5. Kendrick, Lachowsky, Roland, Shock, and Strain voted “no” (and Higgins was absent).
(See a complete report on the discussion of Ordinance 21-16 HERE.)
Ordinance 21-22, Salary Survey Process for Raise Requests
After Murphy read the entire Ordinance, sponsor Kendrick explained the measure sets standards for how salary surveys are to be calculated and used in department raise requests, while also specifying that each department request should be submitted as a separate ordinance.
He said
We saw with the previous Ordinance that it sat on the table for many months.
There was a lot of discussion on how raise requests were done, whether they were being done properly, and then having an ordinance that lumped every department together on one ordinance….
I think it would avoid a lot of the issues that we had in the Personnel Committee, a lot of the discussion, and a lot of the months of this prior Ordinance being tabled…
We can have a set standard that all of our elected officials and managers understand and know; that way the Quorum Court understands and knows there’s a set level of expectation … on how to bring those requests within an ordinance.
Brown asked if the Ordinance could include a requirement for a budget impact statement; however Kendrick recommended “leave this as is” now and go back to amend it later.
May-September Timeline for Raise Requests
JP Jerry Boyer (R, Dist. 12) created a lengthy discussion when he said “staying with May and September would be my position” after he apparently misunderstood language in Ordinance 21-22 that deletes earlier incorrect references to the timeline used for salary requests.
Ordinance 21-22 preserves the existing May-September timeline, as Kendrick explained.
Boyer also questioned whether raise requests could include data from “counties they feel are more comparable” with Faulkner County’s population as he commented on the wide population range among Class 6 counties. (In the past, Budget Chair Pickett has required department heads to include all Class 6 counties when performing salary surveys for raise requests.)
Murphy added that the Ordinance “has a clause in it that allows the Quorum Court to take up any request at any time. … but the preference is that everybody understand there’s two time periods throughout the year they’re preferred: May, September.”
Allison moved to waive the second reading “so department heads can act on this….” and Kendrick provided the second. Allison then moved to waive the third reading and Brown seconded. In both cases, JPs voice voted unanimously to waive the readings.
Roland called the question, and the Court voted unanimously by roll call to pass Ordinance 21-22.
(See a complete report on the discussion of Ordinance 21-22 HERE.)
Ordinance 21-25, Appropriations
Pickett moved to consider Ordinance 21-25 dealing with appropriations for the Sheriff’s Department, and Kendrick seconded.
After Murphy’s full reading, Roland asked if the $10,320 in overtime was due to “a shortage of officers,” and Angie Wooley, the Sheriff’s Department Fiscal Officer, explained, “I don’t know that that would make up for all of it that we will need this year, but this is proceeds that we made from our Sheriff’s sale….”
She said the $57,000 for equipment would be spent on “handguns, holsters, ammunition, and gear and body armor for our … SWAT team” and another $4,000 would buy “ten tasers; tasers cost over $1,000 each….”
When Kendrick called the question, JPs voted unanimously by roll call to pass Ordinance 21-25.
Resolution 21-03, Marriage
Lachowsky moved to consider Resolution 21-03 and Strain seconded before a full reading by Murphy. With no discussion, the Court voice voted unanimously to pass Resolution 21-03 authorizing former County Attorney David Hogue to perform a marriage between August 17 and September 17, 2021.
“Raise Requests Again”
Pearson announced that the Personnel Committee would take up “raise requests again” in September and asked department heads to “submit it to me, including any that were on the previous Ordinance tonight that did not pass. Please re-submit those if you would like those to be considered again and we will put those together in separate ordinances.”
Circuit Clerk Award
Taylor drew applause when she announced that her office has received an award for data quality from the Arkansas Supreme Court for the second year in a row. “My staff’s worked really hard to keep our data clean and quality. And I think we have one of the top circuit clerk’s offices in the state,” she added.
Census Numbers Are Disappointing
Baker announced his disappointment that the Census numbers showed that County population grew by 9.7% and “some cities lost population…. We’ll deal with it and go on.”
He added, “Only thing I can blame it on, in all fairness, was the coronavirus and Census takers being handicapped by the coronavirus…. The COVID restrictions, I think, probably caused the accurate count not to be made.”
Baker said the County Fair and parade are scheduled starting the third week in September.
Donna Clawson with the Friends of the Faulkner County Animal Shelter announced a fundraiser set for September 11 and that “two big billboard signs” had been “donated to us.”
Baker then adjourned the meeting.
Videos edited from original video on Faulkner County’s YouTube channel.)
Visit Faulkner County Reports on YouTube for more videos and video excerpts from this and other County meetings.
