JPs OK New Parental Leave, Pay Hikes for Deputy Clerks & $3,000 Bonuses
At their October 19 meeting, JPs gave County employees a new 2-week paid parental leave benefit as well as pay hikes for deputy clerks and $3,000 “premium pay” bonuses from federal COVID relief funds.
County Attorney Phil Murphy played a prominent role, as the lengthy agenda was made more difficult by confusion on several points of order. Emotion ran high at times as County Judge Jim Baker repeatedly asked Murphy for direction and JPs asked more than once for clarification before votes were taken on various motions.
Quorum Court watchers packed the old Courtroom for a second month: County employees who came to support the premium pay bonus Ordinances filled much of the room.
All JPs attended on October 19, but JP Rose Roland (R, Dist. 5) was unable to vote because she attended online. (The Arkansas public health emergency that allowed JPs to attend and vote remotely expired on September 29.)
County 4-H students gave the opening prayer and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
County Extension Service
After the roll call, County Judge Jim Baker began with item 9. on the agenda, the quarterly report from the County Extension Service.
Mary Beth Groce, the new County Extension Director, presented year-end (October 2020 – September, 2021) information about their services:
♦ Over a quarter-million contacts through educational programming; agricultural, horticulture, and family consumer science programs; Master Gardeners; and the County 4-H program.
♦ Over 13,000 volunteer hours, valued at $380,000 “contribution to the County”
Gross said they’d been “doing a lot of canning classes” and “pesticide applicator trainings for people in the County,” and said they are “trying to get some more resources” because “Army worms have been a problem recently.”
Next, JPs unanimously voice voted to approve the September Journal (minutes), as Baker returned to the agenda items.
The Journal, as distributed with the meeting agenda, was incorrectly dated August 21, 2021 and referenced a meeting date of August 21, 2021, although the content reflected September’s Quorum Court meeting.
Tax Revenue & Sales Tax Both Up Over 2020
With few additional details, County Treasurer Scott Sanson presented last month’s financials and totals for the “big five” revenue accounts:
County General: $1,742,633
County Road: $4,688,423
County Road Sales Tax: $2,977,466
Animal Control: $1,335,916
Criminal Justice Sales Tax: $1,781,365
“As you can see, we’re greatly above last year’s (revenue) at this point,” Sanson said, “We’ll see how it finally turns out.”
Sales Tax Up 15.64% Year-to-Date
He added, “Sales tax for the month of September is $1,077,034 … up 21.7% over September 2020. We are currently 15.64% over year-to-date 2020…. through three-quarters of the year, we are 86% of our projected….”
Sheriff’s Report
County Sheriff Tim Ryals said there are “zero” cases of COVID in the jail and presented numbers from his monthly report. He said the average capacity in the Unit I jail was “156, and remember we’ve got a capacity of 118.”
In Unit II, the average male high was 133, and the highest number of female inmates was 73 and “we’re maxed out,” he said.
Ryals added, “We’re holding 101 Arkansas Department of Corrections inmates … and we’re trying to get them to relieve our stress … take some of these inmates….”
He said the “video bridge” setup “has really declined,” which means “an uptick in our transport” for a total cost of $16,000, “an increase in our total cost of 267%.”
As Baker has done each month, he asked about the third-party medical provider, TurnKey, and Ryals confirmed, “We can count on them to do an amazing job….”
Animal Shelter Committee
During Committee reports, JP Randy Higgins (R, Dist. 2) said the Community Animal Shelter Development Committee had been meeting weekly starting on September 16 and that Baker has “shared … current finances and opportunities with the building itself….”
He added that the Committee met with Ryals and would soon have a meeting with Rik Sowell, the architect, “about the physical building itself.”
He also introduced Committee members, several of whom were in the audience.
Public Comments
David Jones, a Conway resident, spoke about “the proposed bonus the County is talking about,” saying the County could “spread out” the ARP funds and use the funds for the Sheriff’s Department:
They’re understaffed, underpaid, and everybody in here knows that we have a lot of reserve deputies…. We should at least help with Reserve deputies…. allow some money to go to the Sheriff’s Department so he could hire more deputies and buy better equipment.
Public Hearing on ARP Funds?
When Scotty Keller, a County resident, began to ask about a public hearing “or a committee of the whole” to discuss plans for spending the $24 million in ARP funds, Baker interrupted, saying “that’s not on the agenda.”
However, Keller pointed out
If you’re giving raises …and bonuses … then the bonuses are about this money….
Ya’ll need to discuss that in whole and decide how you’re going to spend this money. And you need to contact all of the public. We have not had input into how you’re going to spend this money….
Ya’ll have delayed and delayed and delayed the raises that had been asked for early in the year .. and now we’re finally to a place where you’re going to have to deal with them … including the Sheriff’s Department…. Those people worked every day, in the field all the time, and our Sheriff’s Reserves were with them, as well.
From the audience, County Assessor Krissy Lewis began speaking; however, when Baker said, “Come up here … and make your comments,” she responded “… I’m waiting on other comments….”
Baker said, “There’s not going to be any comments once we start (the agenda)…”
Wooley: Other Departments Deserve to be Paid
Speaking next, Fiscal Officer Angie Wooley of the Sheriff’s Department said she’d “mirror the other two commenters” when talking about the Sheriff’s Department’s needs and working conditions.
She urged JPs to waive the three readings of the bonus Ordinances and added, “… other County departments put in the work, too and they deserve to be paid….,” which drew a noticeable round of applause from some of the audience.
Ordinance 21-11, Family Leave Benefit
Without a motion to consider or discuss, Baker asked co-sponsor JP Justin Knight (R, Dist. 1) to speak at “this third reading” of Ordinance 21-11. Knight explained,
This gives two weeks paid for those that are either adopting or having a child. The majority of employees won’t use this, but some will….
If they have a major complication during delivery or something, they still have to go to the catastrophic leave board and they still have to get approval for that….
It’s separate from their personal leave but it does give a benefit to County employees that they don’t have at this point….
JP Tyler Pearson (D, Dist. 7), the other sponsor, added, “I think this is is a great thing for children first and foremost… and for this County to be a more competitive employer.”
JP Jake Moss (R, Dist. 13) spoke in support, as did JP John Allison (R, Dist. 3).
As he did before in Committee, Allison pointed out that “two prospective parents,” County employees, “will put this to use next month if we waive the third reading….”
JP Kris Kendrick (R, Dist. 9) said
According to the minutes, the motion to waive the readings failed… so there’s some confusion as to what reading this is…. The way these minutes read and what we’re saying — I don’t think they match….
Murphy: This is Third Reading
County Attorney Phil Murphy said
This will be the third reading. Last month we had the first reading and then we had a motion to waive the second reading that passed. We had a motion to waive the third reading and that failed, so this … basically we had two readings last month. This month is the third and final reading of this one.
(NOTE: FCR’s report on the September Quorum Court meeting shows that Murphy corrected Baker after the vote to say that the motion to waive the 2nd reading failed. Our report also does not show that a motion to waive a 3rd reading or a vote took place. The meeting video verifies our reporting.)
However, JP Matt Brown (R, Dist. 8) — also an attorney — suggested that the Court “waive the third reading tonight, that way we’re covered,” and as Murphy began to answer, Pearson seconded Brown’s motion.
Then Murphy asked Brown, “Is the motion to waive the second reading?” and Brown said, “Assuming the second reading was not waived, the motion would be to waive the third reading … the motion would be that this passes tonight — it kicks in for those folks.”
Murphy argued, “I think the motion, then, is to waive the second reading, because we had the third reading tonight. You have to have a third reading in order to vote on it, so it’s a motion to waive the second reading….” and Brown acquiesced.
JPs voice voted unanimously to waive the second reading of Ordinance 21-11, and without further discussion, voted unanimously by roll call to pass the Ordinance.
Ordinance 21-28, Employee “Premium Pay” (ARP Funds)
At Baker’s invitation, Higgins moved to “adopt Ordinance 21-28” and read by title only; Boyer seconded.
Kendrick asked why the Budget & Finance Committee had not changed the Ordinance, as JPs had voted last month to send it back to Committee, saying the amount was “too high.”
Ordinance 21-28 Not on Budget Agenda
Higgins, who sits on the Budget Committee, responded that the Committee was presented “no additional options” and so was “comfortable to send it back to the full Court,” prompting Kendrick to point out
This was not on the [Budget & Finance] Committee agenda … I don’t think it was ever made notice to the JPs that this was going to be a point of discussion … so it would help, if you want discussion and input on that Committee, it’d probably be helpful to put it on the agenda so we know what’s actually on there….
I don’t want to see this voted down; I would like to see our employees get some type of raise….
JP Andy Shock (R, Dist. 10) said,
I think this should be spread out throughout the County employees…. I will absolutely be supporting this Ordinance. I can’t understand why anyone would not support this Ordinance…. I don’t think us helping out our County employees is going to keep us from doing any projects that we may have in the future.
Why Three Readings?
When Kendrick asked why this Ordinance “requires three readings,” Murphy responded
… Any time we have an emergency ordinance or something that goes into effect immediately, it’s always two-thirds … or 9 votes from this Quorum Court in order to pass anything. If it’s not an emergency, then it’s read three times generally….
Allison: Bonus is For “Essential Workers”
When Knight asked, “Any Justice not supporting this… what would it take for you to support it?” Allison explained that “essential workers” putting their “health and safety at risk” were the intended recipients of “premium pay” under the American Rescue Plan.
He moved to amend Ordinance 21-28: “We’ll give a flat $1,000 to everyone who doesn’t fall in that category [of increased risk]” and make essential workers’ bonus up to $5,800, “based on $2 per hour work during the emergency declaration.”
Kendrick seconded, “for discussion.”
Higgins pointed out
… The Rescue Plan Ordinance that’s written takes into account every office within the County and how much time they were exposed or at least potentially exposed to COVID….
If an employee, for instance, in any department was exposed to the public — whether they were handling money, whether they were having to have face-to-face conversations — all of that is … potential exposure and they’re providing an essential service being a government employee.
Keeping the Assessor’s office open, keeping the Sheriff’s office open …all those are essential employees and, as such, they are eligible to receive … premium pay through the Rescue Plan….
When Kendrick suggested sending the Ordinance back again to the Budget & Finance Committee to discuss Allison’s motion, JP Sam Strain (R, Dist. 5) said he agreed.
Strain said he’d done “some research on what … private companies and our corporations in our community have given in the way of bonuses…. The average … is in the neighborhood of $1,500 to $2,000.”
He said none of the constituents he spoke to had actually received such a bonus but said he supported bonuses for County employees, adding
I do believe there’s going to be some backlash from my community … because they were very concerned that the County employees were going to get double what anybody else has gotten….
If you vote on it today, then I’ll vote no. Because I don’t like the way it was brought to the Court in the first place; I think there was some questionable activity going on there.. and I’d like to see something that’s a little more equitable to our taxpayers….
Boyer asked Murphy if an “ordinance can be introduced to the Quorum Court at any time” without it first being “on an agenda,” and when Murphy agreed, Boyer added
I am vehemently opposed to changing the amount …
I will vote no. I will vote no. I will vote no to change this Ordinance.
Returning to Allison’s motion, Murphy said
The issue becomes who’s the first responder … those are very difficult lines and where you draw them becomes incredibly difficult for the executive branch as we try and determine exactly where the risk is …
I would say that presents a difficult task … very similar to the issue we dealt with a month or two ago about ‘an employee in good standing’ in the County and trying to figure out who was in good standing….
As Allison was asked to restate his motion, Pearson drew loud applause from the County employees in the audience when he said
Does that include court personnel? Does that include juvenile probation officers? … I think that’s way too difficult to do … way too difficult to track, and incredibly biased…
“Healthy, Functioning Committees”?
Kendrick observed,
This is why it’s really important to have healthy, functioning committees. I think what we’re seeing right now is, because there was no transparency, nobody knew about the Committee meeting or this being discussed. This is what we get…
Judge “Scolds” Kendrick
When Baker admonished him to “keep your comments to the amendment… Let’s just vote on it. We don’t need a scolding down from somebody for something that didn’t happen….” Kendrick countered, “We got scolded for not showing up to a meeting. We didn’t know they were discussing it, so I think it’s relevant.”
When Higgins said, “…We did have an open discussion in [Budget] Committee,” Kendrick pointed out
But there was no transparency, Justice Higgins. It wasn’t on the agenda. Nobody knew about it. How are we going to show up to discuss it if nobody’s there, if it’s not told that it’s going to be discussed?
When Baker said he’d “call for the question,” Allison’s amendment to award up to $5,800 to “essential personnel” and $1,000 for other employees failed on a 9-3 roll call vote, with Allison, Kendrick, and Strain voting “yes.”
Motion to “Vote Tonight”
Kendrick next called for “a vote on this Ordinance tonight;” however, Murphy opined that taking a vote at this meeting would require a change in the agenda, which would require its own separate motion.
Kendrick commented, “The agenda is not the Ordinance … under the rules, it can be voted on right now. I call the vote,” which developed into a and an extended conversation between Murphy, Baker, and Kendrick about the proper procedure for considering appropriation ordinances.
At one point, Murphy said
… I think the motion came from Justice Higgins to be put on the floor for a first reading, for one of three readings. So if you want to change that motion, then you should make a separate motion, instead of it being three separate readings, to be done in one…
Kendrick asked,
Was that verbatim? … He actually said, “for three readings to put this on the floor”? …I’ll sit here and wait while Margaret goes back and plays the tape….
(NOTE: Higgins’ motion to “adopt Ordinance 21-28” did not mention being “put on the floor for one of three readings,” although the meeting agenda did show “1st reading.”)
After several more minutes, Baker asked Kendrick, “Did you make a motion to call the vote tonight? Did you get a second?” Brown quickly provided a second to Kendrick’s move to call the vote.
Murphy continued to insist that Kendrick’s call for the vote amounted to an agenda change and, at Kendrick’s request for “the rules,” quoted “from page 17” of the Democratic Rules of Order, saying agenda changes must be voted on. It was unclear, however, why Murphy’s point explained the need for an agenda change.
Kendrick then changed his motion to “vote on this (Ordinance 21-28) tonight.”
Brown seconded as Murphy clarified, “The motion is to change the agenda to make Ordinance number 21-28 essentially a final reading of this ordinance….”
He added
If the motion fails, then we’re right back where we started — it’s the first reading and we go back to Justice Allison’s issue, the motion…. If it passes … you would then need to either take Justice Allison’s motion back up or call for the vote.
Responding to a question from Boyer, Murphy explained at one point that Allison’s changes
are not something we can do tonight … would take time from Margaret’s office and likely from the Sheriff’s office as well to delineate which employees will qualify under which section … I think we can talk about Justice Allison’s issue afterwards, after we deal with this first motion…
Meanwhile, Roland received no response when she said
I’m going to suggest … because of the difficulties and the differences of opinions, and the little arguments that we’ve had tonight … we just simplify….
Get an across-the-board bonus of $2,000 or $2,200 or $2,500 to all employees … and then come back in 2022 and talk about essential workers…. Let’s get this off the table and get this done.
Kendrick Amends Motion to “Vote Tonight”
After Murphy quoted from “page 17” of the Democratic Rules of Order, saying agenda changes must be voted on by “the members,” Kendrick changed his motion to “vote on this (Ordinance 21-28) tonight.”
Brown seconded as Murphy clarified, “The motion is to change the agenda to make Ordinance number 21-28 essentially a final reading of this ordinance….”
Several more minutes passed as Boyer tried to clarify the actions being taken, then JPs voice voted 7- 4 to pass Kendrick’s motion to “vote tonight,” with JPs Boyer, Higgins, Pickett, and Shock voting “no” and Pearson voting “present.”
Knight: $3,000 for All Employees?
After County Clerk Margaret Darter, Murphy, and Baker spent several moments discussing the calculations needed to adjust the Ordinance per Allison’s motion, Knight moved to “establish a one-time premium pay of $3,000 for current County employees…”, adding later it would be “for all current employees… taking out hours and risk involved” and “no more pro-rating.” Shock provided the second.
Higgins said, “I don’t think it’s that simple, but I think it’s not as hard, either. We can’t do just this Ordinance and pay everybody out … what I think you’re suggesting is rewording Ordinance 21-28 and 21-29 and change the figure $5,500 to $3,000…”
Murphy explained, “… we’re not allowed to simply give lump sums to employees….”
After several more minutes discussing how much time might be needed to make changes to the Ordinance, Kendrick asked again “Do we need to amend it right now or do we just need to take this back to Committee and give you a month to get the numbers correct?”
Pickett: $5,500 “Not Enough”
When Baker asked to call the roll for a vote, Pickett said
We know where $5,500 came from, how that amount got to be in the Ordinance. Conway County gave $5,200 and our JP from Greenbrier said “we don’t want Conway County to outdo Faulkner County, so let’s raise it to $5,500.” We all agreed.
That drew loud applause from the County employees in the audience, as Pickett continued, “Now, where did the $3,000 come from?”
When Kendrick responded, “A lot of discussion that didn’t take place in the Budget Committee,” Pickett continued, “Fifty-five, in my opinion, $5,500 is not enough,” drawing more loud applause from the audience.
Pickett said, “So, anyway, we have this number, this $5,500 that has some foundation, but the $3,000 is just off the cuff.”
When Strain said, “The $3,000 is a thousand dollars more than the highest bonus I could find in the private sector,” loud disagreement from the audience could be heard. When Baker interrupted Strain, saying, “I’m going to correct you right there,” the audience broke out in loud whoops and applause.
Baker: Loans Were Forgiven
Baker continued
There’s no telling how many loans was loaned within the business communities we’re talking about. And, once they were made, they were forgiven. They were forgiven. That’s a lot of money in different areas. It went into the community. I’m glad it did.
But to talk about that bonus, that loans — nearly every bank in Conway participated in their own program, made the loans. And they were forgiven… I don’t believe they passed the loans on to their employees; I don’t believe the employees received it….
Strain added, “… I’m just telling you that’s what I could find out, that the citizens I talked to, I couldn’t find a single one that got a bonus over $600.”
Although Kendrick moved to “call the vote,” Baker gave the floor to Darter, who emotionally described how County employees “are mandated to be open and provide services to this community,” adding
other employees in the private sector don’t have to have their salary and their name and address put out there on the website, they don’t have to go through what these County employees have to go through, nothing they do is private….
When Kendrick asked this time to “call the vote, please” — accompanied by more applause from the audience — Baker asked for a roll call.
JPs voted 8-5 to pass Knight’s amendment changing the premium pay bonus amount to $3,000 “for all County employees,” with JPs Brown, Higgins, Pearson, and Pickett voting “no.” Murphy then instructed Baker, “If they want to make a motion on the Ordinance itself, time to vote on that.”
JPs then voted 10-2 by roll call to pass Ordinance 21-28, as amended, with JPs Allison and Brown voting “no.”
Ordinance 21-29, Employee “Premium Pay” (CARES Act)
Higgins moved to “approve Ordinance 21-29,” and Lachowsky (R, Dist. 6) provided a second. When Baker prompted, Higgins added “by title only.”
After Murphy read the Ordinance, Higgins said, “We’re looking to see how do we amend the language so that it mirrors 21-28.”
After some moments, Murphy responded,
What we’re going to need to do is go back to 21-28, use the same language there in the preamble in paragraph 1. and 2. and add that to our proposed Ordinance (21-29).
Higgins moved to “amend 21-29 so that it mirrors the intent of 21-28,” and Lachowsky quickly seconded.
Vote on Amendment Out of Order?
At Baker’s request for a roll call, JPs voted 10-2 by roll call to pass Higgins’ amendment, with JPs Allison and Brown voting “no.” When Baker declared, “Proposed Ordinance 21-29 has passed, as amended,” Murphy instructed Baker that
the call for the vote was premature … that should have been a vote for the amendment … to basically include the supplemental information in the preamble from -28 and put that on -29… That was just the amendment. At this point there should be a call….
Baker interrupted, “It’s been moved, and a second to put it on the floor.”
Lachowsky asked, “Do we need to a motion to amend the agenda to make this the final reading on this Ordinance?” and Kendrick quickly seconded.
Amid more confusion, Higgins called for the vote, and JPs voted 10-2 by roll call to make this the final reading, with JPs Allison and Brown voting “no.”
Baker said, “Ordinance 21-29, as amended, does pass but you’ve got to … the amendment passed, and now we’re voting on Amendment 21-29….”
Higgins instructed, “The agenda has been duly changed, and now we have to vote on the final amendment to 21-29…” Baker adds, “that mirrors 21-28….” and says “the floor is now open for discussion on 21-29, as amended….”
JPs voted 9-2 by roll call to pass, with JPs Allison and Brown voting “no” and Shock being out of the room. (Due to the confusion in the meeting and muffled audio, it was unclear whether the vote was another vote for Higgins’ amendment or for the completed, amended Ordinance 21-29.)
Baker said, “I show that Amendment 21-29 does pass,” and Murphy agreed: “Yes, sir.”
As was the case in both the Personnel and Budget & Finance Committee, the following five raise requests for deputy clerks in the various County offices went through the Quorum Court very quickly and with only one question. (Muffled audio made it difficult, in many cases, to determine who called the votes and who seconded the motions.)
Ordinance 21-32, Raise for Assessor’s Deputy Clerk
Pickett moved to “consider proposed Ordinance 21-32 for approval,” and Higgins seconded as Shock returned to the room.
At Baker’s urging, Murphy read the Ordinance by title only.
Lachowsky asked if the County’s annual COLA would “happen on top of this increase” in the chief deputy clerk salaries, and Pickett responded, “No, that would have to be decided at budget…” and Higgins said, “in the past what we have done is exclude those from the COLA….”
At the end of the meeting, Lachowsky pointed out that Ordinance 21-33 says “this position will still receive a cost of living adjustment (at the end of the year) in addition to this raise,” and suggested, “that’s something we could go back and amend in Budget & Finance whenever the time comes….”
Allison said, “… The employees do deserve raises … I prefer to see the growth in government come from economic growth by good, fiscally sound fiscal plans and management….”
When Pickett said, “Call the question,” Baker asked for a roll call vote and Ordinance 21-32 passed unanimously with no further discussion.
Ordinance 21-33, Raise for Circuit Clerk’s Deputy Clerk
Higgins moved to “approve proposed Ordinance 21-33 and read by title only,” with Kendrick providing the second.
With no discussion, the vote was called and JPs voted unanimously by roll call to approve the Ordinance.
Ordinance 21-34, Raise for County Clerk’s Chief Deputy
Higgins moved to “approve proposed Ordinance 21-34 and read by title only,” and Allison seconded.
When the question was called, JPs and Baker were looking over at Murphy; however, it was unclear what was being said.
Murphy then noted that the approved date on the Ordinance would need to be changed to October 19, 2021; after asking the Court and getting no dissent, Baker pronounced the change approved “by common consent.”
At Baker’s request for a roll call vote, JPs voted 11-0 to approve Ordinance 21-34, with Pearson not voting.
Ordinance 21-35, Raise for County Treasurer’s Chief Deputy
Higgins moved to approve Ordinance 21-35 and read by title only, and Allison again seconded. As before, the vote was called and JPs voted unanimously by roll call to approve the Ordinance.
Ordinance 21-36, Raise for County Tax Collector’s Chief Deputy
Higgins moved to approve Ordinance 21-36 and read by title only, and the second was Allison. The vote was called and JPs voted unanimously by roll call to approve the Ordinance.
Ordinance 21-37, Appropriations
Higgins moved to “approve Ordinance 21-37 and read by title only,” and Shock seconded this monthly appropriations Ordinance.
OEM Director Sheila Bellot explained that the $52,181 Homeland Security grant in Section 1 and after Higgins called the vote, JPs voted unanimously by roll call to approve the Ordinance.
Announcements
Allison said the Veterans Museum in Vilonia is sponsoring a program on November 6 at 11:30 am, and Faulkner County Election Commissioner Rene Henderson announced an Election Commission meeting for October 13 to discuss redistricting maps for JPs. After Baker commented on the County-wide clean-up “last weekend,” he 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.
