HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-13-2016 Item 15, IronsCity Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Consideration of Settlement Agreement Page 2
the City and its public safety associations, SLOPOA and the International Association of Fire
Fighters, Local 3523 (SLO City Fire Union).
Following the August 2011 special election in which both measures were overwhelmingly
approved by City voters, the SLOPOA filed an unfair labor practices complaint against the City
with PERB alleging that the City failed to meet and confer in good faith with SLOPOA prior to
calling the election and placing the measures before the voters; the City denied that it committed
any unfair practice and asserted its compliance with the law and the validity of the election results.
Ultimately, the charges proceeded through full administrative hearing before a PERB
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), who ruled that the City had violated applicable labor laws by
failing to “meet and consult” with SLOPOA prior to placing the measures on the ballot. The City
filed an appeal of the ALJ’s decision, both parties fully briefed their positions for submission to
the PERB Board, and the appeal has been awaiting hearing and decision before the PERB Board
since 2014.
One reason for delay likely is the fact that a case presenting similar issues, although with
significant factual distinctions, which was decided by the PERB ALJ and full Board several
months prior to the City’s, has been making its way through the California Court of Appeal (City
of Palo Alto v. Public Employment Relations Board (International Association of Firefighters,
Local 1319, Real Party in Interest). That case has now been decided by the Court of Appeal,
generally against the City of Palo Alto, but has been remanded to PERB for further review of its
remedy order. The Court of Appeal held that PERB exceeded its jurisdiction and violated
constitutional separation of powers doctrine by ordering the City Council to rescind its resolution
placing a binding arbitration repeal measure before City voters. However, the Court also held that
PERB does have the authority to void the Council’s legislative act and staff anticipates that PERB
will simply amend its decision on remand to reflect that remedy, with the result of the decision
being practically the same.
Once PERB acts on the remand order in the case, the City of Palo Alto will have to evaluate
whether it will pursue additional appeals and/or seek Supreme Court review of the Court of Appeal
decision. Whatever happens in the Palo Alto case, it is unlikely that the case will result in absolute
clarity in predicting the outcome in SLO’s case because the determination of whether an unfair
practice has been committed is a fact intensive analysis and there are important factual distinctions
that we would argue warrant a different result in SLO’s case. What is likely is that there won’t be
finality or certainty in the City of Palo Alto case any time in the near future and that, no matter the
outcome in that case, SLO can anticipate a similarly lengthy, contentious and risky court outcome
if the current litigation proceeds along the same path Palo Alto’s case has followed.
In the midst of this evolving factual and legal background over the last couple of years, the
SLOPOA elected new leadership and retained new legal counsel. Under that new leadership,
SLOPOA approached the City over a year ago with an invitation to open discussions about a
potential resolution to the currently pending action and the Council authorized staff to engage in
settlement discussions. Over several months, City staff and SLOPOA leadership and membership
have negotiated a tentative settlement that staff is now recommending the Council approve. The
Settlement includes a financial component given the significant time and resources the SLOPOA
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Consideration of Settlement Agreement Page 3
has invested in the PERB action and in working with the City, the fact that by settling this issue
the City will be avoiding further legal costs that could far exceed the settlement number, and that
the mutually developed dispute resolution process provides the parties more clarity than the
existing process under Resolution 6620 and AB646, while retaining “local control” of impasse
resolution decisions.
The Proposed Settlement
The general terms of the recommended settlement are summarized below:
Financial: City will pay SLOPOA $150,000.
Dismissal of Action and waiver of right to future action: The SLOPOA will dismiss the
pending PERB action with prejudice and agree not to bring, fund or support any future
action, including but not limited to any quo warranto action challenging the Charter
amendments or election results and the City will withdraw its appeal before the PERB
Board.
Dispute Resolution Process: The City and SLOPOA agree to modify the current process
provided in Resolution 6620 for dispute/impasse resolution (as to the SLOPOA only) and
replace it with a modified dispute resolution process that includes the following:
1. Fact Finder. Any dispute subject to the process will first be
submitted to a fact finder, which will be chosen via a strike process
from a list of pre-approved fact finders on which the parties will
mutually agree in advance. The fact finder’s decision will be a
recommendation to the Council.
2. Final Authority. Any final decision, adopting, modifying or
rejecting the factfinder’s recommendations will be within the
ultimate discretion of the Council majority, subject to subsequent
judicial review rights provided in the new dispute resolution
process.
3. Findings. The Council must review the factfinder’s
recommendation at a public meeting and, either adopt the findings
and recommendations of the factfinder favorable to the association
or make written findings of fact as to why it is opting to modify or
reject a factfinder’s recommendation and/or to impose its last best
and final offer contrary to the factfinder’s recommendation.
4. Legal Standard. The legal standard applicable to Council’s
findings in support of any action to reject favorable factfinder
recommendations or unilaterally impose will be “preponderance
of the evidence.” In other words, the Council’s findings to reject
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Consideration of Settlement Agreement Page 4
or modify a recommendation favorable to the association or to
unilaterally impose less favorable terms and conditions would
need to be supported by the preponderance of the evidence in the
record, including evidence and testimony provided via the public
hearing.
5. Writ Review. In the event the association does not agree with the
Council’s final action resulting in terms and conditions less
favorable to the association than those recommended by the
factfinder, the association will have the right to challenge the
Council’s action by writ, providing for judicial review of final
administrative actions (or in the event that the Council refused to
act in accordance with the agreed upon process, a writ to compel
Council’s compliance). The final decision for judicial review
purposes would be the final action taken by the Council.
6. Process Modifications: The agreed upon dispute resolution
process can be modified only through the “meet and confer”
process, including submitting any unresolved disputes regarding
proposed modifications to the existing process. This differs from
the otherwise applicable statutory requirement that the Council
“meet and consult” with labor groups over changes to dispute
resolution processes, which does not necessarily require
agreement and does not mandate any further actions in the event
agreement cannot be reached.
These general terms have been fleshed out and memorialized in a dispute resolution process to be
amended into Resolution 6620, a legislative draft of which and the proposed resolution adopting
the process are attached to this report. The settlement with SLOPOA does not achieve absolute
certainty that a third party, including the SLO City Fire Union, which has recently sought to
intervene in the longstanding action, could not bring a subsequent challenge to the City’s Charter
election. However, staff believes the settlement forecloses the most significant risk of a legitimate
challenge. Staff also believes that the SLOPOA’s leadership in re-opening discussion of this
matter represents a significant positive new chapter in City/SLOPOA labor relations and that the
agreement achieves a desirable clarification and certainty in the dispute resolution process between
the parties that ensures there will not be a return to binding arbitration as the dispute resolution
process between the City and the SLOPOA.
CONCURRENCES
The Police Chief concurs with this recommendation and the tentative agreement outlined has been
approved by a majority vote of the SLOPOA membership.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Consideration of Settlement Agreement Page 5
It can be seen with certainty that the recommended action will not result in any adverse
environmental impacts for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore,
no environmental review is required.
FISCAL IMPACT
The agreement will result in a one-time $150,000 expenditure to SLOPOA from the general fund.
Staff believes that the settlement will result in the avoidance of legal costs that could significantly
exceed the recommended settlement amount.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Council could reject the tentative settlement. This alternative is not recommended
because the recommended settlement is consistent with tentative agreements authorized by
the Council throughout an iterative negotiations process over the period of several months
and would result in the City incurring significant ongoing legal fees and continuing to face
risks to the finality and certainty.
2. The Council could provide direction to staff to pursue different terms of settlement. Again,
this alternative is not recommended for the reasons discussed above.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
2. Draft Resolution modifying existing Resolution 6620 (1989 Series)
3. Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
4. For Reference – Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
File path
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This is a settlement agreement between the San Luis Obispo Police Officers’
Association (SLOPOA) and the City of San Luis Obispo (City). SLOPOA and the City
are parties to an unfair practice charge (LA-CE-729-M) in which SLOPOA has alleged
that the City violated the Meyers Milias Brown Act by placing certain ballot measures
before the voters prior to completion of statutory negotiations requirements. The City
denies that it has engaged in any wrongdoing.
In the interest of promoting harmonious labor relations between the parties,
achieving finality in the local elections process that was the subject of Unfair Practice
Charge No. LA-CE-729-M, reaching agreement in the applicable procedures for the
resolution of labor disputes between the parties, and to avoid the uncertainty,
inconvenience, and expense of continued litigation, SLOPOA and the City agree to
resolve the above-captioned unfair practice charge before PERB as follows:
1. SLOPOA hereby withdraws with prejudice its unfair practice charge based
on the following understanding:
a. City will withdraw its appeal pending before the Public
Employment Relations Board.
b. City will pay SLOPOA $150,000.00 within 30 days of dismissal
of Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CE-729-M.
c. SLOPOA will not bring, participate in, fund or support any other
or future legal or administrative action, including but not limited
to any quo warranto action, challenging or otherwise seeking to
modify or invalidate the City Charter amendments or election
results that are the subject of Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CE-
729-M.
d. The Parties agree to take all steps necessary to implement the
dispute resolution process (applicable as to SLOPOA only)
attached hereto as Exhibit A as the exclusive process by which to
resolve disputes between the parties as outlined in Exhibit A,
effective immediately upon dismissal of Unfair Practice Charge
No. LA-CE-729-M.
2. This Settlement Agreement does not constitute an admission of wrongdoing,
contract or statutory violation, or liability on the part of any party to this agreement. In
addition, neither party is waiving the merits of any claims or positions it has taken in
this matter.
3. This Settlement Agreement represents a full and complete resolution of the
claims and disputes between the parties based upon the above-referenced matter and
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 1
Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
Page 1
shall be binding upon the parties, their members, officials, representatives, represented
parties and their successors.
4. The undersigned parties represent that they have read and understand the
terms of this settlement and that they are authorized to execute this Settlement
Agreement on behalf of themselves and their principals.
5. This Agreement will become effective upon the signing of this
Agreement by both parties, any action by the City Council necessary to implement the
terms of this agreement, SLOPOA’s submittal to PERB of a request of withdrawal of
its unfair practice charge and PERB’s dismissal of the action.
For SLOPOA: For City of San Luis Obispo:
______________________ ___________________________
______________________ ___________________________
Date Date
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 1
Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
Page 2
Exhibit A to
Settlement Agreement between SLOPOA and City of San Luis Obispo
Remove reference to SLOPOA in Section 13.2 of Resolution 6620; amend 6620 to include new
section 13.3 to apply only to SLOPOA and to read as follows:
13.3 Dispute Resolution Procedures for the San Luis Obispo Police Officers’ Association
(SLOPOA) Only
A. It is the intent of the City and the SLOPOA that resolution of disputes on matters within the
scope of representation as defined in California Government Code Section 3504 shall be
resolved in the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 3505 through 3505.7 (as those
sections subsequently may be amended) and as further provided in this section. To the extent
that this section is silent as to procedural matters addressed in the Government Code, the
provisions of the Government Code shall be deemed to apply. Otherwise, the express terms of
this section shall govern.
B. Selection of Neutral Factfinder.
(1) Within a reasonable time following the adoption of this section, the City and the
SLOPOA shall consult with one another to agree upon a list of no fewer than 7
acceptable and reasonably available factfinders from which the neutral factfinder will be
chosen.
(2) Any party may request to review and revise the list one time per calendar year after initial
agreement on the list or as otherwise necessary to maintain the requisite number of
acceptable and available factfinders. The list shall only be revised by mutual consent of
the parties.
(3) The neutral factfinder shall be selected from the predetermined list via an alternating
strike process as follows:
(a) The parties will determine either through mutual agreement or by coin toss which
of the parties will strike first and that party will select one name to strike from the
list.
(b) The second party will then strike a name from the list.
(c) The parties will continue with alternating strikes from the list until only one name
remains.
(d) The remaining factfinder will be contacted no later than two business days
following the selection and requested to serve as the neutral factfinder.
(e) If the selected neutral is unavailable, the name shall be removed from the list and
the strike process shall be repeated until an available neutral can be retained. For
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 1
Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
Page 3
purposes of this section, the selected neutral will be deemed “unavailable” if s/he
is not able to begin hearings within 45 days of the date the request to serve as the
neutral factfinder is made.
(f) The parties may mutually agree to a factfinder from the list without going through
steps a-e above.
C. Procedures For The Factfinding Hearing
(1) The SLOPOA may request that the parties' differences be submitted to a factfinding not
later than 30 calendar days following the date that either party provided the other with a
written notice of a declaration of impasse. Within five days after receipt of the written
request, each party shall select a person to serve as the factfinder in accordance with
section B above.
(2) Once selected, the factfinder shall, as soon as reasonably possible, based upon the
schedules of the parties and the factfinder, hold a hearing on the issues in dispute in the
impasse. In no event shall the hearing take place more than 30 calendar days from the
selection of the factfinder by the parties except by mutual agreement of the parties. For
the purpose of the hearing, the factfinder shall have the power to issue subpoenas
requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of evidence.
(3) Ten calendar days prior to the hearing the parties shall either jointly or separately submit
a statement to the factfinder listing the issue(s) in dispute identifying the proponent of the
issue(s) in dispute.
(4) In arriving at their findings and recommendations, the factfinder shall consider, weigh,
and be guided by all the following criteria:
(a) State and federal laws that are applicable to the employer.
(b) Local rules, regulations, or ordinances.
(c) Stipulations of the parties.
(d) The interests and welfare of the public and the financial ability of the public
agency.
(e) A Comparison of the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of the
employees involved in the factfinding proceeding with the wages, hours, and
conditions of employment of other employees performing similar services in
comparable public agencies.
(f) The consumer price index for goods and services, commonly known as the cost of
living.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 1
Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
Page 4
(g) The overall compensation presently received by the employees, including direct
wage compensation, vacations, holidays, and other excused time, insurance and
pensions, medical and hospitalization benefits, the continuity and stability of
employment, and all other benefits received.
(h) Any other facts, not confined to those specified in paragraphs (a) to (g), inclusive,
which are normally or traditionally taken into consideration in making the
findings and recommendations.
(5) If the dispute is not settled within 30 calendar days after the appointment of the
factfinder, or, upon agreement by both parties within a longer period, the factfinder shall
make findings of fact and recommend terms of settlement, which shall be advisory only.
The factfinder shall submit, in writing, any findings of fact and recommended terms of
settlement to the parties before they are made available to the public. The public agency
shall make these findings and recommendations publicly available within 10 days after
their receipt.
(6) The costs for the services of the factfinder selected by the parties, including per diem
fees, if any, and actual and necessary travel and subsistence expenses, shall be equally
divided between the parties.
(7) The costs for the services of the factfinder agreed upon by the parties shall be equally
divided between the parties, and shall include per diem fees, if any, and actual and
necessary travel and subsistence expenses. The per diem fees shall not exceed the per
diem fees stated on the factfinder's résumé submitted to the parties. The factfinder's bill
showing the amount payable by the parties shall accompany his or her final report to the
parties and the board. The factfinder may submit interim bills to the parties in the course
of the proceedings. The parties shall make payment directly to the factfinder.
(8) Any other mutually incurred costs shall be borne equally by the public agency and the
employee organization. Any separately incurred costs shall be borne by that party.
(9) After these factfinding procedures have been exhausted, but no earlier than 10 days after
the factfinders' written findings of fact and recommended terms of settlement have been
submitted to the parties pursuant to Section 5 above, the Council shall proceed as set
forth in Sections D. et seq below.
D. Council Procedures Following Factfinding
(1) If the parties remain at impasse after conclusion of the factfinding proceeding, as set forth
in Government Code Section 3505.7, the Council shall hold the public hearing required
by that section not earlier than 10 calendar days and not later than 60 calendar days
following the factfinder’s written findings and recommended terms of settlement have
been submitted to the parties.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 1
Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
Page 5
(2) At the public meeting, the Council shall review the findings and recommendations
submitted by the factfinder, the available information in the record presented to the
factfinder, and any other testimony or relevant information that may be submitted to the
Council by the parties or any other interested person(s) prior to the conclusion of the
public hearing. The format of the public hearing for purposes of this section shall not be
evidentiary or adversarial in nature, but shall follow City standard procedures for Council
public hearing items.
(3) Following the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council by majority vote may either
adopt, modify or reject, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendation of the
factfinder and/or the Council may implement its last best and final offer, if inconsistent
with the factfinder’s recommendation, after following the procedures set forth in section
4 below. If the factfinder’s recommendations are consistent with the City’s last, best and
final offer, the Council may implement its last, best and final offer without additional
findings otherwise required herein.
(a) The Council shall take final action no later than 30 calendar days following the
conclusion of the public hearing, but may do so at the same meeting during which
the public hearing is conducted or at any time prior to said 30-day limit.
(4) The factfinder’s findings and recommendations for settlement shall be entitled to a
presumption of correctness, unless rebutted as follows:
(a) If the Council opts to modify or reject any finding or recommended term of
settlement favorable to the association and/or to implement its last best and final
offer, the Council shall adopt written findings of fact, supported by a
preponderance of the evidence presented in the record, in support of its final
action. Said written findings of fact by the Council shall be sufficient to show the
Council’s reasoning for any such rejection and/or modification with specific
citations to the record. The written findings shall be supported by a preponderance
of the evidence and the Council’s conclusions shall be supported by its findings.
(b) Within 10 calendar days after submission of the factfinder’s findings and
recommendations to the parties, the SLOPOA shall identify in writing to the City
each factfinder’s “finding or recommended term of settlement” that it deems
“favorable to the SLOPOA” for purposes of this section.
(c) The Council may adopt any finding or recommendation of the factfinder without
requirement of further findings of fact, other than as specifically required by this
section.
(5) Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit, modify or preclude Council’s otherwise
applicable rights to meet in closed session under labor relations provisions of the Brown
Act, so long as no final action set forth herein is taken prior to the required public
hearing.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 1
Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
Page 6
E. Judicial Review
(1) The parties agree that this ordinance requires a hearing at which evidence/testimony is
required to be taken and discretion in the determination of facts is vested in the
Council. The City shall not assert any position that is contrary to the terms of this
resolution including, but not limited to, any position that asserts that a court lacks
jurisdiction under either CCP Sections 1094.5 or 1085.
(2) No later than 45 calendar days following the Council’s final action to modify or reject the
factfinder’s findings or recommendations favorable to the SLOPOA and/or to implement
its last best and final offer, the parties agree that the SLOPOA may seek review of the
Council’s final action by filing a writ petition in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo
County pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5 and/or Section 1085
depending upon the issues submitted for review. The record for review shall include all
evidence presented through the conclusion of the public hearing.
(3) In the event the Council fails to take final action as required herein following the
conclusion of a factfinding proceeding, the parties agree that the SLOPOA, within 30
calendar days following the date on which the Council would otherwise have been
required to take final action, may compel the Council’s final action pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1085.
F. Process Modifications: Unless otherwise mutually agreed between the parties in writing, the
dispute resolution process provided herein shall constitute the exclusive means of impasse
resolution between the City and the SLOPOA as contemplated by Government Code Section
3507(a)(5) (or as it subsequently may be amended) and may be modified only through the meet
and confer process provided in Government Code Section 3505 (or as it subsequently may be
amended), including submitting any unresolved disputes regarding proposed modifications to
this process. The parties may modify any of the procedures set forth herein as they may deem
convenient by mutual written agreement.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 1
Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
Page 7
DRAFT
Members
Public Employment Relations Board
1031 18th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
Re: San Luis Obispo Police Officers’ Association and the City of San Luis Obispo
PERB Case No. LA-CE-729-M
Dear Board Members:
The San Luis Obispo Police Officers’ Association (SLOPOA) and the City of San Luis
Obispo (City) have reached a settlement in the above-referenced matter. A copy of that
settlement is attached for your records. The parties request that this matter be dismissed;
Respondent City withdraws its appeal with prejudice and Charging Party SLOPOA withdraws its
unfair practice charge with prejudice.
This case involves modifications to an impasse procedure. The procedures for resolution
of bargaining disputes are governed by Government Code section 3507(a)(5). Since the focus of
Govt. Code section 3507 is the establishment of locally developed rules governing such issues as
the impasse process, and the parties here have been able to agree upon a process that best meets
their needs in the collective bargaining process, the parties believe that the purposes of the
MMBA are best served by granting the requested withdrawal of this case (City of Lompoc (2013)
PERB Decision No. 2328-M [withdrawal appropriate where resolution is consistent with the
MMBA’s goal of promoting harmonious labor relations].)
If you have any questions regarding the above please do not hesitate to contact either of
us listed below.
Dated: December __, 2016 Dated: December __, 2016
____________________________ ______________________________
Christine Dietrick, City Attorney Stuart Adams, Attorney
Respondent City of San Luis Obispo Charging Party San Luis Obispo
Police Officers’ Association
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 1
Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
Page 8
cc: Bruce Barsook/Che Johnson
Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Monica Irons, Human Resources Director
_________, President SLOPOA
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 1
Proposed Settlement Agreement and draft letter to PERB
Page 9
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2016 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION 6620 (1989 SERIES)
TO ESTABLISH A NEW DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS
APPLICABLE ONLY TO THE SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE OFFICERS
ASSOCIATION
WHEREAS, the resolution of labor disputes between the City and the San Luis Obispo
Police Officers Association (SLOPOA) is currently governed by Resolution 6620 (1989 Series);
and
WHEREAS, SLOPOA and the City are parties to an Unfair Practice Charge, LA-CE-729-
M, pending before the Public Employment Relations Board in which SLOPOA has alleged that
the City violated the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act by placing certain ballot measures before the
voters prior to completion of statutory negotiations requirements and in which the City has denied
those allegations; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that approving a settlement agreement in the pending action
furthers the City’s interests of: promoting harmonious labor relations between the parties;
achieving greater certainty in the results of the local elections outcome that was the subject of
Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CE-729-M; clarifying and reaching agreement on the applicable
procedures for the resolution of labor disputes between the parties; and avoiding the uncertainty,
inconvenience, and expense of continued litigation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Amendment of Section 13.2 of Resolution 6620 (1989 Series). Section 13.2
of Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) is hereby amended to delete reference to “SLOPOA,” thereby
making the section inapplicable to SLOPOA, but leaving those provisions otherwise intact and
continuing in their application only to IAFF Local 3523.
SECTION 2. Add New Section 13.3. Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) is hereby amended
to add new Section 13.3 establishing a new dispute resolution process applicable only to
SLOPOA to read as follows:
13.3 Dispute Resolution Procedures for the San Luis Obispo Police Officers’ Association
(SLOPOA) Only
A. It is the intent of the City and the SLOPOA that resolution of disputes on matters within the
scope of representation as defined in California Government Code Section 3504 shall be
resolved in the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 3505 through 3505.7 (as those
sections subsequently may be amended) and as further provided in this section. To the extent
that this section is silent as to procedural matters addressed in the Government Code, the
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
Draft Resolution modifying existing Resolution 6620 (1989 Series)
Page 1
provisions of the Government Code shall be deemed to apply. Otherwise, the express terms of
this section shall govern.
B. Selection of Neutral Factfinder.
(1) Within a reasonable time following the adoption of this section, the City and the
SLOPOA shall consult with one another to agree upon a list of no fewer than 7
acceptable and reasonably available factfinders from which the neutral factfinder will be
chosen.
(2) Any party may request to review and revise the list one time per calendar year after initial
agreement on the list or as otherwise necessary to maintain the requisite number of
acceptable and available factfinders. The list shall only be revised by mutual consent of
the parties.
(3) The neutral factfinder shall be selected from the predetermined list via an alternating
strike process as follows:
(a) The parties will determine either through mutual agreement or by coin toss which
of the parties will strike first and that party will select one name to strike from the
list.
(b) The second party will then strike a name from the list.
(c) The parties will continue with alternating strikes from the list until only one name
remains.
(d) The remaining factfinder will be contacted no later than two business days
following the selection and requested to serve as the neutral factfinder.
(e) If the selected neutral is unavailable, the name shall be removed from the list and
the strike process shall be repeated until an available neutral can be retained. For
purposes of this section, the selected neutral will be deemed “unavailable” if s/he
is not able to begin hearings within 45 days of the date the request to serve as the
neutral factfinder is made.
(f) The parties may mutually agree to a factfinder from the list without going through
steps a-e above.
C. Procedures For The Factfinding Hearing
(1) The SLOPOA may request that the parties' differences be submitted to a factfinding not
later than 30 calendar days following the date that either party provided the other with a
written notice of a declaration of impasse. Within five days after receipt of the written
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
Draft Resolution modifying existing Resolution 6620 (1989 Series)
Page 2
request, each party shall select a person to serve as the factfinder in accordance with
section B above.
(2) Once selected, the factfinder shall, as soon as reasonably possible, based upon the
schedules of the parties and the factfinder, hold a hearing on the issues in dispute in the
impasse. In no event shall the hearing take place more than 30 calendar days from the
selection of the factfinder by the parties except by mutual agreement of the parties. For
the purpose of the hearing, the factfinder shall have the power to issue subpoenas
requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of evidence.
(3) Ten calendar days prior to the hearing the parties shall either jointly or separately submit
a statement to the factfinder listing the issue(s) in dispute identifying the proponent of the
issue(s) in dispute.
(4) In arriving at their findings and recommendations, the factfinder shall consider, weigh,
and be guided by all the following criteria:
(a) State and federal laws that are applicable to the employer.
(b) Local rules, regulations, or ordinances.
(c) Stipulations of the parties.
(d) The interests and welfare of the public and the financial ability of the public
agency.
(e) A Comparison of the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of the
employees involved in the factfinding proceeding with the wages, hours, and
conditions of employment of other employees performing similar services in
comparable public agencies.
(f) The consumer price index for goods and services, commonly known as the cost of
living.
(g) The overall compensation presently received by the employees, including direct
wage compensation, vacations, holidays, and other excused time, insurance and
pensions, medical and hospitalization benefits, the continuity and stability of
employment, and all other benefits received.
(h) Any other facts, not confined to those specified in paragraphs (a) to (g), inclusive,
which are normally or traditionally taken into consideration in making the
findings and recommendations.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
Draft Resolution modifying existing Resolution 6620 (1989 Series)
Page 3
(5) If the dispute is not settled within 30 calendar days after the appointment of the
factfinder, or, upon agreement by both parties within a longer period, the factfinder shall
make findings of fact and recommend terms of settlement, which shall be advisory only.
The factfinder shall submit, in writing, any findings of fact and recommended terms of
settlement to the parties before they are made available to the public. The public agency
shall make these findings and recommendations publicly available within 10 days after
their receipt.
(6) The costs for the services of the factfinder selected by the parties, including per diem
fees, if any, and actual and necessary travel and subsistence expenses, shall be equally
divided between the parties.
(7) The costs for the services of the factfinder agreed upon by the parties shall be equally
divided between the parties, and shall include per diem fees, if any, and actual and
necessary travel and subsistence expenses. The per diem fees shall not exceed the per
diem fees stated on the factfinder's résumé submitted to the parties. The factfinder's bill
showing the amount payable by the parties shall accompany his or her final report to the
parties and the board. The factfinder may submit interim bills to the parties in the course
of the proceedings. The parties shall make payment directly to the factfinder.
(8) Any other mutually incurred costs shall be borne equally by the public agency and the
employee organization. Any separately incurred costs shall be borne by that party.
(9) After these factfinding procedures have been exhausted, but no earlier than 10 days after
the factfinders' written findings of fact and recommended terms of settlement have been
submitted to the parties pursuant to Section 5 above, the Council shall proceed as set
forth in Sections D. et seq below.
D. Council Procedures Following Factfinding
(1) If the parties remain at impasse after conclusion of the factfinding proceeding, as set forth
in Government Code Section 3505.7, the Council shall hold the public hearing required
by that section not earlier than 10 calendar days and not later than 60 calendar days
following the factfinder’s written findings and recommended terms of settlement have
been submitted to the parties.
(2) At the public meeting, the Council shall review the findings and recommendations
submitted by the factfinder, the available information in the record presented to the
factfinder, and any other testimony or relevant information that may be submitted to the
Council by the parties or any other interested person(s) prior to the conclusion of the
public hearing. The format of the public hearing for purposes of this section shall not be
evidentiary or adversarial in nature, but shall follow City standard procedures for Council
public hearing items.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
Draft Resolution modifying existing Resolution 6620 (1989 Series)
Page 4
(3) Following the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council by majority vote may either
adopt, modify or reject, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendation of the
factfinder and/or the Council may implement its last best and final offer, if inconsistent
with the factfinder’s recommendation, after following the procedures set forth in section
4 below. If the factfinder’s recommendations are consistent with the City’s last, best and
final offer, the Council may implement its last, best and final offer without additional
findings otherwise required herein.
(a) The Council shall take final action no later than 30 calendar days following the
conclusion of the public hearing, but may do so at the same meeting during which
the public hearing is conducted or at any time prior to said 30-day limit.
(4) The factfinder’s findings and recommendations for settlement shall be entitled to a
presumption of correctness, unless rebutted as follows:
(a) If the Council opts to modify or reject any finding or recommended term of
settlement favorable to the association and/or to implement its last best and final
offer, the Council shall adopt written findings of fact, supported by a
preponderance of the evidence presented in the record, in support of its final
action. Said written findings of fact by the Council shall be sufficient to show the
Council’s reasoning for any such rejection and/or modification with specific
citations to the record. The written findings shall be supported by a preponderance
of the evidence and the Council’s conclusions shall be supported by its findings.
(b) Within 10 calendar days after submission of the factfinder’s findings and
recommendations to the parties, the SLOPOA shall identify in writing to the City
each factfinder’s “finding or recommended term of settlement” that it deems
“favorable to the SLOPOA” for purposes of this section.
(c) The Council may adopt any finding or recommendation of the factfinder without
requirement of further findings of fact, other than as specifically required by this
section.
(5) Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit, modify or preclude Council’s otherwise
applicable rights to meet in closed session under labor relations provisions of the Brown
Act, so long as no final action set forth herein is taken prior to the required public
hearing.
E. Judicial Review
(1) The parties agree that this ordinance requires a hearing at which evidence/testimony is
required to be taken and discretion in the determination of facts is vested in the
Council. The City shall not assert any position that is contrary to the terms of this
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
Draft Resolution modifying existing Resolution 6620 (1989 Series)
Page 5
resolution including, but not limited to, any position that asserts that a court lacks
jurisdiction under either CCP Sections 1094.5 or 1085.
(2) No later than 45 calendar days following the Council’s final action to modify or reject the
factfinder’s findings or recommendations favorable to the SLOPOA and/or to implement
its last best and final offer, the parties agree that the SLOPOA may seek review of the
Council’s final action by filing a writ petition in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo
County pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5 and/or Section 1085
depending upon the issues submitted for review. The record for review shall include all
evidence presented through the conclusion of the public hearing.
(3) In the event the Council fails to take final action as required herein following the
conclusion of a factfinding proceeding, the parties agree that the SLOPOA, within 30
calendar days following the date on which the Council would otherwise have been
required to take final action, may compel the Council’s final action pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1085.
F. Process Modifications: Unless otherwise mutually agreed between the parties in writing, the
dispute resolution process provided herein shall constitute the exclusive means of impasse
resolution between the City and the SLOPOA as contemplated by Government Code Section
3507(a)(5) (or as it subsequently may be amended) and may be modified only through the meet
and confer process provided in Government Code Section 3505 (or as it subsequently may be
amended), including submitting any unresolved disputes regarding proposed modifications to
this process. The parties may modify any of the procedures set forth herein as they may deem
convenient by mutual written agreement.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon dismissal in its
entirety of Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CE-729-M by PERB and execution by the parties of
the settlement agreement in that matter. In the event PERB declines to dismiss the action in its
entirety, this resolution shall not take effect.
SECTION 4. Resolution Number 6620 (1989 Series) is hereby amended as set forth
herein and superseded to the extent inconsistent herewith.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2016.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
Draft Resolution modifying existing Resolution 6620 (1989 Series)
Page 6
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Carrie Gallagher
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
Draft Resolution modifying existing Resolution 6620 (1989 Series)
Page 7
Redline version of City of San Luis Obispo Resolution No. 6620 (1989 SERIES) Section 13.2
Original text here is a transcription of Section 13.2 with “(-#-)” indicating pagination in the original
printing. Any perceived typos most likely exist in the original including the omission of sub-section #6
under 13.2(G):
SECTION 13.2 REACHING AGREEMENT (only applies to SLOPOA and SLOFA)
A. Statement of Intent
It is the intent that:
(1) Employee Organizations and City representatives comply with the State law (Meyers-
Milias-Brown Act) requiring City and Employee Organization representatives to
“meet-and-confer in good faith” and to meet as necessary to present respective
positions, to resolve differences and to reach agreement (Memorandum of
Agreement).
(2) The substance and progress of the meet-and-confer process and other resolution
measures be transmitted by City and Employee Organization representatives to,
respectively, the City Council and the Board of Directors and the membership of the
Employee Organizations.
(3) Agreement be reached through the meet-and-confer process, and that other resolution
measures be used only after giving every reasonable opportunity for resolution
through meet-and-confer process.
(4) Each successive stage of this process for reaching agreement be given a full and
honest opportunity to resolve differences and to produce agreement and, failing that,
to reduce the scope and number of issues which would be referred on to the next
stage, and (-15-) further, that each successive stage only deal with issues not resolved
by the meet-and-confer process or by earlier stages in the procedure.
(5) Agreement be reached in the minimum time and that time limits be rigorously
adhered to, except that any time limit in this resolution may be extended by mutual
consent, in writing when the prospect for timely agreement would be enhanced by
such an extension.
(6) The content and substance of the meet-and-confer process and other resolution
measures remain private and confidential, except as provided in this resolution.
B. Request for Mediation
Mediation may be requested only after the possibility of settlement by direct discussion
has been exhausted. If so mediation may be requested in either of two ways:
(1) By mutual agreement of both parties in the negotiations. Each party shall provide to
the other a list of all points of disagreement, and their position on each of the points.
Meeting shall then be scheduled promptly with the Employee Relations Officer (City
Administrative Officer).
(2) By providing written Notice of Intent (“Notice”) to request mediation. Such notice
shall include a list of all points of disagreement and the amendments proposed to
resolve the disagreements. The party receiving the Notice shall have one 10-day
period to change its position on any points of disagreement. If notice of change is not
received within the 10 (-16-) days or if any issue(s) remains unresolved, a meeting
shall then be scheduled promptly with the Employee Relations Officer.
C. Meeting with Employee Relations Officer (ERO)
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 3
Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
Page 1
(1) The ERO shall convene a meeting between the chief negotiator for the employee
organization, one other representative of the employee organization, the ERO and one
other representative of the City:
(A) To review the position of the parties in a final effort to reach agreement or reduce
the points of disagreement, and
(B) If agreement is not reached, to make arrangements for the utilization of the
mediation procedures provided herein.
D. Mediation
Following the meeting with ERO, only the disputed issues shall be submitted to
mediation. The mediator shall be selected from the State Mediation and Conciliation
Service by mutual consent. All mediation proceedings shall be private and confidential
and the mediator shall make no public recommendation nor take any public position at
any time concerning the issue. Any fees or expenses of mediation shall be payable one-
half by City and one-half by the employee organization. All other expenses shall be borne
by the party incurring the expenses.
E. Terminating Mediation
1. After no less than 10 days, mediation may be terminated only when at least two of the
following agree in writing that there is no reasonable prospect of reaching a
settlement through the mediation process:
(A) Chief negotiator of the employee organization
(B) Chief negotiator for the City
(C) Mediator (-17-)
2. Mediation shall be terminated if agreement has not been reached in 30 days.
3. At the termination of mediation, the mediator shall submit a written report of the
mediation to the parties for use by the Fact-finder.
F. Fact-Finding
1. If mediation fails to resolve any issues, then only those unresolved issues shall be
referred to “fact-finding.” A list of five potential Fact-finders shall be obtained from
the State Mediation and Conciliation Service. Then following a random determination
of which party begins, parties shall alternately strike one name from the list until only
one remains.
2. Each party shall submit in writing its position on each unresolved issue and its last
offer of settlement seventy-two hours prior to commencing Fact-finding. After due
consideration, the Fact-finder shall select the position of one party on each issue using
factors traditionally taken into consideration in determination of wages, hours and
other terms and conditions of employment in the public sector including but not
limited to:
A. State and Federal laws applicable to the employer.
B. Changes in the consumer price index (all urban consumers – Los Angeles, Long
Beach, Anaheim).
C. Stipulations of the parties.
D. The financial condition of the City and its ability to meet the cost of the award.
E. The wages and benefits of similar communities or organizations.
F. Previous Memoranda of Agreement with the employee organization. (-18-)
G. The interest and welfare of the public and employee.
H. The Employer-Employee Resolution.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 3
Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
Page 2
I. Issues previously agreed to during the current meet-and-confer and mediation
process.
J. Past practice with respect to the issues before the Fact-finder.
3. Within 10 days of commencing fact-finding, recommendations of the Fact-finder
shall be reported in writing at a meeting of representatives of the City and the
employee organization. Additionally, the fact-finder shall determine the eligibility of
issues for consideration by a Settlement Panel (“G” below).
4. Each party has 10 days to accept, reject or propose alternatives to recommendations
of fact-finding. Any recommendations or alternatives not accepted by both parties
within 15 days of the Fact-finder reporting the recommendations will be presented to
the City Council. The City Council may accept or reject any recommendation. Any
recommendation of the fact-finder or the employee organization accepted by the City
Council shall be considered resolved. All proceedings and recommendations of fact-
finding shall be private and confidential. If findings are accepted or issues are
otherwise resolved any fees or expenses shall be payable one-half by the City and
one-half by the employee organization. If not, the City will pay all fees and expenses
of the Fact-finder.
G. Settlement Panel
Issues remaining unresolved following fact-finding which directly deal with articles of
any current City MOA (or prior MOA for the employee (-19-) organization, if expired)
except “Employee Rights” or “City (management) Rights” as contained in the applicable
MOA may be taken to professional Settlement Panel according to the following process:
1. The Employee Organization may request that an eligible issue be taken to the
Settlement Panel by clearly stating its request in writing. The position may be the
same as previously taken or one closer to the other party’s. In no case can the position
request more than the most recent proposal.
2. If the Employee Organization modifies its position on any issue, the City shall have
one ten-day period to agree to or reject the proposed position or present a written
counter proposal only on the modified issue(s).
3. If the Employee Organization does not modify its position, or if a counter proposal is
not presented by the City, or if the counter proposal is rejected within 10 days then
the unresolved issues shall be referred to a professional Settlement Panel. Each party
shall submit to the Settlement Panel, in writing, its established position on each
unresolved issue including any counter proposal.
4. A list of seven panelists shall be obtained from the state Mediation and Conciliation
Service. Then following a random determination of which party begins, parties shall
alternately strike one name from the list until only three remain.
5. The Settlement Panel shall select the positions of one party on each unresolved issue
using factors traditionally taken into consideration in determination of wages, hours
and other terms and conditions of employment in the public sector including but not
limited to: (-20-)
A. State and Federal laws applicable to the employer.
B. Changes in the consumer price index (all urban consumers – Los Angeles, Long
Beach, Anaheim).
C. Stipulations of the parties.
D. The financial condition of the City and its ability to meet the cost of the award.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 3
Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
Page 3
E. The wages and benefits of similar communities or organizations.
F. Previous Memoranda of Agreement with the employee organization.
G. The interest and welfare of the public and employees.
H. The Employer-Employee Resolution.
I. Issues previously agreed to during the current meet-and-confer, mediation and
fact-finding process.
J. Past practice with respect to the issues before the Settlement Panel.
7. These findings shall be reported within 10 days, in writing, at a meeting of
representatives of the City and the employee association at which time alternatives to
the findings may be discussed. The City Administrative Officer and Chief Negotiator
for the employee organization shall jointly prepare a letter transmitting the findings to
the City Council.
8. If the findings completely sustain one party and issues are not otherwise resolved, the
other party shall pay all fees or expenses of the Settlement Panel. If the findings
sustain each party on at least one issue then the parties shall pay fees or expenses in
proportion to the number of issues on which they were not (-21-) sustained. If the
issues are otherwise resolved any fees or expenses shall be payable one-half by City
and one-half by the employee organization. All other expenses shall be borne by the
party incurring the expenses.
9. If findings are not accepted or otherwise resolved:
(A) The findings will be made public.
(B) The employee organization will no longer be bound by any agreement not to
sponsor, support or collect signatures for a charter amendment requiring binding
interest arbitration.
13.3 Dispute Resolution Procedures for the San Luis Obispo Police Officers’ Association
(SLOPOA) Only
A. It is the intent of the City and the SLOPOA that resolution of disputes on matters within the
scope of representation as defined in California Government Code Section 3504 shall be
resolved in the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 3505 through 3505.7 (as those
sections subsequently may be amended) and as further provided in this section. To the extent
that this section is silent as to procedural matters addressed in the Government Code, the
provisions of the Government Code shall be deemed to apply. Otherwise, the express terms of
this section shall govern.
B. Selection of Neutral Factfinder.
(1) Within a reasonable time following the adoption of this section, the City and the
SLOPOA shall consult with one another to agree upon a list of no fewer than 7
acceptable and reasonably available factfinders from which the neutral factfinder will be
chosen.
(2) Any party may request to review and revise the list one time per calendar year after initial
agreement on the list or as otherwise necessary to maintain the requisite number of
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 3
Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
Page 4
acceptable and available factfinders. The list shall only be revised by mutual consent of
the parties.
(3) The neutral factfinder shall be selected from the predetermined list via an alternating
strike process as follows:
(a) The parties will determine either through mutual agreement or by coin toss which
of the parties will strike first and that party will select one name to strike from the
list.
(b) The second party will then strike a name from the list.
(c) The parties will continue with alternating strikes from the list until only one name
remains.
(d) The remaining factfinder will be contacted no later than two business days
following the selection and requested to serve as the neutral factfinder.
(e) If the selected neutral is unavailable, the name shall be removed from the list and
the strike process shall be repeated until an available neutral can be retained. For
purposes of this section, the selected neutral will be deemed “unavailable” if s/he
is not able to begin hearings within 45 days of the date the request to serve as the
neutral factfinder is made.
(f) The parties may mutually agree to a factfinder from the list without going through
steps a-e above.
C. Procedures For The Factfinding Hearing
(1) The SLOPOA may request that the parties' differences be submitted to a factfinding not
later than 30 calendar days following the date that either party provided the other with a
written notice of a declaration of impasse. Within five days after receipt of the written
request, each party shall select a person to serve as the factfinder in accordance with
section B above.
(2) Once selected, the factfinder shall, as soon as reasonably possible, based upon the
schedules of the parties and the factfinder, hold a hearing on the issues in dispute in the
impasse. In no event shall the hearing take place more than 30 calendar days from the
selection of the factfinder by the parties except by mutual agreement of the parties. For
the purpose of the hearing, the factfinder shall have the power to issue subpoenas
requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of evidence.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 3
Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
Page 5
(3) Ten calendar days prior to the hearing the parties shall either jointly or separately submit
a statement to the factfinder listing the issue(s) in dispute identifying the proponent of the
issue(s) in dispute.
(4) In arriving at their findings and recommendations, the factfinder shall consider, weigh,
and be guided by all the following criteria:
(a) State and federal laws that are applicable to the employer.
(b) Local rules, regulations, or ordinances.
(c) Stipulations of the parties.
(d) The interests and welfare of the public and the financial ability of the public
agency.
(e) A Comparison of the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of the
employees involved in the factfinding proceeding with the wages, hours, and
conditions of employment of other employees performing similar services in
comparable public agencies.
(f) The consumer price index for goods and services, commonly known as the cost of
living.
(g) The overall compensation presently received by the employees, including direct
wage compensation, vacations, holidays, and other excused time, insurance and
pensions, medical and hospitalization benefits, the continuity and stability of
employment, and all other benefits received.
(h) Any other facts, not confined to those specified in paragraphs (a) to (g), inclusive,
which are normally or traditionally taken into consideration in making the
findings and recommendations.
(5) If the dispute is not settled within 30 calendar days after the appointment of the
factfinder, or, upon agreement by both parties within a longer period, the factfinder shall
make findings of fact and recommend terms of settlement, which shall be advisory only.
The factfinder shall submit, in writing, any findings of fact and recommended terms of
settlement to the parties before they are made available to the public. The public agency
shall make these findings and recommendations publicly available within 10 days after
their receipt.
(6) The costs for the services of the factfinder selected by the parties, including per diem
fees, if any, and actual and necessary travel and subsistence expenses, shall be equally
divided between the parties.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 3
Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
Page 6
(7) The costs for the services of the factfinder agreed upon by the parties shall be equally
divided between the parties, and shall include per diem fees, if any, and actual and
necessary travel and subsistence expenses. The per diem fees shall not exceed the per
diem fees stated on the factfinder's résumé submitted to the parties. The factfinder's bill
showing the amount payable by the parties shall accompany his or her final report to the
parties and the board. The factfinder may submit interim bills to the parties in the course
of the proceedings. The parties shall make payment directly to the factfinder.
(8) Any other mutually incurred costs shall be borne equally by the public agency and the
employee organization. Any separately incurred costs shall be borne by that party.
(9) After these factfinding procedures have been exhausted, but no earlier than 10 days after
the factfinders' written findings of fact and recommended terms of settlement have been
submitted to the parties pursuant to Section 5 above, the Council shall proceed as set
forth in Sections D. et seq below.
D. Council Procedures Following Factfinding
(1) If the parties remain at impasse after conclusion of the factfinding proceeding, as set forth
in Government Code Section 3505.7, the Council shall hold the public hearing required
by that section not earlier than 10 calendar days and not later than 60 calendar days
following the factfinder’s written findings and recommended terms of settlement have
been submitted to the parties.
(2) At the public meeting, the Council shall review the findings and recommendations
submitted by the factfinder, the available information in the record presented to the
factfinder, and any other testimony or relevant information that may be submitted to the
Council by the parties or any other interested person(s) prior to the conclusion of the
public hearing. The format of the public hearing for purposes of this section shall not be
evidentiary or adversarial in nature, but shall follow City standard procedures for Council
public hearing items.
(3) Following the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council by majority vote may either
adopt, modify or reject, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendation of the
factfinder and/or the Council may implement its last best and final offer, if inconsistent
with the factfinder’s recommendation, after following the procedures set forth in section
4 below. If the factfinder’s recommendations are consistent with the City’s last, best and
final offer, the Council may implement its last, best and final offer without additional
findings otherwise required herein.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 3
Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
Page 7
(a) The Council shall take final action no later than 30 calendar days following the
conclusion of the public hearing, but may do so at the same meeting during which
the public hearing is conducted or at any time prior to said 30-day limit.
(4) The factfinder’s findings and recommendations for settlement shall be entitled to a
presumption of correctness, unless rebutted as follows:
(a) If the Council opts to modify or reject any finding or recommended term of
settlement favorable to the association and/or to implement its last best and final
offer, the Council shall adopt written findings of fact, supported by a
preponderance of the evidence presented in the record, in support of its final
action. Said written findings of fact by the Council shall be sufficient to show the
Council’s reasoning for any such rejection and/or modification with specific
citations to the record. The written findings shall be supported by a preponderance
of the evidence and the Council’s conclusions shall be supported by its findings.
(b) Within 10 calendar days after submission of the factfinder’s findings and
recommendations to the parties, the SLOPOA shall identify in writing to the City
each factfinder’s “finding or recommended term of settlement” that it deems
“favorable to the SLOPOA” for purposes of this section.
(c) The Council may adopt any finding or recommendation of the factfinder without
requirement of further findings of fact, other than as specifically required by this
section.
(5) Nothing herein shall be interpreted to limit, modify or preclude Council’s otherwise
applicable rights to meet in closed session under labor relations provisions of the Brown
Act, so long as no final action set forth herein is taken prior to the required public
hearing.
E. Judicial Review
(1) The parties agree that this ordinance requires a hearing at which evidence/testimony is
required to be taken and discretion in the determination of facts is vested in the
Council. The City shall not assert any position that is contrary to the terms of this
resolution including, but not limited to, any position that asserts that a court lacks
jurisdiction under either CCP Sections 1094.5 or 1085.
(2) No later than 45 calendar days following the Council’s final action to modify or reject the
factfinder’s findings or recommendations favorable to the SLOPOA and/or to implement
its last best and final offer, the parties agree that the SLOPOA may seek review of the
Council’s final action by filing a writ petition in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo
County pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5 and/or Section 1085
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 3
Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
Page 8
depending upon the issues submitted for review. The record for review shall include all
evidence presented through the conclusion of the public hearing.
(3) In the event the Council fails to take final action as required herein following the
conclusion of a factfinding proceeding, the parties agree that the SLOPOA, within 30
calendar days following the date on which the Council would otherwise have been
required to take final action, may compel the Council’s final action pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1085.
F. Process Modifications: Unless otherwise mutually agreed between the parties in writing, the
dispute resolution process provided herein shall constitute the exclusive means of impasse
resolution between the City and the SLOPOA as contemplated by Government Code Section
3507(a)(5) (or as it subsequently may be amended) and may be modified only through the meet
and confer process provided in Government Code Section 3505 (or as it subsequently may be
amended), including submitting any unresolved disputes regarding proposed modifications to
this process. The parties may modify any of the procedures set forth herein as they may deem
convenient by mutual written agreement.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 3
Legislative draft of relevant provisions of Resolution 6620
Page 9
CITY OF SAN MIS OBIM
RESOIIFFICN NO. 6620 (1989 SERIES)
A RESOIDTION OF MM CITY OF SAN = OBISPO
ESTABLISHING M FRAMEWORK FOR FUMRE REIMICNS
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN MIS OBISPO, AS AN
EMPMYER; AND ITS MMDYEES, AND SUPERSEDING
RESOMTIbN NO. 3405 ( 1977 SERIES).
6620
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1 TITU OF RESOLUTION 1
2 STATEMENT OF PLUUKM 1
3 DESIGNATION OF MlJNICIPAL.EMPj-oYEE,ja=CNS OFFICER 1
4 DEFINITIONS 1
5 EMPWYEE RIGHTS 5
6 CITY RIGHTS 6
7 MEET AND CONFER IN GOOD FAIM - SCOPE 6
8 amsum=aa. im GOOD FAITH: - scopE 7
9 ADVANCE NOTICE 7
10 PETITION FOR RECOGNTTICN 8
u APPROPRIATE UNIT 11
12 RECOGNITION OF EMPL= ORGANIZATIONS AS MAJORITY 12
FORMAL RECOGNITION
13.1 RESOLUTION OF IMPASSES 14
13. 2 REACHING AGREEMENT 15
14.1 GRIEVANCES 22
14.2 DISCIPLINE ACTION- APPEAL 24
15 NEMMLAIMM OF AGREEMENT 24
16 EMPLOYEE REPRMEN7ATICN AT MEET AND CONFER 25
17 ACCESS TO WORK STATIONS 25
18 USE OF CITY FACrLTTIES 26
19 BULTZTIN BOARDS 26
20 DUES CHECK OFF 27
21 PEACEFUL PER MZQNCE OF CITY SERVICES 27
22 RULES AND REGUTATIONS 29
23 CO9S7WCTICN 29
24 SEPARABILITY 29City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 2
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. T= OF RINOILITION
This Resolution shall be known as the Employer-Employee Relations
Resolution of the City of San Luis Obispo.
I yo vUWIWOIKS)
The Purpose Of this RBSOlutim is to implement Chapter 10, Division 41
Title 1, of -the Government Code of the State Of California - (Sections 3500 et
seq.) caption "Public Employee Organizations,!' by providing orderly
Procedures for the administration of employer - employee -relations between
the City and its employee organizations and for resolving disputes
regarding wages, hours, and other terms and cmiditions of employment.
SECTION 3. DESIGNATION OF NLMCIPAL EMPLOYEE RELATIONS OFFICER
The City Council hereby designates the City Administrative Officer as
the Municipal Employee Relations Officer who shall be the City's principal
representativesentative . in all matters of employer-employee relations, with
authority to meet and confer in good faith on matters within the scope of
representati ,on. including wages, hours and other terms and =kUtions of
employment.
The Mudcipal Employee Relations Officer so designated is authorized
to delegate these duties and responsibilities.
As used in this Resolution, the following terms shall have the
meanings indicated:
A. Appropriate. unit w- means a unit of employee classes or positions
established pursuant to Section 11 of this Resolution, citing factors
to be considered in making such determination.
1-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 3
B. Citv -means the City of San Luis Obispo, a municipal corporation, and
where in ate herein, "City" refers to the City Cmnicil, the
governing body of said City, or any duly authorized management employee
as herein defined.
Consult or:r _ Cbnsultati.on _ in Good Faith . - , means _to commtlh cafe .verbally
or in wr ting.for the purpose of presenting . and obtaining views or
advising of intended actions.
D.- EmeYgencv moans emergency conditions such as: extraordinary fire,
flood; or. ea dxpake,:public calamity, or catastrophe: which threatens
life or property.
E. _Eumloyee —means any person filling a line -item position in. the City
budget- except those persons elected by popular vote.
F. Employee. Confidential - means an employee. who is privy to decisions of
City management affecting a player- employee relations.
G. Employee.. Management - 'means:
1) Any employee having significant responsibilities in formulating
and aam;nister`ing City policies and programs,, including but not
limited to the chief executive officer and department heads; and
2) Any employee having.authority to. exercise. independent judgement to
hire, transfer, suspend, lay -off, recall: promote, discharge,
assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or having the
responsibility to direct :then, or...to adjust their. grievances, or
effectively to reommend such action if in connection with the
foregoing; the exercise of which authority,is not of a merely
routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent
jam•
2-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 4
H. Employee. Professional - means employees engaged in work requiring
specialized knowledge and skills attained through completion of a
recognized course of instruction, including, but not limited to,
attorneys, engineers and architects.
Emnlovee::Omanization - _means any,, oxlgrc iMzat cm::which..31 dudes. ftloyees:
of the City and which has as. one of its - primary. purposes representing
such, employees: in, their: employment relations with-the City.
J. Eawlover-Employee Relations- means the relationship between the City
and its employees and. their employee organization, or when used in a
general sense, the relationship between City management and employees
or employee organizations.
K.. Grievance as•this -tezm LiS. defined ,in section 14.,(A).
means:
1) a deadlock in the discussions between a majority, representative
and the .City ;over any s matters concerning which i they are required
to meet and confer in good faith, or over the scope of such
subject matter,,and.dfferences that remain are so substantial and
prolonged that further. _ meeting arui conferring would be futile: or
2) any unresolved.oampl.aint by an. affected- ,employee organization
advanced in good faith, concerning a decision of the Municipal
Employee Relations Officer made pursuant to gections.10,. 11, or 12
of this Resolution.
M. Majority Representative - means an employee organization, or its duly
authorized representative, that has been granted - formal recognition by
the Municipal Employee Relations Officer as representing the .majority
of employees in an appropriate unit.
3-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 5
L
1_
N. Mediation or Conciliation - means the efforts of an impartial third
per, or pins, motioning as ' I aries, to assist the
parties in reaching a voluntary resolution to an impasse, through
interpretation, suggestion and advice. .Mediation and conciliation are
interchangeable.; terms.... All.; such. proceedings., shall be private and the..
mediator - shall. make no public recommendations_nor.take any public
position cortoerning the issues.
O. Meet and Confer, in Good Faith (sa etimes - referred to. herein as "meet
and confer" or, „meeting and conferring")•- means performance by duly
authorized. City representatives and duly authorized.repressentatives of
an employee, organization recognized as-.the` major ty representative of
their mutual: obligation, to -meet .at reasonable times and .to discuss in
good faith matters within the scope of-representation including tinges,
hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, in an effort to:
1) reach agreement on those matters within the authority of such
representatives and
2) reach agreement on what will be rimed to the-City Council on
those matters within the - decision making:: authority of the City
Council. This does not; require. either_ party. :to agree to a
P. Municipal Emol Relations Officer - means the - City's principal
representative in all.matters of.employer- employee relations designated
pursuant to Section 12 of this Resolution, or a duly authorized
representative.
4-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 6
Q. Peace Officer - shall mean and include those employees defined as peace
officers by the Penal Code.
R. Recognized Employee Organization - means an employee organization which
has. been - formally. acknowledged by the Mom cipal.Employee Relations
Offioe:as.•the.employee.cr organization : that< - represents :.e ployees,of the
City, as provided elsewhere in this Resolution.
S.;., Resolution -- means; unless - the, context: indicates'; otherwise; the
Employer - Employee'' Relations . Resolution of the • City .of San Luis Obispo.
T. Scope of Representation means all matters. relating to employment
conditions and employer - employee relations, including, but not limited
to, wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment, city
Rights (Section 6) are excluded frcam the scape.of'. - - representati.on. .
LJ. SIAFA - means, San Luis Obispo Firefighters'. Association.
V. SIAPOA = means; San Luis Obispo Police Officers' Association.
SECTION 5. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS
Eaiployees of the City shall have the right to form, join and
participate in the. activities- of employee organizations of.their own
choosing for the purpose of representation on all matters. of
employer -employee relations including but .not limited tp, usages, hours and
other terms and =editions of employment. Employees of the City also shall
have the right to reftm to join or participate in the activities of
employee organizations and shall have the right to represent themselves
individually in their employment relations with the City. No employee
shall be. interfered with, intimidated, restrained, coerced or dicrrriminat
against because of the exercise of these rights.
5-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 7
0 0
SECTION 6. CITY RIC YrS
Me.ricdt of the City include, but are not limited to, the exclusive
right to determine, the mission of its constituent departments cxmmtissions
and boards; set standards.of service; determine the procedures and
standards of:.seleckion for employment.:and prarnotiont direct "its employees;
take disciplinary action; relieve its employees: from: duty because of lack
of work or for other legitimate;: reasons; maintain the efficiency of
govt operations; .determine.the methods,.•means..and personnel by .
which government: operations are to be.coiducted;, determine : the "content of
job classifications; take all necessary actions to carry.ent`its: mission in
a *+-; es; and exercise complete control and discretion over its
orga*+; ;ation and the technology of performing its work.
1 • i • e• 1' e••• •o'
A. The City, through its representatives, shall 'meet and confer in good
faith with representatives of formally recognized employee
organizations with majority representation , rights regarding matters
within thie scope .of reputation including wages, hours and other
terms and conditions of employment .within..therappropriate unit.
B. 'the City shall not be required to meet and confer ~in:goocl faith on any
subject except as required by Federal or State law, nor shall it be
required to meet and confer in good faith.on Employee or City Rights as
defined in Sections 5 and 6.
C. With respect to the San Luis Obispo Police Officers Association
SIDPLlA) and the San Luis Obispo Firefighters Association (sirm) only
and consistent with the Meyers- milias -Bm m Act, and the intent of the
6- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 8
i
City and the Employee Organizations, meet-and-confer, mediation,
fact - finding and settlement panel discussions between the two parties or
their agents shall be confidential. It is permissible, within the intent
of confidentiality, for the representatives of the City to meet with the
City Council.and.for the representatives of.the Employee organizations to
meet with their.Board of Directors.or membership. It is.not.permissible
for,- representatives - of ;either the City or:the Employee.organizations to
dic icc the content of the meet- arxi-oomfer, mediation, fact- finding or
settlement panel discussions, with members of the public or media except as
provided in this.MTl%w- Employee Resolution.
All matters affecting employer-employee relations, including those
that are not subject. to meeting. and conferring, are subject to
consultation. 4be City, through its representatives, shall consult in good
faith with representatives of all recognized employee organizations an
employes - employee relations matters which affect them.
SE=ON.9. ADVANCE NOTICE
Written notice shall be given to each recognized. employee organization
affected a minimum of 14 calendar .days 'prior,to:adoption,of any ordinance,
rule, or resolution or regulation directly relating to matters within the
scope of representation proposed to be adapted.by the City Council or by
any board or commission of the City, and each shall be given the
opportunity to meet with such body prior to adoption.
7-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 9
In case of emergency, when the City or any board or commission of the
City determines that an ordinance; rule; resolution or regulation must be
adopted ;;ately without prior .notice or meeting with a recognized
employee organization, the City .small provide such notice acid opportunity
to.Meet at tine earliest. practicable time (within 30 days) following the
adoption of such ordinance, rule, resolution or.-regulation.
SECTION 10. PETITION FUR_RECOGNrITCN
There are two .(2) levels, of employee, organizatiom.:recognition - formal
and informal.- The recognition, requirements of each are set forth below.
A. _ FORL IMM2TITION the right to meet . and confer in good faith as
majority x , - -+±±tative: An employee organization that seeks formal
recognition for purposes of meeting. and oenferring.in good. faith as the
majority representative of employees in an, appropriate unit shall -file
a petition with the Municipal Employee Relations officer containing the
following information and documentation:
1) Name and address of the employee organization.
2) Names and titles of its officers.
3) Names of employee organization:reprewntatives.who are authorized
to speak on behalf of-its members.
4) A statement that the employee organization has, as one of its
relations with the City.
5) A statement whether the, employee organization is a chapter or
local of, or affiliated directly or indirectly in any marmer with,
a regional or state, or national or international organization,
and, if so, the names and address of each such regional, state or
international organization.
8 City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 10
6) Certified copies of the employee organization's constitution and
by -laws.
7) A- designation of those persons, not e3o3eeding two in number, and
their- addresses,. to whom notice will be hand delivered or sent by
regular .U.S..Mail will be dew sufficient notice on the
employee organization for any purpose.
8)_ -A statement that the employee.organization.recognizes that the
provisions of Secticn.923 of..the Iabor.Code are not applicable to
City employees.
9) A statement that the employee organization has no restriction on
membership based an race, color, creed, sex or national origin.
l0).- Zhe job classifications or titles. of..epployees in the unit
claimed to be appropriate and the number of member employees
therein classified by department, division, and job title.
11) A statement that the.employee organizaticn.has in its possession
written proof, dated within six months of the date upon which the
Petition is filed, to establish that at least 30% of the
employees in the unit. claimed >to.be, appropriate have designated
the employee on;zation to represent them in their employment
relations with the City. Such written proof shall be submitted
for confirmation to the Municipal Employee. Relations Offioer or
to a mutually agreed upon disinterested third party.
12) A request that the Municipal Employee Relations Officer recognize
the employee organization as the majority representative of the
employees in the unit claimed to be appropriate for the purpose
of mecum and conferring in good faith on all matters within the.
scope of representations.
9- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 11
B. INFaFML IUXD(2=CN - the right to consult in good faith, An
employee organization that seeks recognition for purposes of
consultation in good faith shall file a petition with the mmicipal
I
Relations Officer containing the followring,information and - -- Employee Mug ,
documm-rtaticn:
1) All of the information enumerated in A. .(l) through (9) of
this - Section inclusive.
2) A. statement thatthe employee organization has in its
possession written - proof , dated within - six months of the date
upon which the petition is tiled, to.establish that employees
have designated the employee organization to represent them in
their employment relations with the City. Such written proof
shall be submitted for confirmation to Municipal Employee
Relations Officer or to a wally agreed upon disinterested
third party.
3) a request that the Nimicipal Employee Relations officer
recognize the employee organization for the purpose of
consultation in good faith.
C. 7hepetiticn, includiM.al-l-ac=npanyiM:docummits, shall'be
verified, under oath,. by the Executive Officer and Secretary of the
organization that the statements are true. All changes in such
information shall be filed forthwith in like manner.
D. No employee may be represented by more than one recognized
organization for the purposes of this Resolution.
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 12
SECTION 11. APPROPRIATE UNIT
A. The Nsmicipal Employee Relations officer, .after reviewing the petition
filed by an employee orpnIzation seeking formal recognition as
majority. representative ,. shall determine whether the proposed unit is
an appropriate unit. The principal criterion in making this
determination I is whether there is a cxmmamit of.interest among such
employees. Me following factors, among others,, are: to be considered
in making such determination:
1) Gfuich unit will assure employees the fullest freedom in 'the
exercise of rights set forth under. this. Resolution.
2) The history of employee relations: (i) in-the unit;
ii) among other eaployees of the City; and (iii) similar
public employment.
3) The effect of the unit on the efficient operation and
consistent with the Egan; national structure of the City and
e: 1 .• JI I• • - JI I• • - - - •I
4) The extent to which employees have cMTMon skills, working
conditions, job - duties or similar educational. rem» *em*+*s.
5) Me. effect on the existing classif-ication:.st-ructure of
division of a single classification among two or mere units.
B, In the establishment of appropriate units:
1) professional employees shall not be denied the right to be
represented separately fz= nan- professional employees, and
2) management and confidential employees who are included in the
same unit with nen- ment or non - confidential employees
may not represent such employees on matters within the scope
of representation.
11- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 13
3) Representation units should consist of the broadest feasible
grouping of positions that share an identifiable community of
interest. Every effort should be made to minimize the
proliferation of units within the guidelines herein
established.
r• -a••r. • • r• • •-..• • r• •r
A. . Me.Mnicipal Employee Relations Officer shal1ioafter.designaticn of an
appropriate unit, determine the majority representative of such
employees in such unit. - such determination Shall :be. made either by
a* wrjin .for a secret ballot election or by any other reasonable
method which -is based upon written proof,. and is - designed to ascertain
the free choice of such employees.
1) In the event an election is held, any employee organization
claiming: representation of, all or any part of the appropriate
unit shall be entitled to a place on the ballot.
2) The employee organization found to represent a majority of the
employees in the•apprcpriate unit..shall.be formally
acknowledged as.the. recognized employees- organization by the
NtJnicipal Employee Relations Officer.
3) In the event no employee organization receives a majority in
an election.,a runoff election ..will .be held between the top
two vote getters.
4) The recognized employee organization, determined as provided
herein, is the only employee organization entitled to meet and
confer in good faith on matters within the scope of
12-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 14
representation on behalf of employees in such unit. This
Shall not preclude other recognized employee organizations, or
individual employees, from consulting with management
representatives on employer - employee relations matters of
concern to them.
B. The recognition rights of the majority representative designated in
accordance with this section shall. not be subject to challenge for the
longer term of either 12.mranths:fol-1ewing :the date of such recognition
Or during - term of any ramorandLm of understanding between such
organizations and the City.
C.. An -employee organization which desires to challenge the recognition
rights of -a recognized empleyee.crganizaticn shall submit written proof
that it represents at least 30% of the employees in the appropriate
unit. The Municipal Employee Relations Officer shall arrange for a
secret ballot election to. be conducted by the City Clerk. or other such
method normally used by the City to conduct an election. The choice of
Vino organization!' shall also be. included in the ballot. Employees
entitled to vote in such, "election. shall be those.perrscros regularly
employed -in permanent positions within the--unit moo - were employed
during the pay period immediately prior to the date which is fifteen .
days before the election, .including those who did not work during such
period because of illness, vacation, or authorized leaves of absence,
and who are employed by the City in the same unit on the date of the
election. An employee organization shall be granted formal recognition
following an election if the employee organization has received the
vote of a numerical majority of all the employees eligible to vote in
13- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 15
the unit in which the election is held (50% plus 1 of the votes of all
eligible employees).
D. The Hz icipal Employee Relaticros officer shall withdraw the recognition
rights of any recognized employee organization.:which has .been. found by
secret. ballot. election to no .longer represerrt .. a. majority . of the
employees in an appropriate unit.
SECTION. 13.1 RESO=CN OF IMPASSES. (except SLOPOA and ST -OFA)
Impasse procedures may be invoked only after the .possibility of
are as follows:
A. • A *?n'T'TON BY U CITY COUNCIL after a hearing an the merits
of the dispute.
B. Any other dispute resolving probes to which the parties
mutually agree or which the City Council may order. Any party may
initiate the. impasse procedure by filinng with the other party (or
parties) affected a written request for an impasse meeting together
with a statement of its position cn all disputed issues. An
pas meeting shall .:.then.be...scheduled..to.be held in executive
session by the Ndmicipal Employee- Relations.Offioer forthwith after
the date of filing of the written request for such meeting; with
written notice to all parties affected. The purpose of such
upasse meeting is twofold: (1) To permit a review of the
position of all parties in a final effort to reach agreement cn the
disputed issues, and (2) if agreement is not concluded, to mutually
select the specific impasse probe to which the dispute shall be
submitted; in the absence of agreement between the parties on this
14-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 16
point, this matter shall be referred. to the City Council. The
fees and expenses, if any, of mediators or of any other impasse
procedure, shall be payable once -half by the City and one-half by
the - employee organization or employee organizations.
S=ON 13. 2 REAMM AMZM= (only applies to SIDPoA and STOpA)
A. Statement of Intent
It is the intent that:
1) Employee Organizations- and.: City.. Y q -r i c entatives -cxzply with the
State law (Meyers-Milias-Brown Act) regairing City and Employee
aCrganization representatives to .11meet-and-canfer in good faith"
and to meet as necessary to present.respective positions, to
resolve differences and to reach agreement (Memorandum of
2) The substance and progress of the meet-and-confer Process and
other resolution measures be = transmitted by City and Employee
Organization representatives to, respectively, the City Council
and the -Board of Directors and the medDership of the Employee
Organizations.
3) Agreement be reachedzthrough..the-meet-and-cbnfer,prbCeS gj and that
other resolution measures be used only after giving every
0 8%10 q - 6000) a a C-j
E =
4) Each successive stage of this process for reaching agreement be
given a full and honest opportunity to resolve differences and to
Produce agreement and, failing that, to reduce the socpe and
number of issues which would be referred on to the next stage, and
15— City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 17
further, that each successive stage only deal with Issues not
resolved by the meet-and-confer process or by earlier stages in
R t..1.17 1 -0
1 - 5) - Agreement be, reached., in , the minimum time and.:ihat, time limits be
rigorcusly adhered. to, except that. any time i i7ni t -in this
resolution may be extended by mutual =Lsezrt, in writing when the
prcspe't for; timely= agreement, would be.: enhanced -by- such -an
extension.
6) - The content and - suJostar&e of the meet_arjd;_;Confer process and other-
resolution measures ..remain private and - confidential; except as ;
provided in this resolution.
B. Pagpest, for Mediation
Mediation may be requested only after the possibility Of settlement by
direct discussion has been exhausted. If so mediation may be requested
in either of two ways:
1) By mutual agreement of both parties in the negotiaticns- Each
Party shall provide to the other a list of all points of
disagreement, and their position on, each. of the points. Meeting
shall then be scheduled prcaptly. with - the,,Mmplcyee Relations
Officer (City Administrative officer).
2) By providing written Notice of Intent (,,Notice,,) to request
mediation. -Such notice shall include a list of all points of
disagreement and the amehtwnts proposed to resolve the
disagreements. The party receiving the Notice shall have one
10-day period to change its position on any points of
dicarrt. If notice of change is not received within the 10
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 18
days or if any issue(s) remains unresolved, a meeting shall then
be scheduled promptly with the Employee Relations Officer.
C. Meeting with Employee Relations Officer (ERD)
1) The ERO shall convene a meeting between the chief negotiator for
the employee ..mfan i zaticn, one other representative of . the
employee =1 ization, the SRO and. one- other' representative of the
City:
A) To review the position'.of °the parties.in.•a final effort to
B) If agreement is riot reached, to .make . arrangements for the
utilization of the mediation . proce s provided herein.
D. Mediation
Following the meeting with ERO, only the disputed issues shall be
submitted to mediation. The mediator shall be selected from the State
Mediation and 0MIC111ati.on Service by mutual consent. All mediation
proceedings shall be private and confidential and the mediator shall
make no public reommmendation nor take any public position at any time
concerning the issue.. Any _fees or expenses: of mediation shall be
payable one -half by City .. and :one - half :by:the:eiOlcyee- orgahizati.on.
All other expenses shall be borne by the party incurring the expenses.
E. Terminating Mediation
1., After no less than 10 days, mediation may be terminated only wheys
at least two of the following agree in writing that there is no
reasonable prospect of reaching a settlement through the mediation
A) Chief negotiator of the employee organization
B) Chief negotiator for the City
C) Mediator
17- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 19
2. Mediation shall be terminated if agreement has not been reached in
30 days.
3. At the terminatiai of mediation, the mediator shall submit a
written report of the mediation, to the parties for use by the
Fact-finder.
F. Fact-Finding
1. If mediation fails to,resolve any issues, , -then. only those
unresolved issues shal I .1et referred. tO-"faLG+-rfindiM. It A list of
I five potential- Fact-finders shallI be obtained from - the state
Mediation. and Conciliation Service. Men :following A. randcm
determination of ;diidh party begins,, -parties. shall alternately
strike one name from the list until,only one remains.
2. Each party shall submit in writing its position on each unresolved
issue and its last offer of settlement seventy-two hours prior to
camnencing Fact-finding.• After due-oonsideration, -the Fact-finder
shall, select the position of one party on each issue using factors
traditionally taken into consideration in determination of- wages,
hours and other terms: and- ccnditions, of employment in the public
sector -including but not.linited.toi
A. State and Federal laws applicable to the employer.
B. Changes in the consumer price index (all urban consumers - Los
Angeles, Lc! .Beach, Anaheim) .
C. Stipulations of the parties.
D. The financial condition of the City and its ability to meet the
cost of the award.
E. The wages and benefits of similar ommmmities or organizations.
F. Previous Memorarda of Agreement with the employee organization.
18- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 20
G. 7he interest and welfare of the public and employee.
H. r1he Employer Employee Resolution.
I. Issues previously agreed to during the current meet- and - confer
and mediation process.
J. .Past practice with, respect to the.issm ,before the
Fact- finder.
3 . - --: Withi.n .10 •; days.,of - c ncirq . fact =fib, .reocm nendat cns . of the
Fact - finder shall be:reported.,in:writing at-a:.meeti:ng of
representatives of the City and the employee organization.
Additionally, the fact - finder, shall determine the eligibility of
issues for consideration-by a Settlement Panel ( °G" below).
4. Each party -has l0-days to accept, reject or propose alternatives to
reocmmmdations.of :fact - finding. Any recannendations or
alternatives not acopted by both parties within 15 days of the
City Council. Me City Council may accept or reject any
reommaendation. Any recmmmndation of the fact - finder or the
employee organization.::aocepted: by, the City -Ccn=: l shall be
considered: resolved. All proceedings:. and-. recmmendaticns of
fact - finding shall be private and confidential. If .findings are
accepted or- ica„pa are otherwise resolved any fees or expenses
shall be payable one -half by the City and one -half by the employee
organization. If not, the City will pay all fees and expenses of
the Fact- finder.
G. Settlement Panel
Issues remaining unresolved following fact - finding which directly deal
with articles of any current City IAA (or prior mA for the employee
19- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 21
n
organization, if expired) except "Employee Rights" or "City
management) Rights" as contained in the applicable NBA may be taken. to
professional Settlement Panel according to the following process:
1...7he Employee Organization may request that an eligible 1SSUe be
taken.to.the::Settlement Panel by clearly: stating its request in
writing. Me position may be the same.as. previously taken or one
closer, to the, other: party,s.., In no:.c:ase, can the •positim--request
2. If the:Employee Organization modifies its position on any issue,
the City shall have one ten- day.period to:agree to or :reject the
modified issue (a).
3. .If the Employee Organization does.nct modify its position, or if a
counter proposal is not presented by the City, or if the counter
rejected within 10Pr'op .is reJ days then the unresolved issues
shall be referred to a professional Settlement Panel. Each party
shall suit to the Settlement Panel, in writing, its established
position on each unresolved. issue., including.: any counter proposal.
C A list of seven panelists.shalI be; obtained.:frrn. ".the state.
Mediation and Conciliation Service.. Then following a random
determination • of - which • party begins, pages shall alternately
striker .one name from the list: until only three .remain.
5. The Settlement Panel shall select the positions of one party on
each unresolved issue using factors traditionally taken into
oarisIderation in determination of wages, hours and other terms and
conditions of employment in the public sector including but not
limited to:
20= City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 22
A) State and Federal-laws applicable to the employer.
B) a anges in the corm mer price index (all urban consumers - Los
Angeles, Lxq beach, Anaheim)
C) :Stipulations of the parties.
D)- -..The financial condition of the city. and._its_ability to meet
the cost of the award.
E) _ 7he wages and benefits: of similar cxmmamities or
organizations.
F): Previous Memoranda of Agreement with the employee
organization.
G) The interest, and welfare of the public and employees..
H) Zhe.Employer- Employee Resolution.
I) Issues previously agreed to during the cuxrent .
meet - and - confer, mediation and fact- finding process.
J) Past practice-with respect to issi before ' the' Settlement
Panel.
7. These findings shall be reported within 10 days, in writing, at a
meeting of representatives of the City-and the employee association
at which time altexmatives to.the.fir4ings : may.be discussed. The
City Administrative Officer and Chief Negotiator for the employee
organization shall jointly prepare a letter- transmitting the
findings to the City Council.
8. If the findings completely sustain. one party and issues are not
otherwise resolved, the other party shall pay all fees or expenses
of the Settlement Panel. If the findings sustain each party on at
least one issue then the parties shall pay fees or expenses in
proportion to the number. of issues on which they were not
21- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 23
sustained. If the issues are otherwise resolved any fees or
expenses shall be payable one-half. by City and one -half by the
employee organization. All other expenses shall be borne by the
ply incurriM the
9. :Jf findings are not accepted or otherwise.resolved:
A) The findings will be made public.
B) ... `Ihe= employee.. organization will..no :1onger::be: bound by any
agreement.. not to. sponsor,`, support or.collect signatures for a
charter amendment requiring binding 7interest arbitration.
SECTION 14.1 ..GRIEVANCES
A. A: grievance, is an alleged violation, misinterpretation or
misapplication of. the Exployer- Employee Resolution, the Personnel Rules
and Regulations, any..of.agreement with.,an employee
association or any existing written policy or procedure relating to
wages; .hours or other terms and oonditi.ons:of:emplcyment excluding
disciplinary matters.
B. Any emplcyee may.file and process a grievance ' by -providing the time,
place and of:the:.action pxnmpting...the:: grievance.
Employees may be aoccqanied- by.: a ;representative:,at,•eacth step of the .
process. If a specific action to be grieved affects several employees,
those. employees may consolidate, their- grievances and be represented.
C. Provided that.. lementation processes are correctly followed, amending
the Employer-Employee Resolution or the Personnel Rules and Regulations
or creating new or amended written policies or procedures may not be
grieved but shall first be subject to notice and consultation or
meeting and conferring with the Employee Organization as provided -in
Sections 7, 8 and 9 in this resolution or by State law.
22- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 24
D. The grievance procedures shall be outlined in the P ersa¢mel Rules and
Regulations.
E. Rules and Procedures for the SLOP QA and SIOFA only;
1. Any. dispute regarding the eligibility ofg' _ty an: issue; for . the grievance
process - may -,be : appealed through :the process. ultimately to .the
Hearing Officer who shall. decide, ,on; the :eligibility prior.to ruling
an .the, merits.
2. A grievance is appealable,,.. following. several, preliminary steps, to
a Hearing Officer whose:decisicn shall -be` final. A list,of five
potential hearing. officers.shalI be obtained. ftcm the State
Mediation and Conciliation Service by mutual consent. Then
following a random determination. of which -party. begins, parties
shall alternatively.stxi one name from the list until only one
remains. 'lire grievance procedure shall be outlined in-the
Personnel 'Rules and Regulations.
3. .Ally fees or.e)q*nses of the Hearing Officer shall be payable
one -half by. the City and one -half by the appellant. All other
J-.N 0- •' •• - • M 1 .•
4. The City reserves the - right. to ::make.;the'-Hearing;Officer's opinion
advisory or to replace the Hearing Officer position in the
grievance process with the Personnel Board for-an Employee
Organization after July 1993 provided that:
a. The Hearing Officer has ruled on at least five separate
grievances for the Employee Organization; and
b. The City has been sustained in at least 65 percent of the
determinations on grievances _filed by members of the Employee
organization.
23- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 25
SECTION 14.2 DISMMMARY ACTION- APPEAL (only applies to SIDpDA and SI.OFA)
A. Any employee demoted, suspended for four days or more or the shift
equivalent, reduced in pay, or removed under the provisions of Section
2.36.330 of.the.Persa2mel Rules and Regulations. shal I. have the- riqftlt to
appeal -such disciplinary - action to a Hearing.-. ..The appeal-,shall- .-
be.-in writing.; and: shall be :.filed with, the .:Persormel :birector.within .
fifteen:• business -:days-follcxaiiig, the., effective ;date.:of::the -notice-of
decision on disciplinary f.action -,,The Hear ng-officer. shall be selected
from a- list of five''names ~obtained.fr m-the State,Mediation, and ..
Conciliation Service.:., -Followi.ng a - randan -deterauiation . of _which. party
begins, parties sha11 alternately strike one name from, the list lentil
only one remains.
B. The. appeal procedure including' a. Hearing officer shall be outlined in
the Personnel Rules and Regulations. expenses - of theReginaAnyfees,
Hearing Officer shall be'payable one- half.by the City and one -half by
the appellant. All other expenses shall be borne by the party
incurringng the
C. 'The City reserves the right .to replace - the:- Hearirttg,, officer, in the.-
appeal procedure with the',PetSCMel Boan3 after.. July,•,:1993. -
Mien the meeting and conferring pzocess.is concluded between the City
and a formally recognized eMPloyee organization representing a majority of
the employees in an appropriate unit, all agreed upon matters shall be
incorporated in a written memorandum of agreement signed by the duly
authorized City and majority representative. As to those matters within .
the authority of the City Council, the memorandum of agreement shall be
submitted to the City Council for determination:
24- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 26
r1
tic •, a r • -• -s. v s; i •• -
Members of any recognized employee organization may, by a reasa able
method select not more than three employee members of such organization and
one.emplcyee observer to meet and confer with. the Munacipal.Employee .
Relations Officer -and other-management officials (after written
certification_of. such selection is. :provided,by.an authorized official of
the; organization ).an - subjects- within..the.scope of..*+T++eritation during
regular duty or work hours without_loss,of compensation or other benefits.
The employee organization shall, whenever practicable, submit the r me(s)
of each emplcyee..representative to the Municipal.EMployee Relations Officer
at least two working days in advance of such meeting.
Provided further:
1) Mat no employee representative shall leave his or her duty or
work station or assignment without specific approval of the
depart head.or other, authorized City antyage _, .official. If
employee representative cannot be released, date of meeting will
be. rescheduled in accordance with item,(2) below.
2) mat any such meeti;ig is .:subject to:schecbulingby city management
consistent with cperating.needs and ,work:schedules. Nothing
provided herein, however, shall..limit or restrict.city management
from scheduling such meetings before or after regular duty or work
hours.
SECTION 17. ACCESS 'Ili WORK LOCATIONS
Reasonable access to employment work locations during duty hours shall
be granted officers of recognized employee organizations and their
officially designated representatives, for the purpose of prooess=q
grievances or contacting me¢nbers of the organization concerning business
25- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 27
within the soope of representation. Nan emtployee representatives of any
employee organization must have specific approval of the m=cipal Employee
Relations Officer to have such access. Employee access during non duty
hours ' and ncn employee representative access during: duty: hours, may be
obtained: with the. specific approval in eaeh:.instartce of the Municipal
Employee Relations - officer -.or an authorized..a*+tar _ management
official . when. such. access. shall. not. interfere:. with. the normal operation of
the department or with established safety: or security :requir me ts.
SECTION 18. USE OF CITY- FACILITIES
Employee organizations may, ,': with the prior approval: of. the department. .
head, appropriate supervisor or Municipal Employee, Relations Officer, be
granted.the use of City., facilities dur ng:non- working:hours for ,meetings.
SECTION 19. USE OF BUIi= HOARDS
Recognized employee organizations may use portions of City bulletin
boards wader the following conditions: .
a) - Only notices of recreatioml.and social-affairs, notice of
meetings, or.:elections and appointments and. results of.- elections
may be posted.
b) Ail. materials must reoeive.:.the: approval= :of::the,:.departiment head in
charge of the bulletin board.
c). All materials must be dated and must identify the organization
that-published them.
d) the actual posting of materials will be done by the City as soon
as possible after they have been approved. Unless special
arrangements are made, materials posted will be removed th rty -one
days after publication date.
26-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 28
e) The City reserves the right to determine where bulletin boards
shall be placed and what portion of them are to be allocated to
employee organization materials.
f) An employee organization that does not abide. by these rules will ..
forfeit its ;right, to have,:materials-posted on City bulletin
SECTION 20. ..:DUES CHECK -OFF
Only .a formally•recognized- :emplvyee,associaticn- (i.e., the majority .. _ ..
representative, "of.emplcyees in an.apprcpriate unit).. may be granted
ermissicn by. the Municipal Employee.Relations Officer to have:.the
1 • 11. X111 .' • ..1 • p .III - • { . O • • _ •'
pr'ocedures prescribed. by the Municipal Employee. - Relations Officer.
Provided, however, this shall not preclude the continuation of dies
check -off heretofore granted to any employee organization.
Dues withheld by the. City shall be transsmitted.to the officer
designated in writing by.. the employee organization as the person authorized
to-receive such funds, at the address specific.
All employee organizations who; receive -dues cheek -offs shall indemnify,
defend, and hold the City ofr. ;san:.Luis:Obispo hazmless -against any claims
made and against any suit instituted.against -the City of San Luis Obispo on.
amt of check -off of employee organization dues. In addition, all such
emp cyee:organizaticns shall refund to-the °City of San :Luis Obispo any
amts paid to it in error upon presentation of supporting evidence.
Participation by an employee in a strike or a concerted work stoppage
is unlawful and shall terminate the employment relation. Prmvided hmmver
that nothing herein shall be so construed as to affect the right of any
27- City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 29
employee to abandon or to resign his employment.
a) Fgplayee organizations shall not hinder, delay, interfere or
coerce employees of the City to hinder, delay, or interfere with
the' peaceful- performance.. of C ty.servioes by strike;. tested
work.stcppage;.cessaticn:_of work,: slow -dawn, sit -dmm, -stay -away,
Or. unlawful. picketing.
b): .;In the-event that . there . occurs.. any strike, ,:ooneexted..werk
stoppage. -or any: other:•:form : ofF- interference: with,or::limitaticn of
the -peaceful,perfamance-of City services prohibited by Section - -
4.04:(a) hereof, the, in addition to, any .other .-..lawful remedies
or disciplinary actions, may-by action of the Municipal Employee
Relations. Officer, cancel ' any or: all :payron:.deducti&is;.prnhibit
the use:.of.bulletin boairI prohibit the use of City facilities,
and withdraw recognition of the employee organization or
orgaiii zations::participating _in. such `actions.
c) Employee meznbers- of -any employee organization shall not be locked
out,orprevented by:management officials -fimm performing their
assigned duties TAM: such'.;employees: are; . willing -and able to
perform such duties':-in •:the.: custcmary. ,I arm.er. aiid at a T reasonable
level of efficiency.
Any decision made under the provisions of this Section may be -appealed
to the City Council by :filing a written Notice.of Appeal :with.the City_
Clerk, aoocapanied by a complete statement setting forth all of the facts-
upon which the appeal is based. Such Notice of Appeal must be filed within
ten (10) working days after the affected employee organization first
received notice of the decision upon which the ocnplaint is based, or it
will be considered closed and not subject to any other appeal.
28 City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 30
SE=C N 22 . BUD'S AND REGtTIATIC IS
The City Caluboil may adopt such additional Rules and Regulations as
may be necessary or omwenient:to Implement the provisions of this
Resolution and. Chapter 10, Division 4,•Title 1'of''the.C,cwerrment. Code: of
the -state .of CElifornia.(Section 3500, et seq.) .
SECTION 23.. C@IS°PfBJCI'ION
A. ° Nothing_. in.this.:Resolution shall be.. oonstrued..to.- deny..any:persc.n or
employee - the ::rights:,granted:by:Federal and: State laws;And_-City Charter
provisions.
B. The, rights , powers and authority .,of.the'City.Council.. in, all: Matters
including the right to maintain any legal action, shall not be modified
Or .: restricted by this Resolution.
C. Nothing in this Resolution shall abrogate any written agreement between
any employee organization and the City:in effect on the effective date
of this_ Resolution. .....All such:agreements :shall'.continue in °effect•for.
the duration of the term specified therein unless modified or rescinded
by mutual agreement of the parties thereto.
D. -..The provisions:, on :this Resolution are not ;inter -.to cAnflict: urith .the .
provisicns:,of Chapter 10, Division 41 _:Title;l.ofLL the .-Goverment Code of
the State of California (Section 3500,. et seq.) as amended.
SE=CU N. SEPARABILSTY
If any provision of this Resolution or the application of such
Provision to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid the
remaindp*- of this Resolution or the application of such provision to
persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid,
shall not be affected thereby.
29-
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 31
IA
Y
Resolution No. 6 6 2 0
On motion of
1989 Series)
Councilmember Settle, sued by Councilmember Rappa ,
and on the following roll call vote:
pyM: Councilmembers Settle, Rappa, Pinard, Reiss and Mayor Dunin
NOM: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was passed. and adopted this 6th day,of June
1989.
ATTEST:
CIT1'Y _Pam Vog
P.F OVED:
30-
rnff« 1131
1=1Q7
1:4 Zoi C4711
City Council Meeting of 12/13/2016
Business Item 15
Attachment 2
For Reference - Resolution 6620 (1989 Series) as adopted June 6, 1989
Page 32