Letter: Town Manager Explains Employee Salaries, Raises
Town Manager Michael Embury pens his first of a series of articles explaining the town budget.
To the editor,
This is the first of several articles to provide readers the facts regarding the fiscal 2012 and recently passed fiscal 2013 budgets. The purpose is to describe what happened in fiscal 2012 and why and what the fiscal 2013 budget means for us all.
The first issue is town employee salaries. Over the course of the last four years, salaries have changed as follows (listed by employee group):
Police:
- 2009-2010 – 3 percent
- 2010-2011 – 0 percent for patrol (12 hour shift); 1 percent for non-12 hour shift employees
- 2011-2012 – 1 percent for all employees
- 2012-2013 – 2 percent for all employees
NOTE: Union agreement to long term structural change moving to two 12 hour shifts versus three 8 hour shifts and 20 percent co-pay for new retirees reduced employee costs by slightly more than $600,000. This was accomplished through negotiation without arbitration.
Fire:
- 2009-2010 – 3 percent
- 2010-2011 – 0 percent (result of arbitration award)
- 2011-2012 – subject of litigation
- 2012-2013 – subject of litigation
Local 1033: (Represents employees in Department of Public Works, Water, Senior Center, Clerical, Library, Police, Fire, Golf Course)
- 2009-2010 – 2.75 percent
- 2010-2011 – 2.75 percent
- 2011-2012 – 2.75 percent
- 2012-2013 – in negotiation
Non-Union Employees: (Includes department heads. Individuals and salaries will be in next week’s article.)
- 2009-2010 – 0 precent (Eligible employees received step increases; others longevity.)
- 2010-2011 – 0 percent (Employees moved to the high deductible Blue Cross plan resulting in no increase in this year’s premium for this group – 13 percent to 0; steps and longevity.)
- 2011-2012 – 0 percent (No step increases or longevity)
- 2012-2013 – 2 percent
It is beneficial to look at the recent history for town employees and factually assess how some groups have taken responsibility to work with the town in lowering employee costs.
Labor contracts and budgets are available on the town website.
Lastly, let’s consider the question I have been asked: “Why did the town have to take the school department to court over the fiscal 2012 budget?” The reasons are very clear:
- To their credit, the NK Administration declared a potential deficit as required under RI General Law.
- The law requires a remediation plan to cure the anticipated deficit based upon the school’s revenue structure.
- The published plan proposed requesting a supplemental appropriation of more than $700,000 from the town council to solve the anticipated shortfall. (Nearly the same amount that the council had not appropriated to the school department for the fiscal 2012 budget.)
- During this time there were no additional steps taken to cure the shortfall and the numbers that were being used were changing.
- The town was left with two courses of action – court action and actions required under the town charter.
- Court action produced deficit numbers that changed from one day to the next. Charter action reduced the NKSD appropriation as required due to revenue shortfalls.
- Periodic returns to court were necessary since the North Kingstown School Committee did not comply with the judge’s decision regarding the bottom line and the plain language of the town charter.
- As of June 11, 2012, the “to date” financial report showed the school department had a little over $1.8M that had not been spent.
Thankfully this matter seems to be resolved. It is unfortunate these actions were required but as we have seen around the state, these issues cannot be left unresolved until the end of a fiscal year or carrying over into a new fiscal year. (Woonsocket is the latest example of a school committee producing a year-end report of a balanced budget only to have it balloon to $10 million.)
In these difficult fiscal times, school departments and municipalities are watching every penny as the year progresses. As revenue shortfalls are discovered (state aid, Jamestown enrollment decline, Medicare reimbursement, etc.), midyear adjustments need to be implemented.
Now that there is an understanding of the ground rules, hopefully we can avoid this situation in the future.
Michael Embury
Town Manager
Rhodeyresident0303
5:13 pm on Thursday, June 21, 2012
Fire:
•2009-2010 – 3 percent
•2010-2011 – 0 percent (result of arbitration award)
•2011-2012 – subject of litigation
•2012-2013 – subject of litigation
thanks mike !!! says it all ....continue to destroy the Fire Department until the residents have to share buckets of water and first aid kits !!!!!!!
so basically all other departments have gotten raises.....
while the fire department is working 56 hours a week and only getting paid for 42 and with the so called (10% annual raise) the firefighters are actually seeing a 33% HOURLY PAY CUT !!!
Rhodeyresident0303
5:14 pm on Thursday, June 21, 2012
if the fire department truly got a 10% raise why isnt it listed in the 2012 fiscal year ????????
care to explain that Mike ?
Concerned Resident
6:45 pm on Thursday, June 21, 2012
same ol' same ol' from rhodey yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn.
You are contradicting yourself as usual.....are ff actually seeing a decrease in their pay checks??????
Especially interesting that you only question - comment of fire.....huh!
Looking forward to you copying and pasting your comments across the internet universe.
Remember, you are not being forced to work as a NK ff.
Must be difficult for someone like yourself to be employed in a town where as the town manager acts responsibly will ing to address the difficult decsions.
Possibly you can assist other stricken towns and cities as you seem to be the person that knows all.
Tired of Tired
7:27 am on Friday, June 22, 2012
@Concerned their pay is based on 42 hours. When they are asked [told] to work 56 hours their per hour rate goes down. Even you have to see that. Then you say their pay is still the same, which it is. They take home the same, but they have to work 33% or 14 hours more time to get it. Where does that time come from? Why are they not entitled to compensation for it? They are working the equivalent of 2 more days a week for free. Would you work 2 more days a week every week for free?
Concerned Resident
8:10 am on Friday, June 22, 2012
@Tired: appreciate your input. I also appreciate you writing that ff are working additional hours for the same pay. It is troubling that the few who insist that there was a pay decrease.
I would prefer that NK ff not have to work per the revised ordinance. Unfortunately there was a stalemate in negotiations pushing things to this point. Also unfortunate is the fact that ff want to put all the blame on the TC. Many times it's not what you know it's what you don't know as much went on behind the scenes.
As far as working additional hours without additional compensation, this is something that happens much in the private sector......do most if any like it - no but they are happy to have a job especially in these difficult times.
Lastly, to set the record straight – I’m appreciative of the work of NK ff feeling that they are an asset to NK. At the same time I’m not sit back while any individual and or group attempt to get their point across with what I will refer to half-truth’s. There is so much I could say – write (all true) but sometimes it best not to fan certain embers. I ask any individual to put themselves in the position of owning a business during these difficult times thinking of difficult and not popular decisions they might have to make. As President Bush once said “it’s not easy”.
Anyways, thanks again for you straight forward input!
Dave
8:57 am on Friday, June 22, 2012
Here's the issue: the tc and manager are trying to make all the cuts from ONE department. That's not smart or fair. They gave increases to NON CONTRACUAL employees repeatedly.
Concerned Resident
9:51 am on Friday, June 22, 2012
@dave: guessing you're reading a different letter than posted above. I could be wrong but weren't you individual pretty much saying similar about NKSD?
Dave
10:03 am on Friday, June 22, 2012
Nope, Never never aid that cause it's not true. As far as the letter above, it's a nice try to justify a poor performance, IMO.
Concerned Resident
10:17 am on Friday, June 22, 2012
@dave: Must have been another "dave"
Gotta love the attempt to discredit as I did not attempt to justify any.
Please explain how you feel that cuts are all from one dept??
Please explain what you would do differently??
Please explain what how your suggestion(s) would affect the tax paying residents of NK??
Dave
11:13 am on Friday, June 22, 2012
CR, get it straight. I said the SC had cut the increases for non union employees for three years now. I also said the town had given increases to their department heads...even while denying it. Longevity and or COLA's are still increases. Now they are getting 2% increase this year in addition.
LOOK at the town budget. The Fire Dept is giving up quite a bit, yet there are increases in the water dept library fund etc.....
What would I do differently? where do i begin? First how about if you're gonna cut down on the recycling services, let's SAVE money rather than spend more! The reason given for changing that contract (the existing company broke too many bottles--really??) smell very bad. Second, how about level funding their budget for a year? Thirdly stop shoving projects from private developers down the throats of nk residents.....Turbines, Rolling Green, et...
Fourth, put the sewers in where they can help the entire town, not one or two select businesses.
Fifith, put some money and tax incentives into post road corriidor and not into making a new town center in the south of town, that's killing post road, AND taking away rural areas.
Sixth I would put the town manager in check. He needs to realize who the employee is. I could go on, but I'm sure you have the idea.
Concerned Resident
12:07 pm on Friday, June 22, 2012
@dave: simmer down there davey. Possibly there's a reason why the FD is in the position that they are in. Didn't the ordinance change give them an increase of 10% along with a pension increase? For some reason you want to focus on the town side....police??.....SD??...nonunion employees??
My question in what you might do differently pertained to raises and or lack of but since you refer to other issues I would like to also comment.
Current recycle pick up leaves much to be desired, I myself have called a number of times to lodge complaints......the same comments I have heard from other communities. Have you seen ads for one bin recycling, did the Coastal quote accordingly? Additional TC comment was that existing new quote $$$ was similar to Coastal quote.
I agree - level funding would have been best for tax paying residents of NK.
I would also like to see projects go away but it is not that simple as there is appeal processes that include the courts and state agencies......seems that if they do try to something ending up in court that is also held against the TC. ie no win.
Like many others in town I have a septic system that works fine and is relatively inexpensive. The post rd sewers are to (hopefully) make post rd more attractive to business. Expansion of sewers will require additional bond(s) causing an increase in NK taxes.
cont
Concerned Resident
12:15 pm on Friday, June 22, 2012
I wonder how many would complain if they were forced to pay for sewer hookup. I wonder how many would complain when the end result of sewer hookup were higher cost than properly maintaining a septic system.
Sewers are the first step in revitalizing post rd.....next step might include some of your thoughts BUT, remember you want a level budget not leaving incentive $$.
I agree that the focus should be on post rd and not other areas for developers.
When you write that you would hold the TM in check I’m not sure what - how you are referring to such.
Concerned Resident
2:17 pm on Friday, June 22, 2012
Almost forgot that in many areas ground water (re-charging) does not allow for sewers
NK_Voter
7:57 pm on Friday, June 22, 2012
Thanks Mr. Embry. Coherent and to the point. Nice to see the Police Union work with the town to cut costs.
Concerned Resident
6:57 pm on Saturday, June 23, 2012
Good point as it shows cooperation and negotiating works.
Jeff Crawford
8:25 pm on Friday, June 22, 2012
Don't worry about this. The real problem is lurking on the horizon when the State loses the law suit filed by the unions over the State retirement cuts. What they don't want to acknowledge is that State Employees had a contractual arrangement with the State from the first day of employment and it was up to the General Treasurer and the General Assembly to make sure the Defined Benefit plan was funded over the years. So when the court rules in favor of the workers, the buck is going to filter down to everyone one way or another. My guess is $ 1,000,000,000.00 . You can thank the current and former members of GA and Adminstrations for milking the cow over the last three decades and not watching the pending implosion.
NKGOP Watch
1:54 am on Saturday, June 23, 2012
You people make me want to pull the rip cord and bail out of NK already! But i think we can save ourselves, and it looks like Embury is once again not telling the whole reason why the school started with a good budget, spent NO EXTRA, but ended up in a deficit - that outside revenue was cancelled out during the school year. NOT THEIR FAULT.
Also, just my opinion and not just in NK. THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PAY ZERO RAISES STARTING WHEN THE NATIONAL AND STATE ECONOMY WENT INTO CARDIAC ARREST. My GOD people should be happy just to be working until this crisis is past! Raises!? Are you KIDDING? RAISES?