Marin’s civil grand jury renewed its call for public agencies to provide timely, independent analyses of the costs of pay and benefit proposals pitched during labor negotiations, this time targeting special service agencies including the Marin Municipal Water and Golden Gate Bridge districts.
“The need for labor negotiation transparency, Part II” underscores a report issued earlier this month in which the jury concluded the public has a right to know about how elected officials cut pay and benefit deals with public employees. The earlier report was addressed to the Board of Supervisors and local city councils.
“The grand jury decided to reinforce its position by sending the report to additional respondents,” said Jack Nixon, a former San Rafael city councilman who serves as jury foreman.
This week’s follow-up report repeats jury findings and recommendations and seeks responses from the water and bridge districts, as well as the Novato and Southern Marin fire districts and the North Marin Water District.
The jury urged officials to give taxpayers independent interim reports how pay and benefit pacts are progressing, letting the public chime in before decisions are final — and making officials more accountable for the result of benefits that consume the lion’s share of agency budgets.
Adoption urged
The jury urged adoption before next June 1 of a formal negotiation process used in Southern California called Civic Openness In Negotiations, or COIN. The program requires public agencies to hire professional negotiators and an outside auditor, issue an independent fiscal analysis of all pay and benefit proposals, and post details of tentative labor pacts at least two board meetings before they are adopted. After each proposal is accepted or rejected during closed-door negotiations, it is publicly disclosed, along with costs.
In addition, tentative agreements would be made public a week before their consideration, and a final agreement would be placed on the agenda for discussion for two consecutive meetings of the agency board, giving time for taxpayers to weigh in.
The jury noted that the negotiation process itself would not be public, but more information about it would be disclosed. As it stands in Marin County today, public officials exclude local residents “from input until it is too late for a reasoned public dialogue,” jurors noted.
“The COIN process can be implemented without affecting the manner in which tentative agreements are negotiated but which nevertheless will ensure public awareness of the terms and cost of those agreements in advance of their being adopted,” the jury declared. “The COIN process mandates transparency in government decision-making.”
Marin’s Citizens for Sustainable Pension Plans urged county supervisors to adopt the COIN plan in April but the move drew heated protests from union representatives who believe disclosure wouldn’t provide an advantage. Supervisors expressed lukewarm interest, calling aspects of the plan challenging but worth exploring, but have not scheduled the matter for action.
‘Litmus test’
The county board, local city councils and five special district boards are compelled to make formal statements about the proposal because they are required by law to respond to jury reports that address them. These typically involve brief, carefully-crafted statements in which officials agree, “partially” agree or disagree, or disagree with jury recommendations.
Some observers think candidates will face a COIN transparent government “litmus test” during 2016 election campaigns, and pension critics say they intend to keep the pressure on.
“We owe a great deal of gratitude to this grand jury for their dedication to pursuing transparency in our governments’ negotiations,” said Jody Morales, head of the sustainable pension group.
But Bob Briare, president of Marin Professional Firefighters Local 1775, said pension critics are exploiting grand jury reports “to get their own message out,” and “the sad part is they just don’t trust our government.”
Briare said the COIN program would impede collective bargaining by curbing the frank exchange of ideas between negotiating parties.
“Negotiations are difficult enough,” Briare said. “There are a lot of proposals going back and forth” in negotiations, the former Southern Marin firefighter noted, adding the grand jury “doesn’t say how you are going to pay for” the program it so strongly recommends.
Those unhappy with pay deals approved by officials, he noted, can vote for others at election time.
