Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-07-10 Government Operations Committee Minutes � GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES 7uly 10, 2002 Councilors Present: Anne Allen, Nichi Farnham, Joseph Baldacci, Dan Tremble, Gerry Palmer, Frank Farrington Staff Present: Ed Barrett, Bob Farrar, Norm Heitmann, Frank Comeau Other Present: Ms. Rebecca Henry, Mr. Ricky Howard, Gil Merchant, Channel 7, )eff Tuttle-BDN Councilor Baldacci convened the meeting at 5:00 p.m. 1. Request to limit or eliminate smoking in or around Park Playground Areas. Assistant City Manager Farrar presented the committee with several options to consider regarding the request by a concerned citizen, Ms. Rebecca Henry, to � consider limiting or eliminating smoking in or around Park Playground Areas. At the request of the committee, he provided information from other communities with respect to what they are doing about this issue. Farrar outlined the options as follows: 1. to enact an ordinance which prohibits smoking in or around playground areas and/or the entire park area. 2. establish smoke free zones within specific areas of the playgrounds, for example just around the playground area itself, not the entire park 3. or leave the situation as it is now. The ordinance carries with it the weight of enforcement responsibility. An order would be along the line of voluntary compliance, for which we would post a sign indicating that. City Solicitor Heitmann noted that an ordinance carries with it a penalty, hence the enforcement issue. He said he sees this as a potential problem especially if you are going to limit it to the playground area, and establishing boundaries. You would not have the police out there enforcing the ordinance, more likely you would have citizens complaining and reporting the violation. Heitmann's recommendation would be to begin with voluntary compliance, much like we have rules and conduct around the pool and public parks now, like a code of conduct. He said that you expect � certain behaviors without having an ordinance, with encouragement by signs. � Parks and Recreation Director Frank Comeau concurred with Heitmann, stating that if you had some sort of voluntary tobacco free zone in the safe fall zone of the playgrounds, which would encompass the wood chip area around the playground. He thought it would be difficult to enforce anything beyond this area, and that most people would cooperate if it was in a limited area. Allen suggested putting in a bench or a designated area for smoking. Comeau said that most of the parks have tables and benches in the park away from the play area that could be used for smoking, however he did not want to designate an area for such. Tremble said that he noticed in the memo received regarding this issue, that the skateboard park and the pool areas have prohibited smoking, and wanted to know if this was by council order. Comeau said that the skateboard park is such because most of the users were under the smoking age anyway. As for the pool, anything inside the fenced in area prohibits food and smoking. Tremble noted that there are already signs posted at the skateboard park and pool regarding expected behavior, and inquired about existing signs at he parks. Comeau said the only signs are the park hours, and the dog feces law. Tremble was hoping to limit sign clutter, and O add the voluntary statement to an existing sign, and was not concerned about the enforcement issue. City Manager Ed Barrett stated that he has asked Comeau and Farrar to work on a standardized theme of signage for our parks, to consolidate our signage, similar to the sign at the swimming pool, to be more aesthetically pleasing. Councilor Palmer suggested upgrading the location of the signs as well as the verbiage of the sign. He suggested using the term animal waste in place of animal feces as other communities do, to be less offensive. Comeau said that the wording has been changed to waste on any new signs that have gone up. Allen suggested using the phrase and symbol for tobacco free zone as a positive message rather than using no smoking. Tremble wanted to know the intent of the request, was it to protect people from second hand smoke or to protect people from themselves. He questioned the inclusion of tobacco products in the literature he had received from the other municipalities. � � Ms. Henry thanked Norm Heitmann for gathering and forwarding the information regarding what other municipalities are doing about this issue. Chairman Baldacci asked her to explain what she would like to see happen. Henry said that she hopes the council is in support of a healthy Bangor community and that she sees this as two issues. The main issue is children's exposure to second hand smoke and being able to exercise in a smoke free environment. She would encourage the expansion of the tobacco free zone beyond the wood chip area, to eliminate the pacing of the smokers along the wood chip area and thereby limit exposure to the children. Palmer wanted to know if she could respond to Tremble's question regarding tobacco products versus second hand smoke. Henry said her original note was about cigarette smoke, although she stated that she did know that other communities had included the tobacco free portion. Palmer said that most of this was because of contamination and expectoration of the products and the health issues involved. Allen asked if we did have a designated smoking area, would this be something that � could be done rather easily with a canister. Allen said she was hoping this could be done subtly so that the behavior would be detached from the playground area. Comeau said that this would be a vandalism target, and without a sign, it would not send the message intended. Heitmann said that we could revisit this issue about the designated smoking area later after seeing what kind of behavior modification occurs with the no smoking signs. He noted that sometimes having an ashtray encourages people to smoke. Baldacci said that he would like to see a code of conduct for the playground area, as an example of behavior for the children. Heitmann said that this could be included in the Adopt a Park signs at the parks. Palmer wanted to encourage us to use positive language, smoke free areas, tobacco free, etc. in our signs. Allen supports the code of conduct, and she feels that the tobacco free should have more emphasis. � � Palmer would like to see any ways that the City could support or enhance programs that deal with the danger of having tobacco products in the presence of children. Smokers have some rights, however these rights have to be limited to a degree, and that smokers have tremendous burden on the healthcare system, but particularly around children. His concern is that if we go to far, these people will not bring their children to the park for fresh air, and the children will be breathing second hand smoke more than they would at the park. He would encourage more education about parents not smoking around their kids, not just at the park, but for everywhere. Palmer said that we are fortunate to have the best public park system in the state of Maine. Baldacci asked the committee if they support the parks as a tobacco free zone on the terms of the voluntary compliance issue. Tremble and Allen support this, however Allen would like to see some emphasis in the signage. Baldacci would like to see the code of conduct listing for the playground as well. Henry wanted to clarify if the code of conduct would be for the playground or the entire park, to which Baldacci said the entire park, however he would leave it up to the committee to decide. She said that the use of tobacco was an addictive choice for people and that she would rather not get into a smoker's rights issue. � Heitmann said that we have more parks that do not have playgrounds, than we do parks that do have playgrounds. He suggested limiting the code of conduct to the playground areas. Barrett said that staff could work on some guidelines and recommendations and bring them back to the committee. Palmer said that staff should come back with which parks should get which signs and some recommendations. Brown Woods and the City Forest are forests, and people should not be smoking in these tremendous resources to our community. Baldacci said the basic principles are the voluntary issue of encouragement, having a code of conduct, and establishing areas where children play as tobacco free zones. StafF was directed to return within the next meeting or two with recommendations, based upon the Committee's discussion. 2. Request to consider Amending the Personnel Rules and Regulations Sick Leave Section 7.10.1, (c), Use of Sick Leave. Farrar stated that he recently had an inquiry from an employee regarding being able . to use paid sick time to attend to his gravely ill grandchild. He noted that as � currently written, the Personnel Rules and Regulations do not provide paid time off for an employee to attend to their grandchild. Current rules and regulations do allow for paid sick time to be used if the employee needs to attend to their spouse, children, parents, stepchildren, stepparents, brothers and sisters. The question is whether the list should be expanded to include grandchildren. In speaking with Mr. Howard, there are opportunities for him to take the time ofF; this isn't a question of a legitimate request, rather whether he can use his accumulated sick time for this purpose. He could take vacation time, compensatory time, sick leave bonus day, or he could take time off without pay. Farrar said the current regulation does not allow for paid sick time to be used, and does not allow him to overrule or further interpret it. Mr. Howard stated that he had worked for the City for two years and enjoys working for the City. He stated that according to his handbook he received, he could take time off to care for an immediate family member. His grandchild is at Dana Farber and his son has two other children that are now in his care. He said that the City's definition of immediate family is outdated. He feels that the City of Bangor has a chance to be more progressive than the State of Maine. The State of Maine policies aren't as good as the City of Bangor. Baldacci asked Mr. Howard if he was going to have the primary custodial • responsibility for these two children. Mr. Howard indicated yes, while his son is in Boston. Tremble asked Heitmann about the City's definition for immediate family. Heitmann said that we should try to be specific about what constitutes and immediate family. Allen said that the role of grandparents is becoming more active in the lives of grandchildren in assuming these types of responsibilities and other avenues as well, and is something that needs to be defined in this policy. Farrar suggested that if the committee did want to expand the classification, that they should specifically state which family members are to be included in the definition. Tremble noted that this is sick time that the employee has earned and therefore should be able to take it regardless of whether they are the sick person or whether they need to care for someone else. Barrett clarified that sick leave is a benefit, and it is not expected that an employee will use all 15 days that they earn every year. It is not vacation, but it is there for emergencies. � � Howard said that he has used vacation time, and may eventually use up all his earned time even if he was able to use sick time. Farrar said that the City has been liberal in its interpretation of using sick time for those individuals requiring care by the employee to include comfort as well. Barrett said that we should come up with two groups of family members, one that you have the time by right, whether you were the caregiver or not, and the other would be time for whether you are primarily responsible for the other family members. Palmer said that Mr. Howard was right, that the City of Bangor is a great place to work. He said that there are at least 3 grandparents on the committee and they understand his situation. Allen asked if we needed to make an exception to a current policy in order for Mr. Howard to take time off. Heitmann said that there is no provision to make and exception. Barrett noted that Mr. Howard does have options to be paid; however he is not able to use his sick time now. Palmer asked if the policy was changed, could the date be retroactive to cover Mr. Howard's situation. � Baldacci said that the timeline is three weeks for a possible change to the policy. Tremble asked if the Committee could move on the proposed policy change as previously suggested by Mr. Barrett so that it could come before the next council meeting. The Committee agreed with this approach and also expressed a willingness to have an effective date of July 15t Gilbert Merchant, Mr. Howard's supervisor, asked that if for some reason Mr. Howard was unable to attend the council meeting, if he could speak in his place. Baldacci advised Mr. Howard to provide something in writing to distribute to the rest of the council, if he was unable to attend. Farrington asked that this come to a workshop prior to a council meeting, so that the proposed language changes could be reviewed and discussed by the full Council. 3. Discussion and Consideration of Casual Dress Days. Farrar presented a recommendation to allow casual dress days on Fridays during the months of June, July and August. He noted that he had included a list of clothing that would not be considered acceptable attire. � Baldacci asked how casual, and Farrar stated casual enough to include jeans. � Tremble said that he did not usually think of jeans as part of business casual. Farrar said that initially he did not have jeans included in his original draft, however he said that a number of employees who reviewed the draft indicated that dockers, chinos, capris are acceptable, and that if you have business casual days and don't allow jeans, you are not providing anything further than what is currently acceptable. Palmer said that City employees have a responsibility to the taxpayer and many are required to meet the public and should be dressed appropriately. He said that jeans are unacceptable. Allen said that for fund raising it would be okay to dress down, however, dressing down on a routine basis should not be allowed. Tremble asked about United Way days, etc., if these were dress down days or casual dress days. Farrar said that for donations, employees could dress down. Tremble said that we might want to go to casual dress days for those events, because at certain times when he was in he noticed some questionable t-shirts � being worn by employees. Farrar said in his opinion, we are already at casual dress. Allen asked if this applied strictly to this building. Farrar said that a number of outlying facilities have already adopted casual dress for certain times, and this was primarily for City Hall and any other department that did not have a policy in place. Baldacci said that we need to crack down in the opposite direction. Barrett said that you need to look at individuals and their situations, where some people may have not contact with the public, such as WWTP workers and Motor Pool Maintenance workers. Palmer noted that at the turn of the century, mechanics would wear a white shirt and tie, and the tie was always visible under their coveralls. He was interested in having a reward for the most professionally dressed in the summer months. Farrar said that this was an opportunity to provide employees with what they see as a benefit, with little or no cost. This is something that does not have a monetary cost, although it does have other types of non-financial costs associated with it. Palmer asked what the benefit to the public or taxpayer would be. � � Farrar said according to employees who had spoken to him, that if they are allowed to dress more casually, then their morale would be better and their productivity would be higher. Tremble moved that casual dress day as presented by Farrar be amended to say that no jeans are allowed. The motion was not seconded nor were any other motions made. Baldacci stated that employees who want to wear casual dress, may want to come before the council directly and make their pitch. 4. Approval of Earned Time Off (ETO) Policy. Farrar stated that on Monday the night the Council formally adopted the amendment to the Personnel Rules and Regulations which now provides for earned time off for non-union regular part-time employees. The policy drafted for consideration tonight is the administrative policy that sets forth the rules and regulations for those part- time employees earning their earned time off. Farrar pointed out the accumulation schedule. Depending on the number of hours � worked employees will accumulate a certain number of hours on a quarterly basis up to a maximum of 10 days a year, if you are regularly scheduled 30-40 hours per week. That schedule decreases if you work fewer hours. Tremble moved that the policy be accepted and Allen seconded it, and recommended to the full council. 5. Approval of Policy regarding job applicants with criminal histories. Farrar said that in the shrinking job market, it was time to establish general guidelines to be followed when considering applicants with criminal histories for City positions. He said that with the legal department's help, he drafted up parameters for situations where we would hire someone with a criminal background and those situations where we would not. Farrar said that we can consider someone with a criminal history who has been convicted of a misdemeanor offense as long as it does not involve a crime against another person, substantially relate to the duties of the position sought, or involve dishonesty or lying. Barrett said that we normally pick up that someone has a conviction, by the applicant reporting it on their employment application. Farrar explained that our � application specifically asks whether the applicant has been convicted of a crime other than a minor traffic violation, with a request for an explanation if a yes. Farrar � said that we could utilize the police department if necessary. Typically the infractions are old, usually when the applicant was young. Tremble asked if a person committed an assault, would they be disqualified. Farrar replied that an assault is a misdemeanor, therefore no. Baldacci said that if a person has a felony that is more than 10 years old, would the applicant be disqualified. Farrar said that a felony conviction more than 10 years old would not immediately disqualify an applicant from consideration. Barrett said that we would probably still give preference to applicants without a felony conviction. Tremble asked if you could still use this as a reason to not hire someone. Farrar said that if an applicant with a felony conviction is up against 9 other applicants with no felony conviction, we could give preference to the individual who did not have a felony conviction. The policy was moved, seconded and approved. � Meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. �