LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Meeting was held on February 14, 2005, at 5:38 p.m. with Chairman Salters presiding. Members present were Mr. Hogan, Mr. Slavin, and Mr. Shevock. Mr. Shelton was absent. Members of Council present were Mr. Carey, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Sadusky, Mr. Ritter, Mr. Ruane, and Council President Williams. Mayor Speed was also present.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Hogan and unanimously carried.
Presentation of Pension Actuary Valuations as of July 1, 2004
Members were provided with a Summary of the General Employees and Police Pension Plans Actuarial Valuations as of July 1, 2004, as well as a four (4) year investment performance of the plans, as prepared by Pike Associates. Based on this valuation, the recommended contribution for the General Employees Pension Plan is 23.59% of covered payroll. This is an increase of 2.07% over the prior year’s valuation of 21.52% of covered payroll. The principal reason for the increase is the recognition of a portion of the prior three (3) years’ investment losses. The recommended contribution for the Police Pension Plan is $533,486, a decrease from the prior year’s contribution of $538,271. It is noted that police officers that were hired after September 1, 1982 will retire from the State of Delaware Police Pension Plan.
Mr. Slavin moved to recommend acceptance of the Pension Actuary Valuations as presented, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried.
Recommendation of Civilian Pension Board - Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA)
Members considered a recommendation of the Civilian Pension Board (Meeting of January 26, 2005), that a 2% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) increase be given to retirees on July 1, 2005. The last COLA was provided on July 1, 2003 for those who retired on or before December 31, 2002 at the rate of 1.5%. It was noted that after the Pension Board Meeting, several members of the Board had indicated that the motion should have stipulated that the COLA would be given to those that retired prior to December 31, 2004.
Mr. Salters moved to recommend that a 2% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) be given to retirees on July 1, 2005 for those that retired prior to December 31, 2004, as recommended by the Civilian Pension Board, seconded by Mr. Slavin.
The Mayor and several members of Council relayed concern with the City’s current unfunded liability and that the proposed COLA would only add to an already serious situation for the City. Mr. Hogan noted that during the Pension Board Meeting, there was a suggestion that a 1% COLA be provided and questioned why members would not have concurred.
Council President Williams noted that due to a conflict of interest, the Finance Director abstained from voting during the Pension Board Meeting and questioned how this may be avoided in the future. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell suggested that the Code could be amended to allow for the Assistant Finance Director to serve in the absence of the Finance Director.
The motion to recommend that a 2% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) be given to retirees on July 1, 2005 for those that retired prior to December 31, 2004 was carried with Mr. Hogan voting no.
Investment Policy Review
Mrs. Mitchell, Finance Director/Treasurer, presented a revision to the Investment Policy that would amend Section 7.10 by allowing for the City’s Post-Retirement Benefits Fund to be invested in the Delaware Local Government Retirement Investment Pool (DELRIP).
Referring to Section 7.3 of the Policy, Council President Williams questioned why the Fitch, Inc. would be used as a rating guide rather than Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) and/or Standard & Poor’s (S&P). Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that she would look into the matter, noting that in other areas of the policy, Moody’s and S&P is referenced.
Mr. Hogan moved to recommend adoption of the revision to Section 7.10 of the Investment Policy as recommended by staff, seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried.
Proposed Charter Changes - Reincorporation of City Charter
The last reincorporation of Dover occurred in 1929 and since that date, the Charter has been amended a multitude of times, resulting in a legal researching nightmare in determining the most current provisions of the Charter. The reincorporation would result in a concise, single complete document from which to operate. In January 2003, members of Council adopted a Resolution requesting the General Assembly of the State of Delaware to reincorporate the City of Dover. H.B. 59 was introduced to the 142nd General Assembly; however, it was referred to a committee and never received final consideration.
Members of City Council have continued to have discussions regarding additional amendments to the City Charter. Since no action was taken with regards to the City’s request for reincorporation, during a Special Meeting of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee of November 9, 2004, members suggested that staff review the City Charter for the purposes of identifying any discrepancies or conflicts with existing State law or City policies and practices for a report back in 90 days.
As requested, the City Clerk, City Manager, and Finance Director/Treasurer reviewed the Charter and consulted other department heads for possible amendments. Mrs. Green, City Clerk, presented draft Charter revisions (depicting proposed amendments by bold italics (blue) for inserts, (red) strike-outs for deletions, and bold (green) italics for notes and comments (as on file in the Office of the City Clerk). Based on discussions during the Special Committee Meeting of November 9, 2004, the Deputy City Solicitor submitted a letter explaining his position on the elimination of the Alderman’s Court. It was noted that based on the direction of the committee, the proposed Charter revisions include the elimination of the Alderman’s Court.
Mr. Hogan moved to recommend approval of the Charter revisions as presented. The motion failed for the lack of a second.
Mr. Ruane noted that according to Section 53, the police force shall be chosen and appointed by the Mayor. Although the Mayor appoints the Police Chief, he does not hire/fire police officers. He suggested that the Section be amended to coincide with the Code. As a result of concerns that the Charter is in conflict with the Police Officers’ Bill of Rights, it was suggested that the City Solicitor review Section 53 for possible amendments.
Mr. Salters relayed his concurrence with the Deputy City Solicitor’s position regarding the Alderman’s Court. He suggested that many of the problems the City has with the courts resisting enforcement of the City’s Building and Property Maintenance Code would be eliminated if the Alderman’s Court was activated.
Members were reminded that one of the local legislators has concerns with Alderman Courts, which is supposedly why the City’s Reincorporation (H.B. 59) never received final consideration. Mr. Hogan relayed concern that members were once again going to allow for the Reincorporation to be stalled.
Mr. Ruane advised members that there would be additional costs involved with the reactivation of the Alderman Court; therefore, he did not feel that this would be a solution to the problem. He suggested that in order to rectify any problems we may have with the Courts’ review of City Code violations, the City should visit and address these concerns with the magistrates of the courts.
After much discussion, Mr. Slavin moved to recommend approval of the proposed Charter changes for the Reincorporation of the City Charter with the stipulation that Section 52, Alderman, remain intact, seconded by Mr. Shevock.
Mrs. Green advised members that since it was proposed to totally eliminate Section 52 of the Charter, it was not reviewed for the purpose of identifying any discrepancies or conflicts with existing State law or City policies and practices. Considering this and noting that other areas of the Charter that referenced the Alderman were simply changed to City Clerk, she suggested that the City Solicitor be requested to review Section 52 as well as other references to the Alderman for possible amendments.
Mr. Slavin withdrew his motion, as did the seconder, Mr. Shevock.
Mr. Slavin moved to recommend approval of the proposed Charter changes for the Reincorporation of the City Charter with the stipulation that Section 52, Alderman, remain intact to be further reviewed by the City Clerk and City Solicitor for possible amendments to be presented to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shevock and carried with Mr. Hogan voting no. City Clerk’s Office Note: Approval of the committee’s recommendation will require adoption of the Resolution requesting the General Assembly to Reincorporate the City Charter as amended (Attachment #1).
Mr. Slavin moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Hogan and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 6:34 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Reuben Salters
Chairman
RS/jg
S:ClerksOfficeAgendas&MinutesCommittee-Minutes20052-14-2005 LF&A.wpd
Attachments
Attachment #1 - Proposed Resolution and Charter Amendments (For reference purposes, the attached Charter Amendments depict the annotated amendments; however, upon approval by Council, the annotations will be eliminated when forwarded to the General Assembly as an attachment to the Resolution)