Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-10-03 Agenda Packet - Board (20) Page 1 of 2 Barbara Cahill From: Waite, Patrick J. [PJW1 @IBEW1245.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 2:27 PM To: Barbara Cahill Subject: TDPUD 10.3.07 Board Meeting Barbara Please forward this email to the TDPUD Board of Directors,and have the email read during the public comment section of Agenda Item #14. Thanks Pat Waite IBEW 1245 Business Representative My name is Pat Waite; I am a rate payer who lives in Tahoe Donner, and a Business Representative for IBEW Local Union 1245 representing the bargaining unit employees at TDPUD. After reviewing tonight's Board packet I came across an item that presented interest to the represented employees. Unfortunately I am unable to attend tonight's meeting to address the Board in open session. However, I would like this letter read into the record in its entirety at the October 3, 2007 TDPUD Board meeting. Agenda item#14, "Proposed Labor Changes for 2008"has some potential affects on the bargaining unit employees at TDPUD. Specifically, Cost Center#3 discusses the District creating a Customer Services Manager with"the net affect of this change adds one management staff and reduces one Customer Services Clerk." The concern does not lie with the addition of a management staff, but with the loss of a bargaining unit position. To fully understand our concern, I will present history on related issues between the District and Union. As the Board is aware, we have a pending grievance that has been referred to arbitration regarding the District's assignment of water inspections historically performed by bargaining unit employees to an exempt management employee. When the District created and filled Associate Water and Electric Engineers in late 2004, the Union asked District management if they intended to transfer duties the bargaining unit was currently performing to the new management positions. The District assured us the new engineers were to help the current engineering staff, and not to replace the bargaining unit that was performing those duties. When the exempt employee first started inspecting water facilities in the summer of 2005, the Union brought up the issue to former General Manager, Peter Holzmeister the at the August 8,2005 Labor/Management meeting. At that meeting Peter assured us the District had no intention of using engineers to inspect, as engineers should be engineering. At the next Labor/Management meeting on September 8, 2005, we again brought up the issue, at which Peter did not respond. Again, on October 6, 2005, the Union voiced its concern to Peter that the practice was continuing,his tone and rhetoric had changed. Peter told the Union that exempt employees have always performed those duties, and to grieve it. The Union tried multiple times to work through the issue and ultimately left with no other recourse, sent the grievance to the Board, and subsequently to arbitration. As you can see by this example, the bargaining unit employees have a valid concern that the new management position will start performing duties currently performed by the bargaining unit, and soon thereafter the Union and District will be embroiled in another grievance that can be avoided. Additionally, Cost Center#7 states there are no vacancies in the Water Department. It should be noted that there is a current vacancy of a Water Foreman position that the District has assured the Union at recent Labor Management meetings would be filled. 10/3/2007 -----Original Message----- From: Dennis De Cuir [mailto:dennis@ddecuir.coml Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 5:49 PM To: John Ulrich Cc: Denise Lynch Subject: Status Report PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL John, You suggested I prepare a brief report that you might share with your board to apprise them of the status of the matter involving Ciro Mancuso. The purpose is to preserve the attorney-client privilege so that the board can be candidly informed of the facts as we know them, and receive the advice of counsel. In a 2002 agreement for the Pioneer Commerce Center, Mr. Mancuso's corporation agreed to pay certain estimated costs, above a quarter million dollars, for labor and materials to be supplied by the District. Ultimately the bill exceeded the estimate by some $33,000+. Billed for the overage in January 2007, Mr. Mancuso requested a compilation of information on the labor and materials in the middle of March 2007. At the end of April District staff supplied a detailed composite of time sheet information on a worksheet showing each discipline, date, time in hours, hourly rate, and summation. He was given a detailed materials list. He did not pay. Sometime in July or August before he left, Peter Holzmeister phoned to speak with Mr. Mancuso to inquire about payment when none was forthcoming. Peter asked me to follow up because Steve's firm had a conflict. On September 13th I sent a letter asking Mr. Mancuso to contact me in five days and arrange for immediate payment or risk having the District put its staff work on his other projects on hold. I didn't hear from Mr. Mancuso, but he did contact you on September 19th, charging (according to your email to me) that my letter was fraudulent and retaliatory, and making other allegations about District culture, work ethic, and accounting practices. He demanded a complete extract of the labor, materials, and any other invoices "to prove money was actually spent" to justify the "collection of the shortfall." The information had been provided already in late April or the first week of May. Another Mancuso project needs a "sign off" from the District in order to obtain a building permit from the Town of Truckee. As of last Friday the District on my advice has taken the position that there is no reasonable basis to suspect that the District's bill is in error, and that Mr. Mancusco is free to pay it under protest, take out his permit, and if he remains unsatisfied after considering additional background information, he could seek his legal remedies. Given his position, the District in my opinion has good reason to feel insecure about payment for work on the other projects that are underway. It is reasonable position. Mr. Mancuso had his Truckee lawyer Christina Wooley phone me today. After two conversations she reported that Mr. Mancuso will not pay under protest to get the sign-off 1 now and work out the questions later, but will instead turn this over to his litigation lawyers. She said his questions had not been answered, that he suspected fraud, and wanted to see how the estimate could have been so wrong when on other projects it hasn't been. Mr. Mancuso apparently believes in the advice of his lawyer that the District must treat his corporations differently. She states that the subject Pioneer Commerce Center is owned by one of his corporations, and the desired permit would be held by another. In her view that means the District must ignore the fact that the credit behind both corporations is the same individual. My opinion is that we have a reasonable legal position. Let me know if the board has any questions. You may recall that the reason for my retention on this matter stemmed from prior work the Porter Simon firm had done work for Mr. Mancuso. Thus if the board wished to confer on this matter, you should contact me to help in preparing the closed session agenda item. -- Dennis Dennis W. De Cuir A Law Corporation 2999 Douglas Boulevard, Suite 325 Roseville, California 95661 Telephone (916) 788-1022 Facsimile (916) 788-1023 2 E Ande n&Aswc1sta Search Status Report General Manager Truckee Donner Public Utility District September 28, 2007 Current Status: Board and community meetings have been concluded to get information for position profile and brochure. The Position Brochure was completed and available for distribution on September 13th. Position advertising placed in a number of trade magazines, professional association's publications, and web sites. As a result of the advertising and outreach efforts, there have been over twenty (20) applicants for the position. Preliminary screening and communication with applicants occurs as they are received. We continue to network and seek additional candidates though personal contact and mailing to targeted individuals and organizations. Closing date is October 10th and it is anticipated that the number of additional candidates will be larger as the closing date approaches. Ongoing Steps in the Process: • Continue outreach to candidates; provide brochure and other requested information to interested individuals. Board of Directors Items for Consideration: • Board to determine process they wish for review focus group applications (and scan other candidate resumes) to determine which candidates should wr en&Asp dates advance in the process. This is best done in at a special closed Board meeting or at an Ad Hoc meeting of Board members. • Board will need to set an approximate timetable for the interview process so that dates can be coordinated. • The Board of Directors or Ad Hoc Committee will select top tier candidates (5-8) who will meet with the Board or Ad Hoc Committee to determine who will advance at finalists in the selection process. • The Board of Directors or Ad Hoc Committee will meet with top tier candidates and determine who will advance as finalists. • Finalists will meet with the Board of Directors and perhaps other groups such as TDPUD managers and selected individuals from advisory groups or the community at large. (The role of these groups will be advisory only.) • Full Board will to make decision as to individual selected for General Manager. • Board Chair and District Council will negotiate terms with final candidate. Ralph Andersen Support Ralph Andersen & Associates will facilitate all interview sessions including creating interview binders, screening interview reports, and development of interview questions to be used in the process to create a standard format. Prior to finalist interviews by the Board of Directors, a full interview,background, and reference reports will be included in interview binders. Ralph Andersen &Associates Truckee Donner Public Utility District General Manager Project Timetine Task Estimated Dates of Completion Task 1 —Review Project Management Approach Review search project timelines,process,and gather input for position July 25 profile&search brochure. Task 2—Develop Position Profile and Recruitment Brochure August 10-September S Process can be facilitated if Board designates staff/Board member(s) Final Brochure Completed on who can review draft versions.Final text and brochure layout can be September 13 and ready for distribution forwarded to Board via e-mail. to potential candidates. Task 3—Outreach and Recruiting-execution of search outreach September 4—October 10th activities&preliminary interviews with qualified candidates by Ralph (the submission cutoff date) Andersen&Associates. Task 4—Candidate Evaluation—Ranking candidate based on search Ongoing Throughout Process profile by Ralph Andersen&Associates. September 6—October 12 @October 17 Will require meeting Board and/or Task 5—Search Report—Complete package of applications and designated Search Panel to determine ranking of candidates for consideration.Typically 4-6 of the top 8-10 who will advance in the process candidates will advance and scheduled for interview process. Ralph Andersen&Associates will coordinate interviews with top candidates at time to be determined. Board/Search Panel meets with top candidates as soon as schedule permits. Task 6—Selection—Ralph Andersen&Associates will prepare @a Week of November 5th interview binders and materials for Board/Search Panel,schedule interview,and facilitate process. Additional meetings of fnalist(s)may be required depending on Board process,for approval Task 7—Negotiation As needed following selection of final candidate Task 8—Close Out As needed following selection of final candidate 2 Tradition ra f Exec I e n e c Since 1977 i800Suinf6rd Rare h Road,Siw,,410 flocAiin. C a o 00 Y? 6? Mllon, t/I6 6-W 490(i Fitc YM 630-4911 Wehsiic io+w_raipk wdclsvn cum