Menlo Park City Council Email Log

[ Home ] [ City Council ] [ Search ] [ 05/06 Archive ] [ 07/08 Archive ] [ 09/10 Archive ] [ 2011 Archive ] [ Watch City Council Meetings ]

Re: HR29

From: Keith, Kirsten <"Keith,>
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2014 15:53:13 -0700

Hello Ms. Feinler,

Thank you for your email.

The League of California Cities opposed HR 29. Menlo Park is part of the League, and I sit on the Employee Relations Committee that addresses these issues.

The League sent our letter on 02/19/14 to the Legislature opposing HR 29. Unfortunately, the measure was adopted by the Assembly Thursday, 04/03/14. Here is the floor vote: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/hr_29_vote_20140403_0942AM_asm_floor.html

The League Employee Relations Committee met last Friday, 04/04/14, and we discussed HR 29, and its repercussions, at great length. Since it was a House Resolution, it does not go to the Senate or the Governor. It is important that cities continue to make sure their legislators know where they stand on this issue because it is an indicator of possible legislation to come.

It is also important to let Assembly Member Gordon, who abstained on the vote, know your views on these issues.

Another bill you may be interested in is AB 2126, which the League is opposing. AB 2126 is awaiting a hearing date in the Assembly Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security Committee. A summary is provided below.

AB 2126 (Bonta) - OPPOSE
As Introduced on February 20, 2014

Assembly Bill 2126, by Assembly Member Rob Bonta, would authorize either bargaining party in the collective bargaining process to request mediation if they fail to reach agreement (current law allows BOTH parties to AGREE to enter into mediation). The bill mandates the appointment of a mediator within 5 days after receipt of the party's request.

In the past, the League and other stakeholders were successful in removing the mandatory mediation provision from both AB 537 (Chapter 785, Statutes of 2013) and AB 646 (Chapter 680, Statutes of 2012), citing that such a requirement would lead to expensive and unnecessary delays in the bargaining process that would prove detrimental to both employers and employees.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Kirsten Keith
Council Member & Former Mayor
City of Menlo Park
701 Laurel Street
Menlo Park, CA 94025

On Apr 13, 2014, at 3:36 PM, "Elizabeth Feinler" <feinler_at_(domainremoved)

Restricting to whom a city might outsource its needs to only that city's resources seems ludicrous - one of those silly restrictions that only government comes up with. I would think that one would go to the best resources available with more than one competitive bid for cost and comparison unless there happened to be only one expert to provide a given need (very unlikely.). I would be in favor of a caveat that favors a local provider, all other things being equal. Otherwise for efficiency, cost, expertise and a number of other reasons the best source at a competitive price should be the benchmark for cost and efficiency. It only makes good business sense for heaven's sake!

Who comes up with this nonsense??? Have they never run a business or even read a book on the subject????

Elizabeth Feinler
Received on Sun Apr 13 2014 - 15:51:40 PDT

[ Search ] [ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]

Email communications sent to the City Council are public records. This site is an archive of emails received by the City Council at its city.council_at_(domainremoved)