Ward 3 Councilor Andrew K. Surprise (WNG File Photo)
WESTFIELD – The bulk of Ward 3 Councilor Andrew K. Suprises’s fourteen motions regarding proposed changes to the municipal budget process at the City Council meeting were tabled without discussion until the July 5 City Council meeting, after the June 28 vote on the FY19 budget. One unrelated motion, however, was discussed at length; to have the Finance sub-committee meet with Westfield Teachers Association president and vice president at their request to discuss the labor negotiation process and contracts.
Ward 2 Councilor Ralph J. Figy, who is liaison to the School Department, expressed his concern after Surprise read the motion. “I’m very concerned when we stray into contracts. It’s one thing to talk about negotiating,” Figy said.
Surprise said the WTA wanted to talk about current contracts. “I don’t see any issue,” he said.
“I beg to differ. We do approval of appropriations; we don’t negotiate,” Figy responded.
At-large Councilor Brent B. Bean, II, who is co-liaison to the schools, asked why other unions across the city were not included in the meeting. “I don’t want to single out unions on the education side,” Bean said.
City Council President John J. Beltrandi, III asked if Surprise had gotten any input from the Law Department about the meeting. He said no, because the union leaders just wanted to discuss the process.
Ward 1 Councilor Mary Ann Babinski noted that the motion said “to discuss labor negotiations,” and since the WTA initiated it, maybe they wanted to educate the Finance committee on how the process worked.
“Have they indicated expediting it? I don’t see what the gain is for this budget process,” said At-large Councilor Matthew Emmershy, who also serves on Finance, adding that current contracts are signed and set.
Ward 6 Councilor William Onyski said he thought the intent was good, if there was a process, and that he would agree if the Council asked the mayor’s side to come in on the meeting.
“We’re always happy to speak to the Mayor,” Surprise said.
“If we get in the middle of negotiations by the union telling us what they want, we’re crossing the line,” Onyski said, adding, “If we’re officially listening to any union’s requests; then it’s becoming a negotiation.”
“They wanted to tell Finance what they felt the Finance committee should know,” Bean said, adding that many times over the last few weeks, members of Finance mentioned cuts. “I don’t think it’s a legal question; in the end, it might bring you some clarity on what they feel is an important issue, because of the ongoing comments that contracts are unsustainable,” Bean added.
“Respectfully, I would oppose this motion,” said Personnel Action Committee chair Cindy C. Harris.
Surprise said he thought one of the reasons they want to meet, is because the City Council doesn’t determine School Department funding. “We just give them the money,” he said, adding, “I think we have spoken to the unions before.”
“I find it kind of curious that the request has been made. There are some things we couldn’t speak to,” said Finance sub-committee chair Dan Allie, in response to which Surprise tabled the motion to July 5.
