03/20/2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

was heard before a Special Magistrate; and on December 19, 2014, the Special Magistrate issued his recommendations on the Articles at Impasse. He revealed that on January 26, 2015, both the Union and County filed their rejections of the recommendations rendered by the Special Magistrate; and under Florida Law, the Legislative body is required to conduct a public hearing at which the parties explain their positions, with respect to the rejected recommendations of the Special Magistrate. He listed the ten Articles at impasse, and recalled that the Union had submitted a proposal concerning a Union Business Bank under Article 6 — Union Activity, at the October 9, 2014 Special Magistrate hearing, but the Special Magistrate determined that it was not identified as an issue when the impasse was declared, precluding the Special Magistrate from making a recommendation on that issue; and therefore, Attorney Reingold did not include Article 6 on the Agenda. Attorney Reingold announced that each Commissioner received two books from Attorney Mierzwa, (1) Attorney Mierzwa's presentations, and (2) Local 2201's recommendations. He pointed out that based on the subject matter, speakers were not required to provide their addresses. Attorney Reingold requested Commissioners to declare any ex parte communications they have had since January 26, 2015. Commissioners, as requested, disclosed ex parte site visits, investigations, and communications. Each Commissioner affirmed that he can and will have an open mind based on the evidence presented and the applicable law. John O'Connor, Indian River County Firefighter, and President of the International Association of Firefighters Local 2201 (Union), recognized veterans in the audience, and invited everyone to the reception at the Elks Lodge following this meeting. The Board decided to eliminate time limits, and felt it would be best to hear each Article individually, unless Counsel requested to combine the items. 5. ARTICLES AT IMPASSE A. Article 14 — Uniforms and Equipment 10 minutes each, County presents first 9:50 a.m. Attorney Mandel stated that under Article 14, the only Paragraphs that remained in dispute were 14.01 and 14.02, concerning the issue of uniforms and safety equipment. He reviewed the County's proposed changes as shown in Exhibit G of the Agenda Packet; and stated that the Special Magistrate's recommendation was to replace existing Paragraph 14.01 with the County's proposed language, and leave Paragraph 14.02 unchanged. He requested the Board adopt the County's proposed recommendation on both paragraphs. Impasse Hearing March 20, 2015 Page 2