The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20-Human Resources ORIGINAL CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: LINN LIVINGSTON Subject: PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING IMPASSE ON SAN BERNARDINO FIRE DEPARTMENT USE OF A 24-DAY WORK PERIOD UNDER THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 10584, SECTION 13 Dept: HUMAN RESOURCES Date: December 30, 2008 MICC Meeting Date: January 5, 2009 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: Recommended Motion: That the hearing be closed and that the 24-day work period for City firefighters be imp',m,o',d forthw,". ~ . ~' .~ !)i /1... / A f1/l,0;) Sig ature Contact person: Linn Livinqston Phone: 384-5161 Supporting data attached: Yes Ward: FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: No Cost Source: (Accl. No.) (Accl. Description) Finance: Council Notes: Agenda Item No. 20 1-5 -01 STAFF REPORT Council Meeting Date: January 5, 2009 BACKGROUND The 24-dav Work Period Issue The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is a federal statute which governs payment of overtime. Under the FLSA, overtime ordinarily is due when an employee works more than 40 hours in a seven day period. Special overtime rules apply to firefighters under 9 7(k) of the FLSA. Under 9 7(k), an employer may establish a work period of between seven and 28 days. The threshold for overtime depends upon the length of the work period. For example, if the employer uses a 28-day work period, it must pay overtime if the firefighter works more than 212 hours in the 28-day work period. If a 24-day work week period is used, the overtime threshold is 182 hours. The San Bernardino Fire Department currently uses a 28-day work period for overtime purposes, although it has erred in how it calculates overtime hours within the 28-day work period. The SBFD's overtime practices are the subject of a lawsuit currently pending in United States District Court, entitled Moss. et al. v. Citv of San Bernardino, Case Number 5:07-CV-I027. The City is working to bring its section 7(k) pay system into compliance with the FLSA. Part of this process involves changing from a 28-day work period to a 24-day work period. A 24-day work period is needed because the SBFD's firefighters work a six-day cycle (two days on, four days off). Thus, the work period should be an even multiple of six (i.e. 4 x 6 = 24). Otherwise, it is extremely cumbersome to compute overtime with a six-day work cycle within a 28-day work period. For example, using a 28-day work period with a six-day work cycle would result in anomalies such as different hourly rates of pay for different shifts from work period to work period. Past Efforts to Meet and Confer with the Firefighters Union on the 24-Dav Work Period Issue Switching from a 28-day work period to a 24-day work period probably is a subject over which the City must meet and confer with the Fire Fighters' Union, Local 891. Accordingly, James OdIum, outside counsel for the City, has asked the Union, through its attorney Cory Glave, to meet and confer on the subject. The Union has refused to do so. The most recent series of correspondence between the Union's and the City's respective counsel concerning meeting on this issue is attached as Exhibit A. The Union contends that, under the current Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Union, the Union has no obligation to meet and confer with the City on the issue. More specifically, the Union contends that Article VII, Section 4 of the MOU constitutes a "zipper clause"]. A zipper clause is a provision to the effect that the MOU has settled all issues and all collective bargaining obligations for the term of the MOU. In the view of counsel for the City, Article VII, Section 4 is not a zipper clause and does not relieve the Union of its obligation to meet and confer on this issue. The Union refuses to meet unless the City agrees that the meetings do not constitute a formal meet and confer and the City agrees that no change would be made unless the Union agrees to the change. In the opinion of the City's outside counsel, these conditions are unreasonable because the Union has a legal duty to meet and confer and cannot unilaterally bar the City from making this change which is an integral part of bringing the City's 9 7(K) pay system into compliance with the FLSA. Commencement of the Citv's Impasse Procedure Because the Union refuses to meet and confer on this issue, the City declared an impasse concerning the 24-day work period issue. The series of correspondence between the Union's and the City's respective counsel concerning impasse is attached as Exhibit B. Accordingly, the City invoked section 13 of the Employer-Employee Relations Resolution of the City of San Bernardino, which deals with resolution of impasses (Copy attached as Exhibit C.) The first step in impasse resolution is to schedule an impasse resolution meeting. The purpose of the impasse resolution meeting is for the Union and the City to make a last attempt to resolve the impasse and, if that cannot be done, to select a procedure to resolve the impasse, such as mediation or referral to the Mayor and Common Council. The City scheduled an impasse meeting for December 18, and so notified the Union. However, no representative of the Firefighters Union showed up for the meeting. Under the Impasse Resolution Procedure, absent a mutual agreement concerning an impasse procedure, the matter may be referred to the Mayor and Common Council. On December 29, 2008, Mr. GIave was given fax notice that this matter would be heard by the Mayor and Common Council. RECOMMENDA nON That the hearing be closed and that the 24-day work period for City firefighters be implemented forthwith. 1 Article VII, Section 4 states: "All benefits, privileges and working conditions authorized for the members at the present time, which are not included in the MOD shall remain in full force during the term of this MOD unless changed by mutual consent." JAMES A. ODLUM MUNDELL, ODLUM & HAWS, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 650 EAST HOSPlT ALITY LANE SUITE 470 SAN BERNARDINO. CALIFORNIA 92408.3595 TELEPHONE: (909) 890-9500 FACSlMILE: (909) 890-9580 LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE: WESTLAKE PLAZA 2829 TOWNSGATE ROAD SUITE 320 WESTLAKE VILLAGE,CA 91361 Tc:Jephone (80S) 446-2221 'A PrQfessional('orporalion e-majl:jod!um@mohlaw_~om A California Limited Liabilily Panncrship including a Professional Corporation Please Reply to San Bernardino Orfice VIA FAX 310.379.0456 October I, 2008 Mr. Corey Glave Goldwasser & GJave, LLP 1042 2nd Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: SBCPF Local 891 v. City of San Bernardino Dear Mr. Glave: The City of San Bernardino hereby requcsts that Local 891 meet with the City to mcet and confer concerning changing the work period for bargaining unit fire suppression personnel to a 24 day work period under g7(k) ofthe FLSA, including setting the beginning and ending dates of such work periods. 1 will be leading the negotiations for the City. The City is available to meet on October 9,21,24,27,28 or 29. I suggest the meetings be held in the SBFD's conference room at Station 221. Please let me know on which of the foregoing dates the Union is available. Very truly yoU~ J~um G)(jJ;f!,/r "f}" I .LU-.L":I-OO .L.l...l.D rg. L. COREYWll.LIAM GLAVE ATIORNEYATLAW 1042 2NJ) STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 TELEPHONE (310) 379-006S FACSIMilE (310) 379-0456 E-mail POAanornev@taol.com October 14,2008 VIA FACSIMILE ONLY James A. OdIum Mundell, Odium & Haws, LLP Re: Request to Meet and Confer Dear Mr Odium, Thank you again for your letter wherein you requested that the San Bernardino City Professional Firefighters, Local 891, meet and confer with the City of San Bernardino about proposed changes to the Fire Department's to a twenty-four day work period. You Jetter appears to he similar in nature to your requests of February 11,2008, June 2, 2008, and June 13, 2008. Accordingly, we would refer you to our responses of February 26, 2008, June 3, 2008, June 10, 2008, and June 16, 2008. You again indicated that the City intends to adopt a 24-day work period pursuant to FLSA F(k). We again request information as to the City's intentionsl Does the City contend that this would be a change to the Memorandum of Understanding and the provisions that provide that the average workweek for shift personnel shall be 56 hours; that "Overtime worked in excess of an employee's regular work schedule shall be paid at the applicable time-and-a half overtime rate under either the Fair Labor Standards Act or Charter Section 186; and that defines overtime as all hours worked in excess of the regularly scheduled workweek; or some other practice not specifically referenced in the MOD? Additionally, is the City proposing to change its payroll processes and if so, exactly what is the city proposing? Additionally, in regards to Charter 9186, is the City proposing a change to the process required by the Charter? lIt should be noted that City Attorney Penman, in a legal opinion letter to the San Bernardino City Council, dated June 16, 2008, acknowledged our request for information (dated June 16, 2008) and indicated that "Mr, Odium will be responding to that letter as part of the City's continuing effort to engage the Union in discussions on this subject," The Union never received a response or the requested information from either you or your client. James Odium October 14,2008 Page 2 As we indicated before, we believe it would be beneficial to all the parties if the City would provide us with any and all proposals the City is offering so that we can fully analyze the proposals and can make lIJ\ informed decision on whether the Union desires to meet with the City and to be prepared the proposals if the Union agrees to meet with the City on these issues. Finally, I will be the lead contact person on this matter for the Union so all communications should be conducted through my office; I will assume that the same is true with the City and your office unless I hear otherwise Weare looking forward to your response. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to write ~t~I7t~ ~.GLAVE COREY WILLIAM GLA VB A'ITORNEY AT LAW 1042 2"'" STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 TELEPHONE (31 Ol379-0065 FAC:5IMILE (310) 379-0456 E-mail POAattornty@aol.com FACSIMILE COVER SHEET TO: JAMES ODLUM Mundell, Odium & Haws, LLP FROM: Corey Glave DATE: October 14, 2008 FAX NUMBER: (909) 890-9580 NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): 3 IN CASE OF ERROR IN TRANSMITTING, PLEASE CALL: (323) 547-0472 MESSAGE THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE.EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RES!,ONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIfY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE, AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. HMES A. ODLUM r "'UNDELL, ODLUM & HAW! :"LP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 650 EAST HOSPITALITY LANE SUITE 470 SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92408-3595 TELEPHONE: (909) 890-9500 FACSIMILE: (909) 890-9580 LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE: WESTLAKE PLAZA 2829 TOWNSGA TE ROAD SUITE .~20 WESTLAKE VILLAGE. CA 91361 Telephone (805) 446-2221 .A ProfessionalCorporalion e-mail:jodlum@mohlaw.com A California Limited Liability Partnership including a Professional Corporation VIA FAX (310) 379-0456 ORIGINAL BY MAIL October 21, 2008 Mr, Corey G1ave Attorney at Law 1042 2nd Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Citv of San Bernardino's Request to Meet and Confer with Local 891 Dear Mr, Glave: This is in response to your October 14, 2008 letter, As your letter notes, the City already has asked the Union to meet and confer about issues involving overtime pay for firefighters, but thus far the Union has declined to meet. The questions in the third paragraph of your letter seem to mix apples and oranges, First, you refer to the definition of "average workweek" in Article VI of the MOU, This language does not govern FLSA overtime, so the City's proposal will not change the "average workweek" language. Second, you ask whether the City's proposal will change the language in Article III, Section 6 of the MOU stating that overtime "in excess of an employee's regular work schedule" will be paid at the overtime rate under either FLSA or Charter Section 186. There can be two types of overtime "in excess of an employee's regular work schedule," First, employees can work outside their "regular work schedule" but below the FLSA threshold. This is "MOU overtime," and the City's proposal will not change payment of MOD overtime. Second, employees can work overtime "in excess of [their] regular work schedule" that is also above the FLSA threshold, Under the City's proposal, this language would not change, but the City would bring its practices into workable compliance with the FLSA. Mr. Corey W. Glave I October 21,2008 Page 2 You next ask if the City is proposing "to change its payroll processes and ifso, exactly what is the city proposing?" As stated in my October I, 2008 letter, the City is proposing to change to a 24-day work period, and therefore in that sense the City would be changing its payroll process. The FLSA Statistician would continue to receive his $50 per month stipend for the remainder of this MOU. How the City otherwise internally processes payroll is not a mandatory subject of bargaining. Finally, you ask if the City is proposing, "in regards to Charter 9186 . . . change to the process required by the Charter?" If you mean the 9186 process for adjusting wages each year, the answer is no. The Union has been given reasonable notice of the City's proposed action. The Union cannot continue to insist on bargaining by mail or demand excessive written details of a proposal before meeting. Cf. Beverlv Farms Foundation, 323 NLRB 787, 793 (I997)(a party "who insists on negotiating by mail or demanding that [a party] submit its proposals in writing has unlawfully refused to bargain.") Please let me know by October 31 if the Union will meet to discuss the City's proposal, and provide me with dates when you and your client are available. If the Union still is unwilling to meet, I will recommend that the City proceed accordingly by, for example, filing an unfair labor practice charge or implementing the proposal. \;;~;;o(j~ (James A. Odium - .J Date/Time local 10 1 Local 10 2 1 O~21 ~2008 909 890 9580 C_'. .-1 Transmission Report 043420 pm Transmit Header Text Local Name 1 Mundell, Odium & Haws Local Name 2 This document: Confirmed (reduced sample and details below) Document size: 8.5"x11" )M1~_" ^. VI>lXM MUNDELl., ODLUM & HAWS. LLP A't1<)'<>ltnAT1....... .>OfA.~TllCI$m.A!.rrVIA~ SUITU," .A....~~~~NU>lH<),(:AUfOll....," '''(l!..!191 T1Ul'lIO'''f'''.Olh'O-""" h"~''''\ ~ l'/IJ\II too.911oJ L.,.."iG.,....L""''''.~o<flC~ ...._'H."~"ul, ,.,.""""....."."..,,"'-' ""n,,-' ..un...U'''.l..c.l.n''..' ,..,.0.-..""...."" ."_0......_ .-.--- .(.'..,k.,...LIIO""'I._IO,.,.,.....,"_.......,,'''...,.IoIC''''''..i'''' VIA FAX (310) 379-6-456 ORIGINAL BY MAIL Ocl~r21.2008 M.t.CorcyGlavc Attorney ilt Law 10422"Streel lIermuS4 BelICh, CA 90254 Rc City of 51111 Bcrnllrdil1o'~ RC!l!!.Ql12.Mj:..tlJJ!c! Cnofer wilh r.~'Il Dear Mr, Glavc' This Is in response to your Odobcr 14.20081e:ucr. As your lclla" no-tl::S, the: eil)' m1rcadr has uk-cd rhc Union 10 ITI\.'eI and confer abottl i~S1.Ies involving O\'L-nimc p.ay for firefighter.;. hul thu~ far the Union bas declined tomrn. The qUl:~lioJ1S in the third parag.ruph of your letter $Ccrn 10 mix aJlple~ MId oranges r-irst, yoo refer to the ddinition (If''av~c workweek" in Article VI oflbe MOl), This language dtl'e~ 1101 govern FLSA overtime.!iO t~ City's prOfXl:>ll1 will nOl change lb<: MD.vcragcworkwcek"language. St.'Cond, you ask whetherlh<: Cily's proposal will cbange the language in Article IH. Section 6 of the Mot! $l.atlng thatovct1.ime "in eJlee~s of an employec'~ regular work :><:bedule" wrlr be paid 111 the ovcnimc rille unde( either fLSA 0/" C1larlcr Scc:tiOll IlS6. There can be two types ofov<<1imO;'" "in excess ofan employee's regular work schedule." First, employees Cal1 work oubide their "regular work ~hedulc~ hut below the FLSA Ihremold_ This is ~MOU ovcrtime.M and lI1e City's propoul will not ehange- payment of MOU overtime, Se-..:ood. employee~ can won overtilJJ( "in e~cess of ltheirJ regular worlc ~h('dulc" lhat is also llboVl; the FLSA Ihcesbold. Under Ihe Cily '$ proposal, Ihis languaj!e w(luld 001 dlllllge. butlhe eil)' would bring. il! prllClicc~ inln wnrbblc compIUlnl'ewithlheFJ..SA Total Pages Scanned 2 i No Job, Remote Slatlon 001 199 31031904~6 Abbreviations HS Host send HI{ Host receive WS Waltlnq send Tolal Pages Confirmed 2 Stall Time Duration ~4~2~~~ 10-71-2008 000026 Pages 2/2 I Line Job Type HS Results CP26400 PL Polled local PR Polled rem ole MS Mailbox save M P. M adbox print CP Completed FA Fail ru 1 emllnaled by user TS TeullJllaled by systetn RP Report G3 Group:3 EC Error Corted ........ ....ou OUU L..J.J.... c~. La COREY WILLIAM GLA VE ATIORNEY AT LAW 1042 2ND STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 TELEPHONE (310) 379-0065 FACSIMILE (310) 379-0456 E-mail POAanornev@aol.com November II, 2008 VIA FACSIMILE ONLY James A. Odium Mundell, Odium & Haws, LLP 650 E. Hospitality Lane, Suite 470 San Bernardino, CA 92408 Re: Reauest to Meet and Confer Dear Mr. Odium, Thank you for yOur letter of October 21,2008. If the City is willing to sign the attached meeting agreement, the San Bernardino City Professional Firefighters are willing to get together with the City and see if a mutually agreeable resolution can be reached. Weare looking forward to your response. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to write. ~ru~'t CORE~W. GLA VE rdX II"UI"'I . .3~IU.3r:7IU-s;:)o ........ ......... .......... .................. .."'. 0.1 The San Bernardino City Professional Firefighters, Local 891, via its representatives here today, is meeting with City's representative informally to discuss issues related to the City's desire to a 24-day work period. It is the Union's intent to listen to proposals from the City, to seek additional information to be able to fully understand and evaluate the City's proposal and possibly to offer its own proposals to the City in order to address the City's claim deficits The Union has agreed to meeting informally with the City based on the public statements of the City Attorney's office as well as the City Attorney's written opinion that the 1) the City is not, and cannot, require the Union to enter into formal meet and confer discussions; 2) the City is not, and cannot unilaterally reopen negotiations on the Current MOU and that 3) the City will not and cannot make any changes to the existing MOU without the mutual consent of the Union. At this time, the Union is not entering into a formal meet and confer process with the City and is not agreeing to reopen its MOU or waive the prevailing benefit clause. Both parties hereby agree that these discussions do not and WIll not constitute a formal "meet and confer" process, as that phrase is used and/or referenced under Government Code ~3500, et. seq, and that would be required to alter, modify or change the MOU and/or prevailing benefits. These discussion are being conducted for the mutual benefit oftbe Union as well as the benefit of the City of San Bernardino and San Bernardino Fire Department to see if a mutually agreed upon proposals can be developed. It is acknowledged that the Association is not re-opening negotiations and, absent a mutually agreed upon change (set forth in writing) no changes to the MOU or prevailing benefits will be made. San Bernardino City Professional Firefighters, Local 891. City of San Bernardino San Bernardino Fire Department. l.'aA arul" . ................,-'..."'%....... ........ ........ ....... "'.....~.... ...". .... COREY WILLIAM GLA VE ATrORNEY AT LAW 1042 2ND STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 TELEPHONE (310) 379-0065 FACSIMilE (310) 379-0456 E-mail PQAattornevl{!>aol.com FACSIMILE COVER SHEET TO: JAMES ODLUM Mundell, Odium & Haws, LLP FROM: Corey Glave DATE: November 11, 2008 FAX NUMBER: (909) 890-9580 NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): 3 IN CASE OF ERROR IN TRANSMITTING, PLEASE CALL: (323) 547-0472 MESSAGE THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT 15 PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE, AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. Page 1 of 1 Jim Odium From: Jim Odium Uodlum@mohlaw.com] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 5:48 PM To: 'Cory William Glave (POAattorney@aol.com)' Subject: Moss v. City of San Bernardino Attachments: meeting agreement revised 11.13.08.doc Attached is a revised draft of what you sent me which I would agree to as a precondition of informal discussions about the 24 day work period. The City would agree that these are not a formal meet and confer and that it is not a reopener, but it would otherwise allow both sides to reserve their respective positions under the MMBA. 12/30/2008 The San Bernardino City Professional Firefighters, Loca1891, via its representatives here today, is meeting with City's representative informally to discuss issues related to the City's desire to use a 24-day work period for purposes of 9 7(k) of the FLSA. It is the Union's intent to listen to proposals from the City, to seek additional information to be able to fully understand and evaluate the City's proposal and possibly to offer its own proposals to the City in order to address the City's stated desire to use a 24-day work period for purposes of 9 7(k) of the FLSA. At this time, the Union is not entering into a fonnal meet and confer process with the City and is not agreeing to reopen its MOU or waive the prevailing benefit clause. The Union's position is that it is not obligated to meet and confer over changing to a 24-day period and that the City cannot make such a change without the Union's agreement. The City disagrees with the Union's position. Both sides agree to enter into informal discussions without prejudice to their respective positions. Both parties hereby agree that these discussions do not and will not constitute a formal "meet and confer" process, as that phrase is used and/or referenced under Government Code 93500, et. seq. These discussion are being conducted for the mutual benefit of the Union as well as the benefit of the City of San Bernardino and San Bernardino Fire Department to see if a mutually agreed upon proposals can be developed. It is acknowledged that the Association is not re-opening negotiations. San Bernardino City Professional Firefighters, Local 891. City of San Bernardino San Bernardino Fire Department. Page 1 of 1 Jim Odium From: Poaattorney@aol.com Sent: Friday, November 21,20083:01 PM To: jodlum@mohlaw.com Ce: penmanja@ci.san-bernardino.ca.us Subject: Re: Moss v. City of San Bernardino Mr. Odium, Thank you for your e-mail. Unfortunately we do not agree with the changes you made to our meeting agreement. As you are aware, the City of San Bernardino (by and through its City Attorney) and San Bernardino City Fire Department have agreed to this same language in the past. We don't know why there needs to be any change to it now. I would suggest you consult with Mr. Penman and see if the language is acceptable to him as he has signed a similar agreement just a couple months ago. Corey Glave Attorney at Law Cell 323-547-0472 Fax: 310-379-0456 This electronic mail transmission, including any attachments, may contain confidential information which is legally privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain information that may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product doctrine, or other privilege, and may be restricted from disclosure pursuant to applicable stated and/or federal law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail information in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete all copies of the original e-mail and any attached document(s). Corey Glave, Attorney at Law, does not accept or consent to the service of process, motions, pleadings, documents or any other items by electronic format. Correspondence via electronic format does not indicate an agreement or consent to acceptance of service in such format. Thank you and have a great day. One site has it all. Your email accounts, your social networks, and the things you love. Try the new AQl&om today! 12/30/2008 .lAMES A. ODLUM M' ~DELL,ODLUM&HAWS,i :...p ATTORNEYS AT LAW 650 EAST HOSPITALITY LANE SUITE 470 SAN BERNARDINO. CALIFORNIA 92408-3595 TELEPHONE, (909) 890-9500 FACSIMILE (909) 890-9580 LOS ANGELES COUNTY OFFICE: WESTLAKE PLAZA 2829 TOWNSGA TE ROAD SUITE 320 WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA Q 1361 Tclephone (80S) 446-222f .A Professiollal Corporarion e.mail)odlum@molilaw.cotn A California Limited Liability Partnership including a Protessional Corporation VIA FAX 310.379.0456, ORIGINAL BY MAlL December 8, 2008 Mr. Corey Glave Goldwasser & Glave, LLP 1042 2nd Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Citv of San Bernardino and Professional Firefighters. Local 891 Dear Mr. Glave: The City of San Bernardino has concluded that there is an impasse between the City and Local 891 with respect to meeting and conferring concerning the Fire Department changing to a 24-day work period for purposes ofFLSA section 7(k). Despite numerous requests to meet, the Union has refused to do so unless the City signs an agreement containing unreasonable terms. Therefore, please consider this a request for an impasse meeting, pursuant to the City's Impasse Resolution procedure, a copy of which is attached. (A copy of the complete Resolution 10584 establishing rules and regulations for employer-employee relations is enclosed with the original of this letter mailed to you.) The City's position is that Local 891 has an obligation to meet with the City concerning the proposed change and that the terms of the agreement required by Local 891 as a condition of meeting are unreasonable. Please give me dates in the next two weeks when Local 891 is available for the impasse meeting. If I do not hear from you this week, the City will schedule the meeting as provided in the Impasse Resolution procedure. (I [I ~ X //-1 (j / r 13 Mr. Corey Glave December 8, 2008 Page 2 { To avoid undue delay, I contacted the State Mediation and Conciliation Service today to request that a mediator be assigned to this matter. At the SMCS's request, I am copying this letter to the agency. ~ery truly yours, "oJ ~/Y7Lvo- G(l~vi'( Ws A. Odium cc: Mr. Paul Roose, State Mediation and Conciliation Service RESOLUTION NO. 10584 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ESTABLISHING UNIFORM AND ORDERLY METHODS OF COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE CITY AND ITS EMPLOYEES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING IMPROVED EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONS. WHEREAS, Chapter 10, Division 4, Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California was amended effective January 1, 1969, for the purpose of promoting improved employer-employee relations between public employers and their employees by establishing uniform and orderly methods of communications between employees by establishing uniform and orderly methods of communications between employees and the public agencies by which they are employed; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 3507 empowers a City to adopt reasonable rules and regulations after consultation in good faith with representatives of its employee organizations for the administration of employer-employee relations; and WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino desires to adopt such reasonable rules and regulations as authorized by law, NOW THEREFORE THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DO HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. TITLE OF RESOLUTION This resolution shall be known as the Employer-Employee Relations Resolution of the City of San Bernardino. SECTION 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The purpose of this resolution is to implement Chapter 10, Division 4, Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California (Sections 3500 et. seq.l captioned 'Public Employee Organizations', by providing orderly procedures for the administration of employer-employee relations between the City and its employee organizations and by promoting full communications between the City and its employees to protect the exercise 1 EX/JIB 11 lie d I of that unit, if such recognition was included on the ballot, and is the only employee organization entitled to meet and confer in good faith on matters within the scope of representation for employees in that unit. This shall not preclude individual employees from consulting with management representatives on employer-employee relations on matters of concern to them. (c) Revoke the recognition rights of a majority representative, which has been found by secret ballot election no longer to be the majority representative. (B) The recognition rights designated in this section shall not be subject to challenge for a period of twelve (12) months following the date of such recognition. Such challenge shall be filed only during the first week of October after the expiration of the twelve month period. (Amended by Res. No. 11377, May 7, 1973) ( 12633, Dec. 20, 1976) SECTION 12: DESIGNATION OF CITY EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATIVE The Mayor and Common Council shall designate, by resolution, a designated City representative who shall be the City's principal representative in all matters of employer-employee relations, with authority to meet and confer in good faith on matters within the scope of representation including wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment. The designated City representative is authorized to delegate these duties and responsibilities to his assistants. SECTION 13: RESOLUTION OF IMPASSES Impasse procedures may be invoked only after the possibility of settlement by direct discussion has been exhausted. 15 t The impasse procedures are as follows: (AI Mediation or Conciliation All mediation proceedings shall be private. The Mediator shall make no public recommendations nor take any public position concerning the issues. The Mediatoris) shall be chosen by mutual agreement of the representatives of the City and employee organizations. If mutual agreement is not reached, the Mediator shall be chosen by the California State Conciliation Service. ~ (B) A determination by the Mayor and Common Council after a hearing on the merits of the dispute. (C) Any other dispute resolving procedures to which the parties mutually agree or which the Mayor and Common Council may order. Any party may initiate the impasse procedure by filing with the other party (or parties) affected a written request for an impasse meeting together with a statement of its position on all disputed issues. An impasse meeting may then be scheduled by the designated City Representative forthwith after the date of filing of the written request for such meeting, with written notice to all parties affected. The purpose of such impasse meeting is twofold: (1) to permit a review of the position of all parties in a final effort to reach agreement on the disputed issues, and (2) if agreement is not concluded, to mutually select the specific impasse procedure to which the dispute may be submitted. In the absence of agreement between the parties on this point, the matter may be referred to the Mayor and Common Council. The fees and expenses, if any, of mediators or of any other impasse procedure, shall be payable one-half by the City and one-half by the employee organization or employee organizations. 16 SECTION 14: GRIEVANCES Grievances shall be processed in accordance with procedures established by the City. SECTION 15. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING When the meeting and conferring process is concluded between the City and a formally recognized employee organization, all agreed upon matters shall be incorporated in a written memorandum of understanding signed by the duly authorized City and employee representatives. This memorandum of understanding shall be submitted to the Mayor and Common Council for determination. SECTION 16. RULES AND REGULATIONS The Mayor and Common Council may adopt any rules and regulations necessary or convenient to implement the provisions of this Resolution and Chapter 10, Division 4, Title I of the Government Code of the State of California (Sections 3500 et. seq.). SECTION 17. CONSTRUCTION (A) Nothing in this resolution shall be construed to deny any person or employee the rights granted by Federal and State laws and City Charter provisions. (B) The rights, powers and authority of the Mayor and Common Council in all matters, including the right to maintain any legal action, shall not be modified or restricted by this resolution. (C) The provisions of this resolution are not intended to conflict with the provisions of Chapter 10, Division 4, Title I of the Government Code of the State of California (Sections 3500, et. seq.). (D) The provisions of this resolution are inapplicable to the Water Department or the Board of Water Commissioners of the City of San Bernardino, in accordance with Article IX, Section 163.2 of the Charter of 17 u_'----; Transmission Report' L----' ---l DafefTlme Local 10 1 Local ID 2 12-013-2008 909 .'390 9580 064455pm TransmIt Headel Text Local Name 1 Mundell, Odium & Haws local Name 2 This document: Confirmed (reduced sample and details below) Document size: 8.5"x11" J~~ltS" lil" I<~' MUNJ>lU.L, OOLLM & HAWS, LLP ~l1{"''''n -"':.~~ .~l ~~'lllU~m~1 try I.~,'[ SUIiL'.10 ",-N ~t'~"~'l"""'. LMW""",^ Ol",,",UO< 1l1,..,IONf'O<N.3'''''W,,", F","V".~. <0<)0,<1"', lIS", w. ,~!;"U"''-~" "n~' ',"n,.l-f""~ "'nD....~"-"."."W ,....,';""~...""'...,~ """"" "'1' 'A", "'UA~'--C' "'" "~",,,,"O\',... ,.''' ^C.l>!"",..,.."...I.'obo''''~'''_''.'"''''''''oI''~U''''"'''''('",l''n''" ..""...,..~"c~...","" VIA FAX .JJO,J'f9.(HJ6, ORIGINAL Of .UAIL DecemberS, 20m; Mr. CoreyGlllvc Goldwassl:r&Glave-,U.r 1042 2"" Slr~<:l HCrI1l0SllHcach,CA 9{):!S4 Rc: ~t1J~l.'rn~41r.1O and rro{cssinl1~l Fircfil!hleC'S r ocaLt'-U [kar Mr. UJ~w: The Cily (Jf San nemardil10 hils concludcd lhallhcrr i~ IlZl impas-sc between the Cilyal1dJ.ocarIl91.....ilhrespcctlomeelingandconferringconccmil1glhcFire Oepllrtmel11 changing 10 a 24-d1lY work period for purp05c.~ of Fl,SA section 7(k). Dc~pilt IIU!TlCrou.I r~"quem 10 meet. the Union has refu~ed 10 uo ~oulllc~~ the Chy ~ipl, an agrecm~nl col1lainin~ uorcawnablc lo:rms ThcrcJilfe.plC3>cconsiderlhisllrcqucst [urlln impn~se Illccling, pursulUll tOlhc City's Imp:!s'e Rc~[)]ution procedure". n copy of which is atla.bcd. (A copy oflhe compkll'Resolulion In584 estah1i$hing mItt anll regulalj{'IIS for cmploycr-etTlplu~'e(' re/ution. isencJoledwilhthcuriginlllo(lhis1c:uermailedtoyou.) lbe Cily\ fK).ilion is lhal J.ocall!91 hilS an c>hligalion 10 meel Wilh the ('it\' alilccming the pn>po,ed change and lhallh( lenns uflhe Ilgrttmenl rcqtlil""d hy L"",,! 1191 as a condili(lfi nrme~'(jng lire unR-a.'lol1ahk Please givc me dale, in lhe ne~t IWo weeb when Local tl9 I is lll'ailllblc for the impasse mc<:lil1g, If I do not beilf from YOIJ Ihi" wed.. [he Clly will sdledulc thc lTlC<!1inJ; Ilsprovldedinlhelmpa5scl{~oJulil)llproccdul1:. [, Total Pages Confirmed 6 --~----~ ~-_.. Slarl Time i I~ne- -M~"Type--TR~Uits -~J ~_L'- ~ ~-':jS_ CP26400_J Abbrevtatlons HS Host "",d HR Host receive WS WaIlIng send Pl Polled local F'R Polled remore MS Mailbox save MP Matlboxpnnt CP COlllpleted r A Fail TU TelrTllrtdted by user IS Ternllnated by system RP RepOlI G3 GIOUp 3 EC ErrOl COIl eel rax IrUA . J~UJIJU~JU COREY WILLIAM GLAVE ATIORNEY AT LAW 10422"'" STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 TELEPHONE (310) 379-0065 FACSIMILE (310) 379-0456 E-Mall POAattorneyl/llaoLcom December 12, 2008 VIA FACSIMILE ONLY James A. Odium Mundell, Odium & Haws, LLP Re: Declaration of Impasse Dear Mr. Odium, Weare in receipt of your December 8, 2008, letter wherein you claim that the "City of San Bernardino has concluded that there is an impasse between the City and Local 891 with respect to meeting and conferring concerning the Fire Department changing to a 24- day work period for purposes ofFLSA section 7(k)." Local 891 does not believe there is any ground to declare an impasse under tbe City's Impasse Resolution as the Union has not met and conferred with the City on this issue as it is not required to during the pendency of the current Memorandum of Understanding. We have offered to meet informally with the City as long as the City agreed to an agreement similar to the one approved by the City Attorney and executed by the City just a couple months ago. If the City believes that the Union has acted outside the requirements of Government Code 93500, et seq., the properly venue would be for the City to file an unfair practice claim against the Union; not unilaterally declare an impasse when no meet and confer has occurred. Additionally, the City's Resolution specifically states that the Mediator shall be chose by mutual agreement; we haven't even been provided a list to choose from yet. Finally, please provide this office with a full, complete copy of the Employer-Employee Relations Resolution, as your letter only included pages 1, 15, J 6, and 17. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to write, c.:,~'~ CORE~ GLAVE rax Iro~ . J~UJr~u,~U COREY WILLIAM GLA VB ATTORNEY AT LAW 1042 2ND STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 TELEPHONE (310) 379-0065 FACSIMILE (310) 379-0456 E-mail POAattoroev4Paol.com FACSIMILE COVER SHEET TO: JAMES ODLUM Mundell, Odium & Haws, LLP FROM: Corey Glave DATE: December 12, 2008 FAX NUMBER; (909) 890-9580 NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): 2 IN CASE OF ERROR IN TRANSMITTING. PLEASE CALL: (323) 547-0472 MESSAGE THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT 15 ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED. CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION. DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE, AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK You. JAMES A. ODLUM MUNDELL, ODLUM & HAWS, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 650 EAST HOSPIT AUTY LANE SUITE 470 SAN BERNARDINO, CAUFORNIA 92408-3595 TELEPHONE: (909) 890-9500 FACSIMILE: (909) 890-9580 LOS ANGELES COlINTY OFFICE: WESTLAKE PLAZA 2&29 TOWNSGA TE ROAD SUITE 320 WESTLAKE VILLAGE,CA 91361 TeJephone (805) 446-2221 e-mail :jodlum@molllaw_com ^ California Limited Liability Partnership including a Professional Corporation "A I'rofessionalCorporalion VIA FAX 310.379.0456 December 15, 2008 Mr. Corey Glave Attorney at Law 1042 2nd Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Citv of San Bernardino and Professional Firefighters. Local 891 Dear Mr, Glavc: This is in response to your December 12 letter to me, which in turn respondcd to my December 8 letter. The City's position on the impasse issue is set forth in my December 8 letter. No constructive purpose would be served by rehashing the City's position, particularly since your letter still contcnds that the Union is not required to meet and since you have failed to provide any dates for such a meeting, Suffice it to say the City will move forward with the impasse resolution procedure, Accordingly, an impasse mccting is scheduled for December 18 at 9 a.m, in the Fire Department's main conference room, I am the Designated City Representative for these purposes, Your letter also says you have not received a complete copy of the Employer- Employee Relations resolution, I mailed one to you on December 8. Because this is the Holiday Season, the mail may be a little slow getting to you, If you still have not received one, please let mc know and I will res end a copy. 't::OJrL ~s A. Odium L I Transmission Report DaLelTlnle Local 10 1 tocal to 2 12-15-2008 909 890 9580 09.3543 a III Transllllt Headel Text local Name 1 Mundell, Odlulll & Haws Local Name 2 This document Confirmed (reduced sample and details below) Document size: 8.5"x11" JM'LS_~."IJ'.!:~ MUNDELL. OnLUM & HAWS, LLP ~rT""N"\'~ '1 : All' .j','f.:.0.5' tR"'""AL"y IA~1 .Urlf"" ,.\ ~(k~MU'~". "A'."('~"'_\ '~'''I_''''< IHH';;"'.l'Mi""".'.,,, t~n"HI.I ,,,,,,,,"".'WJ ,..........",....."','"""''''' ..nTl...~' >I.~l' """'-'''''''''~T' 0">00 "L-<t.." '....'....,.,,"j<~'",...,"'" ~("""O;OL""""'L.'..',!\.~......"^."_I"".....'."".""'''''.''....~''',, r,_..o"......"" .A,...k_~.'.,'_.... FIA FAX 3JO,179.0~56 l">I:<:cmber 15,2008 Mr,Corc~ Gla\'e AUom1'l'IIIILaw 1042 2nd Str~cl lIermosa I3c~ch, CA 90254 He: .c.i!y, of Sail [lCI!l~r.iti'1!)..4lli!...fu!~'JQ!liJlli~f~<:r5.J,<xoI1l91 DcurMr,Gtnve" 111i~ is in response to your lJecember 12 kllcf t() ml", which in turn re~PDnded 10 my flccembcr8. Ieuer. lhe Cjl)"~ position on the iml'a~.';c isslle i5 let f(lrth in my J)ttcmlJ.::r g leUer, N,) c(mstru~:tjve pUrp<:1SC would b., ._ervei.l by rehashing the City's position, p~rticlllar!y since )'uurlcllCrsliltwmendstll31thcUlIlonisnotrequiredtomcctandsill(:cvouhhcfailcd to provide an)' <.lales for such a rncclillt;, Suffke it to say the City will m~w forward with the impa.,sc rCSoluliun ptvcedurc_ AcoordinllJ}'. an impllSse mcclin~ is sch~'1.!uJcd for Deecrnb(,'r IF at 9 3_111. in Ihe Fire Depanment', main ellfifcrenc.' ro~'m, I nm tile Designated Cil~ Repn'xnlRtivc for lhe.le pllcpmcs. Yourl<<tcralsns..1ysrouhil\,emifrel'eivcdacornpletecol'}'nfthc-Employer- bllpltl)'.-e Rdatinn~ rtStJluliull. I mailed orw to you "n Oeccmber~. ncc~use this is the Hnlid~}' SeDson. the m'lil may be" Ellie .Iow ~CUifll,: 10 )'UU Ir),,,u ~till ha".. nOl te<:eivctl un... pk.'l'let me kn<'''''.lld 1 \\iIJrr>clld~eopy ~'~;:"om~ <;i'll~S^ OdJum '" Total Pagp.s Confirmed ~-~-- Start Time 093501 a m 12-15-2008 Pages 1/1 tine AbbreVIations HS Host send HR I-jost recetve WS Wattlng send Pt Polled local fiR Polled remote MS Mailbox save MP Matlbox print CP Completed FA Farl TU Terrnlflat(~d by user IS Telmtnated by system RP Reporl (;3 Group 3 n: ErrOl CorrecI JAMES A. ODLUM MUNDELL, ODLUM & HAWS, LLP ^ TTORNEYS AT LA W b50 EAST HOSPITALITY LANE SUITE 470 SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 9240R-3595 TELEPHONE: 1909) 890-9500 FACSIMILE (909) 890-9580 LOS ANGELES COlJNTY OFFICE; WESTLAKE PLAZA 2829 TOWNSGA TE ROAD SUITE 320 WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA 9]361 Telephone (805)446-2221 .A I'rofessiotlalCorporalion ~-rnilil:Jodlulll~?lllohlaw_<.:Drn A California l,imilcd Liability Partnership including a Professional Corporation VIA FAX 310.379.0456, ORIGINAL BY MAIL December 29, 2008 Mr. Corey Glave Attorney at Law 1042 2nd Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: City of San Bernardino and Professional Firefighters. Local 891 Dear Mr. Glave: Representatives of the San Bernardino Fire Department and I were present for the impasse meeting on December 18 at 9 a.m. in the SBFD's main conference room, as designated in my December IS letter to you. No one appeared on behalf of Local 891. Pursuant to section 13 of the Employer-Employee Relations Resolution of the City of San Bernardino, the matter regarding the SBFD's use ofa 24-day work period under the FLSA will be heard by the Mayor and Common Council on January 5, 2009 at 4:30 p.m. V. ry truly yours, O~ sA. OdIum l____ Transmission Report ] Dale/Tlmo Local 10 1 Local 102 12-29-2008 909 890 9580 06-03-58 P m Transmit Header Text local Name 1 Mundell, Odium & Haws Local Name 2 This document: Confirmed (reduced sample and details below) Document size: 8.5"x11" JM1b.\u;),1'>.l MVNDELL, OnLlJ.~ & HAWS,lLP ."r"A~H,.r,.... "'''HS, ""'m" In'~~1 SUI r~ <l', j"."~r~".\a:)I",_C\( If,""IA ")4ll1.,w_ nll"Wr<t .""',""'..,,~ f.e'",'l' '_9lI'o1''''''''~\ '.... ,,~u "'''' "'''m,. '~'.F1^,_, "~" ,,,. FU"~<"".,. ...." Al-..,I.,,,,,,.t.,,,,,,,...,,,,,,,,r.....,,,,'1"""'''''''''''''''''''''''''',,,,,,,,,, "",,,.,,.,,,-,",-, '... ".'''' T'~~'_"<l.'''_m' '^""(~.......c.""~,,, J/!A FAX3/0,379J)4j6, ORIG/:VAL BY.41,4.fl. l)cc.:mbL'l"29.2OQg Mr. ('orl:)'Gla\'~ AUorney at L~w 1042 2"" Slre~l Ifcnnl)s~ Bl;"dCh, C" 90254 Re. tj!1_Jll'~!Il-1l.tfD.!r~8,!ll1J~ofcs;jonaL.f~%,Locar lI~J DearMr.Glavc: RcprC5en!.lltive~ oCme S.m Hemgrdino l:ire DepanmerJ.! and J wen: prt~cnl {OTItic implIs~\: mel'1ing on De<:t:mbet 18 at 9 a,m. in Ihe SIWD's main wn{l:l'encc roorn, iIS designated in lnyDe<:t"mber J5lelterloyou, No one apptarcd un tlchalfofl.oc~189! PutSllanllo se'lion lJ oflhc Em"loyer-Emplo}'~ RcJaIIOllS Rt'~ofulion Oflhc City ofSlIn Rt'rllardino. the mailer r~ardin,!; the SFlFlYs use of a 24-.day work p<:rind under Ihe FLS^ ",ill t>c hear,j hYlht' MllY'l/" an..! Common Council unlafluary 5, 2009 lit 4:30p_m. V:1')'trUIl'10UN.~ ~A Odium .Tota~~'aq~~_~.?anned _.-!.___m_~_____~,:!af Pages,,~~~_nrrned ~_~_ ~~ Job I Remote Station __L~tart Time T OUrC:ltion ~O_~__L~~_E~~~!_?0456 _.___,____----.l~_~__~l__~~p._m 12._?~~~l~OR ~Q.~~_ Pages line 111 _____L!.______ Abbrevlafrons HS Host send HR I fast receive WS WC:ljtinq serld PL Polled focal PH Polled remote MS Mailbox save MP M;,oilboxPflllt CP Completed ~ A Fad lU t errnlnalcd by user rs Termlnat~d by system RP Report C3 Group 3 EC Enor COf!Qcl of that unit, if such recognition was included on the ballot, and is the only employee organization entitled to meet and confer in good faith on matters within the scope of representation for employees in that unit. This shall not preclude individual employees from consulting with management representatives on employer-employee relations on matters of concern to them. (c) Revoke the recognition rights of a majority representative, which has been found by secret ballot election no longer to be the majority representative. (8) The recognition rights designated in this section shall not be subject to challenge for a period of twelve (12) months following the date of such recognition. Such challenge shall be filed only during the first week of October after the expiration of the twelve month period. (Amended by Res. No. 11377, May 7, 1973) ( 12633, Dec. 20, 1976) SECTION 12: DESIGNATION OF CITY EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATIVE The Mayor and Common Council shall designate, by resolution, a designated City representative who shall be the City's principal representative in all matters of employer-employee relations, with authority to meet and confer in good faith on matters within the scope of representation including wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment. The designated City representative is authorized to delegate these duties and responsibilities to his assistants. SECTION 13: RESOLUTION OF IMPASSES Impasse procedures may be invoked only after the possibility of settlement by direct discussion has been exhausted. 15 The impasse procedures are as follows: (Al Mediation or Conciliation All mediation proceedings shall be private. The Mediator shall make no public recommendations nor take any public position concerning the issues. The Mediator (s) shall be chosen by mutual agreement of the representatives of the City and employee organizations. If mutual agreement is not reached, the Mediator shall be chosen by the California State Conciliation Service. (B) A determination by the Mayor and Common Council after a hearing on the merits of the dispute. (C) Any other dispute resolving procedures to which the parties mutually agree or which the Mayor and Common Council may order. Any party may initiate the impasse procedure by filing with the other party (or parties) affected a written request for an impasse meeting together with a statement of its position on all disputed issues. An impasse meeting may then be scheduled by the designated City Representative forthwith after the date of filing of the written request for such meeting, with written notice to all parties affected. The purpose of such impasse meeting is twofold: (1) to permit a review of the position of all parties in a final effort to reach agreement on the disputed issues, and (2) if agreement is not concluded, to mutually select the speci f ic impasse procedure to which the dispute may be submitted. In the absence of agreement between the parties on this point, the matter may be referred to the Mayor and Common Council. The fees and expenses, if any, of mediators or of any other impasse procedure, shall be payable one-half by the City and one-half by the employee organization or employee organizations. 16 Page 1 of2 Jim Odium From: Jim Odium Uodlum@mohlaw.com] Sent: Monday, December 15, 20084:28 PM To: 'Poaattorney@aol.com' Subject: RE: CoSS Employer-Employee Resolution Attachments: Impasse Resolution Ordinance.PDF Entered Into Ree. at MCC/CDC Mtg: lido? by: ~ ~ ff-tl--Lu~ Agend ~ .;(.0 ~: v C~~ City Clerk/CDC Secretary City of San Bernardino Attached is the EER. The meeting scheduled for this Thursday is the "impasse meeting" described in the EER; it is not the mediation itself. I will tentatively schedule the mediation for the 30th, subject to the mediator's availability and rescheduling if Mr. Moss and Mr. Parker are unavailable. From: Poaaltorney@aol.com (mailto:Poaattorney@aol.com) Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 2:57 PM To: jodlum@mohlaw.com Subject: C058 Employer-Employee Resolution Mr. Odium We received you fax letter today that indicated you had sent a full copy of the EER on December 8, 2008. We have yet to receive the document in the mail. Could you please send it again or send it via e-mail as soon as possible. Also, we received a call from a State Mediator that indicated that he had not yet set dates for the purported mediation. I would suggest that we let the Mediator set the dates for the mediation, versus one party unilaterally doing so. Additionally, the first available date in December that I have is December 30th (I could not verify dates with my clients as Mr. Moss and Mr. Parker were out of state last week) Corey Glave Attorney at Law Cell: 323-547-0472 Fax: 310-379-0456 This electronic mail transmission, including any attachments, may contain confidential information which is legally privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain information that may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product doctrine, or other privilege, and may be restricted from disclosure pursuant to applicable stated and/or federal law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail information in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete all copies of the original e-mail and any attached document(s). Corey Glave, Attorney at Law, does not accept or consent to the service of process, motions, pleadings, documents or any other items by electronic format (except as provide for by the CM/ECF system). Correspondence via electronic format does not indicate an agreement or consent to acceptance of service in such format. Thank you and have a great day. 1/<;nI\I\0 Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and favorite sites in one place. LryjLD_Q"". 1/t::./')(\('\1\ Page 2 of2 REVEREND YONG BEOM LEE WELL MISSION CHURCH 1298 N "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92405 Advocati Ecc/esiae Entered Into Rae. at MCC/CDC Mtg: ,10/0 1 by: i(~ L-v Agenda nem No: L by: ~ City Clerk! DC Secretary City of San Bernardino STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO v. ) MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST ) FOR WAIVER OF FEES (Gov. Code Section 54954.2 & 54954.2(b )(2)) ) REVEREND YONG BEOM LEE WELL MISSION CHURCH Applicant CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Respondent TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SAN BERNADINO: The City Council of San Bernardino, City Councilman Dennis Baxter and the Office of the City Manager are herein notified of this Motion for Consideration of the Applicant's Request for Waiver of Fees as it relates to Developmental Permit-Type I & 2 required by the City's Planning Department. The Applicant makes this request upon the advisement the Planning Department. POINTS AND AUTHORITIES AS TO PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO ADDRESS LEGISLATIVE BODY: "Every agenda for a regular meeting must provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public". (Gov. Code Section 54954.3(a)) AS TO ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST NOT APPEARING ON THE AGENDA: "A legislative body may take action on an item not appearing on the posted agenda.. .that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of that body". (Gov. Code Section 54954.3(a)) Further, "In a non-emergency situation, the governing body may determine by two-thirds vote of the members of the legislative body present at the meeting that there is a need to take immediate action..." (Gov. Code Section 54954(b)(2)) MEMORANDUM OF FACTS The following are facts relating to this matter in support of the Applicant's request: 1. The Well Mission Church is a lawfully incorporated church entity in the State of California since 1999. 2. The Applicant, the Church entity's pastor and primary agent, entered into lease agreement at the location listed as: 1298 North "D" Street San Bernardino, Ca 92405 on September 21, 2008, authorizing him to operate a Church Administrative Office from that location. 3. The Applicant effectuated an application for business license with the City of San Bernardino on or about, October 22,2008. 4. The application for business license was postponed as pending until the Applicant had obtained a Zoning Authorization Number from the Planning Department, altering the zoning specification from a tax office to a church. 5. That the Zoning Authorization was postponed pending the Applicant's completion of a Developmental Permit Application Form and payment of fees inclusive of the following: A. $1,035.00forPermitType-1 B. $6,663.00 for Permit Type - 2 6. That the Application for Developmental Permit was completed and subsequently denied pending the submission of a more detailed Site Plan Specification Statement as well as the cash amounts required on the Planning Division's Schedule of Fees, on or about December 01, 2008. 7. That the Applicant's improvement to the structure located at the address herein listed included only the following: A. Painting of interior walls B. Rear entrance access ramp. C. New lighting fixtures. D. Painting of exterior walls. 8. That the Well Mission Church's San Bernardino location has not yet developed a membership that would generate sufficient cash amounts in donations to render such fees in payment. 9. That Lisa Sanford of the Planning Division did advise that any request for a waiver of these fees would first have to be deliberated by the City Council, then subsequently approved by the City Manager upon their recommendation. 10. The Well Mission Church does provide a very needed service to the community inclusive of the following: A. Religious values and Values reorientation instruction. B. Emergency food deliveries. (Krispy Kreme donuts and Bowl Noodle soups.) C. Environmental beautification. D. Community morale. Wherefore, The Applicant, Reverend Y ong Beom Lee of the Well Mission Church, is hereby requesting that his application for a waiver of fees relative to Developmental Permits I & 2 be considered and approved by the legislative and governing body of the City Council of San Bernardino, forthwith. VERIFICATION Dated this osth day of January, 2009 /~11 t~ {P/~~ tRfViRtND YONG BEOM LEE