November 19, 2008
Buffalo, Chautauqua County keep public in the dark
The city of Buffalo and Chautauqua County are refusing to disclose terms of tentative collective bargaining agreements--that could raise local property taxes for years to come--until after the contracts are ratified.
In Buffalo, the city signed a tentative 9-year agreement with Local 264, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. The union, one of the city's largest, represents blue-collar workers. It scheduled a ratification vote for today. The contract will provide 20 percent raises to union members, who have not had pay increases since 2001, according to the Buffalo News (here).
The paper said the city's finance commissioner "declined to release contract details pending the ratification vote, including an annual breakdown of proposed raises, or concessions included in the package". The story doesn't say whether she meant ratification by union members or the Buffalo City Council. The agreement also must be approved by the state-appointed Buffalo control board.
Meanwhile, in Chautauqua County, it's not just the public that's being kept in the dark about a tentative four-year contract with the Civil Service Employees Association, Unit 6300, which represents more than 900 county workers.
Most county lawmakers, who are expected to vote on the contract later today, will not see it until a closed-door executive session of the county Legislature at 6:30 p.m., reports the Jamestown Post-Journal (here).
County officials...say they cannot comment on the agreement until the legislature ratifies it.
The agreement was reportedly reached after 18 months of negotiations between key county officials and union leaders. If approved, the labor contract will span a four-year period from Jan. 1, 2008, to Dec. 31, 2011, so it could include retroactive pay increases for the year.
My recent report, Lifting the Shroud of Secrecy from Public Employee Contracts, (here) explains how many local governments refuse make public details of collective bargaining agreements until after they ratify them, committing taxpayers to potentially millions of dollars of future spending.
For comment from editorial writers, see here, here, here.
« Previous |
Main
| Next »
|