Plain City Village Council wants to discuss the pay scale for village employees. It just doesn’t want the village to hear that discussion.
At Monday night’s council meeting, members attempted to go into executive session to discuss personnel matters. Before the meeting, the Journal-Tribune spoke to village solicitor Paul Lafayette about the planned closed session, raising concerns that it did not meet the criteria to be held in private.
Lafayette later explained to council that while Ohio Sunshine laws do allow a council to discuss personnel matters in private, they seem to limit that discussion to specific employees and do not allow private discussions about a class of employees or the entire village work force. He said that some appellate courts have interpreted the rules differently, but the Third Appellate Court, which would interpret the rule for Plain City, has rules it must be a specific employee.
Last year, council hired the consulting firm of Clemans Nelson to conduct a study of the village salary and compensation schedule. The firm compared multiple surrounding and similar communities. The consultants determined that the village fiscal officer, the maintenance supervisor, the parks and recreation director and several other positions were underpaid for the position and community.
At a recent work session, council directed Village Administrator Nathan Cahall to prepare a resolution and two pay structures for council to review during the executive session. The schedules list positions, not employees and include positions with no person currently filling them. The resolution and pay schedules were delivered to council members but not listed on the council agenda or included in the public information packet.
The first of the pay schedules would bring all employees to the minimum salary recommended by Clemans Nelson. It would mean a salary adjustment for five employees and a longevity bonus for 10 employees. The total cost to implement that pay schedule for 2019 would be $33,616.
The second pay schedule would bring employees to a recommended midpoint. It would mean a salary adjustment for nine village employees.
A third option would be to do nothing.
Councilman Darrin Lee said he still had questions about the recommendations and he did not want to discuss them in front of the public.
When Lafayette explained that he didn’t feel comfortable having council discuss a pay schedule for all employees, Lee questioned if council could circumvent the rule by going into and out of executive session 30 times to discuss the individual positions.
Lafayette called that “subterfuge.” He likened that to a round-robin meeting where council members call each other to discuss official business so it isn’t done in front of the public.
“If you go in and out, you are opening the door for trouble,” Lafayette said.
The solicitor said that while the discussions cannot be held in executive session, the matter could still be talked about in open session. Lee said that rather than hold the discussion in a regular meeting he would rather talk about the public employees during work session, scheduled for 6 p.m., Feb. 5, in the village hall meeting room.
Resident Jason Shumway questioned the delay. He said the village could lose more employees.
“If it happens, it happens,” Lee responded.
In a recent letter to council, Cahall explained that after accepting the Village’s offer of employment last week, an apprentice water and sewer plant operator candidate received another offer from a surrounding community that paid more. The candidate took that position and Plain City will need to begin the search process again.