.jpg)
This is the bottom line question regarding Wicomico County Executive Rick Pollitt's veto of County Council legislation setting up the collective bargaining / binding arbitration apparatus for the Wicomico County Sheriff's Department. This is one of those few occasions where I don't claim to have the right answer.
Pollitt is absolutely correct that the Wicomico County Council should not cede there authority regarding budget matters to the County Executive. Unlike the Barrie Tilghman administration and the Salisbury City Council, Pollitt understands the importance of separation of powers.
The question still remains. How can the deputies receive binding arbitration when the county council still has the authority to cut the budget? There are several possibilities that would not sit too well with Sheriff Mike Lewis:
- Binding arbitration as to salary and benefit levels could be achieved, but if the council felt the necessity to reduce funding in the Sheriff's department the number of deputies could be reduced.
- Binding arbitration as to salary and benefit levels could be achieved, but the Sheriff's office would be treated as one item for budgetary purposes and the Sheriff would be forced to allocate resources from a gross sum.
It may seem to many that this matter should be solved immediately by binding both Executive and Council to a binding arbitration scheme. This is definitely not the answer. Again, rather than using Salisbury as an example (rushing through badly crafted legislation in order to claim a "false" accomplishment) the County Council should hold to their principles. What should occur is for Council to commit to spending time on this matter each work session (or each month) until legislation has been crafted that is palatable to all parties. However, this must not be accomplished at the price of sacrificing the council's budgetary independence.
Crossposted on Delmarva Dealings
6 comments:
And, for starters, the Council should have independent legal advice.
I can understand the concept that the Council is a legislative body which functions independently from the County Exec. This does not, however, exempt the Council from complying with the mandate by the citizens to give the Deputies collective bargaining WITH binding arbitration. One of the questions posed by the Council is what the meaning of the word "County" is. They seem to be taking the position that the word "County" means County Exec. and not County Council. Although it seems obvious to me the the word "County" means both the County exec. and the County Council under the umbrella of the County Govt., we are, for the time being, stuck with a governing body that is locked in a power struggle with the people. That makes about as much sense as the infamous statement made by Bill Clinton relating to "...what the meaning of the word "IS" is."
I also understand the the Council has taken the position that they CANNOT engage in binding arbitration because they are legally prohibited from doing so. I personally have looked at the County Charter and cannot find any language at all which would prohibit the Council from carrying out the mandate of the people. Apparently the County Atty. never saw anything in the Charter or he wouldn't have drafted the original legislation at the direction of the County Exec.
If these are genuine concerns of the Council, it appears that they could be easily remedied by passing legislation which would enable us to quckly get around this and move on.
If the Council would simply pass legislation which prohibited them from cutting the line item which relates to the salaries and benefits of the Deputies, the result would be that the Council is left out of the arbitration process should the need arise. More importantly, the will of the people will have been carried out.
However, if the Council continues to refuse to take direct measures to implement the full will of the people, thier intent will be unquestionably clear. The amount of taxpayers dollars that will be consumed in legal fees will be unimagineable. It doesn't have to be this way.
Well said. I really enjoy your site and I check it at least twice a day.
This public haggling over who is and who isn't bound by arbitration is shortsighted at best, and only promotes anger & mistrust. Wicomico County can't afford to loose moral in the Sheriff's department!
So, stop the posturing, figure out the language that all can live with, and give the law enforcement officers what they need & deserve.
honestaby.......finally...a voice of reason.
I appreciate it, Grand dad. We need the sheriff's department now more then ever. I am not advocating giving them card blanche, but by golly give them their fair venue to address their needs and move on with it.
Post a Comment