CARMICHAEL, CA (MPG) - After an in-depth discussion by the Carmichael Water District Board of Directors on June 15, regarding employee benefits, the Board held a special meeting on July 14, to continue the discussion and make clarifications to the policy drafts. The Board specified that under the employee education/training policy, the District will pay for job-related trainings and required classes, including the costs of the classes, travel, and materials. But employees utilizing the education assistance portion of the benefit would be subject to the new cap of $500 per employee per year — a benefit that would terminate at $2,500 total per employee. Also, only classes at non-profit universities would be eligible for reimbursement.

The Board also specified that the life insurance benefit and matching portion of the deferred compensation retirement benefit would now be available at the same level for all District employees, both union and non-union.  The Board discussed their intention to retroactively reinstate the District matching retirement benefit to June 1, 2020.

Human Resources Coordinator Lori Kalisiak said that limiting the education assistance to non-profit universities would mean “no one could even attend American River College, since it’s not a university.” She also stated that the Board was making decisions based on inaccurate information because HR was not consulted in gathering the relevant data. Kalisiak said she wished the Board had handled these issues more transparently and actually spoken to staff instead of acting unilaterally.

Board President Paul Selsky asked the Directors to review the policy drafts and submit comments before the next meeting in preparation of the final vote on July 20.

At the July 20 regular meeting, the Board went over the amendments to the employee benefits policy. Since the prior meeting, the Board decided to change the education assistance benefit to make junior colleges as well as universities eligible for reimbursement, within the limits already specified. The expanded life insurance benefit and the extension of the matching retirement benefit to all employees remained unchanged from the previous meeting, and the Board maintained the termination of administrative leave benefits.

Director Roy Leidy was absent from the July 20 meeting but submitted a request that the vote be held until the August meeting because he had additional comments on the issues.

From the beginning, Director Leidy was outspoken in his disapproval of how the Board was handling this issue. At the May 18 meeting when the resolution to terminate benefits was first introduced, Leidy called the resolution “too draconian. … I feel that this resolution implies that there were advantages taken, perhaps by staff. Nobody did that. The staff has nothing to do with this. … The way it’s written would cut them off at the knees, and that’s not an acceptable way to manage the welfare of this agency.”

Director Mark Emmerson said on May 18, “I like this resolution because there’s no blame associated with it. Even though I’m very disappointed in the Board for not picking up on this earlier and, frankly, I’m a little disappointed in management staff in having instituted this without bringing it expressly to the Board for approval.”

Past Board member Sandy Kozlen called in to the May 18 meeting, stating that Steve Nugent, who retired last year as General Manager after 30 years with the District, “made some mistakes.” Kozlen said that staff should be kept in the loop on such major changes, but he emphasized that benefits unapproved by the Board are illegal and must be terminated, even if the Board later decides to reinstitute them.

From the beginning, Director Leidy said the matter should have been handled with more transparency: “I’m just wanting to be equitable to the staff that we value so much. And if I was a staff member, I’d feel this was a real slap in the face.”

Staff members who spoke at the May 18 meeting all agreed that learning about the termination of benefits during the meeting was a shock.  Assistant General Manager Lynette Moreno said, “I don’t appreciate that all of this is happening the way it’s happening. … It does feel like punishment to staff.”

HR Coordinator Kalisiak also expressed frustration: “To me, it seems very adversarial with staff.” She stated that the meeting agenda didn’t provide enough information about what was going to be discussed, and the refusal to provide a copy of the resolution prior to the meeting “deprives us of the necessary notice to be able to address this.” She asked, “How long has this been taking place? At what time or times was this discussed by the Board?”

The drafting of the resolution and the Board discussions that led up to it are not part of the public record and did not occur during any public Board meetings. So, presumably, these issues were discussed by the Board during closed sessions.

At the July 20 meeting, Director Jeff Nelson moved approval of the amendments, despite Director Leidy’s request to postpone the vote. Director Ron Greenwood seconded, and the Board voted 4-0 to approve, with Leidy absent.  

(All meetings discussed were held through online teleconferencing in compliance with current social distancing guidelines.)