Bill gives officials no seat at table

Las Vegas and Clark County leaders Monday objected to a last-minute legislative bill amendment passed Friday that would boot them from the bargaining table during contract negotiations with Las Vegas police unions.

"I think it's unworkable," Clark County Commissioner Steve Sisolak said. "We can't have every department negotiating their own contracts."

Sisolak said he was uncomfortable with the county having no say about a contract for which it must foot the bill.

Under the amendment to Assembly Bill 130, only the sheriff's representatives would be required to negotiate union contracts with the Metropolitan Police Department. The amendment passed the Senate Government Affairs Committee by a 5-0 vote.

Current law requires representatives from the city and county, which pay more than 60 percent of the police department's annual $549 million budget, to have seats at the bargaining table while contracts are hammered out. Elected leaders want to keep it that way.

"We have to be at the table," Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said.

The original bill and amendment were proposed by the Las Vegas Police Protective Association, which represents about 2,300 rank-and-file police officers.

The union's lobbyist in Carson City, David Kallas, said the amended bill would put union contracts under more public scrutiny because they would be submitted under the police department's regular budget process, which includes public hearings before the City Council, the County Commission and the Metropolitan Police Department's Committee on Fiscal Affairs, which includes members of both the council and commission.

"This isn't a way to try to circumvent the process. This is a way to simplify the process with more accountability," Kallas said.

The amended bill would also streamline negotiations, which frequently stretch beyond six months because representatives from the city and county don't have decision-making authority and must consult with their bosses and elected officials before proceeding, Kallas said.

County Commissioner Tom Collins said negotiations often drag on beyond contract expiration dates, requiring workers to be paid retroactively for new raises.

He said he didn't think the county would relinquish its authority by not participating in labor talks because the commission would still have to ratify all proposed contracts, he said.

"It doesn't seem alarming to me to let the sheriff negotiate," Collins said. "It might be efficient."

Sheriff Doug Gillespie said he doesn't support the bill because he doesn't think the current system needs to change.

He supports having city and county representatives in the negotiating room, but even if the bill passes, the city and county would not be left in the dark, he said.

His staffers would continue to share information about ongoing negotiations with city and county staffers, as well as the Fiscal Affairs Committee, which includes two members from both the City Council and County Commission. And even under the proposed law, he might still be able to invite city and county representatives to the bargaining table.

The original version of Assembly Bill 130 would have given negotiators at the bargaining table binding approval of any proposed contract. The idea emerged from the turmoil surrounding the 2005 contract talks with the Police Protective Association, Kallas said.

During those talks, negotiators left the bargaining table with a contract, but county officials objected to raises in salaries and benefits of more than 25 percent over four years. The commission voted to remove Collins, who approved of the contract terms from the Fiscal Affairs Committee and replaced him with Commissioner Rory Reid, whose vote killed the proposal.

The contract eventually went to an arbitrator, who picked a county proposal that increased salaries and benefits about 22 percent over four years.

Earlier this year, the Police Protective Association negotiated a new one-year contract, agreeing to give up cost-of-living raises while the Police Department agreed to pay a 1.75 percent increase in required employee contributions to the public employees' retirement system.

The amended version of Assembly Bill 130 must be approved by the full Senate before moving back to the Assembly, where it passed last month in a different form. If the bill passes both houses, it must be signed by the governor before becoming law.

Review-Journal reporter Scott Wyland contributed to this report. Contact reporter Brian Haynes at bhaynes@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0281.