GOOD AFTERNOON. THE RULES
COMMITTEE IS CALLED TO ORDER.
PLEASE NOTE THAT ASSEMBLY MEMBER
ALVAREZ AND ASSEMBLY MEMBER CHEN
HAVE HAVE BEEN APPOINTED FOR
TODAY'S HEARING. TO FILL TWO
EXCUSED ABSENCES. SECRETARY,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. PACHECO
HERE. FLORA ALVAREZ HERE.
ARAMBULA. CHEN. DIXON FRIEDMAN.
HOLDEN LO MAIENSCHEIN TING.
HERE. WE HAVE A QUORUM. TODAY'S
AGENDA INCLUDES SB 1407. THE
MOTION ON SB 1407 WILL BE Dð
PASSED TO APPROPRIATIONS. WE
HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA. IS OUR
MOTION ON SLATE. I HAD SOME
QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE ITEM ON
THE CONSENT AGENDA. OKAY YOU MAY
PROCEED. OH, I WAS I WAS JUST
HOPING TO, ASK, THE RULES
COMMITTEE JUST TO KIND OF WALK
US THROUGH THE RECLASSIFICATION
PROCESS. I MEAN, OH, SORRY. I
HAVE TO TALK ON THE MIC, FIRST,
JUST LET ME THANK THE RULES
COMMITTEE FOR UNDERTAKING THIS
RECLASSIFICATION STUDY AND JUST
LOOKING AT STAFF SALARIES. I
THINK IT'S LONG BEEN OVERDUE,
I'VE ALSO HAVE GONE THROUGH MY
PREVIOUS JOB AT RECLASSIFICATION
STUDY, AND I KNOW HOW DIFFICULT
IT IS AND HOW ARDUOUS IT IS AND
HOW MANY, MEETINGS. BUT I WAS
WONDERING IF THE COMMITTEE STAFF
COULD WALK THROUGH THE
RECLASSIFICATION PORTION OF THE
PROPOSAL, BUT IN PARTICULAR
AROUND THE, LOWER LEVEL POSITION
. AND WHEN THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN,
WHEN THAT WOULD BE USED, THERE
WERE SOME EXAMPLES THAT WERE
PRESENTED IN THE PROPOSAL, AND I
WAS JUST HOPING THAT WE COULD
JUST GET A FULLER. FULLER
UNDERSTANDING OF WHEN THAT WOULD
BE USED. AND, HOW THAT WOULD BE
USED AND FRANKLY, HOW OFTEN IT'D
BE USED. SO, LEAH, WOULD YOU
LIKE TO ANSWER THAT OR. DOES
THAT WORK? OKAY. HI, I'M LEAH
LOPEZ KHÓ FOR ASSEMBLY RULES
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
QUESTION, MR. TANG. SO THE LOWER
LEVEL LANGUAGE WAS WRITTEN INTO
THE POLICY TO PUT, SOME PRACTICE
INTO THE WRITTEN DOCUMENT, IT'S
REALLY A MECHANISM FOR MYSELF IN
RULES COMMITTEE STAFF TO MAKE
SURE WE STAY WITHIN BUDGET WHEN
EMPLOYEES ARE, CHANGE JOB
CLASSIFICATIONS. SO PART OF THIS
COMPENSATION SETTING DOCUMENT,
THAT'S BEFORE YOU TO VOTE ON IS
JUST A NOD TO MAKE SURE WE IN
RULES COMMITTEE ADHERE TO AN
EMPLOYEE'S APPROPRIATE
CLASSIFICATION. SO THE LOWER
LEVEL EXAMPLES THAT ARE LISTED
IN THE DOCUMENTS ARE NOT
SPECIFIC, EXAMPLES PER SE, BUT
IT PERTAINS TO WHEN AN EMPLOYEE,
WORKS WITH RULES COMMITTEE AND
SAYS, YOU KNOW, FOR VARIOUS
REASONS, PERHAPS I WANT TO DO A
DIFFERENT JOB, A CASE IN POINT
IS A DISTRICT DIRECTOR, A REAL
LIFE EXAMPLE HAD SOME LIFE
CIRCUMSTANCES AND SAID, I REALLY
ENJOY MY JOB, BUT I'M NOT, ABLE
TO TAKE ON THAT FULL
RESPONSIBILITY. AND SO IN THAT
DEGREE, WE RECLASSIFIED THAT
INDIVIDUAL AND THEIR SALARY WAS
ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY. I CAN
SHARE IT SIMILAR TO WHAT MEMBERS
GO THROUGH AT THE CITIZENS
COMPENSATION COMMISSION. SO WHEN
THERE'S CHANGES IN LEADERSHIP AT
THE MEMBER LEVEL, THIS CITIZEN
COMPENSATION COMMISSION,
SALARIES ARE ADJUSTED, WHICH IS
YOUR CASE. SO IT'S A LINE
ALIGNING CLASSIFICATIONS WITH
SALARY. AND YOU KNOW,
UNFORTUNATELY WITH THAT IS,
PERHAPS A DOWNGRADE IN THEIR IN
THE EMPLOYEE SALARY. GOT IT, GOT
IT. WELL I THINK I JUST FOR MY
PERSONAL OPINION, I FEEL THE
CITIZENS COMPENSATION COMMITTEE
HASN'T REALLY DONE THE
LEGISLATURE JUSTICE. I KNOW THE
SALARIES PRIOR TO THE GREAT
RECESSION, WHERE I BELIEVE AT
AROUND 116,000 PLUS A NUMBER OF
OTHER BENEFITS THAT WERE TAKEN
AWAY, AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE
ONLY COMPENSATED NOW TO 120,000,
STRIKES ME AS NOT EVEN HAVING
KEPT UP WITH INFLATION, FRANKLY.
SO APPRECIATE THAT EXAMPLE. IT
JUST, SO, SO GOING ON THAT
POINT, YOU MENTIONED, I JUST
WANT TO CLARIFY BECAUSE THAT IS
THE ONE EXAMPLE YOU MENTIONED IN
THE POLICY. SO IF YOU ARE A
CHIEF OF STAFF AND YOU'RE STILL
WORKING AS A CHIEF OF STAFF WITH
THAT PARTICULAR LEGISLATOR,
REGARDLESS OF WHAT JOB YOUR YOUR
BOSS HAD, ASSUMING YOU STILL
CONTINUE TO OVERSEE THE 4 OR 5
STAFF YOU POTENTIALLY HAVE
OVERSIGHT OVER TO YOUR DISTRICT
OFFICE, THEN WOULD YOU
ANTICIPATE THAT THAT CHIEF OF
STAFF WOULD BE, YOU KNOW,
DOWNGRADED, I GUESS, OR JUST
TRYING TO USE THE PROPER
LANGUAGE? YEAH. SO WE'RE
SPEAKING OBVIOUSLY IN
HYPOTHETICALS, BUT THERE'S TWO
PROSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, SCENARIOS
OF WHAT YOU'RE RAISING. SO
MOVING FORWARD, RULES COMMITTEE
STAFF WILL BE WORKING WITH
EMPLOYEES TO CLEARLY IDENTIFY
WHERE THOSE, POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW
, NODS TO CHAIRMANSHIPS OR
LEADERSHIP IS SO THAT IT'S
CLEARLY STATED. WE DO OUR
CURRENT PRACTICE IS FOR LIKE AN
INTERIM ASSIGNMENT. WE HAVE SOME
FORMAL FORMAL PROCESS WHERE WE
WILL DOCUMENT WITH EMPLOYEE THAT
IT'S THIS IS AN INTERIM BASIS.
SO IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THAT
PROCESS MOVING FORWARD. IF
YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT CURRENT
PRACTICE, THE ONLY THING I CAN
SAY IS OUR PERSPECTIVE IS TO
BRING EMPLOYEES UP, NOT BRING
THEM DOWN WHERE WE'RE CURRENTLY
AT. BUT TO BE HONEST WITH YOU,
THERE MAY BE CERTAIN EMPLOYEES
THAT ARE MISCLASSIFIED. BUT IF
YOU'RE LOOKING AT HOLISTICALLY,
OUR INTENT IS NOT TO, BRING
PEOPLE DOWN. YEAH, I THINK I
MENTIONED THIS IN OUR IN OUR IN
OUR IN OUR CONVERSATION. I THINK
ONE OF MY CONCERNS AND ONE OF MY
CONCERNS SINCE I'VE BEEN IN THE
LEGISLATURE IS I'VE ALWAYS FELT
RELATIVE TO OTHER POSITIONS,
THERE'S SOMEWHAT OF A
DISINCENTIVE OR THERE'S A
GREATER. SORRY, I'LL JUST SAY
THERE'S A GREATER INCENTIVE TO
BE COMMITTEE STAFF THAN TO BE
PERSONAL STAFF FOR A LEGISLATOR.
SO I MY, ONE OF MY CONCERNS,
WHICH I MENTIONED TO YOU IN OUR
CONVERSATION, WAS THAT I WAS
CONCERNED HOW THIS WOULD,
DISCOURAGE PEOPLE FROM, SAY,
WORKING FOR A LEGISLATOR.
INSTEAD, THEY'D RATHER BE
WORKING FOR A COMMITTEE. THE
COMMITTEE STAFFS ARE MORE HIGHLY
COMPENSATED. AND, YOU KNOW, AND
SO FOR ME, THAT MIGHT BE SEEM
MORE ATTRACTIVE JOB. SO. SO ARE
YOU DOING THE SAME WITH
COMMITTEE STAFF, I GUESS? YEAH.
GREAT QUESTION. SO THIS IS A
FIRST STEP IN THE IN THE PROJECT
. AND THE HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR, LIZ FOSTER, IS HERE
ALSO BECAUSE HER TEAM IS
PLANNING TO REACH OUT TO YOUR
CHIEFS OF STAFF. THIS WEEK AND
DISCUSS, YOU KNOW, WHERE YOUR
CURRENT STAFF'S COMPENSATION IS
AND HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. BUT
THE PROJECT IS JUST BEGINNING.
THIS IS THE COMPENSATION
PHILOSOPHY THAT YOU'RE VOTING
ON. AND THEN MOVING FORWARD,
WE'RE GOING EMPLOYEE BY EMPLOYEE
, CLASSIFICATION BY
CLASSIFICATION. SO IT'S A GREAT
POINT. MR. TING, OUR FORMAL
POLICY WAS BIFURCATED BY
INSTITUTIONAL STAFF VERSUS
MEMBER STAFF. THIS IS PUTTING
ALL EMPLOYEES IN ONE
COMPREHENSIVE POLICY. SO
EVERYONE HAS THE ABILITY TO GET
THE SAME, WHETHER IT'S A MERIT,
WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW,
UNFORTUNATELY IN YOUR SITUATION,
THE DOWNGRADE, UNFORTUNATELY
WE'RE TREATING ALL EMPLOYEES.
WE'RE TRYING TO STABILIZE THE
COMPENSATION AND MADE IT MAKE IT
UNIFORM AS MUCH WE CAN. MOVING
FORWARD. AND SO, THIS IS THE
BEGINNING OF, OF THIS PROJECT.
BUT THANK YOU. SO THAT'S GREAT
TO HEAR. SO I'LL JUST ADD TO
CURIOSITY. SO, I MENTIONED THE
SORT OF THE, THE INVERSE, WHICH
IS, YOU KNOW, IF A PERSONAL
STAFF WENT TO COMMITTEE STAFF,
IF A COMMITTEE STAFF MEMBER, THE
RARE SITUATION THAT A COMMITTEE
STAFF MEMBER MOVED OVER TO
SOMEONE'S PERSONAL STAFF, WOULD
THEY BE DOWNGRADED BECAUSE IT
TEND TO COMMITTEE STAFF TEND TO
MAKE MORE THAN PERSONAL STAFF,
WHICH I DON'T PERSONALLY AGREE
WITH, BUT THAT'S THAT'S
CURRENTLY WHAT THE SALARY
STRUCTURE IS RIGHT NOW. SO YEAH,
WE'RE WE'RE WE'RE WORKING
TOWARDS PAY EQUITY. SO PAY
EQUITY LEGISLATION THAT YOU KNOW
THIS STATE CHAMPION SAYS EQUAL
PAY FOR EQUAL WORK. AND WE'LL BE
LOOKING CLASSIFICATION BY
CLASSIFICATION. SO WHEN YOU MOVE
FROM SAY A PRINCIPAL CONSULTANT
TO A CHIEF OF STAFF, WE'RE GOING
TO LOOK AT YOUR EXPERIENCE AND
PLACE YOU AMONGST THE CHIEFS OF
STAFF IN OUR ORGANIZATION TO
ENSURE IT'S AN EQUITABLE
PLACEMENT, YOU KNOW, LEAH
MENTIONED IT'S NOT OUR INTENT TO
DO A DOWNGRADE, BUT THERE MAY BE
SITUATIONS WHERE THERE'S A HUGE
SHIFT IN RESPONSIBILITY THAT
THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN. LIKE
WE TALKED ABOUT A LEADERSHIP
ROLE TO A NON-LEADERSHIP ROLE.
AND I THINK WHAT I WOULD JUST
URGE IS THAT WHEN THOSE
SITUATIONS HAPPEN, THAT
OBVIOUSLY THEY BE TREATED VERY
CONSISTENTLY AND THAT THE POLICY
IS, IT'S A POLICY FOR THE
POSITION. RIGHT? SO THAT THAT'S
MY THAT WOULD BE WHAT I WOULD
URGE. AND THAT'S WHAT IT SEEMS
LIKE YOU'RE TRYING TO DO 100.
AND SO I THINK IT IS I THINK IT
IS REALLY IMPORTANT. I DID
NOTICE AGAIN, THE INSTITUTIONAL
DIFFERENCE VERSUS THE,
LEGISLATIVE STAFF REFERENCE.
I'VE I'VE ALWAYS FELT LIKE THAT
NEEDED TO BE, MUCH MORE EQUAL
AND MUCH MORE EQUITABLE. SO I
APPRECIATE THAT YOU ARE LOOKING
AT IT TO TRY TO MAKE IT MUCH
MORE SEAMLESS AND TO HAVE THAT
TRANSITION BE MUCH MORE. OKAY
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER TING,
DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES.
THANK YOU. CHAIR, MAY I, I
BELIEVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER ARAMBULA
HAD SOME QUESTIONS. THANK YOU
MADAM CHAIR. I'M GOING TO BEGIN
THE COMMENT YOU'VE MADE A FEW
TIMES IS MOVING FORWARD, AND I'D
LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THIS FOR NEW
HIRES OR WILL THIS APPLY TO
CURRENT STAFF? BECAUSE IF IT'S
APPLICABLE TO CURRENT STAFF,
THAT'S NOT REALLY US MOVING
FORWARD. THAT'S NOT GIVING THOSE
EMPLOYEES AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK
UNDER A PROCESS THAT THEY
UNDERSTOOD DURING THEIR YEARS OF
EMPLOYMENT AND FEELS A BIT
PUNITIVE. THAT I'D LIKE TO
UNDERSTAND IS THIS POLICY POLICY
REALLY FORWARD LOOKING? IS IT
FOR THOSE WHO WILL BE HIRED
AFTER THE POLICY GOES INTO
EFFECT, OR WILL IT RETROACTIVELY
APPLY TO ALL EMPLOYEES, AS IS
BEING PROPOSED? I THINK THAT'S
WHY MANY OF US ARE ASKING THESE
QUESTIONS. SECOND, IF IT IS
RETROACTIVE, WHAT DO WE THINK
HAPPENS REGARDING RETENTION? DO
WE THINK THIS ULTIMATELY MOVES
PEOPLE OUT OF THE BUILDING? WILL
IT AFFECT INSTITUTIONAL
KNOWLEDGE? HOW WOULD, HOW WOULD
THIS POLICY BENEFIT US THAT IF
WE'RE MOVING PEOPLE WHO HAVE
UNDERSTANDING OF THIS BUILDING
OUT WITH THIS POLICY, THAT I'D
LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU
THINK THIS WILL DO FOR RETENTION
? YEAH, I, I'M NOT REALLY QUITE
SURE HOW TO ANSWER THAT. MR.
ARAMBULA IT'S BOTH IT'S, YOU
KNOW, IT'S GOING TO AFFECT NEW
HIRES, BUT IT'S ALSO, YOU KNOW,
IT'S A SALARY POLICY THAT, IF
APPROVED, WOULD GO INTO EFFECT
IMMEDIATELY. SO IT IMPACTS
CURRENT STAFF, I GUESS, WHERE
I'M A BIT PERPLEXED IS I'M NOT
QUITE SURE WHERE I SEE HOW THIS,
IMPACTS RETENTION. IN FACT, OUR,
OUR OBJECTIVE IS TO RETAIN HIGH
QUALITY STAFF BY LOOKING AT
SALARIES THAT WE HAVE HEARD, ARE
FRANKLY A LITTLE BIT LOW. AND SO
THE INTENT OF THIS PROJECT IS TO
SAY THIS IS OUR, CRITERIA OF
BASING COMPENSATION, AND WE WANT
TO MOVE SALARIES UP FOR THE
LOWER LEVEL CLASSIFICATIONS. AND
SO THAT WOULD BE OUR FIRST STEP
IN THAT DIRECTION. I UNDERSTAND
THE RISING OF ALL THE RISING
TIDES WILL LIFT ALL BOATS, BUT
IT SEEMS CONTRARY FOR US NOT TO
HOLD HARMLESS THOSE EMPLOYEES
WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING HARD AS
WELL. AND I THINK WHAT I'M
CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE LONG TERM
EFFECT THAT THE POLICY WILL
HAVE, AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT
WILL SHIFT PEOPLE INTO COMMITTEE
POSITIONS OR OUTSIDE OF THE
BUILDING, BECAUSE DURING ALL OF
OUR TIMES UP HERE, WE WILL HAVE
DIFFERENT PERIODS WHERE WE WILL
BE INVOLVED AND WE WILL BE LESS
INVOLVED. BUT FOR OUR STAFF, WE
SHOULD BE ADVOCATING TO MAKE
SURE THAT THEY HAVE STABILITY,
THAT THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
MAKE A CAREER OUT OF THIS, AND
THAT WE ARE COMMITTING TO THEM.
AND WHAT THIS FEELS LIKE A BIT
IS THAT WE AREN'T. THAT WHAT
WE'RE SAYING IS AS LONG AS
YOU'RE IN GOOD GRACES, THINGS
ARE FINE. BUT IF THINGS EVER
TURN AND YOU ARE NO LONGER, THEN
THE POSSIBILITY IS THAT YOUR
STAFF WILL BE DOWNGRADED AND
DECREASE IN PAY. AND HOW DO WE
THEN ULTIMATELY BELIEVE THIS
WILL HELP US TO BUILD UP
INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND
QUALITY STAFF IN THIS BUILDING
THAT REALLY DOES MAKE THIS PLACE
WORK? YEAH I ABSOLUTELY AGREE.
STAFF IS ESSENTIAL AND I I'M
SORRY, I JUST DISAGREE WITH THE
STATEMENTS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO
DISADVANTAGE STAFF. I MEAN,
WE'RE BASICALLY TRYING TO RETAIN
AND SET UP A RECRUITMENT POLICY
AND GO IN THAT DIRECTION, SO
MAYBE WE CAN HAVE FURTHER
CONVERSATIONS BECAUSE, I JUST
RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH, WITH
WITH THAT, MADAM CHAIR. AND I'M
HAPPY TO I THINK FOR MANY OF US,
IT'S SIMPLY THIS LOWER LEVEL
POSITION OR DOWNGRADE THAT WE
HAVE ISSUES WITH. IT'S NOT THE
REMAINDER OF THE PROPOSAL. AND
THE LIFTING OF OUR LEGENDS AND
FIELD REPS. AND IT'S MORE JUST I
WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS IS
A CHANGE FOR ALL OF US. AND
THERE IS ANGST AMONG CHANGE, BUT
THIS IS A WAY WE AS AN
ORGANIZATION CAN ACTUALLY TALK
TO ALL 80 MEMBERS AND ALL STAFF
COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT
STAFF AS WELL AS YOUR YOUR ALL
STAFF IN THE SAME REGARD. AND
YOU KNOW, SO PEOPLE UNDERSTAND
THAT WE ARE BASING COMPENSATION
ON OTHER RELEVANT EXPERIENCE,
YEAH. WE NEED STAFF. WE NEED
INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE. SO I'M
SORRY, THERE'S A MISS DISCONNECT
THERE, BUT HAPPY TO CONTINUE TO
WORK WITH YOU. AND THEN NEXT UP
WE HAVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER DIXON.
THANK YOU, I'M GLAD WE'RE HAVING
THIS DISCUSSION. I HAVE ONLY
HEARD ABOUT SPECIFIC NUMBERS AND
CLASSIFICATION RANGES. I GUESS
THROUGH THE RUMOR MILL. AND SO I
JUST WONDERED IF YOU COULD
PLEASE ADDRESS WHAT IS THE
STATUS PEOPLE? SOME PEOPLE SEEM
TO KNOW THAT SOME POSITIONS ARE
BEING ADJUSTED. I DON'T HAVE ANY
INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN
COMMUNICATED TO ME DIRECTLY. SO
JUST TO HELP ME CONTROL, MAYBE
MISINFORMATION. YEAH. WHAT IS
THE PROCESS GOING FORWARD AND
WHAT DO PEOPLE KNOW AND ARE ALL
CLASSIFICATIONS BEING REVIEWED
SIMULTANEOUSLY? ARE YOU DOING IT
IN STAGES AND MAYBE THAT WOULD
BE HELPFUL TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE
ALREADY HEARD THEY'RE NOT BEING
REVIEWED CURRENTLY. AND SO WHEN
WOULD ARE THERE POSITIONS BEING
EXCLUDED? I JUST THINK THERE'S
MISINFORMATION. IF YOU COULD
JUST FOR THE RECORD, TELL US
WHAT'S GOING ON. SO STEP ONE IS,
THE POLICY ADOPTION. STEP TWO IS
TO LOOK AT OUR LOWER
CLASSIFICATIONS OFFICE ASSISTANT
SECRETARY, LEGISLATIVE
ASSISTANT, FIELD REP. FROM
THERE, WE'LL PROGRESS BASED ON
SALARY. SO WE WANT TO FOCUS
FIRST ON OUR LOWER PAYING STAFF,
WHICH IS ABOUT FOR LEDGE
ASSISTANTS AND FIELD REPS. IT'S
ABOUT 350 EMPLOYEES THAT WE
WOULD GET TO ADDRESS, BRING
HOPEFULLY THE MINIMUM BASE
SALARY UP AND THEN PLACE THEM
APPROPRIATELY IN THAT RANGE SO
THAT THERE'S NO COMPRESSION
ISSUES. SO HOW ARE PEOPLE
GETTING THOSE NUMBERS? BECAUSE
I'VE HEARD NUMBERS. WELL, AIR
STAFF IS DOING THAT AND THEY'LL
BE REACHING OUT TO YOUR CHIEF OF
STAFF BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE AWARE
OF NUMBERS AND SEEING THAT THEY
MAY BE FROM A COMMUNICATION
STANDPOINT, I'M NOT QUARRELING
OR FINDING ANY FAULT WITH YOUR
PROCESS. THIS IS A PERFECT, I
GUESS, A KIND OF A MICROCOSM OF
HOW INFORMATION IS COMMUNICATED.
SOME PEOPLE GET INFORMATION AND
YOUR INTENTIONS ARE WELL LAID
OUT, BUT MAYBE IT'S SOME
CREATING, SOME CONSTERNATION
AMONG THOSE WHO ARE NOT BEING
REVIEWED AT THIS TIME. AND WILL
THEY EVER BE MADE WHOLE? AND
WHAT HAPPENS TO EVERYBODY ELSE,
JUST MAYBE THEY ALL KNOW IT, AND
I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT DOESN'T.
BUT THEY'RE ASKING ME. AND SO I
AND THEY'RE FORMING SOME
CONCLUSIONS THAT PERHAPS AREN'T
NOT ACCURATELY, DEFINED IN YOUR
PROCESS. YEAH. I MEAN, WE'RE
GOING TO TAKE IT ONE STEP AT A
TIME. WE'RE GOING TO BE MAKING
CALLS LATER THIS WEEK TO EACH
AND EVERY ONE OF YOUR CHIEFS OF
STAFF. THE CHIEFS WERE ABLE TO
COME ON THE MEETING THAT WE HAD
LAST WEEK WERE INFORMED SEVEN
ONE IS THE FIRST GROUP, AND THEN
WE'RE MOVING TO A SECOND GROUP
ON EIGHT ONE AND CONTINUING ON
UNTIL WE AS WE SAID, LOOK AT
EVERY SINGLE EMPLOYEE THAT IS IN
THIS ORGANIZATION AND I THINK
THAT'S GREAT. I COMMEND YOU FOR
THAT. THERE SEEMS TO BE
INFORMATION OR MISINFORMATION
THAT SOME GROUPS ARE BEING
ACCELERATED BEFORE OTHERS, OR
BEING COMPENSATED AT THE NEWER
RATE BEFORE OTHERS. SO MAYBE
JUST TO KIND OF LAY OUT THAT
MAYBE I'M ASKING YOU TO THIS
QUESTION, WILL ALL NEW
COMPENSATION, SALARY RANGES TAKE
EFFECT ON THE SAME DATE? THEY
WILL NOT. SO THE FUTURE PLAN
WOULD BE ONCE WE WE'RE ALMOST TO
SOME INTENT NOT DOING THEM AT
THE SAME TIME BECAUSE THEN AS
YEARS GO ON, WE WILL BE MAKING
THIS A MORE AUTOMATIC PROCESS
AND CONSULTATION WITH EACH
OFFICE. AND SO WE'RE SPLITTING
GROUPS UP SO THAT SEVEN ONE IS
THE FIRST GROUP, EIGHT ONE. AND
THEN NEXT YEAR THOSE THOSE
REVIEWS WOULD BE SEVEN ONE,
EIGHT ONE. AND SO IT DOESN'T ALL
HAPPEN ON THE SAME TIME. BUT,
YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE
LATER WILL HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE
CALCULATED IN, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE
ASSESS WHERE TO PLACE THEM, SO
IT ISN'T, YOU KNOW, IT ISN'T ALL
GOING TO BE SEVEN ONE. WE ALSO
ARE AWARE THAT OUR GREATEST
COMPETITOR HAS ALREADY MOVED,
AND WE WERE ALREADY HEARING THAT
PEOPLE WERE LOSING RECRUITS AND
STAFF TO THAT COMPETITOR. AND SO
THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT
THESE CLASSIFICATIONS WENT
FIRST. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. JUST
JUST COMMUNICATE IT TO
EVERYBODY. THAT'D BE VERY
HELPFUL. OKAY THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. OF COURSE, NEXT UP WE HAVE
ASSEMBLY MEMBER, FLORA. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR. AND THANK YOU
BOTH FOR BEING HERE, I THINK ONE
OF THE BIG THINGS THAT IS SORT
OF BEING LOST, LIKE THIS ALL
KIND OF GOT BROUGHT TO
EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION WITH THE
PASSAGE OF AB ONE, RIGHT? WHERE
WE REALLY NEEDED TO TAKE A LOOK
AT SALARIES AT STAFF LEVEL. AND
I THINK ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT
WE'RE STARTING TO SEE AND I
COMMEND THE WORK OF HONESTLY,
ALL OF YOU, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT
AN EASY THING TO GO TO LOOK
THROUGH. BUT THE FORMER
CHAIRWOMAN OF APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE, HAD A QUOTE ON HER
OFFICE A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO IN,
DOING THE MOST FOR THE MOST
AMOUNT OF PEOPLE. RIGHT. AND I
THINK THAT THAT IS SORT OF WHAT
WE'RE GRAPPLING WITH RIGHT NOW.
I JUST, I JUST, I JUST APPLAUD
THE RULES COMMITTEE FOR TRYING
TO JUST LIFT EVERYBODY UP. AND
THERE MIGHT BE CERTAIN,
SCENARIOS WHERE IT'S NOT EXACTLY
WHAT YOU WANT. BUT AGAIN, I DO
LOVE THAT QUOTE FROM LABOR DOING
THE MOST FOR THE MOST AMOUNT OF
PEOPLE. SO I APPLAUD YOUR
EFFORTS. THANK YOU. AND THEN
SENATOR HOLDEN DID YOU HAVE A
QUESTION JUST BRIEFLY. I JUST
WANTED TO ALSO CONGRATULATE YOU
ON, TAKING ON AND CONTINUING TO
MOVE FORWARD IN A, IN A VERY
POSITIVE WAY AS BEST AS YOU CAN
TO LIFT EVERY BOAT, I GUESS ONE
OF THE QUESTIONS THAT COMES TO
MIND IS THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT
LOOKING FORWARD. HOW LONG IS THE
PROCESS GOING TO CONTINUE IN
TERMS OF LOOKING AT THESE
CLASSIFICATIONS AND THESE
REVIEWS? I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT
MAYBE GOING INTO NEXT YEAR. I
JUST DON'T WANT TO GET AHEAD OF
WHAT I, WHAT I BELIEVE IS
GETTING A BETTER HANDLE ON THESE
CLASSIFICATIONS AND POSITIONS
THAT NEED TO BE LIFTED UP. BUT
IN THIS ARE THOSE THAT MAY BE
DOWNGRADED AND DOWNGRADED IN
THEIR JOB CLASSIFICATION. WE
DON'T KNOW THE FULLNESS OF WHAT
THAT REPRESENTS. IT DOESN'T
APPEAR TO ME AT THIS POINT UNTIL
YOU CONTINUE THE PROCESS THAT
YOU WILL EMBARK ON. ONCE WE GIVE
SOME DIRECTION ON A POLICY
TODAY. SO I GUESS I'M TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND, IS THERE ANY REASON
WHY WE CAN'T BUILD IN A LITTLE
BIT OF CUSHION FOR THE
DOWNGRADES AS WE CONTINUE TO GO
THROUGH THIS PROCESS, AS WE
CONTINUE TO AS YOU CONTINUE TO
HAVE YOUR INTERVIEWS WITH OUR
STAFF AND OTHERS THAT MAY HAVE
BEEN IN A POSITION OF LEADERSHIP
AND NOW ARE NOT, KNOW THE
FULLNESS OF WHAT THAT
REPRESENTS, I WON'T BE BACK NEXT
YEAR, BUT MAYBE MY CHIEF OF
STAFF WILL. SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW
WHAT, THOUGHT PROCESS WE COULD
INTEGRATE INTO THIS. BECAUSE I'D
LIKE TO THINK IN EVERY
COMMITTEE, NOT JUST EVERY OTHER
COMMITTEE, BUT THIS COMMITTEE,
THAT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO
HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY TO
PROPOSALS THAT LAND IN FRONT OF
US. I DON'T WANT TO EVER FEEL
LIKE IN THIS COMMITTEE OR ANY
COMMITTEE, THAT THERE'S NOT AN
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A SUGGESTION
THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR, FOR US TO
GET THE BEST COVERAGE AND HAVE
PEOPLE AS WHOLE, WHATEVER THAT
ULTIMATELY IS DEFINED TO, AS AN
INDIVIDUAL WOULD INTERPRET IT,
SO THAT NO ONE FEELS THAT
THEY'RE INJURED. IF WE HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF THINK
THROUGH, SOME, SOME APPROACH
THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR FLEXIBILITY
. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE
SECOND BULLET POINT, UNDER LOWER
LEVEL POSITION DOWNGRADE, AND IT
DESCRIBES A DOWNGRADE AND JOB
CLASSIFICATION WILL RESULT IN A
SALARY ADJUSTMENT, I WOULD LIKE
TO SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE AN
EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECEMBER FIRST
OF 2024, WHICH WOULD THEN GIVE
YOU MORE TIME TO OUTREACH TO
MORE STAFF AND DETERMINE WHETHER
OR NOT THERE'S ANYONE ELSE, OR
ANY WHO ALL THE UNIVERSE MIGHT
BE THAT COULD FALL INTO A
CATEGORY OF DOWNGRADE. SO WE CAN
GIVE ADDITIONAL SENSITIVITY TO
WHAT THAT MIGHT REPRESENT. I
HEAR I HEAR YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY
BEFORE THE MEMBERS AS CURRENTLY
DRAFTED, IF YOU KNOW MR. HOLDEN,
THAT'S YOUR SUGGESTION. MY
RECOMMENDATION, MADAM CHAIR,
WOULD BE. THEN WE WOULD NEED TO
PAUSE ON THE BASE MINIMUMS,
BECAUSE WE NEED TO HAVE, YOU
KNOW, SOME MECHANISMS TO CONTROL
OUR SPENDING AND, CERTAINLY WANT
TO SUPPORT RAISING THE BASE
MINIMUMS, BUT WE HAVE TO, AS AN
ORGANIZATION, LOOK AT OUR HIGHER
PAID STAFF AND UNDERSTAND, YOU
KNOW, HOW WE DO MERIT INCREASES
TO MR. RAMOS POINT TO RETAIN AND
TO RETAIN THE INSTITUTIONAL
KNOWLEDGE. SO YOU KNOW, IT'S
CERTAINLY A DISCUSSION FOR ALL
YOU, YOU KNOW, I'M YOUR
ADMINISTRATOR, SO I WILL
CERTAINLY TAKE DIRECTION FROM
THE MEMBERSHIP. BUT I JUST AM
PAUSING TO MAKE SURE THAT
THERE'S SOME FISCAL PRUDENCY IN
YOUR POLICY AND YOUR DIRECTION.
SO I PUT IT BEFORE YOU GUYS, BUT
THANK YOU. WELL, AND JUST ONE
OTHER THOUGHT, AND I THINK
THAT'S WHAT I WAS SORT OF
GETTING AT WHEN YOU GET A, A
REPORT FROM WHATEVER COMMITTEE,
THERE IS SOME KIND OF ALREADY
ATTACHED FISCAL IMPACT THERE. I
DON'T UNLESS I OVERLOOKED IT.
EVEN IN WHAT YOU PRESENTED, I
DON'T THINK THERE'S THERE IS A
REPRESENTATION ON WHAT THE
FISCAL IMPACT WOULD BE BASED ON
WHAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING. AND IF
I MISS THAT, MY APOLOGIES. SO
I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW YOU CAN.
I MEAN, I GET WHAT YOU'RE TRYING
TO SAY. I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING
, BUT THAT SHOULD ALREADY BE
PART OF WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US TO
LOOK AT AND EVALUATE. AND MAYBE
I LOOK AT THAT AND I DON'T EVEN
MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION. BUT
ABSENT THAT, I'M BEING ASKED TO
MAKE A DECISION WHERE I'M
STARTING TO FEEL LIKE, DO I HAVE
ALL THE INFORMATION THAT I NEED
TO HAVE AS A MEMBER OF THIS
COMMITTEE? IF YOU'RE UPDATING
CAUCUSES, THAT'S ONE THING. IF
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A POLICY
THAT NOW WE NEED TO DIG DEEPER
ON AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE
EVERYTHING THAT WE NEED TO MAKE
THE FULLNESS OF A RECOMMENDATION
TO THE REST OF THE BODY OUT OF
THIS COMMITTEE. I'M NOT SURE AT
THIS POINT I HAVE ALL OF THAT.
OKAY. THANK YOU, IS THERE A
MOTION? OH, SORRY. I'M SORRY.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER FREEMAN, YOU HAD
A QUESTION. I HAVE A FEW
QUESTIONS, AND I WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR BEING HERE, AND I
APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT'S BEING
DONE. I REPRESENT A VERY HIGH
COST OF LIVING AREA, AND
CERTAINLY, WE HAVE NOT REALLY
HAD A PROBLEM ATTRACTING QUALITY
STAFF, BUT CERTAINLY RETENTION
HAS BEEN A BIT OF A CHALLENGE. I
MEAN, I ALWAYS LOOKED AT THE JOB
A LOT OF THESE FIELD REP JOBS AS
BEING STARTING PLACES FOR PEOPLE
WHO ARE INTERESTED IN POLICY,
WITH THE EXPECTATION THAT IN A
COUPLE OF YEARS THEY WOULD MOVE
ON TO SOMETHING BIGGER AND
BETTER, WHICH IS WHAT'S HAPPENED
MANY TIMES. BUT WHILE PEOPLE ARE
WORKING, IT CAN CERTAINLY BE A
CHALLENGE, THAT'S FOR SURE. SO
I'M REALLY GLAD TO SEE THAT BASE
SALARY. INCREASING. I DON'T KNOW
IF YOU'VE GIVEN THOUGHT TO
CHANGING IT FOR DIFFERENT PARTS
OF THE STATE, BUT THAT'S MAYBE A
DIFFERENT DISCUSSION FOR A
DIFFERENT DAY. I DO HAVE SOME
QUESTIONS. MY FIRST QUESTION IS
WHAT ARE WE EXACTLY VOTING ON
TODAY? BECAUSE I HAVE SIMILAR
CONCERNS AS TO MR. HOLDEN, THAT
THERE'S A LOT OF VAGUENESS IN A
LOT OF THIS, THAT I, THAT I
DON'T EXACTLY KNOW WHAT THE
POLICY IN SOME CASES, WHAT THE
POLICY IS GOING TO BE OR WHAT
IT'S GOING TO COST. SO I'M
WONDERING TODAY IF WE'RE MOVING
YOU FORWARD TO CONTINUE TO
DEVELOP THIS OR IF WE VOTE AND
IT'S NOT COMING BACK TO RULES
AFTER THAT, WHAT'S BEFORE YOU IS
THE SALARY POLICY THAT WAS
POSTED ON THE AGENDA. SO IT'S
THAT THAT NEW SALARY POLICY
WHICH WOULD, CIRCUMVENT WHAT THE
CURRENT POLICY WAS, WHICH WAS
ADOPTED IN 2017. SO LET ME LET
ME JUST ASK A FEW QUESTIONS, SO,
YOU KNOW, I'M LEAVING. SO IT'S
NOT GOING TO AFFECT ME GOING
FORWARD IN MY PERSONAL OFFICE,
BUT I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT THE
PEOPLE WHO HAVE DEDICATED
THEMSELVES TO THIS, TO THIS
BUILDING, AND AS A CALIFORNIAN,
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME THAT
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE REPRESENTING
ME HAVE ADEQUATE STAFFING TO
HELP THEM RUN THE STATE. I THINK
IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF DOES A
MOST OF THE WORK AROUND HERE AS
WE ALL KNOW. AND SO IT'S
IMPORTANT THAT WE ARE ABLE TO
ATTRACT AND RETAIN THE PEOPLE
WHO ARE IN THE BEST POSITION TO
HELP ELECTED OFFICIALS MAKE
THESE REALLY IMPORTANT
DECISIONS. SO IN TERMS OF THE
LOWER THE DOWNGRADE POSITIONS,
I'M WONDERING IF YOU CAN EXPAND
ON WHAT THE, THE
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE
INDIVIDUAL OR THE MEMBERS
DECREASING ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE
I'VE CHAIRED COMMITTEES AND I'VE
NOT CHAIRED COMMITTEES, AND I
WOULD HATE TO THINK THAT IF I'M
NO LONGER CHAIRING A COMMITTEE,
THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN MY STAFF
HAS TO HAVE A SALARY DOWNGRADE
BECAUSE OF THAT, BECAUSE THERE'S
CERTAINLY STILL A LOT OF WORK TO
DO. THEY'RE CERTAINLY DOING A
LOT OF WORK. IT MIGHT BE A
DIFFERENT KIND OF WORK, BUT IT'S
NOT LIKE THEY'RE GOING HOME ANY
EARLIER. SO DO YOU HAVE ANY IS
THERE ANY GUIDANCE IN ANY OF THE
POLICIES THAT WE'RE VOTING ON
THAT MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T
HAVE A SITUATION WHERE JUST
BECAUSE A MEMBER MAYBE IS ON
LESS COMMITTEES OR NO LONGER
CHAIRING SOMETHING, THAT THEIR
STAFF IS GOING TO BE DOWNGRADED.
SO CURRENTLY THERE'S ONE
CLASSIFICATION FOR CHIEFS OF
STAFF. SO IF YOUR, YOUR CHAIR OF
A POLICY COMMITTEE AND THAT
CHAIR RESPONSIBILITY SHIFTS,
YOUR STAFF WOULD STILL REMAIN IN
THAT CLASSIFICATION. SO IT'S
ONLY SPECIFIC TO JOB DUTIES THAT
CHANGE BASED ON THEIR
CLASSIFICATION. SO CURRENTLY IT
WOULDN'T IMPACT YOUR STAFF. IT
WOULDN'T IMPACT MY CHIEF OR MY
STAFF. CORRECT. THERE ARE
CERTAIN CLASSIFICATIONS IN OUR
LEADERSHIP SCHEDULE THAT ARE
DIFFERENT. AND SO THOSE WOULD BE
IMPACTED. MOVING FORWARD, AND
THEN OF COURSE, THE SCENARIO
WHERE AN EMPLOYEE WORKS DIRECTLY
WITH LIZ AND HER STAFF BASED ON
THEIR NEEDS, AS I USE THE
SCENARIO OF A DISTRICT DIRECTOR,
YOU KNOW, MAKING THE CHANGE
BASED ON, YOU KNOW, THEIR
CIRCUMSTANCES, AND THEN ARE WE
TALKING ABOUT ONE POT OF MONEY
THAT'S BEING REDISTRIBUTED, OR
ARE THERE GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL
FUNDS COMING IN TO FUND THOSE
INCREASED SALARIES AT THE LOWER
RANGE? SO THIS IS ALL COMING
FROM THE ASSEMBLY OPERATING
BUDGET. I GUESS I'M WONDERING IS
THE DOWNGRADING OF THE MORE
SENIOR STAFF THAT THAT ARE THE
ANTICIPATING IN HERE? IS THAT
GOING TO BE WHAT THEN HELP? WHAT
WHAT MAKES THE LOWER INCREASE
POSSIBLE? NO, FRANKLY, YOU KNOW,
ALTHOUGH IT'S I, I SAID EARLIER
A PRUDENT DECISION. IT'S ALSO
WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. IT'S
REALLY A NOD. TO PEOPLE WHO ARE
WORKING OUT OF THEIR CLASS. SO
IT'S MISS IT'S MISS
CLASSIFICATIONS THAT WERE
ZEROING IN ON. I'M ONLY ASKING
BECAUSE I'VE HEARD, YOU KNOW,
SOME CONCERNS FROM PEOPLE WHO
ARE MORE SENIOR AS TO WHETHER
THEY'RE NO LONGER GOING TO
RECEIVE, YOU KNOW, RAISES
COMMENSURATE WITH THEIR
EXPERIENCE TO SORT OF PAY FOR
THE NEWER PEOPLE COMING IN.
YEAH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION,
BECAUSE IT'S PART OF US WHO HAVE
BEEN HERE A LONG TIME, LIKE, HOW
DOES THIS IMPACT US? SO THIS IS
A PRETTY COMMON PRACTICE IN HR
WHERE YOU REACH YOUR CAP AND
THEN THEY'LL SAY RED CIRCLED Y
RATED A FROZEN. THERE MAY BE
SOME PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN AT THE
TOP OF THEIR RANGE, AND WE WILL
BE NOTIFYING THEM,
UNFORTUNATELY, CURRENTLY TO BE
HONEST, IT IMPACTS MANY RULES
COMMITTEE STAFF. SO WE'RE HAVING
THOSE CONVERSATIONS THAT, HEY,
YOU MIGHT BE AT THE TOP OF YOUR
CLASSIFICATION. SO, THERE ARE
SCENARIOS AND WE'LL REACH OUT,
BUT, I WOULD HAVE TO GET INTO
SPECIFICS, BY YOUR EMPLOYEE OR
YOUR SITUATION TO KIND OF
UNDERSTAND YOU KNOW, WHO YOU'RE
CONCERNED ABOUT OR WHAT THEIR
SPECIFIC FACTS ARE. I'M NOT
NECESSARILY CONCERNED ABOUT A
SPECIFIC EMPLOYEE. I'M JUST
TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M
VOTING ON. YES. AND I DO THINK
THERE ARE CONCERNS FROM FROM
STAFF. AND SO I HOPE THAT
THERE'S ENOUGH COMMUNICATION TO
REALLY ADDRESS THE CONCERNS
BECAUSE IT'S NEW PEOPLE ARE
TALKING, PEOPLE ARE WORRIED. AND
I HAVE HAD HEARD CONCERNS FROM
PEOPLE, SO, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN ATTRACT
AND RETAIN CERTAINLY PEOPLE THAT
ARE INCOMING. AND WE ALSO HAVE
TO BE SURE THAT WE CAN WE CAN
RETAIN OUR SENIOR STAFF WITH
THEIR KNOWLEDGE BASE SO WE DON'T
LOSE THEM TO LOBBY FIRMS TO, YOU
KNOW, STATE AGENCIES, YOU KNOW,
ETC. WE HAVE TO BE SURE WE'RE
COMPETITIVE TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE
REALLY DEDICATED THEMSELVES TO
HERE. AND, YOU KNOW, AS MUCH AS
I LOVE BEING HERE, I CAN TELL
YOU THAT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT
MY STAFF PUTS IN ON WEEKENDS AND
AFTER HOURS IS NOT NECESSARILY
REFLECTED IN THEIR PAYCHECK. SO
IT'S SOMETHING BEYOND MONEY THAT
KEEPS PEOPLE HERE. BUT THERE'S
ONLY A CERTAIN POINT WHERE
PEOPLE ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH
THAT. AND THEN, LASTLY, I WOULD
ASK, SO THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO
WHOSE CURRENT SALARY INCREASES
THAT THEY WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE
BEEN ENTITLED TO, LET'S SAY, A
YEAR AGO, I THINK ARE FROZEN
BECAUSE OF THE NEW POLICY. AND
ONE THING THAT I HAVE HEARD FROM
STAFF, YOU KNOW, WHO ARE IN THAT
POSITION AND I'M TALKING I HAVE
A FIELD PERSON WHO IS AT THAT
LOWER LEVEL WHO'S BEEN WAITING
FOR A WHILE TO GET, YOU KNOW,
THE RAISE THAT SHE WOULD
NORMALLY HAVE GOTTEN. BUT I
THINK BECAUSE OF THAT, IT'S BEEN
FROZEN. ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE
THAT, THAT SORT OF RETURN TO
THEM RETROACTIVELY SO THAT THEY
FEEL THAT THEY WEREN'T JUST
LOSING MONEY WAITING FOR THE
POLICY TO BE FINISHED? I THINK
WE SHOULD SIDEBAR ON EACH OF
THESE INDIVIDUAL INQUIRIES, YOU
KNOW, THE INTENT IS TO HAVE THE
POLICY GO INTO EFFECT SEVEN ONE.
SO I DON'T WANT TO DISADVANTAGE
STAFF. THE INTENT, I THINK WE'RE
ALL ON THE SAME PAGE OF OUR
INTENT, WHICH IS WE WANT TO
SUPPORT STAFF. WE VALUE THEM.
HOW DO WE MAKE THIS RIGHT? AND
IT FEELS VERY NEW. AND SO IT'S
SCARY AND I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT LET LET'S HAVE A
CONVERSATION ABOUT YOUR SPECIFIC
SITUATION BECAUSE, WE WERE IN
THIS KIND OF GRAY AREA WHERE WE
WERE WORKING WITH HR TO, TO GET
THESE MECHANISMS UP AND GOING SO
THAT WE COULD MOVE FORWARD. AND
NOW WE'RE BEFORE YOU TO SAY,
LET'S MOVE FORWARD. BUT I AND
UNDERSTAND THERE'S SITUATIONS,
BUT I CAN'T I DON'T KNOW THE
FACTS JUST HOW TO RESPOND TO
YOUR INQUIRY. BUT MY HOPE IS
THAT MOST OF THE STAFF WILL FEEL
COMFORTABLE AND SUPPORT THEIR
INCREASE IN THOSE LOWER LEVEL
POSITIONS. MOVING FORWARD. OKAY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ARE THERE
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ONE FOLLOW
UP ON MR. HOLDEN'S QUESTION.
OKAY. SO I THINK IN RESPONSE TO
MR. HOLDEN'S, IDEA, MAYBE WE
HOLD THE DOWNGRADES TILL, YOU
KNOW, END OF NOVEMBER, BEGINNING
OF DECEMBER, YOU HAD MENTIONED
THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO WAIT TO
RAISE OTHER PEOPLE'S SALARIES.
AND COULD YOU. IS THAT A
FINANCIAL. IS THAT A FINANCIAL
REASON? WELL, AGAIN, WE WOULDN'T
HAVE TO, BUT IT WOULD BE MY
RECOMMENDATION TO DO SO THAT WE
CAN PAUSE AND LOOK AT THAT
ACTION. AND CAN YOU WALK? AND
WHY IS THAT? IS IT BECAUSE YOU
NEED THE MONEY FROM THE
DOWNGRADES TO FUND THE INCREASE?
I GUESS, I WOULD JUST MY CONCERN
IS THAT WE AS AN ORGANIZATION
KEEP INCREASING SALARIES, WHICH
MIGHT BE RIGHTFULLY WHAT WE NEED
TO DO, BUT THERE'S NO MECHANISM
TO SAY FROM THE ORGANIZATIONAL
PERSPECTIVE, WE HAVE A LIMIT
BASED ON PROP 140, WHAT OUR
BUDGET IS FROM THE ASSEMBLY'S
PERSPECTIVE. AND SO I DON'T WANT
TO PUT THE MEMBERS HERE IN A
PREDICAMENT WHERE IN FUTURE
YEARS, WE'RE COMING TO YOU AS
RULES COMMITTEE STAFF TO SAY WE
NEED TO DO REDUCTIONS IN FORCE
BECAUSE WE HAVE TOO MANY
EMPLOYEES ON OUR PAYROLL. AND SO
THAT'S IT IS A REAL CONCERN OF
MINE. MAYBE I'M A LITTLE,
NERVOUS THERE, BUT, THAT WOULD
JUST BE MY RECOMMENDATION THAT
WE LOOK AT IT HOLISTICALLY AND,
ARE WE AS AS A OPERATING BUDGET?
ARE WE RUNNING A DEFICIT? ARE WE
RUNNING A SURPLUS? I MEAN, DO WE
HAVE, A RESERVE? I MEAN, JUST
GOING BACK TO BECAUSE AS MR.
HOLDEN MENTIONED, THERE'S NO
FISCAL PIECE. SO. SO JUST TRYING
TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE COULDN'T DO
BOTH. I THINK IT'S A YOU KNOW, A
QUESTION OF WHERE DOES THE
SPENDING AND THE SALARY
INCREASES CONTINUE, WHAT ARE THE
MECHANISMS TO PUT LIMITATIONS
ON? BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION,
WE THE ASSEMBLY ARE IN OKAY
SITUATION. I DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR
YEARS. LOOK, DO WE HAVE A
SURPLUS? WE ARE. OKAY SO WE HAVE
A SURPLUS. YES AND IS THAT, FROM
A PERCENT STANDPOINT, CAN YOU
GIVE US A SENSE OF HOW I CAN GET
BACK TO YOU ON THAT? CERTAINLY.
WE'LL DO SO. BUT, SO IT JUST
DEPENDS HOW YOU ALL WANT TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH THIS POLICY. MY
RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO
PROCEED FORWARD WITH THE POLICY
THAT IS AT HAND. I'LL MAKE A
MOTION A SECOND. OKAY SO, I JUST
WANT, AS A NEW PERSON, IS THIS
UPDATING AN EXISTING POLICY? IS
THIS A NEW POLICY OR DOES IT A
CURRENT POLICY EXIST. AND THIS
IS UPDATING THIS IS REVISIONS TO
AN EXISTING POLICY. REPLACING IT
WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL IF WE
COULD KIND OF SEE A RED LINE
VERSION AND WHAT'S NEW AND
WHAT'S. WELL WE'RE THROWING OUT
THE OLD VERSION. THIS IS REALLY
NEW OKAY. IT'S DELETING AND
REPLACING. WELL AND MR. FARR
REFERENCED EARLIER THE ACA ONE.
AND I REMEMBER AS PART OF THAT
THAT DISCUSSION AND THAT THAT
BILL THAT IT CONTAINED IT, I
DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS AN
ADMONISHMENT IS A RECOMMENDATION
THAT EMPLOYEES OF OFFICES ONE IS
REPUBLICAN, ONE DEMOCRAT.
OBVIOUSLY, THERE ARE NO PARTIZAN
DIFFERENTIALS IN SALARY AND
COMPENSATION. IS THAT PRINCIPLE
BEING REFLECTED IN HOW YOU'RE
CALCULATING YOUR NUMBERS? YES.
OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S VERY
GOOD OKAY. SO THERE'S A MOTION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH I'M SORRY. I
HAD ONE OTHER THING I WANTED TO
JUST SAY, ONE OF THE OTHER
CONCERNS THAT I HAVE HEARD FROM
SOME OF THE STAFF AT THE HIGHEST
LEVELS HAS TO DO WITH JUST
HISTORIC PAY INEQUITIES,
PARTICULARLY WITH WOMEN VERSUS
MEN. AND I DO HOPE THAT AS YOU
LOOK AT THIS, YOU LOOK AT SOME
OF THOSE INEQUITIES SO THAT WE
DON'T SORT OF FREEZE EVERYONE
WHERE THEY ARE AND ALLOW FOR
THIS DISCREPANCY BETWEEN GROUPS
OF PEOPLE, SO I DON'T KNOW IF
YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT ABOUT.
YEAH, I MEAN, I'VE HEARD THIS A
LOT. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A
STRUGGLE FOR RULES COMMITTEE
STAFF BECAUSE, BASED ON THE
LEGISLATION, IT'S EQUAL PAY FOR
EQUAL WORK. AND WE WOULD BE, IN
TROUBLE IF WE, BASE SOMEONE'S
COMPENSATION ON A PROTECTED
CLASS ISSUE. SO EVEN THOUGH I
HEAR YOU AND I UNDERSTAND THAT
THERE'S SYSTEMIC ISSUES OUT
THERE, THAT'S NOT OUR JOB TO
LOOK AT AN INDIVIDUAL BASED ON
THOSE PROTECTED CLASS. THAT'S
WHY WE'RE SETTING THIS POLICY
OUT BASED ON RELEVANT WORK
EXPERIENCE, AS WELL AS TIME AND
POSITION, AND TRYING TO GIVE A
NOD TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN IN
THE BUILDING FOR SOME TIME.
WELL, MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING THAT
CAN BE LOOKED AT AS YOU LOOK AT
HOW, WHEN, HOW AND WHEN YOU DO
THOSE STEPS, GIVEN THAT, YOU
KNOW, SOME CLASSES OF PEOPLE MAY
HAVE HAD A LOT MORE STEPS EVEN
WHILE THEY'VE BEEN HERE WORKING
IN THE LEGISLATURE AND TRYING TO
FIND A WAY TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
AND RECONCILE IT, YOU KNOW, NOT
TO MENTION THE PAY SCALE AT
WHICH PEOPLE ENTER, YOU KNOW,
NOT NECESSARILY BEING REFLECTED
IN THE, IN THE WORK THEY'RE
DOING. SO I WOULD SAY I AGREE
WITH YOU, EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL
WORK, BUT ARE WE SURE THAT WE
ARE PAYING PEOPLE EQUALLY FOR
THE WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING? SO
I WOULD THAT'S WHAT I'M
SUGGESTING. THAT'S WHY WE'RE
LOOKING PERSON BY PERSON BY
PERSON. AND THAT'S THE REASON
FOR HAVING A DOWNGRADE OPTION.
BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY WHO
HAD A VERY, VERY LARGE
RESPONSIBILITY AND NO LONGER
DOES AND HAS MOVED INTO A
CLASSIFICATION WITH PEOPLE WHO
HAVE LESS RESPONSIBILITY, IT'S
HARD TO MEET THOSE PAY EQUITY
GOALS IF THEIR COMPENSATION
ISN'T APPROPRIATELY ADJUSTED.
OKAY, NO, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
IT IS. 1:41 P.M. QUESTION OF THE
CHAIR. IS IT YOUR EXPECTATION
THAT THIS COMMITTEE WILL GET AN
INTERIM UPDATE? SO WE CAN TRACK
A LOT OF WHAT WAS SHARED TODAY
THAT MAY NOT BE AS EVIDENT IN
FRONT OF US. MY OFFICE IS ALWAYS
OPEN FOR A COMMITTEE, FOR THE
COMMITTEE TO BE HAVE A SESSION.
AND MAYBE IT'S JUST FOR THIS
PURPOSE. I MEAN, WE IT IS UNDER
THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMITTEE
WHERE WE CAN GET AN UPDATE
WITHIN 45 DAYS OR SOMETHING LIKE
THAT. YOU TELL ME. I MEAN, IT'S
JUST ADOPTING THIS POLICY THAT'S
BEFORE I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE
ANOTHER AGENDA THAT WE CAN
ANOTHER ITEM WE CAN PLACE ON THE
AGENDA. I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO
DISCUSS THAT AS WELL. BUT THE
ONLY THING THAT'S ON THE AGENDA
IS THIS POLICY. I KNOW I
UNDERSTAND, AND WE'RE YOU'RE
ASKING US TO VOTE ON THE POLICY,
AND I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT
OF GOOD ENERGY MOVING, TRYING TO
MOVE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I'M
JUST SAYING THAT THERE HAVE BEEN
QUESTIONS RAISED. WILL THERE BE
AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET AN UPDATE
FROM STAFF FOR THIS COMMITTEE TO
BE UPDATED ON HOW THESE MEETINGS
WITH STAFF ARE GOING AND HOW
WHAT FEEDBACK THEY'RE GETTING,
THAT'S ALL. AND I LIKE MAYBE I
SHOULD ASK THAT THAT BE
AGENDIZED AND WE CAN HAVE
FURTHER DISCUSSIONS AND IF
NECESSARY, WE CAN AGENDIZE IT.
AND I DO TAKE YOUR CONCERNS VERY
SERIOUS AND SO IF IT'S A MATTER
THAT SHOULD BE AGENDIZED, THEN
WE SHOULD DEFINITELY AGENDIZE
IT. SO I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR
QUESTION. IS MAKING A MOTION TO
AGENDIZE THIS, I WOULD SECOND
IT. MAKE A MOTION TO AGENDIZE
IT. OKAY, SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. CHEN TO AGENDIZE. AND
I'M MAYBE I'M NOT EVEN SO. SO
THERE'S SO THERE'S, I THINK A
MAIN, A MOTION THAT'S BEEN MADE
TO ADOPT THE POLICY. POLICY YOU
TAKE THE ACTION ON THAT. AND
THEN ASSEMBLY MEMBER ALVAREZ,
I'D LIKE TO ASK THE
PROFESSIONALS IN THE ROOM WHO
WORKED ON THIS, WHAT WOULD BE AN
APPROPRIATE TIME FRAME FOR YOU
TO PROVIDE POTENTIALLY AN UPDATE
ON THE STATUS OF YOUR
CONVERSATIONS AND YOUR THINKING?
HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED? YEAH
I, I THINK, YOU KNOW,
APPROPRIATELY, WE COULD, YOU
KNOW, GET BACK TO THE CHAIR
WITHIN A THREE MONTH TIME FRAME.
OKAY. YEAH. GREAT SO WOULD YOU
LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO PROVIDE
AN UPDATE IN THREE MONTHS? WELL,
I, I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS
REALLY COMPLICATED BECAUSE IT'S
NOT. THERE WAS A CONVERSATION
THAT ENSUED. THERE WERE A LOT OF
QUESTIONS. I'M PREPARED TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH THE MOTION, BUT I'D
LIKE TO KNOW THAT THE QUESTIONS
THAT I PUT ON THE TABLE, WE CAN
GET SOME FEEDBACK TO IN A
REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME. I
MEAN, YOU DON'T WANT IT TO BE IN
DECEMBER WHEN I WON'T EVEN BE
HERE. I'M JUST SAYING THERE'S A
THERE'S AN EXPECTATION THAT WE
CAN, AS YOU CONTINUE YOUR
CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF AS YOU
GO FROM YOUR PRIORITY LEVELS,
THAT AT SOME POINT IN THE NEAR
FUTURE, YOU CAN COME BACK TO US
AND LET US KNOW HOW THAT PROCESS
IS GOING. SO THAT WOULD BE
APPROXIMATELY THREE MONTHS. AS
YOU HEARD, OF COURSE, IF THERE'S
AN ITEM THAT WE NEED, WE NEED TO
AGENDIZE MORE THAN HAPPY TO
AGENDIZE IT. I JUST DON'T THINK
WE'LL HAVE THE INFORMATION BY
JULY. SO DID YOU WANT TO PROCEED
WITH YOUR MOTION, MADAM CHAIR?
SORRY. ASSEMBLY MEMBER FULLER SO
THERE'S CURRENTLY A MOTION ON
THE THAT'S ON THE FLOOR RIGHT
NOW, WHICH IS TO MOVE IT AS IT
IS IN PRINT. SO IF THERE'S A
SUBSTANTIVE OR A SUBSTANTIVE
MOTION, THEN WE NEED TO DEAL
WITH THAT. BUT IF WE HAVE TO
DISPENSE WITH THE FIRST MOTION
FIRST. BUT I THOUGHT THE MOTION
WAS TO APPROVE CONSENT. I'M
SORRY. IT WAS TO APPROVE CONSENT
TO PURSUE CONSENT BECAUSE THIS
ITEM HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN OFF
CONSENT. THAT'S CORRECT. IT IS
NOT. YEAH, BUT BUT I THINK SO.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND ASSEMBLY
MEMBER. LO I'M SORRY, I WAS JUST
GOING TO ASK, GIVEN THAT THERE'S
BEEN SIGNIFICANT DISCOURSE, IT
WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT
THE CHAIR'S PREROGATIVE WOULD BE
ON PROCEEDING SO WE CAN HELP
UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE PRIVY TO
MUCH OF THE CONTEXT AND THE
FUNCTIONS OF THIS AS WELL, TOO,
BUT ADEQUATELY ADDRESSING ANY OF
THE OUTSTANDING CONCERNS YOU
ALREADY ARTICULATED THAT THERE'S
OPPORTUNITY IN YOUR OFFICE IS
OPEN, BUT DO YOU HAVE A
PREROGATIVE ON THE DIRECTION OF
THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION VERSUS THE
THREE MONTHS? I BELIEVE I THINK,
THOUGH, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD
BE TO PROCEED FORWARD WITH THE
ORIGINAL MOTION. I THINK I NEED
A CLARIFYING AS TO WHAT THE
SUBSTITUTE MOTION WOULD BE. I'M
NOT FULLY UNDERSTANDING IT, AND
THAT'S WHY I'M RECOMMENDING THAT
MAYBE WE HAVE FURTHER
DISCUSSIONS AND IF WE NEED TO
AGENDIZE IT, WE WILL AGENDIZE IT
AT A FUTURE MEETING. BUT MY
RECOMMENDATION IS TO PROCEED
FORWARD WITH ADOPTING THE POLICY
AND APPROVING THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. SO MY RECOMMENDATION
WOULD BE TO PROCEED FORWARD WITH
THE MOTION. AND THE SECOND, AND
FOR US TO VOTE. YEAH. AND I'M
GOOD WITH THE MOTION. IT'S
ALREADY BEEN MADE ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT
THERE ARE GOING TO BE ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS. THERE ARE CHIEFS
OF STAFFS OF MEMBERS WHO ARE
GOING TO BE HERE, WHO ARE STILL
NOT QUITE SURE WHERE THEY LAND
ON ALL THIS. THERE ARE OTHER
STAFF THAT YOU WILL BE TALKING
TO AS THE DAYS AND WEEKS GO
FORWARD OUT OF THAT, YOU KNOW,
THERE MAY BE SOME ADDITIONAL
ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO KNOW
ABOUT. SO IF THERE'S AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR THERE TO BE AN
ITEM AGENDIZED JUST TO UPDATE ON
THE PROGRESS, WELL, KEEP IN MIND
EVERY OFFICE IS GOING TO HAVE A
DIFFERENT SET OF QUESTIONS. SO
YOUR OFFICE MAY HAVE A CERTAIN
SET OF QUESTIONS. AND THIS
DIALOG SHOULD BE OPEN TO ALL
ASSEMBLY MEMBERS, EVEN THOSE
THAT ARE NOT HERE ON THIS
COMMITTEE. SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO
GET EVERYBODY'S INPUT, NOT JUST
THOSE MEMBERS THAT ARE HERE ON
THIS COMMITTEE. BUT OF COURSE,
IF WE NEED TO AGENDIZE A
PARTICULAR ITEM, I AM MORE THAN
HAPPY TO AGENDIZE IT. OKAY, I
GUESS THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE,
BUT TO YOUR EARLIER POINT, YOU
KNOW I SERVE ON ENERGY. HAPPY TO
MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY GETS TO
HEAR EVERYTHING WE'RE GOING TO
HEAR TODAY IN ENERGY. BUT I
DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU
REALLY WANT TO DO. THIS
COMMITTEE IS FOCUS IS ON THESE
TYPE OF ISSUES. AND THEN WE
REPORT OUT AND WE CERTAINLY CAN
TAKE TIME TO GET INPUT FROM
OTHERS. THAT'S ALL. I DON'T I
DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S SO
COMPLICATED TO JUST YES WE CAN
AGENDA NOT COMPLICATED. IT
SOUNDS LIKE WHAT YOU SAID AND
THAT'S FINE. OKAY. THANK YOU.
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
SO ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
PACHECO. AYE. PACHECO. AYE.
LARA. FULLER. AYE. ALVAREZ.
ALVAREZ. AYE. ARAMBULA. AYE.
ARAMBULA. AYE. CHEN. CHEN. AYE.
DIXON. DIXON. AYE. FRIEDMAN.
FRIEDMAN. AYE. HOLDEN. HOLDEN.
AYE. LO. LO. AYE. MAINCHAIN.
MAINCHAIN. AYE. TING TING. AYE
MOTION PASSES. RULES COMMITTEE
IS NOW ADJOURNED.