An 11th hour layoff, New Years Eve, of 22 Coos County Road Department employees by commissioners, Whitty, Stufflebean and outgoing commissioner, John Griffith has unleashed a firestorm of activity. The abrupt manner in which the County conducted the layoffs has resulted in an unfair labor practices (ULP) complaint filed against the county and initiated a recall effort of Commissioner Kevin Stufflebean.

According to claims included in an amended ULP, filed with the Oregon Employment Relations Board, January 28, 2009, the County contracted out ‘bargaining unit’ work to managers and further failed to notify the Union. “The decision to contract out bargaining unit work is a mandatory bargaining subject under ORS 243.650(7).”

The ULP claims multiple ORS violations including the County’s refusal to provide ‘…any notes, reports, transcripts, minutes and/or recordings from the County Commission’s executive session held on December 31, 2008.’ The Union requested the information January 12, 2009 to investigate possible violations of Oregon law and the Public Employees Collective Bargaining Act.

Citizens for Fair and Open Government, headed by former roadmaster, Larry Van Elsberg, launched a recall believing a perceived lack of transparency on the part of the former Board of Commissioners excluded citizens from actively participating in the reorganization of the Road Department and jeopardized public safety. The County denies these claims and asserts all meetings were properly noticed in accordance with Oregon’s open records laws.

As reported last week, during a January 20, 2009 ‘worksession’ at the Owen Bldg, Stufflebean claims the Road Department layoffs were openly discussed during an announced December 16, 2008 special meeting. The Sentinel listened to the recording of that session and provided copies to some citizens to try and obtain an opinion as to Stufflebean’s claim.

Present at the meeting were Commissioners Whitty, Griffith and Stufflebean and the department budgets discussed included the Sheriff, SCINT, Juvenile and Planning as well as the Road Department. Stufflebean, aided by management from the Road Department, referred to charts that appear to be the same information supplied to media and during the Owen Bldg meeting.

Stufflebean presented anticipated reductions in revenue, the cost of maintaining aged county equipment and then explained, “…One of the things we run into with the road department is road department is actually maintenance department where we need materials, meaning asphalt and gravel in order to maintain roads. We have invested in everything but equipment and supplies… that has put us in a very difficult situation that we are in right now.”

Stufflebean notes the department has been operating in the red for several years ‘spending down carryover funds’, a claim disputed by Van Elsberg. The next spreadsheet discussed is the ten-year budget projection also provided at the Owen Bldg that includes a shift towards increased spending on asphalt, equipment purchases Stufflebean says “…we are looking at staff reductions in the 2012-2013 budget year.”

Stufflebean announces a major reduction in road department complaints owing to an emphasis on customer service attributed to managers Barry Austen and Shawn Migas. After explaining the need to invest in new equipment and that as jobs have become vacant in the last two years they have been left unfilled he states, “…we will be maintaining backhoe crews, brush cutting crews, making sure we have a culvert installation crew, do our ditching crew, we will be able to do paving, we will be able to run the crusher and we will be able to do slide removal. Sign and spray is one of our most critical functions we do, herbicide spray… plus we will be able to retain bridge inspections and we will have fleet services also.”

Reference is made to an organizational chart that lists how many people are qualified to do the jobs listed above. No reference is made in open session to impending layoffs. Ed Pool, a Bridge resident who has listened to the recording but was not present to view any of the charts says, “I heard nothing that would lead me to believe they were about to lay anyone off.”

John Griffith called an executive session citing labor negotiations and current or potential litigation. Treasurer Mary Barton, Road Department managers, Shinnock, Migas and Austen, and Human Resources Director, Steve Allen all attended with the Commissioners and County Counsel Jacqui Haggerty. The ULP claims that a decision to layoff road crew workers was made during executive session December 31 but it may have occurred during this December 16 meeting.

Pool found it curious that just before the audio cuts off Stufflebean is heard saying, “I would prefer that this be handwritten notes and not taped executive session…” Pool is now actively collecting signatures for the recall petition.

Whether the public was properly informed that a major decision relating to road maintenance was being made there is little doubt the road workers were kept in the dark. Union president Adam Wideman, about a week before the layoffs, received a copy of a 10-Year Projection for Road Dept Budgets prepared November 11, 2008 and referred to in the meeting of December 16.

The projection was part of the handouts provided to the public at the Owen Bldg meeting but was not provided to Wideman by anyone affiliated with the road department management and indicates 40 employees maintained through 2010 with a reduction of personnel beginning in 2011.

Wideman, along with all other road department employees, had been advised at 7:00 AM New Year’s Eve morning to attend a mandatory meeting at 3:30 that afternoon. Unaware that he would be laid off that afternoon he attended the regular BOC meeting that morning to ask if there were any major reductions to be made in the next couple of years and was advised there would be some changes. This was the only notice given to County Road Department employees.

The Sentinel has learned the layoff of 22 Teamster workers reduced the ratio of union to nonunion employees affecting the Oregon Teamsters Employers Trust health benefits. The number of Teamsters must exceed the number of non-Teamster workers to stay in compliance with the terms of the policy. The County has been notified that nonunion employees will lose their coverage as per trust requirements effective as early as March. Not all county workers are covered by OTET but amongst those about to lose their health insurance are the county commissioners and the human resources director.