A special master recommends concessions for St. Pete Beach and its police force, but the contract would only last until Oct. 1.
By JADE JACKSON LLOYD
Published May 12, 2004
ST. PETE BEACH - A near 18-month impasse between the city and its police union is a step closer to resolution, with both sides getting some of what they wanted.
A special master, whose recommendations the City Commission can oppose, advised the Fraternal Order of Police union to accept a retroactive 1 percent pay increase and negotiable work shifts offered by the city.
Alternately, he said the city should continue allowing a third party to handle the police's disciplinary matters instead of giving that authority to the city manager.
This arbitrated contract, however, is for one year only and expires Oct. 1 of this year. If the city and union agree to new terms on their own, the contract extends to October 1, 2006.
Historically, the city has negotiated three-year contracts with three unions: Communication Workers of America, International Association of Fire Fighters and the FOP. All three agreements expired Sept. 30. City officials successfully renegotiated two of them, but have been enmeshed in police negotiations since mid-2003.
During an April 22 special master hearing, a mediator heard arguments from FOP representatives and city administrators on whether:
Police disciplinary matters should continue to be handled by an outside arbitrator;
The four-day, 10-hour work shifts negotiated in the last contract should stand; and
The union should accept the city's offer of a 1 percent pay increase.
Chris Centofanti, 32, a St. Pete Beach patrol officer for 12 years, said the latest development presents less of an end to the story than a pause, unless police officers get more of what they requested.
"The union wants a guaranteed work schedule, preferably the one we're working now that we all love," he said. "Let us continue to catch the bad guys. Let us continue to do what we do and continue to have binding arbitration and discipline."
"They threatened impasse 18 months ago at the very first meeting," Centofanti added. "They've been wanting this since the beginning because they want the (Pinellas County) sheriff's department in there. ... No wonder we're still sitting here after 18 months and not satisfied."
City Manager Mike Bonfield acknowledged that having the sheriff's office patrol the city streets would be more cost-effective for the city.
Still, he said the only way the change could happen is if voters want it - not through any pressure from City Hall.
"The community ultimately decides it by referendum," he said during a late April interview. "If it's something they want to explore, it's fine. If not, that's fine as well."
Bonfield said that years ago, the sheriff's office aggressively pursued smaller towns to get them to convert to using their services. The threat continues to hang over the police department because of it, even though the campaign has not been active in a while, he said.
Though he's heard that allegation since he took the job in January 2002, Bonfield contends it's completely unfounded.
"The only thing I can think of is people are using this to obfuscate the real issue ... and that's, "What should we include in this contract?' The union can be focused on themselves and what their interests are. I have other unions to deal with" and other citywide issues.
Both sides agree on one point: It's not over until a contract is signed.
"We still disagree with his (the special master's) position on the discipline," Bonfield said Tuesday. "I wasn't surprised at his position, but I was disappointed with it. I'm still hopeful we'll be able to work something out. I'm not closing the door on any of it."
Centofanti said the union wants a three-year contract and a few more concessions.
"What did we get out of this?" he said Tuesday. "We didn't get any extra money. We didn't get any extra benefits. They've offered us nothing more than we already had. If you take away shift schedules and binding arbitration, what are we working for?"
