Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Relations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee member objects to Clifton Park settlement with Civil Service Employees Association
Summary
A Clifton Park Town Board member objected to a proposed settlement with the Civil Service Employees Association Local 100, saying the board bypassed the state Public Employment Relations Board and has incurred roughly $27,000 in outside legal bills; a motion to consider the agreement was made but no vote is recorded in the transcript.
A committee member of the Clifton Park Town Board said the board should not approve a settlement with the Civil Service Employees Association Local 100, criticizing the process and legal costs, at a meeting where the agreement was read and a motion was made.
The committee member said the dispute stems from a 2025 memorandum of agreement that added job titles and employees into the union ranks. According to the board member, the town’s board majority did not pursue the usual step of taking the matter to the state Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) for a hearing and instead went straight to court; the committee member said the resulting settlement now before the board would make four of the named employees union members while others would not be included. "I don't agree with this settlement," the committee member said, adding that "the town spent a lot of money on lawyers" and that "we have bills of $27,000 so far" for outside counsel.
The meeting record shows the item was read aloud by a meeting participant identified in the transcript as the Clerk, who said "So moved" and a procedural "2nd" was recorded; the transcript does not include full motion text, the name of a second recorded separately, any vote tally, or any official approval. The committee member described the union as having "caved" in the negotiations and said the town "didn't follow the proper process," but the transcript does not record a response from other board members or town staff on those points.
The committee member’s statements raise questions about the procedural path the town took and the legal costs the town has incurred. The claim that the board bypassed PERB and went to court is reported here as an allegation made in the meeting transcript; no corroborating explanation or rebuttal appears in the provided text. The only quantified cost given in the transcript is the committee member’s statement of roughly $27,000 in outside counsel bills.
The transcript records the settlement being presented and a motion to consider it but does not show a vote or final disposition within the provided segments. If the board takes formal action, the record of the motion, seconder and vote will determine the item’s outcome.
