The Holyoke City Council Finance Committee voted 3–2 on Jan. 14 to deny funding for three items tied to the ratified contract with the Holyoke Professional Supervisors Association. Committee members said the denial represents a decision on appropriation rather than renegotiation of the contract language, and the matter will be brought to the full City Council for final action Tuesday.

The items in question included a multi-part contract that committee members and city negotiators described as the result of lengthy bargaining. Labor counsel Russell (identified on the record as city labor counsel) and personnel staff described give-and-take across wage, vacation, longevity and flex-time provisions. Russell said the bargaining process took “many, many meetings” and that the final contract standardized language and added merit and evaluation components. Personnel chief Kelly Curran said some provisions addressed recruitment and retention concerns and that the parties had negotiated caps on certain buybacks to control costs.

Opponents on the committee — including Councilors Sullivan and Jourdain — said their objection was not to modest pay increases but to “giveaways” elsewhere in the contract, including changes to vacation language, longevity, and buyback terms that they said would increase long-term costs. Councilor Jourdain moved that the three items be denied; the roll call on the motion to deny recorded Councilor Ocasio voting to deny, Councilor Givner voting no, Councilor Devine voting no, Councilor Sullivan voting to deny and Councilor Jourdain voting to deny. The motion to deny passed 3–2.

Committee members and labor counsel clarified the council’s role: the committee votes on appropriations (whether to fund contract costs). Russell explained that the committee’s vote affects whether money is available to implement the contract, while the negotiated contract terms remain the product of bargaining and ratification. Assistant city solicitor Michael Bissonnette and other staff had provided legal context on a statutory question involving retroactive pay; Bissonnette’s written advice, included in the packet, said retroactive pay language could permit awards back to the beginning of the prior fiscal year under certain readings of the statute. Some committee members said they remain concerned about the list of non-wage items and their fiscal effect.

The committee voted to deny funding for the three items and will deliver the matter to the full council for consideration. Committee members said councilors who oppose the appropriation can vote against it on Tuesday and the full council can decide the city’s funding position.