05/05/1999 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 5/5/99 Resolution No. 99-43 introduced by Mr. McKay and Mr. Nashar was given its third ,~~ ~ reading. A resolution requesting the Ohio Department of Transportation to improve Interstate 480 from the west corporation line to the east corporation line by constructing noise barriers and declaring an emergency. Mr. Nashar moved for adoption; second by Mr. McKay; motion passed unanimously. Resolution No. 99-43 adopted. Ordinance No. 99-45 introduced by Mr. Gareau was given its third reading. An ordinance amending Section 3 of Ordinance 98-32 entitled "An ordinance establishing rates of compensation for various administrative and legislative personnel, and declaring an emergency" in order to establish a salary range for the newly-created position of Assistant Director of Finance, and declaring an emergency. Mr. Gareau moved for adoption; second by Mr. Limpert. Roll call: Gareau, yes, with explanation. "By way of background for this particular piece of legislation this evening, many of you recall that this issue of Assistant Director or Finance was brought up during the appropriations hearings. At that point in time, there was a considerable lengthy debate had as to 1. whether we will create this position and 2. what we will pay this person when, if they are in fact hired. Discussion was had initially by Mrs. Copfer as to a salary range of, a salary of $55,000. Myself and Mr. O'Grady, I believe Mr. Limpert as well, at that point in time believed that that was at least an interesting place to start. But Mr. O'Grady was more of the mindset that $45,000 was appropriate. Mr. Limpert and myself believed that $55,000 was appropriate to get a trained professional in to the position to be able to hit the ground running. The majority of Council disagreed and felt that $35,000 would be an appropriate amount of money to pay this person. I saw the wisdom of the numbers; and, of course, $35,000 is what it is when the majority so states. When I drafted the first piece of legislation for this position, I established a .salary range of $35,000 to $55,000- $35,000 being the low end of the range, which is, in fact, what the majority agreed with, $55,000 being where I originally was. I was originally told at that point in time that was unacceptable. So I redrafted the ordinance still keeping $35,000 as the bottom end of the range and creating a salary range of $35,000 to $45,000, which is for most intents and purposes similar to the salary ranges we have established for other positions in the city. Once again, the majority has told me that that is not acceptable despite the fact that we had a $35,000 salary established by Council, the entity that controls what sort of money gets paid for this position. Council will vote down Ordinance 99-45 this evening, it's my belief, for reasons that are not entirely clear to me. You will recall as I stated that we've gone through this-it was an emotional, it was a rigorous debate during appropriations hearings. And despite the fact that we discussed this and Assistant Director of Finance, excuse me, the Director of Finance presented a volume of information as to this position and what it should be paid, the majority felt otherwise and said $35,000 would be appropriate. I think the residents of North Olmsted deserve to know why this legislation as written will fail. Particularly when we're dealing with a salary range and not the amount of money that the person is actually going to get paid. That's agreed on. We have that. Despite that fact, the legislation will go down. If someone is concerned on Council with fluctuating salaries within salary ranges, they need only speak to Ms. Popa who recently found out that it is ultimately Council that will decide what a position will be paid. Ms. Popa, there was a request for more than 3% for her pay increase, and this Council in committee said no that's not appropriate. And they deemed an amount that 8