|
Council Minutes of 5/5/99
<br />was appropriate, and that's what she's being paid this year." At this point, President
<br />,~ Saringer reminded Mr. Gareau that issue was not being discussed. Also, there is a time
<br />limit of four minutes. Mr. Gareau continued: "I expect that some on Council are
<br />concerned that a $10,000 salary range is an opportunity for the administration to
<br />circumvent Council's stated desire to pay the Assistant Director of Finance $35,000 by
<br />somehow transferring secretly money over to the Assistant Director of Finance salary and
<br />paying her more, he or she, more than what we actually agreed to pay at $35,000. I think
<br />if such a belief is held by persons on Council, it is preposterous and it's baseless and I
<br />think that it really calls into question the Director of Finance for reasons that really are
<br />not necessary. Lastly, the majority will speak tonight-their voice was largely silent
<br />prior to this meeting this evening-to address their concerns with this particular
<br />Councilman, the sponsor of this legislation, conversations were few and limited to what
<br />the majority wanted. Compromise was urged by me. In fact, I compromised three times
<br />when I changed my position as it was rejected. Madam President, as part of my
<br />comments since my time is up, I would incorporate the proposal for the Assistant
<br />Director of Finance in its entirety as presented by Mrs. Copfer during the appropriations
<br />hearings and make them a part of my comments. Thank you." (Please note that Finance
<br />Director Copfer's presentation is attached.) Roll call continued: Limpert, yes, with
<br />explanation. "As stated by Mr. Gareau, I have question on whether the caliber of the
<br />individual can be obtained for this money. However, the majority in committee has said
<br />they feel we can secure the type of caliber that is required for $35,000 and I'm willing to
<br />go along with the majority. However, I would like to keep in mind, I want to keep in
<br />mind that this position has been recommended by the State Auditor's office, bond
<br />counsel and it's quite a long list. And I think it is important that we get it filled with a
<br />very competent individual so that the heavy load that is currently in that department can
<br />be shared amongst qualified people. Thank you very much." Roll call continued:
<br />Kasler, no; McKay, no, with comment. "I believe that the committee meetings are the
<br />place to make your comments to express your desires. And, if you have any questions of
<br />any particular Councilman, ask it there. Not on the floor of Council. Thank you." Roll
<br />call continued: Miller, no; Nashar, no. The motion failed with four negative votes and
<br />two affirmative votes. Mr. McKay moved for reconsideration for the purpose of
<br />amending Ordinance 99-45; second by Mrs. Kasler. Mr. Gareau asked the Law Director
<br />if it was appropriate to reconsider for the purpose of amendment at the same meeting.
<br />Law Director Gareau said it was appropriate. Roll call: McKay, yes; Kasler, yes;
<br />Limpert, no; Miller, yes; Gareau, no; Nashar, yes. The motion for reconsideration passed
<br />with four affirmative votes and two negative votes. Mr. McKay moved to amend
<br />Ordinance 99-45: Section 2, the bottom of the range will change from $35,000 to
<br />$30,000; in 1999 the top of the range will change from $45,000 to $40,000; in 2000 the
<br />top of the range will be $41,200. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Kasler. Mr. Gareau
<br />asked for a point of order as to whether he was still the sponsor of the legislation. Mrs.
<br />Saringer said yes, that the motion was to amend his sponsored legislation. Roll call:
<br />McKay, yes; Kasler, yes; Limpert, no; Miller, yes; Nashar, yes; Gareau, no. The motion
<br />passed with four affirmative votes and one negative vote. Ordinance 99-45 is amended.
<br />Mr. McKay asked the Law Director for a point of clarification as to whether the
<br />legislation goes to second reading and if it could be passed under suspension of the rules.
<br />Law Director Gareau said it would go on second reading. The rules can be suspended,
<br />9
<br />r ,. ..
<br />
|