My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/29/2000 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
2000
>
03/29/2000 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2014 8:45:28 AM
Creation date
1/10/2014 9:50:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
3/29/2000
Year
2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Special Council Minutes of 3/29!2000 <br /> <br />commissioner was recently provided a car for transportation. The committee <br />recommended approval. <br />• Page 1, line 14, supplies, was increased from $1,000 to $1,300 for the purpose of <br />providing afax/printer for the Clerk of Council. <br />• A city planner, and that will be in line item 32, outside services, which will be in the <br />amount of $14,000. <br />• Page 15, line 593, an increase of $7,500 in engineering funds to pay for engineering <br />services done last year for the fire station roof. <br />Mr. McKay thanked all the Council members, the President of Council, the Mayor, the <br />directors, the department heads and managers and everyone who helped to formulate the <br />appropriation ordinance. <br />Mr. Gareau said that it had come to his attention that there was a deviation between the <br />recommended changes by Council and the ordinance that appears before Council. <br />Specifically, it deals with account number 101 105 573 11-30, which is the EDP <br />commissioner's salary. At the committee meeting, Council had a lengthy discussion with <br />respect to the original proposed salary increase which was in excess of 20%. It was <br />agreed by the majority of Council at the meeting to use a 5% increase over the 1999 <br />appropriated figure. The ordinance, as it appears tonight, reflects a 7% increase and the <br />cash difference between the 5% and 7% is $898. Mr. Gareau moved that Council amend <br />Ordinance 2000-27 at the Data Processing Division administration line to be reduced by <br />$898 to a total of $80,627, to reflect a change in the Data Processing Commissioner's <br />salary to a 5% raise over the 1999 appropriated figure. Mr. Gareau noted that the motion <br />included, without delineating them specifically, a change in the following other lines, <br />which would be consistent with that reduction: reduce the Data Processing total by that <br />amount; reduce the Office of the Mayor total by that amount; reduce the General Fund <br />total by that amount; reduce the Grand Total by that amount. The motion was seconded <br />by Mrs. Kasler. Mayor Musial said he preferred to look upon this modification of his <br />ordinance he introduced not as a deviation but as an adjustment in view of the <br />clarification. He followed up the proposed change in that particular line item with a <br />memorandum to all of Council dealing with this particular subject. The reason he did so <br />was because he felt there was some confusion at the meeting the previous evening with <br />regard to the value of the car that was being provided to Gary Hannum. The allegation <br />was made during the course of the meeting that the least value on a yearly basis was <br />about $6,000. In fact, it is a 1991 Chevy Corsica, which under the IRS regulations <br />appears to only have a value on the order of $1,600. If you add the fuel charge, the total <br />value of that car is only on the order of $1,800. So the difference between the two is <br />really $4,200 of phantom income. Because time is of the essence, he put this in here for <br />consideration by Council and he requests favorable consideration by Council tonight. <br />Mrs. Kasler said she could only speak for herself--she read that memo and is not sure that <br />she is satisfied with the premise of the memo and the items that go into the cost. <br />However, the automobile, as she stated in the Finance Committee meeting the other <br />night, is not her concern. That is an administrative decision as to who automobiles are <br />assigned to and, if the need is there, that's fine. She did not count that in as part of a <br />raise. She counted it in as a benefit and a way to reward an employee other than a merit <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.