My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/16/2008 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
2008
>
12/16/2008 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2014 8:50:25 AM
Creation date
1/6/2014 11:04:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
12/16/2008
Year
2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
Council Minutes of 12/16/2008 <br />7) Kevin Drake, 2783 Walter Road, is a police officer for a private railroad corporation. <br />When he worked for Conrail year ago, all employees all the way up to top took a 12% <br />wage deferral for about three or four years in order to save the railroad. They all pitched <br />in and saved the railroad from going bankrupt. It never ceases to amaze him that, <br />whenever there is talk about cutbacks, it goes from the bottom up instead of from the top <br />down. He doesn't understand that. He does not wish to make this personal, but in a city <br />where we have a Safety Director and the safety forces are being laid off, it doesn't make <br />much sense. Sometimes in cases like this, you have to start from the top and work down. <br />As a resident, he is willing to take the tax deferral. But he would like to see a little bit <br />more done to keep the people that we have here now that are being laid off. He would <br />hope that everybody would be willing to pitch in to do a little bit more to see that come to <br />fruition. <br />8) Patrick Rice, 31109 Lorain Road, a resident and business owner noted that the city, <br />like many residents, is forced to make do with less money. He and others are in <br />attendance in support of the safety forces, and he feels that the layoff of five fire fighters <br />and five police officers is unacceptable. Through public meetings and on-line forums, <br />several suggestions have been made to reduce expenses and increase revenues. We can <br />suspend leaf pick-up for 2009 and residents can simply bag their leaves next fall. We can <br />suspend curbside recyclable pick-up and residents can take their recyclables to the center <br />themselves. He would suggest that the city implement a small weekly fee for curbside <br />trash collection for residents. Increased speed enforcement on I-480 will increase <br />revenues immediately and make the roadway safer for all drivers. Also, installation of <br />red light and speed cameras in school zones will generate considerable income and free <br />up officers for other important duties. His understanding is that school crossing guards <br />may also be laid off soon. These cameras can improve child safety and generate revenue. <br />If there are not plausible reasons why these cost reduction and revenue generating ideas <br />cannot be implemented, then please enact these changes and maintain our safety forces at <br />the current levels without layoffs. <br />Councilman Gareau explained that the fund used to pay the wages for the people who are <br />affected by the layoffs is the General Fund. To look to find efficiencies and additional <br />money, one must look within the General Fund. We have other funds within the city that <br />must be spent for a particular purpose. Leaf pick-up is paid for out of the Solid Waste <br />Recycling Fund. If you were to cut the leaf pick-up, which is the same fund that pays for <br />trash pick-up, you cannot take that money and transfer it over to the General Fund in <br />order to find additional money. <br />Finance Director Copfer explained, by a vote of the people in 1991, 15 % of our income <br />tax goes to the Solid Waste & Recycling Fund. Therefore, those monies can only be used <br />for solid waste and recycling purposes. The leaf pick-up is a recycling effort. Therefore, <br />if you eliminate that, that extra money can't go to the General Fund because it's limited <br />by the voted purpose of solid waste -and recycling. Someone suggested adding a trash <br />fee. That is the trash fee-15% of the income tax goes to pay for trash pick-up already. <br />Additionally, you could move expenses into those other funds, but they would still have <br />to meet the purpose of that fund, which is solid waste and recycling. So, if we change <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.