10-01-86 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MtNUres City Council October l, 19~6 The Community Services portion of the budget was proposed at $2?_,369 for 19~7 versus $14,~61. Council decreased the Canadian Da,ys category b.y $500 and increased the Historical Society category b,y $1,500 to budget for a sign and marker in the Gervais Mill Par~. Therefore, Councit approved an increasetl Community Services budget of ~23,3fi9. Shade Tree ~udget eaas proposed at $6,320 for 1987 reflecting no increase over the 1986 budget. Council approved this portion of the overa11 budget. In the Unatlocated portion of t~e ~udget, the fity Clerk suggested that the 4dorkers Comp. categor,y be increased to ~8,000, and the Insurance, General Liability and Insurance, Umbrel1a, be combined into an Insurance Package category at $24,000. The Clerk also suggested that the Public Official Liability category be decreased to $4,50~ and that Contingencies be decreased to $33,500. This decreased the proposed Unallocated budget to $70,000 from the $~3,000 that was proposed, The 1986 Unallocated bud~et s•aas $99,754. Council next considered employee salaries for 1987. Mrs. Scalze submitted a letter to the Council suggesting a 7.9.25% salary increase for the three part-time Recreation ~irectors. Scalze's letter included documentation of her reasoning for this increase. Fahey stated that he had a problem with such a substantial percentage increase as there is no handle on the number of hours that these Directors work. Fahey pointed out that in the past the City has granted across-the-board percentage increases to its employees +vith a fesv exceptions and that is e~ihat he was prepared to do tonight. Fahey suggested that a six-month study be done, during which the Recreation Directors wou1d keep trac'~ of their time worked. This would give the Council a feeling for the number of hours involved and whether a substantial increase was warranted. ~ahey stated th<it the only other way to fairly compensate the Directors, and for which the Council would be the least criticized, would be to go to a voucher system. Flowever, Fahey felt that that would be too cumbersom~. Scalze pointed out that she has compared what Little Canada is paying its Recreation Directors to vahat other cities of similar size are paying. That is the basis for her 29.25% increase. Slesener did not feel it soas possible to compare full-time recreation programs tiaith part-time programs. ~lesener also stated that he would like to see a time study done in order to determine if the t4ao Assistant Directors are putting in a similar number of hours as the two are paid the sam2 salary. Collo~ia stated that he tiaas totally against going to a voucher system. Page -6-