Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRIL 13, 1994 <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Pedersen. <br />Ayes (5) Morelan, Pedersen, Hanson, Scalze, LaValle. <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />FIRE RELIEF The City Administrator reported that the Fire Department <br />BENEFIT is askinq for a$2,100 per year of service benefit level. <br />LEVELS The current benefit level is at $2,050. The City <br />Administrator reviewed his report dated April 8, 1994 on <br />this issue and pointed out that the current $2,050 level <br />appears to require a City contribution of $15,010, while <br />a$2,100 level would require $19,156 for 1995. Based on <br />the volatile bond market as well as the required increase <br />in City contribution, the Administrator felt the increase <br />in benefit levels was premature at this time. <br />Joe Vitale, president of the Little Canada Relief <br />Association, agreed that an increase in benefit level to <br />$2,100 would require a$4,000 increase in the City's <br />contribution. Vitale reported that there have been a lot <br />of discussions on this issue, and he suggested that if <br />the City began matching the 2% State Aid figure, there <br />would be no need for these discussions each year. Vitale <br />pointed out that the relief fund is overfunded at this <br />point, and that criteria for funding decisions seems to <br />change. In the past, if the funding rates were in the <br />90% range, then increases were granted. Vitale also <br />pointed out that there are two members of the Fire <br />Department retiring this year, and it would be nice to be <br />able to provide a pension of $2,100 per year of service. <br />The City Administrator stated that the City has never <br />indicated that benefit levels would be based solely on <br />the funding ratio. Having a funding ratio in the high 90 <br />percentile makes increases possible, but the City has <br />always looked at the amount of support it would be <br />required to give. This criteria has never changed. The <br />Administrator pointed out that the problem is the cost to <br />the City to stay at the funded level. The Administrator <br />pointed out that 5tate Aid and interest rates are <br />dropping. Evidence of a surplus at this point does not <br />mean the fund is healthy enough to support an increase. <br />The Administrator felt that the City has been consistent <br />in basing its decisions for funding increases. <br />Scalze asked if the analysis presented takes into account <br />roster changes. <br />11 <br />