My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2002-06-12 CC Packet
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1996-2025
>
2002
>
2002-06-12 CC Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2009 9:46:09 AM
Creation date
5/12/2009 9:43:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
222
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />City of Centerville <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />May 22, 2002 <br /> <br />Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated she would provide further information at the next Council <br />meeting. <br /> <br />Motion bv Council Member Caora. seconded bv Council Member Nelson to <br />authorize the tlSDenditure of uo to $3.000 to work 08 the eo.pater sitnatioa. <br /> <br />Mayor Swedberg suggested asking a professional to use fire wire through the wall to <br />allow the accounting people to share information along with fixing the viruses and <br />whatever else is wrong. <br /> <br />All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />5. ExelIlPt/Non-ExelIlPt Status <br /> <br />Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated this item had been placed on the agenda to discuss the status <br />of the exempt/non-exempt classification. She then indicated there had been some discuss <br />of leaving the current employee at his non-exempt status and changing the position in the <br />future to make it an exempt position. <br /> <br />Council Member Capra indicated there was a contract with Mr. Palzer dated 1995 and <br />asked if the City was bound by that contract. <br /> <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated the document could have been drafted better but said he <br />feels the City would be bound by the agreement and he feels it is an enforceable contract. <br /> <br />city Attorney Hoeft indicated it was his analysis that the director of public works and <br />building inspector are the same individual and until those duties are separated the <br />position should remain non-exempt. <br /> <br />city Attorney Hoeft further explained that the current public works director's job <br />description contains duties that do not allow for exemption. <br /> <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated that, if the City is interested in establishing an exempt <br />position, the City would need to more clearly define the position of public works and <br />separate out the positions. <br /> <br />Council Member Capra asked if the City is bound by the agreement. <br /> <br />City Attorney Hoeft commented that it is hard to say what the agreement is but it makes <br />the determination that the current employee at that time would be a non-exempt <br />employee. He then said that if the position is split into a public works director and a <br />building inspector then the agreement would not apply. <br /> <br />Council Member Capra indicated her concern lies with the tact that a non-union <br />employee is doing union work and that is something that the union typically does not like <br />and could become an issue in the future. <br /> <br />Page 9 ofl5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.