CC_Minutes_2004_1115 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council Study Session - 11/15/04 Minutes - Page 6 expense would be totally eliminated. Councilmember Ihlan questioned Directive #5 (Elimination of one maintenance position in either the Street or Parks & Recreation divisions. . .) and whether that would require contracting out for some services or overtime compensation. City Manager Beets responded that ramifications would be that some priorities wouldn't be met as they currently are met, noting that service levels would be impacted and would not remain status quo. Mr. Beets advised that staff's objective was to minimize the impact and not jeopardize the City's infrastructure in the long-term. Discussion included overtime costs (i.e., swimming pool); Council mandates for overtime expenditures; creation of additional seasonal employee positions; union issues implicated; and maximum levy amount comfort levels for individual Councilmembers. Further discussion included COLA. Councilmember Kough opined that he would not support any COLA over the 2.5% national trend; and spoke in support of the wading pool. City Manager Beets reviewed staff's ongoing review of the COLA index, due to collective bargaining negotiations. Mr. Beets noted that industry-wide, the City's counterparts were experiencing 3% increases. Mr. Beets further noted that, with reductions in previous years, the City was impacted and became a training ground for employees to move onto other cities. Mr. Beets also referenced the City losing last year's arbitration when they reduced COLA from 3 - 2%, with the balance of City employees receiving 2%. Mr. Beets suggested a firm policy, related to COLA, for across-the-board increases, to add more weight for arbitration negotiations. Councilmember Schroeder spoke in support of determining COLA based on the City of Roseville, not based on Stanton V Surveys. Councilmember Schroeder further spoke against