CC_Minutes_2012_1015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, October 15, 2012 Page 16 fourteen (14) categories, and which were actually specific to the base budget and which were one-time expenses and should therefore not be included in the base budget for future budget discussions. Discussion ensued on those individual categories, with Mr. Miller clarifying that items (e.g. call volumes for Ramsey County Dispatch services; Fire Relief Pension obligations based on actuarial calculations; COLA); and other consid- erations and rationale for including those categories in the base budget. Councilmember Pust opined that the City Council needed to further review the list to determine which items should remain on the base budget and which should be addressed in other funding categories as one-time expenses. Exam- ples provided by Councilmember Pust included the Compensation Study costs versus implementation of those results; and equipment replacement as it corre- lates with the CIP. Councilmember Pust noted that this was her last opportunity to address the base adjustments and details for the record during her tenure on the City Council. City Manager Malinen referenced pages 2-3 of the RCA and the decision pack- ages provided by Finance Director Miller, and his subsequent review of each package on pages 3-4 of the RCA. Mr. Malinen noted that many were part of the City Council's budget process for 2013 and summarized each and their spe- cifics. As an example in response to Councilmember Pust's concerns, Mr. Ma- linen advised that he and Mr. Miller always projected COLA at 2%, as had been done previously, and then agreements had been subsequently negotiated, with the 2013 budget amount reflecting those adjustments to the levy. Mr. Miller concurred, noting that there was additional funding needed beyond the levy amount, reflected through 2012 turnover and hires at the lower end of the wage scale to replace retiring employees at the higher end of the wage scale, representing some savings in the base. Mr. Malinen reiterated that the percentage coming forward affecting the em- ployee would be 2% projected, but that would not be 2% reflected over the cur- rent levy amount. Councilmember Pust thanked Mr. Malinen and Mr. Miller for that clarification; however, she opined that if staff was spending captured salary savings and only building in 1%, they were not increasing the base. Mr. Miller clarified that 1% was what was needed for 2013, based on an annual formula, with staff always asking for the net needed. Mr. Malinen noted, with clarification by Mr. Miller, that those items were al- ready part of the base moving forward into this projection and budget.