Laserfiche WebLink
Session 1840 <br />May 13, 2002 <br /> <br />a public benefit to having a clean community. <br /> <br />Mr. Ollendorff is budgeting an increase to Ambulance Service. Mr. Norfleet is <br />recommending outsourcing medical billing. Our collection rate is dropping at an extent, <br />where we believe contracting out this service would be better. The contractor will not be <br />paid unless we get paid. While there are no guarantees, the contractor asks for 9% of <br />all fees collected, so we are budgeting a 70% collection rate, which would equate to a <br />$36,000 fee to be paid to the contractor. The Council would need to approve the <br />contract in June or July and also the new ambulance rate. Mr. Munkel inquired as to <br />why we are having trouble with collections. Mr. Ollendorff responded that they weren't <br />sure. A consultant was hired two years ago to go over all of the billing practices and to <br />help improve our collection procedures. The consultant said that everything was being <br />done right and couldn't recommend any improvements. Mr. Ollendorff believes that we <br />are getting a higher percentage of Medicare and Medicaid customers, but he is not sure <br />if this is the whole answer. Mr. Norfleet explained that the ambulance service billing <br />process took at least two days a week. He further explained that the contractor would <br />just take care of the billing portion and his staff would collect the payment. The <br />contractor will pursue the citizens for payment and if we don't get any money, the <br />contractor will not get paid. <br /> <br />Under Contributions to Police Service, we have had two major partners in financing <br />police officers. We entered into an agreement with the U. City School District two years <br />ago to share the cost of a resource officer at the high school. They paid 80% of the cost <br />under a grant, while we paid 20% of the cost. The grant has run out and was not <br />renewed. Last year, the school district was broke, so the City paid the full cost of this <br />officer. We are going to ask the school district to pick up their share of this officer. It <br />looks like they will do this, so this officer is in the budget. If the school district does not <br />agree, then we will need to look at phasing out one police officer. Washington <br />University started paying us $60,000 three years ago for extra policing of our City where <br />a large number of their students live. Mr. Ollendorff will be requesting them to increase <br />that payment up to the $80,000 - $90,000 category. A formal request has not been <br />made, but on an informal basis, we have been told that they would be open to this <br />increase. <br /> <br />Under 690.10, Prior Year's Revenue, Mr. Ollendorff said he was budgeting $821,837 of <br />the $6.2 million to be carried forward to next year. Mr. Ollendorff reminded everyone of <br />Mr. Wagner's opening remarks regarding this issue and noted that Mr. Wagner would <br />rather see this money utilized as current revenue now, by encumbering for new projects <br />this year instead of saving it and transferring it next year and have a budget that is <br />$400,000 more out of balance. If Council agrees, Wednesday night we will reduce this <br />figure by about $400,000. Responding to Ms. Welsch's need for further clarification, Mr. <br />Ollendorff said that it would mean instead of ending the year with a $6.2 million reserve, <br />we would end up with $5.8 million. The Council may find even more programs to cut. <br />Ms. Welsch questioned exactly what the reserves meant. The Mayor noted that the <br /> <br /> <br />