05/09/05 Budget Study - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Budget Study Session May 9, 2005 are not proposed budget figures, but lists of what currently exists; the summary of personal services is what exists now. As he proceeds through each department, he will indicate what is proposed. It will not be listed until there is Council approval. The first budget is Legislative Services, City Clerk, and he proposed a change to full- time City Clerk and no other person. Currently there is a half-time City Clerk and a half- time clerical assistant. You will note later, that I propose a full-time Information Technology Department, with a full-time person. Those are the only changes in the Legislative Budget. Under 721.10, Miscellaneous, which is U City in Bloom, the contribution will need to be increased to $30,000. Ms. Welsch asked about the figures under 713.00 and was advised that it is the figures for the Mayor and Council salaries. Then she asked about 721.03 and was advised the figure represented the supplements to the City Code and that it is a contractual service. Then she asked about 722.06 and the amount listed. She was advised that is the travel budget for the entire Council. Ms. Welsch asked if that figure was a certain percentage of the total budget. The City Clerk added that these figures were provided by her and the Council could put in whatever they saw fit to do. Mr. Ollendorff said the total budget figure is $27 million. Ms. Welsch wanted to know if the percentage was ten per cent and Mr. Wagner said it was a tenth of one per cent. Discussion as to the increased amount followed. Ms. Brot wanted to know how much was spent this year. Mr. Ollendorff explained that the location of the NLC conference brought a bearing on the use of travel fund dollars. If it is local, it always costs less. Mr. Norfleet reported that $13,316.72 was spent thus far this year, with the exception of last month’s expenditures (April 2005) for travel. Mr. Wagner noted expenditures had been cut in half. Ms. Brot said it is an important Council function to perform effective oversight. She questioned the use of the word “Personal” in the heading “Personal Services” and suggested that “Personnel” would be more appropriate, but she wanted to discuss the use of the terminology at another time. Next, she commented about the excellent job done by U City in Bloom and supported increasing their budget and said she wanted to add $1,400 that will be devoted to the Loop Special District. They rely upon U. City in Bloom to provide some necessary functions. She wants that amount designated especially for the Loop. Mr. Wagner added that the $1,400 be included on top of what they received last year. Some discussion followed between Mr. Wagner and Ms. Brot, but I am not sure what they were saying. Ms. Brot asked if she could double check on the figure required by U City in Bloom before it was necessary to vote on the Budget. Mr. Sharpe asked about supply of water and said it would occur in the Park Budget. He cut the amount last year, but reinstated it this year. It should be the first item discussed at the Budget Study Session on May th 11, 2005. Page 3