Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
30 <br /> <br />WEDNESDAY, APRIl, 29, 1998 <br /> <br />based rather than based on emotional appeals for increases, and that it gave Council predictability in budgeting <br /> <br />this element of operational costs for multi-year budgeting efforts. Mayor Adams asked whether the 5% <br />compensation increase on the chart presented was provided for in the budget that was presented, and Mr. <br />Reynolds continned that it was, for both City and School System employees. Council Member Teague asked <br />whether State funds for compensation increases within the School system were contingent upon a local match, <br />and Mrs. Ernest replied that the City must provide at least a 2% pay increase on December 1, 1998 in order to <br />qualify to keep the State funds this year, and at least 2.25% next year. Mr. Teague asked whether <br />compensation costs as shown fully included all benefits costs, and was told that it did. Mayor Adams stated <br />that he would also like to see a sample chart showing a 3% raise effective July 1, 1998. <br /> <br />In the interest of time and the fact that Vice-Mayor Crabtree had to depart promptly at 9:00 P. M. to travel to <br />Richmond, Council next discussed their next scheduled meeting, to occur on May 7, 1998. The discussion <br />centered upon which departments and officers Council wished to hear from at that time on their budgets. <br />Council then returned to their discussion of the proposed Pay and Compensation increase provided for in the <br />FY 98-99 Budget, and covered issues which included possible bonuses, health care insurance costs, and <br />related issues. At the close of this discussion Council Member Haskell complimented Mrs. Ernest on an <br />excellent presentation. <br /> <br />The final item for discussion on Council's agenda was a presentation by Mr. Gary Via, General Services <br />Administrator, on his proposal for establishing a procurement card system for purchases of $1,000 or less. <br />Mr. Via presented information that demonstrated that implementation of this system would result in greatly <br />reduced paper work and administrative processing, better security 'and tracking of purchases than the current <br />purchase order system, much better accounts payable response to vendors, and greatly reduced costs to the <br />City for all the purchasing activity covered within this level of purchases. Mr. Via noted that the system <br />proposed was already being used successfully in other jurisdictions, most notably the State government, and <br /> <br /> <br />