My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07 City Council (6/16/03)
City-of-Paris
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2001-2010
>
2003
>
09 - September
>
2003-09-08
>
07 City Council (6/16/03)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/8/2005 11:20:27 AM
Creation date
9/8/2003 8:33:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGENDA
Item Number
7
AGENDA - Type
MINUTES
Description
City Council
AGENDA - Date
6/16/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Meeting <br />June 16, 2003 <br />Page 13 <br /> <br />been proposed, is on those 4 shifts you have two people on a shift, you have an <br />operator and a maintenance person, which if either of those people are out for <br />any reason, who ever gets called in the odds are 65%-75% that the are going to <br />start out at time and one-half rate as soon as they come in even if someone is <br />pulled off the regular standard day shift to cover for that employee the odds are <br />that they are going to be in an overtime situation. Mr. Anderson said if you <br />spread that out over a year, and calculate how many days of holidays, and <br />vacation, he went back and looked at how many sick days were involved and <br />assuming that 65% to 75% of the hours that are going to be necessary to cover <br />those type of known and expected absences, the equivalent straight time hours <br />come out close to the number of straight time hours that the city is paying now. <br />Mr. Anderson said there is a real danger that the city is not going to save as much <br />money by going to that schedule and doing those employee cuts as what might <br />be expected. He advised that the addition problem that he sees is that it will put <br />a strain on the employees that are left because there are fewer employees to cover <br />the hours. <br /> <br />Mr. Anderson said another thing he wanted to mention is the fact that the Water <br />and Sewer Fund is an enterprise fund. It is suppose to carry its own weight, to <br />be self supporting, and any operating expenses related to that should be charged <br />to that fund and the rates are to support that. That is the accounting theory <br />behind it and that is how everybody does it. <br /> <br />Mr. Anderson said one of the other suggestions that was made at that meeting <br />had to do with shifting some of those proposed cut employees over to the Parks <br />Department and then having them come back and do ground keeping at the water <br />plant or the sewer plant. He advised that type of cost shifting of genuine water <br />and sewer related cost to the General Fund defeats that theory and defeats that <br />purpose and would also adversely alter our ability to recover the cost to our <br />contract customers because those costs, it would no longer be in the Water and <br />Sewer Fund Budget and they could no longer roll those into the contracts. <br /> <br />Mr. Anderson said another item in the Water and Sewer Budget has to do with <br />the administrative transfer and the franchise fee. He said it is a percentage of the <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.