Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Council Meeting <br />August 14, 2003 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />were really scrambling at the time to get the figures into the budget. City <br />Manager Malone said they are not allowed to alter the budget figures in that <br />column because that was the budget that was adopted. If there is some disparity <br />between the present fiscal year and the proposed budget, they can go through <br />individually when they have those questions because there is plenty of time to <br />research that and bring that back to the City Council. <br /> <br />City Manager Malone explained that the computer is not printing the proposed <br />budget from a database of the so called incorrect figure, but rather it is printing <br />the proposed budget from the data base of the actual pay plan and the employees <br />we have presently and those that are proposed. He said that it is not just taking <br />this current year's budget and adding 11% to it. Mr. Anderson said he knew <br />what Council was asking. He said that the number that is shown in there for the <br />budget is what was adopted, and he will go back determine what discrepancy <br />there is between the quarterly report and what this year-to-date is and be able to <br />tell Council when this number goes through. <br /> <br />Councilman Guest asked Mr. Anderson if that would take into account <br />hospitalization and the pension program. He said that under the pension program, <br />according to these figures, the annualized year-to-date figures would represent <br />a 14% increase per department request and that will skew the figures also. Mr. <br />Anderson advised that it would skew the figures to a certain extent. Mr. <br />Anderson told the Council that the previous City Council allowed the employees <br />to increase their contribution from 5% to 6% and that also affects the city's <br />corresponding share and this was actually put in place in two phases. The one <br />they initially started paying in the year 2003 was 11.10 percent and that changed <br />to 11.84 as part of the phase in. <br /> <br />Councilman Guest said the totals under the hospitalization only reflects a 13% <br />increase and, in their last conversation, he felt that is not near what they are <br />anticipating. Mr. Anderson advised that it is just a flat amount that the city <br />contributes for each employee. He said that, as he mentioned the last time, the <br />city has some heavy claims for a large number of employees. He advised that the <br />hospitalization number represents $6,000.00 per employee for hospitalization <br /> <br /> <br />