04/11/1984 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e - fringes. Ms. Schue commented that health costs were out of the control of the City. Ms. Wooten stated that she was not willing to support such methodology. Mr. Long said statutory criteria were included in setting wages and fringes which were more important than revenue forecasts. He said the forecast could not be used to set limitations on wages and fringe benefits. Mayor Keller understood Mr. Holmer to suggest a framework under which the City could negotiate. He stressed that staff should not discount Mr. Holmer's philosophy. Mr. Gleason said he understood the discussion to suggest that the system used to predict revenue should be used to predict wages as well. While he thought it was a good theory, he commented that it was overly optimistic, stating that wages have historically outstripped costs. He explained that the City Council has adopted a system of wages based on the market. He said going below the market price on wages would cause problems. He felt the increased productivity of the City should be reflected in the wage scale. He stressed that wages could not automatically be tied to services and materials. In response to a question, he said salaries were included in the total projection by assuming there would be no increase in employment. He believed that this will cause problems in the future. In response to a suggestion of having a five percent increase in the budget to allow an increase in wages if productivity increased, Mr. Gleason said this assumed that the work would stay the same. He said he was most concerned with the productivity side of the budget, stating that he did not have the capital resources or staff to perform the analysis needed. O. Non-Departmental--Non-Contingency Mr. Wong stated that the projected rate of 1.3 percent for the operating budget was based on an average of the rates from the past several years. He said the figure might be low, but it was sufficient. Mr. Holmer stated that $340,000 could be saved each year if the City backed out the $1 million in the fund. Mr. Gleason explained that the $340,000 was a one-time savings because the amount was carried forward each year. Ms. Wooten explained that the contingency was rolled over each year. Mr. Wong said that only part of the contingency was spent each year, the remaining falling into the beginning working capital each year. Mr. Holmer stated that staff had provided him with a printout of Non-Departmental Detail which the other councilors did not have. Mr. Wong stated that the contingency was based on 1.3 percent of the operating budget. The City could save approximately $27,000 if it backed out of the restorations. Mr. Holmer felt that the City could live with the present revenues, stating again that the City could save up to $340,000 if the con- tingency were reduced. Mr. Hansen requested that staff study the issue and provide a report on the issues and totals for consideration by the council. P. Non-Departmental--Transfer to FRS Capital Projects Q. Non-Departmental--Transfer to EPAC Operations (Hult Center) Mr. Wong reviewed the methodology and assumptions for both items. Ms. Wooten stated that she could not consider the Hult Center as part of the budget without another source of revenue. She added that she did not agree with the particular MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 1984 Page 7