[Homey]

The other day, I heard the Mayor wants to hire a part time person in the Controller's Office for approximately $25.00 per hour. I wonder if it's because John Schaefer is over-burdened during the tax season at his own office. But, since tax season will be over in a few weeks, why do they need a new position? Afterall, he only works part time at City Hall.

I was confused since I thought the size of government was a concern and during these economic times, less is better.

I wonder if the council will pass this...especially since the budget is already in place?

[Ang]

Sounds like a question for the Mayor's questions thread is in order.

http://www.citybythelake.org/forums/index....ic=1973&hl=

[chuck]

Sounds like a question for the Mayor's questions thread is in order.

http://www.citybythelake.org/forums/index....ic=1973&hl=

Actually it is not a rumor (the ordiance was introduced the first of March) nor is it a new position. The part time contractor is proposed to become a part time employee. As an employee the position will assume some management controls receomended by the state board of accounts.

[Homey]

So if it's not a new position, will this person replacing a current employee? Do all new "contractors" positions have to go before the city council to be approved?

Also, are you stating that the state board of accounts has instructed the city to have this position?

And this position was included in the budget prior to geting it passed before the city council?

[chuck]

So if it's not a new position, will this person replacing a current employee? Do all new "contractors" positions have to go before the city council to be approved?

Also, are you stating that the state board of accounts has instructed the city to have this position?

And this position was included in the budget prior to geting it passed before the city council?

The position is and has been funded in the budget as a contractual service. By moving the position to that of a part time employ, the council must approve the transfer of funds. The position will not replace an exisiting position or employee. The position will assume some administrative oversight recommended by the SBA as a seperation of duties issue.

[lovethiscity]

The position is and has been funded in the budget as a contractual service. By moving the position to that of a part time employ, the council must approve the transfer of funds. The position will not replace an exisiting position or employee. The position will assume some administrative oversight recommended by the SBA as a seperation of duties issue.

why? Has there been some sort of conflict of interest within the department?

[Homey]

why? Has there been some sort of conflict of interest within the department?

yes, it all sounds like a bunch of confusing transfering, mumbo jumbo. Not a new employee, not a new position, not replacing a position or employee, a transfer of funds...duh, what is it? How about some plain talk? We don't have enough employees in the controller's office already? We need more employees? We did fine before didn't we? I'm so much more confused.

[Homey]

BTW - we are the taxpayers who pay for these things and a simple and clear explanation would be refreshing...like a transparent government policy.

Did someone quit in the controller's office? Are they splitting duties...is it a replacement?

[Ang]

To me it seems as if it is a new position that is combining some duties from other positions to lighten the burden on the full time people. That is just the way I see it. I could be wrong, though in my interpretation.

Either way, Thank you Sir for taking the time to read and post here and answer the questions. You're input is always appreciated.