Columbus, Georgia

Georgia's First Consolidated Government

Post Office Box 1340
Columbus, Georgia, 31902-1340
(706) 653-4013
fax (706) 653-4016

Council Members

Budget Review Committee

May 28, 2013

Page 2

Minutes



BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE

April 21, 2015



Members Present: Chairperson Berry Henderson, Mayor Pro Tem Evelyn Turner Pugh

and Councilors R. Gary Allen, Mike Baker, Jerry ?Pops? Barnes, Tom Buck, Glenn

Davis, Judy W. Thomas and Evelyn ?Mimi? Woodson. Councilor Bruce Huff arrived

at 9:13 a.m. Also present were Mayor Teresa Tomlinson, City Manager Isaiah

Hugley, City Attorney Clifton Fay, Finance Director Pam Hodge, Clerk of Council

Tiny B. Washington and Deputy Clerk of Council Lindsey Glisson.



Members Absent: No one was absent for this meeting.







Call to Order: Chairperson Henderson called the meeting to order at 9:04 a.m.

in the Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, of the City Service Center.





The following documents were distributed around the Council table: Responses

to Questions and Requests made at the April 14, 2015 Meeting, Recommended

Position Reclassification Descriptions, FY14 Recreation Center Participation

Numbers, U.S. Department of Labor FLSA Fact Sheets (2), Work Period Maximum

Hour Standards (Fire Protection vs. Law Enforcement), 1986 Inter-Office

Communication on FLSA



Provided below is a summarization of presentations outlined by the

respective Department Head that highlights the impact of the 1.5% budget

reduction, as well as, any suggestions or recommendations made to the Budget

Review Committee.

-----------------------------------------*** ***

***--------------------------------------------



Chairman Henderson informs the public, according to the City Attorney

and Mayor Tomlinson, the City has received several Open Records Requests

regarding the lawsuits, as it pertains to the cost associated with them.

Ultimately these costs are at the expense of the taxpayers of this City.



City Attorney Fay reiterates there have been several Open Records

Requests for the total defense cost involved in the ongoing budget litigation

with the Clerk of Municipal Court, Marshal, Clerk of Superior Court, and

Sheriff. The total cost to the taxpayers is $478,600.50 to date. At this time

the following presentation was given to the committee:

________________________________________________________________________



BUDGET LITIGATION DEFENSE COSTS

Linda Pierce John Darr Countryman/Bishop Date

$70,078.90 $11,391.00 $58,827.35 8/31/14

1/6/15

$28,191.34 $31,343.35 1/14/15

$15,839.51 $18,700.12 1/14/15

$54,988.60 1/18/15

$31,898.36 2/2/15

$6,014.20 2/2/15

$26,015.27 2/11/15

$71,723.04 2/13/15

$1,839.00 3/2/15

$17,290.00 3/2/15

$9,134.06 3/9/15

$3,225.00 4/1/15

$2,034.64 4/1/15

$11,830.28 4/8/15

$3,768.40 3/31/15

$4,468.10 3/31/15

Total $217,754.88 Total $111,603.61 Total $149,242.01 4/16/15

Grand Total $478,600.50

________________________________________________________________________



The plaintiffs in these lawsuits have hired a combination of about five

different private law firms. The City has had to engage three different law

firms in defense of these matters, to include the time put in by the City

Attorney?s Office, Mayor?s Office, City Manager?s Office, and Council.



City Attorney Fay then gave a few brief specifics, if the grand total

was to be divided by $250 an hour that would equal close to 2,000 hours of time

spent by attorneys and City Officials. In the beginning of these lawsuits, the

offer was extended to the Sheriff John Darr and Clerk of Superior Court Linda

Pierce to participate in mediation, where the City offered to pay their

attorneys a statutory rate of $250, but they were declined.



Clerk of Superior Court Pierce has hired three different private law

firms to represent her in the past two years. The question before the court is

does the legislators set the budget, appropriating money for all City

departments, to include elected officials or do elected county officers get to

set their own budgets. With setting their own budgets the elected officials

would have the opportunity to proceed without any deliberation of the City

Council.



The Clerk of Superior Court?s attorneys have stated in court during

their proceedings, the Clerk as a Constitutional Officer is an Island, she sets

her own budget, she is a Budget Officer, and she is her own unit of local

government. City Attorney Fay states, this is not the law in Georgia. He said

he is confident that the City?s position will prevail in Superior Court and in

appeal in the Georgia Supreme Court.



With these lawsuits being watched statewide, they will ultimately

determine whether the legislators across the State of Georgia set budgets for

their municipalities or if they will be allowed to be vested by elected

officials who are demanding a certain amount of money.

________________________________________________________________________



Cost Factors

? Legal Expenses Were Caused By The Filing of the Lawsuits

? Plaintiffs Darr and Countryman Invoked ?Conflicts? With City?s Outside Legal

Counsel

? Plaintiffs Requested ?Expedited? Treatment Requiring Many Months Of Work In A

Few Weeks

________________________________________________________________________



Mayor Tomlinson stated, the Elected Official Litigants have mentioned

several times the amount of money the City has spent defending these lawsuits.

She wanted to point out, had the City not been sued, they would have spent zero

in defense costs. Another important point, $100,000 to $150,000 of what has

been incurred is due to the fact Sheriff Darr and Marshal Countryman invoked a

Conflict against Page, Scrantom, Sprouse, Tucker & Ford Attorneys because the

taxpayers were already paying their defense; one being in a Gender

Discrimination Suit, which Sheriff Darr lost at a trial level and was on appeal

before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals; the second being, an EEOC Claim that

Marshal Countryman had in regard to a personnel dispute with an employee.

Because the taxpayers were already paying for their defenses, they

strategically asserted a Conflict. Even though these defenses are not related

to the budget, the filing of a Conflict forced the City to hire another law

firm for their defense. When the elected officials first filed these suits,

they all filed them for Expedited Treatment or Emergency Treatment.



Mayor Tomlinson stated, because the officials failed to meet with them

at the outset, the plaintiff?s attorneys were unaware of a large amount of

facts and materials. Since then, they have filed eight amended pleadings, in an

attempt to light on something that was listed as a claim. Each time these

plaintiffs file an amended pleading, the City?s attorneys have to respond in

full, which takes many hours, this has exponentially added to the cost.

________________________________________________________________________



Cost Factors (cont.)

? Plaintiffs Have Filed 8 Amended Pleadings, Plus Motions, Requiring written

Responses

? We Offered To Mediate Prior To Plaintiffs? Commencement Of Lawsuits, But Were

Ignored

? Can?t Afford To Not Defend Lawsuits- Request Blank Checks

? Elected Officers Want Taxpayers To Pay Their Attorney?s Fees

________________________________________________________________________



In the past the City?s attorneys have met for mediation with the Clerk

of Superior Court?s attorneys to share information and evidence they had, to

which her attorney?s declined to move forward with any proceedings. Mayor

Tomlinson stated, she believes the same would have occurred had the officials

agreed to meet in the beginning, which would have saved the taxpayers a

significant amount of money.



She then goes on to say, the City cannot afford to not defend these

lawsuits. As the City well knows, the Sheriff has been $11.3 million over

budget in the last six years. If elected officials are allowed to set any

budget they wish, it could very easily bankrupt the City, as we are currently

at 60.3 days in the Reserve Fund. The Administration firmly believes they are

exercising in strict accordance with the Charter and State Law, but if their

claims come to be correct, the City will definitely need State guidance because

that will have been something that has never been done before in the history of

the State of Georgia.



The cost given today is just the City?s cost in defense of these

lawsuits. These parties are requesting that the taxpayers fund their attorney?s

fees as well.



Chairman Henderson stated, the City has settled on lawsuits in the past

when it has been economically feasible to the taxpayers. These lawsuits will

determine how all other municipalities in the State of Georgia will be forced

to handle their budgets, especially in difficult economic times.

-----------------------------------------*** ***

***--------------------------------------------



At this time Councilor Davis made a request for a discussion to be held

at a regular Council Meeting, in regard to the parking issues at the City

Service Center.



-----------------------------------------*** ***

***--------------------------------------------

Finance Director Pam Hodge then called upon the list of departmental

presentations scheduled for this meeting.

-----------------------------------------*** ***

***--------------------------------------------



DEPARTMENT PRESENTATIONS:



FIRE & EMS DEPARTMENT:



Chief Jeff Meyer, approached the rostrum and addressed the two ambulances

included in the Mayor?s Recommended Budget for a cost of $510,000. In the past

he has addressed Council in regard to the need for investments in Emergency

Response Vehicles. He is hoping with the proposal that is going to be presented

today, his department will be able to leverage the $510,000 for ambulances into

something more long-term that will meet the emergency needs of the City.



At this time, Deputy Chief Mike Higgins gave the following presentation:

________________________________________________________________________

10 Year Information



Population Increased ? 8%

Responses Increased ? 52%

Revenue Increased ? 75%



? Fuel Usage and Repair Costs have Increased In Relation to Population and

Responses

________________________________________________________________________



Chief Deputy Higgins explained, over the past ten years, the population

has grown by 8%, the responses have increased by 52% and the revenue generated

by these responses has increased by 75%. In a year the department is up to

60,000 responses.

________________________________________________________________________



Vehicle Information



77% of the emergency fleet is 10 years old, 100,000 miles or both



? 8 of 13 Engines

? 5 of 6 Ladders/Quints

? 2 of 2 Squad/Service Trucks

? 9 of 10 Ambulances

________________________________________________________________________



Emergency Vehicle Replacement

Option One



? Mayors proposed FY16 budget

o 2 ambulances $510,000

________________________________________________________________________



With the Mayor proposing $510,000 for two new ambulances, the

department has looked into utilizing that money for other uses.

________________________________________________________________________



Emergency Vehicle Investment

Option Two

REPLACE 25% OF THE FLEET



? Lease Purchase (estimates)

o Three Engines - $164,796 (10yrs)

o Four Ambulances - $141,650 (5yrs)

o One Ladder/Quint - $111,222 (10yrs)

o One Service Vehicle - $83,567 (10yrs)

o Total - $501,235 Annual

________________________________________________________________________



In utilizing the proposed money in a different way, it would allow the

department to replace 25% of its fleet this fiscal year. Through a Lease

Purchase Program, at a cost of $501,235 over a ten year period, the department

could replace 3 engines, 4 ambulances, 1 ladder/quint, and 1 service vehicle.



On average an ambulance accumulates 100,000 miles a year and they tend

to stay in the maintenance shop quite a bit, this is the reason they put a life

expectancy of 5 years. Currently, the department has 9 out of 10 ambulances in

operation.

________________________________________________________________________



Emergency Vehicle Investment

Option Three

REPLACE ENTIRE FLEET



? Lease Purchase (estimates)

o Thirteen Engines - $714,116 (10yrs)

o Seven Ambulances - $247,888 (5yrs)

o Six Ladder/Quint - $667,332 (10yrs)

o Two Service Vehicle - $167,134 (10yrs)

o Total - $1,796,470 Annual

________________________________________________________________________



During the first year of the Lease Purchase Programs, there are some

companies that give organizations the option where they will buyback the

current vehicle inventory.

________________________________________________________________________



Recommendations



? Approve Option Two

o Emergency Response Vehicles $501,235

o Utilize this program over the next 4 years to replace entire front line fleet



? Adjust the CCG Fire and EMS Strategic Action Plan to Budget for future needs

________________________________________________________________________



The department?s recommendation is the Option Two, at $501,000.

Approval of this option will allow the department to have a Vehicle Replacement

Program, which would replace the entire fleet over 4 years. The first and

second year, the cost would be $501,000, and will reduce each year after.



In response to a question asked by Councilor Davis, Chief Deputy

Higgins states, each cost associated with Option 2 & 3, includes $60,000 in

equipment. Chief Deputy Higgins then explains the differences between the cash

purchase and lease purchase options to replace their vehicles.



In response to a question from Councilor Thomas, Mayor Tomlinson

stated, with the Mayor?s Recommended Budget being provided early this year,

her office was unable to get the leasing information that was obtained by the

Fire Department. Had she had this information available at the time, she most

likely would have recommended a lease option to Council to replace the

emergency vehicles.



Chairman Henderson addressed Councilor Thomas in reference to the

process that would add the request of the Fire Department.



At this time, Councilor Thomas opted to include the Lease Purchase

Program presented by the Fire Department to the Add List and to put the Mayor?s

Recommendation, the purchase of 2 ambulances on the Delete List.



Councilor Woodson asked Finance Director Hodge if it is feasible to

split the $501,000 into two parts, allowing Council to come back at mid-year to

re-evaluate, since there will be other departments coming forward with

requests. Director Hodge responds by saying, the expense is already included in

the budget.



After some discussion, Chairman Henderson made a referral suggesting to

the City Manager that the Vehicle Committee reconvene.



*** *** ***



ENGINEERING:



Engineering Director Donna Newman, approached the rostrum and stated she

was coming before the Committee to present two items. One item is the critical

issues the Engineering Department may face in the future and the other item is

to answer any questions in reference to the reclassification that is included

in the budget.



Director Newman stated, over the past few budget years, there have been

several positions continuing to be unfunded in the Traffic Engineering

Division, all of which are General Fund Positions; these unfunded positions has

made the department unable to plan for the future. She then goes on to explain

the constant change in technology as it is associated with Traffic Engineering.



The main concern is the vacant positions and not being able to bring

people in who are knowledgeable about the technology that is required. There

are some very important personnel that are coming up for retirement in the near

future.



In response to a question asked by Councilor Woodson, Director Newman

stated, if she had to pick just one position to fill this fiscal year it would

be the Traffic Signal Technician.



At that time, Councilor Woodson asked for the Traffic Signal Technician

position to be placed on the Add List.



City Manager Hugley stated, when an item is placed on the Add List, as

indicated by Chairman Henderson, there needs to be an offset for the cost.



Chairman Henderson, in response to a question asked by Mayor Tomlinson,

stated, Council needs to look through that department?s budget and determine

what should be considered a priority and what is not to offset the cost of the

additional items.



*** *** ***



INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT):



Director Dr. Forrest Toelle, approached the rostrum and stated he does

think the proposed budget is adequate. There are several issues that Dr. Toelle

wanted to bring to the attention of Council. The issues are there is no

contingency if the main system was to be out of commission and there is a

vacant position in IT that will need to be filled in 2017.



The position that was granted was originally graded at a Pay Grade of

G19, since then, the position was sent to the University of Georgia, where it

was then assessed at a G21.



There is $1 million needed for the City?s Microsoft Licensing, which is

not reflected in the IT Department?s Budget. At this time, Director Hodge

stated, based on preliminary information, she believes there will be excess

funds from other departments for FY15 to cover this expense. Director Hodge

said, in FY16 staff will have to go through the same process and address that

expense at mid-year, since this is an annual requirement. This concluded the IT

Department?s presentation.



Dr. Toelle and Councilor Davis had a brief discussion on the costs and

processes associated with offering some services that the City provides via the

internet. During the discussion Councilor Davis made a referral requesting

information that would show the cost savings of offering these services online

versus the current processes.



-----------------------------------------*** ***

***--------------------------------------------

Finance Director Pam Hodge then proceeded to begin her presentation on the Fair

Labor Standards Act (FLSA), since the Golf Authority Representative had not

arrived yet.

-----------------------------------------*** ***

***--------------------------------------------



FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT (FLSA):



Director Pam Hodge, approached the rostrum and stated the information that

will be given during the FLSA Presentation pertains to Law Enforcement and Fire

Protection.

________________________________________________________________________



FLSA

? Federal law that regulates the wages and hours worked by employees

? Defines exempt and non-exempt status

________________________________________________________________________



LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FIRE PROTECTION EMPLOYEES

? Section 7(k) of the FLSA provides that employees shall be paid overtime on a

?work period? basis

? ?Work period? may be from 7 consecutive days to 28 consecutive days

________________________________________________________________________



MAXIMUM HOURS STANDARDS

WORK PERIOD (DAYS) FIRE PROTECTION LAW ENFORCEMENT

28 212 171

21 159 128

14 106 86

7 53 43

________________________________________________________________________



Director Hodge explained, the numbers in the chart that are emphasized,

represent the schedules adopted by the different Public Safety entities. For

example, the Fire Department works159 hours, before they are required to

receive overtime compensation.

________________________________________________________________________



MAXIMUM HOURS STANDARDS

? Salary covers pay up to the number of hours outlined

? Overtime paid for only hours above the maximum

? ?Straight/GAP Time? not required by FLSA

? Law Enforcement and Fire Protection employees are NOT hourly employees, but

considered partially exempt

________________________________________________________________________



CURRENT PRACTICE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT

? 28 DAY CYCLE = 171 HOURS (Hours worked before overtime is required)

? Example #1: HOURS WORKED = 165 HOURS

- BI-WEEKLY BASE PAY = $1,412.45

? (Overtime Hourly rate = $1,412.45/80=$17.65)

? At the end of the 28 day cycle (in addition to Base Pay):

- ?STRAIGHT/GAP TIME? HOURS (160-171) = $17.65 X 5 HOURS = $88.25 (NOT REQUIRED

BY FLSA)

________________________________________________________________________



REQUIRED BY FLSA

? 28 DAY CYCLE = 171 HOURS (Hours worked before overtime is required)

? Example #1: HOURS WORKED = 165 HOURS

- BI-WEEKLY BASE PAY = $1,412.45

? (Overtime Hourly rate = $1,412.45/86=$16.42)

? At the end of the 28 day cycle:

? No additional pay required.

________________________________________________________________________



CURRENT PRACTICE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT

? 28 DAY CYCLE = 171 HOURS (Hours worked before overtime is required)

? Example #2: HOURS WORKED = 180

o BI-WEEKLY BASE PAY = $1,412.45

? (Overtime Hourly rate = $1,412.45/80=$17.65)

? At the end of the 28 day cycle (in addition to Base Pay):

o ?STRAIGHT/GAP TIME? HOURS (160-171) = $17.65 X 11 HOURS = $194.15 (NOT

REQUIRED BY FLSA)

o OVERTIME HOURS (172-180) = $17.65 x 1.5 x 8 HOURS = $211.80

________________________________________________________________________



REQUIRED BY FLSA

? 28 DAY CYCLE = 171 HOURS (Hours worked before overtime is required)

? Example #2: HOURS WORKED = 180 HOURS

o BI-WEEKLY BASE PAY = $1,412.45

? (Hourly rate = $1,412.45/86=$16.42)

? At the end of the 18 day cycle:

o OVERTIME HOURS (172-181) = $16.42 x 1.5 x 8 HOURS = $197.04

________________________________________________________________________



CURRENT PRACTICE FOR FIRE PROTECTION (in accordance with FLSA)

? 21 DAY CYCLE = 159 HOURS (Hours worked before overtime is required)

? Example: HOURS WORKED = 168 HOURS

o BI-WEEKLY BASE PAY = $1,412.45

? (Hourly rate = $1,412.45/106=$13.32)

? At the end of the 21 day cycle:

o OVERTIME HOURS (159-168)

________________________________________________________________________



Director Hodge answered several questions from Councilor Thomas,

pertaining to the 8 ? hour work day for the Columbus Police Department and the

12 hour work day for the Muscogee County Sheriff?s Department.



Mayor Tomlinson added to the discussion by saying the GAP Time

Compensation varies depending on assignment.



*** *** ***



GOLF AUTHORITY:



Director John Milam, approached the rostrum to begin his presentation. He

stated during the budget kickoff, departments were told to turn in the same

budget that was utilized the year before. With the anticipation of budget cuts,

Mr. Milam reviewed his budgets and located a savings of $20,000 at Bull Creek,

but none at Oxbow. After he submitted his budgets, he received a response back

from Mayor Tomlinson that reduced the budget for Bull Creek by 15.74% and a

7.8% reduction to the Oxbow Budget.



Director Milam stated, if his line items are to be cut, he believes he

should be the one to oversee that task. Any further cuts to the Golf Courses?

Budgets would jeopardize the property, increase the depreciation, and at some

point in time there will be problems like Parks & Recreation is having with the

swimming pools.



Director Milam requested that Council allows the Golf Courses to

operate with the same budget as they did for the past fours years. With this,

Director Milam stated, he will be able to maintain the courses, but there will

not be many improvements.



There was a short discussion between Chairman Henderson and Director

Milam on the conditions of the courses and the impact the economy has had on

citizens utilizing them for entertainment purposes.



Director Hodge responded to questions from Councilor Thomas on the

salary and wages line item.



Mayor Pro Tem Turner Pugh asked if the Golf Course Authority had considered

doing a Capital Campaign to raise the funds to construct a new clubhouse for

Bull Creek. Director Milam stated the authority has discussed it on numerous

occasions. Mayor Pro Tem offered to assist the Golf Course Authority in this

effort.



Director Milam reiterated his request of $234,000 for Bull Creek and $41,000

for Oxbow.



Director Hodge stated, the subsidy from the General Fund is proposed to remain

the same as it has been for years, but the reduction that Director Milam is

referring to is the decrease in revenue.



*** *** ***

POLICE PAY REFORM AND RESTRUCTURE:



Director Pam Hodge, approached the rostrum to give the following

presentation on the Police Pay Reform and Restructure:

________________________________________________________________________



MAYOR?S COMMISSION

? Convened in September 2014

? Consisted of approximately 30 members of CDP from varying divisions, ranks

and seniority.

? Finance and Human Resources participated

? Two City Councilors attended the meetings

? Reviewed Office Retention and Longevity

________________________________________________________________________



MAYOR?S COMMISSION

? Reviewed multiple options

? Need to be as close to budget neutral as possible within the CPD funds

available



CONCLUSIONS:

? No consensus due to varying perspectives

? Correct compression at an estimated cost of $15 million

________________________________________________________________________



LONGEVITY DISTRIBUTION

? Officers with less than 10 years of service

o 55%

? Offices between 10 and 20 years of service

o 17%

? Officers with more than 20 years of service

o 28%

________________________________________________________________________



Director Hodge stated, getting officers to stay with the Columbus

Police Department after their first 10 years of service was pinpointed as the

issue and was the purpose of the Mayor?s Committee.

________________________________________________________________________



FY2016 PROPOSAL

? Remove the sign on bonus

? Remove ?Straight/Gap? time

? Pay based on FLSA

? Institute a graduated pay incentive up to 35 years of service

? Use funds with greater impact to encourage retention and longevity

________________________________________________________________________



Director Hodge stated, the City has paid out $634,000 for the sign on

bonuses to be paid out to 389 employees in the Columbus Police Department

(CPD). Out of the 389 employees that have received the sign on bonus, 159 of

those employees no longer work for CPD.

________________________________________________________________________



FY2016 PROPOSAL

YEARS OF SERVICE BASE PAY INCREASE

After 1 Year $750

After 3 Years $1,000

After 5 Years $1,200

After 7 Years $1,500

After 10 Years $1,500

After 15 Years $1,500

After 20 Years $1,500

After 25 Years $1,500

After 30 Years $1,500

________________________________________________________________________



With each milestone that an officer reaches, his/her yearly salary will

be increased by that appropriate amount according to the chart.

________________________________________________________________________



FY2016 PROPOSAL

2 YEAR FINANCIAL IMPACT

Remove Sign on Bonus ($54,500)

Remove ?Gap? Time ($514,282)

Add Increase Year 1 $531,050

Add Increase Year 2 $173,350

Net 2 Year Impact $135,618

Benefits Impact $6,182

TOTAL 2 YEAR IMPACT $141,800



Court Pay ($115,450)*

*Court Pay could be reduced by scheduling court

appearances (to the extent possible) with the

officer?s regular 171 hour work schedule.

________________________________________________________________________



Mayor Tomlinson stated, all CPD Officers will receive some kind of

increase in the first year.



Police Chief Rick Boren stated, his department has reviewed court pay

in the past, but does not believe this compensation can be taken away from the

officers. Chief Boren then explains the process of scheduling hearings for his

officers to attend.



In response to a question asked by Councilor Thomas, Director Hodge

said, this incentive program is only available for officers employed with the

Columbus Police Department.



Councilor Barnes stated, during the committee discussions, the concern

of numerous officers was that they were not sure of what their salary would be

if they were to be on the police force for 20 years, or further down the line.

This reform was constructed to help reduce the compression factor of CPD.



Chief Boren stated, his concern is if they have a pool of applicants,

and they realize that another agency has a $2,000 sign on bonus with starting

with the same amount of money, will they choose to go with the agency with the

bonus rather than the one without.



Councilor Woodson asked if the turn over rate lately has been due to

the change in scheduling, as it pertains to shifts. Chief Boren responded by

saying no, there has only been one officer who reported this for being the

reason for leaving.



Councilor Thomas expressed a concern for the new officers with 1 to 2

years of service, who are currently receiving the sign on bonus. To address

this concern, Mayor Tomlinson stated she would make a commitment to Councilor

Thomas that these particular officers would continue to be paid the bonus until

the last payment.



There was a brief discussion among the committee and Chief Boren on the

importance of retaining experienced officers to take on the ranks after the

more seasoned officers chose to retire.



*** *** ***

There being no other budget related items to discuss, Chairman Henderson

announced that the meeting is adjourned with those ten members present, and the

time being 12:07 p.m.



________________________

Lindsey A. Glisson

Deputy Clerk of Council

Council of Columbus, Georgia

Attachments


No attachments for this document.

Back to List