My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
September 2003
sbend
>
Public
>
Historic Preservation
>
Meeting Minutes
>
HPC Meeting Minutes 2003
>
September 2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2019 1:16:16 PM
Creation date
6/8/2020 10:11:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
South Bend HPC
HPC Document Type
Minutes
BOLT Control Number
1001360
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
SOUTH BEND & SAINT JOSEPH COUNTY <br />HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION <br />235-9798 <br />175rouvrOWNW011 Mu <br />Wednesday, September 10, 2003 <br />TO: Commission Treasurer Catherine Hostetler <br />Commission Members <br />FROM: Karen R. Hammond -Nash, Director <br />RE: 2004 Budget <br />The newspaper announced that the County Council has approved 2004 Department budgets. However, <br />Council has a policy of distributing the data regarding budget approvals only through Wendy House in <br />the Auditor's Office. At the time of this mailing, Wendy has not yet received that data from the <br />Council. She will call me when she does, which may or may not be before the Monday HPC meeting. <br />As you may know, the County Commissioners asked department heads to keep their total budget <br />requests equal to their 2003 budgets, but suggested that raises might be given to employees by moving <br />money from other accounts within the department budget. About two thirds of the county departments, <br />plus HPC, accordingly sought to fund raises by reducing part time or contractual services budgets. <br />The County Commission, according to my information, approved the requested raises in some <br />departments, and did not approve them in others, HOWEVER, the matching reductions that department <br />heads offered WERE written into the Commissioners budget in — I understand — every case. <br />The County Council, at a meeting with department heads last Thursday, considered refusing ALL raises <br />and enforcing ALL reductions; refusing all raises but not requiring reductions in part time help; and <br />various other permutations. <br />When individual directors were invited to speak, I pointed out that our Assistant Director position <br />requires a 4 -year degree and a knowledge of or degree in architecture, and that that the present salary of <br />$23,500 is low for such a requirement. We had sought a raise of $1,000 for Julie and the same amount <br />for me, and the County Commissioners had recommended only $500 for Julie, while reducing our <br />contractual services budget by $2,000. I did receive an assurance that the Council members would <br />consider the matter further. <br />I also heard privately from Dennis Schafer that he and other council members might look favorably on <br />annual bonuses, rather than raises, because bonuses are not built into subsequent budgets. I would refer <br />this matter to our budget committee of Catherine Hostetler and Jerry Ujdak, for consideration and <br />possible action in October or November. <br />Note that our 2003 Contractual services allocation is $31,000, and the County Commissioners proposed <br />2004 allocation is $29,000. Of that amount, we expect to spend just under $16,000 for inspector <br />services, about $2,000 for transcription services, leaving about $13,000 this year, and probably only <br />$11,000 next year, for paying for such things as engineering or archeological surveys, forestry or <br />landscape surveys, extra printing, and/or matching grant programs. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.