The 2008-2009 Trenton Park Department Budget will go back to the city council for a second vote based on a recommendation from the council’s Administrative Committee, which met on Thursday night at city hall.
This website brought to you in part by the following sponsor:
On a vote of 3-2, the committee agreed to send the budget back for reconsideration by the entire council and the committee is requesting improved communications between the city and park board. Committee Chairman Ed Holt suggested that the matter be considered by all council members, who voted not to consider the budget at the April 14 council meeting when it approved budgets for the city and Trenton Municipal Utilities. At that time, concerns were expressed regarding a 5 percent salary increase given by the park board to the park superintendent when other city personnel were given a 2 percent raise in the city and TMU budgets.
Mayor Cathie Smith, who was among several individuals making remarks at the meeting, said it was unfortunate that the issue has taken on “the appearnce of being simply a pay issue,” which she said was not the case. She praised the work of all supervisors within the city’s job frame, noting that they all are “deserving of twice the amount they are being paid.” She said the issue in “no way reflects on the jobs that our city supervisors do, the expertise they have or the amount of work they do.” Noting that the biggest part of any budget is personnel, Mrs. Smith said it is because of that the perception has been that the problem was with the salary being paid.
Councilwoman Terry Toms, who serves as a liaison to the park board along with Holt, reiterated that it was the council’s responsibility to be a good steward of the taxpayer’s money and that she felt the park board’s efforts in determining how the salary was reached was inappropriate, calling their action “all over the board.” She said that if the park board wants to pay the park superintendent the $41,000-plus it had agreed to, it should not do so with taxpayer’s money. She emphasized that her concern was not about the person holding the position, rather it was about the salary and how it was arrived at.
Marti Williams, who is president of the park board, noted that the park superintendent has a book which outlines salaries of park supervisors throughout the state, the size of community they serve and for what they are responsible. Mrs. Williams noted they took information from that into consideration as well as calling around to other communities the size of Trenton to find out superintendent responsibilities and salaries. She noted that the park superintendent’s salary in Trenton is “mid-range” among those paid in similar size communities with similar duities.
There was a discussion about responsibilities and how pay raises are determined. City Administra-tor Kerry Sampson noted there is a job description for the park supervisor and that there is also a salary range for salaries in the city. He said a range was established about 10 years ago, based on the type of job, requirements, education needed and what other communities in the area are paying for similar positions. He said it was probably time to revisit that area.
Councilman Kenneth Ewing noted that it was not the council’s responsibility to set salaries for the park board, but it is their responsibility to appointment members to the park board.
“If we don’t like what they do, we replace them,” he said.
He said he would like to see more cooperation and communication between the city and park board and feels like there is a willingness to do that. He said that it is not a case of the park board paying its superintendent too much, it’s a case of the city not paying its employees enough.
Councilman Jim Bush feels that the park board has not wanted to work with the city and stated that “if the park board doesn’t have any respect for the city, then there shouldn’t be a park board. The perception I get is the park board does not get along with the city.” He said he would like to see the city have control over the sales tax money for parks rather than give the money to the park board as has been done in the past.
Councilman Chuck Elliott said the city has no real control of the park board budget, but added he would like to see the city, park board and utilities have pre-budget meetings in the future before raises are decided. He and Holt both indicated they would like to have reports from the park department each month, with Holt stating he would also like to see the park board have their own bills for review each month as well as having park bills separated from other city bills with the city agenda at each meeting.
It was noted that the council would be considering an ordinance on Monday night that would require the park superintendent to attend council meetings and make reports as is required of other supervisors and the TMU Director.
Also speaking at the meeting were Councilman Steve Perry, former park board member Gary Berry and Gary Schuett.
Ewing made the motion to send the budget back to the council for consideration and Perry seconded it. Voting in favor were Ewing and Perry while Ms. Toms and Bush were opposed. Holt, as chairman cast the deciding vote due to the tie.
The city council will look at the budget at its meeting on Monday night, which is set for 7 o’clock at city hall.