Finance - January 22nd 2013

MINUTES OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 – 7:30 p. m.
Main Conference Room – Mayfield Village Civic Center

 The Finance Committee meeting was held on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 in the Main Conference Room at the Mayfield Village Civic Center.  Mr. Marrie called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

(Click here for a print friendly/PDF document) 

Present: Mr. Marrie, Mr. Marquardt, Dr. Parker and Mr. Delguyd

Also Present: Chief Edelman, Mr. Metzung, Mr. Marrelli, Mr. Wynne, Mr. Thomas, Ms. Wolgamuth, Mr. Dinardo and Mrs. Betsa

ELECTION OF CHAIR:

Mr. Marrie nominated Mr. Delguyd as Chair of the Finance Committee for 2013.  Mr. Marquardt seconded.

Mr. Delguyd will serve as Chair of the Finance Committee for 2013.

1. Discussion of a motion to authorize expenditure in the amount of $15,000 to OneCommunity for annual subscription and fiber maintenance fee for 2013.

Mr. Delguyd stated, this was discussed at Caucus. Any questions?  Mr. Marrie replied, no, it’s an annual fee.

The Committee recommended Item #1 for approval.

2. Discussion of a motion to authorize expenditure in an amount not to exceed $15,000 to City of Bedford Heights Jail for prisoner housing for 2013.

Mr. Delguyd asked, did we exceed this last year?  Chief Edelman replied, we did, for the past two years actually. I have had to ask Council for additional monies in December the last two years, so I increased it this year.  Mr. Marrie asked, you went from $10,000 to $15,000?  Chief Edelman replied, yes.  Mr. Delguyd asked, so this is above last year’s request?  Chief Edelman replied, yes it is.  Mr. Delguyd asked, any questions? There were none.

The Committee recommended Item #2 for approval.

3. Discussion of a motion to authorize expenditure in the amount of $7,884 to Carlson Cleaning Services for cleaning of new police station for 2013.

Chief Edelman reported, same amount as last year.  Mr. Delguyd asked, it’s under contract?  Chief Edelman replied, yes.

The Committee recommended Item #3 for approval.

4. Discussion of a motion to authorize expenditure in the amount of $6,350 for Code Red emergency notifications for 2013.

Chief Edelman reported, this is the same amount as last year. We are on a three-year contract.  Mr. Delguyd asked, we pay that amount no matter how much we use?  Chief Edelman replied, correct.  If we go over a certain number of minutes, we have to pay additional monies, but we are not even close to that.  Mr. Marrie asked, but this is still way cheaper than Reverse 911?  Chief Edelman replied, yes. That can cost anywhere around $80,000 because you have to buy the equipment.

The Committee recommended Item #4 for approval.

5. Discussion of a motion to authorize expenditure in the amount of $15,000 to CRIS for monthly CRIS/LEADS/NCIC usage for 2013.

Chief Edelman reported, these are our databases that we use.  This is the annual fee.

The Committee recommended Item #5 for approval.

6. Discussion of a motion to authorize expenditure in the amount of $7,280 to Treasurer of State for annual MARCS fee.

Chief Edelman reported, this is the annual fee for the MARCS radios.

The Committee recommended Item #6 for approval.

7. Discussion of a motion to authorize expenditure in an amount not to exceed $22,000 to Progressive Fitness Center for 2013 memberships for residents.

Mr. Delguyd stated, this is a pass through.

The Committee recommended Item #7 for approval.

8. Discussion of a motion to approve an expenditure in an amount not to exceed Four Thousand Dollars ($4,000) to the Village Prosecutor for 2012 legal fees.  This amount is above the amount of $23,871.56 previously authorized in Resolution No. 2012-08.

Mr. Marquardt asked what the rationale is on this.  He wasn’t clear on it from the Minutes of Caucus. I know he charged more, but I wasn’t sure what the change in scope was.  Mr. Wynne replied, in 2009 when we started to cut back on expenses, we had been incorrectly charged for things that would be considered part of the retainer.  Our Prosecutor fees were out of line with where they should have been.  We sat down with him and went over it and capped his compensation package at $50,000. We have held it firm for the past three years and will consider increasing it a little bit for 2013, but for this year, his fees came in above the cap.

Mr. Marquardt asked, why was that?  What changed? Why were they higher than expected?  Mr. Wynne replied, he is charging the right hourly rate.  There was more volume in the Court.

Mr. Marquardt asked, so things are charged properly with the retainer and then his hourly portion of it was higher?  Mr. Delguyd replied, his hours were higher.  Not his hourly rate.

Mr. Marrie asked, this $4,000 is only 2/3rds of what he has invoiced?  Mr. Wynne replied, his billings are $5,600 above the cap.   Mr. Marrie asked, you are comfortable with just going with 2/3rds?  Mr. Wynne replied, yes.  We put a cap in place for a reason. At the same time, I know our Court revenues are up.   Dr. Parker stated, so we could hold a hard line and just say, that’s it, but that’s not what we do.  If it is legitimate and he justifies it.

Mr. Marquardt asked, what are we doing for 2013?  Mr. Wynne replied, keeping it the same and proposing to increase the $23,000 to $28,000. It would be a $5,000 increase.  Dr. Parker asked, for what reason is that? Mr. Wynne replied, because we have held him firm and frozen the rate for the past few years with no increase at all.  Dr. Parker stated, but we are giving him an increase.  Mr. Delguyd stated, I would rather pass it when we need it.  Dr. Parker agreed. What if he has less?  It would make sense if he knows that if he can justify things, we are willing to pay for justifying the charges.  Maybe it’s better to keep him in check and have him come back to us if he has a crazy year.  Mr. Marquardt stated, it just seems convoluted.  If you put a cap on it and we say we are going to pay him 2/3rds and then we say, well, we are going to raise it now. I  am missing the basic logic.

Mr. Delguyd asked, he’s on a $50,000 retainer?  Mr. Wynne replied, no.  His retainer is $26,000 and change and then the difference between the $50,000 and $26,000 and change is $23,000 which his hourly fees go against. Included in the retainer are any conversations needed or any trips to the police station to meet with the officers over cases.  The only time he gets paid additional to the retainer is when he has to appear in Court.

Mr. Delguyd asked, so the retainer is for standard work?  Mr. Marquardt, what does the cap do then?  It just says stop working when you get to a certain amount?  Mr. Wynne replied, we capped it at $23,871.56.  Mr. Marquardt asked, for the retainer? Mr. Wynne replied, the retainer is $26,000 and change. He gets a check every two weeks. Mr. Marquardt asked, what was the cap on? Mr. Wynne replied, his additional fees for  Court.

Mr. Delguyd asked, so his retainer covers research, questions, conferences and then the retainer we are talking about now is actually his time in Court?  Mr. Marrie asked, the $23,000 is for his Court time? Mr. Wynne replied, yes.  He sends us bills every month for Court time. Mr. Marquardt stated, so that’s a variable charge based on his Court time. Mr. Wynne replied, correct.   Mr. Marquardt stated, and we capped it and said if he ran out of November he shouldn’t go to Court anymore. Mr. Wynne replied, no.  He just shouldn’t charge us anymore.

Mr. Delguyd asked, what were the fees before the cap? Mr. Wynne replied, six figures.   They were significant.  This is the only professional we have a cap on.  Dr. Parker stated, compared to what we were paying before, it’s not that much. 

Mr. Delguyd asked, is he doing a good job?  Chief Edelman stated, he really has no idea at this time of year if he is going to go over that $50,000.  He won’t know that until later in the year.

Mr. Delguyd stated, that’s why I said keep the cap where it is.  I have no problem bringing it back to Council during the third and fourth quarter every year.

Dr. Parker asked, does he give us updates? Mr. Wynne replied, no, we track internally.  I brought it to his attention that he is over the cap.  Dr. Parker suggested, maybe when he gets to 10% of the cap, let us know.

The Committee recommended Item #8 for approval.

9. Discussion of a motion to amend the Medical Expense Reimbursement Plan to provide for the funding of the $250/$500 Network Deductible Plan and to include a pro-rated calculation for new hires and termination.

Mr. Delguyd asked, this Plan is already been in place and has been approved, this is just so that if you get hired in the middle of the year, we don’t give you the full deductible?   Mr. Wynne replied, correct.

The Committee recommended Item #9 for approval.

10. Discussion of a motion to fund the Medical Expense Reimbursement Plan for 2013.

Mr. Wynne reported, this is per the agreement.  It is going to be about $165,000.  I didn’t put an amount to it because if we have terminations or hires during the year, we would have to come back every time.

Mr. Delguyd asked, the legislation that covers the Plan, is that up again this year?  Mr. Wynne replied, no, that will be up at the end of 2014.  We are on a three-year contract with the County.   There is no expiration on the Medical Expense Reimbursement Plan. We can amend this Plan any time we want.

The Committee recommended Item #10 for approval.

11. Discussion of a motion to acknowledge receipt of financial reports for December 2012 and to approve of same as submitted.

The Committee recommended Item #11 for approval.

12. Discussion of First Reading of Ordinance No. 2013-01, entitled, “An emergency ordinance authorizing and directing the Mayor to enter into a Development Agreement with East Commons, Ltd.”  Introduced by Mayor Rinker and Council as a Whole.

Mr. Delguyd stated, I know there are some changes being discussed from what we read at Caucus.  Correct, Diane?  Ms. Wolgamuth replied, yes.

The Committee recommended Item #12 for approval.

13. Discussion of Resolution No. 2013-02, entitled, “An emergency resolution providing for the employment of an Engineer for Mayfield Village, Ohio.” Introduced by Mayor Rinker and Council as a Whole.

The Committee recommended Item #13 for approval.

 

ANY OTHER MATTERS

Mr. Delguyd asked if there were any other matters.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Mary E. Betsa, Clerk of Council