news
Employees won't face layoffs in the move, initiated by Chief Financial Officer Lynn Norris. Instead, municipal department heads will trim overtime costs and reassign duties so they can leave vacant positions unfilled.
"Personnel cost is the largest, single cost we've got," Norris said, "and we have to manage it."
The city currently spends 65 percent of its $32 million general fund budget on personnel.
That's nearly $21 million annually on its 484 full-time and 120 part-time employees. Costs include hourly wages, overtime, salaries and benefits.
The rest of the general fund goes toward providing municipal services, completing capital projects, purchasing equipment and carrying out other city functions.
Personnel costs shouldn't surpass 55 percent of the general fund budget, said Norris, who was reappointed to his position in September after having left in 1998 to take a job as a private consultant.
That would amount to $17.6 million in the current budget as compared to the actual $21 million.
During his previous 13-year tenure, Norris said the city's personnel costs stayed in the 48-50 percent range.
Now that he's back on the job, Norris said it's his goal to realign the city's largest expense. He estimated the effort to require two years.
Municipal leaders currently are preparing the next fiscal year budget, and personnel expenses are projected to drop by nearly 4 percent - or by roughly $743,000.
The reduction comes from a combination of attrition and overtime savings. Overall, Tupelo will lose 10 full-time employees this coming fiscal year versus the current FY. Most occur in the Public Works and Police departments, which lost four and five employees, respectively.
"We've had some, of course, retire, and due to the capabilities of existing employees, we feel we can carry on if during our peak season we hire temps," said Public Works Director Sid Russell. "We feel confident we can provide the same level of service and save the taxpayers a little bit of money."
Additional savings will come from overtime reductions, especially in the Fire Department, which restructured its staffing schedule to trim nearly $300,000 from that line item.
The City Council must approve the FY11 budget by Sept. 15, including any new capital projects funded through the personnel cuts.
The fiscal year begins Oct. 1.
Contact Emily Le Coz at (662) 678-1588 or emily.lecoz@djournal.com.
I'm a little confused, what exactly does a communications director do?
Jack Reed Jr., Mayor
Lynn Norris, Chief Financial Officer
Kim Hanna, City Clerk
Darrell Smith, Chief Operations Officer
Terri Blissard, Grant Administrator
Anna Freeman Wyatt, Communications Director
Sally Enos Williams, Mayor’s Executive Assistant
Neely Turner, Chief Operations Officer’s
Administrative Assistant
Ora Baldwin, Retirement Director
Debbie Brangenberg, Downtown Tupelo/Main Street
Why do we need a Chief Operations Officer. Especially one that is already retired and drawing money from another company. Why do we need an executive assistant for both the mayor and Chief Operations Officer. One person could do both and their salary and benefits could help pay for the fire truck or dog park (ha). Why do we need a retirement director or communications director? I understand money managemnent being in the business field myself and having to deal with large budgets, but to do frivolous projects such as dog parks, water tank painting (doesn't even work), narrowing main street for bicycles that will cause major traffic tie ups( how many more cars are there in the city in relation to bicycles), and so many other ridiculous projects at the cost of personnel that in most cases are underpaid and had few raises in the last several years is ridiculous. I agree things need to be done to attract dollars to the city from tourist and other sources, but so many of these things mentioned above are not great priorities when they come at the sacrifice of peoples livelyhood. There is a fine line between doing what is right for the city and what is right for your employees just like any other business and I do not feel our city leaders are capable of walking that line and making hard decisions that are in the best interest of the citizens of Tupelo and its employees. How many of the things mentioned in the article today are critical to the future of this city? I know some are, but many are not. Citizens of Tupelo, wake up and talk to your council person and the mayor and lets see if we can get them to wisely spend our money and at the same time adquately support city workers. I realize the economy is terrible and all must make sacrifices, but when I see money going to so many unnecessary things in this city, it is a travesty!
And the mayor for a town the size of Tupelo doesn't need a "communications director", so that position can go and should have never been created.
Besides Reed's ties are so close with Journal Inc. that they'll never run anything negative about him, and he probably has good relationships with the TV/radio stations due to his company's advertising, so why would he need a PR person?
Pay and benefits wise that's probably $200K plus with just those two unnecessary positions.
I can't say that I know whether or not the people they let go or don't hire are for jobs that really need doing. Is there really that much "fluff" in Tupelo's city government?
Remember the days of elected Department heads ?