Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Travel Training topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council questions travel and training requests; tables fire marshal trip for further review
Summary
Councilors raised concerns about mandatory qualifications, certification and overtime for several travel requests; the city tabled the fire marshal's inspector training pending clarification at a Committee of the Whole meeting.
Councilors pressed staff for more information about travel and training requests on the consent agenda, singling out the fire marshal's planned inspector training and a police training request, and moved to delay action on the fire marshal's trip.
Councilor Bach Schneider asked for separate consideration of several travel items and expressed concern about the fire marshal's required certification. In reference to the fire marshal position, Bach Schneider said the job description "states that the fire marshal must be a Minnesota State Fire Inspector 1 certified and qualified to approve fire sprinkler plans," and asked whether the training was to obtain that certification.
Councilor Johnson rejected delaying the item, saying the travel was budgeted and a supervisor and the city administrator had approved it: "I am not amenable to that. These are regularly the planned, they're part of the schedule, the budget. It's something that she needs to do." After discussion about checking qualifications with the chief, Councilor Bach Schneider moved to table the fire marshal travel request (item 5.4a) to the Committee of the Whole; the motion carried.
Councilors also questioned other travel entries. For the Police Department, Councilor Bach Schneider said he did not support sending staff to nonmandatory training during tight budget times: "I just have concerns with sending people for things that aren't required for any sort of certification." Councilor Motley said he shared the concern and voted against a related training item.
Council discussion also flagged an unclear overtime/comp-time designation for another travel request (item 5.4c). A councilor noted the packet listed "a total of 22 hours" but did not show the dollar total; staff calculated $880 for overtime (22 hours at about $40/hour) but did not clarify whether the hours would be paid as overtime or taken as comp time. Because the paperwork did not consistently indicate overtime versus comp time, a councilor said she was "not comfortable voting this through" until clarified. The council later approved item 5.4c by motion.
Ending: The council tabled the fire marshal's travel for the Committee of the Whole and asked staff and the police chief to clarify qualifications and compensation coding for the other travel items before final action where appropriate.
