Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Greenville council adopts supplemental appropriations, approves insurance certificates and police overtime settlement
Summary
The Greenville City Council voted unanimously to adopt a supplemental appropriation ordinance, approved two —then-and-now' insurance payments for Litman Thomas Insurance Agency and authorized a settlement to resolve alleged overtime pay discrepancies for two police officers; one abstention was recorded on the smaller insurance payment.
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Greenville City Council on Monday adopted four separate measures, including budget adjustments, two insurance payments and a settlement addressing alleged overtime-pay discrepancies for two police officers.
Council suspended its usual rule set to read items by title and approved: (1) a then-and-now certificate authorizing payment to Litman Thomas Insurance Agency for a cyber-insurance renewal totaling $9,824; (2) a second then-and-now certificate to Litman Thomas Insurance Agency for an insurance renewal for $1,120 (one council member abstained); (3) a supplemental appropriation ordinance adding multiple line-item appropriations across general, water, transit and wastewater funds; and (4) an ordinance authorizing the safety service director to enter settlement agreements with two police officers over alleged overtime-calculation discrepancies.
Why it matters: The supplemental appropriation moves existing funds and records reimbursements for projects already paid on the city's behalf, including wastewater treatment plant work. The settlement resolves outstanding wage-exposure claims that, according to the law director, could have produced greater expense and litigation costs if taken to arbitration.
Key developments
—Litman Thomas insurance payments: The council approved two —then-and-now' certificates that permit payment on already-issued invoices to Litman Thomas Insurance Agency. The larger certificate for $9,824 (cyber-insurance, Oct. 1, 2025—6/30/2026) passed on a unanimous roll-call vote. A second certificate for $1,120 passed after one abstention.
—Supplemental appropriations: The council adopted an ordinance to add appropriations for multiple funds for the remainder of the 2025 fiscal year. Line items listed during the reading included, among others, $515 for the mayor's office payroll, $1,200 and $1,400 for treasurer and administration office supplies (insurance bond renewals), $13,510 for the city share of employee healthcare, $5,000 for fire maintenance, approximately $16,900 for water maintenance received from paid commercial meter invoices, $25,000 matched on the purchase of a 2026 transit bus, RX and medical claims increases ($80,000 and $100,000), and $134,625.65 posted to wastewater capital improvement for solids-handling project reimbursements. The ordinance was adopted on a roll-call vote with all members voting yes.
—Police overtime settlement: Law Director Mr. Reman described the settlement measure as a —full release— that resolves disputed promotion-pay and overtime items for two officers. "[It] resolves it for less than our exposure would be if it fully got litigated," Reman said, calling it "a win-win." The council adopted the ordinance on a unanimous roll-call vote.
Votes at a glance (recorded during this meeting)
- Then-and-now certificate (Litman Thomas) —$9,824 (cyber-insurance) —Outcome: adopted; recorded roll call: Godwin yes; Norris yes; Rogers yes; White yes; Wilman yes; Elely yes. - Then-and-now certificate (Litman Thomas) —$1,120 (insurance renewal) —Outcome: adopted; recorded roll call: Godwin yes; Norris abstain; Rogers yes; White yes; Wilman yes; Elely yes. - Supplemental appropriation ordinance —Various line items (see body) —Outcome: adopted; recorded roll call: Godwin yes; Norris yes; Rogers yes; White yes; Wilman yes; Elely yes. - Ordinance authorizing police overtime settlements —Two officers; exact settlement amounts not specified in meeting —Outcome: adopted; recorded roll call: Godwin yes; Norris yes; Rogers yes; White yes; Wilman yes; Elely yes.
What the meeting record does and does not show: The law director said the settlement avoids arbitration costs and fully resolves the named issues; the meeting transcript records the council's authorization but does not include the final settlement figures or individual officer names. The supplemental appropriation lists multiple specific amounts for accounting purposes in the reading but does not include supplemental documentation in the public record excerpt available online.
Next steps: As adopted, the supplemental appropriations take effect under the city's financial rules and the safety service director is authorized to execute the settlement agreements; the transcript does not indicate that the council reviewed or received settlement amounts publicly at this session.
