<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">General Government includes the following line items:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Mayor and Council Wages<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Mayor and Council Operating Expenses<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Newsletter<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Charter and Ordinance Expenses<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Administrative Wages (Reg/Vac/Sick, Overtime, Bilingual,Bonuses)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Employee Benefits (Workers Comp, Health/Life/Disability, Pension Plan Contribs, Payroll Taxes)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Office Clerk Operating Expenses<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Building Inspection Fees<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Financial Services<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Town Administrator Operating Expenses<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Legal Council<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Speed Camera Admin Expenses<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Engineering<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Building Maintenance<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Utilities<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Insurance<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Web Site<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Information Technology<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Looking at FY16 the two biggest expenses by far are Administrative Wages and Employee Benefits. Combined they are 60% of the total spend listed in General Government Expenses. I apologize in advance if any of the numbers are wrong – they
were taken from the adopted budget Ordinance listed on our web site:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">FY16: $1,092,741<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">FY15: $936,810<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">FY14: $811,551<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">FY13: $800,957<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">FY12: $693,847<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Since FY12, we have seen a 58% increase in General Government Expenses.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">With the exception of the newly sworn in Ward 5 Councilmember, all the key players, including myself, have stayed the same since FY12. Ultimately, I think questions should be asked of all of us of the ‘why’ this is being done. The taxpayers
also have to ask themselves as well if they have seen an increase in the level of service provided to them.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In budget hearings we routinely hear from staff that they need more staff due to ‘increased regulatory demands.’ When pressed, they have been unable to delineate this in a quantitative answer. What the town has not done with the 58% increase
in general government expenses is use technology (to the best of my knowledge) to address some of the normal administrative challenges. We do a lot of things manually. Some basic business process improvements that could likely save the equivalent of 1-2
FTEs (and thus give back time to Department Heads and staff to concentrate on their jobs and their professional development):<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> -Implement automate timekeeping (last time I checked with staff we still manually compile time – our payroll solution has a simple add-on that should work)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> -Implement paperless vouchers (we provided policy direction as far back as 2012 but this has not been implemented yet would have an enormous impact and reduction of staff, the Mayor, and the Finance chair’s time)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> -Implement an HR solution for regulatory matters (I9 tracking, performance appraisals, etc.).
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> -Implement a better technology footprint for basic government services (permits, business licenses, rental inspections)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">From a business process point of view, our town is administered without a high degree of technology sophistication. Until we passed policy direction regarding the online distribution of Council materials every meeting staff would spend
hours printing out our hard booklets. Now all information gets loaded through Dropbox and any changes to the documents are automatically fed to all of us. We save money in regards to staff time, print costs, and save a few trees on top of it.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I think it is incumbent upon the town leaders to first investigate the question before trying to answer a problem. It would have been my preference to have engaged a 3<sup>rd</sup> Party Consultant and/or a Town Committee with some oversight
to the process. It would have also been my preference for the Town to have held a Public Hearing on the matter prior to drafting legislation. Either of those are hallmarks of open and transparent governance rather than being asked to nibble around the edges
and amend what appears to be a fait accompli.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Respectfully,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jonathan<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jonathan W. Ebbeler<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Chair, Economic Development Committee<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Councilman, Ward 1<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>