pages: CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf, 17
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2005-07-19 | 17 | amount of the vehicle allowance, but there had been a change in the gross amount; noted the Human Resources Director was present if anyone has questions. Councilmember Matarrese stated that when a salary is provided in a Contract, Council does not have someone go back later and adjust the salary so that the net after taxes is the amount stated in the Contract; that he views the vehicle allowance in the same fashion; upholding the Contract and putting the amount back to $250 is simple. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the $250 was net when the Contract was enacted and something happened, such as a change in the IRS code, to make the amount no longer net. Mayor Johnson stated the amount in the Contract is $250; there was a change in the tax code; the amount became taxable; the benefit in the Contract was not stated as a net amount ; it is a question of fact, not laws; the question [of increasing the amount) should have been addressed to the Council, not an outside attorney. The Human Resources Director stated that she does not know the tax Code or if any changes were made to the tax Code; the benefit was non-taxable when first provided and then became taxable, which is why the legal opinion was given to the City Attorney; the opinion was sent to the Finance Director who continued to provide the benefit as a tax-free benefit for the next year to year and a half; after said time, it was discovered that the benefit should be taxable and put into the payroll system as a taxable benefit; the additional memo came forward to state that if the vehicle allowance is going to be a taxable benefit, the net amount needs to be $250 per month. Councilmember deHaan stated the opinion was for the two Contracted positions of City Attorney and City Manager; inquired how the legal opinion would apply to the $250 allowance given to other Department Heads; inquired whether other Department Heads were not entitled to the adjustment since they are not under Contract. The Human Resources Director responded that she does not know the exact language of the Contracts for the City Manager and City Attorney that she cannot appropriately answer the question; auto allowance for all other employees is through the payroll system and is a taxable benefit. Councilmember deHaan stated there could be a major impact if the legal opinion was exercised all the way through the system; the amount of the car allowance would depend on the amount of money a Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 17 July 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf |