pages: CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf, 18
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2005-07-19 | 18 | person makes; the more an individual makes, the higher the car allowance would be. The Human Resources Director responded in the affirmative ; stated taxes are based upon income. Councilmember Daysog stated the City Manager and City Attorney received a check for $250 with no taxes taken out before 2001 something happened, whether an IRS ruling or direction was to have the car allowance go through payroll; the amount would be reduced with taxes assessed; the issue then becomes a labor contract issue of good faith; the $250 amount was negotiated on a good faith basis; a staff member, such as the Finance Director or Human Resources Director, with Linda Tripoli's letter from April, 2001, opined that the amount would have to be increased in order to remain whole at $250; in the highest tax rate, mathematically the cost would be roughly $80 on the federal side and 11-12% on the State side, which comes out to roughly $370; that he does not see the problem. Mayor Johnson stated that in her opinion, the problem is that the matter should have come to the Council; when the Council approves a Contract that states the person receives $250 per month, the amount is $250 per month; if there is a subsequent tax change or ruling that makes the amount taxable, the matter should come to Council to ask if the amount should be $250 or increased now that taxes have to be paid on the amount; the matter is not really a legal issue, rather it is a matter of determining whether the Council wants to change the amount now that there is a tax consequence. Councilmember Daysog stated the Council's intent was always to keep the amount at $250; that he cannot imagine that the Council wanted the amount lowered in 2001; that he can only imagine that the memo issued in 2001 and circulated to the City Council was consistent with what the Council wanted. Mayor Johnson stated the clearest way to know what the Council intended would be to ask the Council: Council sets amounts for salaries, vehicle allowances for other people, and all kinds of things, which are always gross, not net; many benefits provided have tax consequences. Councilmember Matarrese stated it is a question of process, not amount ; the process should be that if there is a change that incurs a higher dollar outlay than what was done before or if there is a question of intent, the matter, under Contract or Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) should come to the Council; the issue is not hugely complicated; that [bring the matter to Council] should be Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 18 July 19, 2005 | CityCouncil/2005-07-19.pdf |