05/27/2025 Council Meeting [31:05-36:08]

is that I have some considerations. You need the balance to drive 29. Due to all those conflicts we're going to have on either the fourth or the fifth. If there's no direction on that, we can read that to 29. I'm good. Okay. I don't think we're going to do that. Thank you. I'm going to ask you your same arm. Really loud, not in the corner, so I'm trying to bring my zero thumbs up. So, last, apparently, who, Jonathan, it's been with us since I took office in 2019. He was approached by a law office to be homeless. He was in town. So, losing a very valuable employee with that, having a proposal with helping out with the budget reduction for next year. So, last year, the castle graciously allowed me to hire a receptionist for 32,000 a year with a pay scale. I kind of thought that this might be coming down the road from the next year or two. So, we were cross training this person the entire time to be a paralegal. And she was able to step into Jonathan's position. And I don't want to say picked up where he left off, but have a good grasp of what we're doing. Jonathan's position was on a pay scale E. What I'm proposing is not a pay scale E. To move this person is in a pay scale A position, to the pay scale D position, put it in the paralegal role that we have. And then, I won't fill the scale A position for this year, and I won't ask for it next year. But, you know, three or five years down the road, if I'm still in this role, and we're still trucking along and being better than I'd like to revisit. Maybe putting that position back in here. But for now, we'll learn to deal without it. So, that'd be a savings off and next year's budget of 32,000, and a savings of a little over 20,000 this year. So, I guess, to sum up, move the person from A to D, move them out of that position, and fill the position that was just left, and then not fill that position. Is that clear or am I jumping all over the place? Oh, yeah. And I had the numbers, but I left them on my desk. Maybe Martha can help me out with it. I think it's like 1800, but maybe the difference in pay is that sound about right, for your... 13 or 15 or something like that. It's not like 33 or anything like that. Is this the receptionist's position that is partially supported by 4D funds? Yes. Is that an option if this person's job responsibilities change? As far as any reimbursement, because we could theoretically tap into that. And really, it's probably a pretty good idea because we have two positions in the office that prepare all the charging information, the court information, documents for the courts, but then they also answer phone calls when people walk into the office. So there's probably, we could easily justify a percentage of at least one person's pay for the child's court people to walk in. Now, whether that looks like 30% or 40 or 50%, I don't know, but what I would do in that situation is I would write that up, send up the Indianapolis and get proud approval, or do that. And we actually have that window now, since we have that person in the pay scale aid, that we could probably transition that over. But I would seek that to say the additional money this year and could probably answer back before the next meeting. Any questions? The way we did the model, I think there was two others before, when we did that, when we built those out, we did permanent reduction in staff. Which I think is essential in what he's asking you. I was saying, that's okay for now, but you know, we have to move back and change that number to the other half of the end. It's not a salary, it's okay.