Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 1 · column 5 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
The supervisors got a lesson on the intricacies of bureaucratic budgets at their meeting August 3, as social services director Sylvia Kreitler explained the consequences of their decision to cut her 1987-88 budget by approximately $3,000.
The money represented the local share of salary for an additional case worker’s position. The action was taken at the behest of Supervisor Newbill Miller, who was opposed to the staff expansion.
“Let me see if I can explain this. When you cut my budget and took away that position, you changed the formula for the budget,” Mrs. Kreitler told the supervisors. The cut meant a loss of $9,450 in money for purchased services, which go primarily to the elderly and to children in foster care, she said. “I’m not asking for all of that, but I need $1,886 in order to straighten out our budget,” the social services director said.
“There’s a ripple effect,” explained administrative assistant John McCarthy, when Mrs. Kreitler*s request brought no immediate response from the supervisors. The staff reduction meant a concurrent reduction in various line items of the social services budget. he said.
90.7%