Joplin, Missouri City Council Informal Session – September 8, 2026
Joplin, Missouri City Council Informal Session – September 8, 2026
On September 8, 2026, the Joplin City Council held an informal session to discuss two staff items: the annual rollover of purchase-order encumbrances and proposed changes to the city's promotion policy. No agenda or minutes were available; this summary is based on the meeting transcript.
Rolled Encumbrances and Purchase Orders
- City staff explained that encumbrances and purchase orders are the same concept: legally binding commitments for goods and services that may cross fiscal years and help prevent overspending.
- Under the city charter and budget ordinance, appropriations lapse at the end of the budget year unless spent or lawfully encumbered; both allow purchase orders to be rolled over.
- When a valid PO is rolled, the adopted budget increases by the PO amount while the same amount is recorded as a commitment, so there is no bottom-line effect. Example: a $500,000 line item with a $100,000 rolled PO shows a $600,000 budget and a $100,000 commitment, leaving a $500,000 bottom line.
- Because the budget is adopted in mid-October and departments continue issuing POs through the end of the fiscal year, staff brings a November resolution listing the valid encumbrances rolled.
- Reasons for rolling POs include goods ordered but not yet delivered, valid continuing commitments, long lead times/back orders/supply-chain delays, construction/project timing, multi-year contracts, capital projects, grants, and special revenue programs. Rolling preserves the commitment, improves financial reporting and audit trails, and prevents committed funds from being used elsewhere.
- For FY2025 to FY2026, the city rolled encumbrances across all funds totaling $50,744,631. The updated outstanding total was given as $21,932,870 (transcribed as '21,932,87').
- Staff said all remaining rolled 2025 items would close at fiscal year end except the fire-truck purchase order if the truck was still incomplete; fire trucks take about three years to build. Items not complete by fiscal year end should be re-budgeted for FY2027. Closing a rolled encumbrance reduces both the budget and the commitment, with no bottom-line effect.
- Councilmember Cowles asked about rebudgeting amounts and requested more project detail; staff said departments track rebudgeting separately and the new encumbrance list would come in November 2026. Councilmember Price asked about 2024 PO dates; staff clarified the FY2025 fiscal year ran November 1, 2024 through October 31, 2025.
Promotion Policy
- Staff presenter Mr. Edwards reviewed the council's follow-up discussion on the promotion policy. The proposed change, first raised in August, would increase the promotion pay adjustment from 10% to 15% when an employee moves from a non-exempt to an exempt position and loses overtime eligibility.
- The adopted ordinance also included language requiring promoted supervisors to be paid more than the employees they supervise; it was originally intended for exempt positions, but the council asked about broader application.
- Staff identified current pay inversions mainly in police corporal and fire captain ranks: seven police corporals earn less than police officers they supervise, costing about $71,000 to bring them to step 12; ten fire captains earn less than driver engineers, costing about $55,000. The combined immediate cost was about $126,000, with ongoing costs hard to quantify. Applying the rule would effectively remove steps for police corporal and fire captain positions.
- Staff presented five options: (1) rescind the promotion policy; (2) strike the sentence requiring supervisors to be paid more than direct subordinates; (3) make a one-time adjustment; (4) remove 'exempt' and/or place a cap on the adjustment; or (5) make no changes.
- Councilmember Koppel strongly supported the 15% non-exempt-to-exempt bump but opposed applying the supervisor-pay rule unevenly. He wanted any rule to apply consistently from top to bottom, noted other positions where pay inversions could occur, and defended the value of seniority.
- Councilmember DeTar said the rule would not prevent future inversions because a newer promotee can still be paid less than a long-serving subordinate; he favored option two as the most straightforward.
- Staff recommended option two, saying it would preserve the 15% adjustment and avoid harm. Staff called option three problematic and costly, a cap potentially error-prone, and option five unfair to lower-level supervisors.
- At Councilmember Koppel's suggestion, the council heard from department representatives. Fire Chief Nemo said option two was cleanest; option three might require opening the contract, and pay-scale changes create ripple effects. He suggested longevity pay might better reward experience. Ms. Haas, speaking for general employees, also supported option two as fairest from top to bottom and said the other options would cause unintended consequences.
- Councilmember Jackson asked about newer promotees leapfrogging experienced employees; staff acknowledged the tension and said no city has completely solved this issue.
Key Outcomes
- The council reached consensus on option two: remove the requirement that a promoted supervisor be paid more than a direct subordinate, while keeping the 15% pay adjustment for non-exempt-to-exempt promotions.
- Councilmember DeTar moved to direct staff to bring option two back at the next formal meeting; Councilmember Koppel seconded. The motion passed with six votes in favor.
- No formal action was taken on the encumbrance rollover; it was informational. Staff will return in November 2026 with the new list of valid encumbrances to roll into FY2027.
Meeting Transcript
All right. We'll get started with our uh informal session for September 8th. Um appreciate everyone being here this evening, and Ms. Hoges, I think you have the uh the lead here this evening. Good evening, Mayor, Council. Hope everyone's good tonight. So we were asked some questions about uh rolled encumbrances. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Uh so just to start off encumbrances and purchase orders, they they mean the same thing. Uh purchase orders are legally binding orders for goods and services uh that don't necessarily adhere to our our fiscal year. Uh purchase orders are a financial commitment helping entities uh keep uh it helps keep uh from overspending available funding. So under our charter, uh all appropriations shall lapse at the end of a budget year uh unless they have been expended or lawfully encumbered. Um and then in our uh ordinance adopting the budget, we also have the appropriate language. So both our charter and our and our ordinance allows for rolling over purchase orders. Uh so how does it really work? Uh it when we roll a valid PO, it increases the adopted budget while at the same time recording the commitment uh for the rolled purchase order, which really results in no bottom line effect on the total amount. So the example here is the original budget for some line item is $500,000. We have a rolled PO for $100,000, so the budget uh is $600,000 at that point, but at the same time there's a commitment uh through the rolled PO of $100,000. So the bottom line is $500,000. Uh but the difficult part is that we don't know what valid POs we will have when we're adopting the budget because that's mid-October and departments are still doing purchase orders through the end of the fiscal year. So in November we bring a resolution uh letting you all know uh what those encumbrances are. Uh so what are reasons uh to roll purchase orders from one fiscal year to the next? Uh goods or services were ordered before year end, but have not yet been delivered, completed, or accepted. Uh there's a valid continuing commitment to a vendor, so the open purchase order must remain available for payment uh when performance is complete. Uh long lead times, back orders, supply chain delay delays, which we have seen, construction schedules or or other project timing issues extend the fulfill fulfillment beyond our fiscal year end. Capital projects grants, special revenue programs, multi-year contracts often span more than one budget period. Uh as I mentioned, carrying a purchase order forward preserves the related encumbrance and prevents the committed funds from appearing available for another purpose. Uh this is evident uh through our annual audit. Uh you'll see the encumbrances in the audit. It improves financial reporting by distinguishing funds already committed from funds still available for new spending. Helps demonstrate compliance with council approved appropriations, purchasing policies, grant restrictions, and local budget requirements. The rollover maintains the connection among the original authorization, contract, purchase order, receipt, invoice and payment for internal control and audit purposes. So we rolled encumbrances uh for 2025 to 2026 across all funds, uh totaling 50 million seven hundred forty-four thousand six hundred and thirty-one dollars. Um I provided that list. That is the same list that went uh in the resolution uh to city council. Uh on the provided, so I provided the updated list, and uh this list is now down to 21,932,87. Uh however, none of these will roll forward uh unless the fire truck uh has not been uh completed by that by fiscal year end. So they will all close. Um if an item isn't complete by fiscal year end from 2025, it should then be re-budgeted for 2027. When a rolled encumbrance is closed, uh the reverse process occurs. Uh so the budget is actually decreased, the encumbrance is closed, so there's no bottom line effect. Uh as a result of this process, this means uh budgets are not arbitrarily increased without a corresponding valid purchase order. So uh our fiscal year is approaching. Uh there will be a new batch of valid encumbrances that will follow the same process to be rolled into 2027. Any questions? Okay. Council members, any questions? Mr. Cowles.
openpublica.com