Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />City of New Brighton <br />July 12, 1983 <br />page Six <br /> <br />Mayor Harcus asked staff to respond to the recommen- <br />dations made in the aforementioned reports. <br /> <br />The Director of Liquor reviewed the staff report <br />on a computerized perpetual inventory control system. <br /> <br />Computerized <br />Perpetual Inven- <br />tory Control Sys. <br />Report #83-188 <br /> <br />Councilmember Schmidt questioned whether the City <br />should be going this far this fast in terms of <br />computerizing one department when the staff had <br />been asked to look at other departments in terms <br />of computerizing. <br /> <br />The Liquor Director stated the system is an inventory <br />tool only on a contractual basis, and that it is <br />available now and saw no relationship between this <br />and an integrated system as inventory is a distinct <br />function. He further stated the system is a register <br />system that takes an inventory like those used at <br />Lunds, Country Store, etc., and tells what it is you <br />have sold by item and that it is a state-of-the-art <br />cash register. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schmidt stated the proposed system needed <br />to be crosschecked with Finance and an opinion on the <br />system solicited from them. <br /> <br />Mayor Harcus stated that the Liquor Director, Mr. Rubin <br />of Rubin Gottleib & Assoc., and Mr. Kozlak had looked <br />at the system. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schmidt stated the City did not wish to <br />ignore the inventory problem but stated the Finance <br />Department has a responsibility for that inventory and what <br />happens to the money and indicated he was not aware the <br />Council authorized the use of Rubin, Gottleib & Assoc. <br />as consultants. <br /> <br />The Liquor Director stated he was not aware that consultants <br />had to be appointed on a continual basis by the Council. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schmidt stated he recognized that this proposal <br />was done without the cooperation of Finance and that only one <br />perception of what was needed was being presented, and <br />that he questioned these practices. He further stated <br />the City had better assess the operation's profitability <br />before investing anymore money into it. <br /> <br />The Liquor Director stated that he felt when the costs <br />were factored which were not footnoted on the financial <br />statement, the liquor operation was doing very well. He <br />further stated that the department went to great lengths <br />to get varying perspectives on the proposed system and <br />operational needs, and that the City could not ignore <br />