My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2002_1209_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2002
>
2002_1209_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/10/2011 3:50:03 PM
Creation date
10/10/2011 3:35:49 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
113
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Parks & Recreation Devartment <br /> M 0 <br /> Eliminate On-Line Registrants would be required to register by phone or <br /> Program Registrations in person. $ <br /> Eliminate Summer Program information distributed to the community <br /> Brochure would be limited. 142000 <br /> Eliminate 4 of July <br /> Fireworks Decreased emnhasis on 4t'of Julv Celebration 77000 <br /> Eliminate Aggressive <br /> Skate Park Less recreational amenities 1 0,000 <br /> The Skating Center (Oval) is 10 years old and in need <br /> of improvements. Delaying improvements further will <br /> Eliminate Skating Center lead to added maintenance and higher repair costs in <br /> Improvements the future. 6300 <br /> Less recreational/cultural amenities available to the <br /> Eliminate Nature Center Community. 7500 <br /> Reduce the Park Provides playground equipment and other capital <br /> Improvement Program needs in city parks 10 0,0 0 0 <br /> Additional City-wide Budget Reductions <br /> ❑ Reduce amounts set aside for contingency. The current budget has $165,000 set aside for <br /> contingency purposes. This represents 0.5% of the operating budget (excluding debt and <br /> TIF payments). By contrast a typical construction project has a 5-10% contingency level. <br /> ❑ Reduce the COLA from 3% to 2%. This would result in approximately $80,000 in lower <br /> costs city-wide however only $40,000 in levy reductions would result (the remaining <br /> portion provides reductions in non-tax program costs). This action could potentially place <br /> added strain on negotiations with the City's collective bargaining units and may be <br /> detrimental to recruitment and retention efforts. <br /> Discussion Items <br /> Staff undertakes considerable long-term planning efforts to ensure that the timing of certain <br /> expenditures coincides with diminishing needs elsewhere. To the greatest extent possible, all <br /> programs and services are continually evaluated to find new efficiencies and cost-saving <br /> measures. However, it is acknowledged that other factors external to the organization and <br /> beyond the City's control exist and play a role in determining the City's funding needs for the <br /> upcoming year. These factors oftentimes do not lend themselves well to planning efforts, and <br /> can arise relatively quickly. Some of these factors include; commitments made in prior years, <br /> unfunded mandates, and losses in state/federal aid. Some of these factors are explained in <br /> greater detail below. <br /> Lew Impact Due to Lost State and Federal Aid <br /> The proposed levy increase is partially due to the anticipated loss in state aid. The City currently <br /> receives $40,000 in Local Government Aid (LGA) from the State. These monies are used to <br /> support the General Fund activities which include Police, Fire, and Public works. Given the <br /> 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.