My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1985_0513_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1985
>
1985_0513_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/15/2011 4:01:44 PM
Creation date
12/15/2011 4:01:04 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
May 13 r 1985 <br />0 <br />TO: City Council, <br />FROW: Jim Andes' <br />SUBJECT: Policing '-Contract <br />City of Lauderdale <br />6 1 0 <br />The� C ity of Roseville,, has been providing police services to <br />Lauderdale since, 1975. Laulderdalle res idents are provided the <br />s I <br />amie services as residents of Rosevilleo Lauderdale is part of <br />the western patrol district. <br />Liauderdalle I s cost .1mis based on the proportion of their poiDulation <br />to, Roseville's population, For examples.- <br />Lauderdale is responsible for 5.,,819% of the 1985 City's Police <br />budget of $1,682.6'77,,, or $99,110. 'This amount is reduced by <br />poilce stat,e aid ($6,198) to $92,91121, <br />Recently, Fialcion HeJghts proposed to share their Sheriff's car <br />with Lauderdale. The cost to Lauderdale would be approximately <br />$85,000, and is based on a flormula Including population, land- <br />0 <br />area, and number of events inviesiti, <br />_giated <br />0 <br />Lauderdale is seriously cons ideir g this offer and has advise,4-- <br />Roseville Lauderdale "indicated they were not <br />dissatisfied with the service, but the Falcon Heightis proposal <br />was signantly less money. In effect,, they were saying <br />Lauderdale would priobabil,y go with Falcon Heights, if the <br />RosevJ-1le charge could not be reduced, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.