2011-02-01_PR_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

v. Chris was asked about the overall budget for the City of Roseville. The current annual budget is approximately $36M. The city currently has about $11.5M in debt. The highest it has been is approximately $40M roughly 15 years ago. The current city debt of$11.5M is relatively low historically. For the city the size of Roseville, it is not uncommon to see a debt load of$30M. vi. The bond term cannot be longer than the estimated useful life of the asset. 30 year bonds could be issued for assets expected to be useful for 30. 15-20 year bonds are the most common. Revenue bonds are not a likely resource as program fees are currently at or near maximum. State bonding funds are also an unlikely source due to the local nature of the improvements. State binding money is typically dedicated for state and regional assets. vii. The city has historically bonded for the entire anticipated amount of a project. You can stagger it or phase it in if that is the chosen path. The master plan does not identify a timeline for completion of projects. The timeline will likely be determined by the funding availability. The master plan does identify funding for additional annual maintenance costs created by improvements. If annual maintenance funding is not included in the initial funding, it may be a challenge to obtain annual funding through the council. viii. There are currently no levy limit restrictions. There was a time that there were levy limit restrictions, but currently none are in place. Increases in the levy limit are typically reserved for land acquisition and bricks and mortar type projects, not day to day operations. ix. Some of the master plan improvements are currently identified in the city capital improvement plan (CIP). The current CIP is a ten year plan. The Park Improvement Plan (PIP) has been used for smaller improvements. The PIP was about $250k in 1990 and increased to $350k in the mid 1990's; in 2004 it was reduced to $150k and is currently at $185k. x. It was mentioned that the school district is currently considering a levy referendum at the November 2011 election. This is a change from the previous thought that would be approaching voters in 2012 or 2013. xi. The city has relied on excess cash reserves to"plug"various budget gaps or fund various capital improvements to lower bond costs to maintain services at current levels. xii. Parks and recreation would work with other departments within the city to maximize the improvements of the master plan. 3. Review Commission Recommendation and Council Authorization. o At the January 10, 2011 City Council meeting, the request was made to approve $50k in funding for a statistically valid survey and additional community outreach for the master plan. The council did approve $50k budget to be taken from communications, not PIP. The council tabled the vote on approving the survey until the January 24, 2011 meeting. Two proposals (Leisure Vision and Green Play) were considered for conducting the survey. Leisure Vision is the preferred vendor to conduct the survey. The benefits of their proposal are: 1. Nationwide benchmarking for our results compared to those in similar cities 2. 95% accuracy in predicting the outcome of a referendum based on their recommendation 3. They do have the ability to gather information from homes that use English as a second language. 4. They will guarantee 600 responses— 125 each from four different quadrants of the city • The Organizing Team will need to determine what is to be asked in the survey. Leisure Vision has provided some sample surveys and has a base for us to work from, but we will need to modify it slightly to match our situation. • Leisure Vision will work with Cobalt (currently providing a Roseville Citizen satisfaction survey) to be sure that residents do not receive both surveys. 4. Continued Discussion of Master Plan Projects and Priorities • The question was asked about how the different funding amounts are broken down. What makes up the $8M option vs the $40M option? • The $40M option does include land acquisition and a trust fund to maintain the existing system and future improvements. • The Organizing Team will need to decide how each option is to be broken down and what other types of projects it may create that require additional funding. • After much discussion, Jeff Evenson offered to come up with a city map identifying the projects of each funding option with cost estimates and where they will take place within the city. • The map would give us a tangible piece to bring to the community of what they will get for each funding level.