Laserfiche WebLink
1 741 were some vacancy savings, the City relies on these savings to offset the expense of'paying out <br />1 7 5 un used va ca don for tb os e employe es tba t lea ve. His torically, tb e va can cy sa vings an d se veran ce <br />1� 7 6 pay balance each other out <br />1� 7 7 <br />1 7 8 3) How many of these unfilled positions are in the process of being filled - as in, how many have we <br />1 7 done interviews for. StaffResponse: We are in the biringpi-ocess for a replacementpolive officer. <br />All otberpositions are filled. <br />1 f 2 4) If you reallocated these salary savings into any other line item or purpose in the budget, please let <br />me know what that was and how to track it on the budget sheets. StaffRespouse: Not applicable - <br />see above. <br />1� 5 <br />1 86 5) If you were doing the City Manager's budget today, following on the heels of the worst economic <br />1� 7 crisis since the 1930s in this country, how would it look different than the City Manager <br />Recommended Budget presented to the Council on August 11, 2008? StaffResponse: At this time, <br />there would be no change in the Recommended Budget. Altbougb there have been numerous media <br />reports on the collapsing credit markets, stock market declines, and bome foreclosures, it does not <br />appear to have wide Apr ea d impa c t on Ros e ville property owe ers ... at least yet. <br />1� 3 We ba ve o bs erved tba t fore clos ure ra tes in Rose ville are rela tj vely lo w an d significan dy less than <br />1� �')14 most surrounding suburbs. In addition, based on the most recent Census data, we know that <br />1� 5 Roseville bas a significan tly bigber bousebold income than surrounding areas including those tba t <br />1� �,)6 are on fixed incomes. This is not to suggest that Roseville bomeowners aren't being impacted. <br />17 However, based on the data from Ramsey County Assessor's office and the 2009 Preliminary tax <br />1� levy and ra te study, a typical bomeo wner in Rose ville is expected to pay an additional $3. 75 per <br />1� month in 2009 in property taxes and utility fees.combined. <br />200 <br />2 1� 6) What assumptions went into the analysis that resulted in the $90K recommended for increased fuel <br />2 2 and energy costs? I'm trying to understand how much of the new $90K is attributable to the cost of <br />2 gas. Why? Because 2008 saw the highest gas prices we're going to see. They're certainly not <br />2('),1 going to continue to rise through the recession. They may stay flat at high rates, but they aren't <br />2 5 going to increase by another 50%. So - unless we 9 re going to be driving more (which there is no <br />2 6 evidence to support) , we shouldn't be expecting to pay more for gas than we paid in 2008. If you <br />2 7 disagree, F d appreciate hearing why before the meeting so I don't get crossways with anyone. Staff' <br />2 8 Response: Fuel budgets for 2009 are expected to be addressed at a future Council meeting. <br />2 <br />2 1 7) 1 need a breakdown of this $67K. How much is for each component - and why? There isn't an <br />2 1� 1 lection in 2009 - so why do we have to spend more for this item than we spent in a year there was <br />2 1 2 an election? We should see a reduction here, not an increase, so 19m clearly missing something. <br />2 1� 3 Staff 'Response: In an effort to avoid budgetary spikes, the City bas bistorically set aside the same <br />2 1 41 monies in a non-election year as it does during an election year. In this case, the budgetary <br />2 1 5 difference in the offyearis minima1- about $35,000. The City could reduce the 2009 Budget by <br />2 1 6 this amount, but it would then ha ve to increase the budget for 2010 by a corresponding amount. <br />OEM <br />