CC_Minutes_2011_1212 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, December 12,2011 Page 11 parks programming in Phase I of the Master Plan Implementation), at approxi- mately $30,000 in additional spending. Mayor Roe noted that Attachment I in the packet provided additional detail on those costs coming on line. Mayor Roe further noted that the preliminary levy and budget at 4% did not include the $118,000 in additional savings from poten- tial employee health care costs initially included in the City Manager- recommended budget; and asked Mr. Miller what a proposed levy increase would be with that further reduction, and prior to any additional deliberations tonight. Mr. Miller advised that this would represent an approximate $1% levy increase, reduced from the 1.8% levy amount proposed in the budget at$14,847,544. Mayor Roe confirmed with Mr. Miller that this reduction in the 2012 levy would be consistent on the 2012 budget; and with the $118,000 in additional reductions, the budget became $41,295,004; with the tax-supported portion dropping by $118,000 as well, to become $19,287,810. At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Mil- ler confirmed that the 2013 budget would also be reduced accordingly. Mayor Roe clarified that, without any further City Council action, the proposed tax levy detailed in Attachment A of the agenda packet would provide for a tax levy of$14,847,544, with the debt service would remain the same. In Resolution C, Mayor Roe noted that the entire City budget proposed for 2012 —both tax and fee supported — would be reduced from $41,413,004 to $41,295,004. However, Mayor Roe noted the need for Council consideration of those items detailed on pages 1 and 2 of the RCA dated December 12, 2011 (lines 27 — 39); and suggest- ed that each item be considered under individual motions. In general, Councilmember Pust spoke in support of the Park Improvement Pro- gram (PIP) being incorporated into the CIP as an initial discussion point, but not totally supportive at this time; expressed her uncertainty for COLA; didn't see the value in $30,000 to conduct an employee compensation and comparison study; and needed additional information regarding the Asset Management Soft- ware from the marketplace. Councilmember Pust opined that money could be found in existing funds for the software costs. Councilmember Pust noted, from previous discussions and original lists of potential budget cuts, the possibility that anticipated additional fuel costs could be lower and opined that they could be ad- dressed by lowering the proposed contingency fund to avoid additional levy in- creases. Councilmember Pust spoke in support of the $9,500 membership to Metro Cities as a benefit to the City since they were the City's only ears/eyes to the Metropoli- tan Council, on which the City currently didn't have good representation other than through other government entities. While a lot of groups represented city in- terests at the state capitol, some redundantly, Councilmember Pust noted that leg- islators needed to do a better job of representing issues of cities, such as water pu- rification, public transportation and environmental quality controls — all of which this group did.