My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2011_1212
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2011
>
CC_Minutes_2011_1212
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2012 9:01:28 AM
Creation date
1/25/2012 9:01:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
12/12/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday, December 12,2011 <br /> Page 13 <br /> $30,000 for General Fund's portion for Asset Management Software <br /> City Manager Malinen clarified with Public Works Director Dwayne Schwartz <br /> that the actual cost for the General Fund's portion would be approximately <br /> $15,000. <br /> McGehee moved, Johnson seconded, approval of asset management software in <br /> the amount of$15,000 be added to the 2012 budget, but not the 2012 levy, as a <br /> one-time General Fund expenditure. <br /> At the request of Mayor Roe, Councilmember McGehee expressed her willing- <br /> ness to discuss the source of funds, whether from the tax levy or reserves. <br /> Mayor Roe noted that funding was available in the proposed CIP program for CIP <br /> purposes, including the asset management software tool. <br /> Roll Call <br /> Ayes: Johnson; Willmus; McGehee; Pust; and Roe. <br /> Nays: None. <br /> $220,000 to provide for cost-of-living-adjustments (COLA) for all employees <br /> McGehee moved, Roe seconded, approval of increasing the 2012 budget to pro- <br /> vide COLA for City employees in the amount of$220,000. <br /> At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen advised that non-represented <br /> employees received 0% COLA in 2010, and 1% in 2011; with those having union <br /> contracts receiving different amounts. <br /> As discussion ensued regarding the impacts to the proposed levy increase, Coun- <br /> cilmember Johnson expressed his strong concern that, in lieu of upcoming discus- <br /> sions related to other increases proposed for 2012, this portion of additional costs <br /> remain around 1%. Therefore, Councilmember Johnson stated that he was not go- <br /> ing to support COLA or any further increase in the proposed 2012 levy that would <br /> further increase the levy amount. <br /> Councilmember Willmus stated that his target was also to not exceed a 1% levy <br /> increase; and further stated that he was not supportive of increased through addi- <br /> tion of COLA or the PIP. <br /> Councilmember Johnson advised that he still wanted to further discuss the PIP. <br /> Councilmember McGehee stated that, of the things this City Council has chosen <br /> to burden its citizens with at this time, the levy was the least of their worries, giv- <br /> en the significant increase proposed in utility rates. Councilmember McGehee <br /> proceeded to breakdown those proposed costs as stated at previous meetings; and <br /> reiterated her disappointment in not going to the public with these increases other <br /> than with the public hearing held at the December 5, 2011 meeting. Councilmem- <br /> ber McGehee stated that she didn't feel bad about giving staff a 2% COLA this <br /> year, opining that they hadn't been very well treated since their health care <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.