CC_Minutes_2011_1212 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, December 12, 2011 Page 15 Ayes: Johnson; McGehee; Pust; and Roe. Nays: None. Abstentions: Willmus Motion carried. At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Miller advised that, on the non-tax-supported side, this action would create an additional $25,000. Mayor Roe noted, on the last page of Attachment E (page 37 of the packet), the $88,201 set aside for contingency; and during his tenure, there had not previously been an amount included for contingency, and asked staff's rationale for including it this year. Councilmember Pust noted another chart distributed in the past by City Manager Malinen showing a contingency amount of only $50,000; and questioned which was accurate. At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen advised that the difference was before and after the market value homestead credit (MVHC) split between the CIP and tax levy. Finance Director Miller advised that, when the City Council took action to reset the levy to 1%, they essentially wiped out any contingency. $15,000 to accommodate higher than expected fuel prices No action. $30,000 to conduct an employee compensation and comparison study No action. Recess Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 8:08 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 8:17 p.m. At the request of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miller was prepared to provide re- vised numbers. Councilmember Pust questioned proposed 2013 budget numbers, with Mr. Miller advising that they represented inflationary and other assumptions currently avail- able for those projections; and confirmed that those numbers would be revisited before 2013. Councilmember Johnson stated that, while the currently proposed 2013 budget indicated a 2% increase in the draft resolution, he was certainly not accepting that this was an accurate representation at this time, but noted that it was the point of a biennial budget to more accurately forecast future expenditures and revenue. Mr. Miller concurred with Councilmember Johnson's comments; opining that it was simply a tentative plan for planning purposes; and that staff would return to the City Council in mid-2012 for a course correction, clarifying that the City Council still needed to adopt a 2013 levy and budget in 2012.