Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Regular Meeting - 07/11/05 <br />Minutes - Page 21 <br /> <br />Councilmember Schroeder addressed a philosophical difference <br />he and City Manager Beets had related to taxes and additional <br />revenues from fees to determine the total price of government for <br />companson purposes. <br /> <br />City Manager Beets recognized that philosophical difference, <br />opining that while taxes make up a huge part of the City's <br />revenue, the amount taken in from fee revenue, didn't <br />appreciably change the bottom line or cost of government. <br /> <br />Acting Mayor Maschka note that housing cost comparisons <br />would move proportionally for homes of higher value; and could <br />be attributed to the City's commercial tax base. City Manager <br />Beets concurred. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schroeder noted that the commercial tax base <br />impact was an important source of information to have and that it <br />kept the overall tax base lower; but he expressed the need for <br />further justification based on the needs and services provided by <br />the City. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schroeder complimented City Manager Beets <br />and staff on the table comparing various tax levy projections. <br /> <br />City Manager Beets reviewed and outlined new obligations in <br />tax supported programs that were basically non-negotiable, and <br />proposed budget additions or reductions in tax supported <br />programs. <br /> <br />Discussion included the City's overall pay scale compared to <br />other applicable cities and its status of 5% below average; <br />Primary Elections in 2006; healthcare premium increases; Police <br />Department recordkeeping software and maintenance; additional <br />Police dispatch costs (prior to consolidation); and the proposed <br />budget related to Council priorities. <br /> <br />City Manager Beets reviewed his fee-based recommendations <br />included lining of sewer lines under the Utility program (to be <br />paid for with sewer fees); reduced operating expenditures in the <br />Community Development Department to better match estimated <br />revenues; increase in Information Technology staff (paid for with <br />