Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />TO: MEMBERS OF THE ROSEVILLE CITY COUNCIL <br /> <br />FROM: AMY IHLAN <br /> <br />SUBJECT: REVIEW OF "NEW OBLIGATIONS" FOR BUDGETING <br />PROCESS <br /> <br />DATE: SEPTEMBER 26, 2005 <br /> <br />As part of the budgeting process, I would W<e to review the "new obligations" listed on the budget <br />spreadsheet to try to identify which items are new spending, and which represent increased costs of <br />existing obligations. <br /> <br />I would W<e to ask the following questions for each listed "new obligation": <br /> <br />1. Is the item new spending, or an increased cost of an existing budget obligation? <br />2. Is it a one-time expense, or an ongoing obligation? <br />3. Do we need to fund the item in 200G? (Is deferral possible? What are the consequences or <br />costs of deferring?) <br />4. Do we need to raise the tax levy to pay for the item? (Are there other budget items that <br />could be cut? Are there available non-levy sources? Would it be appropriate to draw on <br />reserves on a one-time basis? Or some combination of these?) <br /> <br />I would also W<e staff to explain wherl,er "contingency funds" are included as part of the proposed <br />budget, and in what amount. <br />