CC_Minutes_2012_0827 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,August 27,2012 Page 14 startling, since the City of Duluth was proposing less than 2%; and while Duluth and Roseville were completely different cities, this presented a pretty stark dif- ference. Recognizing the City had been under-investing in its infrastructure for a number of years and thus keeping the Levy down, Ms. Schaffer asked if the peer cities used for comparison purposes at populations of 10,000 or more was the correct peer group to use. Ms. Schaffer noted that this group included many relatively small communities with relatively few taxpayers or a similar commercial tax base. Ms. Schaffer opined that it would be natural for the City of Roseville, when compared to that peer group, to always look good; and wondered if the comparison would be better informed if compared to other municipalities like Roseville(e.g. age of housing and infrastructure mix)rather than just by popula- tion. Ms. Schaffer opined that this comparison based on population alone seemed to have a weakness, while using other criteria may prove that Roseville is not that far below that peer group as was thought, and may actually meet or exceed that average in 2013. Ms. Schaffer recognized that determining who was in a particular peer group was a huge decision; however, she opined that it did certainly affect comparisons. Noting that other units of government, in a deflationary environment, had re- fused to increase their contracts, Ms. Schaffer questioned if the City of Rose- ville required their vendors across the board to continue to operate from that perspective. Ms. Schaffer opined that the inflationary increases projected, while interest rates continued to deflate or remain stagnant, didn't add up. Ms. Schaffer recommended that the City do more integrated decision-making beyond the work done on the CIP program; and recognizing that the Park Re- newal Program and new Fire Station were in process. Ms. Schaffer questioned if all areas of the City and all departments were advocating at their full poten- tial; and suggested using integrated views and trade-offs needed with capital needs; and prioritizing those needs accordingly. Ms. Schaffer opined that the her perception was that each need seemed to stand on its own when in reality they competed with each other; and priorities for the overall system would be more prudent. In conclusion, Ms. Schaffer stated that she was taken aback by the size of the proposed tax increase; and concerned with the current decision-making process- es. Vivian Ramalingam,2181 Acorn Road Ms. Ramalingam concurred with the last few statements made by Ms. Schaffer about the apparent lack of coordination between various elements and expendi- tures. Ms. Ramalingam opined that it was reasonable to think that these deci- sions were not under the purview of only one person, the City Manager. Ms.