My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2012_0910
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2012
>
CC_Minutes_2012_0910
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/25/2012 1:11:04 PM
Creation date
9/25/2012 1:11:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/10/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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, September 10, 2012 <br /> Page 8 <br /> At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Miller clarified the five (5) En- <br /> terprise Funds: Golf Course, Recycling, Sewer, Water, and Sanitary Sewer. <br /> At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mayor Roe and Finance Director <br /> Miller clarified that the additional $185,000 CIP recommendation would in- <br /> crease the projected Preliminary, not-to-exceed 2013 levy increase from 14.5% <br /> to 15.8%. <br /> Mayor Roe reiterated that, between tonight and the final adoption in December, <br /> the City Council would have several opportunities to review and adjust the <br /> Levy; as well as to be aware of additional assumptions and more specific infor- <br /> mation moving forward (e.g. confirmation on employee health care costs). <br /> However, Mayor Roe noted that tonight's action established a ceiling above <br /> which the City Council was not legally allowed to increase. <br /> Councilmember McGehee asked for additional background research by staff as <br /> follows: <br /> 1) What are the typical vehicle replacement milestones or standards of <br /> other metropolitan for public works and police vehicles; <br /> 2) How do other cities handle their street payments when repairing or re- <br /> placing them (e.g. Roseville assesses 25% of street costs to residents, <br /> but what do commercial properties pay?). Councilmember McGehee <br /> referenced the City of Edina that charges all properties 100%. Coun- <br /> cilmember McGehee asked for a review of those other rates as well. <br /> 3) Given the amount of infrastructure installed in the Twin Lakes area to- <br /> date, would there be any gain if the City closed out that tax increment <br /> financing (TIF) District earlier to create an additional funding source <br /> to be used for other expenses. <br /> Mayor Roe noted, specific to the TIF District, any remaining funds needed to be <br /> balanced with additional infrastructure needs in that area that remain pending as <br /> development moved forward. Mayor Roe clarified that the District had a lim- <br /> ited term, and that any development needed to occur within that certain time <br /> frame. <br /> Councilmember McGehee stated that Roseville citizens had already paid a lot of <br /> money into infrastructure in the Twin Lakes area. Plans to have that money or <br /> future money repaid by the faux impact fee had failed and perhaps additional <br /> needs should be handled directly by the development needing the service. <br /> In noting the additional budget discussion necessary going forward, Coun- <br /> cilmember Willmus asked that a future meeting be dedicated to those discus- <br /> sions, without significant other agenda items to review. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.