CC_Minutes_2012_0924 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, September 24, 2012 Page 22 ongoing references had been made to the anticipated future use by the commu- nity of those buildings,parks and their respective improvements. Councilmember Johnson concurred and opined that as the facilities were im- proved and their scopes broadened, the intended purpose to expand their uses and opportunities for the community would be achieved. Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11013 (At- tachment A) entitled, "Resolution Providing for the Competitive Negotiated Sale of$17 Million General Obligation Bonds, Series 2012A;" to finance the completion of a new fire station and continue funding the Park Renewal Pro- gram. Mayor Roe suggested that it would be appropriate at this time for any individual Councilmember to offer amendments by motion at their discretion. Position Statements Councilmember Pust opined that tonight's discussion had already been made several times. As a councilmember elected to make decisions for the entire community, including financial decisions in general, Councilmember Pust noted that she was charged with making those ongoing financial decisions of how to use citizen tax dollars and how much to set the levies to ensure core services were accomplished for those citizens. Councilmember Pust noted that the community trusted those five (5) elected people to tinker with that annually, as part of the day-to-day work of running a budget. Separate from that, Councilmember Pust indicated there was another category of spending money: the debt service work done, and generally speaking, the City Council went to the voters to seek their opinion for long-term investments, such as over a period of twenty (20) years to seek direction beyond the five (5) elected officials. Councilmember Pust noted that this was typical for the City as well as the State for major capital expenditures to go to referendum and ask the community their preference on long-term investments. Councilmember Pust noted that, in this case, the City chose not to do so; and even though the court stated that that option was fine to do, the questioned re- mained as to whether it was the right thing to do or not. Councilmember Pust noted that she had voted against this the first time; and while this was for capital work, not general tinkering, it still represented big dollar amounts and the voters should have been asked. However, Councilmember Pust noted that she was not among the Council majority on that vote, and had lost that argument. Now to- day, Councilmember Pust noted that a lot of things had happened, and the timeframe had been held up, and that the proposed action was not simply to make up that time, but to accelerate the whole thing. Councilmember Pust opined that for those asking her to support this proposal as it was a capital ex-