CC_Minutes_2013_0819 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,August 19,2013 Page 12 that gap was by 2020, without refreshing his memory through further review of his records. In all fairness to Mr. Miller's recollections, Mayor Roe clarified that there was ac- tually no gap until the City Council officially changed its policy. Mayor Roe not- ed that the factors in the current CIP were addressed; but the question was what level of quality for the PMP and pathway system the City Council wanted to maintain in the future and for the long-term. Mayor Roe noted that there was cur- rently no funding for new pathways in the original CIP Task Force recommenda- tion; but that there was no gap unless the City committed to constructing new pathways; and therefore, opined that it wasn't fair to ask Mr. Miller to quantify that gap. Councilmember McGehee opined that of those items, it included the current need for replacing buildings because the City previously chose not to maintain the ex- isting structures. Councilmember McGehee further opined that the City currently had no policy or fund to maintain the buildings, even though they now had a software program to track them; while also making the commitment to install ad- ditional pathways beyond the existing 75 miles, with no fund for repair or mainte- nance. Mayor Roe opined that this was not a true statement; advising that all existing pathways were incorporated into the CIP at this time as well as those planned through the Park Renewal Program, even though those new segments represented a small number of miles compared to the broader Pathway Master Plan. Mayor Roe further noted that the City included pathway and parking lot maintenance un- der annual levy funding. With Councilmember McGehee suggesting further discussion of maintenance ex- pectations of residents for existing assets, Mayor Roe suggested that an addition- al question is how confident the City Council was for continued funding and at what available portion of that funding through Minnesota State Aid (MSA), and whether it would continue to adequately fund the PMP, as those funds were not sustainable, and had actually been reduced in the recent past. In referencing 2013 Budget memorandums from staff dated July 22, 2013, Coun- cilmember Etten identified $20,000 savings for the HRIS acquisition as a one- time item; reduced funding of$80,000 needed in 2014 for Fire Relief Fund obli- gations; and questioned how that money figured into this budget recommendation as well as that targeted for 2013 staff merit pay. Councilmember Etten sought clarification if those dollar amounts were part of these recommendations or where those funds could be identified. Finance Director Miller advised that some of those dollars represented operational savings (e.g. $80,000 decline in Fire Pension obligations in 2014) that served to