My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2013_0819
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2013
>
CC_Minutes_2013_0819
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/9/2013 10:12:48 AM
Creation date
9/9/2013 10:12:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/19/2013
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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,August 19,2013 <br /> Page 23 <br /> Councilmembers Laliberte and Etten spoke enthusiastically about such models <br /> from which to work in addition to this draft. <br /> Councilmember Etten opined that this would provide an option versus operating <br /> in a vacuum; even though expressing his appreciation for the draft created by <br /> Mayor Roe and trigger mechanisms. Councilmember Etten opined that his intent <br /> was to see if there were other options that may be more successful. <br /> Mayor Roe noted that this was the first discussion and that it needed to continue. <br /> Mayor Roe advised that his intent was to determine if there was consensus by the <br /> body to continue looking at a version of this draft along these lines or not; or con- <br /> sideration by the majority to consider such a draft policy. If that consensus had <br /> not been evident, Mayor Roe noted that then that the discussion need go no fur- <br /> ther. <br /> McGehee moved, Roe seconded, that the City Council continue to consider a <br /> Compensation Policy based on the Roe draft dated August 19, 2013; with addi- <br /> tional input as requested by Councilmembers. <br /> Public Comment <br /> Gary Grefenberg, 91 Mid Oaks Lane <br /> Mr. Grefenberg stated that this proposed policy bothered him as it made the as- <br /> sumption that those ten or eleven other cities were actually Roseville's peers. Mr. <br /> Grefenberg opined that he didn't see that, as those cities were mostly larger geo- <br /> graphically or in population, few were inner ring suburbs, and few compared to <br /> Roseville's senior population, nor did they consider the ability of taxpayers to pay <br /> higher wages, since those peer communities had a higher average household in- <br /> come than Roseville did. Mr. Grefenberg opined that if Roseville employees <br /> wanted to receive wages comparable with those in the City of Edina, they go to <br /> the City of Edina for their employment. From his perspective, Mr. Grefenberg <br /> opined that the City of Roseville's higher proportion of limited income taxpayers <br /> could not afford to pay wages similar to Edina; and questioned if Roseville faced <br /> similar challenges to Woodbury or Maple Grove. Mr. Grefenberg opined that the <br /> question remained open as to the identity of Roseville's peer communities. Mr. <br /> Grefenberg opined that he would feel more comfortable in comparing with the <br /> Cities of Maplewood, New Brighton and Little Canada, all communities with <br /> comparable equivalencies and abilities to pay. <br /> Mr. Grefenberg further questioned whether the study was actually fair and impar- <br /> tial, or provided an equitable solution, since Roseville taxpayers had less ability to <br /> pay than the majority of other communities, noting that the average household in- <br /> come from 2000 to 2010 had shrunk, but the City of Roseville's levy budget had <br /> increased by 32.6%. While property taxes have increased by that significant per- <br /> centage, Mr. Grefenberg advised that his wages had only increased by 6%. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.