My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2014_0210
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2014
>
CC_Minutes_2014_0210
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/24/2014 1:18:46 PM
Creation date
2/26/2014 2:30:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
2/10/2014
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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, February 10, 2014 <br /> Page 30 <br /> City Manager Trudgeon questioned if the intent was to have peer communities <br /> across the board for comparison purposes, or to recognize the differences among <br /> those peer communities. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte responded that there was a need to recognize the differ- <br /> ences, but regarding financial matters, the City Council needed to settle on a <br /> group of cities and live with the results of those peer comparisons. <br /> Mayor Roe noted that there appeared to be no majority for Item "F" by the body <br /> at this time. <br /> Mayor Roe opined that he was amenable to leaving Item "G" in, but was willing <br /> to give up Item"H" as it was implicit. <br /> Councilmembers Willmus and Etten concurred with Mayor Roe. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte noted that it had been stricken from the original. <br /> In summary, Mayor Roe clarified that the green language remained for Item "A," <br /> had been modified as noted above for Item "C," Item `B" remained as is; green <br /> language was to be used for Item "D," the original Item "E" was stricken, and the <br /> new Item E (green print) was approved by consensus. <br /> Councilmember McGehee sought more discussion on the new Item "E," opining <br /> that this was too detailed for the commission, and opined that the commission <br /> should be asked to make recommendations concerning the timeline for budgets <br /> and leave it at that. <br /> Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of leaving it as simple as that, opining <br /> that the added language provide the commission the ability to get into more detail <br /> if they chose to do so as a group. <br /> Councilmember McGehee opined that if it was left broad, the commission could <br /> do as they saw fit. <br /> Councilmember Etten opined that the first line encapsulated the goal without <br /> needing any more specificity. <br /> Mayor Roe spoke in support of keeping the language for receiving public input. <br /> Councilmember Etten opined that this would be part of the process. <br /> Mayor Roe, with consensus of the body, suggested language revision for new <br /> Item "E" as follows: "Review and recommend the annual timeline and process for <br /> creating City budgets;" and striking the remaining language. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.