Laserfiche WebLink
expectations of the community – as verified by <br />Imagine Roseville 2025 <br />Mr. Johnson thanked the City Council for the $25,000 <br />increase in the 2007 budget; however, he noted that with <br />the 38.5% decrease in the OVAL budget, they were left <br />with a deficit. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson opined that he had accepted the challenge of <br />Councilmember Pust to identify revenue sources, and <br />provided his interpretation of three (3) alternatives for <br />additional funding: <br />a) Addition of an endowment fund for park <br />improvements similar to the City’s Pavement <br />Management Plan (PMP) with interest on reserved <br />funds being available for the department; <br />b) Bond referendum to be used for parks. Mr. Johnson <br />provided his calculations on the impact of such a <br />referendum on homeowners on an annual basis. Mr. <br />Johnson sought clarification from staff and the City <br />Council as to whether bond funds could be used for <br />increased staff for the department, or if only for capital <br />improvement projects. <br />c) Tax Levy increase taxes. Again, Mr. Johnson <br />provided his calculations on the impact to the average <br />taxpayer on a monthly and annual basis. Mr. Johnson <br />noted the emotional support expressed by residents in <br />their recent comments during the <br />Imagine Roseville 2025 <br />process. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson repeatedly recognized the difficult balance <br />required and challenges of the City Council in meeting <br />every department’s needs; however, he also recognized <br />the apparent public support and ownership for the City’s <br />park system and their desire for it to improve and not <br />deteriorate. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson, from a business perspective, opined that the <br />current equipment was about to compromise the integrity <br />of the business; and asked that the department’s capital <br /> <br />