My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2015_0817
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2015
>
CC_Minutes_2015_0817
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/21/2015 4:29:15 PM
Creation date
9/16/2015 11:08:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/17/2015
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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 17, 2015 <br /> Page 13 <br /> Councilmember Laliberte expressed interest in pursuing this discussion moving <br /> forward. <br /> Councilmember McGehee expressed interest in identifying those assets needing <br /> targeted or enhanced funding that were currently sitting on the books. <br /> Mayor Roe reported that he had shared a draft policy he'd created with the Parks <br /> & Recreation staff, suggesting it may find its way into the hands of the Finance <br /> Commission for further discussion. <br /> Utility Fees <br /> Mayor Roe thanked Commissioner Byrne for her thorough look at this, and her <br /> well-written memorandum defining the four design goals. <br /> As noted from his review of the report Councilmember Etten advised that he <br /> agreed there were no significant changes indicated, with past action taken by the <br /> City Council in adjusting fees to assist some residents with utility fees if appro- <br /> priate. Councilmember Etten sought clarification that the Commission was com- <br /> fortable with inter and intra funding policies currently being used by the City <br /> based on professional expertise of commissioners. <br /> Commissioner Byrne reiterated that she found the practice used by the city in <br /> funding infrastructure to be fair with a fixed base fee for all and very transparent <br /> and to the point in making sure it recovered enough to cover that infrastructure. <br /> Regarding a specific portion of the population needing a subsidy based on the <br /> type of customer or income level, Commissioner Byrne suggested those conversa- <br /> tions were needed on a more targeted basis looking toward a specific program <br /> versus trying to pull fixed costs out. For 2016, Commissioner Byrne reiterated <br /> that it made sense to continue with the course already laid out by staff until the <br /> City Council addresses any subsidy or special circumstance programs with more <br /> specificity. <br /> Councilmember McGehee stated that she agreed with the goals of the rate struc- <br /> ture, but not with its conclusions. Displaying handouts showing her perspective <br /> on the current water utility rate program between 2008 and 2015 base rates, <br /> Councilmember McGehee addressed expectations for those enterprise funds based <br /> on fees to service holders in order to pay for infrastructure. Councilmember <br /> McGehee noted this had been accomplished by various means as the city devel- <br /> oped, but requested during previous discussions, she wanted further discussion as <br /> to whether that infrastructure funding should be accomplished through the levy to <br /> set aside dedicated money similar to the PMP that remained transparent and for a <br /> specific identified purpose, or by bonding for those improvements. Councilmem- <br /> ber McGehee stated that she was not a proponent of the senior discount program, <br /> since while some may need it others took advantage of it who did not need it. If <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.