My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0516
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0516
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/27/2016 9:08:10 AM
Creation date
5/25/2016 8:09:32 AM
Metadata
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 Meetang <br />Monday, May 16, 2016 <br />Page 23 <br />Mayor Roe, supported by Councilmember Willmus, asked that staff provide an- <br />other opportunity for City Council feedback prior to the City Manager- <br />recommended budget presentation for staff to better determine how to allocate re- <br />sources based on that feedback, even if it meant a range of those costs. <br />City Manager Trudgeon agreed to provide hat look, suggesting June for that ini- <br />tial preliininary loolc at numbers or a range. <br />At that time, Mayor Roe also asked for another update on the status of tax appeals <br />with Ramsey County; any legislative impacts or updated legislation; single-family <br />and commercial market value calculations projected; and any other levy adjust- <br />ments or significant impacts to taxpayers for 2017. <br />Budget Response Card <br />City Manager Trudgeon sought feedback on the draft budget response card pre- <br />pared by staff, noting a decision was needed for the July/August newsletter dead- <br />line fast approaching. <br />Councilmembers Laliberte and McGehee stated they definitely wanted to use this <br />method again. <br />Councilmember McGehee provided several suggestions based on comments she'd <br />taken from residents last year: put "debt service" and "capital replacement" in <br />separate categories to enhance transparency issues; include the city's phone num- <br />ber on the card; and emphasizing emailing more lengthy comments. <br />Discussion ensued regarding debt service and capital; with a lacic of consensus on <br />how much information was too much or not enough. <br />Councilmember Etten questioned how to effectively separate categories without <br />making the document too large; and suggested a footnote stating what each cate- <br />gory included; or a percentage of the total budget and reflection of taxes paid and <br />responses based on that; or some other method. <br />Mayor Roe suggested simply separating each service into "operating" and "capi- <br />tal." <br />Councilmember Laliberte stated she didn't want to take debt service and add it to <br />Public Works without knowing the value of the debt and operating for each cate- <br />gory without having a total column. Councilmember Laliberte questioned how to <br />make it clear what was part of the budget or levy, or what each referred to. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.