My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
EDA_Minutes_2016_08_29
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Economic Development Authority
>
Minutes
>
2016
>
EDA_Minutes_2016_08_29
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2016 3:23:21 PM
Creation date
9/20/2016 3:23:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Economic Development Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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
RHRA Meeting <br />Minutes – Monday, August 29, 2016 <br />Page 16 <br /> <br />bench handout property taxes and impacts as well as monthly impacts to <br />properties for each option. <br /> <br />President Roe noted the maximum allowable REDA levy per State Statute <br />based on city market value for 2017 would be $787,000. <br /> <br />As detailed in the staff report, various options and their levy impacts were <br />outlined: <br />Option 1 Levy = $303,710 <br />Option 2 Levy = $565,585 <br />Option 3 Levy = $636,521 <br />Maximum Levy = $787,000 <br />At the request of Member McGehee, Ms. Collins confirmed that this was a not- <br />to-exceed levy that could be decreased but not increased by year-end final <br />adoption. <br /> <br />However, President Roe noted the REDA always had the option to pass a <br />budget amendment in 2017; but confirmed the levy would have been already <br />set. <br /> <br />REDA Executive Director Trudgeon advised this recommendation from the <br />REDA would go to the City Council on September 12, 2016 at which time the <br />city set its not-to-exceed 2017 levy. <br /> <br />Member McGehee spoke in support of Option 1, opining she liked how duties <br />were mapped out, and noted the comprehensive plan would occupy <br />considerable staff time in 2017. Therefore, Member McGehee questioned how <br />much more could be accomplished with the remaining limited amount of time. <br />Member McGehee noted the broader budget was her consideration, not limited <br />to the REDA preliminary budget; and expressed satisfaction with the <br />accomplishments of the Community Development Department staff, and her <br />desire to not overtax them in 2017. <br /> <br />Member Etten directed several questions to staff on the budget proposal, <br />including reviewing each option, the apparent error in EDA levy and total <br />budgeted expenses of $5,000 and $12,000 respectively in Attachment A <br />(energy efficiency line item). <br /> <br />Ms. Kelsey reviewed Attachment A and corrected line items, noting the <br />expenses equaled income and predicting nothing was left from the operating <br />reserves, and that bottom numbers and totals were accurate. <br /> <br />At the request of Member Etten, Ms. Kelsey confirmed that staff’s <br />recommendation was to transfer reserve funds from the revolving loan <br />program to operating funds until receipt of tax revenue anticipated in July of <br />2017. At the request of President Roe, Ms. Kelsey clarified that once that tax <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.