My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016_0916_FC__Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Finance Commission
>
Packet
>
2016_0916_FC__Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/18/2016 10:54:53 AM
Creation date
10/18/2016 10:54:30 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
Finance Commission Minutes <br />August 10, 2016 – Draft Minutes <br />Page 4 of 8 <br /> <br /> 137 <br />Commissioner Harold stated he would also support scenario 9 with 2/3 of the future Park 138 <br />Dedication fees going towards maintaining the assets the City currently has versus acquiring new 139 <br />assets. 140 <br /> 141 <br />The consensus of the Commission was to recommend scenario 9 for the Park Improvement 142 <br />Program which includes a Park Dedication fees of $113,333.33 in 2017, the repurpose of a tax 143 <br />levy in 2020 for $650,000, a one-time transfer from the Park Dedication Fund for $400,000, and 144 <br />2/3 of future Park Dedication fees into the fund. The Commission would also recommend 145 <br />deferring expenditures due to concerns about the near term level of spending. 146 <br /> 147 <br />Vice Chair Rohloff stated it was difficult to make a recommendation for the Golf Vehicle and 148 <br />Equipment Program because the scenarios assume there would be a new clubhouse and he does 149 <br />not necessarily support this. 150 <br /> 151 <br />Chair Schroeder expressed concerns on where the City would get the $1 million needed for the 152 <br />new clubhouse because the Commission is recommending Park Dedication fees go into the Park 153 <br />Improvement Program and the Task Force is counting on these same funds as a funding source 154 <br />for the new clubhouse. 155 <br /> 156 <br />Commissioner Zeller suggested presenting scenario 1 for the Golf Vehicle and Equipment 157 <br />Program and allow the City Council to determine where the funds would come from. Scenario 1 158 <br />highlights there is no funding mechanism for this capital fund. 159 <br /> 160 <br />Finance Director Miller stated the Council has scenario 1. He asked if the Commission would 161 <br />have a recommendation on what the City should do. 162 <br /> 163 <br />Chair Schroeder stated she would not feel comfortable recommending where the funds should 164 <br />come from. She does not support a new clubhouse at this time because these funds are needed in 165 <br />other areas. 166 <br /> 167 <br />Commissioner Konidena stated it had been brought up at the Task Force meeting that the Golf 168 <br />Course had been profitable in the past and these funds had been used for purposes outside of the 169 <br />Golf Course. 170 <br /> 171 <br />Finance Director Miller stated the Golf Course had been profitable in the past and those funds 172 <br />had been used to support other City programs and services in lieu of raises taxes. 173 <br /> 174 <br />Chair Schroeder stated the Commission had made recommendation to the City Council in 2015 175 <br />and 2016 to look at alternative uses for the Golf Course. The Golf Course may have made 176 <br />money in the past but it is not making a profit at this time. 177 <br /> 178 <br />Commissioner Bachhuber stated the City has been clear that they want to continue operating the 179 <br />site as a golf course and the Commission could continue to recommend the City look at alternate 180 <br />uses or provide the City with sound financial advice to proceed with. The direction the City gave 181
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.