My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016_1116_FC_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Finance Commission
>
Packet
>
2016_1116_FC_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/28/2016 11:44:12 AM
Creation date
11/28/2016 11:43:16 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
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 />October 11, 2016 – Draft Minutes <br />Page 6 of 8 <br /> <br />documents prepared. Other cities are preparing some of these documents because this was 223 <br />something that their City Councils had requested. If there are tax payer dollars and resources 224 <br />used, he would like to ensure that it is something that the City Council wants. 225 <br /> 226 <br />Chair Schroeder stated this would be helpful to the Council because it would be in writing and 227 <br />they would have time to review it and also it would provide greater transparency for the City. 228 <br />The information would be helpful for the Finance Commission as well when looking at the CIP. 229 <br /> 230 <br />Commissioner Hodder stated annually may be too much. 231 <br /> 232 <br />Commissioner Bachhuber stated if the City Council would not find this useful then it would not 233 <br />make sense to have this done. 234 <br /> 235 <br />Chair Schroeder suggested setting up a format of what this could look like and ask for input from 236 <br />the Council. If they are not interested, then it would be something the Commission would not 237 <br />work on. 238 <br /> 239 <br />Commissioner Zeller stated the justifications are being done and reviewed at the time the 240 <br />Department is proposing to move forward with a project or asset replacement. He clarified Chair 241 <br />Schroeder is suggesting these justifications be done a year earlier than what they are being done. 242 <br /> 243 <br />Chair Schroeder stated she would put together samples and send an email to the City Council and 244 <br />request guidance prior to moving forward. 245 <br /> 246 <br /> 247 <br />Review Investment Policy & Consider Performance Benchmarking 248 <br /> 249 <br />Commissioner Zeller stated the Commission had reviewed this Policy last year. 250 <br /> 251 <br />Finance Director Miller stated this Policy had been reviewed in 2014 and 2015. 252 <br /> 253 <br />Commissioner Bachhuber asked what the size was for the City’s investment portfolio. 254 <br /> 255 <br />Finance Director Miller stated in fluctuations between $35-$40 million. This discussion was 256 <br />brought up because the Commission had asked the City Council if they should review the 257 <br />investment portfolio and the performance of the portfolio and determine if this was meeting 258 <br />performance benchmarks. 259 <br /> 260 <br />Commissioner Bachhuber asked if the City would get a better return on their portfolio if they 261 <br />paid an outside source to manage it form them. 262 <br /> 263 <br />Finance Director Miller stated there are some cities that use professional investment companies 264 <br />but these cities typically have larger portfolios. From his experience this is something that is the 265 <br />Finance Director’s responsibility. He is not sure that the City’s portfolio would be large enough 266 <br />to capture enough return to cover the additional cost. 267 <br />Item 3: Attachment A
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.