CC_Minutes_2016_1205 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, December 5, 2016 Page 17 monies to address ongoing expenses was not a responsible budget process unless something else was removed from the budget to do so. Councilmember Etten stated that he was not supportive of cutting staff pay. Councilmember McGehee seconded what Councilmember Etten stated regarding allocation; and while having no problem allocating reserve funds to the CIP, opined that it had to be levied for and to ensure taking care of ongoing expenses. Councilmember McGehee noted that the City Council needed to levy for those additional and ongoing expenses since they weren't going to go away; and the city needed to be cognizant that unexpected windfalls weren't guaranteed annual- ly. As noted by Councilmember Etten, the actual budget and revenue was pretty close every year, but the CIP continued to be a challenge. Regarding his proposals for the levy, Councilmember Willmus encouraged a sub- stantial allocation to CIP needs with some of the remaining carry forward availa- ble; and as a potential discussion item as part of the next step in the budget pro- cess tonight. Specific to the CIP point made, Councilmember Etten noted that 20% of the levy increase after the first $400,000 of one-time money should be considered by the City Council as a separate issue and not part of the rampant increase in inflation and daily operations of the city. Councilmember Etten noted that this was ad- dressing key things not previously taken care of in past decades and included the $225,000; and represented even less of a levy for extra expenses versus taking care of massive CIP needs. By using this much from reserves, Councilmember Etten noted that the city didn't have another $400,000 — or an $800,000 windfall projected at the end of 2017 to make up for ar justify cutting the levy percentage, and therefore should be put back in the mix for 2018's budget process. If not, Councilmember Etten noted that the city would be starting from a 2.55% hole if it approved that part of the Councilmember Willmus motion; severely limiting what the city could do in 2018 without any other inflationary considerations or other unknown or scheduled needs. Councilmember Etten opined that this did nothing more than defer these problems long-term further down the road versus taking care of CIP needs in the short term. At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon advised that of the $405,000 reserve use proposed in the City Manager-recommended budget, $30,000 was set aside for the transportation plan as part of the comprehensive plan update (a one-time use) with the remaining $375,000 or reserves allotted to plug the deficit. Mr. Trudgeon noted that the reserve funds were not set aside for CIP use. With $225,000 in additional dollars far CIP, Councilmember Etten noted some level was involved in making up that difference — an additional $800,000 versus