My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2017_0918
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2017
>
CC_Minutes_2017_0918
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/19/2017 10:43:54 AM
Creation date
10/19/2017 10:43:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/18/2017
Meeting Type
Work Session
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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 Meeting <br /> Monday, September 18, 2017 <br /> Page 6 <br /> General Fund, but otherwise questioned the value in spending time for reviewing <br /> either function. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of Councilmember Willmus' sugges- <br /> tion, opining that the city was investing in the License Center and counting on <br /> considerable funds collected with the Passport function; and should ensure and <br /> consider a revenue-minded approach when investing in staff and new facilities to <br /> guarantee its stability. Therefore, Councilmember Laliberte stated that she was <br /> open to having the commission look at the License Center from that perspective. <br /> However, Councilmember Laliberte stated that while she wasn't sure if Coun- <br /> cilmember Willmus meant that as part of the commission's "other duties as as- <br /> signed"to include the IT function, she saw a review of either function as a service <br /> the City Council owed to the community in efforts to communicate and be trans- <br /> parent about any security risks. Councilmember Laliberte opined that she would <br /> prefer the review be performed by the commission versus the public contacting <br /> individual city staff. <br /> Mayor Roe clarified that the commission was tasked with City Council assigned <br /> duties, and such a review of either of those functions would not completely fall <br /> under the Finance Commission's purview as currently set up. Mayor Roe opined <br /> that neither IT practices nor data security involved a financial nexus, and while <br /> obviously involving some risk, it probably shouldn't lend itself to a public discus- <br /> sion either, given the actual security involved with data and networks. Specific to <br /> the License Center, from the aspect of looking at ways to improve their finances, <br /> Mayor Roe stated that he could agree to that, but not the operational aspect that <br /> didn't seem under their purview. Given tonight's discussion, Mayor Roe noted <br /> that there appeared to be two sets of different opinions, resulting in no clear guid- <br /> ance for the commission at this time. <br /> Chair Schroeder reiterated the City Council direction for proposed revisions for <br /> Attachment B to include adding Items G (with further wordsmithing) and H "Oth- <br /> er Duties as Assigned" for the next iteration. <br /> Review of Cash Carryover Fund & Cash Reserve Summary Sheet(Attachment C) <br /> Commissioner Zeller provided a recap of the six funds, their specific goals, and <br /> comparative year-end balances. <br /> Councilmember McGehee questioned the Community Development Fund and <br /> how their funds fit into this picture since they provided for their own funding and <br /> reserves through fees. <br /> Mayor Roe agreed that there wasn't a lot of discretion in spending of those re- <br /> serves. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.