My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2018_0326
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2018
>
CC_Minutes_2018_0326
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/18/2018 2:35:30 PM
Creation date
4/18/2018 2:35:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
3/26/2018
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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, March 26, 2018 <br /> Page 17 <br /> Councilmember Laliberte expressed agreement that prioritizing is important. The <br /> challenge is it is easy to find a way to put something under a 1 or a 2. The harder <br /> category is "wants," things the Council would like to do, but are not mandated, <br /> are not for health and safety, and are not an existing asset. From time to time, <br /> there are things that fall into that category. She asked for the FC's perspective on <br /> something like a fiscal note that gets attached to a new project. It would all tie <br /> back to the decision that has been made and how it affects the City in the future. <br /> She noted she expects the City Manager to work with department heads to think <br /> of the City as one department. <br /> Chair Schroeder commented this policy of ranking is a start. As to wants rather <br /> than needs, there might be thought towards how this works. The FC has not yet <br /> discussed that. She also noted that when everything is categorized, it provides <br /> more information to do the balancing. It is a process of giving the Council more <br /> ways to look at the information and then putting a possible procedure in place that <br /> gives comfort to people when things pop up. <br /> Commissioner McRoberts summarized that the Council seems to agree in princi- <br /> ple,but it needs a better list. <br /> The Council concurred with the summary. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte also noted that another factor is the Council wants to <br /> take care of efficiency opportunities when they arise. <br /> Mayor Roe commented that 3 and 4 can fall into the "wants" category, but these <br /> categories mix 2 concepts together, and the Council needs to figure out existing <br /> things and new things through a lens of priority that could perhaps apply to both <br /> new and existing things, for example, a new proposal can be rated as a 1, whereas <br /> something else might come forward and it is a 3, and the City does not have its 1 s <br /> taken care of first. <br /> Chair Schroeder noted that something new can still be a 1. <br /> Mayor Roe concurred. <br /> Councilmember Etten agreed a procedure in place or a framework to look at vari- <br /> ous proposals will be helpful. In terms of categorization, the item cannot be <br /> abandoned it. If it is a 4, it cannot remain a 4 forever. A procedure would be a <br /> good starting point for how to consider needs and wants. <br /> Mayor Roe commented there are certain things replaced on a schedule, in order to <br /> avoid higher costs down the road. Those decision-making processes might help <br /> what those categories should be. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.