Laserfiche WebLink
3 <br />3. Per Capita (1985) Governmental Fund Tv e Ex enditure - See <br />Table "6" <br />These figures exclude amounts expended for public enterprise <br />(e.g. sewer, water, golf, Ice Arena, etc.) expenditures. <br />Roseville has the lowest per capita expenditure of $252.62. <br />The average per capita expenditure for this indicator is <br />nearly double Roseville's level at $481.33, with Eden Prairie <br />the highest at $740.27. <br />4. Per Aousehold <br />This data is provided by the Metro Council. For its "Metro- <br />politan Development and Investment Framework Policy Areas," <br />� the Council has assi ned cities to four <br />g policy areas. Those <br />are: Central Cities (Minneapolis and St. Paul); Fully <br />Developed Areas which include Roseville and most of the first <br />tier suburbs; Developing Areas which include most of the <br />� second and third tier suburbs; and the Freestanding Growth <br />Centers which include such cities as Chaska, Hastings, <br />`""" Stillwater, Waconia, and are located within the rural portion <br />of the seven county metro area. <br />The average household expenditure (1984) for the fully developed <br />cities is $1,333.66 and for the developing cities is $1,946.24. <br />Roseville's per household expenditure is $825.00. Other compari- <br />sons are $1,394.00 for Richfield, and $2,033.00 for Bloomington. <br />5. Another bottom line indicator is the <br />(see Table "7"). Moody's, a national <br />assigned an Aal rating to Roseville. <br />cities with this rating, and only two <br />(the highest). <br />City's credit rating <br />credit rating firm, has <br />There are only four <br />cities with Aaa rating <br />The above indicators provide a clear "snapshot" on how Roseville's <br />financial strenqths compare with other cities of similar size. <br />It is believed the City has not only implemented effective <br />financial controls and policies, but also has been innovative in <br />developing a business approach in financing City services. <br />' "Bureaucratic Buildup" <br />` One concern that citizens generally may have in adding services <br />or positions is that this may be the signal of "empire" or power <br />base building. <br />That is a legitimate concern or observation. The history of <br />government expansion over the past sixty years has been one of <br />growth. No doubt about it. <br />However, we need to look at Roseville's track record to determine <br />if that observation applies. In comparing the staffing level of <br />full time equivalents (FTE) over the past ten years, we see a <br />different story. FTE's are "permanent" full time and the sum <br />total of all regularly scheduled part-time employees. Part-time <br />employees are generally half or three-quarter time positions. <br />