My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2019_0318_CCPacket
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2019
>
2019_0318_CCPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/25/2019 1:50:04 PM
Creation date
4/4/2019 12:43:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
3/8/2019
Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
297
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
Attachment B <br />collaboration. If there are communities that leave the collaboration then the City can either <br />redistribute the costs or downsize the number of employees. . He explained the system that <br />Roseville uses is standardized but the applications are separate. The end users are responsible <br />for the applications. Roseville only ensures that these applications work on the network. <br />Commissioner Zeller stated that it is Roseville’s obligation to fund future pension liabilities for <br />City IT Staff. <br />Continue Discussion on Establishing a Cash Reserve Fund <br />Vice Chair Zeller stated the City Council had asked the Commission to review the concept of a <br />cash reserve fund and to provide recommendations. The City Council also put forth a similar <br />directive to staff to bring a recommendation in conjunction with the City Manager <br />Recommended Budget. He stated these surpluses are the result of recurring overages in the <br />operating budget in recent years. He asked if the problem should be addressed at the source. He <br />stated there had been discussions to use these funds for special projects. He expressed concerns <br />that this would skew the budgeting process to produce excess fund for special projects. The City <br />should not rely on surplus funds. <br />Commissioner McRoberts stated that if a department was continually under spending then that <br />department’s budget should be reviewed so they are not producing a surplus every year. <br />Vice Chair Zeller stated if departments took into account their surplus during the next budgeting <br />cycle then the there would not be the continued surplus year over year. <br />Commissioner Bachhuber stated that if the City is budgeting based on a surplus then there could <br />be large fluctuations in the levy to account for the years that there was not a surplus. <br />Finance Director Miller explained that surpluses were generally the result of vacancies within the <br />City. <br />Commissioner Harold stated one advantage of having the cash reserve fund would be that there <br />is no set designation where the funds would go and this would keep departments from building <br />reserve funds for a future use. He stated all of the operating funds cash reserves that are not <br />legally restricted should be included in the cash reserve fund and not just the general fund. He <br />also stated having flexibility in what these reserve funds could be used for would allow using <br />these funds for the operating budget if needed and not just future initiatives. <br />Commissioner McRoberts asked what the Commission was hoping to address by creating a cash <br />reserve fund. He stated this may need to be defined in order to understand what the reserve fund <br />would accomplish. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.