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 />Commissioner McRoberts stated if a capital expense is being approved then it would be assumed <br />that the operating expense of maintaining that capital is approved and built into the plan. <br />Commissioner Hodder stated from past experience this has not been the case. <br />Commissioner Zeller stated these expenses would eventually have to come into the operating <br />budget if the City wants to maintain their capital investments. <br />Chair Schroeder stated the capital policy does address the concerns about future maintenance of <br />assets. <br />Commissioner Bachhuber stated the CIP plan does look at the capital replacements that are <br />coming up but the City may not be planning for the maintenance on the new capital items. <br />Commissioner Hodder asked how the City would account for investing in renewable <br />technologies that decrease the City’s expenditures over time. <br />Commissioner Murray stated usually these savings are gradual over time. <br />Commissioner Murray clarified the surplus in the IT Fund was partly due to vacant positions. <br />Commissioner McRoberts stated the City should take into account that departments would never <br />be fully staffed and not budget to this amount. <br />Commissioner Zeller suggested taking a pole on of the Commissioners to see if there was <br />support for creating a cash reserve fund. <br />Commissioner Murray stated he would support this in some form but does not want to burden <br />staff with managing this type of fund. <br />Commissioner Bachhuber stated he is not a fan of the cash reserve fund. He does like <br />Commissioner’s Zeller idea of making the operating budgets actual operating budgets and CIP <br />budgets as a separate item. Any surplus on the operating budgets could then be used for tax <br />relief or for capital needs. <br />Commissioner McRoberts stated if the departments do budget to actual operating expenses then <br />there should be some mechanism for when departments have a need to go over their budget such <br />as hiring an additional people in their department. <br />Chair Schroeder stated removing the CIP from all the funds should be done because it is <br />mudding the waters of what they are discussing. It is difficult to discuss a cash reserve fund <br />when there is CIP mixed with it. She does not see the CIP is not an operating budget item. <br />Commissioner Zeller suggested adding two columns to the analysis provided for the <br />Commission’s discussions: actual fund balance at the end of the fiscal year and the capital needs. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.