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 each fund has an upper and lower excess threshold and if funds <br />that are swept out are those that are over the upper threshold amount then there should not be <br />instability or volatility in the fund because there is still an excess in the fund. <br />Finance Director Miller asked where the ongoing funding for the capital needs for these funds <br />would come from. Part of the reason for segregating some of these funds was for accountability. <br />If the department knows they will need funds and they know that the decision to make the capital <br />investment is so critical they do not want there to be a choice in doing it or not, they can have the <br />item already funded. <br />Commissioner McRoberts asked why the City would prioritize capital items if there were <br />different capital funds for each department. <br />Chair Schroeder stated the Commission was in agreement to separate the capital from the <br />operating. <br />Commissioner Bachhuber stated departments would need to trust in the prioritization and the <br />work the City does on the CIP to know that these capital needs would be done appropriately. He <br />suggested that the amount that each department contributes to the CIP is based on what their CIP <br />needs and would be part of the departments budgeted expenditures. Then anything that is in <br />excess of the target surplus could be swept into a cash fund. <br />Finance Director Miller asked what would happen if the fund falls below the target range. <br />Commissioner McRoberts stated this would occur through budgeting. If a department falls <br />below the target levels then they should not be spending as much. <br />Finance Director Miller stated if the City lowers budgets and departments fall below the target <br />reserves then the City would have less flexibility to respond to unforeseen expenditures that may <br />arise. <br />Chair Schroeder clarified the Commission would recommend taking the capital out of these <br />funds and have it in its own separate CIP fund. <br />Commissioner McRoberts stated if the funds in the CIP fund are greater than what is needed to <br />fund the 10-year CIP then the excess funds should be moved out. <br />Commissioner Hodder asked where public safety capital and operational needs would be found. <br />Finance Director Miller stated the operational needs are in the general fund and both police and <br />fire have separately managed capital equipment replacement funds. <br />Commissioner Zeller suggested removing the prioritization from the discussion at this time. <br />Separating the CIP from the operations would be a first step in establishing a cash carry over <br />fund. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.