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 Bachhuber stated the next discussion points would be what are the individual <br />limits in each of the funds and what would the limit be for the sweep fund. <br />Commissioner McRoberts suggested the sweep fund have a target level that would be sufficient <br />to be able to fund those areas that fall below their targets and if this account gets above the target <br />there should be a formal review. <br />Chair Schroeder clarified this concept would budget to the target low for each fund and <br />everything above that would be moved to the cash carry forward fund. The cash carry forward <br />fund would also have a target range and if the fund goes above this amount the City would have <br />a formal review and discussion on what the funds should be used for and the remaining funds <br />would be used to keep the funds at the target levels. She asked Finance Director Miller what the <br />target range would have to be for the cash carry forward fund in order to support the City if a <br />need were to arise. The Commission would like to know how these policy changes would <br />impact the funds. <br />Discussion On Utility Infrastructure Replacement Funding Strategies <br />Chair Schroeder stated the Commission had reviewed this previously and had unanimously <br />agreed that the utility infrastructure replacement funding should not be included in property <br />taxes. <br />Commissioner Murray asked if there had been any changes since the Commission had reviewed <br />this item. <br />Finance Director Miller stated there were no changes. The impact for the average household <br />may not be significant but other property types would be impacted significantly more. <br />Commissioner McRoberts stated the value of the infrastructure does not change with the price of <br />the house. <br />Commissioner Harold moved, Seconded by Commission McRoberts to recommend the City not <br />change the way the rates are charged for the utility infrastructure funding. The motion carried <br />unanimously. <br />Identify Discussion Items for the Future Meeting (Feb. 13, Mar. 13, April 10) <br />Chair Schroeder stated the next agenda would include continued discussions on the cash carry <br />forward fund, the draft meeting calendar and meeting topics and review and discussion of items <br />the Commission would like to present to the City Council. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.