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 />Staff Recommendation <br />As noted in previous discussions, City Staff has previously recommended that if the Council chooses to <br />create a separate Cash Reserve fund that itbe limited to excess monies that are derived solely from the <br />General Fund. This recommendation is rooted in a number of policy considerations which are cited <br />below. <br />General(Core) vs. Specific-Purpose Functions <br />The General Fund is specifically and statutorily designated for general-purpose functions funded <br />primarily by general-purpose (i.e. property tax) dollars.General Fund functions such as police, fire, <br />streets, administration, etc.,typically lack the ability to recover much if any of their costs through <br />revenue-generating initiatives. In fact, societal norms discourage attempts to generate a fee-for-service <br />for these types of functions. <br />As a result, Organizational responsibility to create sustainable funding (i.e. property taxes) for these <br />functions lies primarily with the City Council. Fortunately, these funding sources are fairly reliable. <br />In contrast, specific-purpose functions such as Parks & Recreation, Communications, Information <br />Technology, and the License Center are associated with program-specificrevenues that have been <br />intentionallyestablished to recover some or all of the related costs. Both the Council and Staff are <br />encouraged to exploreentrepreneurial means to offset costs and minimize any burden on property <br />taxpayers.This entailsa different business model whichcarries less certainty and greater risk from year- <br />to-year because a significant funding source(s) is outside of the City’s direct control. <br />As a result, specific-purpose funds are more likely to experience volatility in cash reserves as investments <br />in opportunities are made, and uncertainties & added risks play out. Systematically removingexcess <br />monies at fiscal year-enddiminishes the City’s ability to adjust the business model in response to <br />changing circumstances. <br />Staff believes that apreferred approach for specific-purpose funds is to monitor financial performance <br />over an extended period of time and where applicable, determine which component of the business model <br />needs adjustment including whether Staff is making sound decisions or fees are set too high. <br />Unrestricted vs. Dedicated Funds <br />As noted earlier, the cash held in the four specific-purpose funds noted above are considered unrestricted <br />in the sense that there are no legally-imposed restrictions. However, the monies associated with these <br />funds have been intentionally dedicated for a specific purpose for several decades or more.That intent <br />should be considered before advocating for a different outcome. <br />For example, Information Technology Fund monies have largely accumulated due to service fee amounts <br />chargedto other agencies that we provide IT Support to. Those agencies are aware that were holding <br />excess funds with the understanding that they willbe used for IT-related functions that directly benefit <br />them.If we re-purpose these funds for non-technology initiatives, it would undermine the very trust <br />those partneringagencies place with the City of Roseville, and we can expect them to question the fee <br />structure that we have in place. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.