My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2019_0325
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2019
>
CC_Minutes_2019_0325
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/11/2019 2:59:07 PM
Creation date
4/11/2019 2:59:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
3/25/2019
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday, March 25, 2019 <br /> Page 6 <br /> ways to keep the spirit and idea of what is being talked about in that paragraph in <br /> the policy. <br /> Mayor Roe stated on Attachment A, the example fiscal note, on the expenditures <br /> side of things on page 7 of 9, is the depreciation category intended to be sort of a <br /> capital set-aside amount the City wants to be sure to program in as an operating <br /> cost. <br /> Chair Schroeder indicated it was correct. <br /> Councilmember Etten thought this was great for openness. He stated in Attach- <br /> ment A, page 4 of 9, it talks about the guidelines for capital replacement. He ap- <br /> preciated the Commission settled on guidelines. One question he had is whether <br /> "projects necessary for public health and safety, or to meet legal mandates." <br /> Question number two is directed around maintaining existing assets, but what is <br /> missing is replacement of a lot of the City's general things that may not be a mat- <br /> ter of health and safety. He noted that health and safety might be a fire truck or <br /> emergency equipment or even playground equipment, but he wondered what hap- <br /> pens if an IT server is needed, or new flooring in City Hall. Those things do not <br /> get addressed in this and he would like to combine the ideas of one and two and <br /> projects that are replaced to read "replace or maintain existing assets" versus the <br /> next one "projects that expand existing assets or services in order to benefit the <br /> Public Good" or four "projects that purchase new assets or services in order to <br /> benefit the Public Good." Looking at replacing what the City has, expanding <br /> what the City has, and then adding completely new assets. <br /> Commissioner Harold stated when the guidelines were written, public health and <br /> safety were not being thought of like as just fire trucks and police cars or what <br /> some people might think of as public safety departments. The Commission was <br /> thinking more of a real safety issue, such as broken play equipment. Replacement <br /> of police equipment would be in category two rather than one. <br /> Councilmember Etten indicated that made sense but wondered if item two could <br /> read "Projects that replace or responsibly maintain existing assets," because at <br /> some point a lot of things are not on that and the word "replace" is key to him in <br /> this situation. <br /> Mayor Roe appreciated the clarification on the public health and safety aspect. <br /> Mayor Roe thought the idea with this feedback is to come back with a final draft <br /> for the Council to adopt on the consent agenda. <br /> Mayor Roe asked if there was anything else the Commission wanted to discuss. <br /> Chair Schroeder stated last Monday, the cash carryover fund was voted on by the <br /> City Council and working on the policy for that is going to be ongoing. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.