My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Finance Comm Minutes 09-10-2019
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Finance Commission
>
Minutes
>
2019
>
Finance Comm Minutes 09-10-2019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2019 10:14:52 AM
Creation date
10/9/2019 10:14:50 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
Finance Commission Minutes <br />September 10, 2019 <br />Page 3 of 12 <br /> <br />Commissioner Murray did not disagree but was not sure if the Finance Commission should be <br />making this decision as to moving the money around and funding. He thought this was a <br />Council discussion. <br /> <br />Commissioner Harold agreed but indicated the Council kicked this to the Finance Commission to <br />find out if this sort of project would merit the use of money from the Reserve Fund. He thought <br />this type of project would. He noted in regard to bullet point three he did not think the Finance <br />Commission could decide if this project was the best use for the money because there have not <br />been any other requests. He was not comfortable saying this would be the number one priority <br />for the money but he thought this project, if the Council deemed it a priority for the city, would <br />be a valid project for the money, if the money were there but he did not think the city had the <br />money that the Parks and Recreation Commission was requesting. <br /> <br />Commissioner Murray agreed but thought the Council should make the decision. <br /> <br />Commissioner Harold indicated he was in the same mind frame as Commissioner Murray, but <br />the city Council asked for the Finance Commission’s input and that would be his input. <br /> <br />Commissioner Harold agreed that he did not think this Commission should give a thumbs up or <br />thumbs down but he thought the questions that the Finance Commission is being asked about <br />whether the project could merit the use of the money and based on the available money he <br />thought those are fair questions. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sagisser thought while looking through the documentation regarding the Cash <br />Reserve Fund that it sounds like there is no real definition of what that fund is for. <br /> <br />The Commission agreed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sagisser wondered if that was the reason why this item was sent back to the <br />Finance Commission. Would this be an opportunity to define the fund a little bit and what it is <br />for? <br /> <br />Chair Hodder asked for clarity on the rationale that the Council was thinking when this item was <br />sent back to the Commission. <br /> <br />Mr. Trudgeon thought it was a matter of getting the Finance Commission’s opinion on whether <br />the Cash Carry Forward Fund should be used for this type of program and also kicked down to <br />the Commission more of a general policy on how that fund can be used. He knew the <br />Commission previously talked about it and in the end came to a conclusion that it is up to the <br />Council to decide. He thought if the Commission came back to the Council with a mixed <br />recommendation that would be ok. <br /> <br />Chair Hodder thought that programs needed to be funded in the budget process and levy and not <br />in the Cash Reserve Fund. There are many competing interests and that is where the Council has <br />to make that call. He thought this particular program can be funded and additional monies can <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.