My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2007_0910
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2007
>
CC_Minutes_2007_0910
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/23/2007 2:34:23 PM
Creation date
10/23/2007 2:34:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/10/2007
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
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, September 10, 2007 <br />Page 11 <br />Mayor Klausing questioned how internal transfers accomplished <br />overall policy goals; and opined that continuing to delay difficult de- <br />cisions to eliminate the problems that had been building for several <br />years only increased deficiencies. <br />Councilmember Roe opined that his suggestion for transferring $1.9 <br />million this year represented a significant step, but reduced taxpayer <br />burdens this year, and would provide evidence to financial analysts <br />and bond issuers that the City was taking proactive steps to move to- <br />ward achieving their goals and meeting policy. <br />Mayor Klausing questioned Mr. Miller on the affect of such a move <br />on the affectivity of reserves; and assurance that those reserves were <br />available and would generate enough income to allow avoiding other <br />tax increases. <br />Mr. Miller responded that, the action in aggregate made no difference <br />to the City's overall financial condition; however, it signaled to credit <br />rating agencies that the City had adopted policies and had made a <br />commitment in the General Fund to ensure its financial strength. Mr. <br />Miller noted that this was not an ultimate fix; and clarified that this <br />discussion and option was related to the General Fund, but didn't alle- <br />viate problems in the near term for the City's Parks and Recreation <br />Fund for the Park Improvement Fund. <br />Councilmember Roe suggested that, at a later date, Councilmembers <br />and staff have policy discussions and a review of proportional alloca- <br />tions between the two funds (General and Parks & Recreation), bias- <br />ing toward the Parks and Recreation Fund. <br />Mr. Miller noted that designated and restricted Park Reserve Funds <br />needed to be expended, and would not be sufficient to maintain the <br />park system; and were unlike funds transferring to the General Fund <br />and still earning interest. <br />Councilmember Roe clarified that this discussion is not related to the <br />asset replacement funds (Park Improvement Fund), noting that a <br />budget policy had been adopted related to that fund; however, this <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.