2006-05-16_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City of Roseville - HRA Minutes for May 16, 2006Page 4 of 6 what they have done for the community in housing. He also noted that the funds designated from the Council to the Board were for these types of housing programs not visioning. He noted that he is disappointed that the HRA is considering reallocating budget dollars for this purpose. He felt that when he voted for the levy that it was specifically dedicated for housing programs and not visioning. He felt it should all come from Council contingency and not the HRA’s funds. Mr. Kough noted that he does not agree that the visioning issues are 60% associated with housing. He has received calls that the HRA’s money is for housing and not visioning. He feels that the HRA is deceiving taxpayers by contributing these funds. He is speaking for himself but knows that Councilmember Ilhan also has concerns. There are many other issues besides housing that will be reviewed by the community visioning. He would prefer that the HRA hold their rental housing funds for rental housing issues in the future. Councilmember Ilhan noted that she shared Councilmember Kough’s reservations. She noted that the HRA is a unique taxing entity made up of non-elected board members with no vote from the residents but that the ultimate levy is the responsibility of the Council. She has urged the City Council not to accept dollars from the HRA and feels that it is a matter of accountability to the tax payers and does not support the use of HRA funds for visioning. She would prefer to take dollars out of reserves or wait and budget the amount needed for next year. She felt that when the Council authorized the HRA levy they did so for housing not for visioning. Member Kelsey noted that the visioning process is related to housing and that two of the subcommittees are specifically related to housing. She wondered if the HRA funds could be allocated to the support of these subcommittee’s rather than randomly for the whole visioning process. Chair Majerus noted that the HRA, which is a volunteer board of very dedicated individuals, does take housing seriously and would like to be part of moving the visioning forward which he thinks has a significant portion associated to housing. He noted that the Board does need to be accountable to the taxpayers and being part of the visioning and funding a portion of the process is being accountable for housing. He also noted that the HRA was asked to participate in the funding of the visioning by the majority of the Council. He feels that supporting the Council in this effort is being accountable to their request and at their direction. Member Maschka clarified that the Council approves the HRA levy but also makes requests of them regarding housing issues. Member Bean noted that Council member Pust asked for the HRA assistance and understood that rental housing is a part of the vision. She thinks it is important to be a partner with the City on this effort. Chair Majerus noted a couple of subcommittees that the HRA should be involved in and urged them to become actively involved in the process. Motion: Member Bean moved, seconded by Member Scheunemann, to approve an amended cost sharing agreement with the Roseville City Council in an amount not to exceed $13,000 to help fund a City visioning process and become part of those subcommittees that have a focus on housing and housing issues. Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Motion carried: 7-0 Motion: Member Bean moved, seconded by Member Maschka, to amend the Roseville HRA Budget, Fund 723-78 Neighborhood Enhancement Program to allocate $13,000 to professional services to cover the maximum cost sharing amount of the Roseville Visioning process. Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Motion carried: 7-0 9.Information and Reports http://archive.ci.roseville.mn.us/council/hra/minutes/2006/hram060516.htm3/10/2008