My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2009_0309_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2009
>
2009_0309_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/6/2012 2:47:18 PM
Creation date
4/20/2009 1:00:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
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.
/
222
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
Department Approval <br />�� ,�: �� <br />Item Description <br />l�'�, <br />Jy <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Date: 3/09/09 <br />Item No.: 13.b <br />City Manager Approval <br />� / <br />Continue Discussions on an Alternative Sudgeting Process for 2010 <br />BACKGROUND <br />On February 7, 2009, and again on February 9, 2009 the City Council held a brief discussion on the merits <br />of using an alternative budgeting process for 2010. A copy of the January 26, 2009 Staff Report that was <br />presented at those meetings is attached for reference purposes. <br />Within these discussions, it was noted that one of the fundamental changes that is needed is the <br />prioritization of City programs and services. To assist in that process, it was recognized that the City would <br />benefit by having an understanding of the costs associated with providing these services. However, Staff <br />acknowledged that it did not have the resources necessary to compile these costs. <br />Since this time, Staff has sought estimates from various consulting firms that specialize in program cost <br />assessment. Sased on preliminary discussions, it is estimated that the cost of performing a citywide <br />analysis would be approximately $45,000 -$60,000. This analysis would be limited to calculating the <br />direct and indirect costs of City programs. It would not include any comparative data with peer <br />communities. <br />At issue for the Council is the fundamental decision of whether to pursue an alternative budgeting process. <br />If the Council is not interested in pursuing this, then City Staff will simply follow the process used in prior <br />years. However, if the Council is interested in an alternative process, it must decide: <br />1) Whether to use an outside consultant to calculate citywide program costs <br />2) The manner in which the Council conducts a prioritization process <br />3) The appropriate level of community involvement <br />Instituting an alternative budgeting process for 2010 is time-sensitive. Typically, the City Manager <br />formulates a Recommended Sudget by mid-August. Any program cost assessment, community <br />involvement, or prioritization process will need to be substantially completed by early August. At this <br />time, Staff believes these timelines can be met, but only if we begin the process in the next couple of weeks. <br />Page 1 of 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.