Laserfiche WebLink
Staff has been very outspoken in its support for an alternative budgeting process. The financial realities of <br />having a steadily deteriorating financial condition, coupled with the loss of state aid and being millions of <br />dollars behind in funding asset replacements, dictate a new paradigm shift in how we allocate our resources. <br />It is im�erative for the City to have quantifiable �rogram-s�ecific costs before it can make s�ending�rioritX <br />decisions. Staff further believes that the costs associated with a program cost analysis can be <br />accommodated within the current 2009 Sudget with some small adjustments to planned operational <br />spending. <br />POLICY OBJECTIVE <br />Establishing a budget process that aligns resources with desired outcomes is consistent with governmental <br />best practices, provides greater transparency of program costs, and ensures that budget dollars are allocated <br />in the manner that creates the greatest value. <br />FINANCIAL IMPACTS <br />The costs associated with a program cost assessment can be accomodated with the 2009 Adopted Sudget, <br />through small reductions in planned spending such as personnel vacancy savings, lower fuel and energy <br />costs, etc.. <br />STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br />Sy previous communication, Staff has recommended the Council adopt an outcome-based budgeting <br />process for 2010. Staff recommends that the City hire an independent outside consulting firm to calculate <br />the direct and indirect costs of City services <br />REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION <br />Authorize Staff to hire an independent outside consulting firm for the purposes of calculating the direct and <br />indirect costs of City Services at an amount not to exceed $50,000. <br />Prepared by: Chris Miller, Finance Director <br />Attachments: A: January 26, 2009 Staff Report <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />