CC_Minutes_2009_0810 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, August 10, 2009 Page 9 Councilmember Roe addressed Pathway construction (page 29) and the need hav- ing apolicy discussion as to whether to move forward before approving a CIP plan that included those pathways. Councilmember Roe opined that, by calling the document an investment plan indicates that the City Council had already pri- oritized it, even though it may be identified as unfunded, that it still gave it status. Councilmember Johnson opined that he viewed the document differently, and that it correlated with the Imagine Roseville 2025 vision, with pathways being a big part of that. Councilmember Johnson suggested that the CIP represented the overall plan or "forest" with annual budgetary processes representing the "trees," for a more detailed analysis. Mr. Miller advised that it was the intent of the CIP to take the goals and strategies, and subsequent discussion and priorities, of the Imagine Roseville 2025 process, and provided for a calculation of those goals; in addition to a simple calculation for replacement of existing obligatory assets (i.e., rolling stock and equipment). Mr. Miller recognized the need for large-policy discussions related to items such as fire stations; and acknowledged that not all items included in the CIP had been vetted by the City Council; again emphasizing that this was a planning tool, and those items listed needed to be addressed one way or another. At the request of Mayor Klausing, Mr. Miller addressed Councilmember Pust's issues related to staffing items included in the CIP; noting that those items in- cluded in some department-specific areas were included as context for assets (i.e., squad cars, trucks, and other rolling stocks) and based on some departments ex- panding and others not having done so. Mayor Klausing sought additional Councilmember comment on how to proceed with further Council policy discussions (i.e., fire stations and/or pathways). Councilmember Roe opined that including those items in the CIP was appropriate as a way to document costs and identification by the community as a need; and noted that future receipt of the more-detailed spreadsheets should provide funded and unfunded areas, and reflect back to this document, based on revenue sources (i.e., taxes, fees, other sources) and related gaps for that funding. Mayor Klausing opined that by showing that distinction of actual projected costs, available funding or lack thereof, and/or gaps in revenue sources, should serve to clarify for the public those items authorized to-date by the City Council. Councilmember Pust suggested that more time be taken with the document, with flagging of problematic areas, particularly since the document was now available to the public on-line; and that it should reflect the City Council as one voice, and easy for the community to follow. Councilmember Pust asked that each depart-