My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007_0507_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2007
>
2007_0507_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/10/2012 12:38:43 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:21:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
164
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 — DRAFT Minutes <br />Monday, April 23,2007 <br />Page 37 <br />� Mr. Miller noted that the Community Development Department fees <br />:3 were detailed and outlined in the annual fee schedule resolution adop- <br />� tion, but were not specifically addressed in a policy. <br />� <br />�� <br />� <br />� <br />� <br />�� <br />l] <br />l� <br />l :3 <br />14 <br />Councilinember Roe, with concurrence by Councilmember Pust, sug- <br />gested that the adoption of the fee schedule be incorporated as part of <br />the Revenue Policy, with language indicating that as part of that pol- <br />icy, the City Council will annually, and as part of the budget approval <br />process, adopt the fee schedule. <br />Mayor Klausing concurred that there was a benefit in having the pol- <br />icy explicitly shown. <br />I� Council�nezx�be� �h��ar� concurred that it would be appropriate to in- <br />1� clude it specifically here; even though fee discussions cropped up in <br />1� TIF discussions and policies, when considering public benefits that <br />i� were consistent and stated as an overall policy. <br />1'� <br />�� <br />�1 <br />Councilmember Roe questioned the benefit of maintaining the annual <br />levy based on the City's tax rate as a consistent and general objective. <br />��� <br />�� Councilmember Pust cautioned that budget impacts and contingencies <br />.;�4 not apparent and within the City's control (i.e., fuel costs, Local Gov- <br />�5 ernment Aid reductions or eliminations, employee health care costs) <br />�� required the need to maintain flexibility in setting the annual levy. <br />�7 <br />�� <br />� <br />�€� <br />�1 <br />��� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�5 <br />3� <br />�� <br />�� <br />Mayor Klausing was supportive of a policy based on the general prin- <br />cipal, with deviation as required, to tie the annual levy increase to that <br />of inflation. Mayor Klausing, while recognizing Councilmember <br />Roe's suggestion, questioned the impact if a large development came <br />forward, and broadened the City's tax base, and whether the Council <br />would want to require that the levy be tied to the tax rate if a reduced <br />levy were achievable. <br />Councilmember Roe suggested additional discussion, in addition to <br />staff input, related to reserve levels. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.