My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006_0327_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2006
>
2006_0327_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 12:23:30 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:33:08 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
_ Little impact on Roseville residents; most of the burden of a sales tax would <br />be borne by non-residents. Since a voter referendum is required, residents <br />— make the final choice. Could be coupled with a community center project. <br />b. Con: Impact on local businesses may put them at a competitive disadvan- <br />tage. Uncertainty whether state legislature would approve general or special <br />legislation allowing such a referendum. Lets state off the hook. <br />3. Seek voter approval for a local bond referendum. <br />r <br />a. Pro: Could be coupled with a general Parks and Recreation bond issue. B� <br />ing a referendum, voters can definitively indicate their support or opposition " <br />to various �'&R projects. , _ <br />b. Con: Higher local taxes. Lets state off the hook. <br />4. Adjust P&R annual budget to rely more heavily on local taxes to support the OVAL. <br />a. Pro: Greater transparency. <br />b. Con: Either higher local taxes or eliminatian/reduction in other tax- <br />supported city services. Lets state off the hook. <br />IIY. REOUEST <br />City Council direction about seeking additional funding for the OVAL. <br />����� �� <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.