My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006_0911_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2006
>
2006_0911_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 3:30:18 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:38:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
158
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
City Council Regular Meeting — 08/28/06 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 29 <br />Staff was directed to provide percentage levy impacts and <br />increases for the Fire, Police and Parks & Recreation Department <br />requests versus those in the City Manager-recommendedBudget, <br />if all were granted, and what impacts this would be for a no <br />overall budget increase. <br />Mayor Klausing noted that the City Manager budget <br />recommendation was for a 4.5% levy increase; and those <br />programs not included in the recommended budget, but <br />identified by Department Heads as unmet needs or requests for <br />new funding. <br />Councilmember Ihlan requested total levy increase information, <br />including the �-T�t.A. levy, and what percentage the total requests <br />for Fire, Police and Parks & Recreation departments were <br />reinstated as requested. <br />Councilmember Maschka opined that the City Council needed to <br />seriously consider looking at a local sales tax initiative to deal <br />with capital asset issues, and researching state enabling <br />legislation. <br />13. Consider Directing Staff to Develop Options for Twin Lakes <br />Project <br />Interim City Manager and Finance Director Chris Miller briefly <br />reviewed some of the questions raised by the recent decision by <br />the Court of Appeals regarding the Twin Lakes Project; and <br />subsequent City Council action to request review by the State <br />Supreme Court. Mr. Miller noted that, discussions with the City <br />Attorney and the City's Development Attorney raised a number <br />of issues related to the project. Mr. Miller anticipated that the <br />Developer would be actively evaluating their options as well, and <br />may include project alternatives that could require City action <br />within a short time period. Mr. Miller sought Council direction <br />if they wished City staff to explore and present development <br />options to the City Council at their September 1 l, 2006 regular <br />City Council meeting. <br />Discussion included impacts to the development contract and <br />project; interim steps for the City to consider; prospective <br />options; and various interpretations of the Appellate Court <br />Consider Directing <br />Staff to Develop <br />Options for Twin <br />Lakes Project <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.