My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005_1010_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2005
>
2005_1010_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 4:28:56 PM
Creation date
9/14/2009 10:09:30 AM
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.
/
134
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
in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 201 l. ff you roll over 2006 replacement items to 2007 or <br />some other budget year, you are doubling up our capital replacement costs in the <br />future. That will simply increase the tax levy in whatever year you finally allow these <br />items to be replaced. And in the meantime, we will bear higher-than-budgeted <br />maintenance expenses, we lose trade-in value, and the community will experience some <br />reduction in service due to the item being older and out-of-service more often. <br />Option C: Spend Reserves. <br />Option C shows how the budget can be balanced with a 5%levy by spending reserves. <br />Option D: Combination of the Above. <br />Finally, Option D shows how the budget can be balanced with a 5% tax levy through a <br />combination of things described above: by spending $138,642 of Reserves; by delaying <br />$180,258 of Capital Replacement items; and by cutting $236,000 of proposed new, non- <br />inflationary spending which is mostly in the Police Department. Of course, you could <br />mix-and-match items from Options A, B, and C in some different arrangement to <br />achieve the same result, depending on your preferences. <br />The combination of items I show under Option D on the attached spreadsheet reflects <br />the following: <br />• Not creating a new Captain's position in the Police Department, but at least <br />upgrading the existing Lieutenant position to Captain so we don't lose a valued <br />employee. <br />• Similarly, not creating a new Lieutenant's position but at least upgrading an <br />existing Sergeant's position to Lieutenant, again so we don't lose a valued <br />employee. <br />. Replacing at least the following capital items in 2006 as scheduled: <br />o Warning siren <br />o Four squad cars <br />0 5-Ton dump truck <br />o Tractor trailer <br />o Water truck <br />• Delaying replacement of two squad cars, the Fire Marshall's vehicle, and the <br />Holder snow machine to some future budget year. <br />• In 2006, beginning the new citywide traffic simulation model, performance <br />measurement, enhanced pedestrian safety, and adding the additional <br />contribution to our insurance program. <br />In this regard, I do recommend that we add one new position, that of Police Officer, in <br />our tax-supported programs. We just received word from the Department of Justice <br />that our 2002 'Clinton Cops' grant application has been partially granted. (Don't ask <br />me why it took three years for them to consider our grant application.) In 2002, the <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.