CC_Minutes_2009_1109 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, November 09, 2009 Page 12 was not needed. Councilmember Ihlan further noted that, even though residents consistently request additional pathway construction, there was no item allotting such funding, even though the City spent money on roads that may not be used. Councilmember Ihlan opined that all government functions needed to be on the table, so trade-offs could be made over all funds, not just those funded primarily by property taxes. Councilmember Roe, in response to Councilmember Ihlan's comments, noted that the action to acquire property was using tax increment financing (TIF) funds that were restricted in their use; and couldn't be applied to other areas of expense in the City. Councilmember Roe further clarified, referencing Attachment A in tonight's budget materials, the inclusion of all funds, including Enterprise Funds, even though priorities have not been broken down among those funds in this BFO process to-date. Council- member Roe noted, as an example from those identified funds, that the Community Development Fund is basically funded from fees paid for Building Permits and Land Use applications, those fees based on the ac- tual cost of providing the service and funded accordingly. Councilmem- ber Roe, using the Water Utility Enterprise Fund as another example noted that a substantial amount of the $5.9 million budgeted was for payment to the City of St. Paul for providing water to Roseville citizens. Council- member Roe noted that suggesting that there could be a trade-off in those funds was not realistic. Mayor Klausing concurred, further noting that in relationship to the TIF funds used for property acquisition, State Statute prohibited the City from using those funds for other purposes, such as rink maintenance; as well as charging fees in excess of the services provided for Building Permits, and related inspection costs. City Manager Malinen noted that, as previously discussed and agreed upon by the City Council majority, since the tax-supported funds is the area representing the most significant structural imbalances, that was the first area on which the BFO process was focused, with the intent to add other funds to the process as it evolved over subsequent years, and to con- tinue to improve the BFO approach to budgeting. City Manager Malinen recognized that this was a learning and informative process for all, and subject to refinement as the process proceeded. With respect to the path- way comment of Councilmember Ihlan, Mr. Malinen noted that he and Public Works Director Duane Schwartz had discussed and included fund- ing for pathway and boulevard maintenance, as part of asset maintenance and replacement, and also in street maintenance material funding. Mr. Malinen advised that those material costs were adjusted for inflation, in- cluding facility supplies and small repairs in an effort to institutionalize