CC_Minutes_2009_1123 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, November 23, 2009 Page 11 Mr. Miller advised that staff would try to replicate the published document as that 2008 document as referenced by Councilmember Pust, opining that using that format allowed the reader a quick overview in the executive summary, and more in-depth detail with various city programs. Councilmember Roe asked if the matrix of 162 line items would appear with rankings or mandated levels of service in that document. Mr. Miller suggested that it could and that it would serve to underscore the BFO process and what the end product will become based on that process. Councilmember Roe continued to review his perception of staffs' process to go from the matrix to the budget document, with staff developing worksheets that will connect the matrix and those numbers; allowing next year's process to be less confusing and tie things together much more obviously. Mr. Miller concurred that it would be considerably easier next year if the City Council stuck with this process. Councilmember Ihlan clarified that she was not asking for a line item budget that corresponded to the spreadsheet rankings, but to the budget expenditure summa- ries provided by staff and broken down by departments, not the 162 priorities. Councilmember Ihlan questioned how staff had generated the expenditure sum- maries without a worksheet behind it; and opined that she didn't know how to continue without having that information before her to make meaningful decisions on how to reduce the tax levy. Councilmember Pust recognized the amount of work required of staff to split the numbers across 160 programs over the last 6-8 weeks and the information pro- vided to the Council and public throughout that process; and questioned what ad- ditional information had been provided to Councilmember Ihlan beyond those documents. Mr. Miller advised that he had provided various iterations of the packet informa- tion, including the narrative that accompanied the City Manager-recommended budget, but not reflecting allocations for new impact items (i.e., health care). Councilmember Pust noted that in the past, Mr. Miller had always been forthcom- ing with public or City Councilmember requests to justify the information pro- vided by providing that supporting documentation, and questioned if Mr. Miller had been directed to not supply that supporting documentation in this instance. Mr. Miller advised that the extent of his focus had been on the summary sheets; and that he had not yet spent time on a 20101ine item budget.