My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_0126_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_0126_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 8:42:32 AM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:39:44 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.
/
514
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 Study Session — O1/12/04 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 6 <br />fees and charges used to offset costs associated with regulating <br />and enforcing various activities impacting the health, safety and <br />welfare of the community. Mr. Miller noted that those fees were <br />established through City Code, resolution and/or administrative <br />policy. In an effort to ensure that regulatory-type fees were <br />properly identified, consistent, and periodically reviewed, Mr. <br />Miller advised that staff was proposing a new procedure for the <br />City Council's review and consideration, in establishing a fee <br />schedule, with annual, or more period, review as dictated by the <br />specific situation. Mr. Miller used the review of the City's Park <br />Dedication Fee in 2002 as an example. Mr. Miller opined that <br />this system would ensure continued and more-timely scrutiny by <br />Councilmembers. <br />Mayor Klausing sought further clarification regarding staffs <br />proposed intent. <br />Mr. Miller anticipated replacement of all references to dollar <br />amount in City Code, resolution or policy to reference fee <br />schedule resolution; with a minimum of an annual review and <br />adoption of the fee resolution. <br />Councilmember Schroeder wholly concurred with <br />implementation of this type of fee schedule, but cautioned <br />sufficient controls be maintained for Council review of the <br />justification for fees and that they be a true representation, and <br />not reflect recommendations for across-the-board fee increases. <br />Further discussion ensued regarding the process and staff's <br />justification in seeking fee revisions on a systematic or periodic <br />basis by providing surveys and research on specific areas <br />recommended for modification. <br />Councilmember Kough, on a related note, summarized his work <br />to-date with area veterinarians on dog and possibly cat licenses, <br />with proposed lifetime licensing, rather than issue every two <br />years; implementation of chips for easier identification of lost <br />pets; public health concerns; and incentives for neutering and <br />spaying pets. <br />Further discussion ensued regarding ensuring adequate coverage <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.