My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_0823_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_0823_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 11:15:31 AM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:44:37 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.
/
232
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 — 08/16/04 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 13 <br />already represented by the referendum for City campus <br />construction. <br />Councilmember Kough sought clarification on how the street <br />light assessment would be billed to residents; City Manager <br />Beets responded. <br />Mayor Klausing sought clarification of impacts to residents <br />related to more closely tying costs to usage. City Manager Beets <br />responded that, actual costs for street light operation would be <br />spread throughout the City. <br />Further discussion included impacts to industrial and/or <br />commercial users. <br />Councilmember Schroeder reviewed his perspective on current <br />street light installations within the City, opining that some were <br />below standard, some adequate, and some unnecessary. <br />Councilmember Schroeder further opined that, prior to a <br />consideration of a street light assessment, an overview of the <br />City's street light system would be more appropriate. <br />Councilmember Schroeder concluded by opining that whether <br />identified as a"fee" or a"tax," the results were the same for <br />taxpayers, and the City Council should be forthright. <br />Councilmember Schroeder further opined his opposition to <br />consideration of a utility franchise fee, as suggested by staff to <br />consider using funds to underground utilities, noting the <br />estimated cost to individual parcels didn't justify the expense, <br />and the return would not be realized for many years. <br />Councilmember Schroeder noted that while a franchise fee <br />would increase City revenue and relieve the levy, he was of the <br />opinion that such a fee not be earmarked for undergrounding of <br />utilities. <br />Councilmember Schroeder sought clarification as to whether loss <br />of right-of-way permit fees would be eliminated if the City <br />entered into franchise agreements; City Manager Beets <br />responded that permit fees were negligible. <br />Councilmember Schroeder referenced the staff reports prepared <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.