Laserfiche WebLink
Weaknesses <br />❖ Bigger learning curve compared to traditional budgeting process <br />❖ More challenging to reflect intangible benefits of programs <br />❖ Sometimes difficult to define or identify outcomes and levels of service <br />❖ Resistance to {any } reform movements <br />❖ Program categories may not have been appropriately selected <br />20ll Suggested Process Improvements <br />❖ Refine program categories and sub-categories <br />❖ Establish performance measures <br />❖ Quantify varying levels of service <br />❖ Establish a uniform program ranking process <br />❖ Need to use total Program costs; i.e. we will no longer separately identify inflationary costs <br />❖ Establish links to IR2025 and Council Goals <br />The items noted above are not meant to represent the complete list. It is expected that the Council will hold <br />a discussion to determine what improvements are needed. City Staff will be available to answer any <br />Council inquiries. <br />POLICY �BJECTIVE <br />Establishing a budget process that aligns resources with desired outcomes is consistent with governmental <br />best practices, provides greater transparency of program costs, and ensures that budget dollars are allocated <br />in the manner that creates the greatest value. <br />FINANCIAL IMPACTS <br />Not applicable. <br />STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br />Not applicable. <br />REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION <br />No Council action is requested. The presentation is submitted for informational and discussion purposes. <br />Prepared by: Chris Miller, Finance Director <br />Attachments: A: Examples of Changes to Program Categories <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />