My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2010_0712
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2010
>
CC_Minutes_2010_0712
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/20/2010 11:17:06 AM
Creation date
7/20/2010 11:17:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/12/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, July 12, 2010 <br />Page 17 <br />Councilmember Pust suggested several other areas to consider in any future dis- <br />cussion, including what if neighborhoods want street lights who don't have them <br />and come to the City requesting more, would the whole city pay; or those neigh- <br />borhoods who don't want street lights; and whether there was a way to build into <br />the rate structure how close or far away from street lights; or how much input in <br />asking for them (similar to trail request by neighbors). <br />Mr. Schwartz suggested further discussion in whether to revise the policy to con- <br />sider what qualifies for installation; areas of the City eligible for city-paid street <br />lights that have yet to request them; and others with Xcel qualifications allowing <br />standard street light installation. <br />Councilmember Johnson advised that he was fundamentally opposed to fees as <br />they could be perceived by the public as deceptive; however, he recognized the <br />need to increase the City's income given restraints on the tax levy and difficulties <br />with current budgeting. Councilmember Johnson expressed interest in the com- <br />pelling point made to increase those using the services to participate in their fund- <br />ing. Councilmember Johnson expressed interest in holding a Public Hearing for <br />the purpose of garnering more public opinion, given the number of issues dis- <br />cussed tonight that served to broaden his scope; opining that the City Council <br />proceed cautiously in consideration of this fee. <br />Councilmember Ihlan expressed concern that this would serve as an additional <br />tax; opining that fees weren't bad if their intent was clear to the public. However, <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in opposition to putting on a new fee, but not cutting <br />tax levies accordingly and transparently. <br />City Manager Malinen noted the number of good points brought forward in to- <br />night's discussion; however, he noted the original intent of considering such a fee <br />was to allow creation of another tool to address inadequate resources to provide <br />services desired by the community. Mr. Malinen noted the serious financial gap <br />going into the 2011 budget cycle; and asked that the City Council consider this as <br />an alternative revenue source in addition to current levies. <br />Councilmember Roe opined that he didn't anticipate being supportive of the fee if <br />it was in addition to the current levy; and expressed the need to subtract a similar <br />amount in the first year and fund it specifically through the utility; however, he <br />agreed with the process for utilities and fees versus state-mandated processes. <br />Councilmember Roe noted his interest was based on diverse funding opportunities <br />with City control separate from the levy. <br />Mayor Klausing disagreed with reducing the levy in direct relationship to the <br />utility fee; opining that the funding not used for utilities be used for the CIP or <br />Parks Master Plan; and once the funding gaps are addressed, then the .levy could <br />be reduced accordingly. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.