Laserfiche WebLink
Department Approval <br />�� ,�: �� <br />Item Description <br />l�'�, <br />Jy <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Date: 11/16/09 <br />Item No.: 10.a <br />City Manager Approval <br />� / <br />Continue Discussion on the 2010 Recommended Sudget <br />BACKGROUND <br />On November 9, 2009, the City Council received the 2010 City Manager Recommended Sudget in two <br />separate formats. The first showed a summary by major operating division, and the second showed the <br />program-by-program listing in the same format used throughout the budgeting for outcomes process. <br />At the November 9t'' meeting, individual members of the Council offered some general comments and <br />inquiries. The information below is presented to address those comments and inquiries. <br />Priority Rankings <br />It was noted by a couple of councilmembers that the composite priority rankings presented on November <br />9th did not necessarily reflect the Council or community's preferences. In the interest of providing greater <br />transparency in these rankings, a different compilation is shown in the table below. The table shows the <br />Council and Staff composite ranking, on a scale of 1-5, based on the average ranking for all departmental <br />functions. <br />City Council Rankings <br />The table above excludes the rankings for some capital replacement programs and new items for 2010. It is <br />designed to show eg neral preferences. While individuals can draw their own conclusions, it is evident that <br />in the aggregate, the City Council and Staff were in agreement that Public Safety and Public Works <br />functions ranked higher than Parks & Recreation functions; as did the City's administrative and finance <br />functions. <br />Page 1 of 2 <br />