My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2010_1206
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2010
>
CC_Minutes_2010_1206
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/20/2010 1:46:30 PM
Creation date
12/20/2010 1:46:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
12/6/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
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, December 06, 2010 <br /> Page 13 <br /> Councilmember Pust opined that it was unlikely that it would change in 2011; and <br /> further opined that the reduced interest revenue made sense as well in this econo- <br /> my. Councilmember Pust questioned what the surplus monies form the License <br /> Center indicated. <br /> Mr. Miller advised that historically, due to the Center's increasing efficiencies <br /> and volume, surplus revenue had gone into other General Fund services; however <br /> both vehicle transactions and passport activity was down due to the current econ- <br /> omy. <br /> Councilmember Johnson questioned if the License Center was overstaffed; and if <br /> there was any anticipation for increased activity trending for 2011. <br /> Mr. Miller advised that repeated staffing reductions had been made over the last <br /> three (3) years, mostly through attrition, with those positions not filled. Mr. Mil- <br /> ler noted that, while 2010 may end up looking better than 2009 and while trending <br /> was moving up, it was not significant to offset revenue generation of any magni- <br /> tude at this point. <br /> Mayor Klausing asked if Councilmember Ihlan's intent with the motion was to <br /> absorb those revenue losses into the budget or address them from reserves. <br /> Councilmember Ihlan opined that she would anticipate budget reductions in other <br /> areas; and in the worst case scenario, that funds be taken from reserves. Coun- <br /> cilmember Ihlan advised that her rationale in making the motion was to avoid the <br /> assumption that if revenue projections are reduced, taxes be raised accordingly <br /> without the ability to justify that for taxpayers, when their ability to pay is de- <br /> creasing as well. <br /> Councilmember Roe questioned if Councilmember Ihlan's intent was to reduce <br /> the tax levy and budget as well. <br /> Councilmember Ihlan responded affirmatively unless it was impossible to fund <br /> essential services and after other strategies had been considered; at which point <br /> she expected staff to return for Council authorization to use reserves. <br /> Mayor Klausing spoke in opposition to the motion; supporting staff's recommen- <br /> dations based on their observations and projections, noting their explanations for <br /> their recommended budget and levy. Mayor Klausing expressed his preference <br /> that if Councilmembers were looking for specific budget and levy cuts, they had <br /> already addressed them at previous meetings. <br /> Councilmember Roe recognized the concern in replacing other sources of revenue <br /> with other revenue in this particular area; but clarified that the recommended <br /> budget was essentially maintaining the 2010 budget to preserve essential services <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.