My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2011_0214
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2011
>
CC_Minutes_2011_0214
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/8/2011 3:53:30 PM
Creation date
3/8/2011 3:53:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
2/14/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
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, February 14, 2011 <br /> Page 32 <br /> same function it accomplished, it would serve as a salary breakdown allowing the <br /> City Council to make a decision on what more level of breakdown they preferred. <br /> Councilmember Johnson expressed satisfaction in being able to decipher that in- <br /> formation on a general basis, noting he did not need specifics or individuals. <br /> Councilmember McGehee opined that position descriptions would be helpful for <br /> her use. <br /> Councilmember Pust noted that the Statute seemed quite prescriptive, and she was <br /> unaware of their existence before tonight. <br /> Mr. Miller advised, specific to salaries and wages, that with past City Councils <br /> staff had asked them to adopt a compensation plan listing all positions and their <br /> respective salary ranges; and subsequent to that unless there was a change to a po- <br /> sition or how it was categories, staff had simply asked the City Council to ap- <br /> prove COLA's for those various positions and levels within the organization. Mr. <br /> Miller clarified that past City Council had adopted the position, not the current <br /> five members. <br /> Councilmember Pust opined that this was not her reading of the Statute. <br /> Mayor Roe opined that municipalities had some freedom in the format of their <br /> budget, and needed to agree on that format. <br /> Councilmember Pust referenced the last sentence of Attachment D addressing ac- <br /> tual line items in accordance with State Statute. <br /> Mayor Roe opined that both Statutes went hand in hand from his understanding <br /> and that the municipality retained the right to determine what detail they chose. <br /> At the request of Councilmember McGehee, City Attorney Bartholdi advised that <br /> he could not provide a legal opinion at this time, but could research the matter if <br /> so directed by the Council majority. <br /> Councilmember Johnson opined that this information lent itself to more of a line <br /> item type of budget than done in the past. <br /> Councilmember McGehee opined that she would prefer more detail than provided <br /> in the past. <br /> Mayor Roe noted the breakdowns by division or program area (Attachment B) as <br /> an approach or a total cost broken down by those categories and summed up <br /> across the whole budget. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.