CC_Minutes_2011_0613 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,June 13, 2011 Page 27 Councilmember Pust opined that the 3.4% in context of the CIP recommendations was great work, held together and made sense; however, she admitted that she had no clue about what kinds of changes that meant for the City to have $440,000 or more cut from their operations, depending on the final figures when the whole picture was available. With all due respect to the process, Councilmember Pust expressed her difficulty in agreeing to this motion until all information was on the table and funding options. Councilmember Pust opined that she would be more comfortable talking about options versus a formal vote to adopt a 3.4% levy in- crease without knowing all of those options. While agreeing that it made sense, Councilmember Pust noted that this was a big ticket item for taxpayers, in addi- tion to other unknowns at this time; and opined that it seemed premature to vote now to raise the levy when the 3.4% may be too little or too much once all things were factored in. Mayor Roe clarified that this was not the final action on the levy, but rather a starting point for refinement during the course of the year, and a basis on which to receive public comment on projected impacts. Councilmember Pust, with all due respect, opined that historically, that is the way the levy system has worked, and she questioned whether the public would under- stand this approach. Mayor Roe noted the need for repeated clarification for the public at every oppor- tunity. City Manager Malinen sought Council consensus on direction early on to meet the directives from the City Council and provide time to explain to them and the pub- lic what it means and potential changes; all part of the priority-based budget process. City Manager Malinen advised that this more formal action for the budget would confirm things already presented by staff informally, but would then come forward as part of the City Manger-recommended budget; at which point the City Council could make adjustments and provide more concrete direc- tion to staff. Councilmember Pust questioned why not pick a "zero percent" levy then as a worst case scenario. City Manger Malinen noted the recognition of capital needs to be dealt with, not just capital needs, plus an operational budget, but a need to change operations to reflect capital needs for a sustainable future. Councilmember Pust opined that this worst case scenario could still proceed with capital needs funded from operating, with no levy increases, creating a draconian