Laserfiche WebLink
general fund budget; levy no more than 40% of the tax capacity levy rate; and to put 30% into a <br />fund to pay for road projects, over time. Mayor Ramsey stated roads are important and nothing <br />has been saved for road projects for 30 years. He stated he is not interested in a franchise fee and <br />thinks roads should be paid from the general fund budget. <br />Councilmember Tossey stated that is not what the City has been doing. He asked why the <br />Council allowed the City to get involved in the Joint Fire Board if it was not willing to hold off <br />budget decisions until those discussions are held. He also asked why the HRA built a parking <br />ramp without having an apartment attached to it, thinking the City often times gets the "cart <br />before horses." Councilmember Tossey stated he does not want to eliminate fire staff if the City <br />will end up being the lead agency. He stated he also does not support a franchise fee or to tax <br />residents more. <br />Councilmember Elvig stated the City has to be careful with road funding, noting it reduced the <br />budget by $500,000 with the municipal center refinancing. He urged the Council to keep its goal <br />in mind, not keep moving the target, and to assure there is a clear vision for budget discussions. <br />Councilmember Strommen stated she has the same concern as Councilmember Elvig. If the <br />Council sets a budget goal, it should be done so collectively by the Council and not a lone <br />member. She noted the Council had directed the City Administrator to come back with <br />recommendations to meet a set target. If the focus is on roads, she questioned why the Council <br />just discussed using the majority of the TIF allocation for F&C instead of road projects. <br />Mayor Ramsey indicated he understands it needs to be based on consensus of the Council, not <br />his direction alone. He stated he is frustrated because he is tired of hearing that things will get <br />better in the future because the City still needs $3 million a year to construct roads. <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated the Council's direction was to first complete budget discussions <br />so a target was identified and the Council could determine services it wants to provide, level of <br />cuts from the general fund budget, and then determine the franchise fees to put into play. City <br />Administrator Ulrich presented potential additional revenue enhancements. He noted the City <br />does not have annual street maintenance funded ($595,000), and it needs to be determined how <br />to fund that on a yearly basis. <br />The consensus of the City Council was to retain the receptionist position, request staff for <br />additional input, and to discuss the budget target at the next Work Session so it can be <br />determined whether the City can backload positions. <br />Finance Officer Lund addressed cash flows. She indicated that the 2013 budget, with all the cuts <br />proposed, would result in a $1.4 million positive balance conditioned on the municipal center <br />being refinanced. In the following years, the amount goes down because there would be no 2012 <br />debt service savings and TIF districts would be coming back on line. She suggested the Council <br />discuss whether to consider applying dollars in the positive amount towards road projects to <br />reduce franchise fees. <br />Councilmember Backous stated he supported that suggestion <br />City Council Work Session / February 28, 2012 <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />