My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
10/27/92 Special Meeting
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Budget Committee
>
Agendas
>
1992
>
10/27/92 Special Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2025 9:01:19 AM
Creation date
2/26/2004 9:58:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Budget Committee - Special
Document Date
10/27/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
Case <br /> <br /> City Special Revenue Fund ~250 <br /> Future Sealcoating <br /> iBy: Sandra Ashley Helling, Finance Officer <br /> , <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />Prior to ~991, deposits for future sealcoating were carried in a several <br />different ~ityi funds. To establish better control and simplify the location <br />process, ~ll'!such deposits were transferred to a new Special Revenue Fund <br />#250. ThiS~'fun~, created in 1991, now accounts for all sealcoating deposits. <br />This change p~ovided one comprehensive report on the status of sealcoating <br /> · <br />deposits. <br /> <br />Attached: ~ <br /> <br />Interim Financial Report Fund #250 Future Sealcoating Special Revenue Fund <br /> <br />Observat£~ns ! <br />Rather tha~ a ~ump sum deposit for future sealcoating in Flintwood Hills and <br />Rivers' Be~d S~bdivisons,the deposits have been received on a per lot basis <br />at time off bu!lding~ , permit issuance. A review of the building permits and <br />sealcoatin~ d%eposzts for Rivers' Bend and Flintwood Hills indicates <br />approximat%ly ~eighteen lots in each subdivision were not charged this <br />sealcoating d~posit. In other words, we have approximately $2,000 less on <br />deposit fox, eaCh of these subdivisions than we should. Our Building Inspector <br />has adVise~ that initially he was not aware of the sealcoating deposit <br />requirement, b~t it is now being collected. <br /> i · <br />r~'~ aance iS !in ~he process of verifying payments by parcel number, and it is <br />~,~Licipate~ th~s information will be completed for inclusion in our year-end <br />working p~per~. At the time the sealcoating project is proposed, a <br />determinatibn ~ill need to be made as to whether the total deposits reseived <br />should be ~red£ted against all parcels or credited to only those parcels for <br />which payment ~as received. <br />Budget Committee Action: <br /> <br />None - info~ma~ion only <br /> <br />Review Checklist: Copies also distributed to: <br /> <br />City AdminiStrator City Engineer <br />Building Inspector <br />Finance Offkce'~ <br /> <br />BC: 10/27/9~ <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.