Agenda - Charter Commission - 06/17/1993

Home

CASE # REVIEW OF CHAPTER 7 By: Sandra Ashley Helling, Finance Officer Background: At the request of the Charter Commission, I have reviewed Chapter 7 entitled TAXATION AND FINANCES. Observations: This chapter generally provides for the tools of good financial management, but I am recommending a few changes that are reflected on the attached draft. These changes primarily result from my observations regarding the £mancial planning and budget process. Long-Term Financial Plan I have modified this section to require three elements within the plan. The £~rst two have not changed; they are the Public Service and Capital Improvement Plans. The next two sections (The Long Term Revenue Program and the Capital Summary Program) have been combined into one entitled Five Year Financial Forecast. While the format of the plan or details to be contained within are not specifacally identified, I would envision it as condensing the Public Service (operational service level) and Capital Improvement (long term investment) Plans into an overall financial plan that shows the projected total funds required for the next five years and the revenue streams that will provide this funding. The Annual Budget As the State of Minnesota now determines the timeline during which the official budget public hearing must be held, procedures to follow in the hearings and publication requirements, I have made reference to this within Chapter 7. But in addition, I am suggesting the Council hold at least one public hearing to receive input on the proposed budget prior to the state mandated process. This would allow for public comment earlier in the process and could provide input to the Council on service or program priorities. Under 7.7.2 1 have made a change that deals with enforcement of the budget. While in my opinion an employee that incurs an obligation on behalf of the City for a sum that is not authorized within the budget should be immediately sent to jail and serve a lifetime sentence, I realize some may think this punishment is too severe. The current language states such an obligation incurred by an employee shall become a personal obligation. That sounds logical but in some instances collection may be difficult - particularly ff it is for a puchase the City did use in some fashion. If you don't agree the employee should go directly to jail, perhaps the addition of language to the effect the employee will be subject to disciplinary action is a good compromise. This section has been changed accordingly. Attached The attached draft for Chapter 7 contains new language in bold and language suggested for deletion so indicated by a strike through.