My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
08/10/04
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Finance Committee
>
Minutes
>
2000's
>
2004
>
08/10/04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/8/2025 4:23:04 PM
Creation date
10/19/2004 2:52:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Document Title
Finance Committee
Document Date
08/10/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
Chairperson Elvig noted the questionable column is 4312, and they are over that amount at this <br />time. <br /> <br />Finance Officer Lund replied they are over it now, but if $125,000 is taken out, it will equal year <br />to date for Community Development time of $25,000 for six months. <br /> <br />Motion by Councihnember Zimmerman, seconded by Councilmember Strommen, to recommend <br />that thc City Council proceed with the repeal of the franchise fee ordinance, to be discontinued <br />after the third quarter. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Elvig, and Councilmembers Zimmennan and <br />Strommen. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #2: Amendment of the 2004 Schedule of Rates, Fees and Charges <br /> <br />Councihnember Zimmerman inquired of the difference between the Residential Trunk Charges <br />of' $2,325 per connection and Residential Sewer Trunk Charges of $1,800 per connection. <br /> <br />Finance Office Lund replied these fees came out of the sewer and water study. She noted <br />Residential Trunk Charges should actually read as Residential Water Trunk Charges. <br /> <br />Chairperson Elvig asked how these charges compare with other municipalities. <br /> <br />Financc Officer Lund replied the charges are in line with other cities. She explained the charges <br />have been increasing every year based on an engineering report of percentage increases, which is <br />why it has always stayed so low. <br /> <br />Chairperson Elvig questioned if staff is comfortable with the study to warrant these charges. <br /> <br />Finance Officer Lund responded in the affirmative. She explained in addition to the trunk <br />charges, currently under the adopted 2004 rates and charges, there is no distinguishing factor for <br />"Fire Prevention Services". This section would encompass fees such as Fire Suppression Fees, <br />Fire Alarm Fees, and Contractual Fees. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Kapler indicated it is important to note there is currently not a fixed rate <br />to charge for instances when the Fire Department needs to charge a fee. This has been included <br />under Fire Service Fees. A situation like an illegal burn would fall under an ordinance violation. <br /> <br />Chairperson Elvig inquired about the Victim Service Fee. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Kapler replied that is for assistance after a disaster situation. It would <br />only bc implemented if insurance did not cover the cost. <br /> <br />Chairperson Elvig inquired about the issue of the lock box. <br /> <br />Finance Committee/August 10, 2004 <br /> Page 3 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.