Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />NOVEMBER 30, 1993 <br />can be made, and the Administrator recommended <br />implementation of those reductions. The Administrator <br />reported that he is working toward a zero percent levy <br />increase, and to do so $37,567 must be cut from the <br />budget. The Administrator reviewed a list of options <br />as outlined in his memo dated November 26, 1993 to <br />consider in achieving that zero percent increase. <br />Those options include elimination of the recycling <br />intern -$10,200; elimination of Economic Development <br />expenditures -$5,000; elimination of filing system <br />reorganization personnel - $1,478 (General Fund <br />portion); reconsider allocation to Roseville Area <br />Senior Program -$1,920; Reconsider membership in MCAD <br />-$923; amount of Fire Relief Pension benefit <br />contribution; and use of a portion of the 1993 <br />projected surplus to offset the 1994 levy. The <br />Administrator reported that it is estimated that <br />$37,000 of the surplus would be available for a 1994 <br />levy buy-down. This allows for an estimated $20,000 to <br />be used to fully fund reserves as well as a transfer of <br />$15,000 to the General Capital Improvement Fund. The <br />Administrator pointed out that his list of options <br />totals $58,971 in reductions, with the Fire Relief <br />contribution remaining unresolved. <br />Pedersen questioned elimination of the Economic <br />Development budget. <br />The Administrator pointed out that in the past if there <br />has been a need to fund some thing in the area, the <br />City has found a way to do it. The Administrator was <br />confident that this would hold true for 1994 as well. <br />LaValle indicated that he would like to see a zero <br />percent increase. He suqgested that the intern <br />position be postponed to 1995, and that the Economic <br />Development budget be eliminated. <br />Scalze suggested that the only area left to cut would <br />be the transfer to the Capital Improvement Fund. <br />Morelan agreed it would be great to have a zero percent <br />net levy increase, but felt the Council's job was to <br />provide services that residents want in the most <br />efficient manner possible. <br />Pedersen pointed out that the cuts outlined would not <br />cut services. <br />Morelan did not want to cut too deep in order to <br />achieve a zero percent increase. <br />Hanson pointed out the capital improvement funding and <br />suggested that there are items on that list that the <br />City could live without for another year. <br />Page 6 <br />