My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
11-30-2020 Council Work Session Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2020
>
11-30-2020 Council Work Session Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/15/2021 1:16:19 PM
Creation date
12/29/2020 2:54:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
11/30/2020
Council Meeting Type
Work Session Regular
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
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION <br />APPROVED <br />43 proposed to be replaced (and that page supersedes page 149 of the budget book originally <br />44 provided). <br />45 <br />46 Councilmember Stoesz asked what happens in 2024 if the economy has changed and it's <br />47 more feasible to lease that to purchase a vehicle; would that cost fall in the same area of <br />48 the budget. Ms. Lynch concurred. <br />49 <br />50 Mayor Rafferty asked what is assumed to be the amount levied going forward. Ms. <br />51 Lynch noted paged 51 of tonight's packet that incorporates the levy that is needed going <br />52 forward. <br />53 <br />54 Councilmember Cavegn thanked Ms. Lynch for all her work on the budget and this <br />55 presentation. He has gained information by talking with staff. He thinks it's a big win <br />56 for the City to move to pay as you go. Especially a flat rate and the flexibility it would <br />57 provide. <br />58 <br />59 Councilmember Ruhland thanked Ms. Lynch also. His job involves mortgages and <br />60 interest on financing so he appreciates the idea of the City saving money on interest by <br />61 pay as you go. <br />62 <br />63 Councilmember Lyden noted that he also supports the concept. He added, regarding <br />64 capital equipment (public safety vehicles) that he supports moving with the Tahoe rather <br />65 than the Ford because of the way it is built and what it offers. Public Safety Director <br />66 Swenson explained that staff evaluated both Tahoe and Explorer and the former was <br />67 much more expensive (that has come down somewhat); he that a transition period would <br />68 be required and also mentioned that the Ford has served the department well with some <br />69 difficulties along the way with storage (they have gotten the job done). Councilmember <br />70 Lyden suggested, if staying with the Fords, there should be an extended warranty <br />71 purchased. <br />72 <br />73 Ms. Lynch explained that staff is looking for council consensus on the purchase plan and <br />74 the use of reserve. <br />75 <br />76 The council concurred. <br />77 <br />78 Administrator Cotton asked the council for clarification on the Tahoe vs. Explorer <br />79 discussion. Public Safety Director Swenson explained that the department has always <br />80 tried to come forward with the most economical recommendation regarding its fleet; the <br />81 question comes down to what the council directs. Director Swenson also suggested that <br />82 consideration should include that either auto design will include tweaks instigated by the <br />83 manufacturer that raise the cost of conversion to an emergency vehicle. Councilmember <br />84 Stoesz noted that the MPG fuel consumption is better with the Ford vehicles; he's <br />85 <br />inclined to stay with that model. Mayor Rafferty suggested that <br />the director <br />should be in <br />86 <br />a positon to decide <br />the best vehicle all things considered. When <br />asked, Ms. <br />Lynch noted <br />87 <br />that adding vehicle <br />costs could be impactful especially next year <br />when reserve is being <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.