My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
12-14-2020 Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1982-2020
>
2020
>
12-14-2020 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/8/2021 10:00:23 AM
Creation date
11/17/2021 12:00:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
12/14/2020
Council Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
347
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 />DRAFT <br /> 2 <br />proposed to be replaced (and that page supersedes page 149 of the budget book originally 43 <br />provided). 44 <br /> 45 <br />Councilmember S toesz asked what happens in 2024 if the economy has changed and it’s 46 <br />more feasible to lease that to purchase a vehicle; would that cost fall in the same area of 47 <br />the budget. Ms. Lynch concurred. 48 <br /> 49 <br />Mayor Rafferty asked what is assumed to be the amount levied going forward. Ms. 50 <br />Lynch noted paged 51 of tonight’s packet that incorporates the levy that is needed going 51 <br />forward. 52 <br /> 53 <br />Councilmember Cavegn thanked Ms. Lynch for all her work on the budget and this 54 <br />presentation. He has gained information by talking with staff. He thinks it’s a big win 55 <br />for the City to move to pay as you go. Especially a flat rate and the flexibility it would 56 <br />provide. 57 <br /> 58 <br />Councilmember Ruhland thanked Ms. Lynch also. His job involves mortgages and 59 <br />interest on financing so he appreciates the idea of the City saving money on interest by pay 60 <br />as you go. 61 <br /> 62 <br />Councilmember Lyden noted that he also supports the concept. He added, regarding 63 <br />capital equipment (public safety vehicles) that he supports moving with the Tahoe rather 64 <br />than the Ford because of the way it is built and what it offer s. Public Safety Director 65 <br />Swenson explained that staff evaluated both Tahoe and Explorer and the former was much 66 <br />more expensive (that has come down somewhat); he that a transition period would be 67 <br />required and also mentioned that the Ford has served the department well with some 68 <br />difficulties along the way with storage (they have gotten the job done). Councilmember 69 <br />Lyden suggested, if staying with the Fords, there should be an extended warranty 70 <br />purchased. 71 <br /> 72 <br />Ms. Lynch explained that staff is looking for council consensus on the purchase plan and 73 <br />the use of reserve. 74 <br /> 75 <br />The council concurred. 76 <br /> 77 <br />Administrator Cotton asked the council for clarification on the Tahoe vs. Explorer 78 <br />discussion. Public Safety Director Swenson explained that the department has always 79 <br />tried to come forward with the most economical recommendation regarding its fleet; the 80 <br />question comes down to what the council directs. Director Swenson also suggested that 81 <br />consideration should include that either auto design will include tweaks instigated by the 82 <br />manufacturer that raise the cost of conversion to an emergency vehicle. Councilmember 83 <br />Stoesz noted that the MPG fuel consumption is better with the Ford vehicles; he’s inclined 84 <br />to stay with that model. Mayor Rafferty suggested that the director should be in a 85 <br />positon to decide the best vehicle all things considered. When asked, Ms. Lynch noted 86 <br />that adding vehicle costs could be impactful especially next year when reserve is being 87
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.