CC PACKET 10232001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes October 9,2001 Page 6 1 Councilmember Sparks added the following to the list: • 2 -The Community Center improvement task force had identified a list of$150,000 worth 3 of improvements and there were a couple of things that were not on that list 4 -Permanent restroom at Water Tower Park 5 MAJOR CAPITAL INVESTMENTS 6 -$6,500,000 debt issue for Public Works facility 7 -$2,000,000 debt issues foe Fire Station relocation 8 41,000,000 debt issue for Stonehouse off-sale 9 -Continuing street improvement debt issues for pavement rehabilitation of approximately 10 $900,000 per year 11 -Other from Council 12 Prosser stated that one of the areas that he would like to see them examine are an analysis of 13 their current buildings, status of parking lots, etc. so that they have those items to submit when 14 they are forecasting. 15 Mayor Cavanaugh asked about the Public Works facility under the capital. He asked if, when 16 they look at the gap, has the capital cost been reflected in the operating expense. Prosser 17 indicated that when they complete there analysis they will need to include what it will cost to 18 service that debt as well as, if there are increased operating costs for the facility, they should be 19 included then. ® 20 Mayor Cavanaugh mentioned sub-contracting things such as tree trimming, sewer work, and 21 snow plowing and asked how they get the incentive to begin looking at alternative ways to the 22 $6,500,000. Prosser indicated that was a very complex question because numerous factors need 23 to-be considered. 24 Mayor Cavanaugh indicated that before he would ever approve anything, he would like to know 25 that he looked at the alternatives for the $6,500,000. Prosser indicated that they needed to 26 examine the costs involved to run the facility and to truly understand those costs. 27 After much discussion on the Public Works facility, Prosser indicated that it needed to be 28 reviewed and added to the strategy. He added that they also should look at an appropriate range 29 of options. 30 It was suggested that the use of "Stonehouse" in the above be changed to "SAV". Mornson 31 concurred. 32 PRIORITY LEVELS 33 -Level 1-Critical to continue operation of baseline city services at present service levels 34 -Level 2-Opportunities for increased efficiency in baseline city services 35 36 There was discussion about the Public Works facility and sub-contracting among the Council 37 and Prosser. •