My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Summary 2015 01 13
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Study Sessions
>
2015 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Summary 2015 01 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 11:54:12 AM
Creation date
9/18/2015 8:50:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Supplemental fields
Test
SSSUM 2015 01 13
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Study Session Summary <br />January 13, 2015 <br />Page 4 of 5 <br />Update /Discussion — Budget Follow -up <br />During budget process a number of topics were discussed. Should there be a <br />review earlier, does Council want to start the process earlier? Should the budget <br />process be spread over more time? <br />Performance measures were included in the 2015 budget. They were refined <br />throughout the process. What is Council looking for? What is the measure that <br />will tell you if a project is functioning as you would like it to? <br />Council discussed an interest in organizing the budget by programs. Currently <br />budget is organized around line items that are generally larger than the program <br />level and they do not show any revenues associated with the line items. What <br />programs should be identified? <br />There is interest in changing to a biannual budget system. Everyone agreed they <br />would like to start the process earlier. There was a general consensus that a <br />biannual budget makes sense but you can't bind a future Council to it so the <br />Mayor hesitates to spend a lot of time on a future budget. Boulder does a <br />biannual budget and times it to coincide with City Council elections. <br />Westminster did a charter amendment to allow a biannual budget. Westminster <br />likes the biannual budget and approves it on the off - election years. <br />Council member Lipton believes we should spend less time on the math and <br />more time focusing on programs. <br />Council member Dalton said the City Manager and departments do look at <br />programs. The real question is what does everyone on Council envision the <br />programs to be and what do you want to follow? We need to describe what the <br />program areas are. Council member Lipton would like to develop and test a new <br />system, looking at 3 major programs next year, identify 3 subprograms, identify <br />source of funds. <br />Council member Stolzmann suggested Council come to goal the setting session <br />with an idea of what level of detail you want. <br />Finance Director Kevin Watson said since the City is moving to new ERP, it <br />would be helpful for staff to have an idea of what the Council wants before rolling <br />over all of the information to the new software system. <br />Council member Keany said recreation is an area that is easy to look at from a <br />revenue perspective. Need to see the revenue with the fund. Council member <br />Keany suggested Council members Lipton and Stolzmann recommend create <br />some recommendations for the programs.. <br />There was fairly broad interest from Council for a program budget. Staff will <br />prepare and send to Council some updated information. Staff will work with <br />Council members Lipton and Stolzmann and Finance Committee. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.