My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2017 12 18 SP
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2017 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2017 12 18 SP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:14:00 PM
Creation date
1/17/2018 9:48:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2017 12 18 SP
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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 />Meeting Minutes <br />December 18, 2017 <br />Page 5 of 7 <br />Mayor Muckle proposed the Utility Committee look at some financial information and the <br />two Committees decide what is most valuable to them to help them make policy <br />decisions and have periodic joint meetings <br />Councilmember Keany stated the Utility Committee should sit with staff to determine <br />what information is really needed We should be looking at snow pack projections, the <br />waste hauler contract; we should not be looking at low level details <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton agreed with Mayor Muckle. He suggested all financial <br />information be given to the Utility Committee for a 6 -month test drive. Then get together <br />in 6 months and see how the division of responsibility is going. Once per year have the <br />full council look at the policy issues. <br />Councilmember Stolzmann disagreed; she stated financial review should be at the <br />Finance Committee. Finance knows the real time accounting revenue expenditures; we <br />shouldn't separate the functions. Sending the same reports to both committees is a <br />redundancy of effort. Don't see it this addressing any issues that need to be fixed <br />Director Kowar stated he sees the difference as the Finance Committee is what is <br />happening now, the Utility Committee us looking 5 years out for projects and planning. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton stated we can't separate the roles without all the information. He <br />stated he was not sure the Finance Committee wants to look at utility rates at an in- <br />depth level <br />Councilmember Maloney asked what problem we are solving That needs to be defined. <br />He restated his concern that items come to council with no review from either committee <br />and also neither committee has looked at the rate model before we look at budget <br />Finance is looking at profit and loss without any context about the rate model <br />Councilmember Keany the challenge is what is rolling over and what funds are already <br />committed or not <br />Councilmember Maloney stated his concern that no one is looking at the rate model, the <br />financial statements, and budget requests Neither Utility or Finance had the nght or <br />enough information to make a good recommendation. <br />Mayor Muckle stated someone needs to review items before they come to council <br />Councilmember Keany stated one or the other has to be more involved in the process <br />Councilmember Maloney agreed. <br />Councilmember Stolzmann stated there are a lot of areas that collect fee revenue and <br />we should not carve out the utility fees to have a different process. Carving out what the <br />Utility Committee does, doesn't solve the problem and it means the Finance Committee <br />does not look at the fees for our biggest enterprise. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.