My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2018 10 12 BUDGET
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2018 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2018 10 12 BUDGET
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:14:35 PM
Creation date
11/6/2018 11:49:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2018 10 12 BUDGET
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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 />October 12, 2108 <br />Page 4 of 10 <br />rate should be considered He thinks we need an annual rate. He stated that in the short <br />run this is all about the marketing <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton stated this is a market -driven enterprise and we should have <br />some ability to give the Manager some discretion on ways to get people in the facility <br />City Manager Balser stated work, was done so that these rates do include the cost of <br />services and the Green Play estimates, but they will need to be adjusted as we have <br />more data when the facility opens <br />Councilmember Stolzmann stated it is inappropriate to say that cost was included in the <br />model as there are no projected number of users and we did not look at the impact on <br />the General Fund of each of these scenarios. We don't have good information on which <br />to base these fees. This is a heavily subsidized enterprise and we have to determine <br />what costs we are trying to cover as this is not 100% cost recovery This is an arbitrary <br />decision We should already have the information <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton stated this in an informed decision with the information we have <br />now It is not perfect but it is an informed decision <br />Councilmember Leh stated if we create a good revenue model we will be able to <br />manage the costs but, if we focus too much on costs it will be detrimental to revenue. He <br />thinks based on the information we have, this is reasonable and that is our goal <br />Mayor Muckle suggested using the October 4 proposal with a change to the family rate <br />to option B (resident $74/nonresident $99) for both resident family and nonresident <br />family and allowing staff to work on group rates and introductory rates. <br />Councilmember Maloney agreed we don't know the costs and what our subsidization <br />rate is, but for today he supports the Mayor's proposal and will continue to work on <br />these issues. <br />Councilmember Keany supported the proposal with some work on a family daily rate <br />Mayor Muckle stated some combination of the Finance Committee and the Rec Board <br />will work on the cost study as we move forward <br />Members agreed to Mayor Muckle's proposal. <br />CAPITAL AND GENERAL FUND CONTRIBUTIONS/TRANSFERS TO THE <br />RECREATION AND GOLF FUNDS <br />RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE RECREATION AND <br />GOLF COURSE FUNDS <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.