04/26/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- the General Fund; some councilors thought no commitment had been made to a tax specifically for the Hult Center. / Mr. Gleason emphasized the importance of educating the public about the City's needs, particularly if a measure is put on the ballot. Mr. Hansen hoped some way could be found to judge whether a gas tax measure would pass. e II. SERVICE RESTORATION SCHEDULE e Mr. Long reviewed the April 6 memo from Mr. Gleason to the Mayor and councilors about a service restoration schedule. The schedule indicated service restora- tion would be accomplished at $900,000 a year for three years. It would restore about 50 percent of the cuts that had been made since 1981. When services are restored, they are often done differently because new ways of doing things are often better and more economical. Services would be restored in the areas of public safety, public development, support services, and cultural and leisure services. The program would add 69.5 full-time employees to the City payroll. If the service assumptions were changed by the council, the financial estimates would also have to be changed. Councilors discussed asking the voters if they want the level of services restored. Responding to comments, Mr. Gleason said the Fire Suppression Division is increasingly at risk because the Fire Prevention Program has been decreased. The City is short of Fire Department staff. The department is trying to keep ISO from dropping the City's rating from 3 to 4 because the City does not have enough staff for the pumpers. The rating would affect the insurance rates on large buildings and businesses. The Police Department equipment is deteriorating. The Patrol and Detective sections are lean. The streets system is being damaged because of the lack of maintenance. The audit section disappeared two years ago. City investments are not managed as well as they could be with additional staff. The information program of the City has to rely on the private media, which is usually interested only in contro- versial matters. e III. SIX-YEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST--REVISED BY THE COUNCIL AND COUNCILOR HOLMER --.__.__0 Mr. Wong reviewed his April 20, 1984, memo to the Mayor and City Council concerning the three versions of the six-year financial forecast for the General/Federal Revenue Sharing Fund. The councilors and staff compared the staff version, the council version, and Councilor Holmer's version. Councilor Holmer often ~plained his version. Regardless of service restoration, Mr. Gleason did not believe the City would get by for the next three years within the forecast because of things beyond the City's control. Mr. Holmer said additional taxes placed the City at a disadvantage in its economic diversifi- cation efforts and he had tried to find a way to operate the City for the next three years without additional taxes. Mr. Ball pointed out that the quality and level of City services was important in economic development. Levels of services and City salaries, as well as salaries in the private sector, were discussed. - - MINUTES--Council Revenue Work Session April 26, 1984 Page 2