Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> . <br /> e Keller requested clarification as to whether it meant setting a policy <br /> or getting more direct involvement. Manager responded, the staff sensed <br /> that some Budget Committee members felt they had no control over or <br /> effect on what is happening. This was an attempt to create a situation <br /> where Budget Committee members have some sense of accomplishment and <br /> control. <br /> There was some discussion on whether or not the Council should consider <br /> Budget Committee recommendations any differently than Planning Commission <br /> recommendations, noting the Council does have the final decision on the <br /> budget. However, it was pointed out these proposed processes were an <br /> attempt to help the Budget Committee find a more workable solution to <br /> deal with the budget document. Ms. S~ith also noted it was an attempt to <br /> attain general consensus from the Budget Committee once a budget had been <br /> decided on. She felt the Council would be placing itself in the uncomfor- <br /> table position of overturning what the Budget Committee recommends. <br /> Mr. Williams said it was very unusual for the Council to reverse a Budget <br /> Committee decision, but in fact, the Council had gone to great lengths to <br /> confer with the Budget Committee. Also, he said if policy definition was <br /> the allocation of funds to an activity, then he did not see anything un- <br /> reasonable about looking at the whole budget. <br /> ~1r. Delay felt the use of service sheet summaries was a very significant <br /> improvement and would give the Budget Committee a better opportunity to <br /> understand the processes. However, he questioned Item Din the proposed <br /> budget process, feeling the word "policy" should be changed to "priority." <br /> - The elected officials role is to establish policy. He had concerns that <br /> Items A, B, C, E, and F were too general in nature and questioned what <br /> they meant; and also, Item 2, setting expenditure limitions. <br /> In response, Manager noted for Item A (increased discussions about ser- <br /> vices the City should provide), this item reflected interest from the <br /> Budget Committee members that perhaps certain services are not in the <br /> budget and should be discussed. Item B (response to public concerns <br /> regarding rising costs of government) was included because of public <br /> discussions on Ballot Measures 6 and 11. It was felt that consideration <br /> should be given to various proposals which seemed to reflect the dominant <br /> votinq patterns of the community in reducing the cost of government. <br /> Item C (seek more general public input in reaching decisions) responded <br /> to past participation, mainly by various special interest groups during <br /> budget meetings. This would be an attempt to get more general concern <br /> and take into account the interests of the general public. <br /> He continued, Item E (increased commitment of Budget Committee members) <br /> W,IS a response to poor attendance at Rudqet Committee meetings 1 ast year. <br /> It(~rn F (providing stronger direction by management in recommending budget) <br /> he felt to be a clear statement and the City Manager's Office and staff <br /> waul d be happy to do so. For Item G (all ow Budget Commi ttee to see where <br /> services have been curtailed or expanded), staff would try to provide <br /> documentation to answer that concern. He said Item 2 (the expenditure <br /> limitations) referred to the recent tax limitation elections. Staff is <br /> committed to presenting proposals for setting certain limitations. <br /> e 12/13/78 - 3 <br /> '1,+ <br />