08/11/1992 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Boles noted that the task team was appointed due to the financing study's requirement that members of the development community be consulted on an annual basis regarding fees. He suggested that the City could reduce the cost of service delivery, and in turn the component target, by implementing the task team's recommendations. Mr. Nicholson asked if the motion reflected a continued move toward 100 percent cost recovery as defined in the financing study. Mr. Miller said yes. Mr. Green asked for clarification of the relationship of the $548,000 identi- fied by the task team as General Fund costs to council policy. Mr. Miller said that the cost represented half of the savings that would have been realized by implementation of council policy unless other savings were found. Mr. Nicholson said that the task team recommendation means that 50 percent of the costs identified in council policy as private responsibility will become the public's responsibility. He maintained that adoption of the motion was moving away from the principles reflected in the financing study. The motion passed, 5:3. Mr. Miller requested that staff prepare information contrasting the recommen- dations of the financing study and the recommendations of the task team. e Mr. Boles endorsed Mr. Miller's request, adding that the motion represented continuation of the recommendations in the finanCing study, which was for full cost recovery of some services, considerably less for other services, and continued provision of 50 percent General Fund subsidies to all processes involved. Mr. Miller reminded the council that it would revisit the draft strategy and review and revise its components prior to final adoption. The council discussed Component 31C, Code Compliance (Eliminate; realizes $400,000). Mr. Rutan moved, seconded by Mr. Robinette, to reduce General Fund support for the service by $200,000. Mr. Nicholson asked Mr. Rutan the rationale for his target. Mr. Rutan responded that he believed there had been sufficient discussion at the council level regarding the need to "do things differently." He believed that the target could be realistically achieved by doing things differently. Mr. Robinette agreed, saying he believed that some functions of the service could be performed privately. He endorsed Mr. Rutan's target as reasonable. The motion passed, 7:1. The council discussed Component 36C, land Use Permits (Reduction to Mandated e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 11, 1992 Page 6 5:30 p.m.