Laserfiche WebLink
<br />tree trimming, so staff said they could handle $150,000 so another $40,000 was <br />added. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow asked if the City took out $40,000, took out $30,000 and added $40,000 <br />back. Ms. Charumilind noted the City also added painting of the Sutter Meyer House <br />of $15,000. She said the City went from $117,000; added $40,000; and put back <br />$70,000. So $157,000 minus $70,000 brought it to $87,000. He then asked about the <br />change in the Fund Reserve. Ms. Charumilind noted that once the money was put <br />back in the operating expenses and added on the Fund Reserve column, a total of <br />$3,555,000, which was the total of $1.4M and $2,390,000 out of Fund Reserve. Mr. <br />Crow noted the “Summary of All Funds” also had changes. He noted the grant income <br />has been increased by approximately $70,000. Ms. Charumilind noted the Director of <br />Public Works had been notified that more grant money had been awarded to the City. <br />Mr. Crow asked about the expenditures going down by $30,000. Ms. Charumilind <br />noted a couple of the funds as Economic Development Sales Tax and Parkview <br />Gardens, had been adjusted and are now expected to only expense what they have <br />taken in, revenue equals expense. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow asked where the $15,000 funding for the Sutter Meyer house came from. <br />Mr. Walker stated he had a meeting with Mr. Reilly, president of Sutter Meyer Society <br />and he indicated that the house was in need of painting. He said the Sutter Meyer <br />Society has not had as much success as liked but given the fact that it is a City-owned <br />property, he was of the opinion that the City should maintain it. Mr. Walker said he <br />understood the lease and the lease obligation of the Sutter Meyer Society to maintain <br />the property, however given the financial situation the Society is unable to do it. He <br />said the fact is that it is a City- owned property and felt the City should maintain it, look <br />at amending the lease, so if they have some success or obtain a grant they could <br />repay the City. Mr. Walker noted it was a City- owned property, in the middle of a <br />stable residential area, and was important for the City to assist the Sutter Meyer <br />Society at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow asked what the difference was with Sutter Meyer house as compared to the <br />Green Center coming to the City for assistance or the pool house as mentioned by Ms. <br />Glickert. He noted the pool house is a City-owned property that does not have a <br />tenant that has issues. How can the Sutter Meyer Society come in during the last two <br />weeks of budgeting and request $15,000 when the City has a pool house they own <br />without a tenant in it and the Green Center that has a similar relationship and asked <br />where the City needed to be going? <br /> <br />Mr. Walker noted that the concerns of Ms. Glickert were legitimate and the City would <br />take a look at addressing them. He said if the Green Center was to come forward with <br />some legitimate maintenance issues, he would likely come forward to Council <br />suggesting that the City assist them as well as they are City-owned properties. <br /> <br />Mr. Crow noted a large change was made were revenue and expenses and now the <br />new dictate stating the General Fund has an operating budget submitted by all <br />departments, thus providing a surplus. He said then there were operating <br />expenditures by others than department heads which takes the City to a deficit. Mr. <br />Crow stated the citizens did not care if the revenue and expenditures came from the <br />5 <br /> <br /> <br />