HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Workshop Minutes 01.18.2003 (2)01/20/04 TUE 11:40 FAX 40~ 994 1905 MSU LOCAL
LAUREL CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
Saturday, January ll~, 2003
Presen~ Mayor Ken Oisor~ City Council Members: Oay E~.~tun, Dan Mears, Mark Mace,
Doug Foeb. l~, Yohn Oalcez, Dick Frilzler
Local Government Center ~t..lane Jelimki, Ken Weaver, 1udy Marlite
The CIP decision-making provess used by the employees. Mayor and City Council of Laurel
was discussed allength. Tho following steps were usecl to determine the priorities of the City
for capital improvement projects:
1. Depa~i-u,e~ heads create a wish list of needs.
2. Dep~.tumat heads meet to nego6ate a ranked list of needs. The Mayor acts as a
facilitator at this meeting.
3. The Mayor cievelops his own priority list bozed on the Depm'unent Head list.
4. At a Council workshop, ih6 City Camaeil learns about and clizcusses tho (3IF priority
list.
5. The priority list is revi~ved and finally approved at a regular City Council me~ng.
From this pro~ess several list~ should be de~etoped which are organized by cost of the items
listed. Thi~ information should be publicized and the public be given a chaucc to cm~u,,mt on
file priorities at a hearing of the City Council before the list is finally adopted. This may help
to edusa/;e the public on thc needs of ih6 cit'y. Considcr glrpOhiting a citiz~l'S co~m~it~en to
~ew ~he ~elimia~y ~t.
One C~' list should ~ave i~ems eo~ng $~0,000 or le~s. A second list ~houl~ have itea~
eost~g more than $$O,O00~bur less ~ $$00~000~ A ~i~d list s~oulfl ~ for capi~ ~
co,ting moro than $~00,000. I~ea-o~ under $$,000 in value are ~ot capital items by definition
(7-6-616,MCA) and should notbe on the CIP list but funded directly from deparmaenla!
O&M reseurce~.
CIP.gunding sources include: Taxe~
Tram£er payments
Lo~-us
~O Boucis
Revenue Bonfls
State Revolving Fund
Banks (com,,ereial loam)
Grants
Community Development Block Grants
Treasurer State Endowment Program
Water grants
CTP
Economic DevelopmenZ Administration
Set up a CIP funding schedule over 'time, one year or more.
Have file various dep~rtmenI~ contributed their fair slaaxe to the C3CP fund7 (e.g. 10% of O&M)
01/20/04 T~rE 11:60 FAX 406 994 1905 ~SU LOCAL GVT ~001
Non-Capital Goal Set~ing:
The Cou~il participated in a discussion abot~t "what's righ~ and wl~at~s wrong" in c~ly
government. Thc following sugge~tiom were made about what's right:
1. Open/public meetings
2, Water/sewer plans
3. Improv~nents in flepa~entz (citype~sonnel and city council)
4. Scheduled Council workshops
5. Council commimaent
6. Connnunication on project dovelopm~t
7. The role of government in c, onomio development
8. The exploration ofgranm
9. The paat and present Mayors
10. D~artment hearl meetings
t 1. Cooperation betwean depamnentz
12, Volunteer~ in the Fire Departm~t and Ambulance
1~. The good relations among Council membe~
14. Tho progress on the CIP
The following suggest/nm were made on what's wrong or needs inaprovenacnt in city
government:
1. The goveming process should be made more inclusive among Council members.
2. There is a lack of cooperation lkxn tho stat, government and the city (DOT)
3. The lack of participation fi'om the public on oity board~ and committees
4. The growth plan n, eds to be improved
5. The as, of city parks doesn't satisfy all mom, the park pol/cies need to be
6. An infrastructure rnaint~natmo program is needed
7. Ne*alto look for grants mare
8. Need a v~ion plan for the future
9. Create more SIDs
10. Th, accountability of city employees need~ to be improved
11, The Council needs to ~et goals
These imm, wil/serve as hnput for a brief'2qon-Capital Goal Set~g" process at the next
Council work, zhop on Saturday, January 24, 2004.