Laserfiche WebLink
98 <br /> <br /> Referring again to page XlII, Mr. Pico indicated there seems to be several fund balances. <br /> He was concerned that those funds should be used for unfunded projects. He also pointed out <br /> that in 1995 there is an ending fund balance of $2,263,000. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian explained that any fund balance one year is immediately depleted the <br /> following year unless it is assigned to a large project that is done in phases. The priority of <br /> parks projects is determined by the Park and Recreation Commission. It is the policy to finish <br /> all phases of a project before going on to fund a new project. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked for some means of showing how the developers park funds are spent. <br /> Mr. Swift indicated staff will prepare a spread sheet setting forth where fees came from in <br /> 1992/93 and where the funds will be spent in 1993/94. He pointed out that some large projects, <br /> such as Ruby Hill, may skew those figures. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis inquired how the donated park land is valued. There was then discussion <br /> about the park dedication fee formula. <br /> <br /> Referring to page V, there was discussion about the correlation between the number of <br /> units and the mount of fees. <br /> <br /> On page XXI, clarification was requested regarding the Vineyard Realignment and how <br /> much is paid for by developer funds and how much is City funded ..... <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico questioned the priorities of realignments for Ray/St. John and del Valle <br /> Parkway. It seemed more probable that del Valle Parkway would be done first. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta indicated Council had specifically directed that del Valle Parkway be left in <br /> the General Plan and not be included in the CIP. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarvet asked if there was something showing when a funded project is moved to the <br /> unfunded list. Mr. Boojan responded that occurs only in the first year. The goal is to show a <br /> mirror table of projects from the previous five years to the current five years. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver then asked about the lighting of the sports fields. Ms. Bengtson indicated <br /> there were no plans at the moment. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico discussed funding for various street resuffacing projects. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarvet questioned the spending of NPID funds and Mr. Pico asked why there seems <br /> to be a year delay. <br /> <br /> 06/22/93 <br /> Page 10 <br /> <br /> <br />