Laserfiche WebLink
provided clarifying information on the issue of General <br /> Administrative Services and Low and Moderate General <br /> Administrative Services. <br /> The final page of the ROPS was discussed and staff covered <br /> the Pass Through payments. Going back to the two items <br /> on page three of the ROPS, it was clarified that the <br /> Oversight Board will have the ability to consider these and <br /> determine if that is something to continue or not. <br /> Mr. Labadie asked if staff is proposing these agreements be <br /> re-entered and Ms. Ramirez confirmed. He clarified that the <br /> Board would have to approve such agreements if they were <br /> to be continued. Questions were asked about these funds. <br /> Mr. Ponty said that he will footnote this and will take them <br /> off the front page. One Board Member concurred with <br /> taking these agreements off the ROPS. Items on page 3, line <br /> one and two, are to come off the ROPS far further <br /> consideration by the Board. One suggestion was to lump <br /> together the administrative items listed on the ROPS. These <br /> items were tabled for further discussion. <br /> The Chair suggested to move to the next item on the <br /> agenda, Administrative Budget, and then come back to this. <br /> Mr. Ponty offered to capture the Boards' direction after <br /> reviewing the Administrative Budget. <br /> VIII. Review and Approval of Administrative Budgets <br /> (Oversight Board Binder Tab lVo. 5) <br /> Mr. Ponty referred to the staff report and noted the figure of <br /> $1,008,740.00. One Member asked questions of Legal <br /> Counsel Labadie on the issue of the amount proposed. Mr. <br /> Labadie said that these are plausible and iustifiable <br /> expenses, but it will be up to the State Department of <br /> Finance to determine if that is accepted or not. Questions <br /> were asked about the staffing levels. Mr. Bell noted that <br /> vacancies were not filled and a restructure will be proposed <br /> as part of the budget process. In terms of staff time, Mr. Bell Brian Ponty <br /> noted that the involvement has changed to the current <br /> group present. Mr. Navas wanted the City to work on a plan <br /> to fund these positions with the certainty that it comes down <br /> to 3% or $250,000 through the restructuring. Mr. Bell noted <br /> that was the goal. He believes that by the Board approving <br /> this amount it will allow Redwood City to wind down the <br /> personnel costs. <br /> Redevelopment Agency staffing levels were discussed. Mr. <br /> Ponty said there are about 15 positions under the RDA. A <br /> few Oversight Board Members agreed with this approach of <br /> 6 <br />