Budget Committee Meeting
May 12, 2010 6:00pm
Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
The Budget Committee meeting was called to order at 6:02
Mayor Stromberg was present. Committee members Runkel, Baldwin, Stebbins, Douma, Silbiger, Chapman, Slattery, Jackson, Navickas, Voisin, Everson, Lemhouse, and Thompson were present.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN OVERVIEW
Mr. Faught went over the FY 2011-2016 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Overview and distribution of funds (see slides).
FY 10 $2,952,100
FY 11 $10,859,000
FY 12-16 $25,457,000
Public Works Director Mr. Faught was joined with Public Works Management Assistant Betsy Harshman to present the Public Works budget. He introduced Engineering Services Manager Jim Olsen, Public Works Superintendent Terri Ellis, Street Supervisor John Peterson and Maintenance Safety Supervisor Mike Morrison Jr. who were also there to help present the Public Works budget.
Mr. Faught discussed the Street Fund by category over time (see slide). Percentages for FY 2011 are: Capital 60%, Materials and Services 26% and Personnel 14%. Personnel for the most part has been trending pretty flat over time. When CIP funds are available there will be spikes in the budget. The major projects coming for FY 2011 in the Street Fund are: Jefferson Avenue Extension, Laurel Street Sidewalk, Hersey to Randy and Hersey and Laurel R/R crossing, and three street overlays. Internal work that will be coming is the Slurry Seal Street prep which is patching, pothole repairs and sweeping. On the Stormwater side the Department has continued to do segments of Iowa Street and begin a Winburn Way storm drain project. Another project is storm drain labeling which is a requirement for Stormwater phase II permit.
Mr. Faught went over the performance drivers for the Street Department and Storm Water (see slides). The desired outcomes are for the Street Department to inspect and maintain all City regulatory signs. There are about 700 regulatory signs that need to be maintained. The Storm Water drivers include Federal and State mandates and regulations. The desired outcomes are to insure storm drain water quality meets or exceeds all required parameters. This includes meeting bacteria and temperature standards as well.
Mr. Faught spoke to the performance to budget for the Street Department (see slide). The proposed street operations budget enables staff to meet most desired outcomes with the exception of capital project street repair. On the proposed stormwater collection side budget enables staff to meet most desired outcomes with the exception of meeting all bacteria and temperature standards annually.
Mr. Faught discussed the significant expense budget changes from FY 2010 in the Street Fund. There was an increase in the CIP this year because of the MPO funds and house bill 2011. There are no external capital projects for Stormwater because there is no money for capital projects. In preparing for 2012 the Street Department has a large section of the Department that can retire within the next five years. If the Department chooses not to fill the position the offset will go to materials and service reductions that tie to those things. Grant applications will continue to be submitted.
Mr. Faught went over the Water Fund Budget (see slides). The personnel trend has been fairly flat, and Materials and Services have had little fluctuation. Capital has fluctuated throughout the years due to when monies come in. The work coming for FY 2011 in the Water Fund is the completion of the Water Master Plan. A safety analysis will take place for Holser Dam which is a federal requirement. Due to problems with the TID pump station during water curtailment last year repairs will be made. There will also be improvements to Reeder Reservoir and silt removal on east and west forks, there is a total daily maximum load limit on the reservoirs for this which is designed to set the sediments.
Mr. Faught spoke to the performance drivers for water treatment, water distribution and water supply (see slides). All performance drivers are based on Federal and State mandates. For both water treatment and water distribution the desired outcome is to maintain quantity and quality of potable water with no violations. The water supply desired outcome is to maintain an adequate supply of high quality water. The proposed budget does enable staff to meet most desired outcomes for the Water Fund with an exception of capital projects for example Crowson II which will have to be pushed out another year. The significant budget changes from FY 2010 in the Water Fund are reductions in materials and supplies to offset the personnel cost increase. There will be an 8% water rate increase and have deferred capital projects. Mr. Faught stated that attrition, materials and service reductions and reductions in internal projects will be ways to prepare for FY 2012.
Mr. Faught discussed the Wastewater Fund (see slides). The Wastewater Fund has had fluctuations in personnel. Materials and Supplies fluctuated in 2009 due to spending only what was needed for the year. The work coming in FY 2010 for wastewater is the Ashland Creek mainline replacement which is over a 100 year old line which runs parallel with Ashland Creek. Membrane filtration replacements which will be funded one third for three years. The Wastewater master plan will also be worked on.
Mr. Faught went over the performance drivers for wastewater collections and wastewater treatment plant (see slides). Both are Federal and State public health mandated. The desired outcome for wastewater collections is to have no sanitary sewer overflow. The desired outcome for wastewater treatment plant is to have no National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit violations. Mr. Faught stated that the proposed budget enables staff to meet most desired outcomes with the exception of deferred capital projects for example Grandview Pump Station. The significant budget changes for FY 2011 are an 8% wastewater rate increase. Materials and supplies will be increased for bio-solid disposal and to do priority pollutant testing. The membrane replacement will be paid for by a $200,000 transfer to the Equipment Fund. Mr. Faught stated that attrition; materials and service reductions, reductions in internal projects and appropriate rate increases will be ways to prepare for FY 2012.
Mr. Faught discussed the significant budget changes from FY 2010 in the Administration and Engineering Department and all other Public Work Funds (see slides). In the Administration and Engineering Department there was reductions in contracted services and as of May 1st there is one vacant GIS position due to retirement. In the Cemetery Fund the irrigation system was not replaced and it no recommended replacing it next year. The Airport Fund has proposed rate increases. The significant changes in the Equipment fund is funding $535,000 for three years for the Wastewater Membrane Replacement project and there will also be a $200,000 revenue transfer from wastewater treatment budget.
The Committee questioned if departments will be able to continue to operate with staff reductions through attrition. Mr. Faught answered that the Department will look at the internal organization and see how they can cut back. If there is a retirement in the treatment plant that position will be filled. All other areas will be looked at very carefully and see if some of the work can be shifted.
The Committee questioned why the personnel services cost went up by 7% when the number of people went down by 2%. Ms. Bennett stated that most of it is due to step increases and health benefits.
Thompson arrived 7:15
The Committee questioned how much Public Works spends on consultants. Mr. Faught stated that it ranges $350,000 for water and sewer. Internally for example the Engineering Department is proposing $30,000 for the year for consultants.
The Committee questioned the contingency for Public Works Funds. Mr. Tuneberg stated that a department doesn’t have a contingency a Fund does. Across all Funds in Public Works the total comes to $503,000 which is higher then prior year. The Committee questioned if any contingency has been spent this year. Mr. Faught answered no.
Mr. Tuneberg discussed the memo regarding the add package (see attached). A rate increase will be coming to all PERS participating agencies in the state for FY 2011-2012. It has been indicated that it will be in the 6%-12% range. This amount will not be on top of the amount being paid now it is an additional percentage contribution calculated on what the City’s payroll is.
Ms. Bennett went the agenda for the May 13, 2010 Budget Committee Meeting. The two add packages will and the Reserve Fund will be discussed. The Amigo Club will be attending to request $3,300 as well as Siskiyou Violins to discuss funding their grant request. The Committee will then adopt the budget and if time remains complete the budget process debrief.
Committee member Roberta Stebbins will be unable to attend the next Budget Meeting so gave a few final statements. Ms. Stebbins stated that she really appreciates Council for creating a Reserve Fund. It is important to maintain fiscal stability. There are three major elements to personnel services which are salaries, retirement benefits and health benefits. All three should be addressed. Ms. Stebbins suggested that legal restrictions be placed on the Reserve Fund prohibiting the use for ongoing operating expenses. In regards to the two add packages Ms. Stebbins feels that they are essential but feel it should not be due to increasing the tax rate. If the tax rate is going to be increased then would like it to go to the Reserve Fund. Ms. Stebbins thanks Staff and all Department Heads.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 pm