Public Notice-2013-15 Budget

A Public Hearing will be held at the meeting of the Ashland City Council on June 4, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon.  The purpose of the hearing is to discuss the budget for the biennium beginning July 1, 2013 as approved by the Ashland Budget Committee.  A summary of the budget is presented below.  A copy of the budget may be inspected or obtained at the Ashland Administrative Services Department, City Hall, 20 East Main, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.  This certifies that the budget was prepared on a basis of accounting that is consistent with the basis of accounting used the preceding year.  Major changes, if any, and their effect on the budget are explained below. www.ashand.or.us
 
    Last Year   This Year   Next Year
    Actual 2011-2012   Adopted 2012-2013   Biennial Approved 2013-2015
TOTAL OF ALL FUNDS      
             
FINANCIAL SUMMARY - RESOURCES            
Beginning Fund Balance/Net Working Capital    $ 23,622,354    $    24,873,472    $   28,265,776
Fees, Licenses, Permits, Fines, Assessments & Other Service Charges     31,076,016          32,513,972         64,451,609
Federal, State & all Other Grants, Gifts, Allocations & Donations         3,450,632            8,433,178         10,108,357
Revenue from Bonds & Other Debt         3,060,434            8,336,930           9,495,500
Interfund Transfers/Internal Service Reimbursements       10,693,800            8,488,917         45,967,344
All Other Resources Except Property Taxes       11,028,281          10,488,577         21,672,967
Property Taxes Estimated to be Received         9,758,876          10,083,098         21,386,310
Total Resources    $ 92,690,393    $  103,218,144    $ 201,347,863
             
FINANCIAL SUMMARY - REQUIREMENTS BY OBJECT CLASSIFICATION        
Personal Services    $ 23,697,543    $    26,158,408    $   55,473,254
Materials and Services       29,036,630          34,236,111         82,082,898
Capital Outlay         5,359,064          18,350,085         28,885,070
Debt Service         4,576,034            4,513,787           9,892,574
Transfers            203,105               406,635           2,738,500
Other Financing Uses (Interfund Loan)            408,000               408,000           1,949,000
Contingencies                        -            2,060,000           4,542,000
Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance       29,410,017          17,085,118         15,784,567
Total Requirements    $ 92,690,393    $  103,218,144    $ 201,347,863
             
FINANCIAL SUMMARY - REQUIREMENTS AND FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT EMPLOYEES (FTE) BY ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT
NAME:  Administration Department    $   2,102,339    $      2,577,362    $     7,367,471
FTE:                12.15                   13.15                  15.15
NAME:  Information Technology Department    $   2,952,668    $      3,184,835    $     6,800,971
FTE:                15.50                   14.50                  14.50
NAME:  Adminsitrative Services Department    $   3,767,642    $      5,767,149    $   29,312,119
FTE:                16.25                   16.25                  16.25
NAME:  City Recorder    $      319,864    $         324,681    $        708,330
FTE:                  2.00                     2.00                    2.00
NAME:  Police Department    $   5,645,100    $      5,794,103    $   12,391,656
FTE:                36.30                   36.30                  36.75
NAME:  Fire & Rescue Department    $   5,929,825    $      9,680,564    $   13,590,749
FTE:                34.75                   34.75                  34.00
NAME:  Public Works Department    $ 19,092,546    $    29,645,743    $   52,135,777
FTE:                58.50                   60.05                  59.30
NAME:  Community Development Department    $   1,985,922    $      2,128,214    $     4,589,289
FTE:                12.60                   13.00                  14.00
NAME:  Electric Department    $ 13,403,471    $    15,877,397    $   29,204,529
FTE:                20.25                   20.75                  17.25
NAME:  Parks & Recreation     $   5,352,747    $      6,013,810    $   15,881,100
FTE:                43.80                   43.80                  43.80
NAME:  Non-departmental    $ 32,138,269    $    22,224,286    $   29,365,872
FTE:                       0                            0                         0
Total Requirements    $ 92,690,393    $  103,218,144    $ 201,347,863
Total Full-Time Equivalents              252.10                 254.55                253.00
                               -                          -
PROPERTY TAX LEVIES            
Permanent Rate Limit    $        4.2865    $           4.2865    $          4.2865
Rate Levied    $        4.1973    $           4.1972    $          4.1972
             
Ashland Local Option Library Levy     $        0.1921    $           0.1921    $          0.1921
             
Levy for Bonded Debt Obligations    $      625,750    $         518,876    $     1,032,670
             
        Estimated Debt  Outstanding     Estimated Debt  Authorized,
Not Incurred 
STATEMENT OF INDEBTEDNESS        at July 1, 2013     at July 1, 2013 
General Obligation Bonds        $    34,250,000    
Revenue Bonds                3,210,824    
Other                    233,617                          -
Total Indebtedness        $    37,694,441    $                    -
             
 

The column Next Year is the first biennial budget (24 month) approved for the City of Ashland. The Last Year and This Year columns represent annual budgets.

Overview

We respectfully submit the proposed budget for the City of Ashland for the 2013-2015 biennium.
 
This budget represents the dawn of a new era for the City of Ashland, as represented by the opening sentence above, which refers to the biennium rather than the fiscal year.  This is the first biennial budget ever produced by the City, fulfilling a long-standing Council objective to budget biennially rather than annually.  By budgeting this way, departments get two years worth of appropriation authority and a budget document does not have to be produced next year, thus allowing the Council and the Budget Committee to address policy-level fiscal issues that are often bypassed in the course of approving and adopting an annual budget.
 
This is also the first budget in the City’s history that does not record the primary revenue source in the Parks Fund as property taxes and instead records that revenue as a payment for services from the General Fund.  As such, the entirety of the City’s general property tax levy is recorded in the General Fund, which reduces the need for an unappropriated fund balance in the Parks Fund, thus making those otherwise unappropriated dollars available for programs and services throughout the City.
 
These are significant; some might even say ground-shifting changes in municipal budgeting for Ashland and are sure to be subject to ongoing community discussion.  However, they are also emblematic of Ashland’s progressivism and willingness to embrace change, qualities that have long attracted residents and businesses to this community.
 
We are pleased to report to you that Ashland’s fiscal condition is very good.  This budget has been prepared as a “current service level budget,” in which departments were instructed to prepare their budget requests with an eye toward maintaining departmental functions as they are in the current fiscal year.  Departments then proposed “add packages;” requests for funding for new initiatives, staff positions or capital needs that were not included in the current budget.  Through a combination of normal increases in revenues, the change in Parks appropriations and cuts to various departmental line items, a number of these add packages are funded in this budget.  To the extent practical, preference was given to add packages for one-time expenditures or add packages that meet Council goals and objectives.
 
Unfortunately, there remains on the horizon a looming threat to Ashland’s financial stability and one that is entirely beyond our control: The skyrocketing cost of Oregon’s Public Employee Retirement System (PERS).  There is little in this proposed budget that can be deemed sustainable if the Legislature does not act to rein in PERS costs, which harm not just the City, but virtually every local government and school district in the state.  (It must be emphasized that this proposed budget is balanced even with a 31% increase in PERS costs.)
 
Our goal in preparing this budget was and is to protect core services in each fund and preserve the quality of these services; services that Ashland citizens want and expect. Staff  recognizes that elements of a difficult economic environment remain and that many Ashland residents will continue to struggle financially, yet there is a local need and  growing pressure to address issues sooner rather than later.  That is, unlike a business that sees demand for its services decline in an economic downturn, demand for municipal services remains stronger than ever.  As we do each year, staff sought increased efficiencies when possible and looked at alternative methods and ways of delivering service in several areas. Overall, we believe this proposed budget is both fiscally responsible and consistent with the goals and objectives of the Ashland City Council, and we look forward to working with the Budget Committee in its review of this budget.
 
BIENNIUM 2013-2015 BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
 
The total proposed biennial budget is $200,503,863.  Because it is the City’s first biennial budget, a comparison of this budget to the FY ’13 budget is not meaningful.  The proposed General Fund budget averages $23,336,263 for each of the years in the biennium, as opposed to the adopted FY ’13 General Fund budget of $19,058,142.  The primary cause for such a significant increase is the proposed change in the relationship between the General Fund and the Parks and Recreation Fund.  All property tax proceeds are budgeted as a revenue source in the General Fund and transferred or paid to the Parks and Recreation or the Debt Service Fund (on behalf of Parks).  This change has a $4.7 million impact on year one of the biennium and $5.9 million impact on year two.  However, it does have the benefit of showing all property tax resources being received and disbursed from the primary operating fund in the budget (i.e., the General Fund).
 
Another important change is the inclusion of deferred maintenance and Parks capital improvements in the Parks CIP fund.  This will assist the reader in identifying “Parks” projects in the department’s own funds rather than having them mixed into other funds of the City.  The resulting transfers from the Parks Fund and the City CIP (where SDC and Food & Beverage Tax revenue are recorded) to the Parks CIP  have the effect of increasing the overall budget.
 
The proposed operating budget benefits tremendously from a planned conversion to a self-funded health benefits program on July 1.  This conversion allows the City to hold its health insurance costs flat next during the biennium, rather than increasing them by an estimated 10% in each year of the biennium.  In addition, this budget changes the way health insurance costs are allocated to the departments from an “actual cost of the employee” methodology to a per-FTE methodology.  As a result, many departments will see their health benefits charges decrease next year.  Although personal services costs city-wide are projected to increase by about 4.7% in the first year of the biennium and another 2.6% over that in the second year, those increases would have been much higher if not for the conversion to a self-insurance plan.  All other contractual and compliance obligations were budgeted as required.
 
Where applicable and as practical, staff budgeted fund balances that meet adopted policy. Staff also tried to ensure that expected operational revenues exceed or match proposed operational expenses in each fund. This was not possible in some funds without rate increases and not practical in others where additional funds were carried over from the prior year and are budgeted to be used in biennium ’13-‘15.  Charts depicting year-to-year comparisons of fund budgets, FTE and utility rates can be found in Attachment A.
 
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE ISSUES AND PROJECTIONS
 
Revenues
Property Taxes - This budget proposes no change in the levy of the city’s permanent tax rate.  The maximum the city is permitted to levy is roughly $4.29 per $1,000 of assessed valuation.  This budget proposes charging about $4.20 per $1,000, with all of that levy going to the General Fund.  The city can assess up to $.21 per $1,000 for a voter-approved serial levy that supports Ashland Library operations, however this budget proposes to assess only $.19 per thousand, as was the case in FY 2013.  These operating property taxes, excluding prior year tax collections, are projected to increase by 4% in each year of the biennium, thus generating $19,677,362.
 
For the first year of the 2013-15 biennium, we estimate the un-levied property tax of $.0892 per thousand equals $190,200 in tax revenue proceeds.  The median assessed value of single family homes in Ashland is approximately $245,000, so the impact of the 8.92 cents for a residential property with the median assessed value is approximately $22.12.   Staff believes that levying the tax and either putting the revenue directly into the Reserve Fund or using it for maintenance work in the Ashland Forest Resiliency project would be a prudent course of action.  A surplus ending fund balance is not budgeted or anticipated for the coming biennium so it is unlikely the Reserve Fund will increase in the coming years.  In fact, add packages are proposed for one-time expenditures that would draw down the Reserve Fund.
 
A detailed description of property taxes and debt limitations can be found in the appendices.
 
Transient Lodging Taxes – Transient lodging taxes are projected to increase by 4% in each year of the biennium, generating $4,225,000.  This forecast is based on reports and tax payments provided by the local lodging industry.  The use of much of this revenue is restricted under state law to tourism promotion and tourism related facilities.  Ashland uses a significant portion of its TLT revenues to support a visitor-promotion program through the Chamber of Commerce, to support Oregon Shakespeare Festival promotion efforts and for a grant program aimed at supporting local economic development and tourism promotion projects.
 
Franchise Fees – Revenue from the electric utility user tax and water/sewer franchise fees, the city’s second- and third-largest General Fund revenue sources, are projected to grow slightly during the biennium, with franchises subject to rate increases and use or consumption patterns of the community.
 
Licenses and Permits – Permit revenue spiked in FY 2013 due to the SOU student housing project.  Permit revenues somewhat above recent averages are budgeted for the biennium due to projects known to be in the pipeline and the emerging recovery of the real estate market.
 
Enterprise Fund revenues The proposed budget assumes a 5.3%  rate increase for the Electric Utility effective October 1, 2013, and a similar increase in year two, driven primarily by a projected 5.8% increase in BPA supply costs and a 13% increase in transmission costs, as well as deferred maintenance and capital projects necessary to meet the Council objectives of “Maintain existing infrastructure to meet regulatory requirements and minimize life-cycle costs” and “Maintain and improve infrastructure that enhances the economic vitality of the community.”  The estimated impact on the average residential household in Ashland of this proposed 5.3% increase is $3.65 per month, depending on use.  The Electric Utility is currently conducting a comprehensive cost of service study and an additional rate increase may be required in the second year of the biennium, depending on BPA wholesale cost increases and the results of this study.
 
The proposed budget is balanced with a proposed 9% increase in both water and wastewater rates.  These rate increases have been anticipated to cover the cost of the significant capital improvements called for in the master plans for the enterprises, as well as basic operations and maintenance.  The combined impact on a residential customer in 2014-15 is estimated at less than $6.00 per month depending on water use.  This proposed budget also includes cost of service studies in the Water and Street Funds ($50,000 and $30,000, respectively) in order to meet the Council objectives to “Evaluate all city infrastructure regarding planning, management, and financial resources” and to “Develop a fee/rate structure that encourages conservation and pays the bills.”
 
Other Utilities.  The proposed budget includes increases of 3% in the Transportation Utility Fee and 3% in the Storm Water Utility Fee for fall 2013.  The Storm Water Division needs this adjustment to cover operational costs. The estimated impact on the average residential customer of these combined increases is $0.36 per month.  Both divisions have significant unfunded capital projects in the future that could warrant a larger increase.
 
Expenditures
General cost increasesTo the extent practical, this budget holds the line on general cost increases.  However, personnel services costs across all funds are up 4.7% (excluding proposed new positions) and materials & services costs are up 5.5%, although to the degree such costs are flexible or discretionary, they have been cut or contained to the greatest practical extent.  Personnel costs are up due to a combination of cost-of-living adjustments the city is contractually required to provide to represented employees, a COLA of 2% for non-represented employees and step increases for about half of all City employees.  Mostly, however, personnel costs are up due to a stunning 31% increase in the employer rates the City must pay into the PERS system to help the system deal with a $16.2 billion unfunded actuarial liability.  In fact, were it not for the increase in PERS costs, many departments and divisions would have seen their personnel costs go down in the first year of the biennium due to the new allocation methodology for health benefits costs.  The chart below shows the PERS increases for different classes of employees.
  
General Fund - The General Fund derives its revenues from property taxes, franchise fees, license and permit fees, state shared revenue and charges for service – primarily ambulance service in the Fire Department.  The General Fund includes, among others, the Police Department, the Fire Department, the Community Development Department and the Municipal Court, as well as a number of other smaller functions such as city cemeteries and the municipal band.  Because this biennial budget records all property tax revenues in the General Fund, rather than a portion in the General Fund and portion in the Parks Fund, and then transfers General Fund dollars to the Parks Fund, General Fund revenues and expenditures are up significantly.  However, if these revenues, transfers and contingency are netted out of the General Fund, requirements in the fund is up by only 4.1% over the FY ’13 amended budget in the first year of the biennium and by an additional 3% in the second year.
 
Electric Fund – The Electric Fund increases by 8.2% over FY ’13 in the first year of the biennium and an additional 3% in the second year, reflecting an increase in wholesale power rates from the BPA.  A rate increase is needed in the second year of the biennium and 5% is a place holder in the budget although more exact information on BPA charges is not available at this time.  Should the Council elect to not raise rates, it will be necessary to address expenditures in this fund, most likely by reducing system-wide maintenance and capital projects.  It should also be noted that funds (both revenues and expenditures) that have been budgeted in prior years for the purchase of the North Mountain substation have been removed from this budget, as the City and BPA remain far, far apart on price.
 
Water and Wastewater Funds – As in the Electric Fund, the Water and Wastewater Funds reflect an increase due to capital needs and related operational costs.  The proposed Water Fund budget appears to be down significantly, however that is due to the absence of a federal grant for wildfire mitigation in the watershed that is not re-budgeted in the 2013-15 biennium. Net of that federal grant, the Water Fund is up due to capital projects, personnel cost increases driven primarily by PERS and normal inflationary increases for materials and services. Similarly, increases in the Wastewater Fund are driven primarily by expenditures for capital projects as identified in the Wastewater Master Plan, most of them in the second year of the biennium.
 
Parks & Recreation Department – This proposed budget significantly alters the way Parks and Recreation Department revenue is shown, although it fully funds all Parks operations.  In the past, Parks revenue was shown as property tax in the amount of $2.09 per $1,000 of assessed valuation.  Over the years, this resulted in a very large unappropriated balance in the Parks fund; nearly $2 million in the current fiscal year.  Rather than continuing to budget Parks Fund revenue as property tax, the unappropriated fund balance is budgeted as beginning working capital, the ending fund balance is reduced to 12.5% of operating expenditures (down from 25%) and money is transferred from the General Fund to balance the Parks Fund.  If Parks revenue were to continue to be budgeted as a property tax in the amount of $2.09 per $1,000, it would generate approximately $9.4 million over the course of the biennium.  Instead, the General Fund will transfer $8.8 million to the Parks Fund, which translates into a tax rate of between $1.97 and $2.02 per $1,000, depending on how much revenue is generated by a penny of property tax rate.  This proposed budget funds all Parks programs at current service levels and includes $587,000 for maintenance projects (deferred and otherwise) with an emphasis on safety-related projects, replacement of demolished structures at the Daniel Meyer Pool and projects intended to extend the life cycle of existing structures elsewhere in the Parks system.
 
Reserve FundNo additional transfer is proposed to the City’s Reserve Fund, although three large expenditures are proposed from the Fund.  One is an add package proposed by the Information Technology Department to pay for needed upgrades to the City’s operating system and networks.  IT also proposes a new phone system for the City, replacing the antiquated system we now use and improving customer service.  The third add package is a transfer from the Reserve Fund to the Administration Department in the amount of $100,000 to cover the cost of a “Help Center” for the homeless and those in danger of becoming homeless.  Under the resolution that created the Reserve Fund, these transfers out must be approved by the Budget Committee.  This budget also proposes an interfund loan from the Reserve Fund to the newly created Health Benefits Fund in order that the Health Benefits Fund can have a claims reserve on day one.
 
Central Service Fund After holding Central Service Fund charges flat for five years, this budget proposes to increase those charges by 2% in each year of the biennium and to draw down the Fund’s unappropriated fund balance to a more normal level for an internal service fund.  This increase in Central Service Fund charges was projected in the current year’s budget and an additional increase will likely be necessary in the 2015-2017 biennium.
 
Capital Projects -- Capital improvement spending is $17,601,950 in the proposed biennium budget, compared to $14,273,810 in the FY 2013 adopted budget and $10,773,000 in the prior year.  The City is anticipating certain grant funds for street and airport improvements and low cost loans from the state for Wastewater system upgrades.  Some projects in the CIP are funded by bonds issued late in FY 2013.  Additional borrowing will be needed late in the biennium for Water, Street and Parks improvements.  Proposed rate increases address the increased debt service relating to capital project financing.
 
CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND ADD PACKAGES
 
On February 2, 2013, the City Council held a day-long goal-setting session during which the Council created a set of four goals and 30 objectives built around the core functions of City government.  The Parks Commission subsequently adopted a goal and nine objectives and these were added to the Council goals to create a single set of City of Ashland Goals and Objectives (shown in the appendices following this budget message).  The City’s department heads then put together action plans (not shown in the attached document) to provide the roadmap for meeting these objectives over the course of the biennium.  If certain actions required additional resources, departments submitted “add packages;” requests for additional funding along with a justification as to why the funding is needed.
 
Before considering any add package requests, budget staff carefully examined each and every requested expenditure and identified cuts that could be used to offset the requested add package.  Other add packages, such as the fire inspector position or the code compliance officer, may be offset by increased revenues generated by those positions, however those increased revenues are not included in this proposed budget.  In determining which add packages to include in the budget, priority was given to those that helped achieve Council objectives, could be funded by modifying proposed budgets, and those that were one-time rather than ongoing expenditures.  With that in mind, the following additions have been included in this proposed budget:
 
Department Addition Fund One Time  or Ongoing Fiscal Impact City Goals Objective?
Administration Open City Hall, an online citizen involvement tool Central
Service
Ongoing Year 1-$4,500
Year 2-$4,500
Yes
Police Reclassify Admin. Sgt. to Deputy Police Chief General Ongoing Year 1-$8,262
Year 2-$18,786
 
No
Police Police Patrol Vehicle Service Rotations General Ongoing Year 1-$20,988
Year 2-$20,988
Yes
Police/Parks Increase Park Patrol General Ongoing Year 1 - $10,000
Year 2 - $10,000
Yes
Fire Trails Master Plan General Ongoing Year 1-$5,000
Year 2-$5,000
Yes
Fire Reinstatement of Fire Inspector General Ongoing Year 1-$63,583.00
Year 2-$67,800.00
Yes
Fire Emergency Management General One Time Year 1-$22,000
Year 2-$12,000
Yes
Fire Replace used fire truck with new (transfer to equipment fund) General Ongoing Year 1-$53,000
Year 2-$53,000
Yes
Fire Fire pump test pit (transfer to equipment fund) General One Time Year 1-$6,700
Year 2-$6,700
Yes
Public Works Virtual Server, Database Software (GIS) Central
Service
One Time  & Ongoing Year 1-$10,000.00
Year 2-$21,500.00
Yes
Public Works Wastewater Inspection CCTV System Replacement Wastewater One Time  & Ongoing Year 1-$0
Year 2-$165,000.00
Yes
Public Works B Street Maintenance Yard Building Enclosure CIP One Time Year 1-$0
Year 2-$43,800
No
Public Works Cost of Service Water Rate Study Water One Time Year 1-$50,000.00
Year 2-$0
Yes
Public Works Cost of Service Street Rate Study Street One Time Year 1-$30,000.00
Year 2-$0
Yes
Public Works and CDD Downtown Study General (dedicated parking funds) One Time Year 1-$90,000.00
Year 2-$10,000.00
Yes
Public Works T-Hangar Enclosure Project Airport One Time Year 1-$45,000.00
Year 2-$0
No
Public Works FBO Maintenance Hangar Door Replacement Airport One Time Year 1-$20,000.00
Year 2-$0
No
CDD Code Compliance Officer General Ongoing Year 1-$56,415
Year 2-$59,236
No
 
  
In addition to the above, three add packages are proposed for funding from the City’s Reserve Fund.  Per the resolution that created that fund, Budget Committee approval is required for any transfer from the Reserve Fund to operating funds.  The proposed uses of the Reserve Fund are as follows:
 
IT Operating System and Desktop Upgrades Reserve One Time Year 1-$35,000
Year 2-$55,000
Yes
IT New Telephone System Reserve One Time Year 1-$145,000
Year 2-$0
Yes
Administration HELP Center for the homeless and others in need Reserve One Time Year 1-$50,000
Year 2-$50,000
Yes
 
 
Finally, three add packages are proposed for the second year of the biennium, but only if funding is available and likely sustainable, based on fiscal performance in the first year of the biennium.  Those add packages are as follows:
 
Police Add one FTE to sworn personnel General Ongoing Year 1-$0
Year 2-$96,338
No
IT E-mail system replacement Central Services Ongoing Year 1 - $0
Year 2 - $10,000
Yes
Fire Add one FTE to sworn personnel General Ongoing Year 1-$0
Year 2-$107,453
No
 
 
CONCLUSION
 
As discussed in the introduction, this proposed budget represents a continuation of current services at the minimum level needed to meet public safety and quality of life needs or Federal and State mandates.   While we continue to face uncertain times, we remain focused on providing to the citizens of Ashland as much as we can for as long as we can with the resources available to us. While we were able to balance the budget without recommending an increase in taxes, we are not able to balance the City’s major utility funds without rate increases.  These rate increases are painful but necessary if we are to expect system reliability and modernity in our utilities, not just for us but for the future generations to whom we will bequeath this marvelous city.
 
Budget preparation for an organization as large and complex as the City of Ashland is an arduous endeavor that begins some six months before the budget document is actually published and presented to the Budget Committee and which, along the way, becomes an all-consuming task for many, many members of the City staff. We would like to acknowledge the time and effort of all staff members who give this task a high priority in addition to their normal work responsibilities.  We would like to particularly acknowledge Accounting Manager Cindy Hanks, Financial Analyst Jeff Rehbein and Administrative Assistant Tami DeMille-Campos. And on behalf of the citizens of the City of Ashland, we extend our thanks to the Budget Committee for their time and talent in the review of this proposed budget.
 
Respectfully submitted,
 
 
 
Dave Kanner                                                                        Lee Tuneberg
City Administrator/Budget Officer                                 Administrative Services Director/Finance Director
 
 
 
 
 

 

Online City Services

UTILITIES-Connect/Disconnect,
Pay your bill & more 
Connect to
Ashland Fiber Network
Request Conservation
Evaluation
Proposals, Bids
& Notifications
Request Building
Inspection
Building Permit
Applications
Apply for Other
Permits & Licenses
Register for
Recreation Programs

©2024 City of Ashland, OR | Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A

Quicklinks

Connect

Share

twitter facebook Email Share
back to top